Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2022-04-11 General Government Committee Agenda Date:April 11, 2022 Time:9:30 a.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: Lindsey Patenaude, Committee Coordinator, at 905-623-3379, ext. 2106 or by email at lpatenaude@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/or video record of General Government Committee meetings. If you make a delegation or presentation at a General Government Committee meeting, the Municipality will be recording you and will make the recording public by on the Municipality’s website, www.clarington.net/calendar Noon Recess: Please be advised that, as per the Municipality of Clarington’s Procedural By-law, this meeting will recess at 12:00 noon, for a one hour lunch break, unless otherwise determined by the Committee. 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/archive The Revised Agenda will be published on Friday after 4:15 p.m. Late items added or a change to an item will appear with a * beside them. Pages 1.Call to Order 2.Land Acknowledgement Statement 3.Declaration of Interest 4.Announcements 5.Presentations/Delegations (10 minute time limit) 5.1.Delegation by Adrian Gianello, Regarding Universal Broadband Fund for Rural Internet in Clarington 6.Reports/Correspondence Related to Presentations/Delegations 7.Communications 7.1.Minutes of the Tyrone Hall Board dated November 17, 2021, January 19, 2022, February 16, 2022, and March 16, 2022 5 (Receive for Information) 7.2.Minutes of the Newcastle Village Community Hall Board dated March 15, 2022 11 (Receive for Information) 7.3.Minutes of the Solina Hall Board dated March 9, 2022 14 (Receive for Information) 7.4.Isabel Grace CPA, CA, Superintendent of Business and Finance, Peterborough Victoria Northumberland and Clarington Catholic District School Board, Regarding Trustee Determination for the 2022 Election 17 (Receive for Information) 7.5.Guy Giorno, Municipality of Clarington Integrity Commissioner, Regarding Report on Complaint Gogos v. Jones, 2022 ONMIC 7, April 5, 2022 22 (Receive for Information) General Government Committee April 11, 2022 Page 2 7.6.Ben McWade, P. Eng, Project Manager, Region of Durham, Regarding Request for Noise By-law Exemption for May 3, 2022 to May 31, 2022 61 (Motion for Direction) 8.Staff Reports, Staff Memos and New Business Consideration 8.1.Public Works 8.1.1.PWD-011-22 Mallory Heights Subdivision Phase 1A and 1B, Courtice, Plan 40M-2528 Certificate of Acceptance and Assumption By-Law, Final Works Including Roads and Other Related Works 65 8.1.2.PWD-012-22 Lake Road Extension Schleiss Development, Plan 40M-1921 Certificate of Acceptance and Assumption By-Law, Final Works Including Roads and Other Related Works 71 8.1.3.PWD-013-22 Trudeau Drive Walkway 76 8.2.Community Services 8.2.1.CSD-007-22 Tourism Update 2021 84 8.2.2.CSD-008-22 Former Camp 30 Site – Cafeteria Building 92 8.2.3.CSD-009-22 Future Use of the Tourism Information Centre 96 8.3.Financial Services 8.3.1.FSD-018-22 Sponsorship, Advertising and Naming Rights Sales 100 8.4.CAO Office 8.4.1.CAO-002-22 Flag Protocols Policy F105 105 8.4.2.New Business - Queen's Jubilee (Councillor Zwart)119 9.Unfinished Business 9.1.New Business - Enforcement By-law (Referred from the March 21, 2022, General Government Committee Meeting Link to Item 8.3.6 from the March 21, 2022, General Government Committee Meeting General Government Committee April 11, 2022 Page 3 10.Questions to Department Heads/Request for Staff Report(s) 11.Confidential Items 12.Adjournment General Government Committee April 11, 2022 Page 4 Page 1 Tyrone Community Centre Minutes of Meeting – November 17th, 2021, 7:30pm Attendees: Danielle Carroll Kyle Young Corinna Traill Brian Glaspell Marlene Raby Joy Vaneyk Larry Quinney Greg Carroll Marlene Craig Cecile Bowers Dianne Woodley Lyndsay Luckhardt Regrets: Paul Rowan Justin Vachon Alvina Hare Danielle McCarthy Dave Taylor 1. Motion to accept agenda. Moved by Greg. 2nd by Dianne. Carried. 2. Motion to approve the minutes. Moved by 3. Chair Report: Danielle Carroll Snow plowing has been confirmed for the upcoming winter through the Municipality. 4. Maintenance / Janitor: Kyle Young & Larry Quinney Nothing to add from last month. Nothing to update as window still has not been repaired. 5. Booking Report: Joy Vaneyk Discussed upcoming rentals and need for volunteers for various duties. Updated us on capacity limit and revisions done to the rental contract due to the changes. 6. Treasurer Report – Brian Glaspell. Balance on hand is approximately $37,000 between all accounts including savings for A/C unit Old Business: 1. Discussion was had about having a New Years Eve celebration/dance. Marlene will look into if there is any interest. 2. Ice Rink application has been submitted and just waiting on approval from Municipality. New Business: Nothing discussed due to internet issues. Motion to Adjourn at 8:30pm, Marlene, 2nd Lyndsay Next Meeting: TBD Page 5 Tyrone Community Centre January 2022 Board Meeting January 19, 2022 7:30pm Attending: Danielle Carroll Greg Carroll Larry Quinney Corinna Traill Kyle Young Alvina Hare Marlene Raby Joy Vaneyk Regrets: Dianne Woodley David Taylor Cecile Bowers Lyndsay Luckhardt Marlene Craig Paul Rowan Brian Glaspell Moved & seconded, by Joy V & Larry Q to approve agenda. Urgent Business: Greg provided an update on the burst pipes and water damage in north room. Clarington Municipal staff have fixed pipes and provided heaters to prevent mold. Basement ceiling tiles will need replacing. Reports: Chair: Danielle will provide further updates regarding re-opening and covid restrictions once she receives direction from the municipality. Booking: Joy reported concern with December 23rd rental. Hall was left in a mess. Discussion regarding holding deposits for these conditions and rental fee for organizations from outside Clarington renting the hall. The second blood donor clinic will be held at TCC on Wednesday January 26, 2022. Old Business: Rink: All is well with the rink. Volunteers are maintaining & clearing ice. Motion, moved by Joy, seconded by Greg to accept any donations for the ice rink, that may be forthcoming from the public, through the Municipality. Carried. Air Conditioning units have been requested. A delay in supply is due to lack of boxes. Danielle will follow up with supplier to inquire about expediting the order. Next Meeting February 16, 2022, will be the annual general meeting. Anyone wishing to resign from current positions, please advise Danielle prior to meeting. Motion to adjourn at 8:15pm by Greg. Seconded by Larry. Page 6 Tyrone Community Centre Minutes of Meeting – February 16, 2022, 8:00pm Attendees: Danielle Carroll Kyle Young Corinna Traill Brian Glaspell Marlene Raby Greg Carroll Joy Vaneyk Dave Taylor Marlene Craig Lyndsay Luckhardt Dianne Woodley Regrets: Paul Rowan Alvina Hare Larry Quinney Cecile Bowers 1. Motion to accept agenda. Moved by Greg. 2nd by Dave. Carried. 2. Motion to approve the minutes by Greg, 2nd by Kyle. Carried. 3. Chair Report: Danielle Carroll – sent out emails from the Municipality to the board members. Discussion was had about what we are able to do and what is still on the restricted list. There was a small flood in the kitchen again. Joy advised of the damage. The municipality will be replacing damaged areas. The water has been turned off. We should start looking at dates to set up some community events and boost spirits. Discussed spring fundraiser 4. Vice Chair – Marlene Raby - nothing to report 5. Maintenance / Janitor: Kyle Young & Larry Quinney – spoke more about flooding and issues with the pipes. Fire extinguishers are all good and so is the DFIB pads. Everything is in good order. 6. Booking Report: Joy Vaneyk – Blood donor clinics are the only rentals at the moment. Possibility of a couple rentals in May depending on restrictions. 7. Treasurer Report: Brian Glaspell – in chequeing acct we have just over $5000. Our savings account has $25153 and the other savings account has $228 8. Rink – Greg Carroll – had a mild thaw last week, however rink is doing well. It has been well used. Busier on the weekends than during the week. Old Business: 1. Nothing further to be discussed that wasn’t already covered in reports above. New Business: 1. Nothing discussed Motion to Adjourn at 8:37pm, Lyndsay, 2nd Marlene C. Carried Next Meeting: TBD Page 7 Minutes Annual General Meeting Tyrone Community Centre Wednesday February 16 2022 Agenda: Welcome by chairperson Introduce previous committee. Board Members for 2021 were: Chair – Danielle Carroll Vice Chair – Marlene Raby Treasurer – Brian Glaspell Secretary – Lyndsay Luckhardt Councilor – Corinna Traill Dance Rep - Dave Taylor Booking Rep – Joy Vaneyk Grounds and Maintenance/Sign: Kyle Young General Members – Cecile Bowers, Marlene Craig, Alvina Hare, Larry Quinney, Paul Rowan, Corinne vandeGrootheveen, Justin Vachon, Kyle Young, Marlene Raby, Greg Carroll, Danielle McCarthy, Dianne Woodley, Steve Hutchinson, Kristy Thompson Dissolve 2020 Board Election of Office Bearers:  Chair: Danielle Carroll  Vice Chair: Open  Secretary: Open/Rotating  Treasurer: Brian Glaspell  Rental Coordinator: Joy Vaneyk  Dance Coordinator: Dave Taylor  Grounds and Maintenance/Sign: Kyle Young, Greg Carroll, Larry Quinney  General Members: Cecile Bowers, Marlene Craig, Alvina Hare, Larry Quinney, Paul Rowan, Danielle McCarthy, Dianne Woodley, Marlene Raby, Lyndsay Luckhardt, Corrina Traill Motion to approve 2022 Board made by Lyndsay, seconded by Marlene R. All in favor. Carried Motion to adjourn AGM made by Dave T, seconded by Greg C. Approved Continue to New Business Items – continued on Agenda for February meeting Page 8 Page 1 TCC Minutes Tyrone Community Centre March 2022 Board Meeting March 16, 2022 7:30pm Attending: Danielle Carroll Greg Carroll Larry Quinney Dianne Woodley Kyle Young David Taylor Marlene Raby Joy Vaneyk Marlene Craig Spencer & Emily Metcalf Regrets: Cecile Bowers Lyndsay Luckhardt Paul Rowan Brian Glaspell Alvina Hare Corinna Traill Moved by Dave T and seconded by Marlene C to approve agenda. Carried Reports: Chair: Danielle provided update on covid requirements. Masking, contact tracing and vaccinations are no longer required. We will maintain touch point sanitization for all rentals. Treasurer: Treasurer was not in attendance, but bank balance is approximately $26,000.00. Booking: Joy has revised our contract to reflect present covid regulations. Many calls have been received from customers wondering when dances will commence. Requests have been received from fitness and dance groups regarding hourly rental rates. Moved by Joy and seconded by Larry to charge $60/hour or $50/hour if paying ahead for a minimum of 4 weeks. All in favour. Carried. Dance: Moved by Dave T, seconded by Dianne W to increase dance admission to $15/person, which will include 1 slice pizza, 1 bag chips and 1 bottle water. All in favour. Carried. Not enough volunteers are available for an April dance. Maintenance: Kyle reported the dehumidifier in the north basement is still not working and has not been replaced. There is still water and moisture in the basement; a globe on an outside light needs replacing, 2 lights are out of the globe lights. We are awaiting ladder training to be able to acquire a ladder to fix small items in the hall. Danielle to raise new work orders for the Municipality, and invite Rob G to our next meeting. Larry will polish the floors as soon as material is available. Old Business: Rink: The rink is done for the season. It was a good year. Page 9 Page 2 TCC Minutes Air Conditioning: vendors have been to site. Moved by Dave T and seconded by Larry Q to pursue the bid for 6 units at a cost of $22,208.73 (shipping and tax included). All in favour. Carried. Fundraising: fundraiser has been set up with DFS, www.shopdfscanada.com. This fundraiser will run until March 28, 2022. All board members to notify contacts; information to be added to social media. Ontario Trillium Fund Grant: Moved by Marlene C and seconded by Joy to pursue the OTF ‘Resilient Community Fund’ grant for the purpose of purchasing equipment to reduce the risk of covid transmission. All in favour. Carried. Next Meeting April 20, 2022, Motion to adjourn at 9:00 pm by Greg. Page 10 NEWCASTLE COMMUNITY HALL BOARD March 15 2022 Main Hall 7 pm Zoom Present Were: Henry Corvers Crystal Yaki Marg Zwart, Local Councilor Sierd DeJong Janeen Calder Barry Carmichael (zoom) Also Present: Gabrielle Bell, Secretary 1. Yearly Interior Tour of Building attended by J. Calder, C. Yaki, H. Corvers, S. DeJong and G. Anderson AGENDA Moved by M. Zwart, seconded by J. Calder Added items: a) Masking b) Dishwasher c) Girl Guides d) Village Concerts The agenda is accepted as circulated with above additions. “Carried” 2. MINUTES Moved by H. Corvers, seconded by M. Zwart The minutes of February 15, 2022 are accepted as circulated. “Carried” 3. FINANCIAL REPORT Moved by J. Calder, seconded by M. Zwart The financial report is accepted as circulated “Carried” 4. LEGACY PROJECT - A/C at this time cost would be approximately $650K as per Buildings and Property Supervisor, R. Groen (see attached) - Elevator at this time cost would be approximately $1+ million as per Buildings and Property Supervisor, R.Groen - Enabling Accessibility Fund is available could be considered in 2025 for Elevator Page 11 - Canadian Heritage Grant for 2022 due April 30 2022. C. Yaki, V. Bilenduke-Guppy and G. Bell will be applying for this grant for capital. Legacy portion of grant requires 50% from applicant. - Capital project submission needs to be into Buildings and Property Supervisor, R. Groen by April 30th of each year for consideration in Municipal budget. - Suggested projects – level upper portion of main hall, Media System, Curtains in Main Hall and could fans in Main Hall be reversed to help with cooling? Refer to Buildings and Property Supervisor. 5. VILLAGE CONCERTS– 100th Committee has declined to take over this for 2022 and 2023 - C. Yaki has met with L. Johnson, Chair of Village Concerts the past few years to clarify whether he is resigning from position. He is willing to do 2022 season with assistance from Hall Board i.e. treasurer responsibilities, advertising. He would like to have 2022 be his last season chairing this committee. Chair will have proposal of lineup and financials from L. Johnson at next meeting for consideration. - 100th Committee would like to work with Village Concert Committee in July 2023 to have music that would celebrate the 100th. 6. Co-Vid19 UPDATE – Municipal Facilities will be lifting masking mandate March 21, 2022. Hall Board is in agreement with Municipal Policy on masking re: Co-Vid19. 7. 100th COMMITTEE Volunteers are: Fred Horvath, Myno Van Dyke, Janeen Rowsell, Heather Rambukkana, Crystal Yaki, Theresa Vanhaverbeke, Bill McKee, Willie Woo, Jane Black, Vanessa Bilenduke-Guppy, Gabrielle Bell, Rod McArthur, Barry Carmichael and Amanda Mercier 8. DISHWASHER – M. Zwart presented quote of reconditioned under counter commercial dishwasher. She will work on obtaining a 3rd quote. 9. GIRL GUIDES – we have had staff to open doors and check proof of vaccination twice per week during Co-Vid19. Now that proof of vaccination is no longer needed, do we want to continue with staff to open? Motion by M. Zwart, seconded by H. Corvers That we keep staff on for opening twice per week for Girl Guides “Carried” 10. Motion by H. Corvers, seconded by M. Zwart That we book concert for April/May 2023 “Carried” Board members will think of fundraiser for fall of 2022 to discuss at April meeting. 11. C. Yaki has produced report for ongoing actions for the Hall; this will be updated for each meeting. 12. Kevin Symak has volunteered to wind clock while custodian in on vacation. Page 12 13. Clock – D. Hooper would like to know if temporary fix on quietening the chimes is what we were looking for. M. Zwart will follow up with D. Hooper. Board would like to know if this is a permanent fixture or can it be removed if needed? 14. Discussion: Understanding The Planning Context - due to time constraints C. Yaki gave her thoughts and asked the Board members to consider for future Board retreat. 15. Discussion: Themes For Our Strategic Directions 16. Setting Strategic Directions 17. Identifying Major Priorities 18. Next Steps: Motion to adjourn at 8:45 pm H. Corvers, seconded by G. Anderson “Carried” Page 13 Minutes - AGM Solina Community Centre Board - March 9, 2022. 7:00. Solina Hall Jenny Bowman welcomed the members and visitors to the meeting. Members Present ( Hall) - Herb Tink, Karen Dair, Ron and Bev Whitbread and Jenny Bowman. Councillors - Janice Jones Park Board Members - Chris McKenzie ( Herb, Brandon) Regrets - Joe Neal, Tasha Bowman and Brandon Baker Volunteers/ Visitors - Don Dair, Eric Bowman, Ken Ashton and Kathy Baker Jenny read the minutes of the 2021 AGM - Hearing no errors or omissions she called for a motion to approve the minutes as read. Don Dair made the motion and seconded by Ron Whitbread. Carried Reports Herb gave theTreasurer’s Report - after clarifying the report Chris McKenzie made the motion to accept the report and seconded by Eric Bowman. Carried Herb gave the Park Board - questions re report were answered. Jenny gave the Centre Board Report. Bev gave The Rental Co-ordinators report. Ken Ashton made the motion to accept all remaining reports. Seconded by 
Eric Bowman. Carried. Jenny called for a motion for Herb to pay all bills for the Park and Community Centre for the year 2022 and 2023. Karen Dair made the motion and seconded by Bev Whitbread Executive for 2022- 2023 - Centre Board There were no nominations from the floor but Jenny strongly encourage some of the attendees or someone they knew to consider coming on the Board as there is definitely a need for younger people to take over. Chair /Secretary - Jenny Bowman Treasurer - Herb Tink Directors - Karen Dair, Ron and Bev Whitbread Park Board -Brandon Baker, Chris McKenzie and Herb Tink. Motion to accept members Solina Community Centre Board 2022 and 2023 made by Eric Bowman seconded by Kathy Baker . Carried Volunteers - Tasha Bowman, Ken Ashton, Janice Jones Rental Co-ordinators - Ron and Bev Whitbread Janitors - Don and Karen DAir and Jenny and Eric Bowman Grass Maintenance - Don Dair - Jenny brought forward that maybe it is time for a wage increase for Don. Kathy Baker made the motion to increase $17.00 to $19.00 per hour. Seconded by Bev Whitbread. Carried. Business from the floor - Ken Ashton noted the the Allis tractor needs repairing. Ring gears and Starter drive. The Allis is 38 years old but does a good job of the diamonds and get called in for duty for lawn maintenance. Ken will look into the repairs and report back on his findings. AGM adjourned 8:00 - Don Dair Page 14 Brief Solina Hall Board meeting Yyyyyh We had a brief meeting to approve the opening of the Hall fo April 1, 2022. Motion made by Karen Dair to open on April 1, 2022 with any restrictions in place to be followed. Seconded by Chris McKenzie. Carried. A discussion ensued re the need for presentation of Proof of Vaccination. After much discussion it was decided that at this point we would not ask for it. This can be changed as needed. Motion made by Kathy Baker and seconded by Chris McKenzie. Carried. Jenny has looked into the Self Assessment signage required to open. Lee-Ann Reck has them done and Jenny will pick them up for the Park and Hall. Jenny has been in touch with Lee-Ann and Tim Walsh about the cleaning protocol and supplies. Jenny, Karen, Eric and Don will follow the protocol when cleaning and Herb will pick up the appropriate cleaning supplies. The approved cleaning supply list has been forward to Herb. Chris enquired if The Town was going to repair the tennis court. Janice will enquire and report back on her findings. There was also a question re the pebble stone in the playground being part of the problem with the tennis court. It seems to find its way into the courts. Bev brought up the bar tender situation. Currently the renters supply their own. Previously the Hall Board had supplied the bar tenders but this had changed a couple of years ago under the new alcohol regulations. We prefer to supply our own as they can keep an eye on the Hall. Janice will follow up on the current requirements of renters suppling their own bar tenders or the Hall Board supplying them for alcohol rentals. Hearing no more discussion Jenny called for a motion to adjourn the meeting. Don Dair. Page 15 Chairperson Report 2021 - The hall was closed for 2021 - did open for the elections in June. The floor had been damaged due to a sump pump leak October 2020 - It was replaced by The Town in October. We replaced the benches in the west lawn. The Centre Board donated one and John & Shirley Goslinga. The benches were plaqued to represent these donations. The Centre Board donated in memory of the Solina WI and Silver Set. Karen Dair donated her Arbour Award tree from 4H to the Hall. It was planted by Andrew Louws. We had a major Park clean up in September. Several years of junk moved on to the dump!! It was decided to paint the kitchen to freshen it up. Karen and Jenny chose the colour and Lloyd Yesik will complete the job as soon as he is able - $3000.00 to paint all cupboard inside and out and the shelving in the island. Any repairs needed before painting were included. Page 16 Page 17 Page 18 Page 19 Page 20 Page 21 MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON INTEGRITY COMMISSIONER, GUY GIORNO Citation: Gogos v. Jones, 2022 ONMIC 7 Date: April 5, 2022 REPORT ON COMPLAINT Page 22 TABLE OF CONTENTS The Complaint ................................................................................................................. 3 Summary ......................................................................................................................... 3 Background ..................................................................................................................... 4 Process Followed .......................................................................................................... 12 Positions of the Parties .................................................................................................. 16 Complainant’s Position ........................................................................................... 16 Respondent’s Position ........................................................................................... 20 Findings of Fact ............................................................................................................. 22 Issues and Analysis....................................................................................................... 27 Issue A: Did Councillor Jones misuse her office or the influence of office, contrary to section 13.1? ...................................................................................................... 27 Issue B: Did the Code apply to Councillor Jones’s treatment of the Complainant? ............................................................................................................................... 28 Issue C: Did the manner in which Councillor Jones treated the Complainant involve bullying, harassment, or discrimination, or otherwise contravene section 7? ......... 34 Content .......................................................................................................................... 34 Appendix: Excerpts from Code of Conduct for Members of Council ............................. 35 Page 23 3 THE COMPLAINT 1. Ms Christine Gogos (Complainant) alleges that Councillor Janice Jones (Respondent) contravened sections 7 and 13.1 of the Code of Conduct for Members of Council, By-Law 2017-020, in the course of a neighbourhood dispute. Section 7 of the Code prohibits harassment, bullying, discrimination, and similar inappropriate conduct toward other people. Section 13.1 prohibits the misuse of the influence of office. SUMMARY 2. The Respondent’s dispute with the Complainant was related to a personal matter that had no connection to the Municipality. 3. A careful review of the evidence confirms that, in the course of the dispute, the Respondent did not use or attempt to use the influence of her office as a Council Member. A painstaking examination of recordings disproves the allegation that the Respondent was using her office as a Council Member for purposes unrelated to municipal business. Consequently, section 13.1 (Improper Use of Influence) was not contravened. 