HomeMy WebLinkAboutCouncil Agenda - 2025-10-20Council Meeting Agenda
Monday, October 20, 2025, 7:00 p.m.
Council Chambers - Hybrid
City of Kitchener
200 King Street W, Kitchener, ON N2G 4G7
People interested in participating in this meeting can register online using the delegation registration
form at www.kitchener.ca/delegation or via email at delegation kitchener.ca. Please refer to the
delegation section on the agenda below for registration in-person and electronic participation
deadlines. Written comments received will be circulated prior to the meeting and will form part of the
public record.
The meeting live -stream and archived videos are available at www.kitchener.ca/watchnow
*Accessible formats and communication supports are available upon request. If you require
assistance to take part in a city meeting or event, please call 519-741-2345 or TTY 1-866-969-9994.*
Pages
1. COMMENCEMENT
The meeting will begin with a Land Acknowledgement given by the Mayor and
the singing of "O Canada."
2. MINUTES FOR APPROVAL
Minutes to be accepted as circulated to the Mayor and Councillors (regular
meeting held September 29, 2025, and special meetings held September 29
and October 6, 2025) - Councillor A. Owodunni
3. DISCLOSURE OF PECUNIARY INTEREST AND THE GENERAL NATURE
THEREOF
Members of Council and members of the City's local boards/committees are
required to file a written statement when they have a conflict of interest. If a
conflict is declared, please visit www.kitchener.ca/conflict to submit your written
form.
4. COMMUNICATIONS REFERRED TO FILE - NIL
5.
Q
FA
PRESENTATIONS
5.1 Certificate of Achievement
5.2 Kitchener Blues Festival - 25th Anniversary
5.3 Affiliated Groups Long Service Volunteer Award Presentation
5.4 Certificates of Service and Awards of Merit
5.5 Tova Davidson, Sustainable Waterloo Region
DELEGATIONS
Pursuant to Council's Procedural By-law, delegations are permitted to address
the Committee for a maximum of five (5) minutes. All Delegations where
possible are encouraged to register prior to the start of the meeting. For
Delegates who are attending in-person, registration is permitted up to the start
of the meeting. Delegates who are interested in attending virtually must register
by 5:00 p.m. on October 20, 2025, in order to participate electronically.
6.1 None at this time
REPORTS OF COMMITTEES
7.1 AUDIT COMMITTEE - SEPTEMBER 29, 2025
7.1.a External Audit Planning Report for Fiscal Year 2025, FIN -2025-394
That the Audit Planning Report for the year ended December 31,
2025 prepared by KPMG, attached as Attachment 'A' to Financial
Services Department report FIN -2025-394, be approved.
7.2 HERITAGE KITCHENER - OCTOBER 7, 2025
7.2.a Notice of Intention to Demolish - 11 Irvin Street, DSD -2025-380
That, in accordance with Section 27(9) of the Ontario Heritage Act,
the Notice of Intention to Demolish received on August 28, 2025,
regarding the property municipally addressed as 11 Irvin Street, be
received as information and that the notice period run its course, as
outlined in Development Services Department report, DSD -2025-380;
and further,
That the City arrange to have the property municipally addressed as
11 Irvin Street properly documented through photographs prior to any
demolition activity.
7.3 FINANCE AND CORPORATE SERVICES COMMITTEE - OCTOBER 6,
2025
7.3.a Upper Canada Park Public Art Commission, DSD -2025-358
5
Page 2 of 46
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
That the commission and creation of a new public artwork, "The
Seams," by Javid Jah and his organization JAH Cube, to be installed
at Upper Canada Park as part of the final phase of its current facility
improvements, be approved; and further,
That the Mayor and Clerk be authorized to implement an agreement,
satisfactory to the City Solicitor, with the artist team, outlining the
obligations of the commission, as outlined in Development Services
Department report DSD -2025-358.
7.3.b Racialized and Indigenous Supports for Equity (RISE) Fund, 3 Year
Update, COR -2025-386
That Council endorse the revisions to the Racialized and Indigenous
Supports for Equity (RISE) Grant funding framework to align with the
evolving needs of equity -denied communities in the City of Kitchener,
as outlined in Corporate Services Department report COR -2025-038.
7.3.c 2025-2026 Gas Supply and Delivery Rates, INS -2025-399
That Kitchener Utilities' natural gas variable and fixed delivery rates
be approved as proposed in Infrastructure Services Department report
INS -2025-399 - Attachment 'A', for all Kitchener delivery customers
effective January 1, 2026.
UNFINISHED BUSINESS - NIL
NEW BUSINESS
9.1 - MAYORAL BUSINESS AND UPDATES - MAYOR B. VRBANOVIC
QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS
STAFF REPORTS
11.1 ADMINISTRATIVE REPORTS
11.1.a Dog Designation Process Enhancements, CSD -2025-381 23
11.1.b NSP 25-175 Multiyear Non -Standard Procurement Suppliers, FIN- 34
2025-444, FIN -2025-444
11.1.c Notice of Intention to Designate 2219 Ottawa St S and 808 Trussler 38
Rd Resolution Amendment, DSD -2025-442
11.2 FOR INFORMATION
11.2.a Summary of Bid Solicitations Approved by the Chief Procurement 42
Officer (July 1, 2025 - September 30, 2025), FIN -2025-440, FIN -
2025 -440
BY-LAWS
Page 3 of 46
12.1 THREE READINGS
12.1.a To further amend By-law No. 2019-113, being a by-law to regulate
traffic and parking on highways under the jurisdiction of the
Corporation of the City of Kitchener.
(By-law 2025-115)
12.1.b Being a by-law to designate the property municipally addressed as
14 Irvin Street, in the City of Kitchener as being of historic and
cultural heritage value or interest.
(By-law 2025-116)
12.1.c Being a by-law to designate the property municipally addressed as
18 Irvin Street, in the City of Kitchener as being of historic and
cultural heritage value or interest.
(By-law 2025-117)
12.1.d Being a by-law to designate the property municipally addressed as
69 Agnes Street, in the City of Kitchener as being of historic and
cultural heritage value or interest.
(By-law 2025-118)
12.1.e Being a by-law to designate the property municipally addressed as
80-86 Union Boulevard/571 York Street, in the City of Kitchener as
being of historic and cultural heritage value or interest.
(By-law 2025-119)
12.1.f To further amend By-law No. 2010-190, being a by-law to prohibit
unauthorized parking of motor vehicles on private property.
