HomeMy WebLinkAbout2021-05-25 Agenda
Council
Agenda
Date:May 25, 2021
Time:7:00 p.m.
Location:Council Members (in Chambers or MS Teams) | Members of the Public (MS
Teams)
Inquiries & Accommodations: For inquiries about this agenda, or to make arrangements for
accessibility accommodations for persons attending, please contact: Michelle Chambers,
Administrative Assistant to the Clerk, at 905-623-3379, ext. 2101 or by email at
mchambers@clarington.net.
Alternate Format: If this information is required in an alternate format, please contact the
Accessibility Coordinator, at 905-623-3379 ext. 2131.
Audio/Video Record: The Municipality of Clarington makes an audio and video record of Council
meetings. If you make a delegation or presentation at a Council meeting, the Municipality will be
recording you and will make the recording public by publishing the recording on the Municipality’s
website, www.clarington.net/calendar.
Cell Phones: Please ensure all cell phones, mobile and other electronic devices are turned off or
placed on non-audible mode during the meeting.
Copies of Reports are available at www.clarington.net
*Late Item added or a change to an existing item after the Agenda was published.
Pages
1.Call to Order
2.Moment of Reflection
3.Land Acknowledgement Statement
4.Declaration of Interest
5.Announcements
6.Adoption of Minutes of Previous Meeting(s)
6.1.Minutes of a regular meeting of Council dated May 3, 2021 4
7.Presentations
8.Delegations
9.Communications – Receive for Information
9.1.Integrity Commissioner 2019 and 2020 Annual Reports 15
10.Communications – Direction
11.Committee Reports
11.1.Advisory Committee Reports
11.1.1.Minutes of the Samuel Wilmot Nature Area Management
Advisory Committee dated April 12, 2021
25
11.2.General Government Committee Report of May 10, 2021 30
11.3.Planning and Development Committee Report of May 17, 2021 37
12.Staff Reports
12.1.Report FSD-028-21 - RFP2021-4 Centralized Customer Service Review
Consulting
40
13.Business Arising from Procedural Notice of Motion
May 25, 2021
Council Meeting
Page 2
14.Unfinished Business
15.By-laws
15.1.2021-049 - Being a by-law to license On-Farm Special Events 45
(Item 2 of the General Government Committee Report)
16.Procedural Notices of Motion
17.Other Business
18.Confirming By-Law
19.Adjournment
May 25, 2021
Council Meeting
Page 3
If this information is required in an alternate format, please contact the
Accessibility Co-ordinator at 905-623-3379 ext. 2131
Council Minutes
Date:
Time:
Location:
May 3, 2021
7:00 p.m.
Council Members (in Chambers or MS Teams) | Members of
the Public (MS Teams)
Members Present: Mayor A. Foster, Councillor G. Anderson, Councillor R. Hooper,
Councillor J. Jones, Councillor J. Neal, Councillor M. Zwart
Absent: Councillor C. Traill
Staff Present: A. Allison, G. Acorn, S. Brake, F. Langmaid, R. Maciver, T. Pinn,
R. Windle, J. Gallagher, M. Chambers
1. Call to Order
Mayor Foster called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.
2. Moment of Reflection
Councillor Hooper led the meeting in a moment of reflection.
3. Land Acknowledgement Statement
Councillor Hooper recited the Land Acknowledgement Statement.
Suspend the Rules
Resolution # C-156-21
Moved by Councillor Zwart
Seconded by Councillor Hooper
That the Rules of Procedure be suspended to add an i tem, as Item 10.1 –
Communications for Direction, correspondence from Wendy Bracken regarding
the City of Toronto seeking authority to negotiate with other landfill and EFW
facilities to negotiate taking waste.
Carried
Page 4
May 3, 2021
Council Minutes
2
4. Declaration of Interest
Mayor Foster declared a direct interest in Unfinished Business Item 14.1,
CAO-002-21 Potential Land Disposition, as he is the Secretary-Treasurer with
Durham Region Non-Profit Housing Corporation and has a conflict under the
Ontario Business Corporations Act.
Councillor Jones declared an indirect interest in Item 4 of the Planning and
Development Committee Report - PDS-026-21 Lease with Lakeridge Health for a
Temporary Air Ambulance Heliport.
5. Announcements
Members of Council announced upcoming community events a nd matters of
community interest.
6. Adoption of Minutes of Previous Meeting(s)
6.1 Minutes of a regular meeting of Council dated April 12, 2021
Resolution # C-157-21
Moved by Councillor Hooper
Seconded by Councillor Anderson
That the minutes of the regular meeting of the Council held on April 12, 2021 be
approved.
Carried
7. Presentations
7.1 MPP David Piccini - Update on the 2021 Provincial Budget
MPP David Piccini was present to provide an update on the 2021 Provincial
Budget. He recited a Land Acknowledgement Statement and commended the
Municipality of Clarington and CAO Allison on the mental health initiatives for
staff. MPP Piccini explained that his presentation would focus on a few key
points which will affect the Region of Durham. He noted that the key factors of
the 2021 Provincial Budget are protecting people’s health and protecting the
economy. MPP Piccini continued by providing an overview of the key initiatives
including the temporary jobs training tax credit, enhancing the childcare tax
credit, a focus on tourism, hospitality and business support grants, and the
community building fund. He continued by highlighting items relating to
healthcare including support for Lakeridge Health, local hospices, long term care
homes, and investing in the health care workforce. MPP Piccini added that there
are also several local initiatives including the Community Rural Infrastructure
Fund, Social Service Relief Fund, Fire Grants, and supporting local agriculture.
He concluded by stating that, in response to the pandemic, it is important for
“everyone to link arms” and work together to support the residents. MPP Piccini
answered questions from the Member of Council.
Page 5
May 3, 2021
Council Minutes
3
Resolution # C-158-21
Moved by Councillor Zwart
Seconded by Councillor Hooper
That the Presentation of MPP Piccini, regarding 2021 Provincial Budget, be
received with thanks.
Carried
8. Delegations
8.1 Rick McEachern regarding the Red Oak Tree at 21 Beech Avenue (Item 6.1
of the Heritage Committee Minutes of April 20, 2021)
Rick McEachern was present regarding the Red Oak Tree at 21 Beech Avenue
(Item 6.1 of the Heritage Committee Minutes of April 20, 2021). He explained to
the Members of Council that this tree is significant to Bowmanville's past,
present, and future. Mr. McEachern added that the future of the tree is rumored
to be in jeopardy. He explained that, based on his measurements, he has
determined the tree is approximately 288 years old, which means it sprouted in
1733. Mr. McEachern added that it makes the tree older than our cou ntry and it
has been around prior to the first pioneers settling in Bowmanville. He continued
by highlighting many significant historical events that have occurred since the
tree has been alive. Mr. McEachern stated that this tree was alive prior to the
construction of Beech Avenue and the homes being built on that street. He
explained that he has started a petition on charge.org, containing over 5000
signatures. Mr. McEachern reviewed the criteria for designating a tree with
heritage significance and he feels this tree meets that criteria. He feels the tree’s
life should be extended with support, including trimming. Mr. McEachern
concluded by urging the Members of Council to take the necessary steps to
protect this heritage tree.
Alter the Agenda
Resolution # C-159-21
Moved by Councillor Hooper
Seconded by Councillor Anderson
That the Agenda be altered to consider Clarington Heritage Committee minutes
dated April 20, 2021, at this time.
Carried
11.1.4 Minutes of the Heritage Committee dated April 20, 2021
Resolution # C-160-21
Moved by Councillor Hooper
Seconded by Councillor Anderson
That the minutes of the Heritage Committee dated April 20, 2021, be approved;
and
Page 6
May 3, 2021
Council Minutes
4
That Staff report back on a cost estimate on preserving, trimming and supporting
the Red Oak Tree.
Carried
9. Communications – Receive for Information
9.1 Memo from Lisa Wheller, Human Resources Manager, regarding Retiree
Health Benefit Information, Report Number LGS-015-21
Resolution # C-161-21
Moved by Councillor Jones
Seconded by Councillor Anderson
That Correspondence Item 9.1 be received for information.
Carried
10. Communications – Direction
10.1 Wendy Bracken regarding City of Toronto request to use Energy-from-
Waste (EFW) Facilities in Ontario
Resolution # C-162-21
Moved by Councillor Zwart
Seconded by Councillor Hooper
Whereas the City of Toronto’s Infrastructure and Environment Committee passed
a recommendation, at their April 28, 2021 meeting, seeking authority for the
General Manager, Solid Waste Management Services to negotiate sending the
City of Toronto waste to Energy-from-Waste (EFW) facilities in Ontario;
And whereas the City of Toronto Council will be considering the Committee’s
recommendation at their Wednesday, May 5, 2021 Council meeting;
And whereas the Municipality of Clarington is concerned about waste being
imported into Clarington from other municipalities;
And whereas the Durham York Energy Centre (DYEC) Environmental
Compliance Approval (ECA) only permits waste from Durham and York Regions;
And whereas the Host Community Agreement (HCA) between Durham Region
and the Municipality of Clarington for the DYEC restricts the waste source to
those identified in the EA Terms of Reference, which the ECA reflects; and
And whereas, the HCA outlines that, in the event that at any subsequent time
City of Toronto waste would be processed at the DYEC, then Clarington shall be
paid the sum of Ten Dollars ($10.00) per tonne;
Now therefore be it resolved:
That the correspondence from Wendy Bracken, regarding the City of Toronto’s
plan for their waste, be received;
Page 7
May 3, 2021
Council Minutes
5
That the Municipality of Clarington notify the City of Toronto that its waste is not
welcome in Clarington;
That the Region of Durham be requested to notify the City of Toronto and the
Province of Ontario that City of Toronto waste in not welcome in Clarington or
anywhere in Durham Region;
That the Province of Ontario, and Clarington’s MPPs, be asked to formally
acknowledge and provide a response to the Municipality of Clarington’s
concerns; and
That a copy of Council’s decision be forwarded to the Premier of Ontario,
Clarington’s MPPs, the Region of Durham, the DYEC, the City of Toronto, and
Wendy Bracken.