4. The Code states that every Council Member must comply with the Code, “whether or not acting in his or her capacity as a member of Council.” Despite this provision, I find that the Code does not apply to an incident that is unrelated both to the office, role, function, influence, authority, and responsibility of a Council Member, and to the interests and business of the Municipality. It cannot be the case that an Integrity Commissioner has authority to make findings about whether somebody has been a good neighbour, friend, co-worker, spouse, parent, child, sibling, or community resident, or that Members are subject to Council-imposed penalties if their personal lives are less than exemplary. Unless it relates to Clarington’s interests, a Council Member’s personal life is beyond the scope of the Code. 5. Consequently, the harassment, bullying, and discrimination provisions of the Code (section 7) do not apply to the interaction between the Complainant and the Respondent. 6. The events giving rise to the Complaint involve the interaction among the Complainant, the Respondent, and a third individual whom I refer to in this report as the Other Adult. The Other Adult is not covered by the Council Code of Conduct and is not a party to his inquiry. I mention the Other Adult only to the extent it is necessary to understand and assess the Complainant’s allegations against the Respondent. Page 24 4 BACKGROUND 7. In this report, including the transcripts, I have used placeholders, Name1, Name2, Name3 and Name4, instead of four proper names (first names). Name1 is someone who was telephoned by the Other Adult and whom the Complainant believes was another Council Member. Name2 is the driver of a Chevy Blazer that appears on the second video recording. Name3 is the name by which the police constable greeted the Other Adult. Name4 is the Other Adult’s actual first name. 8. Subsection 223.6(2) of the Municipal Act states that I may disclose in this report such matters as in my opinion are necessary for the purposes of the report. Because of the findings that I am making, including the finding about the application of the Code to what took place, I include in this report only the facts that are directly relevant to the allegations and findings. There was history between the parties prior to what occurred in June 2021. The inquiry canvassed that history thoroughly, but I am choosing not to include it in this report. Given that the facts are interwoven with the private lives of the parties and the Other Adult, this report sparingly describes the background facts. As a result, the summary of events starts abruptly, and individuals’ acts may seem to lack context. This is because restraint in describing people’s private lives takes precedence over narrative flow. 9. The Complainant says that on June 15, 2021, she was at home with a minor child when she heard the Respondent outside stating that the Complainant had “killed” the Respondent’s vines. 10. Soon afterward, the Respondent and the Other Adult came to the Complainant’s front door. 11. In total that evening, the Respondent and the Other Adult made three visits to the Complainant’s doorstep. The parties agree on the number of visits. They disagree on the sequence of what occurred. 12. During or shortly after the first visit of the Respondent and the Other Adult, the Complainant phoned the police. 13. According to the police report, the Complainant’s first call to the police was made at approximately 7:10 p.m. 14. At or shortly before 7:18 p.m.,1 the Respondent and the Other Adult returned to the Complainant’s door a second time. The Respondent rang the doorbell seven times 1 The first recording shows the Respondent and Other Adult standing on the Complainant’s porch at 7:18 p.m. when the recording commenced. Consequently, I conclude that, on their second trip to the Complainant’s door, the Respondent and Other Adult arrived at or shortly before 7:18. Page 25 5 over an eight-minute span,2 and the Complainant did not answer. After yelling to attract the Complainant’s attention (see paragraph 23 for the transcript) they left the porch at 7:26 p.m.3 15. At approximately 7:33 p.m., the Respondent and the Other Adult returned to the Complainant’s door a third time. The Respondent rang the doorbell once during this visit, at 7:33 p.m. The Respondent and the Other Adult departed the Complainant’s property at 7:35 p.m., after the arrival of a Durham Regional Police Service constable. 16. Near the start of the Respondent’s second visit, the Complainant activated her porch camera. The camera was also active during the third visit. 17. Consequently, two recordings (recordings of the second and third visits) were available to the inquiry. The video footage is clear. The audio is of moderate quality. Repeated, patient listening is required to make out some portions of the conversation. Frequently words are obscured by the sounds of contractors working across the street.4 18. According to time stamps, one recording runs from 7:18 p.m. to 7:28 p.m.5 The second recording runs from 7:33 p.m. to 7:35 p.m. and ends when the police constable arrives on the Complainant’s porch. 19. On both recordings, the video runs at approximately twice normal speed, while the speed of the audio is normal. Each video must be slowed to normal speed to be aligned with the audio. 20. The first recording shows the Respondent and the Other Adult standing on the Complainant’s porch. They remain there until 7:26 p.m., when they leave the porch (and move out of view) for the rest of the recording, which stops at 7:28 p.m. The second recording, from 7:33 p.m. to 7:35 p.m., begins by showing the Respondent alone on the porch, after which the Other Adult joins her. The recording ends with the Respondent and Other Adult moving from the porch to the driveway, where they speak briefly to the police constable, who then walks up the porch steps toward the Complainant’s door. 21. The Complainant states that she phoned the police three times more, once during the second visit, once during the third visit, and once more that night. 22. At approximately 7:35 p.m., Constable Clinton Pipe of the Durham Regional Police Service arrived at the Complainant’s house. 2 On the first recording, the Respondent rings the doorbell at 7:18, 7:19, 7:20, 7:21, 7:23, 7:25 and 7:26. 3 The first recording shows the Respondent leaving the porch at 7:26:29, and shows the Other Adult leaving about 4 seconds later. 4 The events took place in the evening, but it was mid-June, so there was still full daylight. 5 The recordings display time in one-second intervals. For ease of reading, this report refers to time only in hours and minutes. Timed to the second, the first recording runs from 7:18:20 to 7:28:54. Page 26 6 23. The following transcript is based on my analysis of the first recording, which corresponds to the Respondent’s second visit to the Complainant’s door: Other Adult: No. I don’t want to sit on their fucking, nasty furniture. They’re [ethnicity]. They’re dirty people. Respondent: Don’t say that. That’s wrong. Other Adult: [inaudible] terrible. Respondent: That’s wrong. They’re just mean people. (pause) Other Adult: I mean, you could always call the cops on her and get a restraining order. Respondent: What is the point? I mean, that’s just wasting their time. Other Adult: That is the [inaudible] angle. Like the police come running. Respondent: That’s the whole problem. Like, it’s wasting By-law’s time. It’s wasting the police’s time. Other Adult: Um hmm. Respondent: [inaudible] Other Adult: No. (pause) Respondent: [inaudible] They don’t care for anything unless [inaudible]’s there [inaudible] Other Adult: They don’t care about everybody, in their fucking, stupid, little property. (pause) Respondent: How is this legal? Other Adult: Should I report it’s illegal? Respondent: No. Other Adult: Why not? Respondent: What’s the point? Other Adult: Because if they – Respondent: They can go ahead and charge me. If it’s that – Other Adult: If they try – Respondent: – a problem they can charge me – Other Adult: No. If they try to say anything, I’ll burn the [inaudible] right now. (pause) Other Adult: OK. Call the cops. We’ll keep ringing your bell. (pause) Page 27 7 Other Adult (on phone): [inaudible] they’ve got a big generator on the back, and some tanks. Voice on phone: [inaudible] Other Adult: Ring the doorbell, dude. Voice on phone: [inaudible] Respondent: What is [inaudible]? Voice on phone: [inaudible] Other Adult: He’s more [inaudible] than anything Voice on phone: [inaudible] Other Adult: [inaudible] He says [inaudible] like they actually do good work Respondent: [inaudible] (pause) Respondent: Watch [inaudible] the door. Other Adult: I know. Doesn’t mean we can’t stand here. They want to be a prick, I can be a fucking prick. (pause) Other Adult: I’m gonna call Name1 and see what he’s doing. (ringing sound) Other Adult (on phone): Hello? Hello? Recorded greeting: After leaving a message – Other Adult: Oh. Oh my [inaudible] (pause) Other Adult: [inaudible] the Noise By-law too, and I ain’t got shit to do with the grass [inaudible] Respondent: I do. I am the law – Other Adult: I know you do. Respondent: – practically. (pause) Other Adult (speaking to phone): The [ethnicity] have fucked us over for the last time. Me and [Respondent] are standing in front of their fucking house. We already were here. Male voice on cell phone: [inaudible] Other Adult: Fucking dumbass [ethnicity] bitch was like I’m calling the cops, so I yelled at her and called her a fucking bitch. Cut [Respondent’s] vine and killed it. That fucking vine’s been – Male voice on cell phone: [inaudible] Page 28 8 Other Adult: Exactly, it was just on the fence, and they fucking killed it. And that vine’s been growing for like 15 years. Male voice on cell phone: [inaudible] said they would call the cops? Other Adult: Yes, because [Respondent] rang the door— yeah because [Respondent] – Male voice on cell phone: I know what to do: [inaudible] come over and [inaudible] fucking eavestrough right off the roof. Other Adult: Come do it. I’m giving you permission. I don’t even give a shit. Male voice on cell phone: [inaudible] tonight Respondent: [inaudible] Male voice on cell phone: slash the tires [inaudible] Other Adult: Come right now. Come right now. Male voice on cell phone: I’m in Port Hope right now. Other Adult: Oh shit. Respondent: (laughs) Other Adult: Oh – Male voice on cell phone: [inaudible] open that [inaudible] bar. Other Adult: Where is – Actually you don’t do it yourself. Send someone like Cameron to do it. Pay him some fucking money to do it. Male voice on cell phone: [inaudible] Other Adult: Exactly. So you’re going to want to fucking get like Cameron [inaudible] Respondent: [inaudible] Male voice on cell phone: Kick their front door open or something. Other Adult: Well, that’s a little belligerent. They care more about their stupid little – Yeah, they care more about their stupid little plants anyway, than they do [inaudible] Male voice on cell phone: [inaudible] Other Adult: [inaudible] This is unreal. [inaudible] Male voice on cell phone: [inaudible] Other Adult: We’ve been ringing the doorbell. They won’t come to the door because they’re fucking [inaudible] Male voice on phone: [inaudible] bitch, she’s like that. Other Adult: Well, yeah, I actually want the cops to come. I actually do want the cops to come, because we haven’t done shit. They’re the ones that are being dumbasses, and if cops come over [inaudible] and the [inaudible] going on [inaudible] Page 29 9 (pause) Respondent: Well, the beauty of vines is that it will always grow back. Respondent (yelling): I can’t believe you people are afraid to talk to me. We’re like grown ups. Like that’s part of the problem people. Other Adult (yelling): You guys are fucking pussies. Respondent (yelling): Call the police. I’d love to talk to them. Other Adult (yelling): Fucking call them, bitch. 24. From the above transcript, I have removed references to the Complainant’s national or ethnic origin. 25. The second recording shows P.C. Pipe arrive in an unmarked, dark grey Ford Interceptor Utility, and park across the street. Apparently by coincidence, the police vehicle is followed by a light grey Chevy Blazer. The Other Adult uses his hand to motion to the driver of the Chevy Blazer to back off, and then leaves the porch, goes onto the street, and speaks to the driver of the Chevy Blazer. (I refer to the driver as Name2 in the transcript below.) The Chevy Blazer turns around in a driveway and exits toward the direction from which it came. When P.C. Pipe gets out of the Ford Interceptor, the Respondent leaves the porch, and the Respondent, the Other Adult, and the police constable speak to another while standing on the Complainant’s driveway. The recording ends with P.C. Pipe walking onto the Complainant’s porch. 26. The following is a transcript of the audio portion of the second recording, which corresponds to the Respondent’s third visit to the Complainant’s door. The Respondent and Other Adult remain silent, and only start to speak when they see the police constable arrive in an unmarked vehicle. Respondent: Oh, who’s that? Other Adult: I was wrong. Respondent: Now, you just keep quiet. Other Adult: Oh God, Name2’s here. Respondent: Oh. Tell him to leave. Seriously, tell him, go and tell him to leave. (pause) Police: Hi there. Respondent: Hi. Police: You call? Respondent: I did not call. The neighbour has called. I’m just [inaudible] for the last year or so, and I’m just trying to talk to them. I want to end the war. Police: OK. (to Other Adult:) Are you Name3? Other Adult: Name3? Page 30 10 Respondent: Name4 is [redacted]. They called; he was with me. Police: OK. Respondent: Name4 has –. Police: All right. Because they called, I’ll see them first. Respondent: Yep. I’m right over here. Police: Yeah. 27. In the above transcript, Name4 represents the Other Adult’s actual name. Name3 represents what the police constable said to the Other Adult, which was either a mispronunciation of the Other Adult’s name or a mistake in naming the Other Adult. 28. When Constable Pipe was admitted to the Complainant’s home, he found that she had been crying. 29. The background above is either agreed by both parties or confirmed by me based on a review of the recordings and the police report. 30. The parties dispute the sequence of what happened during the three visits. 31. The Complainant says that she opened the door in response to the Respondent’s first visit, and she did not open the door when the Respondent returned the second and third times. 32. The Respondent states that the Complainant opened the door during the second visit, and she did not open the door during the first and third visits. 33. More specifically, the Complainant’s version is that the Respondent and the Other Adult arrived a first time at 7:08 p.m., yelling, “Open the door, we know you’re home,” and “I’m not leaving until you come out.” The Complainant states that she then opened the door and told the Respondent and the Other Adult to get off of her property. In the Complainant’s words, what happened next was that Janice slapped her left hand on my door and aggressively pushed herself halfway in to my front foyer and yelled “I'm not leaving until I talk to you.” I then pushed her out with the door and locked it right away and called the police. 34. According to the Complainant, during the Respondent’s second and third visits, the Complainant did not open the door but made another call to the police on each occasion. 35. In the Respondent’s version of the visits, during the first visit, “Get off my porch” was yelled without the door being opened. The door was eventually opened, during the second visit: Page 31 11 When I first came to [Complainant’s] door, I rang her doorbell and waited for her to answer the door. No one answered so I continued to ring the doorbell. I wanted to talk to her [background details redacted]. I continued to ring her doorbell, and no one answered. After some time, she yelled through the door, “I’m calling the police. Get off my porch.” I then returned to my property. I waited on my porch and then thought this is crazy, we need to work this out, so I returned to her porch and rang the doorbell and waited for her to come to the door. She eventually came to the door, opened it, and yelled, “I’m not talking to you,” and slammed the door in my face. At no time, did I touch her door, or attempt to enter her home. She has a large plant in the middle of her porch, and it is difficult to even get near the door; it would be very difficult to force open the door as you cannot get near it. I waited at the front of her house and then the police arrived and I spoke with them. 36. Both parties agree that the Respondent offered, through the police constable, to discuss and work out the issues between her and the Complainant, and the Complainant declined. (The Complainant explains that she felt the Respondent’s offer was insincere.) 37. Later than same evening, there was a further communication between the parties, leading to a fourth telephone call by the Complainant to the police. 38. The parties agree on the fact that there was a brief, subsequent discussion, and generally agree on the content. The only material point of disagreement is whether the Respondent called the Complainant a “bitch.” 39. According to the Complainant: Within an hour after the officers [sic]6 left, I was visiting my neighbour across the street and Janice came outside and walked to her car. Janice then looked over at us and began yelling at me. She yelled, “Too bad you didn't want to talk to me, Christine.” I then said, “You’re not allowed to speak to me, please stop.” Janice then replied, “No one ever told me I can’t speak to you. Who do you think you are? You’re crazy. You are crazy, lady,” and then called me a crazy b*itch. I did not reply and Janice drove off. 40. The Respondent’s recollection is as follows: My comments to [Complainant] while walking to my car that “too bad you didn’t want to talk to me” was my opinion at the time. Again I made no reference to my role as a Councillor, and I did not attempt to use my Council position to influence her to speak to me. I believe that I referred to her as crazy, but at no time did I call her a bitch. 41. After this conversation, the Complainant called the police again. P.C. Pipe came back and spoke to the Complainant in person. He was unable to speak to the Respondent in person, but spoke to her by telephone later same night. 6 The video shows only one police constable. Page 32 12 42. Three days after these events, the Complainant filed the Complaint. PROCESS FOLLOWED 43. In operating under the Code, I follow a process that ensures fairness to both the individual bringing a Complaint (the Complainant) and the Council Member responding to the Complaint (the Respondent). This process is based on the Council Code of Conduct Complaint Procedure adopted by Council. 44. This fair and balanced process begins with me issuing a Notice of Inquiry that sets out the issues in the inquiry. The Complaint, including any complaint materials, is attached to the Notice. The Respondent is given the opportunity to respond, and then the Complainant receives the opportunity to reply to the Response. The Respondent is made aware of the Complainant’s name. I do, however, redact personal information such as personal phone numbers and email addresses. In this case, the submissions of both parties contained highly sensitive personal information that I also redacted; the redactions had no effect on the fairness of the inquiry. I may accept supplementary communications and submissions from the parties, generally on the condition that each party gets to see the other’s communications with me. I do this in the interest of transparency and fairness. 45. I received the Complaint on June 18. On July 8, the Complaint was supplemented by the two recordings. The June 18 and the July 8 materials, collectively, comprise the Complaint. The official date of complaint was July 8. 46. On July 9, I issued a Notice of Inquiry. 47. The Complaint had cited paragraphs 13.1 (a) and (b) and sections 7.1. 7.2 and 7.3 of the Code. I exercised my discretion to determine that the inquiry would consider section 13.1 and all of section 7 of the Code. The Notice invited the parties to address eight specific issues under section 13.1 and eight additional specific issues under section 7. 48. Section 13.1 of the Code of Conduct prohibits the misuse of the influence of office. The Notice of Inquiry identified the following questions as relevant to section 13.1 of the Code: a. Whether Councillor Jones used her position as a Council Member to purport to authorize the Other Adult to enter or to remain on the Complainant’s private property, by saying, “I do, I am the law, practically,” or words to that effect. b. Whether Councillor Jones used her position as a Council Member to demand access to the Complainant’s family residence on a matter unrelated to municipal business for the private advantage of Councillor Jones and/or the Other Adult. The Complaint alleges that Councillor Jones “felt that her Page 33 13 role as a Ward 1 Councillor gives her authority to continue to come on my porch regardless if she was told to leave.” c. Whether Councillor Jones used her position as a Council Member to demand that the Complainant speak to the Respondent about a matter unrelated to municipal business for the private advantage of the Respondent and/or the Other Adult. The Complaint alleges that Councillor Jones made reference to her power as a Council Member during the June 15 incident. d. Whether, subsequent to the demand that the Complainant speak to her because she is a Council Member, Councillor Jones made further statements about her purported right to require the Complainant to speak to her, such as, “too bad you didn't want to talk to me, Christine,” and, “No one ever told me I can’t speak to you. Who do you think you are? You’re crazy. You are crazy, lady,” or words to that effect. e. Whether Councillor Jones attempted to use her office or the influence of office to imply preferential access to the police, when she told the Complainant, “call the police, I’d love to talk to them,” or words to that effect. f. Whether Councillor Jones used her position as a Council Member to attempt to influence an identified Councillor, to intervene in a matter unrelated to municipal business for the private advantage of Councillor Jones and/or the Other Adult. g. Whether Councillor Jones used her position as a Council Member for the private advantage of the Other Adult, namely, for the purpose of assisting the Other Adult in a personal dispute with the Complainant. h. Whether Councillor Jones used her position as a Council Member for her own private advantage, namely, for purposes of a personal dispute with the Complainant related to vines belonging to Councillor Jones or that Councillor Jones claimed belonged to her. 49. Section 7 of the Code prohibits harassment, bullying, discrimination, and similar inappropriate conduct toward other people. The Notice of Inquiry identified the following questions as relevant to the consideration of section 7: a. Whether Councillor Jones harassed, bullied, or intimidated the Complainant and her minor children by standing on the porch of the Complainant’s family residence, yelling, banging the door, and demanding that the Complainant open the door to admit her. b. Whether Councillor Jones harassed, bullied, or intimidated the Complainant and the Complainant’s minor children by bringing with her the Other Adult, who openly discussed vandalism or violence while he was standing on the porch of the Complainant’s family residence, and by laughing when the vandalism or violence was discussed. c. Whether Councillor Jones harassed, bullied, or intimidated the Complainant and the Complainant’s minor children by refusing to leave the front porch of the Complainant’s family residence. Page 34 14 d. Whether Councillor Jones used indecent, abusive. or insulting-words or expressions toward the Complainant, including “crazy” and “bitch.” e. Whether Councillor Jones was a party to ethnic slurs directed to the Complainant and the Complainant’s family, including “they’re [ethnic]; they’re dirty people,” and “fucking dumbass [ethnic] bitch,” or similar language. f. Whether Councillor Jones was a party to sexist and misogynistic insults directed to the Complainant, such as “fucking pussies,” and “bitch,” or similar language. g. Whether the alleged actions described above constituted discrimination against the Complainant by Councillor Jones, and/or harassment of the Complainant by Councillor Jones, on the basis of ethnic origin or sex. h. Whether Councillor Jones was subject to the Council Code of Conduct when she allegedly acted as described above. 