(By-law 2025-120)
12.1.g To further amend By-law No. 88-171, being a by-law to designate
private roadways as fire routes and to prohibit parking thereon.
(By-law 2025-121)
12.1.h To further amend By-law No. 2008-117, being a by-law to authorize
certain on -street and off-street parking of vehicles for use by persons
with a disability, and the issuing of permits in respect thereof.
(By-law 2025-122)
12.1.1 To confirm all actions and proceedings of the Council for October 20,
2025.
(By-law 2025-123)
13. ADJOURNMENT
Page 4 of 46
QO
It
0
00
3
0)
co
n
mw
ILO
QO
It
0
00
3
0)
co
n
I�IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
QO
It
4-
0
N
0)
co
n
uillmuuumu
imm01
uuuu Im�������
m umm uuuuuuu i
mm�
uuumuu uuuuuuuu
uuuuuuuu m Viu
uuuuuuuu
U
0 air
r
`wrn/ E
E
E
0
u
v
ew
c
U 2
W
00
UWA
an
ON
I
QO
It
4-
0
CN
co
f)
0
0'03 SOUUO.L
1�
U, 52
ul
0
0'03 SOUUO.L
1�
u�uw!lu�u'uu�u, ;
ulu�mum ���
�rrruuan,��
HIM
��Vu�uuuu�uu�,�
n
1u1� illllllminvi
iimno�uwwuwn�im�
w�unwiwiwuunn�t
1010110 Q UIN
rrarrrrarm�I�I�I�I�I�IUIu�, ml�l�l�l�l�l�l�l�l�y�l fm�l�l�l�l�l�l�l�l�l�l�l�lu�lq
����wummmmmmmluu � �mimuimuimuimiu� ��muimuimu�iuu�iiu
��mr�rrrrrr�mi�iim�u�ulU� �uou
r J,
m
� � � loioioioioiool�� �iirmnm2���2�22aaomf
E
cm E
M
m
0fam�11��1��1 l�
�����muauJUuauuauU0 1
D�uuuuuUu�uu�k,��
���4�u0000000000U�
QO
It
4-
0
LO
N
co
d
�rNenmrcr�uup�
��
����mr�000000000000al�u
QO
It
4-
0
N
co
d
173
.... .. ........................................................................................
...
4-J
0
4-J
u
4-J
4-J
4-J
0
...............
0
1
0
EMOR
QO
It
4-
0
00
co
f)
■
co
0
m
ry)
C.
Z
NONNI
co
tp
■
co
0
m
0
0)
Ou
I
�
QO
It
0
C\l
3
�
_
f
l,
•
§<
Co
0�
�
/� �
|�
d
:
allill
cu.
�
1111111
•.
Z
Im
_.
,
-
� �mw
�»
�
|6
0iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii
r
'
.
.n
!
°
0111110
/\
r «
11110
'fillill12
,
,c
�
QO
It
0
C\l
3
�
_
f
Staff Reort � )
Community Services Department www.kitchener.ca
REPORT TO: Committee of the Whole
DATE OF MEETING: October 20, 2025
SUBMITTED BY: Gloria MacNeil, Director of Enforcement, 519-783-8516
PREPARED BY: Gloria MacNeil, Director of Enforcement, 519-783-8516
WARD(S) INVOLVED: Ward(s) All
DATE OF REPORT: August 29, 2025
REPORT NO.: CSD -2025-381
SUBJECT: Dog Designation Process Enhancements
RECOMMENDATION:
That Council approve the improvements to the dog designation process outlined in CSD -
2025 -381.
REPORT HIGHLIGHTS:
The purpose of this report is to review the conditions imposed on dog owners by the Dog
Designation Committee and identify opportunities for enhancement.
To improve public access to information by updating and streamlining website content
related to dog bite incidents.
To enhance the notification process following the designation of a dog, ensuring timely and
effective communication with all relevant parties.
BACKGROUND:
On August 25, 2025, Council passed a motion directing staff to investigate and report back on
several potential process enhancements to the dog designation process including but not limited
to:
• Notification from By-law Enforcement Staff to the Ward Councillor, Mayor, Office of Mayor
and Council staff when the Humane Society issues a "dangerous" or "prohibited" dog
order,
• Periodic reports from By-law Enforcement staff to Council on actions and investigations
undertaken by the Humane Society to ensure Owners of designated dogs are complying
with the designation requirements;
• Revising content on the city's website to clearly direct search inquiries on reporting
dangerous dogs to the Humane Society;
• Collaborating with the Humane Society on a process to share permitted information once
a complaint has been received, in accordance with the Municipal Freedom of Information
and Protection of Privacy Act; and,
*** This information is available in accessible formats upon request. ***
Please call 519-741-2345 or TTY 1-866-969-9994 for assistance.
Page 23 of 46
• Legislative challenges with the Dog Owners Liability Act (DOLA) that would improve the
city's ability to obtain an interim order permitting the Humane Society to hold a dog seized
under a warrant in a pound until the DOLA hearing."
BACKGROUND:
The City of Kitchener contracts The Humane Society of Kitchener Waterloo and Stratford Perth
to investigate and enforce all provisions of the Dog Designations By-law, Chapter 420 and the
Responsible Dog Ownership By-law, Chapter 421, and to take appropriate action including
enforcement of the by-law.
The Humane Society on behalf of the City of Kitchener, may on their own initiative or as the
result of a complaint received by a resident, conduct an inquiry/investigation into whether a dog
should be designated a potentially dangerous dog, a dangerous dog, a restricted dog, or a
prohibited dog, where there are reasonable grounds to believe that the dog fits the definition.
Designations can include additional requirements or terms on the dog owner which address
public safety, and which must be adhered to, including muzzling the dog when off the property,
ensuring adequate fencing around the property, notification of moving, etc. It is important to note
that not all dog designations are appealed or come before the Dog Designation Committee.
When a designation is issued, the dog owner has five working days to appeal the designation.
The Dog Designation/Animal Designation Committee, which is currently made up of three
Councillors, are responsible to consider, without bias, evidence provided at the appeal hearing,
and to make a decision to uphold, rescind, or alter the dog designation or conditions of the dog
designation. The decision of the Committee is then forwarded to the first available Council
meeting for ratification. The dog owner/appellant may appeal the decision of Council within 30
days through a Judicial Review.