Yes (6): Mayor Foster, Councillor Anderson, Councillor Hooper, Councillor
Jones, Councillor Neal, and Councillor Zwart
Carried (6 to 0)
11. Committee Reports
11.1 Advisory Committee Reports
11.1.2 Minutes of the Active Transportation and Safe Roads Advisory
Committee dated April 7, 2021
Resolution # C-163-21
Moved by Councillor Zwart
Seconded by Councillor Neal
That Advisory Committee Report Items 11.1.1 to 11.1.4, be approved with the
exception of 11.1.1, 11.1.3 and 11.1.4 as it was considered earlier in the
meeting.
Carried
11.1.1 Minutes of the Agricultural Advisory Committee dated April 8, 2021
Resolution # C-164-21
Moved by Councillor Zwart
Seconded by Councillor Hooper
That the minutes of the Agricultural Advisory Committee dated April 8, 2021, be
approved.
Carried
Page 8
May 3, 2021
Council Minutes
6
11.1.3 Minutes of the Newcastle Arena Board dated April 13, 2021
Resolution # C-165-21
Moved by Councillor Zwart
Seconded by Councillor Anderson
That the minutes of the Newcastle Arena Board dated April 13, 2021, be
approved.
Carried
11.2 General Government Committee Report of April 19, 2021
Resolution # C-166-21
Moved by Councillor Neal
Seconded by Councillor Anderson
That the recommendations contained in the General Government Committee
Report of April 19, 2021, be approved on consent, with the exception of item 5.
Carried
Item 5 - Human Resources Matter – Closed Session Resolution
Resolution # C-167-21
Moved by Councillor Neal
Seconded by Councillor Hooper
That Item 5 of the General Government Committee Report be referred to the end
of the Agenda to be considered during Closed Session.
Carried
11.3 Planning & Development Committee Report of April 26, 2021
Resolution # C-168-21
Moved by Councillor Anderson
Seconded by Councillor Hooper
That the recommendations contained in the Planning and Development
Committee Report of April 26, 2021, be approved on consent, with the exception
of items 3 and 4.
Carried
Item 4 - Lease with Lakeridge Health for a Temporary Air Ambulance
Heliport
Councillor Jones declared a direct interest in Report PDS-026-21, as she is an
employee of Lakeridge Health. Councillor Jones muted her audio and video and
refrained from discussion and voting on this matter.
Page 9
May 3, 2021
Council Minutes
7
Resolution # C-169-21
Moved by Councillor Hooper
Seconded by Councillor Zwart
That PDS-026-21 be received;
That the Mayor and Municipal Clerk be authorized to execute a Lease
Agreement between the Municipality of Clarington and Lakeridge Health
substantially on the terms set out in Attachment 2 of Report PDS -026-21; and
That all interested parties listed in Report PDS-026-21 and any delegations be
advised of Council’s decision.
Carried
Councillor Jones returned to the meeting.
Item 3 - Darlington New Nuclear Build, License Renewal Hearing
Resolution # C-170-21
Moved by Councillor Zwart
Seconded by Councillor Anderson
That Report PDS-025-21 be received; and
That Council adopt the following resolution:
That the Darlington Nuclear Generating Station has been a significant part of
the Municipality of Clarington since the 1980s, and has provided many
positive benefits to the community with minimal adverse effects on the natural
environment;
That the Municipality of Clarington Council and Staff have attended numerous
meetings and information sessions with respect to the Darlington New
Nuclear Power Plant Project and are therefore very knowledgeable with
respect to the Project; and
That the Municipality of Clarington retained a qualified team of professionals
to undertake a detailed peer review of the draft Environmental Impact
Statement for the Darlington New Nuclear Power Plant Project and, on the
basis of this peer review, can state with confidence that the Environmental
Impact Statement meets the requirements of the Guidelines for the
preparation of the document and that it satisfactorily addresses the
Municipality's issues and concerns with respect to the Project;
That the Municipality of Clarington's peer review of the Environmental Impact
Statement for the Darlington New Nuclear Power Plant Project agreed with
the study’s conclusions;
Page 10
May 3, 2021
Council Minutes
8
That Council and the residents of the Municipality of Clarington have been
steadfast in their support for the proposed Darlington New Nuclear Power
Plant Project and are eager to have nuclear power generation continue as a
positive presence in our community;
That Council and the community of Clarington are very supportive of the use
of Small Modular Reactors (SMR) as it would avoid the use of cooling t owers,
thus minimizing any associated socio-economic impacts for Clarington and
Durham Region, for the Darlington New Nuclear Power Plant Project;
That Clarington Staff has worked with representatives of the Canadian
Nuclear Safety Commission (CNSC), Ministry of Municipal Affairs and
Housing, Durham Region and Ontario Power Generation to ensure that
sensitive land uses are addressed within the three -kilometer buffer zone;
That many traffic and transportation network improvements have been
implemented over the past decade to address potential deficiencies within the
network and Clarington Staff have reviewed the findings of the updated
Traffic Assessment Report, September 2019; and
That the Council of the Municipality of Clarington hereby advises the CNSC
that it supports the Darlington New Nuclear Power Plant Project and strongly
supports the use of SMR technology;
That the Mayor and Senior Staff accept the invitation of the CNSC to appear at
the hearing in June to outline the Municipality’s support for the project, our
involvement and comments as set out in Report PSD-010-11 and reaffirmed in
this Report PDS-025-21; and
That the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission and Ontario Power Generation
and all interested parties be notified of Council’s decision.
Carried Later in the Meeting, see following motion
Resolution # C-171-21
Moved by Councillor Neal
Seconded by Councillor Jones
That the Rules of Procedure be suspended to allow Members of Committee to
speak to the foregoing Resolution #C-170-21 for a second time.
Motion Withdrawn
The foregoing Resolution #C-170-21 was then put to a vote and carried.
11.4 Audit Committee Minutes dated April 7, 2021
Resolution # C-172-21
Moved by Councillor Jones
Seconded by Councillor Anderson
That the minutes of the Audit Committee dated April 7, 2021, be approved.
Carried
Page 11
May 3, 2021
Council Minutes
9
12. Staff Reports
13. Business Arising from Procedural Notice of Motion
14. Unfinished Business
Closed Session
Resolution # C-173-21
Moved by Councillor Hooper
Seconded by Councillor Anderson
That, in accordance with Section 239 (2) of the Municipal Act, 2001, as
amended, the meeting be closed for the purpose of discussing three matters that
deal with the following:
a matter that deals with personal matters about an identifiable individual,
including municipal or local board employees;
a proposed or pending acquisition or disposition of land by the
municipality or local board;
a matter that deals with labour relations or employee negotiations.
Carried
Rise and Report
The meeting resumed in open session at 9:01 p.m.
Mayor Foster advised that three items were discussed in “closed” session in
accordance with Section 239(2) of the Municipal Act, 2001 and one resolution
was passed to provide direction to staff.
Item 5 - Human Resources Matter – Closed Session Resolution
Resolution # C-174-21
Moved by Councillor Neal
Seconded by Councillor Jones
That the closed session Resolution #CGG-010-21, be approved.
Carried
14.1 Confidential Report - CAO-002-21 Potential Land Disposition
Mayor Foster declared a direct interest in Report CAO-002-21 Potential Land
Disposition, as he is the Secretary-Treasurer with Durham Region Non-Profit
Housing Corporation and has a conflict under the Ontario Business Corporations
Act. Mayor Foster muted his audio and video and refrained from discussion and
voting on this matter.
Councillor Anderson assumed the chair.
Page 12
May 3, 2021
Council Minutes
10
Resolution # C-175-21
Moved by Councillor Neal
Seconded by Councillor Zwart
That Report CAO-002-21 be received; and
(a) That all proponents who responded to the Spry Avenue RFP be informed that
there will be no award;
(b) That the Spry Avenue property be listed for sale on Multiple Listing Service
(MLS), with a condition that any purchaser have a pre-consultation meeting with
Planning staff; and
(c) That Staff meet with the Affordable Housing Taskforce to discuss strategies
going forward to offer surplus Municipal land for sale.
Carried
Mayor Foster returned to the meeting and assumed the chair.
15. By-laws
15.1 2021-047 - Being a by-law to amend By-law 2014-059 entitled “a By-law to
Regulate Traffic and Parking on Highways, Private Property and Municipal
Property”
Resolution # C-176-21
Moved by Councillor Hooper
Seconded by Councillor Neal
That leave be granted to introduce By-law 2021-047; and
That the said by-law be approved.
Carried
16. Procedural Notices of Motion
17. Other Business
Councillor Neal enquired what percentages of the students hired are the children
of current, or former, employees.
Councillor Neal enquired if Community Services does their own lawn
maintenance and how many pieces of equipment they own.
Councillor Neal enquired about what the full-time staff are doing in Community
Services, with the facilities being closed for most of 2021.
Councillor Neal enquired about the CAO Committee and that it was his
understanding the Committee was to report back to the General Government
Committee.
