Grey County Committee of the Whole Meeting Transcript — September 25, 2025

00:25:28 Speaker 10: over. Okay. Thank you. I'd like

00:25:29 Speaker 10: to call to order this committee.

00:25:31 Speaker 10: The whole meeting of September twenty

00:25:34 Speaker 10: fifth, twenty twenty five. At this

00:25:36 Speaker 10: point in time, I'll put out

00:25:39 Speaker 10: a call. Are there any declarations

00:25:40 Speaker 10: of interest for this agenda? Seeing

00:25:42 Speaker 10: no hands raised, we will carry

00:25:43 Speaker 10: on business arising from the

00:25:45 Speaker 10: minutes. Okay. We will move on.

00:25:48 Speaker 10: We do not have. any delegations

00:25:49 Speaker 10: today. And next, we will move

00:25:52 Speaker 10: on to the determination of items

00:25:53 Speaker 10: requiring separate discussion from Section C,

00:25:55 Speaker 10: Section Six. In the consent agenda,

00:25:56 Speaker 10: there are four different items. So

00:26:01 Speaker 10: I will ask for if there

00:26:04 Speaker 10: are any that need to be

00:26:07 Speaker 10: pulled to examine at the end

00:26:10 Speaker 10: of today's agenda. Councillor Eccles. I'd

00:26:12 Speaker 10: like to pull Six C. Just

00:26:14 Speaker 10: to make sure that we've got

00:26:16 Speaker 10: that clear. Okay. Thank you. Anything

00:26:17 Speaker 10: else? Okay. Then it's recommended that

00:26:19 Speaker 10: the following consent agendas be received,

00:26:21 Speaker 10: and that staff be authorised to

00:26:23 Speaker 10: take actions necessary to give effect

00:26:24 Speaker 10: to the recommendations in the staff

00:26:30 Speaker 10: reports, and that the correspondence be

00:26:33 Speaker 10: supported and received for information as

00:26:41 Speaker 10: recommended in the consent agenda. May

00:26:44 Speaker 10: ask for mover and a seconder.

00:26:46 Speaker 10: Moved by. Excuse me. Moved over

00:26:48 Speaker 10: here to my right. Sorry about

00:26:52 Speaker 10: that. We'll need a seconder, and

00:26:54 Speaker 10: seconded by the deputy ordnance. Any

00:26:57 Speaker 10: discussion? All those in favour? And

00:26:59 Speaker 10: that motion is carried. Okay, so

00:27:00 Speaker 10: we will then visit 6D at

00:27:02 Speaker 10: the end of our agenda. Thank

00:27:06 Speaker 10: you. That allows us to move

00:27:09 Speaker 10: on into our items for direction

00:27:11 Speaker 10: and discussion. So the first one

00:27:15 Speaker 10: is item 7A, and it's recommended

00:27:18 Speaker 10: that. staff report PDR CW fifty

00:27:20 Speaker 10: seven twenty five regarding surplus lands

00:27:23 Speaker 10: for housing site preparation and derisking

00:27:25 Speaker 10: and derisking activities be received, and

00:27:26 Speaker 10: that one hundred and thirty thousand

00:27:29 Speaker 10: dollars be included in the proposed

00:27:33 Speaker 10: twenty twenty six budget and be

00:27:35 Speaker 10: funded from the one time funding

00:27:36 Speaker 10: reserve to fund select site preparation

00:27:40 Speaker 10: and derisking activities for the two

00:27:41 Speaker 10: county owned properties in Markdale. County-owned

00:27:43 Speaker 10: properties in Markdale and Durham may

00:27:45 Speaker 10: ask for a mover and a

00:27:47 Speaker 20: seconder. Move by Councillor Nielsen. Seconder.

00:28:00 Speaker 20: It's now on the floor for

00:28:01 Speaker 21: discussion. So I would like to

00:28:03 Speaker 21: invite our senior policy planner, Buckton,

00:28:04 Speaker 21: up to introduce the topic. Thank

00:28:07 Speaker 21: you. Wonderful. Thank you so much.

00:28:08 Speaker 21: I'm really happy to be here

00:28:11 Speaker 21: today. So I think Brittany's just

00:28:13 Speaker 21: going to pull up there, really.

00:28:14 Speaker 21: Some slides for us. Great. So

00:28:16 Speaker 21: very briefly today, I know there

00:28:21 Speaker 21: was is a very comprehensive report

00:28:22 Speaker 21: addressing what we'd like to do

00:28:23 Speaker 21: with respect to these lands, but

00:28:24 Speaker 21: I've just captured that recommendation here

00:28:25 Speaker 21: as well. Next slide, please. So

00:28:27 Speaker 21: we just really wanted to provide

00:28:30 Speaker 21: a bit of a visual anchor

00:28:31 Speaker 21: for you. I know we've got

00:28:33 Speaker 21: some key maps in the report,

00:28:35 Speaker 21: but I've also included some aerials

00:28:37 Speaker 21: here. So just wanted to identify

00:28:41 Speaker 21: that you know we have been

00:28:42 Speaker 21: having. some discussion regarding surplus lands

00:28:43 Speaker 21: for for a number of years

00:28:46 Speaker 21: now. We've been progressing as staff

00:28:49 Speaker 21: to do investigations around two potentially

00:28:51 Speaker 21: surplus parcels. That would certainly be

00:28:52 Speaker 21: a future discussion that we would

00:28:55 Speaker 21: have with council around their fate.

00:28:57 Speaker 21: But but essentially, we've been evaluating

00:28:59 Speaker 21: them with respect to their housing

00:29:01 Speaker 21: potential and what we might need

00:29:02 Speaker 21: to do to prepare those lands

00:29:04 Speaker 21: to be readily available for future

00:29:06 Speaker 21: construction, either by the county in

00:29:09 Speaker 21: partnership or by. others through an

00:29:11 Speaker 21: offering. So we do have a

00:29:13 Speaker 21: smaller parcel in Markdale, and then

00:29:14 Speaker 21: a larger parcel of about twenty

00:29:16 Speaker 21: acres in Durham that we've been

00:29:18 Speaker 21: investigating over the past few years.

00:29:21 Speaker 21: Next slide, please. Okay, and just

00:29:23 Speaker 21: a little bit of

00:29:25 Speaker 21: a zoomed-in view here. So with

00:29:26 Speaker 21: respect to the work that we

00:29:29 Speaker 21: are requesting funds or budget consideration

00:29:31 Speaker 21: for, with respect to the

00:29:33 Speaker 21: Markdale site, that would include archaeological

00:29:35 Speaker 21: assessment, an environmental assessment, and filing

00:29:37 Speaker 21: of a record of site condition.

00:29:39 Speaker 21: and some site servicing work. We've

00:29:40 Speaker 21: been fortunate to be coordinating together

00:29:42 Speaker 21: with transportation services staff. There, there

00:29:43 Speaker 21: is some upgrade happening right now

00:29:45 Speaker 21: to Great Ridge Road, just abutting

00:29:47 Speaker 21: this parcel as well. So, as

00:29:49 Speaker 21: noted in the report, there are

00:29:51 Speaker 21: some elements of that site preparation

00:29:53 Speaker 21: that we think will fall

00:29:55 Speaker 21: under that project and that that

00:29:57 Speaker 21: cost umbrella. But these, this would

00:29:59 Speaker 21: respect. Sorry, this would identify those

00:30:01 Speaker 21: additional items that we may be

00:30:03 Speaker 21: looking to to really establish the

00:30:05 Speaker 21: principle for residential development on the

00:30:07 Speaker 21: lands. and remove some of the

00:30:10 Speaker 21: uncertainty. With respect to the Durham

00:30:12 Speaker 21: site, we would be looking there

00:30:13 Speaker 21: for some funding to support us

00:30:15 Speaker 21: in identifying stormwater management pond sizing.