When a dog is designated prohibited, the owner is required to surrender the dog to the Humane
Society within six working days or to provide proof satisfactory to the Humane Society that the
dog has been removed from the City to a location not prohibited by the Dog Owners' Liability
Act, or has been disposed of in a humane manner.
REPORT:
This report presents the findings from staff's review of the dog designation process along with
additional context and information related to the specific areas raised by City Council in its
August 25, 2025 motion.
1. Notification from By-law Enforcement Staff to the Ward Councillor, Mayor, Office of
Mayor and Council staff when the Humane Society issues a "dangerous" or
"prohibited" dog order:
Staff have met with the Humane Society and have no concerns with providing notification to
the ward Councillor, Mayor and Officer of Mayor and Council when a prohibited dog
designation occurs. Upon completion of an investigation whereby the Humane Society has
Page 24 of 46
designated a prohibited dog, they will notify the Director of By-law Enforcement and will
provide a summary of the investigation and reason for the designation. The Director of By-
law Enforcement will then send an email to the ward Councillor, Mayor, and Office of Mayor
and Council staff advising the particulars associated with the designation to inform them and
assist in responding to resident and media inquiries.
2. Periodic reports from By-law Enforcement staff to Council on actions and
investigations undertaken by the Humane Society to ensure Owners of designated
dogs are complying with the designation requirements:
Cases are investigated by the Humane Society and remain open and active as most
designations have conditions placed on the owner that are ongoing for the life of the dog.
The severity of the bite determines the frequency of how often Humane Society follows up
with the property, however all properties with conditions are inspected at least once per year
and properties with more severe bites are inspected more frequently.
The Humane Society will notify Legal Services once the conditions imposed on dangerous
or prohibited dogs have been satisfied. This may include, for example, confirmation that
fencing has been installed or that a dog has been neutered following a hearing. Legal
Services will also be advised when a prohibited dog has been surrendered in accordance
with the Committee's decision. Upon receiving this information, Legal staff will update the
Dog Designation Committee to ensure they are informed and to facilitate closure of the file.
3. Revising content on the city's website to clearly direct search inquiries on reporting
dangerous dogs to the Humane Society:
Staff are currently working to enhance the City's webpage, making it easier for residents to
access information related to dog -bite incidents. Updates will include clear guidance on how
to report an incident, relevant contact information, and details on who to reach out to for
follow-up inquiries.
In addition, the Humane Society has updated its website to include a guide outlining what to
do if a dog bites a person or another animal. The guide provides contact details and
suggested information to include such as photos of injuries, medical documentation, and
other information that may support the investigation process.
4. Collaborating with the Humane Society on a process to share permitted information
once a complaint has been received, in accordance with the Municipal Freedom of
Information and Protection of Privacy Act:
While there is an active investigation, staff are limited in the information they can share
publicly. If there is a concern for public safety, a brief update may be provided to the area
Ward Councillor and the Mayor, outlining the nature of the situation.
Staff recognize that residents may become frustrated by the lack of publicly available
information. However, it is essential to ensure that any communication does not create bias,
particularly in cases where the dog owner may appeal the designation. Additionally, staff
Page 25 of 46
must be mindful of legal privacy considerations and avoid disclosing personal information
about individuals.
In the early stages of an investigation, the only update that may be provided is confirmation
that an incident has occurred and that it is under active investigation.
5. Legislative challenges with the Dog Owners Liability Act (DOLA) that would improve
the city's ability to obtain an interim order permitting the Humane Society to hold a
dog seized under a warrant in a pound until the DOLA hearing:
The Dog Owners' Liability Act is provincial legislation governed by the Province of Ontario.
Any proposed amendments to this Act would require Council to formally advocate to the
provincial government.
Staff, in collaboration with the Humane Society, the Dog Designation Committee, and
Council, remain committed to enhancing processes related to dog bite incidents and
improving communication wherever possible.
STRATEGIC PLAN ALIGNMENT:
This report supports the delivery of core services.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS: N/A
COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT:
INFORM — This report has been posted to the City's website with the agenda in advance of the
council / committee meeting.
APPROVED BY: Michael May, DCAO
ATTACHMENTS:
Attachment — COR -2025-111 — 2025 Dog Designation Appeal Committee Composition Review
Page 26 of 46
Staff Report
J
IKgc.;i' r� R
Corporate Services Department www.kitchener.ca
REPORT TO: Finance and Corporate Services Committee
DATE OF MEETING: March 17, 2025
SUBMITTED BY: Amanda Fusco, Director, Legislated Services/City Clerk, 519-904-1402
PREPARED BY: Dianna Saunderson, Manager, Council and Committee Services /
Deputy Clerk, 519-904-1410
WARD(S) INVOLVED: All
DATE OF REPORT: February 24, 2025
REPORT NO.: COR -2025-111
SUBJECT: 2025 Dog Designation Appeal Committee Composition Review
RECOMMENDATION:
That staff be directed to proceed with as the preferred committee
structure/composition as outlined in Corporate Services Department report COR -2025-
111; and further,
That staff be directed to prepare the necessary council policy or by-law to implement the
preferred committee structure/composition, prior to June 2025 for Council's
consideration.
REPORT HIGHLIGHTS:
• The purpose of this report is to review the current composition of the Animal Designation
Appeal Committee and the Dog Designation Appeal Committee.
• The Animal Designation Appeal Committee and the Dog Designation Appeal Committee
convene hearings and make recommendations to Council on dog designations appeals and
restricted animal exemption requests (as outlined in Chapter 408 (Animal Regulation) and
Chapter 420 (Dog - Designation) and Chapter 421 (Dog - Responsible Ownership) of the
City of Kitchener Municipal Code).
• Dog Designation Committee and Animal Designation Appeals generally are infrequent.
• The Dog Designation Committee is responsible for hearing and deciding appeals against
decisions made by The Humane Society of Kitchener Waterloo and Stratford Perth to
designate a dog as dangerous or restricted.
• The Animal Designation Appeal Committee is responsible for rendering decisions related
amending the restricted/prohibited list of animals as outlined within the By-law.
BACKGROUND:
The City currently has five Quasi -Judicial Committees/Tribunals of which two meet regularly;
Committee of Adjustment and Property Standards, and three meet infrequently; the Licensing
Appeal Tribunal, the Animal Designation Appeal Committee and Dog Designation Appeal
Committee. All five of the Quasi -Judicial Committees render decisions based on various
*** This information is available in accessible formats upon request. ***
Please call 519-741-2345 or TTY 1-866-969-9994 for assistance.
