HomeMy WebLinkAboutFinance & Admin - 1996-06-10FAC\1996-06-10
JUNE 10, 1996
FINANCE & ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE MINUTES
CITY OF KITCHENER
The Finance and Administration Committee met this date commencing at 10.10 a.m. under the
Chairmanship of Councillor J. Ziegler with the following members present: Mayor R. Christy, Councillors
T. Galloway, G. Lorentz, K. Redman, Jake Smola, John Smola, B. Vrbanovic, M. Wagner, M. Yantzi and
C. Weylie.
Others present: Ms. J. Koppeser, Ms. J. Jantzi, Messrs. T. McKay, J. Shivas, S. Gyorffy, L. Gordon, O.
Den Ouden, L. Parkhouse, D. Snow, K. Tribby, J. Witmer, T. McCabe, T. Clancy and G. Sosnoski.
Mr. McKay introduced the delegates from Windhoek, Namibia who are participating in an exchange
program with the City of Kitchener; namely, Councillor Hetty Rose-Junius: Mr. Shafimana Ueitele
(Director of Properties and Protective Services); Mr. Pieter Hansmann (Deputy City Secretary) and Mr.
Martin Shipanga (Deputy City Treasurer). Mr. McKay explained that this is the final delegation from
Windhoek under the Africa 2000 program.
1. POSTERING ON CITY STREET ALLOWANCES
The Committee was in receipt of a report from J. Shivas dated May 22, 1996 recommending the
repeal of Chapter 682 (Signs and Posters on Hydro Poles) and proposed revisions to Chapter 680
(Signs) of the City's Municipal Code. They were also in receipt of the Public Notice which
appeared in the K-W Record on May 24, 1996 advising of the meeting this date and inviting
interested members of the public to attend.
Mr. Shivas outlined the proposed by-law, noting that the Supreme Court has ruled that postering
on street allowances cannot be prohibited, but can be regulated. Mr. Shivas explained the
removal of an absolute ban on hydro pole postering as well as amendments to the Sign By-law to
permit postering anywhere on city street allowances, except on specified street furniture and in
accordance with the regulations outlined in his report. He pointed out that the amendments are
aimed at striking a balance between individual expression and issues of public interest and safety.
In response to Committee questions, Mr. Shivas clarified the City has the right to remove any
posters on hydro poles and standards in order to maintain, clean or take down the standard or
pole. He noted that only certain types of attaching devices are allowed and that glue is prohibited.
He further pointed out that at present there is no fixed cost for removal of posters by the City after
their expiry date; however, the City has the right to require an appropriate payment and if
necessary place this on the municipal tax bill. Mr. Shivas added that he would be providing a cost
schedule at a later date.
Councillor Jake Smola expressed concern over the 21 day allowance for removal of posters, and
argued that this encourages postering over an extended period. He offered the opinion that this
time frame should be shortened to 14 days. Councillor Smola also enquired as to the possibility of
a set fine in this area, and Mr. Shivas replied that this would be possible, but would have to be put
in place as an amendment.
Mr. Ron Charie appeared on behalf of the Kitchener-Wilmot Hydro Electro Commission and stated
that the Commission supports the proposed amendments, in principle. In response to a previous
comment concerning the possible use of poster sleeves on hydro poles, Mr. Charie stated that the
poles are intended for hydro distribution and a sleeve would encumber hydro employees and
create a moisture barrier which could be potentially damaging to certain types of hydro poles. He
explained that for this reason the Commission does not support the use of postering sleeves. Mr.
Charie further suggested that the proposed amendments include a prohibition on mounting
posters on hydro poles above the 7 foot mark, for safety reasons. He further suggested that
section 680.3.10 also prohibit postering where there is any electrical equipment whatsoever
mounted on the hydro pole. Again he stressed that this is for reasons of public safety.
Mr. J. McMahon registered as a delegation this date, but did not attend.
Mr. P. Lawson, Lawson Signs, suggested that it is senseless having a by-law without proper
enforcement, and questioned how the City would date the signs so as to identify the end of the 21
day postering period. He also suggested that metal banding could be used to mount signs, and
referred to the stainless steel bands his company presently uses. Mr. Lawson also referred to the
distinction between a sign on corrugated plastic and a poster which is usually a paper
FINANCE & ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE MINUTES
JUNE 10, 1996 - 86 -
CITY OF KITCHENER
1. POSTERING ON CITY STREET ALLOWANCES - CONT'D
material, both of which are presently mounted on hydro poles. He pointed out the need to
consider the definition in the by-law of a poster as opposed to a sign.