Page 13
May 3, 2021
Council Minutes
11
Councillor Zwart thanked staff for quickly working on, and assisting with, the
preparation of the resolution to be sent to the City of Toronto.
18. Confirming By-Law
Resolution # C-177-21
Moved by Councillor Hooper
Seconded by Councillor Anderson
That leave be granted to introduce By-law 2021-048, being a by-law to confirm
the proceedings of the Council of the Municipality of Clarington at a regular
meeting held on the 3rd day of May, 2021; and
That the said by-law be approved.
Carried
19. Adjournment
Resolution # C-178-21
Moved by Councillor Anderson
Seconded by Councillor Hooper
That the meeting adjourn at 9:25 p.m.
Carried
Page 14
Integrity Commissioner
2019 and 2020 Annual Reports
_________________________________________________________________________________
Integrity Commissioner 2019 and 2020 Annual Reports
1
Integrity Commissioner for Durham Region
and Brock, Clarington, Oshawa, Pickering,Scugog, Uxbridge and Whitby
Annual Reports
1. Introduction
I have been appointed as Integrity Commissioner for the Regional Municipality of
Durham and seven of its local municipalities. As is the custom, this is a joint report. (It
does not cover the Town of Ajax, where am not the Integrity Commissioner.)
2. Fiscal Overview
The financial impact of Integrity Commissioner services falls entir ely on the municipal
tax base. Integrity Commissioners and codes of conduct have been mandated by the
Province without any corresponding provincial funding.
A few Ontario municipalities pay Integrity Commissioners salaries or annual retainers,
but most municipalities, including Durham Region and its local municipalities, primarily
compensate Integrity Commissioners by the hour for ser vices rendered.1 Municipalities
are unable, however, to determine the extent of the demand for Integrity
Commissioners’ time. Under the legislation, any member of the public may request an
inquiry into an alleged code of conduct contravention,2 and any elector “or a person
demonstrably acting in the public interest” may request an inquiry into whether the
Municipal Conflict of Interest Act was contravened.3 The Act provides that Integrity
Commissioners perform their functions an independent man ner,4 so municipalities
cannot intervene in the conduct of inquiries.
Here, as in most Ontario municipalities, any individual can seek t o initiate an Integrity
Commissioner inquiry for which the municipality becomes liable to pay.5
I believe that this legislative regime places on Integrity Commissioners an implied
obligation to act reasonably in generating costs to municipalities through the provision of
services, in particular through the conduct of inquiries. Integrity Commissioners must act
1 Durham Region pays an additional annual retainer of $900, which covers the Region and the local
municipalities.
2 Municipal Act, subsection 223.4(1).
3 Municipal Act, subsection 223.4.1(2).
4 Municipal Act, subsection 223.3(1).
5 Some municipalities have attempted to address the uncertainty by asking Integrity Commissioners to
agree to “upset limits” in their contracts. The problem with this approach is that individual
complainants, not municipalities, determine the demand for Integrity Commissioner inquiries. Integrity
Commissioners are Accountability Officers who exercise statutory functions under Part V.1 of the
Municipal Act, and their statutory obligations do not disappear once an upset limit is reached. Their
position is not the same as, for example, that of a contractor that has agreed to regrade a section of
municipal highway of known dimensions.
Page 15
Integrity Commissioner
2019 and 2020 Annual Reports
_________________________________________________________________________________
Integrity Commissioner 2019 and 2020 Annual Reports
2
in a manner that is responsive and fair to the individuals who are parties to their
inquiries, while at the same time following a process that is e fficient, cost-sensitive, and
prudent, taking into account the circumstances of each case.
The following table displays costs for Integrity Commissioner services, exclusive of tax,
and the number of inquiry reports (including MCIA decisions) issued:
Muncipality 2019 2020 Inq. Reports6 Ann. Retainer
Regional Municipality
of Durham $6,019 $12,267 1 $900
Township of Brock $4,302 $17,112 3 $0
Municipality of
Clarington $2,844 $4,828 0 $0
City of Oshawa $5,999 $37,236 5 $0
City of Pickering $813 $598 0 $0
Township of Scugog $1,267 $1,960 0 $0
Township of
Uxbridge $7,266 $741 1 $0
Town of Whitby $8,939 $7,481 0 $0
By comparison, recent annual costs of Integrity Commissioner commissioners in other
GTA municipalities of varying sizes have included: Markham 2018-2019 ($32,105),7
Richmond Hill 2019 ($64,500), Richmond Hill 2020 ($55,000),8
Georgina 2019 ($9,559.80),9 Georgina 2020 ($31,204.95),10 and Aurora 2020
($3,495).11
3. Legislative Reform
The Province is currently consulting on reform of the Code of Conduct / Integrity
Commissioner regime. I will likely participate in the consultations as an individual, on my
own behalf. Because Integrity Commissioners must operate independently of the
6 Two reports from a single inquiry are counted as one report.
7 https://tinyurl.com/5a4aw2fv. One inquiry report was issued that year.
8 https://tinyurl.com/w7rr249w
9 http://www3.georgina.ca/archive/georgina/council-2020/2020-01-22-ADD.pdf
10 https://pub-georgina.escribemeetings.com/filestream.ashx?DocumentId=1705
11 https://tinyurl.com/aw626ads
Page 16
Integrity Commissioner
2019 and 2020 Annual Reports
_________________________________________________________________________________
Integrity Commissioner 2019 and 2020 Annual Reports
3
municipalities, it would not be appropriate for me to convey a position on behalf of any
municipality; I will make clear that my comments are offered in a personal capacity.
While I have not yet made submissions, I am sharing with the Region and its local
municipalities some of the considerations that I am likely to raise:
• Addressing the cost to municipalities, especially smaller ones. The volume
of activity is primarily complaint driven, which places the costs of this provincial
mandate outside a municipality’s control. Consideration could be given to
replacing municipal Integrity Commissioners with the provincial Integrity
Commissioner, or a new provincial agency under Tribu nals Ontario, or full-time,
provincial appointees responsible for geographic areas of the Prov ince – or at
least giving municipalities such an option.
• Legislated qualifications for Integrity Commissioners, who are appointed as
accountability officers under the Municipal Act.12 Currently there are no
standards to prevent the appointment of an individual who has been convicted of
a crime, or who has been subject to professional discipline for misappropriating
client funds.
• A selection process suitable for the appointment of a statutory
accountability officer. It is not obvious why appointment of an accountability
officer would be decided on a commercial basis via Request for Proposals , or
how a corporation or partnership is able expercise the legal authority of an
Integrity Commissioner. An alternative view is that appointments of individuals to
fill statutory offices should proceed according to an application and/or
recruitment process. Various municipalities have started to abandon RFPs for
Integrity Commissioners in favour of an application/ recruitment process better
suited to appointments of individuals to hold statutory office. Examples include
Ottawa and Richmond Hill.
• Some stakeholders are advocating for a power to remove councillors from office
– which essentially means overturning the results of a democratic e lection. I do
not believe that under any circumstance Integrity Commissioners should be
given the power to unseat duly elected m unicipal councillors. I certainly do not
believe that this significant power should be awarded by RFP, or that the power
to penalize elected officials should be handed to a corporation.
12 For example, under federal legislation, the federal Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner must
be a former judge, or “former member of a federal or provincial board, commission or tribunal who ..
has demonstrated expertise in one or more of the following: (i) conflicts of interest, (ii) financial
arrangements, (iii) professional regulation and discipline, or (iv) ethics …”
Page 17
Integrity Commissioner
2019 and 2020 Annual Reports
_________________________________________________________________________________
Integrity Commissioner 2019 and 2020 Annual Reports
4
4. Code of Conduct Inquiries
Whether to conduct an inquiry into an a llegation under the Code of Conduct lies in the
Integrity Commissioner’s discretion. The Integrity Commissioner does n ot make the final
decision on a Code of Conduct inquiry. Instead, the Integrity Commissioner reports
findings and recommendations to Council, and it is Council that makes any decision.
The Complaint Protocols set targets for the completion of the inquiry process, but they
give the Integrity Commissioner the discretion to extend deadlines as necessary.
Generally, inquiries are pursued as expeditiously as possible.
However, the following six factors bear on the timing of inquiries:
1. As explained above, an Integrity Commissioner has an implicit responsibility to
manage the volume of inquiry activity in as manner that is reasonable and
prudent. When multiple complaints are received around the same time, they
cannot all be handled at once. Staggering the inquiries is essential as a matter of
fiscal responsibility and time management.
2. In deciding the sequence of inquiries, the Integrity Commissioner may also take
into account whether multiple inquiries have been init iated by the same persons.
In theory, everyone in the municipality has the right to request an inquiry.
3. If an inquiry is particularly complex, then an Integrity Commissioner has full
discretion to extend the time for as long as the process takes.
4. If the Integrity Commissioner attempts to help the parties achieve an informal
resolution (i.e., settlement), then the inquiry is paused and the complaint is held
in abeyance. Sometimes a particular case will appear to be an ideal candidate for
settlement. This means that the process will be paused, sometimes for a long
while, to give the parties time to settle their differences.
5. COVID-19.
6. The parties themselves: Often a party will request more tim e to make a
submission. As a matter of fairness (and consistent the court jurisprudence on
requests for adjournments) a reasonable request for extension is not denied.
Occasionally a party will not respond to communications for several weeks. This
also affects timing.
Settlement
It is a responsible use of the discretion con ferred on an Integrity Commissioner to pause
the proceeding to give the parties an ample opportunity for resolution and also to allow
the parties to consider the matter with the benefit o f distance from the actual events.