50. The Notice of Inquiry informed the parties that the inquiry would not consider whether the Other Adult contravened the Code, because the Other Adult is not subject to it. The Notice left open the possibility that the actions of the Other Adult might have been relevant to the determination of whether the Respondent herself breached the Code. 51. The Respondent provided her written response on July 28. Following review, and following redaction of personal information, I sent it to the Complainant on August 18. 52. The Complainant replied on August 23 and submitted a revised Reply on August 26. 53. On August 30, I asked the Municipality to search in its files for a series of records that I thought potentially could be relevant. I received the search results, September 10. I asked for further records, September 24, and received them, September 28. 54. I conducted interviews of the Complainant and Respondent on October 1 and October 5 respectively. 55. I received and reviewed considerable photographic evidence related to the vines. 56. I took time to explore whether the inquiry might be resolved or settled by agreement of the parties. Settlement was not possible. 57. I issued a delegation under subsection 223.3(3) of the Municipal Act to a lawyer who works with me, authorizing him to conduct witness interviews. On December 16, I wrote to three potential witnesses – sending the requests by Canada Post Xpresspost – asking them to participate in the inquiry. 58. Two witness interviews were conducted in January. Page 35 15 59. The third potential witness did not respond to written requests and multiple telephone messages. In late February I determined that I would bring the inquiry to a close without hearing that person’s evidence. 60. A lengthy portion of the inquiry was consumed by analysis of the recordings. A considerable amount of time was spent comparing the recording to what the Complainant alleged that the Respondent said. The most significant portions of dialogue were replayed scores of times. That analysis is essential to the findings in this report. In fact, the recordings disprove the allegation that the Respondent was using her office as a Council Member for purposes unrelated to municipal business. 61. As mentioned, the audio portions of the recordings were of moderate quality. A contributing factor was the noise of contractors working directly across the street from the Complainant’s home. From my observation, the project was an interlock stone driveway and/or walkway. Sunset in Clarington did not occur until 8:59 p.m. that day, and workers appeared to be making full use of the long daylight hours. Loud noises of their equipment and activity could be heard throughout the duration of both recordings. Those repeated noises included metal hitting stone, engine sounds, and what seemed to be the sound of a concrete saw. 62. To ensure that the inquiry was based on best quality recording and to mitigate any impacts of compression and transmission, I requested and received from the Complainant multiple copies on different storage media. In all, I received four copies of each recording, most recently in March 2022. Some of what I hear on the recordings is different than what the Complainant feels was said; I examined the recordings exhaustively before reaching this conclusion. 63. I have considered all the submissions of the parties, and all of the evidence including municipal records, municipal by-law enforcement records, photographs from several sources, video recordings, maps, and email records. I have received, reviewed, and considered a large volume of evidence related specifically to dealings between the Complainant and the Respondent, and related generally to neighbourhood happenings, prior to June 15, 2021. Ultimately, I have determined that the history of the parties’ relationship is not the basis on which the inquiry is to be decided; nonetheless, it was necessary to review a significant volume of evidence before reaching that conclusion. 64. Section 223.8 of the Municipal Act states that an Integrity Commissioner who determines there are reasonable grounds to believe that there has been a contravention of the Criminal Code or of a provincial Act, other than the Municipal Conflict of Interest Act, shall immediately refer the matter to the appropriate authorities, suspend the inquiry until the disposition of any resulting police investigation and charge, and report the suspension to Council. Throughout the inquiry I have been mindful of this obligation but at no time have I had a reasonable ground to believe that an offence under the Criminal Code or a provincial statute occurred. Page 36 16 65. I observe that the Durham Regional Police Service classified the matter as “Non- Criminal Only” and considered the matter “Completed.” I also note that the attending police constable could not exactly make out the comments recorded by the front door camera. 66. Under the Code of Conduct Complaint Procedure, no action may be taken on a complaint received more than six months from the date of the alleged violation of the Code. Consequently, I may not consider any alleged violation that occurred prior to January 8, 2021. However, occurrences before that date might be relevant to whether violations occurred on or after that date. 67. In quoting from documents in an inquiry report, my practice is to edit punctuation and capitalization for consistency and to correct immaterial typographical and textual errors. 68. On March 27, I shared with the Respondent a draft of this report. The Respondent provided comments on April 4. I have taken the Respondent’s comments into account in finalizing this report. POSITIONS OF THE PARTIES 69. A significant part of each party’s submissions dealt with incidents occurring prior to June 15. Some of incidents took place years prior. My summary of the parties’ positions is confined to June 15. Complainant’s Position 70. The Complainant denies cutting the Respondent’s vines on June 15 or the previous day. She also observes that she has a legal right to cut anything growing on her property. The Complainant argues, however, that the real issue on June 15 was not the vines but the Respondent’s assumption that the Complainant had made a by-law complaint against the Other Adult. The Complainant explains that she had been cutting the vines on her property for many years, without incident. 71. The Complainant states that at approximately 7:08 p.m., June 15, the Respondent and the Other Adult rang her doorbell, and then banged on the door and yelled, “Open the door. We know you’re home.” The Respondent yelled, “I'm not leaving until you come out.” 72. According to the Complainant, the Respondent and the Other Adult continued to yell, “We’re not leaving until you come out,” so the Complainant answered the door and told them to get off the property, and said she was calling the police. As I have explained Page 37 17 at paragraph 33, the Complainant states that the Respondent then attempted to push her way into the home. 73. The Complainant states that she was crying and shaking as she telephoned the police. She was waiting for the police to arrive when, at 7:17 p.m., the Respondent and Other Adult came onto the porch and began ringing the doorbell again. The Complainant states that she activated the recording function of the front porch camera, and called the police a second time. She activated the recording again, and phoned the police again, when the Respondent returned at 7:33 p.m. 74. The Complainant maintains that she answered the door during the Respondent’s first visit, and told the Respondent to leave the property. Consequently, the Complainant explains, the Respondent knew that her second and third visits were unwelcome. 75. The Complainant makes a number of allegations and says they are backed up by the recordings: 76. She alleges that the Respondent just stood and allowed the Other Adult to say, “I want to spit on their nasty furniture. They’re [ethnicity]. They’re dirty people.” 77. She alleges that the Other Adult yelled, “OK. Call the cops. We’ll continue to ring your doorbell,” and the Respondent replied, “Yup.” 78. She states that Name1, who was telephoned by the Other Adult, was another Member of Council, and states that the Respondent told the Other Adult to leave a message. 79. She alleges that the Respondent failed to intervene while the Other Adult and a male speaking on the telephone engaged in a conversion in which they called the Complainant a “bitch” and a “fucking dumbass [ethnicity] bitch” and then discussed physical damage to the Complainant’s property, including kicking the Complainant’s door open and damaging the Complainant’s plants, as well as discussed paying a third individual to damage the Complainant’s property. 80. According to the Complainant, the Respondent allowed the Other Adult to solicit someone to damage the Complainant’s home and to offer to pay for the damage to be done. 81. She alleges that when the Other Adult invited the male voice on the telephone to damage the Complainant’s property (“Come do it. I’m giving you permission.”) and the other male stated, “I’m in Port Hope,” the Respondent chuckled. 82. The Complainant states that the driver (of the light grey Chevy Blazer), who appears in the second recording (third visit), had been summoned by the Other Adult. The Complainant is alarmed by how quickly the driver arrived in front of Complainant’s Page 38 18 house, and fears what would have happened if the police had not arrived at the same moment. 83. The Complainant makes an additional allegation, that in my view is central to the question of whether the Respondent was using her position as a Council Member: [Other Adult] then makes reference to me calling By-law on [Other Adult] for a noise complaint, which was actually not me but rather [redacted]. [Other Adult] then states [Other Adult] doesn’t care if [Other Adult] is not allowed to be on my property and asks [Respondent] if she gives [Other Adult] permission and Janice then replies, “I do. I am the law, practically,” reassuring [Other Adult] that she has authority to allow [Other Adult] on our property. 84. Later, the Complainant describes the same comment as follows: Ms. Jones can be heard stating, “I am the law, practically” on the video in response to [Other Adult’s] remarks about a noise complaint and damaging my grass. This cannot be refuted. 85. According to the Complainant, the Respondent “makes reference to her power as a councillor twice on the video.” The Complainant quotes the Respondent as yelling, “I can’t believe you people are afraid to talk to me, way to solve the problem,” and yelling, “Call the police. I want to talk to them.” This occurred while the Other Adult was yelling that the Complainant was a “bitch” and she and her family were “pussies.” 86. The Complainant’s account of what occurred after the police constable left appears at paragraph 39, above. 87. The Complainant states that if the Respondent genuinely wanted dialogue and a resolution, then the Respondent would not have been accompanied by the Other Adult. 88. The Complainant states that the Respondent herself behaved in a manner that was “hostile, aggressive and threatening.” Other words that the Complainant uses to describe the Respondent’s conduct on June 15 are “unstable,” “uncompassionate,” “absolutely despicable,” and “disgusting manner for the whole neighbourhood to witness.” 89. The Complainant argues that the Respondent’s repeated visits, after the Respondent had been told to leave, constituted harassment. “[W]what authority was bestowed upon her that she felt it necessary and within her right, to continuously come on my property after I specifically told her to leave and not return?” 90. The Complainant states that the harassment also included “abusive, racial and harassing” comments, and threats of property damage, by the Other Adult. She claims that the Respondent did not tell the Other Adult to stop or to leave, and even chuckled at the comments. The Complainant finds nothing funny about ethnic insults and verbal abuse, and is disgusted by the suggestion that the Respondent found them comical. Page 39 19 According to the Complainant, the Respondent was a party to the behaviour of the Other Adult. 91. The Complainant explains that the Respondent’s conduct on June 15 was extremely stressful, even harmful, to the Complainant and to a minor child who was at home and witnessed it. She provides personal information in support of this claim that I am not including in the report. 92. The Complainant alleges that the Respondent acted in this manner because she was a Council Member: “When a neighbour tells you to leave her property or she'll call the police, any normal person would respect their request and leave, not show up 2 more times and stay on their porch for over 10 minutes constantly yelling and allowing [Other Adult] to continue to swear through the door and ring their doorbell. … Unfortunately, Janice felt that her role as a Ward 1 Councillor gives her authority to continue to come on my porch regardless if she was told to leave. She is not above the law. Other neighbours took notice and were stunned. The officer was even surprised when I mentioned to him that she is a Ward 1 Councillor. Contract workers doing landscaping on our neighbour’s house across the street also took notice and asked me the next morning if I was OK. … This is not only improper behaviour from a Councillor, but also as a citizen, and a neighbour. … She has tarnished her image to those of us who witnessed these events unfold on June 15, 2021. 93. In the same vein, the Complainant argues that the Respondent was exerting authority over the Complainant: The fact that she was told to leave my property and to not come back, shows her in direct violation to my rights as she began trespassing on my property. We felt threatened in our home by the aggressive actions of Ms. Jones and [Other Adult]. NO ONE should ever feel threatened in their own home. She had no right to come back and disturb our peace by her continuous harassing behaviour. They were NOT looking for a resolution. This was a very careless and disgraceful attempt to intimidate us. Ms. Jones and [Other Adult] felt that they had authority over me, the homeowner, to disregard my request by returning two more times and shockingly had the audacity to even make arrangements, while standing on MY PORCH, to hire friends to come and damage our property. To makes matters worse, Ms. Jones did absolutely nothing to STOP [Other Adult’s] actions. We are still stunned as to how bold they both felt causing a scene for the whole neighbourhood to witness on my property. [emphasis added] 94. The Complainant further alleges that the conduct was unbecoming of a Council Member: “As a Member of Council, I do expect a certain level of professionalism and integrity from Ms. Jones, but that was not evident at all during this incident.” Page 40 20 95. In response to the Respondent’s comments about the recordings (see paragraph 114, below), the Complainant takes the position that the security cameras operate lawfully and that the police had previously confirmed this. Respondent’s Position 96. The Respondent is a nurse practitioner and full-time front-line health care worker. At the time, she had been deployed to a nursing home where an outbreak resulted in many deaths. While caring for residents, she herself contracted COVID-19 and became seriously ill. June 15 was a stressful day at work and, when she came home that evening, she discovered that her vines had been cut. This made her distraught, and the Other Adult was trying to comfort her and address the situation. 97. The Respondent says she went to the Complainant’s house to discuss the vine. Instead of discussing the matter, the Complainant videotaped the Respondent. 98. The Respondent states that she did not bang on the Complainant’s door, and states that she rang the doorbell between five to seven times during the course of three visits. According to the Respondent, several of the rings occurred during the first (unrecorded) visit. “No one answered so I continued to ring the door bell. I wanted to talk to her … I continued to ring her door bell and no one answered.” 99. The Respondent denies yelling, except when she raised her voice to make the following statements: “I can’t believe you people are afraid to talk to me.” “Really acting like grown-ups.” “Let’s solve the problem, people.” “Call the police. I want to talk to them.” 100. The Respondent states that she came to the Complainant’s porch three times but did not refuse to leave. 101. According to the Respondent, she was engaged in a private dispute with the Complainant, and was not in any way acting as a Council Member, or using or attempting to use any influence as a Council Member. At no time did she make reference to herself as a Council Member or to her power as a Council Member. The claim that the Respondent felt her role as Ward 1 Councillor allowed her to come onto the Complainant’s porch despite requests to leave is based on nothing but conjecture, she states. 102. The Respondent’s position is that she had every right to defend her property (her vine), and in doing so she was acting as a private individual and not as a Council Member. 103. The Respondent notes that she did not demand access to the Complainant’s residence. 104. She states that she did not use her influence as a Council Member to encourage the Other Adult to enter or remain on the Complainant’s property. The Other Adult made Page 41 21 an independent decision, and acted upon seeing that the Respondent was upset. The Respondent explains that she was indeed upset that evening; she now regrets allowing the Other Adult to accompany her. 105. The Respondent states that she did not condone the Other Adult’s remarks about the Complainant or the Complainant’s ethnicity, including the gendered insults. She explains that she was not party to those comments and, in fact, told the Other Adult not to talk that way. Further, she argues that the Other Adult was the one who made the comments, and the Respondent did not harass or discriminate against the Complainant. 106. The Respondent denies encouraging the Other Adult to make statements about damaging the Complainant’s property. She laughed at one point becomes the Other Adult’s comments were outlandish, not because she agreed with them. 107. The Respondent denies telling the Other Adult, “I am the law.” 108. The Respondent denies that the words, “Call the police. I would love to talk to them,” implied influence on, or preferential access to, the police. She notes that it was the Complainant who first told the police constable that the Respondent is a Council Member. 109. The Respondent explains that she wanted to talk to the police, because she genuinely felt that dialogue would help to bring an end to the conflict. 110. The Respondent states that she did not ask another Council Member to get involved in or to or intervene in the dispute. 111. The Respondent’s position is that, “Section 7 of the Code of Conduct does not apply in the context of a private dispute unrelated to council business, such as my dispute with [Complainant].” In support of that position, she relies on the wording of sections 1.2, 7.1 and 7.6 of the Code of Conduct. 112. The Respondent cites subsection 8(1) of the Municipal Act: The powers of a municipality under this or any other Act shall be interpreted broadly so as to confer broad authority on the municipality to enable the municipality to govern its affairs as it considers appropriate and to enhance the municipality’s ability to respond to municipal issues. 113. Based on this provision, she argues that, “the Code of Conduct cannot be interpreted to apply to a private dispute involving a councillor not related to municipal business, such as my dispute with [Complainant} …” 114. The Respondent expresses concern that the Complainant’s video camera impermissibly records activity taking place beyond the boundaries of the Complainant’s property – and believes that such recordings were unlawful. She also notes that the Page 42 22 Complainant’s recordings include some conversations that took place on the Respondent’s own property but could be heard on the Complainant’s property. 115. The Respondent concludes: “I am embarrassed by this whole situation, and the fact that I became as emotional as I did. I did not, however, breach the Code of Conduct.” FINDINGS OF FACT 116. Findings of fact appear in the Background section of this report, and below. Findings are based on the evidence, according to the standard of the balance of probabilities. The audio and video recordings have allowed me to assess the reliability of individual recollections. Where accounts differ, I have made findings that are in harmony with the preponderance of the probabilities based on all of the evidence. Below, where a finding relates to a claim made by a party, I refer to that claim. 117. During the Complainant’s first telephone call to the police, she mentioned that the Respondent or the Other Adult threatened the use of a gun and a bullet. That allegation was not made in this inquiry. The Complainant told the attending police officer that the Respondent was uttering profanities. That allegation also was not made in this inquiry. 118. Despite what was said to the police, I find no evidence that a gun and bullet were mentioned, and I find no evidence that the Respondent uttered profanities. 119. In relation to the parties’ conflicting recollections of where the opening of the door fit into the sequence of visits: I find that the Complainant opened her door to the Respondent during the Respondent’s first visit onto the porch. The Complainant did not open her door to the Respondent during the Respondent’s second and third visits. 120. In relation to the Respondent’s statement in paragraph 35: I find that the Respondent’s access to the Complainant’s door was not obstructed by a plant. 121. In relation to the parties’ conflicting statements about whether the Respondent placed her hand on the door, and whether the Respondent entered or tried to enter the Complainant’s home: I find that the Respondent did not enter the Complainant’s home and did not try to enter. I find that during the first visit the Respondent did place her hand on the door as the Complainant, having opened the door, was trying to close it. 122. I find that during the Respondent’s first visit to the Complainant’s door, the Respondent was told to get off the property and was told that the police were being called. Consequently, I find that when the Respondent entered the Complainant’s porch the second time and the third time, she knew that she was unwelcome and knew that she had been told to leave the property. Page 43 23 123. In relation to the Respondent’s claim (paragraph 98) that she did not refuse to leave the Complainant’s property: The Respondent was told to leave at approximately 7:10 p.m., left, returned at 7:18 p.m., left again at 7:26 p.m., and returned again at 7:33 p.m. I find that returning twice after being told to get off the property is equivalent to refusing to leave. 124. In relation to the Respondent’s statement in paragraph 98: I find that the Respondent rang the Complainant’s doorbell at least twelve times. By her own admission, on the first visit, she rang the doorbell several times – that is, two or more. The video recording of the second visit shows the Respondent ringing the doorbell seven times, about once every minute (see paragraph 14). The recording of the third visit shows her ringing the bell once. On each of the second and third occasions, the doorbell was rung an additional, unrecorded time, before the camera was activated. This means she rang the bell at least a dozen times. 125. In relation to the parties’ conflicting statements about banging on the door: I find no evidence that the Respondent banged the Complainant’s door. Based on what the recordings show, I find it more likely that the Respondent did not bang, and only rang the doorbell. 