Councillor Ziegler suggested that both metric and imperial measurements be included in the
proposed by-law amendments. Councillor Redman enquired as to how staff are planning to
enforce the pestering by-law, and Mr. Witmer replied that which staff would be responsible for
enforcement has not been discussed. Councillor Vrbanevic questioned why it is not proposed that
pestering be licensed and Mr. Shivas replied that licensing would be difficult to impose, as not all
posters are put up for purely commercial reasons. He added that in light of the Supreme Court
decision he did not feel that a pestering fee was appropriate. Councillor Vrbanevic commented
that at present the responsibility for removing posters is not being met and that it is incumbent
upon the City to ensure that when posters are put up they are taken down.
Councillor Wagner advised that he is not pleased with the situation created under the Charter of
Rights, noting that at present the City already has about 600 portable signs and that there are
approximately 20,000 hydro poles in the municipality. He also questioned to what degree
pestering enforcement would impact on other enforcement duties. In response to the latter, Mr.
Witmer indicated that pestering would be addressed either on the basis of a priority assigned by
Council, or in the absence of this, by a staff priority rating. Councillor Wagner enquired whether
there is any mention in the Supreme Court decision as to how long the municipality must allow
posters to remain up and Mr. Shivas replied that the time period has to be reasonable. Councillor
Wagner suggested that since there is no specific prohibition on removing prior to the 21 days
recommended by Staff, the municipality should be pro-active in removing posters immediately after
they are put up so as to discourage this activity. He offered the opinion that the problem with the
proposed amendment is that it legitimizes an activity which the City does not want to encourage.
Councillor C. Weylie moved the repeal of Chapter 682 and revisions to Chapter 680 as
recommended by staff along with the two amendments proposed by the Kitchener-Wilmet Hydro
Electric Commission, subject to the City Solicitor developing appropriate wording for the Hydro
Commission amendments.
Councillor Vrbanovic advised that he cannot support the proposed amendment, and suggested
that the by-law should clearly stipulate fines, and that pestering should be a licensed activity.
Mayor Christy pointed out that the Supreme Court ruling was in response to a prohibition on
elections signs in Peterbereugh, and that in Kitchener the majority of posters are for commercial
purposes. He suggested that Council should consider licensing commercial posters. Mr. Shivas
argued that licensing fees should not be imposed on community groups who are using posters as
a means of expression and that suggested that their right is no different from the commercial
pestering right. Mr. Shivas also pointed out that the by-law amendment applies to City road
allowances and not Regional road allowances, and that if the amendments proposed by the Hydro
Commission are agreed to, about 30% of existing hydro poles could not be used for pestering due
to the presence of electrical equipment mounted on the pole. Mr. Shivas also stated that staff are
aware that posters are used for both commercial and expressive uses, but could not identify the
relative proportion. Mayor Christy indicated he would support the by-law, pointing out that
commercial pestering should be licensed, and he encouraged staff to provide input in this regard.
Councillor Jake Smola put forward a motion to amend the main motion by Councillor C. Weylie so
as to reduce the maximum pestering period from 21 days to 14 days, and directing staff to
approach the Province to request a set fine.
Councillor Lorentz suggested that the proposed amendments are a good starting point and that
the entire issue should be revisited at the end of the year with a staff report. He advised that he
cannot support licensing of posters, as in his view this would end up costing more money to
administer that the revenue generated. Councillor Wagner indicated he would not support the
proposed amendments on the basis that enforcement is impossible.
1. POSTERING ON CITY STREET ALLOWANCES - CONT'D
Councillor Vrbanevic indicated his willingness to put forward a further amendment to require a
license for pestering activity, with the amount of the license fee to be based on cost recovery.
FINANCE & ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE MINUTES
JUNE 10, 1996 - 87 -
CITY OF KITCHENER
Mr. Shivas acknowledged that the argument in favour of a licensing fee has not been fully tested,
but indicated he would recommend against imposing such a fee. Councillor Galloway suggested
discussion on the feasibility of the City hiring students to remove posters immediately after they
are put up, and Councillor Yantzi suggested deferral of the entire issue to obtain additional
information.