Often the passage of time makes a seemingly intractable difference possible to resolve.
It is important to note that a pause carries no additional cost to the municipality. My
practice is always to pause when circumstance s warrant.
Page 18
Integrity Commissioner
2019 and 2020 Annual Reports
_________________________________________________________________________________
Integrity Commissioner 2019 and 2020 Annual Reports
5
COVID-19
In addition to the first four factors listed abov e, in 2020 everyone was also forced to
cope with the realities of the global pandemic.
As Ontario was gripped by the COVID-19 public health crisis and in a state of
emergency, I decided to suspend further action on various files until the Province and
Durham Region reached an appropriate state of recovery. This was not strictly
permitted by Ontario Regulation 73/20, which gave power to extend deadlines and
suspend proceedings to certain statutory officials, but not Integrity Commissioners
conducting code of conduct investigations.13 (In fact, the Province was specifically
asked to include Integrity Commissioner code of conduct proceedings in an amendment
to the Regulation, but declined to do so.) Nonetheless, given all that the residents of the
Region and Ontario were experiencing, it was the right thing to do. Further, the general
discretion possessed by Integrity Commissioners encompasses delays associated with
the COVID pandemic.
Transparency
I attach to each inquiry (investigation) report a statement of th e time spent on the
process and the total cost to the municipality. Across Canada, very few municipal
Integrity Commissioners do this.
Under the Municipal Act, an inquiry report is a public document. Many municipalities in
Durham Region make the reports easily accessible by posting, for example, on the
Accountability and Transparency page. I encourage all municipalities to do this.
In addition, the reports of many municipal Integrity Commissioners, including me,
appear on the public, online, Canadian Legal Information Institute (CanLII) database,
and are accessible for free at https://www.canlii.org/en/on/onmic/. Outside Durham
Region, some municipalites and some Integrity Commissioners do not participate in
CanLII, or post their reports. In my opinion, this is unfortunate; to make the results of an
accountability exercise difficulty to find is to defeat the purpose.
Reports (Code of Conduct)
The following are the code of conduct inquiry reports issued during 2019 and 2020.
Decisions on MCIA inquiries are listed in the next section.
Region
Re McLean (March 26, 2019), 2019 ONMIC 2 (CanLII), https://canlii.ca/t/j0358
Re McLean (Supplementary) (April 17, 2019), 2019 ONMIC 8 (CanLII),
https://canlii.ca/t/j035b
13 On the other hand, the wording of the Regulation was sufficiently broad to cover Municipal Conflict of
Interest Act inquiries.
Page 19
Integrity Commissioner
2019 and 2020 Annual Reports
_________________________________________________________________________________
Integrity Commissioner 2019 and 2020 Annual Reports
6
Brock
Bath-Hadden v. Pettingill (No. 1) (February 20, 2020), 2020 ONMIC 3 (CanLII),
https://canlii.ca/t/j6gm6
Campbell v. Schummer (August 3, 2020), 2020 ONMIC 8 (CanLII),
https://canlii.ca/t/jbnx5
Miller v. Bath-Hadden (October 13, 2020), 2020 ONMIC 12 (CanLII),
https://canlii.ca/t/jc3zx
Oshawa
Gobin v. Nicholson (November 30, 2020), 2020 ONMIC 13 (CanLII),
https://canlii.ca/t/jcx26
Foster v. Chapman (Dec. 14, 2020), 2020 ONMIC 17 (CanLII),
https://canlii.ca/t/jcx27
This table presents the number of inquiries completed, per year. It includes both code of
conduct inquiries and MCIA inquiries.
Code of Conduct Inquiries MCIA Inquiries
Municipality 2019 2020 2019 2020
Regional Municipality
of Durham 114 0 0 0
Township of Brock 0 3 0 015
Municipality of
Clarington 0 0 0 0
City of Oshawa 0 2 0 3
City of Pickering 0 0 0 0
Township of Scugog 0 0 0 0
Township of
Uxbridge 0 0 1 0
Town of Whitby 0 0 0 0
The above table that does not include inquries still active at the end of the reporting
period. It also does not include inquiries into code of conduct complaints and MCIA
14 The Re McLean inquiry resulted in two report. It is counted as one inquiry.
15 The Bath-Hadden v. Pettingill inquiry involved both a code of conduct complaint and an MCIA
application, and there were two reports. It is counted in this table as a code inquiry.
Page 20
Integrity Commissioner
2019 and 2020 Annual Reports
_________________________________________________________________________________
Integrity Commissioner 2019 and 2020 Annual Reports
7
applications where there were insufficient grounds for investigation, or where the
matters were settled or complaints/applications were withdrawn.
The confidentiality provisions of the Municipal Act prohibit any discussion of outstanding
inquiries, other than to say that the factors discussed above apply to those proceedings.
5. Municipal Conflict of Interest Act Inquiries
The legislation treats inquiries into allegations of MCIA breaches somewhat differently
than inquiries under a Code of Conduct. Council is not the decision maker in an MCIA
matter. Instead, it is the Integrity Commissioner, at the conclusion of an MCIA inquiry,
who decides whether or not to apply to a Superior Court judge for a declaration that the
Member has contravened the MCIA. The Integrity Commissioner must publish writ ten
reasons for the decision. I do this prov iding the reasons to the Canada Legal
Information Institute (CanLII), for posting in its online database.
An Integrity Commissioner’s MCIA decisions are not subject to Council approval. They
are provided to Council for information.
The Municipal Act requires the Integrity Commissioner to complete the inquiry within
180 days after receiving the completed application. However, Ontario Regulation 73/20
had the effect of suspending the deadline in MCIA appli cations between March 16 and
September 14, 2020.
Reasons for Decision (Municipal Conflict of Interest Act)
The following are the reasons for decisions in MCIA applications issued during 2019
and 2020:
Brock
Bath-Hadden v. Pettingill (No. 2) (February 20, 2020), 2020 ONMIC 4 (CanLII),
https://canlii.ca/t/j5ckj
Oshawa
Durham Flight Centre Inc. v. Marimpietri (November 15, 2019), 2019 ONMIC 18
(CanLII), https://canlii.ca/t/j3dhg
Davis v. Carter (February 23, 2020), 2020 ONMIC 5 (CanLII),
https://canlii.ca/t/j5d14
Gobin v .Giberson (December 7, 2020), 2020 ONMIC 14 (CanLII),
https://canlii.ca/t/jc19d
Uxbridge
Petrou v. Beach (September 13, 2019), 2019 ONMIC 11 (CanLII),
https://canlii.ca/t/j2dsg
Page 21
Integrity Commissioner
2019 and 2020 Annual Reports
_________________________________________________________________________________
Integrity Commissioner 2019 and 2020 Annual Reports
8
6. Special Reports
I also issued several Special Reports. Usually a Special Report addresses an issue that
has been raised with me by a Council.
• Regional Municipality of Durham, June 30, 2019, Special Report: Follow-up on
Committee of the Whole Presentation
• Municipality of Clarington, June 8, 2020, Council Members and Alleged By-law
Infractions
• Muncipality of Clarington, October 15, 2020, Council Members and Follow-Up
Communication with Bylaw Enforcement
• Town of Whitby, August 2, 2019, Whitby Yacht Club membership offered to Town
Councillors (educational information memorandum, not a special report)
7. Requests for Advice
The role of the Integrity Commissioner als o includes providing advice to Council
Members and local board members about the following:
4. Requests from members of council and of local boards for advice respecting their
obligations under the code of conduct applicable to the member.
5. Requests from members of council and of local boards for advice respecting their
obligations under a procedure, rule or policy of the municipality or of the local board, as
the case may be, governing the ethical behaviour of members.
6. Requests from members of council and of local boards for advice respecting their
obligations under the Municipal Conflict of Interest Act.
The Municipal Act requires that a Council Member’s or local board member’s request for
advice from the Integrity Commissioner shall be made in writing, and that the advice
shall be in writing.
A Council Member or local board member is free to disclose, or to choose not to
disclose, the advice received. The Integrity Commissioner, on the other hand, is subject
to the strict confidentiality requiremen ts of section 223.5 of the Act.
(1) The Commissioner and every person acting under the instructions of the
Commissioner shall preserve secrecy with respect to all matters that come to his or
her knowledge in the course of his or her duties under this Part.
…
(2.1) Advice provided by the Commissioner to a member under paragraph 4, 5 or 6 of
subsection 223.3 (1) may be released with the member’s written consent.
(2.2) If a member releases only part of the advice provided to the member by the
Commissioner under paragraph 4, 5 or 6 of subsection 223.3 (1), the Commissioner
may release part or all of the advice without obtaining the member’s consent.
(2.3) The Commissioner may disclose such information as in the Commissioner’s opinion is
necessary,
(a) for the purposes of a public meeting under subsection 223.4.1 (8);
(b) in an application to a judge referred to in subsection 223.4.1 (15); or
Page 22
Integrity Commissioner
2019 and 2020 Annual Reports
_________________________________________________________________________________
Integrity Commissioner 2019 and 2020 Annual Reports
9
(c) in the written reasons given by the Commissioner under subsection 223.4.1
(17).
(3) This section prevails over the Municipal Freedom of Information and Protection of
Privacy Act.
For accountability and tracking purposes, each request for advice is assigned a file
number, and (except in Whitby which uses a different process) the Clerk is informed of
the name of the Member associated with each file number. The topic and content of the
request for advice are disclosed to no body.