Page 27 of 46
legislation, specifically the Statutory Powers of Procedure Act, Planning Act, Building Code and
Municipal Act. The term "quasi-judicial tribunal" refers to a body created by law with a mandate
to settle matters in an impartial manner by applying rules of law without regard for expediency
or administrative policy. The Committee of Adjustment and Property Standards Appeal
Committee render final decisions on behalf of the City and their appeal mechanisms are to the
Ontario Land Tribunal or Superior Court. Decisions made by the Licensing Appeal Tribunal,
Animal Designation Appeal Committee and Dog Designation Appeal Committee are ratified by
Council.
Dog Designation/Animal Designation Appeal Committee
The Dog Designation/Animal Designation Appeal Committee is made up of three Councillors
(currently two appointed members and two alternate members). The Committee's responsibility
is to consider, without bias, evidence provided at the appeal hearing, and make a decision to
uphold, rescind, or alter the dog designation or conditions of the dog designation. The decision
of the Committee is forwarded to the first available Council meeting for ratification.
Typically, the Committee convenes approximately four meetings each year, and currently there
is no associated fee for pursuing an appeal. Since 2017, there have been 32 (thirty-two) dog
designation appeals and 0 (zero) animal designation appeals, on average the Tribunal meets 5
times. It is important to note that the same members who serve on the Dog Designation Appeal
Committee also serve on Council for ratification of the decision.
REPORT:
At Special Council meeting earlier this year, Council considered Council and Committee
appointments and directed staff to review the current committee composition of the Dog
Designation/Animal Designation Appeal Committee, noting previously the Committee had an
individual that was a Canadian Kennel Club member who has since resigned and since that time
there have been challenges conducting the hearings from an adjudicative or animal behaviourist
perspective.
The existing structure for the Dog Designation/Animal Designation Appeal Committee also
presents further challenges, specifically related to matters including but not limited to: hearing
scheduling, expertise in animal behaviour, expertise in by-law interpretation and establishing
enforceable decisions/conditions that are within the authority of the Committee, familiarity with
the provisions in the Statutory Powers and Procedures Act, procedural fairness and potentially
bias. In some instances, members of Council hear from constituents related to the incidents,
which could also result in concerns about impartiality.
Based on the current practice, Dog designation appeals are supposed to be scheduled for
consideration by the Committee within 45 days and are usually held on the same day as Council.
The current schedule has also become problematic as there have been a number of other priority
meetings that identified for similar scheduling, resulting in the need to find alternative dates for
the Committee to meet, often beyond the preferred guidelines of 45 days. In 2023 and 2024
there were 10 hearings scheduled and of those hearings; none of which were within the preferred
45 -day timeline, and only three of the meetings proposed on the 2024 schedule were able to be
maintained on the Monday morning of Council.
Page 28 of 46
Additionally, the Committee composition previously included one appointment reserved for an
individual who was a member of the Canadian Kennel Club, to bring experience with dog/animal
behaviour to the Committee. The appointment of the member was ad hoc in nature as the By-
law previously identified the appointment of a Canadian Kennel Club member but did not require
appointment of a specific individual. That requirement was removed from the By-law when it was
revised in 2014. Since that revision, Council members make up the entirety of the Committee.
While the Dog Designation/Animal Designation Appeal Committee meetings are public meetings
and are open to the public to attend, there is discretion taken with meeting records due to the
sensitive nature of the matters being discussed. Following the Committee meeting, the decision
of the Committee is forwarded to the next available Council meeting for ratification. Additionally,
the Committees receive a copy of the meeting minutes, as well as a public staff report, outlining
the Committee's recommendation the Committee and a summary of the hearing proceedings.
Council at their meeting, then consider the Committee's decision and can ratify or amend the
decision. By virtue of the matter being referred to the Council meeting, procedurally, there is
nothing procedurally to prevent parties to the hearing appearing as delegates to address Council
and potentially seek changes to the Committee's recommendation. For delegations, this step
can be very confusing, as the Dog Appeal hearing is conducted in an informal court like fashion,
whereas delegating at Council, delegations are subject to the procedural by-law time allocation
of 5 -minutes. Since 2017, Council has considered all decisions of the Committee and have
approved all decisions as recommended, save and except for one, that resulted in an
amendment to the deadline for spay / neutering. In hopes to sway Council to amend the
Committee's decision, delegations typically share a significant amount of personal information
during the Council meeting, which would be available in the Council meeting minutes and on the
archived livestream.
A summary of the current process for Dog Designation Appeal Committee is below:
Current Process
1.
Appeal the Dog Designation
2.
Attend Dog Designation Appeal Hearing — Committee renders a
decision
3.
Appellant may attend Council to address the Committee decision
4.
Council renders a decision
5.
Appellant may appeal a Council decision through Judicial Review
Staff are proposing three options to amend the current structure of the Dog Designation/Animal
Designation Appeal Committee:
Option 1: Implement a Hearing Officer as the Animal Designation Appeal Committee, the
Dog Designation Committee
A hearing officer could be appointed as the Animal and Dog Designation Appeal Committee for
the purpose of dealing with any dog or animal designation appeals. The Hearing Officer would
be an independent, impartial individual who is trained in the relevant legal and procedural
matters. They would hear evidence, make findings of fact, issue their own procedural rulings as
required and issue a decision. The decision of the Hearing Officer would be final and would not
come to Council for ratification. Staff propose that the already approved Hearing Officer
Page 29 of 46
contracted by By-law Enforcement for the Administrative Monetary Penalty System (AMPS)
could be utilized on an ad hoc basis, for any dog and/or animal appeal requests.
This proposed process would be similar to the City of Kitchener's By-law Enforcement's use of
the Hearing Officer through AMPS which transfers parking disputes from the courtroom to the
municipality. This has resulted in a streamlined process for both staff and the citizens and has
reduced the administrative impact on the court system. There are numerous advantages to
aligning both the animal and dog designation appeals with AMPS, these benefits include:
• Impartiality: A Hearing Officer is a neutral third -party who is not involved in the
enforcement or regulatory process. They can provide an objective perspective on the
case, ensuring fairness in the decision-making process.
• Expertise: A Hearing Officer would have experience in the adjudication process and by-
law interpretation which would add fairness and consistency to the decision-making
process.
• Red -Tape Reduction: The use of a Hearing Officer will expedite the timing and decision-
making process, while also ensuring a fair and just hearing for the Appellant.