On a motion by Councillor M. Yantzi
it was resolved:
"That further consideration of the proposed repeal of Chapter 682 (Signs and Posters on
Hydro Poles) and revisions to Chapter 680 (Signs), be deferred to a Caucus meeting of
City Council to be held on June 24, 1996 in order to obtain a further legal opinion and a
response from staff regarding a means of removing posters from City street allowances
immediately after their installation."
2. ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS
The Committee was in receipt of a report from L. Gordon dated June 6, 1996 in response to a May
21, 1996 request of Council. They were also in receipt of a report from Councillor J. Ziegler dated
June 7, 1996 concerning a proposed amendment to Policy 1-160.
Mr. Gordon advised that after reviewing the consultant services it was identified that 78% of the
dollars spent go to firms within the Region, 46% of the money being spent in Kitchener (including
the City Hall project) and 32% elsewhere in the Region. He suggested that the process seems to
work in favour of consultants in the Region.
Mr. L. Robertson, Lloyd Robertson Engineering, appeared and circulated a lengthy written
submission dated June 10, 1996 in regard to two areas of concern; namely, the possibility that the
policies and procedures pertaining to the selection of professional services/consultants has been
manipulated to such a degree that neither it's intent nor letter are being followed. Secondly, that
the spirit of co-operation and partnering with businesses, service clubs and corporations
encouraged and voiced by Council is not always reflected in the actions leading to the selection of
consultants. He referred to a number of examples in his written submission which illustrate his
concerns. Mr. Robertson urged Council to initiate a review of how the policy and procedures for
consultant selection are implemented by staff. He argued that the application of the current criteria
gives a distinct advantage to consultants outside of the area, as qualified consultants who have
not participated in City projects in the past are scored higher in the rating system. He also
criticized the current procedure of imposing the same requirements for projects valued at
$75,000.00 as for projects over $10,000.00,a practice he suggested is laborious, costly and a
waste of both time and manpower.
On a motion by Councillor John Smola the time allotted to the delegation was extended by three
minutes.
Mr. Robertson further argued that community co-operation and a healthy business community are
necessary, and that the needed spirit of co-operation is not reflected in contract awards. He
pointed out that since 1990 all roofing contracts, even small ones, have been given to out of
Region firms. He suggested that if this happens with regard to small projects it could also be
happening for larger ones. Mr. Robertson repeated his request for a review of how the current
policies and procedures are applied, and pointed out that his request is made while respecting the
integrity and dedication of City employees.
Councillor Ziegler enquired why Premier Roofing had been awarded a continuing contract with the
City. Mr. Gordon replied that in 1991 consultant work for specific City jobs was awarded to
Premier, then known as Tri-Tech, and it was Premier that pointed out that the City should
2. ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS - CONT'D
create a process of surveying and reviewing the condition of it's roofs and on this basis prepare a
10 year forecast. Mr. Gordon advised that Premier was subsequently retained for the survey work
and repair specifications, and that this has resulted in significant cost savings. As a result of this
process, the City put in place similar processes for other jobs and is issuing expressions of interest
in this regard. Mr. Gordon further pointed out that both Council and staff representatives sit on the
FINANCE & ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE MINUTES
JUNE 10, 1996 - 88 -
CITY OF KITCHENER
selection committees and that cost is not considered an overpowering selection criteria. However,
he did acknowledge that when consultants are short-listed, all are qualified to perform the work,
and at this point, cost becomes a significant factor. Councillor Ziegler questioned whether the
work awarded to Premier Roofing should have been the subject of an expression of interest earlier
on in the process. Mr. Gordon acknowledged that this should have been the case, but that
expressions of interest have now been requested.
Councillor Ziegler indicated that he was asked to speak on behalf of Tremco Roofing, a local
manufacturer, with regard to concerns expressed that the current procedure eliminates the
possibility of manufacturers analyzing the status of a roof and the need for repairs. Councillor
Jake Smola questioned how often consultants receive a contract for the actual physical work, and
Mr. Gordon replied that this seldom takes place as the City tries to separate consultants and
contractors for bidding purposes.
Councillor M. Wagner put forward a motion to amend Policy 1-160 as outlined in the report from
Councillor J. Ziegler dated June 7, 1996 and also to request a yearly list of consultant tenders let
by the City.