00:30:17 Speaker 21: We do understand there will be

00:30:19 Speaker 21: a fairly large stormwater facility required

00:30:21 Speaker 21: on that land, and that's a

00:30:22 Speaker 21: bit of a challenge in terms

00:30:25 Speaker 21: of identifying the potential for those

00:30:26 Speaker 21: lands just in relation to the

00:30:28 Speaker 21: footprint that that facility might take

00:30:31 Speaker 21: up. So we do want to

00:30:33 Speaker 21: do a little bit of additional

00:30:34 Speaker 21: work to just identify. To to

00:30:36 Speaker 21: just identify how much of a

00:30:40 Speaker 21: footprint that will take to help

00:30:41 Speaker 21: us understand what remains for development

00:30:44 Speaker 21: potential, and then I think there's

00:30:47 Speaker 21: some conversation to happen as well

00:30:48 Speaker 21: regarding a stormwater outlet for that

00:30:51 Speaker 21: site as well. So certainly happy

00:30:53 Speaker 21: to address questions, but what I

00:30:55 Speaker 21: would say is that you know

00:30:57 Speaker 21: we we we have put forward

00:31:00 Speaker 21: these activities not just on our

00:31:00 Speaker 21: own assessment but with some input

00:31:04 Speaker 21: as well from the development sector.

00:31:06 Speaker 21: We did have an opportunity. to

00:31:07 Speaker 21: meet with some folks in August

00:31:10 Speaker 21: to have a discussion with four

00:31:12 Speaker 21: and nonprofit developers, as well as

00:31:15 Speaker 21: some of the housing operators locally,

00:31:16 Speaker 21: around kind of what what makes

00:31:18 Speaker 21: the site attractive, or what rules

00:31:20 Speaker 21: the site out for them to

00:31:21 Speaker 21: consider around partnership and offering. And

00:31:23 Speaker 21: so, really, it is this de-risking

00:31:26 Speaker 21: and then providing that security around

00:31:26 Speaker 21: potential that allows a project to

00:31:29 Speaker 21: go forward if we were to

00:31:31 Speaker 21: surplus them. But regardless of what

00:31:34 Speaker 21: we decide to do with respect.

00:31:36 Speaker 21: to those lands in future, we

00:31:37 Speaker 21: anticipate that this information will be

00:31:42 Speaker 21: good for us to have, and

00:31:45 Speaker 21: and would you know represent a

00:31:51 Speaker 14: good investment in those lands and

00:31:52 Speaker 14: furthering their potential for future use.

00:31:54 Speaker 14: So I'll I'll leave it there,

00:31:56 Speaker 14: but like I say, happy to

00:31:59 Speaker 14: address any questions. Okay, so do

00:32:00 Speaker 14: we have any questions? Look for

00:32:02 Speaker 14: hands. We'll go to Councillor Nielsen.

00:32:04 Speaker 14: Thank you very much, Ward Microsoft.

00:32:06 Speaker 14: Just two two questions. My first

00:32:07 Speaker 14: question regarding the Markdale site in

00:32:10 Speaker 14: within the report, the Durham site

00:32:13 Speaker 14: suggested the possibility of up to

00:32:15 Speaker 14: like 200 units because of the

00:32:17 Speaker 14: size of the property. Is there

00:32:19 Speaker 14: an estimate of what we could

00:32:20 Speaker 14: possibly obtain out of the Markdale

00:32:21 Speaker 14: site for one and two? Just

00:32:23 Speaker 14: in consideration of that estimate, Grey

00:32:24 Speaker 14: Highlands recently rezoned a property very

00:32:26 Speaker 14: near to this one with approval

00:32:31 Speaker 21: for up to a six-story building.

00:32:32 Speaker 21: So. I'm just wondering if that's

00:32:33 Speaker 21: taken into consideration in terms of

00:32:34 Speaker 21: the type of housing, the accommodations,

00:32:36 Speaker 21: and then maybe the number of

00:32:38 Speaker 21: units we could potentially get out

00:32:40 Speaker 21: of that site. Wonderful, through you,

00:32:42 Speaker 21: Madam Warden. So, you know, with

00:32:44 Speaker 21: respect to the number of units,

00:32:45 Speaker 21: I do think it will depend

00:32:47 Speaker 21: a little bit on the form

00:32:49 Speaker 21: of building that might be considered

00:32:50 Speaker 21: for the lands. You know, with

00:32:52 Speaker 21: consideration to that adjacent six-story building

00:32:55 Speaker 21: and the trail corridor kind of

00:32:56 Speaker 21: going in between them, I do

00:32:57 Speaker 21: think we anticipate that probably a

00:32:59 Speaker 21: tall multi-story. building tucked right up

00:33:02 Speaker 21: on the other side of the

00:33:03 Speaker 21: trail would not be so desirable.

00:33:04 Speaker 21: But perhaps there would be opportunity

00:33:07 Speaker 21: to to push something kind of

00:33:08 Speaker 21: along the lot line, or or

00:33:10 Speaker 21: look at even a stacked row

00:33:11 Speaker 21: house type of development along the

00:33:14 Speaker 21: side. When we we looked

00:33:16 Speaker 21: at it, you know, we looked

00:33:17 Speaker 21: through the lines of minimum development

00:33:19 Speaker 21: density based on our policy, and

00:33:26 Speaker 21: so that would be 25 units

00:33:28 Speaker 21: per net hectare. So for this

00:33:30 Speaker 21: site, I think it's around 18

00:33:32 Speaker 14: units minimum. But I would anticipate

00:33:33 Speaker 14: probably something. more in the range

00:33:37 Speaker 14: of forty to sixty would be

00:33:39 Speaker 14: realistic for viability on the site.

00:33:41 Speaker 14: Thank you for that answer. And

00:33:44 Speaker 14: through you, Ward Microsoft. So, second

00:33:46 Speaker 14: question on the Durham site: when

00:33:49 Speaker 14: calculating the stormwater pond, it's kind

00:33:51 Speaker 14: of the same conundrum—is where you

00:33:53 Speaker 14: have to presuppose the form in

00:33:55 Speaker 14: which it's going to take.

00:33:58 Speaker 14: So, just my understanding of the

00:33:59 Speaker 14: land use would be. if you're

00:34:03 Speaker 14: trying to do subdivision style, you

00:34:04 Speaker 14: might need a larger stormwater pond

00:34:06 Speaker 21: than if you did apartment style.

00:34:08 Speaker 21: So I'm just wondering, in terms

00:34:11 Speaker 21: of council county staff's estimates, when

00:34:13 Speaker 21: calculating the stormwater pond, the form

00:34:15 Speaker 21: style might take. Wonderful, and again,

00:34:17 Speaker 21: thank you, Madam Warden. I thank

00:34:18 Speaker 21: you so much for that question.

00:34:20 Speaker 21: Yes, so with the Durham site,

00:34:21 Speaker 21: there has been some prior

00:34:24 Speaker 21: investigation completed. So with respect to

00:34:26 Speaker 21: the Rockwood Terrace. builds that that

00:34:29 Speaker 21: parcel was all one piece to

00:34:30 Speaker 21: begin with, so we do have

00:34:34 Speaker 21: some prior hydrogeological work that's been

00:34:35 Speaker 21: done, including boreholes across the site.