• Timeliness: Hearing Officers are currently scheduled two times a month for current
business, including Dog Designation/Animal Designation appeals to that schedule would
help to improve the timeliness of their consideration.
• Efficiency: Utilizing a Hearing Officer would allow Council members to save valuable
time and resources that would otherwise have been allocated towards participation in the
tribunal process. Council's involvement in the decision-making process is minimized,
allowing them to focus on other constituent matters. The appeal process would also offer
an online option, facilitated by the Hearing Officer, to provide greater convenience for the
person requesting the appeal.
• Transparency: The use of a Hearing Officer can provide greater transparency in the
decision-making process, as the hearing and the decision are usually public. This can
increase confidence in the regulatory system and ensure accountability.
By utilizing a Hearing Officer, appeals can be resolved in a manner that is both fair and efficient
and is consistent with the way other city by-laws are handled under AMPS.
Option 1 — Hearing Officer - Process
1. Appeal the Dog Designation or Restricted Animal request
2. Attend Dog Designation Appeal Hearing — Hearing Officer renders
a decision
3. Appellant may appeal a Hearing Officer decision through Judicial
Review
This option is being used currently by other municipalities including but not limited to Richmond
Hill and London.
Option 2: Amend the structure of the Animal and Dog Designation Appeal Committee to
have a total of 5 members, 3 members with expertise in adjudication and/or animal/dog
behaviour expertise and 2 members of Council
Page 30 of 46
The Committee could operate in a similar fashion as it is currently operating to date, but rather
than being comprised solely of members of Council, staff could be directed to build a Terms of
Reference for the Committee, that would confirm the operational function of the Committee and
confirm the membership of the Committee and preferred expertise. The Terms of Reference
would be brought back to Council for further consideration and once approved, the hearings
could be scheduled to always ensure that there is one Council member and one animal
behaviourist in attendance at each meeting.
This option would still result in the Committee's decision being forwarded to the next available
Council meeting for ratification. For individuals that decide to delegate at Council meetings, it
typically results in sharing information beyond what was presented during the hearing that
hearing that may be sensitive in nature, in a public forum. Council since 2017 ratified all but one
decision of the Committee unchanged. Following Council's ratification of the decision, the
Appellant would have the opportunity to appeal Council's decision to Divisional Court if they
were unsatisfied.
Option 2 — Councillor & Expert Appeal Committee - Process
1.
Appeal the Dog Designation
2.
Attend Dog Designation Appeal Hearing — Committee renders a
decision
3.
Appellants may attend Council to address the Committee decision
4.
Council renders a decision
5.
Appellant may appeal a Council decision through Judicial Review
Option 3: Amend the structure of the Animal and Dog Designation Appeal Committee to
have a total of 5 members who are proposed to be all citizen members with adjudication
and/or animal/dog behaviour expertise
The Committee could operate in a similar fashion as it is currently operating to date, but rather
than being comprised members of Council, staff could be directed to build a Terms of Reference
for the Committee, that would confirm the operational function of the Committee and would
confirm the membership of the Committee and preferred expertise. The Terms of Reference
would be brought back to Council for further consideration and once approved, the hearings
could be scheduled.
This option would still result in the Committee's decision being forwarded to the next available
Council meeting for ratification. For individuals that decide to delegate at Council meetings, it
typically results in sharing information beyond what was presented during the hearing that may
be sensitive in nature, in a public forum. Council since 2017 ratified all but one decision of the
Committee unchanged. Following Council's ratification of the decision, the Appellant would have
the opportunity to appeal Council's decision to the Divisional Court if they were unsatisfied.
While staff are supportive of all three options, it would be staff's recommendation that the Dog
Designation Appeal Committee structure be replaced with a Hearing Officer, given the ability to
expedite the timing and decision-making process, while also ensuring a fair and just hearing for
the Appellant. Pending Council's decision, staff will continue to seek opportunities to improve
the administration of the Committee and report back to Council where additional approvals may
be required.
Page 31 of 46
Option 3 — Citizen Experts Appeal Committee - Process
1.
Appeal the Dog Designation
2.
Attend Dog Designation Appeal Hearing — Committee renders a
decision
3.
Appellants may attend Council to address the Committee decision
4.
Council renders a decision
5.
Appellant may appeal a Council decision through Judicial Review
STRATEGIC PLAN ALIGNMENT:
This report supports the delivery of core services.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:
There is an operating budget of $1,000.00 for the Dog Designation/Animal Designation Appeal
Committee that is likely to cover the majority of the expenses related to the Committee. There is
no current fee to request an appeal, as the cost is mainly involved the time commitment of
various city staff, council members, and committee members. Pending Council's decision, staff
following the implementation of a potential new structure may seek to make a minor increase to
the budget in future years, or review whether a modest appeal fee should be imposed.
Previously, the budget was used to provide a honourarium to the Canadian Kennel Club member
prior to their resignation from the Committee.
Option 1: Implement a Hearing Officer as the Animal Designation Appeal Committee, the
Dog Designation Committee
The proposed recommendation is expected to have a negligible effect on the operating budget.
If a dog appeal is requested, the cost of a Hearing Officer would be $260 per half day or $520
per full day. There is currently no fee to request an appeal, as the cost is mainly involved the
time commitment of various city staff, council members, and committee members. The use of
the Hearing Officer would significantly reduce this temporal cost.
Option 2: Amend the structure of the Animal and Dog Designation Appeal Committee to
have a total of 5 members, 3 members with adjudication and/or animal/dog behaviour
expertise and 2 members of Council AND Option 3: Amend the structure of the Animal
and Dog Designation Appeal Committee to have a total of 5 members who are proposed
to be all citizen members with adjudication and/or animal/dog behaviour expertise
The proposed recommendations to amend the committee composition to include citizen
members is expected to have a negligible effect on the operating budget. The Committee
currently has its own operating budget that is allocated $1,000 to cover honourariums. To ensure
the Committee is in line with the previously approved honourariums, it is recommended that any
citizen members scheduled to attend a meeting, be paid the same rate that is paid to members
of the Property Standards Committee, $125 Chair (s) and $100 Member (s).
COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT:
INFORM — This report has been posted to the City's website with the agenda in advance of the
council / committee meeting.
Page 32 of 46
PREVIOUS REPORTS/AUTHORITIES:
There are no previous reports/authorities related to this matter.