Councillor Yantzi advised that he has not heard anything that would suggest the process is not
working properly. Councillor Jake Smola suggested that there should be specific reference in the
by-law so as to prohibit bidders from speaking with the selection committee. Mr. McKay
acknowledged that there is no specific written policy in this area; however, allowing this would be
poor business practice. Mr. Gordon added that members of the Committee do not speak to bid
submitters during the evaluation process and that enquiries are directed through him. Mr. McKay
also pointed out that consultant selection is presently the subject of a continuous improvement
process. He offered the opinion that the current consultant selection process is excellent and
gives the City the best value for the least cost. Councillor Redman asked Mr. McKay to comment
on the submission from Mr. Robertson, and he responded that additional time would be required to
review the submission, as he has not received a copy. He suggested that Mr. Robertson has
exercised his rights under the process by approaching members of Council with his concerns, and
that he or anyone else is free to approach the Chief Administrative Officer as well. Mr. Gordon
pointed out that the selection committee has gone to the extreme to make the processes
acceptable to consultants and to ensure they are given an opportunity to make presentations to
ensure adequate information is provided.
Councillor Ziegler advised that he would deal with Councillor Wagner's motion in two parts.
On a motion by Councillor M. Wagner
it was resolved:
"That Policy 1-160 (Consultant Selection) be amended so as to require Council approval of
a consultant selection where the combined cost of project consultant fees and construction
exceeds $50,000.00"
On a motion by Councillor M. Wagner
it was resolved:
"That staff provide Council with an annual list of tenders let for consultant services which
lists who is chosen, the tendered amount, and whether the consultant resides within or
outside of the Region of Waterloo."
DEVELOPMENT CHARGES - 22 COURTLAND AVENUE WEST
The Committee was in receipt of report from T. McKay dated June 5, 1996 recommending no
action on the request of the potential owners for an exemption or grant relative to development
charges.
Mr. Brent Clarkson, MacNaughton Hermsen Britton Clarkson Planning Limited appeared on behalf
of Drewlo Holdings to request relief from development charges. Mr. Clarkson pointed out that the
subject property is approximately 250 feet away from the southerly limited of the Downtown area
exempt from development charges, and that such charges would add $43,000.00 to the project
FINANCE & ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE MINUTES
JUNE 10, 1996 - 89 -
CITY OF KITCHENER
cost. He noted the proposal is for construction of a 12 - 13 storey apartment building with 186
residential units. Mr. Clarkson asked for a grant in lieu of development charges, and in the event
this is not agreed to, a possible reduction in the charges payable.
Mr. McKay pointed out that a reduction amounts to the same thing as an exemption in this case
and is only a matter of degree. Councillor Jake Smola referred to a recent accommodation made
with regard to K-W Triple J. Tooling which located in the Huron Business Park and asked whether
this would be applicable in the case of Drewlo Holdings. Ms. Jantzi advised that to her recollection
this instance involved a 1 year deferral of development charges with interest on the outstanding
amount applied at the rate of prime plus one percent. Mr. Clarkson responded that he was
uncertain as to whether a postponement would be as satisfactory to his client as a reduction.
On a motion by Councillor Jake Smola
it was resolved:
"That no action be taken on the request of the potential owners of 22 Courtland Avenue
West to either exempt this property from the Development Charge By-law or to give a grant
to the owner equivalent to the development charges, and further,
That Council agree to a deferral of development charges for Drewlo Holdings required to
be paid on the date a building permit is issued subject to the following:
a)
that such payment deferral be for a maximum period of one (1) year from the
date of issuance of the building permit to which the development charge
applies;
b)
that interest at the rate of prime plus one (1) percent be applied to the
outstanding development charge calculated from the date of the issuance of
the building permit to the date the charge is paid;
c)
that the owner of the lands to which the development charge applies shall
enter into an agreement with the City, to be registered on title, prior to the
issuance of the building permit, which agreement shall include the matters
set out in Conditions (a) and (b) above."
SURPLUS CITY LANDS - JOSEPH STREET - BORDEN/OTTAWA STREETS
The Committee was in receipt of a report from G. Anderson dated May 22, 1996 recommending
that two vacant parcels of land be declared surplus and be sold.