Some requeests for advice were answered briefly. Other responses were lengthy. In
several instances, a single request for advice involved multipled follow-up requests for
clarification or added information. For statistical purposes, the follow-ups are included
with the original request. Consequently, the figures below understate the full amount of
advisory activity.
The following table records the number of requests for advice that were answered:
Muncipality Requests for Advice
2019
Requests for Advice
2020
Regional Municipality
of Durham 0 3
Township of Brock 3 4
Municipality of
Clarington 2 2
City of Oshawa 5 6
City of Pickering 0 0
Township of Scugog 5 4
Township of Uxbridge 3 1
Town of Whitby 7 3
8. Internal Outreach, Ed ucation and Training
During the reporting period, I delivered the following internal outreach, education and
training:
• January 22, 2019, Town of Whitby, presentation (pre-recorded) to members of
the Town’s local boards and advisory committees
Page 23
Integrity Commissioner
2019 and 2020 Annual Reports
_________________________________________________________________________________
Integrity Commissioner 2019 and 2020 Annual Reports
10
• January 31, 2019, Joint meeting of Councils of Township of Brock, Township of
Scugog, and Township of Uxbridge, Training Presentation
• May 15, 2019, Regional Municipality of Durham, Committee of the Whole,
Education and Training Session
• September 19, 2019, Township of Brock, Council Education Session
• March 2, 2020, City of Oshawa, attended at Corporate Services Committee to
answer questions if necessary; was not called to address the Committee
• March 2, 2020, Town of Whitby, Special Council Meeting, Follow-up to Report
CLK 13-19, Codes of Conduct and Governance Policy Updates
In several cases, I followed up on writing on questions that arose during the sessions.
In 2019, at the request of the Region and several local municipalities, I proposed
amendments that would harmonize the gift/benefit provisions of the codes of conduct
across Durham Region.
Respectfully submitted,
Guy Giorno
Integrity Commissioner for Regional Municipality of Durham, Township of Brock,
Municipality of Clarington, City of Oshawa, City of Pickering, Township of Scugog,
Township of Uxbridge, Town of Whitby
April 30, 2021
Page 24
Page 25
Page 26
Page 27
Page 28
Page 29
Committee
Report to Council
If this information is required in an alternate accessible format, please contact the Accessibility
Coordinator at 905-623-3379 ext. 2131.
Report To: Council Report Number: GGR-008-21
Date of Meeting: May 25, 2021
Report Subject: General Government Committee Meeting of May 10, 2021
Recommendations:
1. Receive for Information
(a) 9.1 Minutes of the Newcastle Business Improvement Area dated
April 8, 2021
(b) 9.2 Minutes of the Ganaraska Region Conservation Authority
dated April 15, 2021
(c) 9.3 Minutes of the Historical Downtown Bowmanville Business
Improvement Area dated April 13, 2021
(d) 9.4 Sheila Hall, Executive Director, Clarington Board of Trade and
Office of Economic Development, Regarding CBOT's Position
on the Conversion of Employment Lands
(e) 9.5 Bob Clark, P. Eng., P. Ag., MCIP, RPP, OLE, Principal
Planner, Clark Consulting Services, Regarding Item 19.1,
Report LGS-018-21 On-Farm Special Events Licensing By-law
(f) 9.6 Mitch Morawetz, President, Durham Region Federation of
Agriculture, Regarding Item 19.1, Report LGS-018-21 On-Farm
Special Events Licensing By-law
(g) 9.7 Rob Alexander, Chair, Durham Farm Fresh, Regarding Item
19.1, Report LGS-018-21 On-Farm Special Events Licensing
By-law
Page 30
Municipality of Clarington Page 2
Report GGR-008-21
2. On-Farm Special Events Licensing By-law
That Report LGS-018-21 be received for information;
That Section 2.6 of the by-law be amended by deleting the words "On-farm Special
Event License" and replacing with the words "Zoning Permission";
That Section 3.6 of the by-law be amended by deleting the words "The Director is
authorized to issue or refuse to issue any licence, either with or without conditions"
and replacing with the words "The Director is authorized to issue, suspend or
revoke any licence in accordance with Section 151 of the Municipal Act, and to
refuse the issuance of any licence if there has been a previous material breach of
the licence, or in accordance with Section 3.9 of this By-law, including conditions
consistent with the zoning";
That Section 3.7 of the by-law be deleted;
That Section 3.12 of the by-law be amended by deleting the words "November 1"
and replacing with the words "December 31"; and
That the by-law, as amended, be brought forward for adoption.
3. Sheila Hall, Executive Director and Bonnie Wrightman, Manager of
Business Development, Clarington Board of Trade & Office of
Economic Development, Regarding an Update on the Q1 2021 - KPI
Report
That the Delegation of Sheila Hall, Executive Director and Bonnie Wrightman,
Manager of Business Development, Clarington Board of Trade & Office of
Economic Development, regarding an Update on the Q1 2021 - KPI Report, be
received with thanks.
4. COVID-19 Rapid Testing
That the delegation of Mark Canning and Gord Gill, Clarington Entertainment
Complex, Joey's World 'et al' be received with thanks;
That Clarington Council endorse the COVID-19 Rapid Screening Initiative for small
and medium sized businesses and thank the Clarington Board of Trade and
Community Services for their support of the program;
That Clarington Council urgently request the Province of Ontario and the Ontario
Chamber of Commerce to expand the Rapid Screening Initiative (which screens
employees) to include customers and that Clarington is willing to be a pilot project
site; and
That a copy of this motion be forwarded to Premier Doug Ford, MPP Lindsey Park,
MPP David Piccini, all Durham Municipalities and Durham Region Health
Department.
Page 31
Municipality of Clarington Page 3
Report GGR-008-21
5. Tenzin Shomar, Executive Director, Clarington Youth Council,
Regarding Opening Outdoor Recreational Amenities
That the following resolution from Tenzin Shomar, Executive Director, Clarington
Youth Council, regarding Opening Outdoor Recreational Amenities, be endorsed by
the Municipality of Clarington:
Whereas recent amendments to Ontario Regulation 82/20 under the
Reopening Ontario Act, 2020 have closed outdoor recreational amenities,
such as baseball diamonds, soccer fields, tennis courts, basketball courts,
parks, and picnic sites;
Whereas scientific evidence has shown that the risk of outdoor transmission
of COVID-19 is substantially lower than transmission in indoor settings;
Whereas Ontario’s COVID-19 Science Advisory Table has reaffirmed that
“limiting mobility” means restricting movement between regions, not
discouraging safe outdoor activities;
Whereas lockdown measures have negatively impacted the mental and
physical health of all individuals, particularly the health of young people; and
Whereas restrictions on public outdoor amenities disproportionally affect low-
income youth who may lack access to adequate greenspace.
Now therefore be it resolved that the Clarington Youth Council urge the
Government of Ontario to allow reasonable outdoor recreational amenities to
open, provided that only members of the same household may use the
amenity in close proximity and different households using the same amenity
must be physically distanced; and
Be it further resolved that a copy of this motion be forwarded to Premier
Doug Ford, MPP Lindsey Park, MPP David Piccini, and the Municipality of
Clarington.
6. Alexander Harras, Manager of Legislative Services/Deputy Clerk, Town
of Ajax, Regarding Removing 412/418 Tolls
That the following resolution from Alexander Harras, Manager of Legislative
Services/Deputy Clerk, Town of Ajax, regarding Removing 412/418 Tolls, be
endorsed by the Municipality of Clarington:
That Ajax Council acknowledges and thanks the Province of Ontario for
freezing current toll rates as the tolling decision is reconsidered and requests
that this freeze continue until a final decision is made;
That Ajax Council urges the Minister of Transportation to immediately
remove the tolls on Highways 412 and 418 to ensure equal access to north -
south express connections in Durham Region;
Page 32
Municipality of Clarington Page 4
Report GGR-008-21
That Ajax Council thanks MPP French for her ongoing advocacy on this
matter; and
That this motion be distributed to Hon. Caroline Mulroney, Minister of
Transportation; MPP Rod Phillips; MPP Jennifer French; Regional Chair
John Henry; and all Durham Region municipalities.
7. Postal Box Garbage Cans and Municipal Property Pet Waste Fines
That Report PWD-022-21 be received;
That the installation of garbage cans at postal boxes (super mailboxes) not be
supported;
That, as necessary, Public Works Staff continue to respond to litte r and illegal
dumping complaints at super mailboxes; and
That the current fines for depositing dog waste on Municipal property remain
unchanged.
8. Symbols of Hate – Anti-Racism and Symbols of Hate
That Report CSD-002-21 be received;
That Clarington Council, in recognition of the power that symbols can have on the
psychology and well-being of community members, request that the Association of
Municipalities of Ontario (AMO) petition the Provincial Government on behalf of
Ontario municipalities to enact legislation that would enable municipalities to make
enforceable decisions regarding symbols deemed unacceptable by the local
community. Such consideration to also include a review of statutes where hate
speech and symbols may be identified as illegal;
That the Municipality of Clarington, as a member of the Federation of Canadian
Municipalities (FCM), support the Town of Collingwood’s motion for FCM to
advocate to the Federal Government in the development of legislation that would
clarify and strengthen the definition of hate speech and symbols, including explicit
recognition of the psychological harm that can be caused by hateful symbols, and
work with all levels of government in addressing the root causes of hate speech;
That this motion be forwarded to AMO and FCM as well as our local area Members
of Parliament and Members of Provincial Parliament for their information;
That the Diversity Advisory Committee, in partnership with staff, be directed to
prepare an anti-racism policy that would apply to all staff, Members of Council, and
all visitors to municipal-owned facilities and spaces. The Anti-Racism Policy would
make clear the Municipality’s expectation of tolerance for those working at and
using Municipal-owned facilities and spaces. This Policy can be displayed at all
facilities so that users are aware of the expectations under the Policy and the
consequences for not adhering to it;
Page 33
Municipality of Clarington Page 5
Report GGR-008-21
That once these action items are approved for direction, the Mayor and Members of
Council of the Municipality of Clarington, in partnership with Clarington’s Diversity
Advisory Committee, release an Official Statement to share some context about
this issue and demonstrate how we are working together to promote a community
where every individual regardless of race, ethnic origin, gender identity or sexual
orientation is welcome and racism, discrimination, intolerance and the promotion of
hatred through symbols or statements have no place in our community; and
That all interested parties listed in Report CSD-002-21 and any delegations be
advised of Council’s decision.