00:34:37 Speaker 21: So we do have some understanding

00:34:39 Speaker 21: of the hydrogeological situation there. There

00:34:42 Speaker 21: was initially a proposal to place

00:34:44 Speaker 21: the drainage for Rockwood Terrace on

00:34:46 Speaker 21: this parcel. So we've seen a

00:34:48 Speaker 21: preliminary design, but there were some

00:34:51 Speaker 21: assumptions I think tied with that

00:34:53 Speaker 21: that might not hold true in

00:34:55 Speaker 21: development of just this parcel. They

00:34:57 Speaker 21: did provide. us with a volume

00:34:59 Speaker 21: estimate of what was expected to

00:35:02 Speaker 21: need to be held, and so

00:35:03 Speaker 21: it's really translating that volume estimate

00:35:04 Speaker 21: into a spatial estimate to understand

00:35:05 Speaker 21: the footprint piece. In terms of

00:35:08 Speaker 21: the form of development for those

00:35:09 Speaker 21: lands, you're right; it's it's a

00:35:11 Speaker 21: larger parcel. There's the potential maybe

00:35:13 Speaker 21: for multiple road frontages with that

00:35:14 Speaker 21: as well. So I I could

00:35:15 Speaker 21: see it having it could go

00:35:17 Speaker 21: a number of ways. We could

00:35:20 Speaker 21: see some traditional subdivision type of

00:35:22 Speaker 21: development in a portion of that

00:35:24 Speaker 21: lands. if they could have room

00:35:27 Speaker 21: for a multi-residential as well, so

00:35:28 Speaker 21: I think that one has some

00:35:29 Speaker 21: potential to do a few things

00:35:31 Speaker 21: with. We have talked about does

00:35:32 Speaker 21: it make sense for for us,

00:35:33 Speaker 21: for example, to forward a a

00:35:35 Speaker 22: lot plan to try and divide

00:35:40 Speaker 22: it out into parcels. I'm not

00:35:42 Speaker 22: sure that that that's necessarily the

00:35:44 Speaker 22: way that we would recommend going

00:35:45 Speaker 22: at this point, but I think

00:35:46 Speaker 22: the information around the storm pond

00:35:48 Speaker 22: will certainly inform us in terms

00:35:49 Speaker 22: of what we've got to work

00:35:51 Speaker 22: with, and we can reevaluate that.

00:35:56 Speaker 11: Okay, sir. Thank you, and certainly,

00:35:57 Speaker 11: as you mentioned, what we're looking

00:36:02 Speaker 11: at approving right now will add

00:36:04 Speaker 11: value to the property. It will

00:36:07 Speaker 11: give us that information so that

00:36:10 Speaker 11: we can do those further explorations

00:36:12 Speaker 11: down the road. Okay, we'll go

00:36:14 Speaker 11: to the deputy warden. Thank you,

00:36:16 Speaker 11: Madam Warden. Thank you, Liz, for

00:36:21 Speaker 11: the presentation, or the report rather.

00:36:22 Speaker 11: Why, on the derm site, are

00:36:23 Speaker 11: we not proposing to do an

00:36:25 Speaker 11: archaeological phase? one, at least, to

00:36:28 Speaker 11: because I would think that would

00:36:29 Speaker 21: be a risk to any developer

00:36:31 Speaker 21: as to what might or might

00:36:34 Speaker 21: not be there. Please try that

00:36:38 Speaker 21: again. The microphones are always tricky.

00:36:39 Speaker 21: Thank you so much for that

00:36:41 Speaker 21: question and for you. So in

00:36:43 Speaker 21: that case, the archaeological is already

00:36:49 Speaker 21: completed. So as part of that

00:36:52 Speaker 19: early work, the archaeological was completed

00:36:54 Speaker 19: for the whole site. There, there,

00:36:59 Speaker 19: that report found no, no. items

00:37:03 Speaker 19: of cultural heritage value, and they've

00:37:06 Speaker 19: recommended no further study for the

00:37:09 Speaker 19: site. So, thankfully, that one's off

00:37:11 Speaker 19: the list already. Check. Okay. Any

00:37:14 Speaker 19: further questions? Yes, we'll go to

00:37:16 Speaker 19: Councillor Eccles. Thank you, Madam Warden,

00:37:18 Speaker 19: through you to Liz. I think

00:37:22 Speaker 19: I'll probably state the obvious here

00:37:24 Speaker 19: that working with Councilman Nielsen, some

00:37:26 Speaker 19: of your concerns on the stormwater,

00:37:29 Speaker 19: that portion at the town of

00:37:31 Speaker 19: Durham, West Grey has a 10-year

00:37:32 Speaker 19: projection. There will be work being

00:37:38 Speaker 19: done on Sadler Street as you

00:37:40 Speaker 19: get closer to Highway 6. We

00:37:45 Speaker 19: have had some stormwater issues in

00:37:49 Speaker 19: the past there, so I think

00:37:50 Speaker 19: it is in collabouration with this

00:37:52 Speaker 19: type of project of what that's

00:37:53 Speaker 01: going to add to it. So

00:37:57 Speaker 01: that's being addressed. Certainly going forward.

00:38:00 Speaker 01: Yeah, it won't be tomorrow, but

00:38:03 Speaker 01: it will start in 2026. Okay,

00:38:05 Speaker 01: thank you. Any further questions?

00:38:08 Speaker 01: Okay, not seen any. Then I'll

00:38:10 Speaker 01: call the question. All those in

00:38:12 Speaker 01: favour? And that motion is carried.

00:38:15 Speaker 01: Thank you, Senior Planner. Okay. So

00:38:18 Speaker 01: next, we will move on to

00:38:20 Speaker 01: Item 7B. It's recommended that CAO.

00:38:21 Speaker 01: R C W fifteen twenty five

00:38:24 Speaker 01: regarding a court security contribution agreement

00:38:25 Speaker 01: and costing implications be received, and

00:38:28 Speaker 01: that staff be directed to fund

00:38:30 Speaker 01: the anticipated twenty twenty five budget

00:38:32 Speaker 01: shortfall from surplus realized in the

00:38:33 Speaker 01: overall corporate services budget, or if

00:38:35 Speaker 01: none exists, to be financed from

00:38:38 Speaker 01: the one time funding reserve, and

00:38:40 Speaker 01: that the warden and the clerk

00:38:43 Speaker 01: be authorised to sign the court

00:38:44 Speaker 01: security contribution agreement, and that staff.

00:38:45 Speaker 01: be directed to prepare a letter

00:38:47 Speaker 01: under the warden's signature to the

00:38:49 Speaker 01: Ministry of the Solicitor General and

00:38:54 Speaker 06: the Ministry of the Attorney General,

00:38:55 Speaker 06: advocating for additional funding to support

00:38:58 Speaker 06: municipalities adhering to the security directives

00:38:59 Speaker 06: required by the province. May I

00:39:01 Speaker 06: ask for a mover and a

00:39:03 Speaker 06: seconder? Moved by Councillor De Braine,

00:39:05 Speaker 06: seconded by Councillor Body. It's now

00:39:08 Speaker 06: on the floor for discussion. Welcome,

00:39:11 Speaker 06: CAO Schertzler. Thank you, Warden Matrissaus,

00:39:12 Speaker 06: and good morning, County Council. So

00:39:16 Speaker 06: the purpose of this report is

00:39:18 Speaker 06: to provide council with an update

00:39:20 Speaker 06: on the court security contribution agreement,

00:39:22 Speaker 06: as directed by county council back

00:39:25 Speaker 06: in July of 2024. This agreement

00:39:28 Speaker 06: was developed to address the funding

00:39:30 Speaker 06: gap between the City of Buenos

00:39:32 Speaker 06: Aires' actual court security costs, which

00:39:33 Speaker 06: are called the court security and

00:39:36 Speaker 06: prisoner transportation costs, and the provincial

00:39:37 Speaker 06: CSPT grant. So, what the difference

00:39:41 Speaker 06: between what the province funds and

00:39:43 Speaker 06: what the actual costs actually are.