APPROVED BY: Victoria Raab, General Manager, Corporate Services
Page 33 of 46
Staff Report
Financial Services Department www.kitchener.ca
REPORT TO: Council Meeting
DATE OF MEETING: October 20, 2025
SUBMITTED BY: Ryan Scott, Chief Procurement Officer, 519-741-2200 ext. 7214
PREPARED BY: Brad Kowaleski, Procurement Specialist, 519-741-2200 ext. 7063
WARD(S) INVOLVED: N/A
DATE OF REPORT: October 15, 2025
REPORT NO.: FIN -2025-444
SUBJECT: NSP25-175 Multiyear Non -Standard Procurement Suppliers
RECOMMENDATION:
That the City proceed with non-standard procurement and enter into agreements with
the suppliers listed in Attachment 1 for a period of up to five (5) years, as outlined in
Financial Services Department report FIN -2025-444.
REPORT HIGHLIGHTS:
• The purpose of this report is to obtain approval to proceed with non-standard
procurement in accordance with Procurement By-law 2022-109;
• The City has arrangements with the suppliers named in Attachment 1 for many years
and continuing these partnerships will allow the City to continue standardization of
products and delivery of services both internally and externally;
• This report supports the delivery of core services.
:11_[4]:(r]:Tell] Ll 113
The City has standardized a range of products and services over time to enhance internal
operations and public service delivery. To continue leveraging these efficiencies, staff
recommend longer-term agreements with select suppliers under non-standard procurement
provisions.
These suppliers have been identified based on the following criteria:
• Sole distribution rights in Canada;
• Exclusive availability of specialized equipment or parts;
• Standardization requirements based on previous procurements;
• Proven service compatibility and long-standing partnerships.
These arrangements provide multiple operational benefits, including improved pricing,
reduced procurement lead times, streamlined administration, and enhanced cost control.
*** This information is available in accessible formats upon request. ***
Please call 519-741-2345 or TTY 1-866-969-9994 for assistance.
Page 34 of 46
While actual expenditures will vary based on operational activity, the non-standard approach
is consistent with the City's procurement framework.
The actual spend will depend on the level of activity throughout the term of the contracts.
REPORT:
In accordance with the Procurement By-law 2022-109, Section 15 — Non -Standard
Procurement, Council's approval is required as the total value of the deliverables for this
non-standard procurement exceeds the delegated authority.
A non-standard procurement is the acquisition of goods, services or construction through a
process or method other than the process and method normally required for the type and
value of the required deliverables, as identified below:
Requirement
Procurement
Value Excluding
Taxes
Procurement
Process
Approval
Authority
Goods, Services or
$40,001 -
Non -Competitive or
Chief Procurement
Construction under the
$250,000
Limited Competition
Officer
circumstances included in
Schedule "C".
Goods, Services or
$250,001 or more
Non -Competitive or
Council
Construction under the
Limited Competition
circumstances included in
Schedule "C".
In accordance with the Procurement By-law 2022-109, Schedule "C", The City may acquire
goods, services and construction through a non-standard procurement process within
specific circumstances listed. Below are the applicable clauses within Schedule "C" and
additional information providing justification supporting their use:
2. Where only one supplier is able to meet the requirements of a
procurement in order to:
a) ensure compatibility with existing products
The City has partnered with specific suppliers over the past decade and in some instances,
theses partnerships are multiple decades old. To ensure compatibility and standardization
with existing products and services being delivered, only one supplier is able to meet specific
requirements. The City has run open competitive procurement several times, however, only
receive one response from the sole supplier whom can meet the requirements with existing
products and service levels. The costs for these products and services are funded in full by
a third party via the business model that the division is operating at the end user level.
3. Where there is an absence of competition for technical reasons and the
goods or services can only be supplied by one particular supplier and
no alternative or substitute exists.
Page 35 of 46
The City has partnered through a joint venture known as The Waterloo Region Education
and Public Network (WREPNet). The dark fibre network has been provisioned, supplied and
supported by one supplier. For that reason, an absence of competition exists and the
product or services can only be provided by one supplier and the City procures from those
suppliers directly.
STRATEGIC PLAN ALIGNMENT:
This report supports the delivery of core services.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:
Funding for these goods and services are available in the approved annual operating and
capital budgets. It is anticipated that the total estimated annual value through these
agreements represent approximately $685,000.
COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT:
INFORM — This report has been posted to the City's website with the agenda in advance of
the council / committee meeting.
PREVIOUS REPORTS/AUTHORITIES:
There are no previous reports/authorities related to this matter.
APPROVED BY: Jonathan Lautenbach, Chief Financial Officer, Financial Services
Department
ATTACHMENTS:
Attachment 1 — Listing of Non -Standard Procurement Suppliers
Page 36 of 46
�
§
a
.CL
�
U)
�
0
E
0
�
U
2
a.
�
%
�
�
■
U)
1�
0
2
0
�
�
�
-j
CD
�
0
rl-
co
¢
D
n
�
U)
�
_
-0
- o-
2
o
k
\
0
7 Q
7"
o
E E 0-E
o
ECL
0 o CL
0 0 Cl
O .
o
[ .S
o
/
0-o
/
m
m
n§
-o 3
F x
@ x
m._2 5
m.2 =
-a
)C
]C
2 22
c%
ƒ
2 2
Ĥ
3
3
3
n 0-
n
�
�
c
■
k
2
k
§
cu>CD
2
E
k
k
/
0
0
�
q
q
2
LU
(&
(&
69,
(Ak
F
�
n
.ECD 2
v0
o.\/
/2°
a
9
tf
p
U)
%
e
=.o
� > 0
= �_ m
3 5
=
®
0
2 « @
�
mo o
:
%� %
L
0)
LU 'k
m
(D
mo o
®
li -D-§7
° 0�
0
°
❑
2-5
0
U)M
Q 2
Lu
°
-0
ƒ
ƒƒk�
Co
�2§k�
/
.0
7
§
c
\
0 §E
2
0
®
OL
U!E
m
� ƒ
§
ƒ
o E
2
_3 L)
b
� 0-
U)
c
0
$
%
S_
�
k
=
k
3
m
Q
Q
E
■
.
q
co
CD
�
0
rl-
co
¢
D
n
�
Staff Report
J
IKgc.;i' r� R
Development Services Department www.kitchener.ca
REPORT TO: Council Meeting
DATE OF MEETING: October 20, 2025
SUBMITTED BY: Garett Stevenson, Director of Development & Housing Approvals,
519-783-8922
PREPARED BY: Victoria Grohn, Heritage Planner, 519-783-8912
WARD(S) INVOLVED: Ward 5
DATE OF REPORT: October 16, 2025
REPORT NO.: DSD -2025-442
SUBJECT: Notice of Intention to Designate
2219 Ottawa Street South
Resolution Amendment
RECOMMENDATION:
That the resolution ratified at the August 25, 2025 Council meeting regarding the
Notice of Intention to Designate 2219 Ottawa Street South & 808 Bleams Road under
Part IV of the Ontario Heritage Act be amended to delete reference to "808 Bleams
Road", as outlined in Development Services Department report DSD -2025-442; and
further;
That the Notice of Intention to the designate would specifically apply to part of 2219
Ottawa Street South, which is identified as Part of Lot 129, German Company Tract,
being Part 1 on Plan 58R-22352 to facilitate the designation of a partition of the
property with a more accurate description.