On a motion by Councillor M. Yantzi
it was resolved:
"That the vacant land described as part of Lot 17, Registered Plan 80, located on Joseph
Street in Kitchener, be declared surplus to the City's needs, and,
That the vacant land described as part of Lot 486, Plan 262, located at Borden and Ottawa
Streets in Kitchener, be declared surplus to the City's needs, and further,
SURPLUS CITY LANDS - JOSEPH STREET - BORDEN/OTTAWA STREETS - CONT'D
That the City's Land Purchasing Officer be directed to negotiate agreements of purchase
and sale with the abutting land owners of each parcel, and to present all agreements to
Council for acceptance."
PUBLIC HALL LICENSES - WATERLOO COUNTY BOARD OF EDUCATION
The Committee was in receipt of a report from J. Koppeser dated May 22, 1996 in response to a
request from the Board of Education that the license fees be waived relative to Board facilities
available to the City under the joint use agreement. It was noted that the Waterloo Regional
Roman Catholic Separate School Board has paid it's license fees for both 1995 and 1996 and that
the Waterloo County Board of Education fees for both years are still outstanding.
Mr. Parkhouse pointed out that Council is at liberty to waive the fees involved, but not the required
FINANCE & ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE MINUTES
JUNE 10, 1996
- 90 -
CITY OF KITCHENER
inspections.
On a motion by Councillor C. Weylie
it was resolved:
"That no action be taken on the request of The Waterloo County Board of Education to
waive the Public Hall License fees for Board facilities, and further,
That staff be directed to list this item for discussion at the next meeting between the City of
Kitchener and the Board of Education scheduled for June, 1996."
APPOINTMENT - KITCHENER PUBLIC LIBRARY BOARD
The Committee was in receipt of report from L. Parkhouse dated May 14, 1996 concerning the
filling of a Board vacancy. They were also in receipt of copies of the applications submitted by 14
individuals, as well as a letter from M. Walsh dated May 22, 1996 advising of the Kitchener Public
Library's Board applicant priority.
On motion Councillor K. Redman nominated Ms. Helena Webb; Councillor M. Yantzi, Ms. Marilyn
Black Lambert; and Councillor C. Weylie, Mrs. Theresa Franks.
On motion by Mayor R. Christy nominations were closed.
Ballots were then submitted by individual Committee members and G. Sosnoski announced each
vote separately, followed by a declaration that Ms. Helena Webb was the winner.
The appointment of Ms. Webb to the Kitchener Public Library Board was formally ratified at a
special meeting of Council held later this date.
LOT MAINTENANCE - 151 LANCASTER STREET EAST
The Committee was in receipt of Planning and Development report #PD96/52 dated June 3, 1996
recommending that the owner be notified that the City intends to consider a by-law to authorize the
removal of waste material from the subject site.
On a motion by Councillor K. Redman
it was resolved:
"That the owner be notified that the City intends to consider a by-law at the June 17, 1996
Council meeting authorizing the removal of waste material from 151 Lancaster Street East,
Kitchener, at the owner's expense if this has not been done by the owner on or before June
24, 1996."
10.
EVENT BUDGET - ADAPTIVE RE-USE COMMITTEE
Council previously granted funding approval for a June 12, 1996 Media Event and Symposium,
subject to the Committee's receipt and review of an event budget.
The Committee agreed to a request by Councillor Wagner that due to time constraints this item,
along with financial incentives for re-use projects, be considered later this date.
EXPENDITURE APPROVAL - BRAMMS STREET
Councillor Ziegler advised that staff had withdrawn this item.
CITIZEN SUGGESTION - LITTERING
The Committee was in receipt of a written submission from Mr. J. Elgie concerning the issuing of
litter tickets and volunteer cleanup of public facilities and lands. Councillor Ziegler had requested
discussion of the proposed initiatives, and now asked staff to consider and assess Mr. Elgie's
proposal and report back at a later date.
FINANCE & ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE MINUTES
JUNE 10, 1996 - 91 -
CITY OF KITCHENER
Councillor Lorentz questioned whether there should be a procedure to deal with such citizen
suggestions, as he receives them on a regular basis.
11. WAIVING OF LICENSE FEES
The Committee received, as information, a summary report of the lost revenues associated with
recent Council decisions to waive certain license fees.
The Committee adjourned at 12:30 p.m., then reconvened at 2:30 p.m. under the
Chairmanship of Councillor J. Ziegler with all members present, to consider the Adaptive
Re-Use Symposium budget and financial incentives relative to adaptive re-use projects in
the Downtown.