00:39:46 Speaker 06: the goal of of the

00:39:48 Speaker 06: previous direction that was provided council

00:39:51 Speaker 06: back in July twenty twenty four

00:39:52 Speaker 06: was to ensure the city is

00:39:54 Speaker 06: not unfairly burdened with costs for

00:39:56 Speaker 06: a service that benefits the entire

00:39:59 Speaker 06: region. Under the Community Safety and

00:40:01 Speaker 06: Policing Act twenty eighteen, municipalities are

00:40:04 Speaker 06: mandated to provide court security and

00:40:07 Speaker 06: prisoner transportation services through their local

00:40:11 Speaker 06: police services. The CSBT grant from

00:40:12 Speaker 06: the province is intended to support

00:40:16 Speaker 06: these services, but it's based

00:40:18 Speaker 06: on. expenses from two years prior.

00:40:19 Speaker 06: Typically, it's calculated as a proportionate

00:40:22 Speaker 06: share of a fixed provincial funding

00:40:25 Speaker 06: pool, and this model often results

00:40:26 Speaker 06: in in underfunding, as it does

00:40:28 Speaker 06: not reflect current costs or or

00:40:30 Speaker 06: what's what's actually happening on the

00:40:32 Speaker 06: ground from a security cost perspective.

00:40:33 Speaker 06: The court security costs contribution agreement

00:40:36 Speaker 06: allows Grey County to fund the

00:40:39 Speaker 06: difference between own sounds net CSPT

00:40:40 Speaker 06: costs and the provincial grant. So

00:40:42 Speaker 06: some of the key terms in

00:40:45 Speaker 06: the agreement is that the city

00:40:46 Speaker 06: is to submit an annual financial

00:40:48 Speaker 06: report to the county by April

00:40:53 Speaker 06: 30th of each year. The county

00:40:58 Speaker 06: will verify that report and provide

00:40:59 Speaker 06: funding within 60 days of council

00:41:02 Speaker 06: direction. The agreement renews annually and

00:41:05 Speaker 06: can be terminated if a new

00:41:07 Speaker 06: agreement is enacted with the province.

00:41:10 Speaker 06: and And the city would be

00:41:13 Speaker 06: responsible for notifying the county of

00:41:17 Speaker 06: any overpayments. in In 2024. the

00:41:19 Speaker 06: anticipated CSPT overage was approximately $250,000,

00:41:21 Speaker 06: and that was what was included

00:41:23 Speaker 06: in the 2025 budget. The actual

00:41:27 Speaker 06: shortfall, as reported in the 2024

00:41:30 Speaker 06: annual financial report, is just under

00:41:32 Speaker 06: $370,000. So this results in a

00:41:35 Speaker 06: budget overage of just under $120,000

00:41:37 Speaker 06: for 2025. Staff recommend funding this

00:41:39 Speaker 06: this overage from any surplus that's

00:41:41 Speaker 06: realized in the corporate services budget.

00:41:43 Speaker 06: or the one-time funding reserve, if

00:41:46 Speaker 06: there's no surplus that's available. Based

00:41:47 Speaker 06: on, we've had obviously lots of

00:41:49 Speaker 06: discussions with with Onsound Police Services

00:41:52 Speaker 06: and city staff about about why

00:41:55 Speaker 06: there's some overages, and and I'll

00:41:58 Speaker 06: just note that even the 2024

00:42:00 Speaker 06: report we noted that there's fluctuations

00:42:04 Speaker 06: that can happen with court security

00:42:07 Speaker 06: costs, and and last year being

00:42:10 Speaker 06: one of those years. Based on

00:42:12 Speaker 06: Onsound Police Services, they noted the

00:42:14 Speaker 06: the rationale for some. of those

00:42:16 Speaker 06: cost increases last year was hybrid

00:42:18 Speaker 06: court operations still require in-person bail

00:42:20 Speaker 06: hearings. There was four new part-time

00:42:24 Speaker 06: special constables began training in December

00:42:27 Speaker 06: 24, increasing staffing costs. Prisoner transports

00:42:28 Speaker 06: increased by 265 percent from 2023

00:42:31 Speaker 06: to 2024. There was a

00:42:34 Speaker 06: court backlog from COVID that they

00:42:38 Speaker 06: were still dealing with, and has

00:42:40 Speaker 06: led to more cases and longer

00:42:43 Speaker 06: trials. And they noted there's been

00:42:44 Speaker 06: violent crime and homicide cases have

00:42:46 Speaker 06: increased, requiring dedicated security personnel. They

00:42:49 Speaker 06: also noted virtual hearings have

00:42:51 Speaker 06: declined, leading to more in-person appearances

00:42:54 Speaker 06: and higher resource demands. And bail

00:42:56 Speaker 06: hearings now require in-person attendance for

00:42:58 Speaker 06: consolidation purposes. In terms of, we

00:43:01 Speaker 06: also outline in the report that

00:43:03 Speaker 06: there's been new provincial security

00:43:07 Speaker 06: directives. So we wanted to flag

00:43:10 Speaker 06: this for council that on August

00:43:11 Speaker 06: 11, 2023. That on August

00:43:15 Speaker 06: 11, 2025, the Ministry of the

00:43:18 Speaker 06: Solicitor General implemented new security directives.

00:43:21 Speaker 06: Single public entrance for all court

00:43:23 Speaker 06: premises were part of those directives.

00:43:25 Speaker 06: Mandatory screening with metal detectors or

00:43:26 Speaker 06: wands, and that an armed officer

00:43:28 Speaker 06: be present on every floor of

00:43:31 Speaker 06: court facilities. Oceansound Police Services began

00:43:33 Speaker 06: implementing these measures at the the

00:43:34 Speaker 06: POA Court in the Gray County

00:43:36 Speaker 06: Administration Building. Increase which will result

00:43:38 Speaker 06: in increasing staffing and costs. We

00:43:40 Speaker 06: are clarifying with Solgen regarding these

00:43:43 Speaker 06: new directives. So there's still some

00:43:45 Speaker 06: further discussions that we have to

00:43:48 Speaker 06: have with Solgen regarding this, and

00:43:49 Speaker 06: and try to better understand what

00:43:52 Speaker 06: those costs will be with respect

00:43:54 Speaker 06: to these new security directives. So

00:43:57 Speaker 06: we'll be bringing back further information

00:43:59 Speaker 06: as part of the budget process

00:44:01 Speaker 06: once we've clarified that that information.

00:44:04 Speaker 06: We just wanted to flag that

00:44:06 Speaker 06: for this particular report. These new

00:44:07 Speaker 06: directives will likely result in further

00:44:10 Speaker 06: cost increases in 2026 and beyond.

00:44:12 Speaker 06: The impact will be greater if

00:44:15 Speaker 06: the directives do apply fully to

00:44:16 Speaker 06: provincial fence courts, in addition to

00:44:18 Speaker 06: superior and interior courts. So, as

00:44:20 Speaker 06: noted, staff will continue working with

00:44:24 Speaker 06: OSPS, OPP, and Solgen to assess

00:44:25 Speaker 06: the financial impact and to clarify

00:44:27 Speaker 06: these new directives, and will update

00:44:30 Speaker 06: council during the budget process once

00:44:32 Speaker 06: we have further information. Based on

00:44:34 Speaker 06: those new directives, however, staff. recommend

00:44:36 Speaker 06: that correspondence be sent to Solgen

00:44:38 Speaker 06: and the Ministry of Attorney General,

00:44:40 Speaker 06: requesting that all additional court security

00:44:42 Speaker 06: costs resulting from the new directives

00:44:44 Speaker 06: be fully funded by the province.