126. In relation to the parties’ conflicting statements about yelling: I find that the Respondent yelled the following statements: “I can’t believe you people are afraid to talk to me. We’re like grown ups. Like that’s part of the problem people.” “Call the police. I’d love to talk to them.” The Respondent did not yell at any other point during the two recordings. I find it likely that the Respondent did yell during the first (unrecorded) visit to the Complainant’s door. I also find it likely that any yelled statements were consistent with the ones cited in this paragraph: that is, they mentioned the Respondent’s desire to have the Complainant open the door and speak to her. 127. In relation to the Complainant’s allegation in paragraph 76: I find that what the Other Adult actually said was, “I don’t want to sit on their fucking, nasty furniture. They’re [ethnicity]. They’re dirty people.” I find that the Respondent did not remain silent in the face of this slur. Instead, the Respondent told the Other Adult, “Don’t say that. That’s wrong. … They’re just mean people.” 128. I find that the Respondent did not utter any of the ethnic slurs or the gendered insults (“bitch,” “dumbass [ethnic] bitch,” “fucking bitch”) heard on the recordings. 129. In relation to the Complainant’s allegation in paragraph 77: The Other Adult said, but did not yell, “OK. Call the cops. We’ll keep ringing your bell.” I do not hear on the recording the Respondent stating “Yep,” or another affirmative response, or any response, for that matter. Page 44 24 130. In relation to the Complainant’s allegation in paragraph 78: The Other Adult did telephone someone whom the Other Adult called Name1 and reached a voice mail greeting. Name1 is similar to, but not the same as, the name of another Council Member. I find that Name1 was not a Council Member and that the Other Adult was not calling a Council Member. I also find that the Respondent did not participate in the phone call to Name1 and the Respondent did not associate her office, as a Council Member, with that phone call. Finally, I do not hear on the recording the Respondent telling the Other Adult to leave a message for Name1. 131. In relation to the Complainant’s allegations in paragraphs 79 through 81: I find that the Respondent was present while the Other Adult and a male voice on the telephone discussed intentionally damaging the Complainant’s property, including ripping the eavestrough off the roof and kicking open the front door, while they discussed paying another individual to cause damage, and while they implied damage to the Complainant’s plants. The Respondent laughed when the male voice said that he was in Port Hope (between 42 km and 48 km away from the Complainant’s residence7). During this discussion the Respondent remained mostly silent, but she did interject at least twice. The Respondent’s interventions were inaudible, but I am inclined to accept the Respondent’s position that she was discouraging rather than encouraging the banter. She had previously corrected the Other Adult’s extreme commentary, and her other comments showed respect for the law and legal process. 132. In relation to the Complainant’s allegation in paragraph 82: I find that Name2, the driver of the light grey Chevy Blazer, who appeared at the same time as the police constable, was not the individual to whom the Older Adult was speaking by phone about damage to the Complainant’s property; the individual was too far away to have arrived within ten minutes.8 I also find that the driver was not the individual whom the Other Adult had proposed paying to damage the Complainant’s property. The Other Adult spoke of paying “Cameron,” and Name2 was not Cameron. 133. I do find that the Respondent and the Other Adult clearly did not want Name2 to be seen by the police constable. Upon recognizing the light grey Chevy Blazer or its driver, the Other Adult attempted to wave it away, and then ran to meet the vehicle. The Other Adult said, “Oh God. Name2’s here.” The Respondent said, “Tell him to leave. Seriously, tell him, go and tell him to leave.” 7 I find it possible, but unlikely, that the male individual on the phone was as far as 62 km away. If he was somewhere within the urban area of the Municipality of Port Hope, that is, within the pre- amalgamation boundaries of the former Town of Port Hope, then he was between 42 km and 48 km away. If he was elsewhere in the Municipality of Port Hope, that is, within the pre-amalgamation boundaries of the Township of Hope, then he was at most 62 km away. 8 The male individual who spoke about kicking open the Complainant’s door, and pulling the eavestrough off the roof, claimed at 7:24 p.m. to have been in Port Hope. Name2’s Chevy Blazer arrived at 7:34 p.m. Page 45 25 134. I find that the Respondent’s reference to the police (“Call the police. I’d love to talk to them”) was not a reference to her position as a Council Member and was not meant to imply that the Respondent would utilize her public office in dealings with the police. 135. With one exception, I find that the Respondent did not refer to her position as Council Member during the course of the dispute. The exception is described in the following paragraphs. 136. Contrary to the Respondent’s recollection, I find that the Respondent did tell the Other Adult, “I am the law, practically.” Clear and unmistakeable on the recording were her two sentences, “I do. I am the law, practically.” Based on the context, I find that the Respondent was referring to her position as a Council Member – that is, a member of the Municipality’s law-making body. 137. Less clear from the recording is the statement, by the Other Adult, that prompted the Respondent to affirm “I do” and to add that she was “the law, practically.” I consider this question to be central to the inquiry, because it relates directly to whether the Respondent was invoking the authority of her office to aid her in a private dispute. In an effort to clarify what was said, I listened to this 10-second segment of the recording more than 100 times. 138. I find nothing in the recording to indicate that the Other Adult was seeking permission or authority for trespass or damage to property. Instead, the Other Adult was speaking disdainfully about the Noise By-law and then added, “I ain’t got shit to do with the grass [inaudible].” The Respondent replied, “I do. I am the law, practically.” She had not even begun the second sentence when the Other Adult affirmed, “I know you do,” placing emphasis on the word “you.” In this portion of the transcript (at paragraph 26), I use dashes to indicate where the Other Adult and Respondent were speaking simultaneously. 139. My finding is that the Respondent was not purporting to authorize law breaking, and was not relying on her office as a Council Member to direct, encourage, or approve the Other Adult’s conduct. I find the most likely explanation to be that the Respondent was explaining why she – unlike the Other Adult – was concerned about the Noise By- law and/or the grass. As a Council Member, she felt obliged to uphold the rule of law. In other words, she was not invoking her authority to make laws; she was underlining her responsibility and duty to uphold laws. (I am fully aware than an individual Council Member has no law-making authority. The legislative function is exercised by the Council collectively. In this paragraph, I am not making a legal statement about how by-laws are enacted. I am making a factual finding about the meaning and intention of the Respondent’s words.) Page 46 26 140. This finding is consistent with the Respondent’s other statements on June 15. Her recorded comments generally demonstrate respect for compliance with laws and by-laws, and concern about wasting the time of the police and by-law enforcement officials. 141. I find that the Respondent, either individually, or collectively as a Member of Council, possesses no authority, responsibility or role related to the Durham Regional Police Service. 142. I find that the Respondent’s statement about calling the police did not mean or imply that the Respondent was suggesting or threatening that she had influence over the police or preferential treatment to the police. At the time the Respondent made this comment, she knew that the police had already been called. I find that the Respondent’s principal reason for inviting the Complainant to call the police (which, as I have noted, had already occurred) was to convey to the Complainant that the Respondent felt that the police would find the Respondent’s position to be more reasonable than the Complainant’s position. 143. The witnesses provided context concerning the relationship between the Respondent and the Complainant prior to June 15. I am not including that evidence in this report. 144. No witness heard any specific statements made on the Complainant’s porch on June 15. 145. One witness saw the Respondent and the Other Adult approach the Complainant’s home on June 15 and was aware that a loud commotion followed, but was unable to hear any specific statements. This witness saw the police arrive a short time later, but could not hear the discussion. 146. One witness saw the Respondent and the Other Adult walk up to Complainant’s home on June 15. This witness confirmed that the Respondent was angry about the cutting of her vines. According to the witness, the Respondent was at the Complainant’s home for “what seemed like 5 minutes” and the Respondent appeared frustrated by the Complainant’s unwillingness to answer the door. This witness was not close enough to hear any specific statements. 147. The Durham Regional Police Service did attend the Complainant’s home on June 15. A police report was generated, and I obtained it during the course of the inquiry. The responding constable and author of the police report states: “I viewed the video and I was not able to determine exactly what was said on the video due to the concrete saw and the construction going on across the street.” 148. The police report confirms that the police constable returned to the Complainant’s home later in the evening of June 15, in response to the Complainant’s complaint that the Page 47 27 Respondent continued to try to communicate with her. According to the report, the constable left a voice message for the Respondent later in the evening, at approximately 11:00 p.m. ISSUES AND ANALYSIS 149. For purposes of this report, I have grouped the questions posed in the Notice of Inquiry (see paragraphs 48 and 49, above) into the following three issues: A. Did Councillor Jones misuse her office or the influence of office, contrary to section 13.1 of the Code? B. Did the Code apply to Councillor Jones’s treatment of the Complainant? C. If so, did the manner in which Councillor Jones treated the Complainant involve harassment, bullying, discrimination, or other behaviour prohibited by section 7 of the Code? 150. As mentioned above, the Notice of Inquiry indicated that I would not consider whether the Other Adult had contravened the Code (since the Other Adult is not subject to it), but I would consider whether Other Adult’s actions might be relevant to the allegations that the Respondent had contravened the Code. 151. The Notice of Inquiry also stated that the inquiry would not consider whether the Criminal Code, Trespass to Property Act, or another law was contravened. If I have reasonable grounds to believe that any such offence occurred, I am required to suspend the inquiry and refer the matter to the police. I have no reasonable grounds; accordingly, I am completing the inquiry and issuing this report. 152. The Notice of Inquiry observed that the Code of Conduct Complaint Procedure permits no action to be taken on a complaint received more than six months from the date of the alleged violation. This prevents me from considering any alleged contravention that occurred prior to January 8, 2021. Occurrences before that date might, however, be relevant to whether violations occurred on or after that date. 153. Both parties raised additional issues not directly relevant to whether the Respondent breached section 7 and section 13 of the Code, including whether the Complainant did cut the Respondent’s vines, and whether the Complainant has the right to record activity using her front porch camera. I make no findings on those issues. Issue A: Did Councillor Jones misuse her office or the influence of office, contrary to section 13.1? 154. No. Page 48 28 155. As I have explained, the evidence does not support a finding that the Respondent was using her office as Council Member to further her dispute with the Complainant. I have found that the Respondent’s only mention of her official position (“I am the law, practically”) was most likely an explanation of why she was obliged to respect the law. 156. I have carefully considered the Complainant’s position that, by insisting on speaking to the Complainant, even after the Complainant make clear communication was unwelcome, the Respondent was implicitly relying on her office as a Council Member. (According to the Complainant, “Janice felt that her role as a Ward 1 Councillor gives her authority to continue to come on my porch regardless if she was told to leave.”) I do not reach the same conclusion. In the absence of evidence connecting the conduct to the office of Councillor, the mere fact that somebody is a Council Member does not mean everything the Council Member does is an exercise of the influence, authority, or functions of office. In this case, there is no evidence connecting the Respondent’s conduct to her municipal office. 157. I find that nothing that occurred on June 15 related to the role, function, influence, authority, or responsibility of a Clarington Council Member. Nothing that occurred on June 15 related to business of the Municipality. 158. The evidence indicates that some issues between the Complainant and the Respondent pre-date the Respondent’s election to office in 2018. This reinforces the conclusion that the June 15 dispute was unconnected to the Respondent’s municipal office. Issue B: Did the Code apply to Councillor Jones’s treatment of the Complainant? 159. No. I find that the Code does not apply to a Council Member’s treatment of another individual where that treatment has no connection to the office, role, function, influence, authority, or responsibility of a Council Member, and no connection to the interests or business of the Municipality. 160. I recognize that section 7 refers to Members’ conduct respecting other persons without expressly restricting its application to municipal-related conduct. Nonetheless, I believe that section 7 applies only on that limited basis. 161. The statutory basis for municipal codes of conduct is subsection 232.2(1) of the Municipal Act: “A municipality shall establish codes of conduct for members of the council of the municipality and of its local boards.” It is implicit that a code of conduct may only apply to conduct that is connected to or affects one’s office as a Council Member or member of a local board. Page 49 29 162. Nothing in the Municipal Act or in Ontario Regulation 55/18 (Codes of Conduct – Prescribed Subject Matters) expressly authorizes a code of conduct to address a Council Member’s private conduct. 163. I am aware that section 5.1 of the Council Code of Conduct appears to state something different. It provides that: Every Member shall observe and comply strictly with every provision of this Council Code of Conduct, as well as all other policies and procedures adopted or established by Council affecting the member, whether or not acting in his or her capacity as a Member of Council. [emphasis added] 164. Do the underlined words truly mean that the Code of Conduct applies to the private lives of Council Members, unrelated to the Municipality? Was it Council’s intention that an Integrity Commissioner would have authority to make findings about whether somebody has been a good neighbour, friend, co-worker, spouse, parent, child, sibling, or community resident? Are Members to be subject to Council-imposed penalties if their personal lives are less than exemplary?9 This cannot be the case. 165. In my view, the words “whether or not acting in his or her capacity as a Member of Council” indicate that Council intends the Code to apply broadly, but not so broadly that the Code would apply to an incident that is unrelated both to the office, role, function, influence, authority, and responsibility of a Council Member, and to the interests and business of the Municipality. 166. The Code is a by-law; consequently, it is subject to principles of statutory interpretation.10 A provision of a statute cannot be interpreted in isolation; its words must be interpreted in the context of the statute as a whole.11 This means that the words of section 5.1 of the Code must be read in the context of the entire Code. 167. The Principles provisions of the Code, sections 1.1 and 1.2, are an important interpretative aid.12 They are akin to a purpose clause,13 and elucidate Council’s intention in enacting the Code: 1. PRINCIPLES 1.1 Improving the quality of Municipal administration and governance can best be achieved by encouraging high standards of conduct on the part of all municipal officials. In particular, the public is entitled to expect the highest 9 Code of Conduct contraventions are subject to penalties, as determined by Council, within the boundaries of subsection 223.4(5) of the Municipal Act. 10 Re Durham Region (Council Member), 2018 ONMIC 3 (CanLII), at para. 33. 11 Ontario v. Canadian Pacific Ltd., [1995] 2 SCR 1031, at 1050, per Lamer C.J.C. 12 Re Kett (No. 2), 2017 ONMIC 14 (CanLII), at para. 152. 13 Oceanex Inc. v. Canada (Transport), 2018 FC 250 (CanLII), at para. 337; T.L. v British Columbia (Attorney General), 2021 BCSC 2203 (CanLII), at para. 20. Page 50 30 standards of conduct from the members that it elects to local government. In turn, adherence to these standards will protect and maintain the Municipality’s and the Council members’ reputation and integrity. 1.2 Key statements of principles that underlie this Council Code of Conduct are as follows, members of Council shall, (a) serve, and be seen to serve, their constituents in a conscientious and diligent manner; (b) be committed to performing their functions with integrity, avoiding the improper use of the influence of their office, and conflicts of interest, under the Municipal Conflict of Interest Act; (c) perform their duties in office in a manner that promotes public confidence and will bear close public scrutiny; (d) recognize, and act upon, the principle that democracy is best achieved when the operation of government is made as transparent and accountable to members of the public as possible; and (e) seek to serve the public interest by upholding both the letter and spirit of the laws of Parliament and the Ontario Legislature, as well as the by-laws and policies adopted by Clarington Council. 168. I note that these Principles sections of the Code refer exclusively to official municipal functions and duties: “Improving the quality of Municipal administration and governance … serve, and be seen to serve, their constituents … performing their functions … use of the influence of their office … perform their duties in office … the operation of government … seek to serve the public interest …” I also note that, except for section 5.1 and section 7, all the other provisions of the Code clearly refer to conduct that involves the business, staff, interests, meetings, information,14 and property of the Municipality, and the duties, service, influence, office, and position of a Member. The context of the entire Code supports the conclusion that section 5.1 and section 7 do not encompass private conduct unconnected either to the Municipality or to the office, role, function, influence, authority, or responsibility of a Member. 169. Also relevant are the various provisions of the Municipal Act that establish municipalities’ authority. 170. The “purpose” section, section 2, helps to interpret all the provisions of the Municipal Act: Municipalities are created by the Province of Ontario to be responsible and accountable governments with respect to matters within their jurisdiction and each municipality is given powers and duties under this Act and many other Acts for the purpose of providing good government with respect to those matters. 14 This includes information possessed by and received by the Municipality. Page 51 31 171. Providing good government is a broad purpose, but not an unlimited purpose. Many aspects of the personal lives of people within municipal government do not affect the provision of good government. 172. The scope of municipal powers is to be interpreted broadly, according to subsection 8(1) of the Municipal Act: The powers of a municipality under this or any other Act shall be interpreted broadly so as to confer broad authority on the municipality to enable the municipality to govern its affairs as it considers appropriate and to enhance the municipality’s ability to respond to municipal issues. 173. While a municipality has broad authority, that authority exists, “to enable the municipality to govern its affairs as it considers appropriate and to enhance the municipality’s ability to respond to municipal issues.” 174. The power to establish codes of conduct and to appoint Integrity Commissioners is included in sections 9, 10, and 11 of the Municipal Act.15 Section 10 applies to single- tier municipalities and does not affect Clarington. It is difficult to see how section 9 (natural person powers) creates authority to bind Council Members in their personal lives. Consequently, if such authority exists, it must reside in section 11. 175. The provisions of section 11 that establish authority are the following: Broad authority, lower-tier and upper-tier municipalities (1) A lower-tier municipality and an upper-tier municipality may provide any service or thing that the municipality considers necessary or desirable for the public, subject to the rules set out in subsection (4). By-laws (2) A lower-tier municipality and an upper-tier municipality may pass by-laws, subject to the rules set out in subsection (4), respecting the following matters: 1. Governance structure of the municipality and its local boards. 2. Accountability and transparency of the municipality and its operations and of its local boards and their operations. 3. Financial management of the municipality and its local boards. 4. Public assets of the municipality acquired for the purpose of exercising its authority under this or any other Act. 5. Economic, social and environmental well-being of the municipality, including respecting climate change. 6. Health, safety and well-being of persons. 7. Services and things that the municipality is authorized to provide under subsection (1). 15 Municipal Act, subs. 232.2(2), subs. 223.3(1). Page 52 32 8. Protection of persons and property, including consumer protection. By-laws re: matters within spheres of jurisdiction (3) A lower-tier municipality and an upper-tier municipality may pass by-laws, subject to the rules set out in subsection (4), respecting matters within the following spheres of jurisdiction: 1. Highways, including parking and traffic on highways. 2. Transportation systems, other than highways. 3. Waste management. 4. Public utilities. 5. Culture, parks, recreation and heritage. 6. Drainage and flood control, except storm sewers. 7. Structures, including fences and signs. 8. Parking, except on highways. 9. Animals. 10. Economic development services. 11. Business licensing. 176. Nothing in these subsections suggests that municipal authority extends to a Council Member’s personal conduct in a matter not affecting the municipality. Paragraph 2 of subsection 11(2) refers to “Accountability and transparency of the municipality and its operations and of its local boards and their operations” [emphasis added]. Unless a municipality is affected (which is not the case here), the personal life of a Council Member does not pertain to the municipality and its operations. 177. The remaining provisions of section 11, subsections 11(4) through 11(11), are not relevant to whether a municipality’s code of conduct may regulate the personal life of a Council Member in a matter not affecting the municipality. 178. I am aware that Canadian courts increasingly take a generous and deferential approach to interpreting the scope of municipal powers, and that the goal of the 2001 modernization of the Municipal Act was to give municipalities “the tools they need to tackle the challenges of governing in the 21st century.”16 However, nothing in the jurisprudence indicates that the Municipal Act makes it Clarington’s business how Councillor Jones treats a neighbour, so long as no municipal interest is affected. 179. The Ontario Court of Appeal says that “municipal powers … are to be interpreted broadly and generously within their context and statutory limits, to achieve the legitimate interests of the municipality and its inhabitants” [emphasis added].17 I underline the 16 Croplife Canada v. Toronto (City), 2005 CanLII 15709 (Ont. C.A.), at paras. 33-34. 