REPORT HIGHLIGHTS:
• The purpose of this report is to amend a resolution regarding the Notice of Intention to
Designate the property municipally addressed as 2219 Ottawa Street South.
• The key finding of this report is the incorrect address was used in the resolution to
publish the Notice of Intention to Designate as there is now a more accurate description
of the lands which will facilitate compliance with the requirements in subsections 29(4)
and 29(4.1) of the Ontario Heritage Act. There is now a reference plan identifying the
block to which the designation is to apply and the legal address has been corrected.
• There are no financial implications associated with this report.
• Community engagement included posting the report online with the agenda in advance
of the City Council meeting.
• This report supports the delivery of core services.
*** This information is available in accessible formats upon request. ***
Please call 519-741-2345 or TTY 1-866-969-9994 for assistance.
Page 38 of 46
BACKGROUND:
The Notice of Intention to Designate the subject property was considered by the Heritage
Kitchener committee at its August 5, 2025 meeting. The resolution to publish a Notice of
Intention to Designate the property municipally addressed as 2219 Ottawa Street South and
808 Bleams Road was passed by Council at its August 25, 2025 meeting. However, the
address noted in this resolution is incorrect. To comply with the Ontario Heritage Act and
given that there is now a registered reference plan with an accurate location, the resolution
should be amended to include the correct address of 2219 Ottawa Street South. The subject
property is referred to this correct address throughout the report.
REPORT:
The subject property has been evaluated and determined to meet the criteria for designation
under the Ontario Heritage Act. The original Notice of Intention to Designate referenced a
large parcel of land with the municipal address 2219 Ottawa Street South and 808 Bleams
Road. This address is incorrect and should have been referred to as 2219 Ottawa Street
South and 808 Trussler Road.
Since the passing of the resolution to publish the Notice of Intention to Designate, the City
has received a registered reference plan that clearly identifies the block encompassing the
heritage resource. To ensure accuracy and clarity, the designation is only to apply to the
block encompassing the heritage resource, as identified in registered reference plan 58R-
22352, received and deposited on August 26, 2025, and included as Attachment `A' to this
report.
Staff request that Council pass an amendment to the resolution adopted in August 2025 to
correct the municipal address to refer to 2219 Ottawa Street South and to update the legal
description to reflect the information shown on the registered reference plan. Pending
Council's approval the Notice of Intention to Designate will also be readvertised in the
Newspaper to ensure compliance with the notice provisions of the Ontario Heritage Act.
STRATEGIC PLAN ALIGNMENT:
This report supports the delivery of core services.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:
Capital Budget — The recommendation has no impact on the Capital Budget.
Operating Budget — The recommendation has no impact on the Operating Budget.
COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT:
INFORM — This report has been posted to the City's website with the agenda in advance of
the council meeting.
Page 39 of 46
PREVIOUS REPORTS/AUTHORITIES:
DSD -2025-243 Notice of Intention to Designate 2219 Ottawa Street South & 808
Bleams Road under Part IV of the Ontario Heritage Act
Ontario Heritage Act
APPROVED BY: Justin Readman, General Manager, Development Services
ATTACHMENTS:
Attachment A — Reference Plan
Page 40 of 46
r
w
9
Staff Report
J
IKgc.;i' r� R
Financial Services Department www.kitchener.ca
REPORT TO: Committee of the Whole
DATE OF MEETING: October 20, 2025
SUBMITTED BY: Ryan Scott, Chief Procurement Officer
PREPARED BY: Ryan Scott, Chief Procurement Officer
WARD(S) INVOLVED: N/A
DATE OF REPORT: October 13, 2025
REPORT NO.: L'IIII' . imm°art Illl iiii.:m Illber�.j
SUBJECT: Summary of Bid Solicitations Approved by the Chief Procurement
Officer (July 1, 2025 — September 30, 2025)
RECOMMENDATION:
For Information
REPORT HIGHLIGHTS:
• The purpose of this report is to provide a quarterly update on Procurements that have
been approved through delegated authority in accordance with the Procurement By-law
2022-109.
• There were twenty (20) bid solicitations approved in this quarter.
• This report supports the delivery of core services.
BACKGROUND:
In accordance with Procurement By-law 2022-109 (Chapter 170 Municipal Code), section
27.1. "The CPO must submit quarterly procurement information reports to Council to provide
the following information about the City's procurement activities:
a) The circumstances and details of approved procurements exceeding $133,800 in value,
under delegated authority of the CPO; and
b) the circumstances and details of any emergency purchase(s) with a procurement value
exceeding $133,800."
REPORT:
Attachment 1 is a listing of the approved bid solicitations for Council's information.
*** This information is available in accessible formats upon request. ***
Please call 519-741-2345 or TTY 1-866-969-9994 for assistance.
Page 42 of 46
STRATEGIC PLAN ALIGNMENT:
This report supports the delivery of core services.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:
All bid solicitations awarded by the Chief Procurement Officer, were within approved
budgets, or were approved in accordance with the budget control policy.
COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT:
INFORM — This report has been posted to the City's website with the agenda in advance of
the council / committee meeting.
PREVIOUS REPORTS/AUTHORITIES:
There are no previous reports/authorities related to this matter.