00:44:45 Speaker 06: So the recommendation is that this

00:44:47 Speaker 06: report be received, that staff be

00:44:50 Speaker 06: directed to fund the anticipated

00:44:52 Speaker 06: 2025 budget shortfall from surplus realized

00:44:54 Speaker 06: in the overall corporate services budget,

00:44:58 Speaker 18: or if none exists, be financed

00:44:59 Speaker 18: from one-time funding. The warden clerk

00:45:00 Speaker 18: be authorised to sign the court

00:45:05 Speaker 18: security contribution agreement. that was agreed

00:45:07 Speaker 18: to previously by council back last

00:45:10 Speaker 17: year, and that staff be directed

00:45:13 Speaker 17: to prepare a letter under the

00:45:16 Speaker 17: warden's signature to Solgen and Meg,

00:45:19 Speaker 17: advocating for additional provincial funding to

00:45:22 Speaker 17: support Mississauga's base on the new

00:45:25 Speaker 17: security directives. Happy to take any

00:45:29 Speaker 17: questions. Okay, thank you very much.

00:45:31 Speaker 17: We'll put it out then to

00:45:34 Speaker 17: County Council, being under Councillor Dobrin.

00:45:36 Speaker 17: Thank you, Warden, and through you

00:45:39 Speaker 17: to the CAO. CEO, I just

00:45:41 Speaker 17: wanted to say I absolutely support

00:45:43 Speaker 17: the recommendation, and with the AMO

00:45:46 Speaker 17: board meeting tomorrow and or tonight

00:45:49 Speaker 22: and tomorrow, we will be discussing

00:45:51 Speaker 22: this as well. And would encourage

00:45:53 Speaker 22: that letter be copied to AMO.

00:45:55 Speaker 22: I'm confident that my Roma Caucus

00:45:56 Speaker 22: colleague across the horseshoe, Councillor Nielsen,

00:45:57 Speaker 22: and I will raise this at

00:46:02 Speaker 22: our caucus as a concern. and

00:46:03 Speaker 22: the the figures that you are

00:46:05 Speaker 22: outlining are very helpful. So thank

00:46:07 Speaker 22: you for that. the The timing

00:46:08 Speaker 22: is perfect. Why not? And thank

00:46:14 Speaker 22: you to Councillor Dobrine and to

00:46:17 Speaker 22: Councillor Nielsen and Councillor McKay as

00:46:21 Speaker 22: well. When he's sitting with Good

00:46:23 Speaker 22: Roads to to share those voices

00:46:26 Speaker 22: and be part of that discussion.

00:46:27 Speaker 22: So thank you. That's very helpful.

00:46:29 Speaker 22: Any other questions? Okay. I don't

00:46:32 Speaker 22: see any further questions. Then I'll

00:46:34 Speaker 22: call the question. All those in

00:46:38 Speaker 22: favour? And that motion is carried.

00:46:40 Speaker 22: Thank you very much. See you.

00:46:42 Speaker 22: So next, we'll move on to

00:46:44 Speaker 22: item seven C. It's recommended that

00:46:49 Speaker 22: report LTCRCW nineteen twenty five capital

00:46:51 Speaker 22: funding programme and ministry survey be

00:46:53 Speaker 22: received, and that staff be directed

00:46:56 Speaker 22: to complete the ministry of long

00:46:58 Speaker 22: term care survey by September twenty

00:47:00 Speaker 22: ninth, twenty twenty five, indicating Gray

00:47:02 Speaker 22: County's readiness to potentially. develop the

00:47:04 Speaker 22: approved 62 long-term long-term care beds

00:47:07 Speaker 22: at Gray Gables, and that action

00:47:10 Speaker 22: be taken prior to County

00:47:12 Speaker 22: Council approval as per Section 26.6B

00:47:13 Speaker 22: of the procedural bylaw, and that

00:47:15 Speaker 22: staff be directed to undertake

00:47:17 Speaker 22: updated cost forecasts and any other

00:47:18 Speaker 22: applicable studies for the potential development

00:47:23 Speaker 22: of 128 bed new home at

00:47:25 Speaker 22: Gray Gables to be funded from

00:47:29 Speaker 22: the one-time funding reserve, and that

00:47:30 Speaker 23: staff be directed to bring forward

00:47:33 Speaker 23: a report before March twenty-six outlining

00:47:35 Speaker 23: the updated budget impacts and a

00:47:37 Speaker 23: draft development agreement for council's consideration.

00:47:39 Speaker 23: May I ask for a mover

00:47:42 Speaker 23: and a seconder? Moved by Councillor

00:47:46 Speaker 23: Nielsen, seconded by Councillor Carlson. It's

00:47:48 Speaker 23: now on the floor for discussion.

00:47:49 Speaker 23: Welcome, Director Cornell. Thank you very

00:47:52 Speaker 23: much, Warden Matrousovs. Good morning, County

00:47:54 Speaker 23: Council. As the warden has indicated,

00:47:57 Speaker 23: I'm in front of council today.

00:47:59 Speaker 23: to present this report to discuss

00:48:01 Speaker 23: to discuss the Ministry of Long

00:48:04 Speaker 23: Term Care's capital funding programme and

00:48:07 Speaker 23: their recent request for operators to

00:48:09 Speaker 23: complete a redevelopment readiness survey. And

00:48:11 Speaker 23: so I'm going to go over

00:48:14 Speaker 23: some of the background. There's been

00:48:17 Speaker 23: a lot of moving parts on

00:48:20 Speaker 23: this topic over the past number

00:48:23 Speaker 23: of years. So in 2019, Grey

00:48:25 Speaker 23: County submitted applications to the Ministry

00:48:28 Speaker 23: of Long Term Care for two

00:48:32 Speaker 23: major Long-term care for two major

00:48:33 Speaker 23: long-term care projects: the Rockwood Terrace

00:48:34 Speaker 23: redevelopment and expansion to a new

00:48:37 Speaker 23: 128-bed facility, and Grey Gables redevelopment

00:48:39 Speaker 23: from a 66-bed Class A facility

00:48:41 Speaker 23: to a new 128-bed home on

00:48:44 Speaker 23: the same property, with the existing

00:48:46 Speaker 23: building repurposed as an assisted living

00:48:48 Speaker 23: retirement home. Both applications were approved,

00:48:54 Speaker 23: and the province allocated 62

00:48:56 Speaker 23: new beds to Grey Gables. That's

00:48:59 Speaker 23: 128 total beds. minus the 66

00:49:02 Speaker 23: existing. Staff have confirmed that the

00:49:04 Speaker 23: new beds are intended to be

00:49:07 Speaker 23: part of a new standalone facility

00:49:10 Speaker 23: and not an extension of the

00:49:12 Speaker 23: current building. Due to the scale

00:49:15 Speaker 23: of both projects, council prioritized Rockwood

00:49:17 Speaker 23: Terrace, which is now under construction

00:49:20 Speaker 23: and represents Gray County's largest capital

00:49:22 Speaker 23: project to date at $96 million.