12. FINANCIAL INCENTIVES FOR ADAPTIVE RE-USE PROJECTS
Councillor Wagner had provided the Committee members with copies of a revenue and expense
report for the Adaptive Re-Use Symposium to take place on Wednesday June 12, 1996 and a
report of the City of Kitchener Adaptive Re-Use Committee concerning the proposal to offer
financial assistance to owners of unused industrial buildings in the Downtown redevelopment area.
Councillor Wagner advised that the cost of the Symposium will be $1,500.00 more than Council
approved on May 21, 1996 and that $500.00 will come from the Economic Development marketing
budget and $1,000 from the Downtown Development Team. Councillor Wagner then explained
what will take place at the Symposium.
Councillor Jake Smola thanked both Councillor Wagner for the special interest he has shown in
this project and staff, and encouraged all members of Council to attend the Symposium.
Councillor Wagner then put forward the recommendation of the Adaptive Re-Use Committee and
asked that the proposal be approved in principle. Councillor Wagner explained the proposal,
stating that the intent is to waive 50% of the increase in taxes between what the City receives now
and what would be received in the event of total redevelopment. This current proposal is to apply
only in the Downtown redevelopment area and only applies to the City of Kitchener portion of the
taxes. Councillor Wagner then advised that the only other municipality he is aware of which has
implemented a program like this is Perth. Reference was also made to a similar program being
contemplated in the City of London. Councillor Wagner felt that the uniqueness of a proposal of
this nature would gain a lot of Press coverage.
The question was raised as to how major redevelopment would be defined and Councillor Ziegler
pointed to the definition provided in the City of London proposal. Mr. McCabe gave a brief
explanation of the City of London proposal. Councillor Wagner explained that if this
12. FINANCIAL INCENTIVES FOR ADAPTIVE RE-USE PROJECTS - CONT'D
proposal is approved in principle, Council would have to go to the Finance and Legal Departments
for further details.
Councillor Galloway questioned whether this matter had been discussed with the Region and the
two School Boards, as he felt it would be in their interest to participate in this program. Councillor
Wagner stated that he would be prepared to pursue the matter with them.
Councillor Redman thanked Councillor Wagner for bringing this matter forward and questioned
whether Mr. Shivas had any comments. Mr. Shivas advised that he would like an opportunity to
review the proposal; however, he did have some initial concerns. Mr. Shivas referred to the
Planning Act provisions for Community Improvement Plans and stated that there may be a way
clear to accomplish something in this area. He advised that he would talk to the solicitors for the
City of London, and Councillor Wagner requested that Mr. Shivas also contact the solicitors for
Perth.
Councillor Wagner advised that he wished to be able to tell those present at the Symposium that
this program has been approved in principle.
FINANCE & ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE MINUTES
JUNE 10, 1996 - 92 -
CITY OF KITCHENER
13.
14.
15.
Councillor Yantzi stated that he agrees with the proposal, in principle, noting that he liked the idea
of it being linked with an increase in assessment. He felt the incentive should be a grant and not a
tax rebate, and that there should be some latitude in how it is implemented.
On a motion by Councillor Wagner
it was unanimously resolved:
"That we approve, in principle, a financial assistance program for owners of unused
industrial buildings in the downtown redevelopment area who redevelop their property, with
the assistance to be equal to 50% of the increase in the City of Kitchener portion of their
property taxes; which will be the difference between the existing property taxes and those
taxes for the fully redeveloped property, for 3 years."
MEMORIAL BOOK
Councillor Ziegler advised that he had intended to bring this matter forward at the Community
Services Committee meeting held earlier. He referred to providing recognition, instead of a
plaque, for people who contribute trees to City parks as memorials. He suggested that their
names be entered in a book to be displayed in a glass case at City Hall and that a certificate be
presented to the families of the deceased.
Mr. T. Clancy advised that he could think of a number of areas where this type of recognition
would be appropriate. Councillor Jake Smola stated that he thought this to be an excellent idea
and suggested that the book be kept in the Heritage Room.
It was generally agreed that staff prepare a report in this regard to be considered at a future
Community Services Committee Meeting.
NEXT MEETING
The next regularly scheduled meeting of the Finance and Administration Committee will be held on
June 24, 1996.
ADJOURNMENT
On motion, the meeting adjourned at 3.20 p.m.
G. Sosnoski
Manager of Corporate
Records/Assistant City Clerk