9. Future Indoor Recreation Facility
That Item 14.2, regarding a Future Indoor Recreation Facility, be referred to Staff to
report back in the fall on the matters listed under Option 3 of Report CSD-003-21;
and
That Council approve the costs to prepare the conceptual plans and project budget,
not to exceed $25,000, which will be funded from the Community Services Capital
Reserve Fund.
10. 2020 Annual Statement for the Development Charges Reserve Funds
That Report FSD-021-21 be received; and
That a copy of this report be posted on the Municipality’s website.
11. Supply and Delivery of One Single Axle and Four Tandem Axle Cab
and Chassis Units
That Report FSD-022-21 be received;
That Winslow Gerolamy Motors Limited with a bid amount of $1,322,556.40 (Net
HST Rebate) being the lowest bidder meeting all terms, conditions and
specifications of CL2021-7 be awarded the contract for the Supply and Delivery of
One Single Axle and Four Tandem Axle Cab and Chassis Units;
That the total funds required for this project in the amount of $1,337,820.40 (Net
HST Rebate) include $1,322,556.40 (Net HST Rebate) for snow removal
equipment costs and other costs such as radios, GPS units, Clarington decal
lettering and striping in the amount of $15,264 .00 (Net HST Rebate) be funded by
the Municipality as follows:
Description Account Number Amount
Fleet Replacement Roads -
(2020)
110-36-388-83642-
7401
$500,000
Fleet Replacement Roads -
(2021)
110-36-388-83642-
7401
837,820
That all interested parties listed in Report FSD-022-21 and any delegations be
advised of Council’s decision. Page 34
Municipality of Clarington Page 6
Report GGR-008-21
12. 2021 COVID Support for Hall Boards
That Report FSD-023-21 be received;
That the Municipality offer an in-take for the Community COVID-19 Support
Program utilizing the guidelines and forms approved in 2020 specifically for hall
boards and arena boards;
That the funding for the hall board and arena board in -take be funded from the Tax
Rate Stabilization Reserve Fund (utilizing the Safe Restart Funds) to a maximum of
$60,000 with no limit per organization;
That the Director of Financial Services, Director of Community Services and the
Chief Administrative Officer be delegated authority to determine and approve the
allocation of funds under the in-take; and
That Staff report back to Committee in September 2021 on the recipients of the
funding.
13. Lambs Road Interchange Study
That Report FSD-024-21 be received;
That the proposal received from CIMA+ having the lowest price meeting all terms,
conditions and specifications of RFP2021-1 be awarded the contract for the
provision of engineering services required for the Lambs Road Interchange Study;
That the funds required in the amount of $226,255.22 (net HST rebate) be drawn
from the following accounts:
Lambs Rd Interchange at Highway 401
Environmental Assessment
110-32-330-
83444-7401
$226,255
That all interested parties listed in Report FSD-024-21 and any delegations be
advised of Council’s decision.
14. Nash Road Widening and Rehabilitation
That Report FSD-025-21 be received;
That Coco Paving Inc. with a total bid amount of $522,002.14 (Net HST Rebate)
being the lowest compliant bidder meeting all terms, conditions and specifications
of Tender CL2021-11 be awarded the contract for the work required to complete
the Nash Road Widening and Rehabilitation;
Page 35
Municipality of Clarington Page 7
Report GGR-008-21
That the total funds required for this project in the amount of $622,100.00 (Net HST
rebate), which includes the construction cost of $522,002.14 (Net HST rebate) and
other costs such as design, material testing, utility daylighting, inspection and
contract administration, permit fees and contingencies in the amount of
$100,097.86 (Net HST rebate) is within the approved project budget and will be
funded by as follows:
Description Account Number Amount
Nash Road Rehabilitation and
Widening
110-32-330-
83458-7401-
$450,000
Pavement Rehabilitation Program
(2021 Budget)
110-36-330-
83212-7401-
172,100
That all interested parties listed in Report FSD-025-21 and any delegations be
advised of Council’s decision.
15. Scanning and Conversion Services
That Report FSD-027-21 be received;
That DOCUdavit Solutions with a total bid amount for the initial two-year term of
$176,470.16 (Net HST Rebate), and a potential five -year contract value of
$441,175.40 (Net HST Rebate), subject to change based on requirements and
price increases not exceeding the applicable CPI, being the lowest compliant bidder
meeting all terms, conditions and specifications of tender CL2021 -10 be awarded
the contract for the provision of scanning and conversion services as required by
the Municipality;
That the funds expended for these services, be funded from respective
department’s approved operating budget as required;
That pending satisfactory service the Purchasing Manager, after consultation with
the respective Department Head, be authorized to extend the contract for up to
three additional one-year terms; and
That all interested parties listed in Report FSD-027-21 and any delegations be
advised of Council’s decision.
Page 36
Committee
Report to Council
If this information is required in an alternate accessible format, please contact the Accessibility
Coordinator at 905-623-3379 ext. 2131.
Report To: Council Report Number: PDR-007-21
Date of Meeting: May 25, 2021
Report Subject: Planning and Development Committee Meeting dated May 17, 2021
Recommendations:
1. Receive for Information
(a) 12.1 Minutes of the St Marys Cement Community Relations
Committee dated February 23, 2021
(b) 13.1 Ruben Plaza, Votorantim Cimentos, Corporate Enviornmental
Manager, St. Marys Cement, Regarding The Circulation of
False Information by Clarington Clear about St. Marys Cement
2. Southwest Courtice Secondary Plan – Recommendation Report for
Official Plan Amendment 125
That Report PSD-027-21 be received;
That Official Plan Amendment 125 (OPA 125) to include the Southwest Courtice
Secondary Plan in the Clarington Official Plan be adopted;
That upon adoption by Council, the Southwest Courtice Secondar y Plan be
implemented by Staff as Council’s policy on land use and planning matters and
through the capital budget program;
That the Director of Planning and Development Services be authorized to finalize
the form and content of OPA 125, the Secondary Pla n and the Urban Design and
Sustainability Guidelines resulting from Council's consideration, public participation,
agency comments and technical considerations;
That the Urban Design and Sustainability Guidelines appended to the Secondary
Plan be approved and be used by staff to guide development applications and
public projects;
That the Director of Planning and Development Services be authorized to execute
any agreements to implement the Secondary Plan once adopted by Council;
Page 37
Municipality of Clarington Page 2
Report PDR-007-21
That OPA 125 be forwarded to the Region of Durham for approval;
That Council close the unopened road allowance legally referred to as:
Firstly: Part of the road allowance between Lots 34 and 35, Con 1
(Darlington), now Part 1 on 40R-31088, Municipality of Clarington;
Secondly: RDAL BTN LTS 34 & 35, Con 1 (Darlington) btn Hwy 401 &
d502897; Municipality of Clarington;
That the unopened road allowance portions be conveyed to the contiguous
landowners for an equivalent amount of land from the developers; and
That all interested parties listed in Report PDS-027-21 and any delegations be
advised of Council’s decision regarding the adoption of the Secondary Plan.
3. Brookhill Neighbourhood Secondary Plan Update
That Report be received;
That Official Plan Amendment 126 to include the updated Brookhill Neighbourhood
Secondary Plan in the Clarington Official Plan be adopted;
That upon adoption by Council, the updated Brookhill Neighbourhood Secondary
Plan be implemented by Staff as Council’s policy on land use and planning matters
and through the capital budget program;
That the Director of Planning and Development Services be authorized to finalize
the form and content of OPA 126, the Secon dary Plan, and the Sustainable Urban
Design Guidelines resulting from Council’s consideration, public participation,
agency comments, and technical considerations;
That the Sustainable Urban Design Guidelines appended to the updated Secondary
Plan be approved and used by Staff to guide development applications and public
projects;
That the Director of Planning and Development Services be authorized to execute
any agreements to implement the Secondary Plan once adopted by Council;
That OPA 126 be forwarded to the Region of Durham for approval;
That the lands shown in the Block Master Plan and applicable land policies and
designations be deferred to allow the applicable landowners to apply for an Official
Plan Amendment prior to the 2-year moratorium; and
That all interested parties listed in Report and any delegations be advised of
Council’s decision regarding the adoption of the Secondary Plan.
4. Recommendation Report for an Official Plan Amendment Regarding
Special Study Area 2
That Report PDS-029-21 be received;
That the Official Plan Amendment attached to Report PDS -029-21, as Attachment
3, be approved;
Page 38
Municipality of Clarington Page 3
Report PDR-007-21
That the submissions made by the public with respect to this issue be directed to
the Official Plan review process for further consideration;
That the Region of Durham be advised of Council’s decision; and
That all interested parties listed in Report PDS-029-21 and any delegations be
advised of Council’s decision.