00:49:25 Speaker 23: On February 23, 2023, council deferred

00:49:27 Speaker 23: a motion regarding Graygate. Motion regarding

00:49:30 Speaker 23: Grey Gables pending completion of the

00:49:32 Speaker 23: Rockwood Terrace tender process, with construction

00:49:34 Speaker 23: now 25% complete. There's an opportunity

00:49:38 Speaker 23: to reassess the financial feasibility of

00:49:40 Speaker 23: the Grey Gables redevelopment. So, looking

00:49:42 Speaker 23: at the capital funding programme and

00:49:44 Speaker 23: specifically around the ministry survey, the

00:49:47 Speaker 23: new capital funding programme offers up

00:49:50 Speaker 23: to 85% funding for new beds

00:49:52 Speaker 23: on a maximum per bed cost

00:49:55 Speaker 23: of $436,000. I just want to

00:49:57 Speaker 23: note. that Rockwood Terrace is not

00:50:00 Speaker 23: eligible for reconsideration under this

00:50:02 Speaker 23: programme. That was part of our

00:50:06 Speaker 23: delegation at AMO, and we've spent

00:50:09 Speaker 23: some time confirming that that is

00:50:11 Speaker 23: the case. The province has committed

00:50:13 Speaker 23: to adding thirty thousand new long-term

00:50:16 Speaker 23: care beds, and this construction funding

00:50:20 Speaker 23: programme is designed to support that

00:50:22 Speaker 23: mandate. In late August, twenty twenty-five,

00:50:24 Speaker 23: the ministry released a survey

00:50:26 Speaker 23: to assess which operators with previous

00:50:30 Speaker 23: Operators with previously previously approved but

00:50:33 Speaker 23: unbuilt beds can proceed in a

00:50:35 Speaker 23: timely manner. The survey outlines the

00:50:37 Speaker 23: following development timeline. The survey response

00:50:40 Speaker 23: deadline is September 29th. Executed executed

00:50:44 Speaker 23: development agreement needs to be in

00:50:47 Speaker 23: place by March of 2026, with

00:50:49 Speaker 23: a construction start deadline no later

00:50:51 Speaker 23: than March of 2028. Gray Gables

00:50:54 Speaker 23: existing 66 Class A beds meet

00:50:57 Speaker 23: the current design standards and are.

00:51:02 Speaker 23: therefore not eligible for the redevelopment

00:51:04 Speaker 23: funding under the construction funding programme.

00:51:06 Speaker 23: The 62 new beds are eligible

00:51:08 Speaker 23: for the CFP funding. Funding

00:51:11 Speaker 23: for the existing beds will need

00:51:15 Speaker 23: to be sourced through alternate mechanisms.

00:51:19 Speaker 23: The ministry survey presents three options.

00:51:21 Speaker 23: Option one: proceed with development planning,

00:51:23 Speaker 23: which would mean the counties opting

00:51:25 Speaker 23: to maintain the 62 bed allocation,

00:51:28 Speaker 23: and council would be. directing staff

00:51:32 Speaker 23: to explore redevelopment options, so updating

00:51:34 Speaker 23: cost estimates, concept designs, site analysis,

00:51:38 Speaker 23: and initial funding may be sourced

00:51:39 Speaker 23: from long-term care reserves or surplus

00:51:42 Speaker 23: to do that work. And this

00:51:44 Speaker 23: positions Gray County to meet ministry

00:51:46 Speaker 23: timelines and secure construction funding, that

00:51:48 Speaker 23: the CFP funding. Option two is

00:51:50 Speaker 23: to withdraw from redevelopment. That. would

00:51:54 Speaker 23: mean releasing the 62 bed allocation

00:51:55 Speaker 23: back to the province, and it

00:51:58 Speaker 23: forfeits future funding and development opportunities

00:52:00 Speaker 23: at Grey Gables under this CFP

00:52:02 Speaker 23: programme. Option three is to defer

00:52:05 Speaker 23: the decision until the Rockwood completion.

00:52:07 Speaker 23: This would mean requesting the ministry

00:52:10 Speaker 23: to maintain the 62 bed allocation

00:52:12 Speaker 23: and provide further information in 2027.

00:52:16 Speaker 23: I do want to note for

00:52:19 Speaker 23: council the risk here is that

00:52:21 Speaker 23: the ministry may rescind. the allocation

00:52:25 Speaker 23: due to a lack of commitment?

00:52:27 Speaker 23: Staff recommend option one to proceed

00:52:28 Speaker 23: with the development planning and submit

00:52:33 Speaker 23: a survey response confirming Grey County's

00:52:36 Speaker 23: intent to execute a development agreement

00:52:38 Speaker 23: with the province by March of

00:52:40 Speaker 23: 2026. This agreement would support the

00:52:42 Speaker 23: potential construction of a new 128-bed

00:52:45 Speaker 23: home at Grey Gables with construction

00:52:47 Speaker 23: beginning no later than March 2028.

00:52:50 Speaker 23: To support this approach, staff. will

00:52:55 Speaker 23: engage external consultants to review existing

00:52:57 Speaker 23: project plans and perform any applicable

00:53:00 Speaker 23: studies and site analysis to update

00:53:04 Speaker 23: the cost estimates. Those cost estimates

00:53:05 Speaker 23: that we have in place are

00:53:08 Speaker 23: from 2018-2019. A revised cost estimate

00:53:10 Speaker 23: and draft development agreement will be

00:53:12 Speaker 23: brought to council for review and

00:53:14 Speaker 23: approval prior to submission to the

00:53:16 Speaker 23: ministry. And upon confirmation of provincial

00:53:20 Speaker 23: funding, staff will initiate. detailed planning

00:53:22 Speaker 23: and design phases throughout 2026, followed

00:53:25 Speaker 23: by a procurement process in 2027

00:53:28 Speaker 23: and groundbreaking in 2028. In looking

00:53:31 Speaker 23: at the financial and resource implications,

00:53:34 Speaker 23: want to flag a number of

00:53:37 Speaker 23: areas. Significant additional work will be

00:53:40 Speaker 23: required should council support the staff

00:53:42 Speaker 23: recommendation to bring forward updated cost

00:53:44 Speaker 23: estimates and to complete the applicable

00:53:48 Speaker 23: studies and site analysis. It's recommended

00:53:50 Speaker 23: that. any cost to complete this

00:53:55 Speaker 23: work be funded from one-time funding.

00:53:57 Speaker 23: In 2019, the estimated cost for

00:54:01 Speaker 23: the project was approximately $37 million,

00:54:05 Speaker 23: based on a per-bed cost of

00:54:08 Speaker 23: $280,000 from a recent comparable build.

00:54:11 Speaker 23: Rockwood Terrace, our new 128-bed facility

00:54:14 Speaker 23: and a direct comparator, was procured

00:54:18 Speaker 23: in 2023-2024 at a total project

00:54:21 Speaker 23: value of $96 million, equating to

00:54:26 Speaker 23: a per-bed cost. Equating to a

00:54:28 Speaker 23: per bed cost on the overall

00:54:30 Speaker 23: project costs of approximately $750,000 per

00:54:32 Speaker 23: bed, an almost 170% increase in

00:54:35 Speaker 23: price from the 2020-19 comparable.

00:54:37 Speaker 23: Under the new capital funding programme,

00:54:39 Speaker 23: the province may contribute up to

00:54:42 Speaker 23: $376,000 per bed, which is 85%

00:54:45 Speaker 23: of the grant cap. In addition,

00:54:49 Speaker 23: the county qualifies for up to

00:54:51 Speaker 23: $500,000 of additional. Thousand dollars of

00:54:54 Speaker 23: additional funding to support design costs,

00:54:56 Speaker 23: which is a new funding opportunity

00:54:59 Speaker 23: for municipal and not-for-profit operators. In

00:55:00 Speaker 23: that's a feature of this construction

00:55:03 Speaker 23: funding programme. Based on Rockwood, it's

00:55:05 Speaker 23: anticipated that costs will exceed the

00:55:06 Speaker 23: provincial cap, and so the county

00:55:09 Speaker 23: might anticipate a full provincial grant

00:55:12 Speaker 23: of approximately twenty-three million four hundred

00:55:14 Speaker 23: seventy-seven thousand. Based on the Rockwood

00:55:15 Speaker 23: cost of 96 million, this would

00:55:18 Speaker 23: leave a balance of approximately 72

00:55:19 Speaker 23: million 522 thousand 800. In percentage

00:55:22 Speaker 23: terms, based on these assumptions, the

00:55:24 Speaker 23: total provincial grant would be approximately

00:55:26 Speaker 23: 24% of the total cost. It's

00:55:28 Speaker 23: noted that these costs are high-level

00:55:30 Speaker 23: estimates based on Rockwood Terrace and

00:55:32 Speaker 23: do not account for inflationary pressures

00:55:35 Speaker 23: between the time of report and

00:55:37 Speaker 23: tender. One of the key next

00:55:39 Speaker 23: steps, if Council's Key next steps,

00:55:41 Speaker 23: if council supports the staff recommendation,

00:55:43 Speaker 23: is to refine these cost estimates.