APPROVED BY: Jonathan Lautenbach, Chief Financial Officer, Financial Services
Department
ATTACHMENTS:
Attachment 1 — Listing of Approved Bid Solicitations July 1, 2025 — September 30, 2025
Page 43 of 46
Ln
N
O
N
O
M
L
E
0
Q
CO
LA
N
O
N
T
A
3
N
m
O
N
m
`W
0
Q
Q
Q
O
_y
J
V-
r
O cn
o�
*
*
* cn
O�
N cn
(1) (1)
* cn
O(DO
cn
CD
O�
Cl)
o m
c�
rn
Ln
o
o
cn
00
00co
ca
m
O cu
o
00 cLa
L-
oo
0
p
��,
C
O
00
IT
O
co
N
co
C
d+�
C C
C
C
C
Q
Gq
CO
LO
O
(D
00 :3
O 7
z
m
C
"T 7
c
�N
N
CoO N
60-
NN6?
CO
69
D
3
O
O
O
O
O
O
Q x
C�
C'1
>
E��OOOO
O
—CO N
E 01
E 0)
E 0)
0 4-
co
�
O
O
O
Q�
(a
N
ti
co
N
O
O
O
O
O
N
UOa)O�
Na)
N j
N
6FUfl
co
Mp
EF?
N
70 W
c O:
Q
O Q
C OE
E(
64
EF}
m Q
C
C LL
�
�
C
LL
LL
LL
LL
LL
O
Q
L
N
(B
cm
D
O
L
c�
-
�j
N
>
O
.Q
0
-
U
U
p
O
D
U
U
�C
U
nm C
o
'Q
O
L
"
V
U
(� O
C
Cl)
C: CO
mO
O
O—U
0
Co
N._ m
CO
O w
�
C N c
(Bw
�0
�0�
coo
a) (nLu0
o an(D
� a)U�o
U)
O 0
�
(6 a
O C
U
J
L
(6 —
U
� O
Q .0
Cd
N cn
(0 O
'O
O (6 N
o0 C
c-
Q
0
C
N
a
N
w=�
s_
(D
C
CL i
N C
O L O
D
'(p
C
co O
O N
(n
CO = N
U
O
UCS
cII+U_
COY
H
�Y�
O L.i ca(�
�����QQ�ooU
W c O"
O•N
p—
UH��C)(D
E c3ON2
>Y
C
1
O
00
L
O
N
U
Q
QQ
cB
?�
C
G1
(n
MO
O
>
C W
U
W
U
W
L
(�
Z
o
a
>,
U
>_
C
Y'
Q
.Q
aO
�
m
C
�
—
>
,�
N
+co�
O
cn LL:
E
N
Q
O
1
O0
?i
v
0
a)
U >
U
U 1
E
O
i
���
")
N N
_U
O
:
O
O
M
`V
CO
� O
CQ
C
U O
�,
a
0
O
LL
C
O
G "O
'�^�
C
L)
S
C:_
3:
70
F VJ
0
"O
V 1
>_ 0
0
L m
N
O �•
cn
N C
0
C
(0
fn c>4
N> C
Q
1
+' O
2
m
C O
.0 O
Co
p
(6
p�
O
Q
m
UI (n W
U Cn
d LL
H
m
CA
CO
U) U) of
C
LO
'k
co
O�
M
�
I
00 0
N
r
N
V
.O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
0
L)
Ln
Ln
A
U�
6
L6
Un
U)
cn
0
a
0
C)
a
a
0-
CN
0
C14
0
LL
�
co
4-
0
Ln
cm
t�
O
CY)
r
CY)
ti
O
O
O
ti
It
rl_
O
O
O
O
O
O
Cr)
N
O
Op
Oi
r
cr
LQr
Op
N
r
r
r
r
co
O
N
O
It
Cr)
N
r
O
CO
E
(p 7
(O
LO
K-}
N
K?
N
Ef?
It
H}
M
613-
N
H}
O
O
r
H?
O
C'1
E O
O
E cP
N
O
O
O
O
E O
O
p C
O
O
O C
L S
LO
M
O
O
N
m
O
O
O
O
p C
L-
O
O
CD
Oti
Lf
O
O6
M
O
ti
LO
a) Q
0 C
fU
L)
60,
Q
O�
EH
LL
LL
LL
U
o
U
06
J
�
O
O
C
c0
C
O
�'�
°
Li
°
0
70•°
o
U)
o o
M .L OC
L aOO
E
.L
-
n
pB
O �
Oc
^OO
C
O
Ucm
�•0
Cy+
a)
U cd
.
(�
5 o ��
_
ca
C
c60
UO c%)0
�LLUcc
.0�a)W
co�oL
SO
���(ACAOcn
O
AUC
(LQ O O
co U U
C
y
N
O-
(n
L
O N
W>
p
U
C
N
N Q
N a) _�
`� N
a) a)
a)
p
U L
O
,�
U
.� O
a)
m -C_Q.cn
.V O O
a •L
Q _ rn
E
(6 C
O L L (6 0 ca
U U
> +� +�
W m
M =
O
U-0
N L
L
U U
O X O
L cn
O� •-
Q O p
U)
0 0 •-
m
a) L
UD �� LLUUOYYQ�
OQdcgdQ�WYZLu
Q2�UU�>m
c
a)
U)
It
E
U
W
a)
p
Cl)
r
Q
4-
O
06a
U)
a)
C
W
L
U
CL
U L
m
l^
VJ
a)
p
L OL
m
ca
O
O
Q)
U)
a)
0 2
(,
U
.ri
�X
W
a
p
i�
i (�
p
L
C
a)
U O
a)
C
/�
V
O
(�
a) r
a_
07
O
N
(0 O
o r 0
m 0
O
=
p 0
V a)
CD
LL -�
J Q
L
a)
L
i
m
O
U OL
O O
CO OL
> a)
m
> a)
cn Q
a)
ca
C7
o
O
O
a) c
0 m
X 0 0
m
o cn
>+
-O C
o
O U
O U
co a)
+r
4)
o
�/O�
V J
O N
U E
+�
a)
m�
o
m
E
a)
U) -r- C
2
L
CDE
�"
0)
DO a)
N
—
>'C
L
>, CD
O� OU
a) 0
C
a) J) O
�o 0
Q ( o
Q .Q C
> CT
OW
L � a)
a mD�D
w-=�
O
L
00-r"tcn�--0-
Q
�! L
v
U) i
L Q
O
L M
U)
�
�
fl-
O
M
I-
r
Ln
r
N
r
r
N
co
M
co
6
Lf)
6
Ln
r
r
r
r
N
r
N
r
N
N
Ln
Lr)
Lr>
Ln
O
Ln
O
O
O
0
0
a
0
LL
a
LL
a
LL
LL
co
4-
0
Ln
cm
t