5. Clarington Comments on Canada’s Radioactive Waste Policy
Framework
That Report PDS-030-21 be received;
That Report PDS-030-21 be approved as the comments of the Municipality of
Clarington on Canada’s Radioactive Waste Policy Framework;
That a copy of Council’s decision and Report PDS-030-21 be forwarded to all
interested parties;
That the Nuclear Waste Management Organization be invited to provide an
educational session for the Clarington Council on the implementation of its process
for the safe, long-term management of radioactive waste through containment and
isolation in a deep geological repository and the timeframe for the removal of waste
from the Darlington Nuclear site; and
That all interested parties listed in Report PDS-030-21 and any delegations be
advised of Council’s decision.
6. Telecommunication Towers
That Report PDS-031-21 be received for information; and
That the Interested Parties be provided a copy of PDS-031-21 and Council’s
recommendation.
7. Sprinkler Systems
Whereas the Provincial government brought in legislation, in 2010, requiring that
building permit applications for multiple-unit residential buildings higher than three
storeys submitted must comply with the new fire sprinkler requirements;
And whereas sprinkler systems have been shown to dramatically reduce fire
losses;
And whereas other types of dwelling units are in need of the same fire protection;
Now therefore be it resolved that the provincial government be requested to amend
the Ontario Building Code to make sprinkler systems mandatory in new buildings.
Page 39
Staff Report
If this information is required in an alternate accessible format, please contact the Accessibility
Coordinator at 905-623-3379 ext. 2131.
Report To: Council
Date of Meeting: May 25, 2021 Report Number: FSD-028-21
Submitted By: Trevor Pinn, Director of Financial Services/Treasurer
Reviewed By: Andrew C. Allison, CAO Resolution#:
File Number: [If applicable, enter File Number] By-law Number:
Report Subject: RFP2021-4 Centralized Customer Service Review Consulting
Recommendations:
1. That Report FSD-028-21 be received;
2. That CSPN with a bid amount of $128,039.52 (Net HST) providing the lowest overall
cost and meeting the passing threshold and all terms, conditions and specifications
of RFP2021-4, be awarded the contract for the provision of Consulting Services as
required to complete the Centralized Customer Service Review for the Office of the
Chief Administrative Officer;
3. That the funds required for this project in the amount of $128,039.52 (Net HST) be
funded by the grant received from the Provincial Government; and
4. That all interested parties listed in Report FSD-028-21 and any delegations be
advised of Council’s decision.
Page 40
Municipality of Clarington Page 2
Report FSD-028-21
Report Overview
To request authorization from Council to award RFP2021-4 Centralized Customer Service
Review Consulting.
1. Background
1.1 The Municipality requires the assistance of a qualified consulting firm to conduct a
Centralized Customer Service Review. The outcome of the Review will include a clear
breakdown of the current state of the Municipality’s customer service approach across
the organization. It will also provide future recommendations for both structural and
operational improvements to increase customer value when interacting with the
Municipality.
1.2 The scope of work for this Request for Proposal (RFP) was prepared by the Office of
the CAO and provided to the Purchasing Services Division.
1.3 The RFP allowed the Municipality to select a qualified consultant with the skills,
resources and experience necessary to provide services for the project. The RFP was
structured on the price-based two-envelope RFP system with an award going to the
proponent passing the stipulated threshold and having the lowest price.
1.4 RFP2021-4 was issued by the Purchasing Services Division and advertised
electronically on the Municipality’s website. Notification of the availability of the
document was also posted on the Ontario Public Buyer’s Association website.
2. Analysis
2.1 Nineteen plan takers downloaded the RFP document.
2.2 The RFP closed on April 30, 2021.
2.3 Six proposals were received by the stipulated closing date and time.
2.4 Of the 13 firms that downloaded the RFP document but chose not to submit a proposal:
Three companies advised they could not meet the submission deadline;
One company advised that they were reluctant to provide the requested financial
requirements within the RFP;
One company did not have the capacity and capability to support the bid at this time;
Page 41
Municipality of Clarington Page 3
Report FSD-028-21
One company was a public opinion research company;
One company did not meet the qualifications as they had not worked for a Municipality
in the past; and,
Six companies did not respond to the Municipality’s request for information.
2.5 The Purchasing Services Division reviewed all submissions received, and all met the
mandatory requirements to move forward to phase one of the evaluation process.
2.6 The RFP stipulated among other things, that bidders were to provide a description of
Firm/Consulting team, key qualifications, firm profile, highlights of past service and
experience of team members with projects of similar size, nature and complexity and a
demonstrated understanding of the Municipality’s requirements and their approach to
meeting the requirements contained within the RFP document.
2.7 Each submission consisted of a comprehensive proposal identifying:
Qualifications and experience;
Experience of the proponent with projects of similar nature, size and complexity;
The proposed team who would be working with the Municipality;
The proponent’s understanding and approach to complete the project;
Key project challenges and demonstrating that the Proponent has adequate
resources and an appropriate strategy for addressing the challenges.
The proposed tasks and timelines; and
Identification of accessibility criteria.
2.8 The submissions were reviewed and scored in accordance with the established criteria
outlined in the RFP by an evaluation team consisting of staff from the Office of the CAO
and the Community Services Department. Submission evaluation criteria included:
Allocated roles and responsibilities of the proposed team members;
Proposed approach to completing the project;
Proposed timelines to complete the tasks required;
Highlights of services provided within the past five years only; and
The proponent’s understanding of the Municipality’s requirements, the project and
any related issues or concerns.
2.9 Upon completion of the evaluation, the evaluation committee concluded that the
following four proponents met the pre-established passing threshold of 80% for phase
one and moved on to the second phase of the process:
Page 42
Municipality of Clarington Page 4
Report FSD-028-21
CSPN;
KPMG LLP;
MNP; and
Optimus
2.10 The evaluation committee deemed that presentations from the proponents who made it
to phase two were not required, and their pricing envelopes were opened and
evaluated. The submission from CSPN had the lowest overall bid.
2.11 CSPN has not worked for the Municipality in the past. However, staff completed a
reference check, which was satisfactory.
3. Financial
3.1 The Municipality applied for grant funding from the Provincial Government and will
receive the approved funding required to conduct the Centralized Customer Service
Review. The grant provides funding for 100 per cent of the costs related to the project;
there is no Municipal contribution required.
3.2 The total funds required for this project in the amount of $128,039.52 (Net HST) is
within the approved grant amount.
4. Concurrence
Not Applicable.
5. Conclusion
It is respectfully recommended that CSPN having the lowest overall cost and meeting all
terms, conditions and specifications of RFP2021-4 be awarded the contract for the
provision of consulting services for the Centralized Customer Service Review as
required by the Municipality.
Staff Contact: David Ferguson, Purchasing Manager, 905-623-3379 ext. 2209 or
dferguson@clarington.net.
Attachments:
Attachment 1 – Summary of Proposals Received
Interested Parties:
List of Interested Parties available from Department.
Page 43
Municipality of Clarington Page 5
Report FSD-028-21
Attachment 1 to Report FSD-028-21
Municipality of Clarington
Summary of Proposals Received
RFP2021-4
Centralized Customer Service Review Consulting
Bidder
Blackline Consulting
Consilium Public Sector Services Inc.
CSPN*
KPMG LLP*
MNP*
Optimus*
Note: Bidders with an asterisk (*) are the companies who were shortlisted.
Page 44
If this information is required in an alternate format, please contact the Accessibility
Co-ordinator at 905-623-3379 ext. 2131
The Corporation of the Municipality of Clarington
By-law 2021-049
Being a by-law to license On-Farm Special Events
WHEREAS subsection 11(2) of the Municipal Act, 2001, S.O. 2001, c. 25, authorizes the
Municipality to pass by-laws respecting the health, safety and well-being of persons;
WHEREAS under Subsection 8(3) of the Municipal Act, 2001, a by-law respecting a
matter may (a) regulate or prohibit the matter; (b) require persons to do things respecting
the matter; and (c) provide for a system of licences respecting the matter;
WHEREAS under Sections 150 and 151 of the Municipal Act, 2001, a municipality may
provide for a system of licences with respect to any business wholly or partly carried on
within the municipality, including the sale or hire of goods or services on an intermittent or
or one-time basis; and
AND WHEREAS subsection 128(1) of the Municipal Act, 2001, S.O. 2001, c. 25, provides
that a local municipality may prohibit and regulate with respect to public nuisances,
including matters that, in the opinion of council, are or could become or cause public
nuisances;
NOW THEREFORE the Council of The Corporation of the Municipality of Clarington
hereby enacts as follows:
PART 1 - INTERPRETATION
Definitions
1.1 In this By-law,
“Applicant” means a person seeking a licence pursuant to this By-law;
“Director” means the Municipality’s Director of Legislative Services or a designate;
“Enforcement Officer” means a Municipal Law Enforcement Officer whose duties
include the enforcement of this By-law;
“Licence” means a licence issued pursuant to this By-law;
“Licensee” means a person to whom a Licence has been issued in accordance
with this By-law;
Page 45
2
“Municipality” means The Corporation of the Municipality of Clarington or the
geographic area of Clarington, as the context requires;
“On-Farm Special Event” means an event or activity that is not permitted as-of-
right as an on-farm diversified use, on lands specifically zoned to permit special
events as a use that is secondary to the agricultural farming operations;
“Owner” means the registered or beneficial owner of farm property;
“Person” means an individual or a corporation, and “Persons” has a
corresponding meaning; and
“Zoning By-law” means a by-law passed by the Municipality pursuant to section
34 of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13 and includes Zoning By-law 84-63
and Oak Ridges Moraine Zoning By-law 2005-109, or their successors.