00:55:46 Speaker 23: Assuming a similar approach to Rockwood

00:55:48 Speaker 23: was taken, and that the balance

00:55:50 Speaker 23: of funds was funded through debenture,

00:55:53 Speaker 23: this would add to the county's

00:55:54 Speaker 23: long-term debt. The amount of debt

00:55:57 Speaker 23: a municipality can carry is subject

00:56:00 Speaker 23: to maximum limits that are established

00:56:03 Speaker 23: by the province, and the annual

00:56:07 Speaker 23: payments to service debts may not

00:56:11 Speaker 23: exceed twenty-five percent of the municipality's

00:56:13 Speaker 23: own source revenue. This is known

00:56:14 Speaker 23: as the annual. repayment limit, or

00:56:17 Speaker 23: ARL. Gray County has established a

00:56:17 Speaker 23: policy to limit the ARL to

00:56:21 Speaker 23: 10% or less. Based on the

00:56:24 Speaker 23: above figures and other commitments, staff

00:56:25 Speaker 23: anticipate that there is capacity to

00:56:27 Speaker 23: assume this magnitude of debt within

00:56:29 Speaker 23: that 25% provincial limit, but that

00:56:32 Speaker 23: this would incur a period where

00:56:34 Speaker 23: the ARL to meet debt repayments

00:56:37 Speaker 23: exceeds the county target of

00:56:39 Speaker 23: 10% or less. In your package,

00:56:42 Speaker 23: there is. a concept plan drawing

00:56:45 Speaker 23: of the the proposed build that

00:56:50 Speaker 23: was included in the original proposal

00:56:53 Speaker 23: submitted to the Ministry of Long

00:56:55 Speaker 23: Term Care in 2019, and I

00:56:58 Speaker 23: know that was a lot. And

00:57:00 Speaker 23: I just like to summarise some

00:57:03 Speaker 23: of the key points. This report

00:57:06 Speaker 23: does not commit Bracken County to

00:57:09 Speaker 23: building at this time. What it

00:57:12 Speaker 23: does is position us to respond

00:57:14 Speaker 23: to the ministry's request for readiness

00:57:18 Speaker 23: and to begin the. necessary due

00:57:20 Speaker 23: diligence required to work on this

00:57:22 Speaker 23: project, the financial forecasting, the feasibility

00:57:26 Speaker 23: studies, planning work, all of that

00:57:27 Speaker 24: information to inform a future decision.

00:57:29 Speaker 24: So, if if council directs and

00:57:30 Speaker 24: approves the recommendation presented, the next

00:57:34 Speaker 24: steps for staff would be to

00:57:38 Speaker 24: undertake that work, to update those

00:57:40 Speaker 24: cost forecasts and any other applicable

00:57:42 Speaker 14: studies. prepare that a follow-up report

00:57:44 Speaker 14: that would come to County Council

00:57:45 Speaker 14: well before March of 2026. That

00:57:49 Speaker 14: would include that updated budget information

00:57:52 Speaker 14: and a draft development agreement for

00:57:54 Speaker 14: Council's consideration. And so that I

00:57:55 Speaker 14: will leave it at that and

00:57:56 Speaker 14: hand it back to you, Warna

00:57:58 Speaker 14: Matrosovs, for questions. Thank you very

00:58:00 Speaker 14: much, Director Cornell. So we'll put

00:58:02 Speaker 14: it out to Council Committee of

00:58:03 Speaker 14: the Whole members if they. Committee,

00:58:04 Speaker 14: the whole members, if they have

00:58:07 Speaker 14: any questions. Okay, we'll begin with

00:58:09 Speaker 14: Councillor Nielsen. Thank you very

00:58:11 Speaker 14: much, Ward Matrussoff, and I'll add

00:58:14 Speaker 14: more of a comment than a

00:58:17 Speaker 14: question. Yesterday, County Council had its

00:58:20 Speaker 14: Budget and Finance Committee meeting, and

00:58:23 Speaker 14: during that conversation, we talked about

00:58:25 Speaker 14: operational efficiencies. This report today shows

00:58:26 Speaker 14: an idea of how we can

00:58:28 Speaker 14: move forward with Great Gables, and

00:58:31 Speaker 14: I think there's two options before

00:58:34 Speaker 14: Great County. The conversation. about whether

00:58:35 Speaker 14: or not Gray County wants to

00:58:37 Speaker 14: have three is ended. The conversation

00:58:38 Speaker 14: about what type of home we're

00:58:41 Speaker 14: going to have at the Gray

00:58:42 Speaker 14: Gables site is what's before us.

00:58:45 Speaker 14: To move to a 128-bed facility

00:58:47 Speaker 14: is a significant difference in operational

00:58:48 Speaker 14: efficiencies that's presented by the data

00:58:49 Speaker 14: coming from the Manor, from Rockwood

00:58:56 Speaker 14: Terrace, and is before long-term care

00:58:59 Speaker 14: community management. The difference is the

00:59:02 Speaker 25: Gray Gables bed as a home

00:59:05 Speaker 25: as it stands now may not

00:59:08 Speaker 25: be. operationally efficient, but it is

00:59:10 Speaker 25: a desirable living facility for the

00:59:15 Speaker 23: residents of that site. And so,

00:59:17 Speaker 23: I don't think there's a wrong

00:59:20 Speaker 23: answer here for Gray County in

00:59:22 Speaker 23: terms of whether we move towards

00:59:24 Speaker 23: a new facility, but as to

00:59:26 Speaker 23: just a decision as to do

00:59:30 Speaker 23: we go for operational efficiencies or

00:59:32 Speaker 23: lifestyle for the residents that exist.

00:59:37 Speaker 23: And so, just more of a

00:59:40 Speaker 23: comment as to what we're doing

00:59:42 Speaker 23: here. Okay, thank you. Look around.

00:59:44 Speaker 23: We'll go to Council Carleton. Thank

00:59:47 Speaker 23: you, Warden. Just a question about

00:59:55 Speaker 26: what the waitlist status is there.

00:59:57 Speaker 26: What's the potential for filling that

01:00:01 Speaker 26: home if we go ahead with

01:00:02 Speaker 26: the build there? Thank you for

01:00:04 Speaker 26: that question, and through you, Madam

01:00:08 Speaker 26: Chair, I did have those waitlist

01:00:11 Speaker 26: numbers handy for the Town of

01:00:14 Speaker 26: the Mountains seniors. The Town of

01:00:19 Speaker 26: Blue Mountain Senior's Fair last week,

01:00:21 Speaker 26: but that was so last week.