17 Ibid., at para. 37. Page 53 33 reference to “legitimate interests.” Unless it relates to Clarington’s interests, a Council Member’s personal life is beyond the scope of the Code. 180. There may exist situations in which an individual’s personal conduct affects a municipality – in other words, circumstances in which private conduct can have an impact on official duties. The jurisprudence on conduct makes clear, however, that the test for applying codes to personal conduct is strict. 181. For example, in the case of a school teacher, Ross v. New Brunswick School District No. 15,18 the Supreme Court of Canada explained that only in narrow circumstances will private conduct amount to professional misconduct: It is on the basis of the position of trust and influence that we hold the teacher to high standards both on and off duty, and it is an erosion of these standards that may lead to a loss in the community of confidence in the public school system. I do not wish to be understood as advocating an approach that subjects the entire lives of teachers to inordinate scrutiny on the basis of more onerous moral standards of behaviour. This could lead to a substantial invasion of the privacy rights and fundamental freedoms of teachers. However, where a “poisoned” environment within the school system is traceable to the off-duty conduct of a teacher that is likely to produce a corresponding loss of confidence in the teacher and the system as a whole, then the off-duty conduct of the teacher is relevant. [emphasis added] 182. It should be noted that the Ross case dealt with virulent anti-Semitism, not an argument with a neighbour. 183. The passage that I have quoted focuses on whether public servants – in that case, teachers; in this case, municipal councillors – should have their “entire lives” subjected “to inordinate scrutiny on the basis of more onerous moral standards of behaviour.” Some may feel that elected officials should be subject to higher standards of conduct, in their personal lives, than other members of the community. That might be a relevant political issue, but it is not the legal issue here. The legal issue is whether a municipality possesses authority to impose penalties for what councillors’ do in their personal lives that does not affect the municipality. In my view, a municipality does not. 184. In Altmann v. The Corporation of the Town of Whitchurch-Stouffville, Justice Phillip Sutherland found that a council’s sanctions against a mayor were illegal for want of statutory authority, but also noted that the offending by-law “limited the applicant’s ability to be … a private citizen of the Town.”19 185. The events of June 15 did not involve the Respondent’s exercise or discharge of official functions, and did not involve her duties, service, or representation of the 18 1996] 1 S.C.R. 825, at para. 45. 19 2018 ONSC 5306 (CanLII), at para. 44. Page 54 34 Municipality, as a Council Member. They did not in any way relate to Clarington’s interests. 186. The harassment, bullying, and discrimination provisions of the Code do not apply to the interaction between the Complainant and the Respondent. I find that section 7 of the Code did not apply to the Respondent’s conduct on June 15. Issue C: Did the manner in which Councillor Jones treated the Complainant involve bullying, harassment, or discrimination, or otherwise contravene section 7? 187. Given the disposition of Issue B, it is unnecessary for me to address Issue C. 188. The Code does not apply to Councillor Jones in her personal capacity, living her life as a resident of the community, in matters not affecting the interests of Clarington. Consequently, I have no business commenting on what the Respondent does in her personal life unrelated to the Municipality. For an Integrity Commissioner to offer an opinion on behaviour that is not subject to the Code of Conduct would be gratuitous and inappropriate. CONTENT 189. Subsection 223.6(2) of the Municipal Act states that I may disclose in this report such matters as in my opinion are necessary for the purposes of the report. All the content of this report is, in my opinion, necessary. Respectfully submitted, Guy Giorno Integrity Commissioner Municipality of Clarington April 5, 2022 Page 55 35 APPENDIX: EXCERPTS FROM CODE OF CONDUCT FOR MEMBERS OF COUNCIL 1. PRINCIPLES 1.1 Improving the quality of Municipal administration and governance can best be achieved by encouraging high standards of conduct on the part of all municipal officials. In particular, the public is entitled to expect the highest standards of conduct from the members that it elects to local government. In turn, adherence to these standards will protect and maintain the Municipality’s and the Council members’ reputation and integrity. 1.2 Key statements of principles that underlie this Council Code of Conduct are as follows, members of Council shall, (a) serve, and be seen to serve, their constituents in a conscientious and diligent manner; (b) be committed to performing their functions with integrity, avoiding the improper use of the influence of their office, and conflicts of interest, under the Municipal Conflict of Interest Act; (c) perform their duties in office in a manner that promotes public confidence and will bear close public scrutiny; (d) recognize, and act upon, the principle that democracy is best achieved when the operation of government is made as transparent and accountable to members of the public as possible; and (e) seek to serve the public interest by upholding both the letter and spirit of the laws of Parliament and the Ontario Legislature, as well as the by-laws and policies adopted by Clarington Council. … 5. ADHERENCE TO COUNCIL POLICIES AND PROCEDURES 5.1 Every member shall observe and comply strictly with every provision of this Council Code of Conduct, as well as all other policies and procedures adopted or established by Council affecting the member, whether or not acting in his or her capacity as a member of Council … 7. CONDUCT RESPECTING OTHERS 7.1 Every member has the duty and responsibility to treat all members of the public, other members of Council, and all staff appropriately and without abuse, bullying Page 56 36 or intimidation, and to ensure that the work environment is free from discrimination and harassment. 7.2 No member shall use indecent, abusive or insulting-words or expressions toward any other member, any member of staff or any member of the public. 7.3 No member shall engage in Harassment of anyone. The Human Rights Code defines Harassment as “engaging in a course of vexatious comment or conduct that is known or ought reasonably to be known to be unwelcome.” 7.4 No member shall engage in Discrimination against anyone on the basis of race, ancestry, place of origin, colour, ethnic origin, citizenship, creed, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, gender expression, age, marital status, family status or disability (the list of prohibited grounds of discrimination in the Human Rights Code). 7.5 Sections 7.3 and 7.4 shall be interpreted in a manner consistent with the Human Rights Code. 7.6 The following examples of Harassment are illustrative only and not exhaustive: (a) Examples [of] Harassment in the workplace include: Physically abusive or aggressive behaviour such as pushing, hitting, finger pointing or standing close to the victim in an aggressive manner Using intimidating or disrespectful body language Verbally abusive behaviour such as yelling, insults, intimidating comments and name calling Spreading malicious rumours Excluding or ignoring the victim Making little or no eye contact with the victim and refusing to engage in common pleasantries Sabotaging the victim’s work or claiming credit for it Repeatedly blaming another for mistakes Making false allegations in memos or other documents Undermining the victim’s efforts by setting impossible goals and deadlines and impeding an employee’s efforts at promotions or transfers Persistent excessive and unjustified criticism and constant scrutiny by a supervisor Engaging in a course of vexatious comment or conduct against a worker in a workplace because of sex, sexual orientation, gender identity or gender expression, where the course of comment or conduct is known or ought reasonably to be known to be unwelcome Page 57 37 Making a sexual solicitation or advance where the person making the solicitation or advance is in a position to confer, grant or deny a benefit or advancement to the worker and the person knows or ought reasonably to know that the solicitation or advance is unwelcome Reprisal or threat of reprisal by a person in a position to grant or deny a benefit to a person who has rejected his or her sexual proposition Unnecessary or unwanted physical contact, ranging from touching, patting or pinching to physical assault Leering or other suggestive gestures Displaying, sending or communicating electronically or by any other means pornographic pictures or other offensive, sexually explicit material Practical jokes of a sexual nature, which cause awkwardness or embarrassment Compromising invitations Unwelcome remarks, jokes or insults about a person’s physical appearance, attire, race, ancestry, place of origin, colour, ethnic origin, citizenship, creed, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, gender expression, age, marital status, family status or disability The displaying of racist, derogatory or otherwise offensive material Insulting gestures or practical jokes, or other action that causes embarrassment, based on grounds of race, ancestry, place of origin, colour, ethnic origin, citizenship, creed, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, gender expression, age, marital status, family status or disability A refusal to converse or work with an individual because of his or her race, ancestry, place of origin, colour, ethnic origin, citizenship, creed, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, gender expression, age, marital status, family status or disability (b) The following examples, relative to employees who report directly to Council, do not constitute Harassment, providing they are undertaken without malice or intent to intimidate or undermine: Performance reviews Work assignments Work evaluation Disciplinary measures taken by the employer for valid reasons Reasonable action taken by an employer or supervisor relating to the management and direction of workers or the workplace is not workplace harassment Page 58 38 7.7 In the course of investigating a complaint that alleges Harassment or Discrimination, the Integrity Commissioner may make interim reports to Council, including interim reports that recommend measures to protect the complainant or to maintain the integrity of the investigation. … 13. NO IMPROPER USE OF INFLUENCE 13.1 No member shall, (a) use the influence of his or her office for any purpose other than for the lawful exercise of his or her official duties and for municipal purposes; (b) use his or her office or position to influence or attempt to influence the decision of any other person, for the member’s private advantage or that of the member’s parent, child, spouse, staff, friend, or associates, business or otherwise; … Page 59 310097.00001/110840507.1 MEMORANDUM To: Municipality of Clarington Council From: Guy Giorno Integrity Commissioner Date: April 5, 2022 Re: Transparency Report on Cost of Code of Conduct Inquiry: File 2021-01-CC Total cost to Municipality of the Code of Conduct inquiry, not including HST, was as follows: File 2021-01-CC Gogos v. Jones 2022 ONMIC 7 Jun.-Dec. 2021 (previously invoiced) 16.9 hrs. @ $239 $4,039.10 Jan.-Mar. 2022 (previously invoiced) 45.1 hrs. @ $239 $10,788.90 Apr. 2022 (to be invoiced) 3.2 hrs. @ $239 $764.80 62.3 hours $15,582.80 Total: $15,582.80 (excluding HST) Page 60 1 Patenaude, Lindsey From:Patenaude, Lindsey Sent:Tuesday, April 5, 2022 1:12 PM To:Patenaude, Lindsey Subject:FW: D2020-32 Phase 6 CTSS - Noise by-law Exemption Request Attachments:Request for Noise By-law Exemption October 14, 2021.pdf From:Ben McWade <Ben.McWade@durham.ca> Sent:March 31,2022 2:27 PM To:Ricciardi,Tony <TRicciardi@clarington.net> Cc:Andrew Gorman <Andrew.Gorman@durham.ca>;Ryan Colvin <Ryan.Colvin@Durham.ca>;Michael Harris <michael.harris@durham.ca>;Jeff MacDonald <Jeff.MacDonald@Durham.ca>;Ramesh Jagannathan <Ramesh.Jagannathan@Durham.ca>;Mike Hubble <Mike.Hubble@Durham.ca> Subject:D2020 32 Phase 6 CTSS Noise by law Exemption Request EXTERNAL Good afternoon, The Region of Durham continues to administer Contract D2020 32,Phase 6 of the Courtice Trunk Sanitary Sewer,on Townline Road between Beatrice Street and Coldstream Drive.In September 2021,the Region submitted a request to Clarington for a noise by law exemption for a period between October 14 and November 15 2021 based on the Contractor’s schedule at the time.Clarington had approved the request (please see attached). Due to the Contractor’s Fall 2021 construction production rates,weather conditions and concrete pipe supply challenges,the Contractor’s schedule was delayed.The Region made the decision to defer the intersection work from late Fall 2021 to Spring 2022 due to concerns with paving and restoration in poor weather.As such,the Region is now requesting a noise by law exemption for the period of May 3 to May 31 2022. We recognize that the May 3 to May 31 request is an additional week longer than the period approved previously for Fall 2021.The additional week is rationalized on the following basis: Spring conditions are anticipated to increase groundwater flows in the open excavation within the intersection and therefore we expect the Contractor’s production rates to be impacted.The work includes the installation of a large diameter deep sewer while supporting adjacent storm sewers,watermains,gas mains and electrical conduits.Following installation,the contractor will backfill and pave the intersection and complete all restoration.Due to the nature of the work and the depth of the large diameter sewer,the intersection will be fully closed in all directions for the four week duration.Advance notification will be distributed and detour signage will be installed.In an effort to complete the work as quickly as possible,we would like to allow the contractor to work in longer shifts beyond the noise bylaw window if needed. The Contractor is currently proposing to complete all of this work within the current noise by law hours of 7am to 10pm,utilizing two continuous crews.One crew is expected to work between the hours of 7am and 5pm and the second crew is expected to work between the hours of 12pm and 10pm.The Region has pushed for this additional effort to minimize any disruption to nearby residents while still attempting to expedite the intersection construction works as safety and quickly and possible.With this in mind,the Region is still requesting a noise by law exemption for the May 3 to May 31 period to accommodate isolated occurrences or Page 61 2 unforeseen circumstances which could necessitate working beyond 10pm.It is the Region and Contractor’s intent to eliminate or minimize night work as much as possible. With the recently provided construction schedule from our Contractor,we respectfully submit this request for a Noise By Law exemption for the period of May 3 to May 31,2022 for the purpose of constructing the trunk sanitary sewer through the Townline and Taunton Road intersection.Noise generated will be from heavy construction equipment working on the site. Please contact the undersigned if you need any additional information. Ben McWade,P.Eng.|Project Manager The Regional Municipality of Durham ben.mcwade@durham.ca|905 668 7711 x3480 (Cell 289 355 8442)|durham.ca My pronouns are he /him THIS MESSAGE IS FOR THE USE OF THE INTENDED RECIPIENT(S)ONLY AND MAY CONTAIN INFORMATION THAT IS PRIVILEGED,PROPRIETARY,CONFIDENTIAL,AND/OR EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE UNDER ANY RELEVANT PRIVACY LEGISLATION.No rights to any privilege have been waived.If you are not the intended recipient,you are hereby notified that any review,re transmission,dissemination,distribution,copying,conversion to hard copy,taking of action in reliance on or other use of this communication is strictly prohibited.If you are not the intended recipient and have received this message in error,please notify me by return e mail and delete or destroy all copies of this message. Page 62 The Corporation of the Municipality of Clarington, 40 Temperance Street, Bowmanville, ON L1C 3A6 1-800-563-1195 | Local: 905-623-3379 | info@clarington.net | www.clarington.net If this information is required in an alternate format, please contact the Accessibility Co-ordinator at 905-623-3379 ext. 2131 October 19, 2021 Michael Harris, P. Eng, Project Engineer Environmental Services Design Division – Works Department The Regional Municipality of Durham Via Email: michael.harris@durham.ca Dear Mr. Harris: Re: Noise By-law Exemption for October 14, 2021 to November 5, 2021 File Number: PG.25.06 At a meeting held on October 19, 2021, the Council of the Municipality of Clarington passed the following resolution: That the request for Noise By-law Exemption, Communication Item 7.2, from Michael Harris, P. Eng., Project Engineer, Region of Durham, for October 14, 2021 to November 5, 2021, be approved; and That, as a condition of granting the noise exemption, the affected Clarington residents within a 500m radius of the work be provided with option of being provided overnight hotel stays, at the Region of Durham’s expense, when work is taking place between 10:00 pm and 7:00 am. Yours truly, _________________________ June Gallagher, B.A., Dipl. M.A. Municipal Clerk JG/cm c: See attached list of interested parties Page 63 Mr. Harris October 19, 2021 Page 2 The Corporation of the Municipality of Clarington, 40 Temperance Street, Bowmanville, ON L1C 3A6 1-800-563-1195 | Local: 905-623-3379 | info@clarington.net | www.clarington.net Interested Parties Ryan Colvin, The Regional Municipality of Durham – ryan.colvin@durham.ca Andrew Gorman, The Regional Municipality of Durham – andrew.gorman@durham.ca Cory Manion, C.Tech, Project Supervisor, The Regional Municipality of Durham – cory.manion@durham.ca Ben McWade, The Regional Municipality of Durham – ben.mcwade@durham.ca Paul Storms, The Regional Municipality of Durham – paul.storms@durham.ca D. Anderson, Manager of Municipal Law Enforcement S. Brake, Director of Public Works R. Brezina, Capital Works Engineer K. Heathcote, Capital Works Supervisor T. Ricciardi, Manager of Infrastructure Page 64 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: General Government Committee Date of Meeting: April 11, 2022 Report Number: PWD-011-22 Submitted By: Stephen Brake, Director of Public Works Reviewed By: Mary-Anne Dempster, CAO Resolution#: File Number: 18T-90003 By-law Number: Report Subject: Mallory Heights Subdivision Phase 1A and 1B, Courtice, Plan 40M-2528 Certificate of Acceptance and Assumption By-Law, Final Works Including Roads and Other Related Works Recommendations: 1. That Report PWD-011-22 and any related communication items, be received; 2. That the Director of Public Works be authorized to issue a Certificate of Acceptance for the Phase 1B Final Works, which includes final stage roads and other related Works constructed within Plan 40M-2528; 3. That the draft By-law (Attachment 2), assuming certain streets within Plan 40M-2528 and adjacent Plans 10M-826, and 40R-18861 (Attachment 1), be approved; and 4. That all interested parties listed in Report PWD-011-22 and any delegations be advised of Council’s decision. Page 65 Municipality of Clarington Page 2 Report PWD-011-22 Report Overview This report concerns Mallory Heights Subdivision Phase 1A and 1B. It requests Council’s permission to issue the required Certificate of Acceptance for the Phase 1B Final Works, as well as approve a by-law to assume certain streets for Phase 1A and 1B within Plan 40M- 2528 and adjacent Plans 10M-826, and 40R-18661 as public highways. 1. Background The Subdivision Agreement 1.1 The Corporation of the Municipality of Clarington entered into a Subdivision Agreement, registered October 23, 2014, with William Tonno Construction Limited and 1494339 Ontario Limited, to develop lands in two phases (Phase 1A and Phase 1B) by plan of subdivision, located in Courtice and described as Plan 40M-2528 (Attachment 1). The agreement required the developer to construct all roadworks, including hot-mix paving, sidewalks, curb and gutter, street trees, a storm drainage system and streetlights, hereinafter referred to as the ‘Works’. Phase 1A had previously received the Certificate of Acceptance for Final Works but the streets and blocks were not dedicated at that time. The streets within Phase 1A have been added to this report to dedicate all streets within 40M-2528 and adjacent Plans 10M-826, and 40R-18661. The Subdivision Agreement provides for: 1.2 Initial Works These works were issued a Certificate of Completion and a subsequent Certificate of Acceptance by the Director of Public Works. 1.3 Street Lighting System These works were issued a Certificate of Completion and subsequent Certificate of Acceptance by the Director of Public Works. 1.4 Stormwater Management System Not Applicable 1.5 Final Works These works, which include all surface works such as curb and gutter, sidewalk, hot-mix paving, boulevard works and street trees, were issued a Certificate of Completion dated June 1, 2017. This initiated a one (1) year maintenance period, which expired on June Page 66 Municipality of Clarington Page 3 Report PWD-011-22 1, 2018. The Works were re-inspected at that time, and although the developer experienced delays in completing repairs, all deficiencies have now been rectified to the satisfaction of the Director of Public Works. 2. Proposal 2.1 It is now appropriate to issue a Certificate of Acceptance for the Final Works in Phase 1B. The Subdivision Agreement requires Council approval prior to the issuance of the Certificate of Acceptance for the Final Works. 2.2 Further to the issuance a Certificate of Acceptance, a by-law is required to permit the Municipality to assume certain streets for Phase 1A and 1B within Plan 40M-2528, and adjacent Plans 10M-826, and 40R-18661 as public highways (Attachment 2). 3. Concurrence Not Applicable. 