References
1.2 In this By-law, reference to any Act or by-law is reference to that Act or by-law as
it is amended or re-enacted from time to time.
1.3 Unless otherwise specified, references in this By-law to Parts and sections are
references to Parts and sections in this By-law.
Word Usage
1.4 This By-law shall be read with all changes in gender or number as the context
requires.
1.5 In this By-law, a grammatical variation of a word or expression defined has a
corresponding meaning.
Application
1.6 This By-law applies to all On-Farm Special Events in the Municipality unless
otherwise specified.
PART 2 – PROHIBITIONS
Operation
2.1 No person shall conduct an On-Farm Special Event without a Licence.
2.2 The Owner or designate must be on scene during the On-Farm Special Event.
2.3 No Person shall contravene any condition of site plan approval, or any provision
within a site plan agreement made pursuant to section 41 of the Planning Act,
R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13, that is applicable to land that is subject to this By-law.
Page 46
3
2.4 No Owner shall permit any activity on their property within the Municipality that is
prohibited by this By-law.
2.5 Nothing in this By-law exempts an Owner of a farm property from any requirement
in any Zoning By-law, or in any way changes the land uses permitted for a farm
property pursuant to any Zoning By-law.
Attendance
2.6 No person conducting an On-Farm Special Event shall permit more than the
maximum number of attendees as stated in the zoning permission to attend the
event, including persons participating in or working at the event.
PART 3 – LICENSING
Applications
3.1 Every application for a Licence shall be completed and submitted on forms
prescribed by the Director.
3.2 Every application for a Licence shall include,
(a) an annual licensing fee of $250.00;
(b) the address of the property proposed to be used for On-Farm Special
Events;
(c) written proof, satisfactory to the Director, that the Applicant is the Owner;
(d) proof of a valid Ontario farm business registration number for the property,
or proof of exemption from the registration requirements;
(e) confirmation of a Municipally approved site plan; and
(f) proof of commercial general liability insurance acceptable to the Director of
Financial Services and subject to limits of not less than five million dollars
inclusive per occurrence for bodily injury, death and damage to property
including loss of use thereof.
3.3 Every Licence shall be posted in a conspicuous location on the premises of the
On-Farm Special Event.
3.4 A Licensee shall comply with all conditions of a Licence.
Review
3.5 The Director is authorized to receive and consider all applications.
Page 47
4
3.6 The Director is authorized to issue, suspend or revoke any Licence in accordance
with Section 151 of the Municipal Act, 2001, S.O. 2001. C. 25, and to refuse the
issuance of any Licence if there has been a previous material breach of the
Licence, or in accordance with Section 3.9 of this By-law, including conditions
consistent with zoning.
3.7 In addition to any other condition or requirement of this By-law, every Licence
issued shall be subject to the condition that compliance with all applicable Federal,
Provincial and Municipal laws, by-laws, rules, regulations, orders, approvals,
permits, standards, and all other governmental requirements is required.
Refusal
3.8 The Director shall refuse to issue or renew a Licence if,
(a) the Applicant is not the Owner of the subject property;
(b) the Applicant is not at least 18 years of age;
(c) the application is incomplete;
(d) the prescribed Licence fee has not been paid;
(e) the Applicant submits false, mistaken, incorrect or misleading information in
support of the application;
(f) an Enforcement Officer, by way of inspection, has determined that the
property is not in compliance with the approved Site Plan Agreement; or
(g) There is reason to believe that the carrying on of the On-Farm Special
Event(s) at the property would contravene any applicable condition, rule, or
law.
General
3.9 Licences are not transferrable.
3.10 The issuance of a License does not represent a commitment by the Municipality
or the Director to issue a Licence in a subsequent year.
Term
3.11 Licences are valid from the date of issuance and expire on December 31 in the
calendar year in which they are issued, unless revoked or suspended at an earlier
date.
Page 48
5
PART 4 – MANAGEMENT AND RECORDS
4.1 Every Licensee shall retain records of all On-Farm Special Event activity during the
period of the License, for the period of six months following the end of the term of
the Licence.
PART 5 – ENFORCEMENT
5.1 Where any Person contravenes any provision of this By-law, an Enforcement
Officer may direct such Person to comply with this By-law. Every Person so
directed shall comply with such direction without delay.
Powers of Entry
5.2 An Enforcement Officer, whether alone or accompanied by an individual
possessing special or expert knowledge or skills, may enter on land at any
reasonable time for the purpose of carrying out an inspection to determine
whether or not the following are being complied with:
(a) this By-law;
(b) a direction or order of the Municipality made under the Municipal Act, 2001,
S.O. 2001, c. 25 or this By-law; or
(c) an order made under section 431 of the Municipal Act, 2001, S.O. 2001, c.
25.
5.3 For the purposes of an inspection under this By-law, an Enforcement Officer
may:
(a) require the production for inspection of documents or things relevant to the
inspection;
(b) inspect and remove documents or things relevant to the inspection for the
purpose of making copies or extracts;
(c) require information from any person concerning a matter related to the
inspection; and
(d) alone or in conjunction with a person possessing special or expert knowledge,
make examinations or take tests, samples or photographs necessary for the
purposes of the inspection.
5.4 In addition to any other provision of this By-law, and subject to the provisions of
the Municipal Act, 2001, S.O. 2001, c. 25, a provincial judge or justice of the
peace may issue an order authorizing the Municipality to enter on land, including
a room or place actually being used as a dwelling, for the purpose of carrying out
an inspection to determine whether or not the following are being complied with:
Page 49
6
(a) this By-law;
(b) a direction or order of the Municipality made under the Municipal Act, 2001,
S.O. 2001, c. 25 or this By-law; or
(c) an order made under section 431 of the Municipal Act, 2001, S.O. 2001, c.
25.
Obstruction
5.5 No Person shall hinder or obstruct, or attempt to hinder or obstruct, an
Enforcement Officer from lawfully carrying out a power, duty or direction under
this By-law.
Suspension of Licence
5.6 The Director may suspend a Licence if the Licensee fails to comply with any
provision of this By-law and such non-compliance is not remedied within 7 days,
or other time period as deemed appropriate by the Director, following notice from
the Municipality specifying the particulars of the non-compliance.
Revocation of Licence
5.7 The Director may revoke a Licence if,
(a) it was issued in error;
(b) it was suspended in accordance with the provisions of this By-law and no
satisfactory evidence of compliance has been filed with the Municipality within
60 days from the date of suspension;
(c) it was issued as a result of false, mistaken, incorrect, or misleading
statements, information or undertakings contained in the application or any
supporting materials;
(d) the Licensee is not in compliance with any Licence condition; or
(e) upon the request of the Licensee.
5.8 The Director shall immediately inform the Licensee of a revocation and the
reasons for it by means of contacting the Licensee at the address provided in the
application. The Director shall also notify all affected agencies.
Page 50
7
Offences and Penalties
5.9 Every Person, other than a corporation who contravenes any provision of this By-
law, is guilty of an offence and on conviction is liable, for every occurrence, day
or part thereof upon which such offence occurs or continues, to a fine of not more
than $10,000 for a first offence; and not more than $25,000 for any subsequent
conviction.
5.10 Every corporation which contravenes any provision of this By-law, is guilty of an
offence and on conviction is liable, for every occurrence, day or part thereof upon
which such offence occurs or continues, to a fine of not more than $50,000 for a
first offence, and not more than $100,000 for any subsequent conviction.
5.11 Without limiting any other section of this By-law, every Person who contravenes
any provision of this By-law is guilty of an offence and on conviction is liable to a
fine in accordance with the Provincial Offences Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.33.
5.12 If any Person is in contravention of any provision of this By-law, and the
contravention has not been corrected, the contravention of the provision shall be
deemed to be a continuing offence for each day or part of a da y that the
contravention remains uncorrected.
5.13 Where any Person contravenes any provision of this By-law, such Person shall
be responsible for all costs incurred by the Municipality directly related to the
contravention.
PART 6- GENERAL
Severability
6.1 Each section of this By-law is an independent section, and the holding of any
section or part of any section of this By-law to be void or ineffective for any
reason shall not be deemed to affect the validity of any other sections of this By-
law.
Conflict
6.2 In the event of a conflict of a conflict between any provision of this By-law and
any applicable Act or regulation, the provision that is the most restrictive prevails.
Schedules
6.3 The following Schedules are attached to and form an integral part of this by-law:
Schedule “A” – Set Fines
Page 51
8
Short Title
6.4 The short title of this By-law shall be the “On-Farm Special Event Licensing By-
law”.
Effective Date
6.5 This By-law shall be effective on the date that it is passed.
Passed in Open Council this 25th day of May, 2021
_____________________________________
Adrian Foster, Mayor
_____________________________________
June Gallagher, Municipal Clerk
Page 52
Schedule “A”
MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON
PART I Provincial Offences Act
By-law 2021-049: On-Farm Special Event Licensing By-law
ITEM COLUMN 1
Short Form Wording
COLUMN 2
Provision creating
or defining offence
COLUMN 3
Set Fine
1 Conduct an On-Farm Special Event
without a valid Licence
s. 2.1 $500.00
2 Contravene a condition of site plan
approval
s. 2.3 $300.00
3 Failure to display License in a
conspicuous location
s. 3.3 $50.00
4 Failure to comply with conditions of a
Licence
s. 3.4 $300.00
“NOTE: The penalty provision for the offences indicated above is section 5.11 of by-law
no. 2021-049, a certified copy of which has been filed”.
Page 53