4. Conclusion It is respectfully recommended that the Director of Public Works be authorized to issue a Certificate of Acceptance for the Phase 1B Final Works, which includes final stage roads and other related Works constructed within Plan 40M-2528, and that Council approve the attached by-law assuming certain streets for Phase 1A and 1B within Plan 40M-2528, and adjacent Plans 10M-826 and 40R-18661 as public highways. Staff Contact: Karen Richardson, Manager, Development Engineering, 905-623-3379 ext. 2327 or krichardson@clarington.net. Attachments: Attachment 1 – Key Map Attachment 2 – By-law to Report PWD-011-22 Interested Parties: The following interested parties will be notified of Council's decision: Michael Foley, 1494339 Ontario Limited Cora Tonno, William Tonno Construction Limited Page 67 NCTOOLEYROADMEREDITHCOURTFIRWOODAVENUELONGWOODEORGE REYNOLDS DR PAGE PLACE VIVIANDRIVE MULL CRES JURA COURT LEITH CT McLELLA ISLAY COURT T M ALLORYST GEORG E RE YNO L DS DR FIRWOODAVE McLEAN ROAD ARRAN COURT DUNKIN AVENUE KINTYRE STREET GEORGE REYNOLDS DRIVEDEVONDALE STREET BILLETT GATE AUDREYCT BROADLANDS DEVONDALE STREET CRESCENT CT MALLORYSTREETG ADELAIDE AVENUE DAISEYFIELD AVENUEVETZALCOURTFIRWOODAVENUE NIDDERYSTREETSTREET MALLORYSTREETMALLORY REPORT D--22 40M-2528.mxd DRAWN BY: . Mallory Heights Subdivision Phase 1A Plan 40M-2528 (Part) COURTICE KEY MAP Adelaide Ave. Tooley Rd. Varcoe Rd. DATE: FILE NAME: February 28, 2022 E.L. ATTACHMENT No. 1 Trulls Rd. Nash Rd. George Reynolds Dr. Parts 1 & 6 on Plan 40R-18661 Blocks 225, 226, 227 & 228 on Plan 10M-826 Phase 1B J:\Engineering\Attachments\Attachments Post ESRI Upgrade\40M-2528.mxd Page 68 Attachment 2 to Report PWD-011-22 If this information is required in an alternate format, please contact the Accessibility Coordinator at 905-623-3379 ext. 2131. The Corporation of the Municipality of Clarington By-law 2022-XXX Being a By-law to establish, lay out and dedicate certain lands as public highways in the Municipality of Clarington, to assume certain streets within the Municipality of Clarington as public highways in the Municipality of Clarington, and to name them. Now therefore the Council of the Municipality of Clarington enacts as follows: 1. That the blocks shown on Plan 40M-2528, and listed below in this section, being in the Municipality of Clarington, in the Regional Municipality of Durham, is hereby established, laid out, and dedicated by The Corporation of the Municipality of Clarington as public highway: Block 68 (0.3m Reserve) Block 69 (0.3m Reserve) Block 70 (0.3m Reserve) Block 71 (0.3m Reserve) Block 72 (0.3m Reserve) Block 73 (0.3m Reserve) Block 74 (0.3m Reserve) Block 75 (0.3m Reserve) Block 76 (0.3m Reserve) Block 77 (0.3m Reserve) Block 78 (0.3m Reserve) Block 79 (0.3m Reserve) 2. That the block shown on Plan 10M-826, and listed below in this section, being in the Municipality of Clarington, in the Regional Municipality of Durham, is hereby established, laid out, and dedicated by The Corporation of the Municipality of Clarington as public highway: Block 228 (0.3m Reserve) 3. That the streets and blocks shown on Plans 40M-2528 and 10M-826, and listed below in this section, being in the Municipality of Clarington, in the Regional Municipality of Durham, are hereby accepted by the Corporation of the Municipality of Clarington as public highways, and assumed by the said corporation for public use: Plan 40M-2528 Block 68 (0.3m reserve) Block 69 (0.3m Reserve) Block 70 (0.3m Reserve) Page 69 Attachment 2 to Report PWD-011-22 Block 71 (0.3m Reserve) Block 72 (0.3m Reserve) Block 73 (0.3m Reserve) Block 74 (0.3m Reserve) Block 75 (0.3m Reserve) Block 76 (0.3m Reserve) Block 77 (0.3m Reserve) Block 78 (0.3m Reserve) Block 79 (0.3m Reserve) Page Place Vetzal Court Niddery Street Daiseyfield Avenue Adelaide Avenue Plan 10M-826: Block 228 (0.3m Reserve) 4. That the lands shown on Plan 40M-2606 and 10M-826, and listed below in this section, being in the Municipality of Clarington, in the Regional Municipality of Durham, are hereby accepted by the Corporation of the Municipality of Clarington as public highways, and assumed by the said corporation for public use: Land Established as Public Highway Name Part of lot 31, Concession 3, Daiseyfield Avenue Designated as Parts 1 and 6 on Plan 40R-18661 Part of lot 32, Concession 3, Niddery Street Designated as Blocks 225, 226 and 227 on Plan 10M-826 Passed in open Council this XX day of MMM, 2022. _____________________________________ Adrian Foster, Mayor _____________________________________ June Gallagher, Municipal Clerk Page 70 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: General Government Committee Date of Meeting: April 11, 2022 Report Number: PWD-012-22 Submitted By: Stephen Brake, Director of Public Works Reviewed By: Mary-Anne Dempster, CAO Resolution#: File Number: 18T-87056 By-law Number: Report Subject: Lake Road Extension Schleiss Development, Plan 40M-1921 Certificate of Acceptance and Assumption By-Law, Final Works Including Roads and Other Related Works Recommendations: 1. That Report PWD-012-22 and any related communication items, be received; 2. That the Director of Public Works be authorized to issue a Certificate of Acceptance for the Final Works, which includes final stage rads and other related works constructed within Plan 40M-1921; 3. That the draft By-law (Attachment 2), assuming certain streets within Plan 40M-1921 be approved; and 4. That all interested parties listed in Report PWD-012-22 and any delegations be advised of Council’s decision. Page 71 Municipality of Clarington Page 2 Report PWD-012-22 Report Overview This report concerns Lake Road Extension Schleiss Development. It requests Council’s permission to issue the required Certificate of Acceptance for the Final Works, as well as approve a by-law to assume certain streets within Plan 40M-1921 as public highways. 1. Background The Subdivision Agreement 1.1 The Corporation of the Municipality of Clarington entered into a Subdivision Agreement, registered September 19, 1997, with Schleiss Development Company Limited to develop lands by plan of subdivision, located in Bowmanville and described as Plan 40M-1921 (Attachment 1). The agreement required the developer to construct all roadworks, including hot-mix paving, and a storm drainage system, hereinafter referred to as the ‘Works’. The Subdivision Agreement provide for: 1.2 Initial Works These works were issued a Certificate of Completion and a subsequent Certificate of Acceptance by the Director of Public Works. Street Lighting System 1.3 Not applicable Storm Water Management System 1.4 Not Applicable Final Works 1.5 These works, which include all surface works such as hot mix paving, boulevard works, and street lighting have been transferred as per a cost sharing agreement between the Municipality of Clarington and Schleiss Development Company Limited. The Final Works items will be completed under the Capital Works contract CL2021-19. Page 72 Municipality of Clarington Page 3 Report PWD-012-22 2. Proposal 2.1 It is now appropriate to issue a Certificate of Acceptance for the Final Works. The Subdivision Agreement requires Council approval prior to the issuance of the Certificate of Acceptance for the Final Works. 2.2 Further to the issuance of a Certificate of Acceptance, a by-law is required to permit the Municipality to assume certain streets within Plan 40M-1921 as public highways (Attachment 2). 3. Concurrence Not Applicable. 4. Conclusion It is respectfully recommended that the Director of Public Works be authorized to issue a Certificate of Acceptance for the Final Works, which the remaining works within plan 40M-1921 will be completed under Capital Works Contract CL2021-19, and that Council approve the attached by-law assuming certain streets within Plan 40M-1921 as public highways. Staff Contact: Karen Richardson, Manager, Development Engineering, 905-623-3379 ext. 2327 or krichardson@clarington.net. Attachments: Attachment 1 – Key Map Attachment 2 – By-Law to Report PWD-012-22 Interested Parties: The following interested parties will be notified of Council's decision: R. Lavender, Schleiss Development Company Limited Page 73 MP SOUTHSERVICEROAD HIGHWAY401 LAMBSROADRA REPORT PWD--22 40M-1921.mxd DRAWN BY: . BOWMANVILLE KEY MAP DATE: FILE NAME: February 3, 2022 E.L. ATTACHMENT No. 1 Rickard Rd Highway401 LAKE ROAD Bennett Rd Lambs Rd Lake Road Extension Subdivision, Plan 40M-1921 Lake Rd J:\Engineering\Attachments\Attachments Post ESRI Upgrade\40M-1921.mxd Page 74 Attachment 2 to Report PWD-012-22 If this information is required in an alternate format, please contact the Accessibility Coordinator at 905-623-3379 ext. 2131. The Corporation of the Municipality of Clarington By-law 2022-XXX Being a By-law to establish, lay out and dedicate certain lands as public highways in the Municipality of Clarington, to assume certain streets within the Municipality of Clarington as public highways in the Municipality of Clarington, and to name them. Now therefore the Council of the Municipality of Clarington enacts as follows: 1. That the blocks shown on Plan 40M-1921, and listed below in this section, being in the Municipality of Clarington, in the Regional Municipality of Durham, is hereby established, laid out, and dedicated by The Corporation of the Municipality of Clarington as public highway: Block 12 (0.3m Reserve) Block 13 (0.3m Reserve) Block 14 (0.3m Reserve) 2. That the streets and blocks shown on Plan 40M-1921, and listed below in this section, being in the Municipality of Clarington, in the Regional Municipality of Durham, are hereby accepted by the Corporation of the Municipality of Clarington as public highways, and assumed by the said corporation for public use: Lake Road (save and except Blocks 8 and 9 on 40M-1921) Block 12 (0.3m Reserve) Block 13 (0.3m Reserve) Block 14 (0.3m Reserve) Passed in open Council this XX day of MMM, 2022. _____________________________________ Adrian Foster, Mayor _____________________________________ June Gallagher, Municipal Clerk Page 75 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: General Government Committee Date of Meeting: April 11, 2022 Report Number: PWD-013-22 Submitted By: Stephen Brake, Director of Public Works Reviewed By: Mary-Anne Dempster, CAO Resolution#: File Number: By-law Number: Report Subject: Trudeau Drive Walkway Recommendations: 1. That Report PWD-013-22, and any related communication items, be received; and 2. That all interested parties listed in Report PWD-013-22, and any delegations, be advised of Council’s decision. Page 76 Municipality of Clarington Page 2 Report PWD-013-22 Report Overview This report provides additional background regarding the concerns with the Trudeau Drive Walkway. In accordance with Resolution #GG-106-22, potential options to address the reported issues have been outlined within. 1. Background 1.1 At the February 28, 2022, General Government Committee meeting, Resolution #GG- 106-22 was referred to the April 11, 2022, General Government Committee meeting to report back on options on how to proceed on addressing the issues with the Trudeau Drive Walkway. 1.2 The proposed Resolution #GG-106-22, dealing with the matter, reads as follows: Whereas residents in the vicinity of the Trudeau Drive walkway have been subjected to vandalism, graffiti, crime, smoking and swearing; as a result of teenagers gathering on the street at the beginning of the school day, the end of the school day and during the school day; And whereas residents on Trudeau Drive may experience slower emergency response times from ambulance and fire due to personal vehicles of parents dropping off children causing congestion in the street before and after school; And whereas Council has been attempting to fix this issue for approximately ten years, including holding several meetings with two principals of Bowmanville High School, holding a public meeting with Staff and residents and the School Board at Bowmanville High School, canvassing the neighbourhood in December 2012 and a Council resolution to install No Stopping signs and Miovision cameras in an effort to address the ongoing issues without closing the walkway; And whereas the problems not only persist but have gotten worse in recent years, resulting in at least one resident moving away from the neighbourhood and another resident being too afraid to speak up for fear of retaliation by students with student massing continuing in the walkway and adjoining street at all hours of the day and night; Page 77 Municipality of Clarington Page 3 Report PWD-013-22 And whereas young children who currently use the walkway to access the Duke of Cambridge can access the elementary school via Liberty Street which is a minor detour, and will have a safer walk to school with less exposure to cigarette smoke and bullying by teenagers in the walkway; Now therefore be it resolved: That Staff, Durham Region Police Service, and any interested members of Council, meet with Scott Johnson, Bowmanville High School principal, and members of the Kawartha Pine Ridge District School Board to discuss a potential resolution of the Trudeau Drive Walkway issue, including (but not limited to): moving the smoking section to another location on school property and prohibiting of pick- ups and drop-offs from Trudeau Drive; and That a survey (online and paper) be conducted, of all residents on Marchwood Crescent and Trudeau Drive, on whether residents support: a) closure of the walkway, or b) keeping the walkway open but prohibiting pick-ups and drop offs on Trudeau Drive and moving the smoking section from the walkway to another area on school property (i.e. at the east end of the field or in the parking lot of Bowmanville High School). 2. Municipal Law Enforcement Smoking on School Property 2.1 The Smoke-Free Ontario Act sets out several prohibitions on smoking in public places, including a prohibition against smoking on lands and premises used in connection with a school. 2.2 In Report EGD-030-13, it was proposed that a certain area of the school property be declared surplus to their needs and dedicated for use as a smoking area. The specific location proposed for this was an area adjacent to the driveway entrance. This is an issue that could be revisited in discussion with School Board representatives. Page 78 Municipality of Clarington Page 4 Report PWD-013-22 Existing No Stopping/No Parking Restrictions in Traffic By-law 2.3 Existing parking prohibitions on Trudeau Drive as per the By-law 2014-059, the Traffic By-law, are as follows: no parking with in 1 m of a driveway; no parking longer then 3 hours. “No parking” signs were also erected on the southerly portion of Trudeau Drive in 2013 after Council adopted the recommendations from Report EGD-030-13. The no parking restriction was for specified times that coincide with school drop offs and pick ups. 2.4 Between 2013 and 2016 the signs were reposted as “no stopping”. In Report EGD-030- 16 Staff requested the signs be reposted as No-Parking. Current signs have remained as No Stopping. The prohibitions currently in effect are Monday to Friday from 8:00 a.m. to 9:00 a.m. and 2:00 p.m. to 3:00 p.m. Current Frequency of Enforcement during School Times (Start/End) 2.5 Prior to March of 2020, the street in the vicinity of the Trudeau Dr. walkway was included in the school enforcement rotation. Since that time, regular patrols have been prioritized to other school locations where traffic problems are more severe. 2.6 The frequency of enforcement activity in the vicinity of Trudeau Dr. is currently tied to resident complaints. Most of the complaints received on Trudeau Dr. are for parking longer than three hours, parking between 3 a.m. and 5 a.m., blocking sidewalks, and parking that interferes with driveway access and visibility. 2.7 It has been observed by Municipal Law Enforcement Officers that parking/stopping on Trudeau Dr. during school hours at the walkway is brief in time and does not interfere with the flow of traffic. This observation was also captured during an assessment with Miovision Camera in 2016 as reported in Report EGD-030-16. Vehicles that are observed in the no stopping zone during school start and end times, are generally unoccupied and officers have noted they are generally owned by adjacent property owners. 2.8 Trudeau Dr. provides a comparatively safe and accessible area for parents to drop off students. Many other school zones experience a higher volume of traffic and pedestrians, closer proximity to intersections, the presence of crossing guards, and higher incidences of jaywalking and hazardous traffic movements. Illegal parking in these more congested areas pose a much higher risk to students as sightlines are impeded at crossings, and there are more hazards associated with traffic. Page 79 Municipality of Clarington Page 5 Report PWD-013-22 3. Public Works Walkway Closure 3.1 The draft motion references gathering information from residents regarding their view on the potential closure of the Trudeau Drive walkway. 3.2 Staff agree that public consultation is an important step in such a decision. 3.3 Extensive public consultation was conducted in 2013 concerning issues associated with the walkway and its potential closure. This included a public open house that was conducted in April of 2013. 3.4 The result of these previous consultations was the recommendations presented in Report EDG-030-13 and their subsequent implementation. 3.5 The objective of these recommendations was to respond to complaints and concerns, although their effectiveness may have been less than hoped. 3.6 While some of the input obtained in the past has reflected a desire to close the walkway, this view is by no means universal. According to the input already obtained from different public agencies, the walkway is an important pedestrian link that alleviates some of the traffic and pedestrian safety concerns that are currently present on Liberty Street. There is a segment of the resident population that rely on the walkway who also would not be in favour of its closure. 3.7 However, if Council determine that closure of the walkway is the best course of action there are some different options to consider. 3.8 One option would be to install fencing at either end of the walkway to present a barrier to entry by the public. If this option is chosen, there would be potential implications for how the walkway could be expected to deteriorate or be vandalized over time, which would become a likely source of other complaints. 3.9 Another option would be to solicit interest in the sale of the property to the owners directly adjacent to the walkway. 3.10 Implementing the sale of the walkway would involve the administrative costs of surveying and conveyancing, and possibly appraisal. If this option was selected, Council should have some consideration for how these costs would be allocated. Page 80 Municipality of Clarington Page 6 Report PWD-013-22 4. Planning and Development Services 4.1 The Trudeau Walkway (known as Block 29) was created and dedicated to the Municipality in 2002, through the registration of Plan of Subdivision 40M-2107 and the associated Subdivision Agreement (10M-800). Staff would suggest that, at that time, the walkway was specifically created to provide connectivity to the existing adjacent school (Bowmanville High School) and points beyond, which now include other public and institutional properties (Alan Strike Aquatic and Squash Centre and the Duke of Cambridge Public School). This promotes active transportation and provides a desirable route for people (specifically students of the schools) to safely and efficiently access the facilities from the Trudeau Drive neighbourhood and other adjacent neighbourhoods. 4.2 It should be noted that the land use permission conditions of the Subdivision Agreement specifically limit the use of Block 29 to a “Walkway”. 4.3 Staff acknowledges that the development of the subdivision, including the walkway, predates current local polices. However, it is appropriate for Council to be informed of current applicable policies that relate to pedestrian walkways, connectivity, and active transportation when considering the future of the Trudeau Drive Walkway. 4.4 The walkability policies in the Official Plan (5.2.2 and 5.2.4) support the creation of neighbourhoods that give priority to walkability, connected communities and the creation of a built environment that gives priority to walkable design and facilitates an active transportation system, which would include walking and biking. 4.5 Policy 5.3.2 of the Official Plan addresses the public realm and states that public streets will be designed to provide an interconnected grid-like pattern of streets and blocks that are walkable and flexible. This is to be achieved by considering items such as natural features and terrain, limiting lengths of streets and blocks to assist with pedestrian and bicycle circulation and having a convenient system of sidewalks. Specifically related to a case of this nature, Policy 5.3.2 also stipulates that the design of the public realm of neighbourhoods should not incorporate measures to restrict access and circulation through neighbourhoods. 4.6 In addition to the above, the Official Plan provides policy guidance related to schools. Policy 18.5.2 stipulates that schools will be sited and designed to provide a visual and functional focus for neighbourhood activity. In addition, schools shall be sited in consideration of a number of factors including access to multi-modal transportation connectivity to the planned catchment area and providing safe pedestrian and bicycle routes for students. Staff understand that these policies are designed to guide new schools. Notwithstanding, the policies provide context for good planning that considers the relationship between schools and the neighbourhoods and areas they serve. Page 81 Municipality of Clarington Page 7 Report PWD-013-22 4.7 To gain an understanding of the area the Director of Planning and Development Services attended the location on March 30, 2022 between approximately 11:00 am and 12:00pm. In a time span of approximately 10 to 15 minutes it was observed that approximately 12-15 students accessed the walkway to gain access to Trudeau Drive (sidewalk) and to connect through an existing trail to the east that provides access to the Squire Fletcher Drive neighbourhood. Based on this anecdotal observation, it appears that the walkway is serving the connectivity function for which it was designed and a clear pedestrian desire line was observed. 4.8 Finally, Planning and Development Staff would suggest that Council consider the design elements of the area when working with the stakeholders (school, neighbours) to determine options and solutions. Often the use, functionality, safety and attractiveness of a space is as a result of design. In this case, the walkway entrance on the school side is relatively hidden by portables and school service areas and is “closed off” by board fencing and overgrown vegetation. In this instance, if the walkway is to remain, it is suggested that design options be reviewed and discussed that would create a more attractive, visible and safe space for all users and adjacent neighbours. 5. Outcome of Meeting with Interested Parties Recent contact has been made with Mr. Scott Johnson, the principal of Bowmanville High School. Mr. Johnson has confirmed that he has knowledge of the reported walkway concerns but is not aware of any major problems. It has been indicated by Mr. Johnson that he will be available for further dialogue, or a future meeting, if required. 6. Concurrence This report has been created and reviewed by the Director of Legislative Services and Planning and Development Services who concur with the recommendations. 7. Conclusion It is respectfully recommended that Council receive this report for information. Staff Contact: Rob Maciver, Director of Legislative Services/Municipal Solicitor, 905-623-3379 ext. 2013 or rmaciver@clarington.net. Ryan Windle, Director of Planning and Development, 905-623-3379 ext. 2402 or rwindle@clarington.net Page 82 Municipality of Clarington Page 8 Report PWD-013-22 Attachments: Not Applicable Interested Parties: The following interested parties will be notified of Council's decision: Nik Papanikolas Dave Zakos Page 83 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: General Government Committee Date of Meeting: April 11, 2022 Report Number: CSD-007-22 Submitted By: George Acorn, Director of Community Services Reviewed By: Mary-Anne Dempster, CAO By-law Number: File Number: Resolution#: Report Subject: Tourism Update 2021 Recommendation: 1. That Report CSD-007-22 be received for information. Page 84 Municipality of Clarington Page 2 Report CSD-007-22 Report Overview Tourism has experienced several changes through the years. Most recently, Tourism became a function of the Community Services Department, Client Services Division in the Fall of 2020. While the Tourism Advisory Committee (TAC) was formed in 2019, the past year saw the committee hit its stride in contributions to the Tourism portfolio. The collaboration between staff and TAC saw improvements in meetings, goal setting, and focus. These improvements materialized into improvements in executing and evaluating annual Tourism marketing campaigns, development of key metrics which have positioned staff to evaluate the economic impact of Tourism in Clarington and positioned the team well to support the new initiatives with Economic Development and the Clarington Board of Trade (CBOT). This report aims to summarize the work that has been accomplished within Tourism since becoming a part of the Community Services Department and outlines some of the focus and initiatives planned for the upcoming year. 1. Background 1.1 Following the confirmation of Tourism as a municipal service in 2015 and the hiring of a full-time staff position, Council voted to establish the Tourism Advisory Committee (TAC) in December 2018 through report CAO-015-18. TAC is comprised of tourism stakeholders and residents, who work with staff to provide advice, and recommendations on how to improve and promote tourism in the Municipality. While the pandemic has provided challenges with meeting in person, TAC continued to meet virtually to enhance the Tourism portfolio. 1.2 In 2019, TAC worked with staff to develop strategic initiatives and goals to assist in providing some direction to the work of staff. This report outlines the collaborative work between TAC and staff on meeting the intent of the initiatives developed in 2019. Further, staff and TAC have worked together closely to evaluate new initiatives that should be included because of the ever-changing landscape of Clarington. 1.3 In Fall 2020, as recommended in the Grant Thornton Report, Tourism was transitioned out of the CAO’s office, Communications Division, into the Community Services Department, Client Services Division. This provided staff an opportunity to review current work plans, the role of TAC, and metrics surrounding how success was measured for the various campaigns that occurred annually. 1.4 In Spring 2021, through report CSD-004-21, the closure of the Tourism Information Centre was approved. This created an opportunity for Tourism staff to focus on how we could expand access to information, and how we could provide information to visitors through a different method, including the development of a Tourism Page 85 Municipality of Clarington Page 3 Report CSD-007-22 Ambassador program. Also, with the elimination of the part-time tourism position during the 2021 operating budget deliberations, staff saw an opportunity to utilize existing resources in our community centres to support the Tourism team. 2. Update of Strategic Initiatives Marketing and Education Plan 2.1 In 2021, Clarington Tourism adopted the tourism ambassador toolkit made available by Central Counties Tourism. This toolkit is a self-paced online course that aims to give a better understanding of the relationship between tourism, and the local economy. By the end of the course, participants learn to treat each visitor in a way that creates a memorable guest experience. Tourism staff completed training in December 2021 to evaluate the program. Two actions came out of the evolution. First, staff has identified that all TAC members should complete the training. Moving forward, this will become a part of onboarding new committee members. Secondly, staff are developing an abbreviated version of the training targeted at Customer Service Representatives (CSRs). This training will position CSRs to act as Tourism Ambassadors. 2.2 As Tourism Ambassadors, CSRs will be able to support visitors and promote Tourism services and opportunities within our recreation facilities. This has become increasingly important. With the elimination of the Tourism Information Centre, Tourism Displays were created within the recreation facilities. The location of these displays was chosen to increase access to Tourism information because of the expanded hours at recreation facilities, provide customers access to accessible washrooms and water stations, lobbies that can be used to take a break, and access to our CSRs to answer Tourism related questions. These displays were launched in January to align with the reopening of the Municipality’s recreation facilities. Coupled with the Tourism Ambassador training for staff, this will position our recreation facilities as the perfect opportunity for visitors to see all that Clarington has to offer. 2.3 Outside of offering local Tourism information, an important part of the Tourism portfolio is the Marketing and Advertising of opportunities for visitors. One initiative saw staff work with The Weekend Route to create a fall campaign that highlighted local businesses. ‘Apples, Corn Mazes, and Sweet Treats,’ route was created and advertised on The Weekend Route website (theweekendroute.com), and through a blog, vlog, and social media advertising. Clarington Tourism included this route as part of the overall fall campaign, which included promotion on the Municipal website and Municipal social media sites. 2.4 Social media remains the most effective way to promote Tourism opportunities in Clarington. The staff has seen increases in followers on social media. Since 2020, Tourism’s Facebook audience has grown 12%, and the Instagram audience has grown Page 86 Municipality of Clarington Page 4 Report CSD-007-22 31%. Partnering with other social media users (accounts, influencers, and content creators) is a common practice. These social media partnerships expand Clarington’s exposure, bring more diverse postings, and increase new content for our followers. An example of this is the partnership with Toronto food and travel influencer @to_finest to create a video. This provided exposure to @to_finest’s 167,000 followers throughout the GTA. The summer video had over 70,000 views and over 4,000 likes, shares, saves, and comments. The fall video had 54,000 views and 3,800 likes, shares, saves, and comments, which added to the success of both the summer and fall campaigns. 2.5 Staff have been pursuing advertising opportunities in new areas outside of Clarington to broaden the reach of information. Advertisements were taken out in Horizon Magazine (100,000 copies distributed), on billboards at Yonge and Dundas Square (168 video spots), Gardiner Expressway (330 video spots), Adamo Magazine (100,000 copies distributes), condo elevators (700 elevator screens 700,000 plays over four months), and the Globe and Mail. These advertising initiatives have increased our advertising base and encouraged more people to take advantage of visitor opportunities within Clarington. 2.6 With the impact of the pandemic, a key goal in 2021 was to re-engage with residents and visitors. To gain feedback, staff, with the support of TAC, held eight pop-ups between July and October. Booths were set up to share local information, conduct surveys through QR codes (paper copies were available), and hand out swag to promote Tourism in Clarington. The information collected during these events has helped staff introduce new communication methods, and plan for more successful campaigns moving forward. 2.7 A specific outcome from the survey data has been the creation of an electronic newsletter. Customers identified through the survey, that the top two ways they prefer to receive information are through social media and email. Staff has already been working to increase social media followers as identified in section 2.4 of this report, so to meet the need of customers preferring email as a communication method, the newsletter was developed. The newsletter now has 387 subscribers and has an email open rate of 25%, 20% higher than the standard 5% open rate of most electronic newsletters. 2.8 Staff identified gaps in services resulting from Public Health restrictions throughout the pandemic. To highlight available opportunities for visitors to Clarington, staff worked with Darlington Provincial Park, which sees over 140,000 visitors per year. The Park could no longer provide canteen or store services to visitors. As a result, staff created and provided Darlington Provincial Park with watercolour postcards showcasing the park, and highlighted local businesses where visitors could buy food, camping gear, and local goods. This benefited both the park by providing visitors access to Page 87 Municipality of Clarington Page 5 Report CSD-007-22 necessities and helped to promote and support local businesses by encouraging park visitors to purchase items locally. 2.9 Based on the success and positive feedback received on the initiative with Darlington Provincial Park, staff created various postcards highlighting some of Clarington’s well- known locations. The postcards were made available to hand out in local businesses and advertised as part of the holiday campaign in December. Economic Impact of Tourism 2.10 Digital advertising and Geofencing are advertising tactics staff use that enables them to track the estimated economic impact of campaigns. This tactic was used in three campaigns in 2021. Digital advertising is measured by impressions and conversions. Impressions are the number of times an advertisement or content is displayed, regardless of customer interaction. Conversions occur when a visitor to a website completes a desired goal (i.e., enters an advertised business). These metrics enable staff to estimate the economic impact of a campaign. The calculation is done using the number of conversions multiplied by the per day spend provided by the Regional Tourism Office. 2.11 The summer and fall campaigns used information from the uptake of information from Clarington’s website, through digital and social media advertisements, by clicking through to a stakeholder website, downloading the summer brochure, and by clicking on ‘contact us’ buttons. In addition to the above, the holiday campaign used tracking of cellphone pings as an additional way to measure the uptake of the campaign. Cell phone pings are when someone who received a Clarington Tourism advertisement on their phone then walks into a Clarington business or the predetermined area (Geofencing). 2.12 The summer campaign included four local pop-up events where over 1,600 pieces of Clarington swag were handed out and surveys were conducted with 241 people. Close to 90% of those surveyed were Clarington residents. Respondents indicated their favourite tourism activities include the waterfront, farmers’ markets, beaches, trails, patios, and farms. Digital advertising tied to the summer campaign showed the campaign resulted in approximately $239,282 being spent in Clarington. This economic impact was calculated using metrics from the summer campaign with the methodology explained in section 2.10. 2.13 The fall campaign included four local pop-up events targeted at key tourism locations that saw over 300 pieces of Clarington swag distributed and 131 surveys being completed. Visitors were from Toronto, Ajax, Oshawa, Pickering, and Scarborough. 23% of people heard about the location(s) from friends, followed by 12% hearing about the location from Instagram. Almost 60% of visitors surveyed intended to spend between $25-$100 in Clarington that day. Digital advertising had an estimated economic Page 88 Municipality of Clarington Page 6 Report CSD-007-22 impact of $40,014. While lower than the summer campaign impact, staff spent less money on digital advertising in the fall, focussing more on other methods including billboards and magazine advertisements. Staff continue to evaluate the success of different advertising methods to inform what continues to be used in future campaigns. 2.14 The holiday campaign included a direct mail postcard encouraging visitors to shop our historic downtowns, rural markets, and tree farms. 2,683 postcards were delivered to Ajax, Oshawa, Peterborough, Pickering, Scarborough, Uxbridge, and Whitby. Digital advertising efforts targeted the same postal codes used for the maildrop. Efforts were made to geofence Clarington’s downtown cores in addition to the businesses promoted through the holiday campaign. Digital advertising had an estimated economic impact of $572,208. The geofencing showed 7,336 people received our advertisements and then walked into a Clarington downtown or business. 3. 2022 Workplan and Opportunities 3.1 Staff is looking forward to re-engaging in person with our stakeholders, residents, and visitors. With the loosening of Public Health measures, the staff and TAC are looking forward to participation in community events as they return. These events will provide staff additional opportunities to gather survey data that will drive improvements in Tourism advertising and visitor attraction. To increase our visibility at these community events, staff working with Corporate Communications, designed a new vehicle wrap for the Department’s van. The vehicle will attend these events creating a higher profile that will support staff in getting out tourism messaging out to the community. 3.2 Staff recognize the importance of reporting on the economic impact Tourism has on the Clarington community. Tourism is an ideal vehicle to drive net new dollars into the local economy and can assist in keeping and stabilizing the tax base for years to come. Because of this importance, the staff is working with Central Counties Tourism (our Regional Tourism Office) on a new initiative to geofence the Municipality’s historic downtowns and other tourism areas of interest. This will showcase the number of residents, visitors, and unique visits to the area over the year and compare the data to previous years, back to 2019. This information can be input into the “Tourism Regional Economic Impact Model’ to provide the economic impact of tourism in these areas. 3.3 Staff will build on the success and learnings from 2021 to plan and implement plans for 2022. TAC continues to be engaged and involved in contributing to the focus and outcomes of tourism campaigns. The goals for this year’s campaigns are to increase brand awareness, develop metrics that allow comparisons of results year over year, and increase the number of visitors to Clarington at key times of the year. Staff will utilize the data gathered through surveys to inform advertising and marketing decisions. Page 89 Municipality of Clarington Page 7 Report CSD-007-22 3.4 The Municipality recently signed an agreement with the Clarington Board of Trade to deliver business retention and expansion services for a two-year term. This would see the attraction portion of economic development activities become a responsibility of the Planning and Development Department. As part of CBOT’s contract, they will be providing a quarterly update to the Planning and Development Committee that will also be inclusive of a staff update on the attraction portfolio. It is recommended that due to the linkages between Tourism and Economic Development that we also provide an update at that time on our activities. Moving forward, we will use this opportunity to update on Tourism initiatives rather than in the format of an annual report. 3.5 Filming is the responsibility of the Tourism office; while this has not been a large component of the work plan during the pandemic, staff has seen the number of requests increasing in the first quarter of 2022. Filming can be an important part of a community, providing community awareness of local assets and downtown cores, a positive economic impact both to the Municipality and businesses, and increases to foot traffic throughout the Municipality. As filming outside of Toronto increases year over year, staff look to create and digitize the filming process. This will ensure Clarington provides a film-friendly experience for production companies while considering the local impacts. Staff continues to work with the Durham Region Film Office on capturing the economic impact of filming in Clarington. 4. Concurrence 4.1 Not Applicable. 5. Conclusion 5.1 Since moving to Community Services, Tourism staff have made a concerted effort to increase the metrics and measurements of success in the already great work on campaigns and marketing campaigns. The shift in focus to incorporating measurable metrics came from the awareness and importance of demonstrating the economic impact that Tourism can have on the local economy. 5.2 Staff, along with TAC, look forward to continuing their work with local stakeholders to increase their profile through campaigns and leveraging the opportunities to gather information on how the Tourism team can continue to support Tourism stakeholders. Staff have begun to plan their usual campaigns surrounding Summer, Fall and the Holidays. In addition, Staff and TAC are looking forward the return of Special Events and Festivals in 2022 to further support and encourage Tourism in our community. Staff Contact: Lee-Ann Reck, Manager, Client Services, 905-623-3379 ext. 2508 or lreck@clarington.net Page 90 Municipality of Clarington Page 8 Report CSD-007-22 Attachments: Not Applicable Interested Parties: List of Interested Parties available from Department. Page 91 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: General Government Committee Date of Meeting: April 11, 2022 Report Number: CSD-008-22 Submitted By: George Acorn, Director of Community Services Reviewed By: Mary-Anne Dempster, CAO Resolution#: File Number: By-law Number: Report Subject: Former Camp 30 Site – Cafeteria Building Recommendations: 1. That Report CSD-008-22 and any related communication items, be received; 2. That Council direct staff to put in place interim measures to secure the Cafeteria Building, to mitigate risk and further deterioration or damage to the structure; 3. That funds, not to exceed $100,000, be approved for the completion of the necessary interim measures; 4. That funds received as a contribution to the preservation of the Cafeteria Building be used to cover these costs; 5. That the funds be drawn from the General Municipal Reserve Fund; and 6. That all interested parties listed in Report CSD-008-22 and any delegations be advised of Council’s decision. Page 92 Municipality of Clarington Page 2 Report CSD-008-22 Report Overview In this report staff are seeking approval from Council to provide funds to implement interim measures for the recently acquired approximately 2-acre parcel of land, including the Cafeteria Building, on the former Camp 30 site. The interim plan would help to mitigate further vandalism, damage, and deterioration of the building, until such time as a permanent plan is developed for the preservation of the building, by the Jury Lands Foundation. As the property and remaining buildings have been vacant for some period of time, they have been subjected to significant vandalism and damage. With the Cafeteria Building now in municipal ownership, staff are recommending measures be put in place to better secure the building and minimize further damage and deterioration. 1. Background 1.1 In December 2021, the Municipality completed a land acquisition with Lambs Road School Property Ltd., for an approximately 2-acre property, including the Cafeteria Building, on the site of the former Camp 30. This transaction included a financial contribution made to the Municipality, for the preservation of the property. 1.2 The long-term plan is for the Jury Lands Foundation to assume responsibility from the Municipality for the restoration of the Cafeteria Building. In the interim, the Municipality will be responsible for the building and associated property. 1.3 Following the transfer of the building and property in December 2021, staff visited the site to complete an exterior visual review of the building. Although difficult to confirm, it did appear that vandalism and damage continues to occur to the building. It was also noted that components of the structure are in bad condition and in need of immediate attention. 2. Proposed Interim Measures 2.1 Subject to approval of these funds, staff will work with a structural engineering firm to identify interim measures that can be completed to mitigate any further damage to the structural integrity of the building. They will also assist in estimating the associated cost of this work. 2.2 Staff will also address the ongoing concern with vandalism and unauthorized access into the building. This will likely result in the installation of perimeter fencing that will make access to the building difficult. As Public Works will commence grass maintenance on the acreage around the building this spring, a gate for authorized access will be installed. Page 93 Municipality of Clarington Page 3 Report CSD-008-22 2.3 We have been advised that additional security measures including video surveillance have been used in the past. Staff will investigate this and will work with our security monitoring company to assess the effectiveness of the use of remote video and other appropriate components. 3. Financial Information 3.1 The request for funding is based on a rough estimate of costs that include the following components: Component Estimated Cost Preliminary Structural Assessment $ 10,000 Building Stabilization Work 50,000 Perimeter Fencing and Security 25,000 Total Estimated Cost $ 85,000 3.2 Due to the level of uncertainty regarding the extent of building stabilization work, staff are seeking approval of an amount up to $100,000 to complete this work. 3.3 The $100,000 payment that was received from the former owner has been allocated to the General Municipal Reserve Fund. The purpose for these funds is to provide for the maintenance and security of the property. As such, staff are recommending the funds to complete this work be drawn from the General Municipal Reserve Fund. 4. Concurrence 4.1 This report has been reviewed by the Director of Legislative Services and the Director of Financial Services/Treasurer who concur with the recommendations. Page 94 Municipality of Clarington Page 4 Report CSD-008-22 5. Conclusion 5.1 It is respectfully recommended that Council approve funds, not to exceed $100,000, from the General Municipal Reserve Fund to enable staff to complete a structural assessment of the Cafeteria Building, complete remedial work to safely secure the building and to prevent further deterioration until such time as a long-term plan for revitalization of the building is determined. Staff Contact: George Acorn, Director of Community Services, 905-623-3379 ext. 2502 or gacorn@clarington.net . Attachments: Not Applicable Interested Parties: The following interested parties will be notified of Council's decision: Marilyn Morawetz, Chair Jury Lands Foundation Page 95 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: General Government Committee Date of Meeting: April 11, 2022 Report Number: CSD-009-22 Submitted By: George Acorn, Director of Community Services Reviewed By: Mary-Anne Dempster, CAO By-law Number: File Number: Resolution#: Report Subject: Future Use of the Tourism Information Centre Recommendation: 1. That Report CSD-009-22 be received for information. Page 96 Municipality of Clarington Page 2 Report CSD-009-22 Report Overview The Tourism Information Centre (TIC) has been closed since March 2020, due to the COVID-19 pandemic, and a new Tourism Delivery Model which provides Tourism information and assistance within Clarington’s major indoor recreation facilities. Staff were requested through ratification of Report CSD-004-21 Future of the Tourism Information Centre to investigate future options for the building, which are presented in this report. We have identified an opportunity to make minor modifications to the space to effectively offer additional programming for our residents. 1. Background 1.1 In March 2020, the COVID-19 pandemic caused the closure of the Tourism Information Centre (TIC) at 181 Liberty Street South in Bowmanville. Other than operating as a flu vaccination clinic for Durham Region for a couple of months, the TIC has been closed to the public since that time. In September 2020, as recommended in the Organizational Structure Review, the responsibility for municipal tourism operations moved to Community Services from the CAO’s Office. 1.2 In May of 2021, Report CSD-004-21 Future of the Tourism Information Centre was received by Council, and ratified with Resolution GG-371-21, C-207-21 which states: “That Report CSD-004-21 be received; That Council approve the permanent closure of the Tourism Information Centre at 181 Liberty Street, Bowmanville; That Council support the revised Tourism Delivery Model, as presented in this report; and That Staff continue to investigate future options for the building, that could include upgrading and repurposing, relocation or demolition, and to provide all necessary funds in the 2022 budget, for consideration.” 1.3 Community Services staff implemented the new Tourism Delivery Model throughout 2021, with Tourism information and assistance now being provided at the major indoor recreation facilities throughout Clarington. This model provides a broader reach with residents and visitors, due to the volume of visits to these facilities, expanded hours and larger number of Customer Service staff available to assist. The closure of the TIC, and a $50,000 reduction of the 2021 Tourism Operating Budget, enhanced the opportunity to embrace this new direction. 2. Need for Recreation Programming Space 2.1 Bowmanville is the largest urban centre within Clarington and is severely lacking in programmable space. There is a large demand for recreation programming within Bowmanville, and the Tourism Information Centre provides an opportunity for recreational opportunities both indoors and using the adjacent outdoor space. Page 97 Municipality of Clarington Page 3 Report CSD-009-22 2.2 Recreation staff have visited the building and surrounding lands and are excited about the potential for a variety of recreational programming opportunities. 2.3 The outdoor space will lend itself to outdoor fitness activities, starting in June as a tie in with June is Recreation and Parks Month. This location will also be a great addition to the Mobile Playground summer camp program and provide the opportunity for gardening programs. 2.4 Other programs also being planned within the building include:  Preschool programming  Babysitting/Home alone  Youth Arts Nights  Yoga classes  Nutrition Workshop  Intergenerational Programming  55+ Activities such as euchre and socials 3. Modifications to the Building 3.1 To make the space flexible to offer a range of activities, staff have removed the interior partial partition walls, replaced some flooring and doors. Additionally, accessibility improvements have been made including power operated entrance doors. By removing the interior partition walls, the space is fully opened and functional for the variety of activities that staff are planning. 3.2 Most of this work has been completed in-house by staff and this has kept the costs down to a minimum, in most cases for supplies only. The costs incurred can be accommodated in the Department’s operating budget, with no impact on forecasted year end results. 4. Concurrence 4.1 Not Applicable. 5. Conclusion 5.1 Staff are looking forward to programming this building for both indoor and outdoor activities. Although adding this space will not satisfy the current need for programming space in Bowmanville, it will provide new opportunities for our residents to access services that we were not previously able to offer in Bowmanville. Page 98 Municipality of Clarington Page 4 Report CSD-009-22 Staff Contact: George Acorn, Director of Community Services, 905-623-3379 ext. 2502 or gacorn@clarington.net . Attachments: Not Applicable Interested Parties: There are no interested parties to be notified of Council's decision. Page 99 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: General Government Committee Date of Meeting: April 11, 2022 Report Number: FSD-018-22 Submitted By: Trevor Pinn, Director of Financial Services/Treasurer Reviewed By: Mary-Anne Dempster, CAO Resolution#: File Number: RFP2021-9 By-law Number: Report Subject: Sponsorship, Advertising and Naming Rights Sales Recommendations: 1. That Report FSD-018-22 and any related communication items, be received; 2. That Montgomery Partners Professional Corporation be awarded the contract for Sponsorship, Advertising and Naming Rights Sales for municipal programs, events and assets for an initial three-year term beginning May 15, 2022 and expiring May 14, 2025 and that the terms of the agreement is in a form acceptable to the Municipal Solicitor; 3. That subject to Council approving recommendation 2, the Purchasing Manager in consultation with the Director of Community Services be given the authority to extend the agreement for up to two additional one-year terms; and 4. That all interested parties listed in Report FSD-018-22 and any delegations be advised of Council’s decision. Page 100 Municipality of Clarington Page 2 Report FSD-018-22 Report Overview Request Council’s approval to award a contract to Montgomery Partners Professional Corporation for Sponsorship, Advertising and Naming Rights Sales for municipal programs, events and assets. 1. Background 1.1 RFP specifications for the Sponsorship, Advertising and Naming Rights Sales were prepared by the Community Services Department and provided to the Purchasing Services Division. The RFP provided for an experienced company for the sales of advertising, sponsorships and naming rights for municipal programs, events and assets. 1.2 The Municipality has in the past supplied, advertising, sponsorship, and naming rights opportunities. These opportunities include advertising at facilities which includes rink boards, digital signs, arena boards, score boards, etc., sponsorship of municipal events and programs such as day camps, older adults’ special events and the Love of Art Gala, etc. 1.3 RFP2021-9 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’s website. 1.4 Five plan takers downloaded the RFP document. 2. Analysis 2.1 The RFP closed on January 13, 2022. 2.2 Two proposals were received in response to the RFP. 2.3 Of the three companies who downloaded the RFP document but chose not to submit a proposal:  One company felt they were unable to bid competitively; and  Two companies did not respond to our request for information. 2.4 Both proposals received complied with the mandatory submission requirements and were distributed to the evaluation committee for their review and scoring. 2.5 The technical proposals were first evaluated and scored independently by the members of the evaluation committee in accordance with the established criteria as outlined in the RFP. The evaluation committee was comprised of two staff members from the Page 101 Municipality of Clarington Page 3 Report FSD-018-22 Community Services Department and one staff member from the Public Works Department. 2.6 The evaluation committee met to review and agree upon an overall score for each proposal. Some of the areas on which the submissions were evaluated were as follows:  The Proponent’s understanding of the Municipality’s requirements;  Highlights of services provided performing similar work on projects of comparable nature, size and scope, in a municipality of similar population size; and  A methodology describing the Proponent’s project management approach, work plan, goals, objectives and methods of communications to be utilized to meet the requested deadlines. 2.7 Upon completion of the evaluation both submissions met the established threshold of 80% for Phase 1 and moved to Phase 2. 2.8 It was deemed, by the evaluation committee, that a presentation from the short-listed Proponents would not be required and the pricing envelopes were opened. 2.9 Montgomery Partners Professional Corporation has not worked with the Municipality previously, references were checked and came back satisfactory. 3. Financial 3.1 This is a revenue generating agreement, through the sale of advertising space and naming rights for both indoor and outdoor spaces, along with the sale of sponsorships for a variety of events and programs held throughout the Municipality. 3.2 Revenues received from this agreement will be credited to the appropriate revenue accounts for the relevant departments during the term of this agreement. 4. Concurrence This report has been reviewed by the Director of Community Services who concurs with the recommendations. 5. Conclusion It is respectfully recommended that Montgomery Partners Professional Corporation be awarded the contract for the provision of sponsorship, advertising and naming rights sales as per the terms and conditions of RFP2021-9. Page 102 Municipality of Clarington Page 4 Report FSD-018-22 Staff Contact: David Ferguson, Purchasing Manager, 905-623-3379 x 2209 or dferguson@clarington.net. Attachments: Attachment 1 – Summary of Bid Results List of Interested Parties available from Department. Page 103 Municipality of Clarington Page 5 Report FSD-018-22 Attachment 1 to Report FSD-018-22 - Bid Summary Municipality of Clarington RFP2021-9 – Sponsorship, Advertising and Naming Rights Sales. Bid Summary Bidder Montgomery Partners Professional Corporation Performance Sponsorship Group Page 104 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: General Government Committee Date of Meeting: April 11, 2022 Report Number: CAO-002-22 Submitted By: Mary-Anne Dempster, CAO Resolution#: File Number: By-law Number: Report Subject: Flag Protocols Policy F105 Recommendations: 1. That Report CAO-002-22 be received; 2. That the proposed Flag Protocols Policy F105, Attachment 1 to Report CAO-002-22, be approved; and 3. That all interested parties listed in Report CAO-002-22 and any delegations be advised of Council’s decision. Page 105 Municipality of Clarington Page 2 Report CAO-002-22 Report Overview Corporate Policies Flag Raising F105 and Half-Masting of Flags F106 were approved 15 and 20 years ago, respectively. The draft Flag Protocols Policy F105 (Attachment 1) combines these two policies, to allow all details related to flag raising, half-masting, general flag etiquette and the authority for these actions, be provided in one policy to assist with compliance. This draft Policy is presented here for review and approval. 1. Background Corporate Policies Half-Masting of Flags F106 and Flag Raising F105 1.1 On June 24, 2002, Corporate Policy Half Masting of Flags F106 (Attachment 2) was approved by Council, through Report CLD-028-02 (Resolution #GPA-298-02). This Policy outlines the proper protocol to follow when half-masting flags at municipal facilities. 1.2 Corporate Policy Flag Raising F105 (Attachment 3) became effective June 11, 2007, authorized through Report CLD-022-07 (Resolution #GPA-379-07), and its purpose was to ensure the appropriate criteria was in place to follow when requests were received to raise a flag in the Courtyard at the Municipal Administrative Centre. 1.3 To improve the efficiency of flag raising and flag half-masting, draft Policy Flag Protocols F105 (Attachment 1) has been developed. This policy combines the details of each of the current policies and has been expanded to provide a comprehensive guide for all considerations related to the raising and half-masting of flags at municipal buildings in Clarington. 1.4 This draft policy was reviewed by Department Heads at their December 14, 2021 meeting, and recommendations are incorporated. 2. Draft Policy Flag Protocols F105 2.1 As mentioned in the Background, all content from Flag Raising F105 and Half-Masting of Flags F106 has been included in the draft Policy Flag Protocols F105. 2.2 This draft policy has been expanded to include details that will improve the ability to ensure compliance, along with the benefit of having all information located in one policy. For example, the specific annual dates for half-masting that are recognized by the Federal Government and Province of Ontario, which we must follow, have been included for reference. Page 106 Municipality of Clarington Page 3 Report CAO-002-22 2.3 General flag etiquette on how to display the flags on the various flag poles, and how to dispose of flags is also included. 2.4 The draft policy outlines the appropriate communications surrounding the reason any time the flag protocol is invoked, and flags are lowered or flags/banners are raised. 2.5 A chart has been included in the proposed Policy (Attachment 1), listing all of the municipally owned and operated buildings, and municipally owned buildings, showing the flags that they fly, along with who is responsible to carry out the appropriate flag protocol. 3. Concurrence 3.1 This report has been reviewed by the Director of Community Services who concurs with the recommendations. 4. Conclusion 4.1 It is respectfully recommended that Council adopt Attachment 1, Draft Policy Flag Protocols F105, replacing Flag Raising F105 and Half-Masting of Flags F106, to allow all protocols related to the half-masting of flags, raising of organization flags/banners, flag etiquette and related authority be outlined in one policy. Staff Contact: Mary-Anne Dempster, Chief Administrative Officer, 905-623-3379 ext. 2002 or mdempster@clarington.net. Attachments: Attachment 1 – Draft Policy Flag Protocols F105 Attachment 2 – Half-Masting of Flags F106 Attachment 3 – Flag Raising F105 Interested Parties: There are no interested parties to be notified of Council's decision. Page 107 Attachment 1 to Report CAO-002-22 Corporate Policy If this information is required in an alternate format, please contact the Accessibility Coordinator at 905-623-3379, ext. 2131 F105 – Flag Protocols Page 1 of 6 POLICY TYPE: Operational SUBSECTION: Building/Grounds/Parking/Equipment – Access & Use POLICY TITLE: Flag Protocols POLICY #: F105 (Combined F105 and F106) POLICY APPROVED BY: Council EFFECTIVE DATE: May 2, 2022 REVISED: Consolidation of F105 and F106 APPLICABLE TO: All Employees 1. Purpose: To identify the approved protocols and procedures for displaying flags and banners at municipal facilities. 2. Policy: This Policy ensures that appropriate criteria and procedures are in place when half-masting flags at municipal facilities, when the Municipality is requested to raise a flag or banner at the Municipal Administrative Centre, and that appropriate flag etiquette is followed. For the purposes of this policy flags displayed indoors at municipal buildings will follow Section 3.3 General Flag Etiquette. Any specific instructions for indoor flags will be determined by the Mayor’s Office as appropriate. 2.1 Half-Masting of Flags 2.1.1 Flags are flown at the half-mast position as a sign of mourning. 2.1.2 Flags at municipal facilities will be flown at half-mast on the death of, up to and including the day of the funeral for the following: a. Current or former Mayor b. Current or former Member of Council 2.1.3 Flags at municipal facilities will be flown on the day of the funeral for a current member of full-time staff. 2.1.4 Flags at municipal facilities will be flown any day the flag is flown at half-mast by the Federal Government or the Province of Ontario. Page 108 Attachment 1 to Report CAO-002-22 Corporate Policy If this information is required in an alternate format, please contact the Accessibility Coordinator at 905-623-3379, ext. 2131 F105 – Flag Protocols Page 2 of 6 2.1.5 Flags will be half-masted annually on the dates indicated in the chart below, from sunrise to sunset. April 28 Day of Mourning for Persons Killed or Injured in the Workplace (Workers’ Mourning Day) June 23 National Day of Remembrance for Victims of Terrorism Second Sunday in September Firefighters’ National Memorial Day; unless half-masting occurs near the place where a memorial is being observed, then half-masting can occur according to the prescribed order of service Last Sunday in September Police and Peace Officers’ National Memorial Day; unless half-masting occurs near the place where a memorial is being observed, then half- masting can occur according to the prescribed order of service September 30 National Day for Truth and Reconciliation November 11 Remembrance Day December 6 National Day of Remembrance and Action on Violence Against Women 2.2 Flag/Organization Banner Raising – Municipal Administrative Centre 2.2.1 The flagpole at the Municipal Administrative Centre that normally holds the Municipality of Clarington flag will be considered our “guest flagpole”. 2.2.2 Flags and flag raising may be approved by the Mayor for: a. Non-profit or charitable organizations b. Recognition of national or international dignitaries visiting the Municipality c. Public awareness campaigns 2.2.3 Displaying of flags and flag raisings shall not be approved: a. For Political parties or political organizations b. For Religious organizations or the celebration of religious events c. If the result would be to defame the integrity of Clarington Council d. If the event or organization has no direct relationship to the Municipality of Clarington 2.2.4 The Mayor, or in the Mayor’s absence, the Deputy Mayor has the authority to approve or deny a request and determine the timeframe a flag may be displayed. Page 109 Attachment 1 to Report CAO-002-22 Corporate Policy If this information is required in an alternate format, please contact the Accessibility Coordinator at 905-623-3379, ext. 2131 F105 – Flag Protocols Page 3 of 6 3. Procedures: 3.1 Half-Masting of Flags 3.1.1 The flag is brought to the half-mast position by first raising it to the top of the mast then immediately lowering it slowly to the half-mast position. 3.1.2 All flags flown together should also be flown at half-mast, except personal flags and standards. 3.2 Flag/Organization Banner Raising – Municipal Administrative Centre 3.2.1 All requests for flag raising or display shall be submitted in writing to the Mayor’s Office. 3.3 Flag Etiquette Flag Display 3.3.1 When three flags are displayed, the National Flag of Canada should be at the centre. To an observer facing the display, the second-ranking flag (Ontario Provincial Flag) is placed to the left of centre, and the other to the right. 3.3.2 When any other number of flags are displayed, the Canadian flag should be on the left side as viewed by the observer, with the respective ranking flags displayed to the right. 3.3.3 The following flags take precedence over the National Flag of Canada, where one of the dignitaries are attending a function in the building: a. The Monarch’s Personal Canadian Flag; b. The standards of members of the Royal Family; c. The standard of the Governor General; and d. The standard of the Lieutenant Governor (in their province of jurisdiction and when assuming the duties of the representative of the Monarch). Disposal of Flags 3.3.4 When a flag becomes tattered and is no longer in a suitable condition for use it should be disposed of in the following manner: a. Return flag(s) to participating vendor for disposal; and b. Flags made of synthetic material (nylon or polyester) should be respectfully torn into strips, with each element of the flag reduced to a single colour, so that the remaining pieces do not resemble a flag. The individual pieces should then be placed in a bag for disposal – the shreds of fabric should not be re-used or fashioned into anything Page 110 Attachment 1 to Report CAO-002-22 Corporate Policy If this information is required in an alternate format, please contact the Accessibility Coordinator at 905-623-3379, ext. 2131 F105 – Flag Protocols Page 4 of 6 4. Authority 4.1 The authority for flag/banner raising is granted, through Corporate Policy F105, to the Mayor and/or designate. 4.2 Upon direction from the Mayor’s Office, the appropriate department will be responsible for carrying out the flag half-masting or flag/banner raising (see below chart). Community Services will be responsible to communicate this direction to all arena and community hall boards, who will be responsible for flag half-masting. 4.3 Communications from the Mayor’s Office surrounding the reason will be released. 4.4 It will remain the responsibility of the appropriate department to ensure flags are in suitable condition and appropriate standards are maintained. Page 111 Attachment 1 to Report CAO-002-22 Corporate Policy If this information is required in an alternate format, please contact the Accessibility Coordinator at 905-623-3379, ext. 2131 F105 – Flag Protocols Page 5 of 6 Responsible Departments Community Services (CS) Emergency Services (ES) Public Works (PW) Library/Museum(L/M) Responsible Department Municipally Owned / Operated Buildings Municipal Administrative Centre ✓ ✓ ✓ CS Courtice Community Complex ✓ ✓ CS Diane Hamre Recreation Complex ✓ ✓ CS Garnet B. Rickard Recreation Complex ✓ CS South Courtice Arena ✓ ✓ CS Bowmanville Museum ✓ L/M Orono Library (Gazebo) ✓ PW 181 Liberty Street South, Bowmanville ✓ ✓ ✓ CS Animal Shelter, 33 Lake Road ✓ CS Hampton Public Works Office/Yard ✓ PW Regional Road 42 Public Works Yard ✓ PW Orono Public Works Yard ✓ PW Newcastle Cenotaph ✓ PW Newtonville Cenotaph ✓ PW Orono Cenotaph ✓ PW Fire Station #1 (Bowmanville) ✓ ✓ ES Fire Station #2 (Newcastle) ✓ ✓ ✓ ES Page 112 Attachment 1 to Report CAO-002-22 Corporate Policy If this information is required in an alternate format, please contact the Accessibility Coordinator at 905-623-3379, ext. 2131 F105 – Flag Protocols Page 6 of 6 Fire Station #3 (Orono) ✓ ES Fire Station #4 (Courtice) ✓ ✓ ES Fire Station #5 (Enniskillen) ✓ ✓ ES Bowmanville Cemetery ✓ PW St. Georges Cemetery ✓ PW Bondhead Cemetery ✓ PW Light Armoured Vehicle, Clarington Fields (Under Federal Procedure) ✓ ✓ ✓ PW Municipally Owned Buildings Brownsdale Community Centre ✓ Hall Board Hampton Hall ✓ Hall Board Kendal Community Centre ✓ Hall Board Newcastle Community Hall ✓ Hall Board Newtonville Hall ✓ Hall Board Orono Town Hall ✓ Hall Board Solina Community Hall ✓ Hall Board Tyrone Community Centre ✓ Hall Board Page 113 Attachment 2 to Report CAO-002-22 Corporate Policy If this information is required in an alternate format, please contact the Accessibility Coordinator at 905-623-3379, ext. 2131 F106 – Half Masting of Flags Page 1 of 2 POLICY TYPE: Operational SUBSECTION: Building/Grounds/Parking/Equipment – Access & Use POLICY TITLE: Half Masting of Flags POLICY #: F106 POLICY APPROVED BY: Council (Report CLD-028-02) EFFECTIVE DATE: June 24, 2002 REVISED: May 25, 2018 APPLICABLE TO: All Employees 1. Purpose: To ensure proper protocol is followed when half masting flags at municipal facilities. 2. Policy: Flags are flown at the half-mast position as a sign of mourning. 3. Procedures: The flag is brought to the half-mast position by first raising it to the top of the mast then immediately lowering it slowly to the half-mast position. When lowering the flag, it must be lowered at least to a position recognizable as “half-mast” to avoid the appearance of a flag which has accidentally fallen away from the top of the mast owing to a loose flag rope. A satisfactory position is to place the centre of the flag exactly half-way down the staff. On occasions requiring that one flag be flown at half-mast, all flags flown together should also be flown at half-mast, except personal flags and standards. Flags at municipal facilities will be flown at half-mast on the death of, up to and including the day of the funeral for the following:  Current or former Mayor  Current Member of Council  Any other person whom it is desired to so honour  Any day that the flag is flown at half-mast by the Federal Government or the Province of Ontario Page 114 Attachment 2 to Report CAO-002-22 Corporate Policy If this information is required in an alternate format, please contact the Accessibility Coordinator at 905-623-3379, ext. 2131 F106 – Half Masting of Flags Page 2 of 2 Flags will be flown at half-mast on the day of the funeral for a current member of full-time staff, or any other person whom it is desired to so honour. If the only flag flown at the facility is the Municipal flag, it will not be lowered. However, if it is flown together with the Canadian and/or Provincial flag, it will be lowered. 4. Appendices: None Page 115 Attachment 3 to Report CAO-002-22 Corporate Policy If this information is required in an alternate format, please contact the Accessibility Coordinator at 905-623-3379, ext. 2131 F105 – Flag Raising Page 1 of 3 POLICY TYPE: Operational SUBSECTION: Building/Grounds/Parking/Equipment – Access & Use POLICY TITLE: Flag Raising POLICY #: F105 POLICY APPROVED BY: Council EFFECTIVE DATE: June 11, 2007 REVISED: May 23, 2017 APPLICABLE TO: All Employees 1. Purpose: To ensure the appropriate criteria is in place when the Municipality is requested to raise a flag in the Courtyard at the Municipal Administrative Centre. 2. Policy: a) The courtesy flagpole is identified as the flag pole at the Municipal Administrative Centre that normally holds the Municipality of Clarington Flag and will be considered our “guest flagpole” to be used to hold flags of other nations or for awareness campaigns. b) Flags and flag raisings may be approved by the Mayor for:  Non-profit or charitable organizations  Recognition of national or international dignitaries visiting the Municipality  Public awareness campaigns c) Displaying of flags and flag raisings shall not be approved for:  Political parties or political organizations  Religious organizations or the celebration of religious events  If the intent is to defame the integrity of Clarington Council  If the event or organization has no direct relationship to the Municipality of Clarington Page 116 Attachment 3 to Report CAO-002-22 Corporate Policy If this information is required in an alternate format, please contact the Accessibility Coordinator at 905-623-3379, ext. 2131 F105 – Flag Raising Page 2 of 3 d) The Mayor, or in his absence, the Deputy Mayor has the authority to either approve or deny the request and, to limit the timeframe that a flag may be displayed to accommodate possible request. Page 117 Attachment 3 to Report CAO-002-22 Corporate Policy If this information is required in an alternate format, please contact the Accessibility Coordinator at 905-623-3379, ext. 2131 F105 – Flag Raising Page 3 of 3 3. Procedure All requests for flag raising or display shall be submitted in writing to the Mayors’ office or disposition. 4. Appendices: None Page 118 MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON GENERAL GOVERNMENT COMMITTEE MEETING RESOLUTION # DATE: April 11, 2022 MOVED BY Councillor Zwart SECONDED BY Councillor Hooper Whereas Her Majesty the Queen Elizabeth II is celebrating a Platinum Jubilee in 2022, marking 70 years of service on the throne as the monarch of the United Kingdom and the Commonwealth; And whereas Canada is a constitutional monarchy and parliamentary democracy, recognizing the Queen as the head of state, represented by the Governor General; And whereas the Commonwealth and the United Kingdom are marking the Jubilee with year-long celebrations, culminating in a four-day extended weekend in the UK with country-wide celebrations in June; And whereas the Canadian Government has a series of events and celebrations planned to mark the occasion; Now therefore be it resolved that the Municipality send an official letter from the Mayor’s Office to the Queen marking the Jubilee and extending official congratulations from Council and the community at large. Page 119