01:00:23 Speaker 26: But I can confidently say that

01:00:26 Speaker 26: the wait lists are lengthy; that

01:00:30 Speaker 26: people are waiting three months to

01:00:33 Speaker 26: more than a year to be

01:00:38 Speaker 26: able to move into one of

01:00:42 Speaker 26: the Grey County homes. And I

01:00:44 Speaker 26: don't foresee an issue in terms

01:00:47 Speaker 26: of occupancy at 128 beds. Okay,

01:00:49 Speaker 26: thank you, and we'll go to

01:00:51 Speaker 26: Councillor Dobrin. Thank you, Warden, and

01:00:51 Speaker 26: through you. Thank you for the

01:00:54 Speaker 26: report. It was very easy to

01:00:56 Speaker 26: follow. Guess my question, just for

01:00:59 Speaker 26: myself, or for anyone listening, is

01:01:03 Speaker 26: that we're prohibited from adding on

01:01:05 Speaker 26: to the existing 66 beds to

01:01:10 Speaker 26: make it 128 beds. We can

01:01:19 Speaker 23: add on 128 a new new

01:01:21 Speaker 23: facility and create an assisted living

01:01:25 Speaker 23: facility. But there's no funding for

01:01:30 Speaker 23: the requirement to blend the two

01:01:34 Speaker 23: homes or the the beds. We

01:01:39 Speaker 23: can't. So the province is saying

01:01:43 Speaker 23: you if you're going to have

01:01:46 Speaker 23: 128 bed facility, you can't add

01:01:50 Speaker 23: on to your existing beds. You

01:01:53 Speaker 23: have to create a new facility.

01:01:56 Speaker 23: But we're not going to give

01:01:57 Speaker 23: you funding for the conversion of

01:02:01 Speaker 23: the 66 beds to the new

01:02:02 Speaker 23: facility. That's my part one. And

01:02:05 Speaker 23: my other question then: Do you

01:02:07 Speaker 23: anticipate that the assisted, the converted

01:02:08 Speaker 23: facility to assisted living, would help

01:02:11 Speaker 23: significantly offset those costs? Great, thank

01:02:15 Speaker 23: you for those questions and through

01:02:18 Speaker 23: you, Warden. So the intern, we'll

01:02:21 Speaker 23: start with part one regarding the

01:02:23 Speaker 23: the blending of the funding and

01:02:27 Speaker 23: the opportunity to add on. So

01:02:29 Speaker 23: staff's understanding is that this is

01:02:32 Speaker 23: a readiness evaluation based on proposals

01:02:33 Speaker 23: that were. submitted in 2019, and

01:02:35 Speaker 23: so the the we did reach

01:02:39 Speaker 23: out in the past number of

01:02:42 Speaker 23: years, I think, to look at

01:02:43 Speaker 23: what the options were, and the

01:02:49 Speaker 23: ministry response was that we need

01:02:50 Speaker 23: to stay true to the proposal

01:02:53 Speaker 23: that was submitted. If there is

01:02:55 Speaker 23: an interest to do something different,

01:03:00 Speaker 23: it would be a separate application

01:03:02 Speaker 23: under the construction funding programme. So

01:03:04 Speaker 23: it it we're. not prohibited from

01:03:05 Speaker 23: adding on. It would mean starting

01:03:09 Speaker 23: at the application process with a

01:03:10 Speaker 23: new application. We have guaranteed these

01:03:13 Speaker 23: 62 beds are they've been approved

01:03:17 Speaker 23: by the province, guaranteed in that

01:03:20 Speaker 23: the the proposal was approved. Pending

01:03:22 Speaker 23: we meet all of these milestones

01:03:25 Speaker 23: steps, it will meet the criteria

01:03:28 Speaker 23: for the the funding. And that

01:03:31 Speaker 23: is all my understanding in support

01:03:34 Speaker 23: of the mandate of 30. Of

01:03:36 Speaker 23: the mandate of thirty thousand new

01:03:38 Speaker 23: beds, so that CAO chair, sir,

01:03:40 Speaker 23: did you have anything to add?

01:03:45 Speaker 23: No, okay. And so, moving to

01:03:47 Speaker 23: the second question around the assisted

01:03:49 Speaker 23: living, offsetting the the costs, what

01:03:54 Speaker 23: we know to this that is

01:03:55 Speaker 23: something that we would be wanting

01:03:56 Speaker 23: to look into and get new

01:04:01 Speaker 23: numbers, new information in that report

01:04:04 Speaker 27: that would come before March of

01:04:10 Speaker 27: twenty twenty six. March of 2026.

01:04:11 Speaker 27: What I can say from historical

01:04:16 Speaker 27: research on that, when we were

01:04:18 Speaker 27: working through that option for the

01:04:21 Speaker 27: Rockwood Terrace redevelopment that did include

01:04:26 Speaker 27: a assisted living portion originally as

01:04:29 Speaker 27: part of that campus, we were

01:04:31 Speaker 27: able to have it break even,

01:04:32 Speaker 27: to not impact the levy and

01:04:35 Speaker 27: cost additional money, but we weren't

01:04:38 Speaker 27: able to have it generate a

01:04:40 Speaker 27: revenue based on our operating. Based

01:04:42 Speaker 27: on our operations, are there other

01:04:44 Speaker 27: opportunities, perhaps? But that's the information

01:04:47 Speaker 27: that I can share today, based

01:04:49 Speaker 27: on the research that we did.

01:04:50 Speaker 27: Okay, thank you, and we'll go

01:04:53 Speaker 27: to Councillor Key. Oh, sorry, Councillor

01:04:58 Speaker 28: McKay first, and then to Councillor

01:05:03 Speaker 28: Keaveny. Yes, Warden, through you, we

01:05:04 Speaker 28: had a tour of Rockwood, Rockwood

01:05:07 Speaker 12: Terrace yesterday. Today, it's going to

01:05:10 Speaker 12: hold a lot of people at

01:05:12 Speaker 12: one time. We don't know when

01:05:14 Speaker 12: that place will be full, and

01:05:16 Speaker 12: it's very hard to estimate. Like

01:05:20 Speaker 12: I sway towards option three, just

01:05:22 Speaker 12: to the fact that we're going

01:05:23 Speaker 12: to be in debt for a

01:05:27 Speaker 12: while with Rockwood tariffs. Do you

01:05:28 Speaker 12: want to go further in depth?

01:05:30 Speaker 12: we know. Then we know every

01:05:33 Speaker 12: year when we set a budget,

01:05:34 Speaker 12: there'll be so much money put

01:05:35 Speaker 12: towards Rockwood Terrace because it's long

01:05:36 Speaker 12: term. Now, if we're going to

01:05:38 Speaker 12: do Markdale, it'll be the same

01:05:40 Speaker 12: thing. So right off the bat,

01:05:45 Speaker 12: on your budget, you're going to

01:05:47 Speaker 12: be paying debt. Thank you. Okay,

01:05:49 Speaker 23: thank you for that comment. So

01:05:50 Speaker 23: we'll go over to Councillor Keaveny.

01:05:51 Speaker 23: Go over to Councillor Kivney. Thank

01:05:53 Speaker 23: you, Warden Matrasovs. I'm also worried

01:05:55 Speaker 23: about the debt, so I just

01:05:57 Speaker 23: wanted to confirm first of all,

01:06:03 Speaker 23: if I may, Director Cornell. So

01:06:04 Speaker 23: completing this survey does not commit

01:06:06 Speaker 23: future councils to the rebuilding of

01:06:08 Speaker 23: Gregables. At this point, it would

01:06:11 Speaker 23: just provide us additional information. And

01:06:13 Speaker 23: do we know off the top

01:06:23 Speaker 06: of our heads if we did

01:06:26 Speaker 06: go forward? You mentioned that that

01:06:30 Speaker 06: would take debt capacity of more

01:06:32 Speaker 06: than. ten percent but less than

01:06:34 Speaker 06: twenty five. Do we have any

01:06:37 Speaker 06: sense if it's closer to ten

01:06:39 Speaker 06: or closer to twenty five, if

01:06:41 Speaker 06: we did go forward with the

01:06:43 Speaker 06: build? Okay, thank you. And through

01:06:44 Speaker 06: do you I I can start

01:06:47 Speaker 06: with the first one. I thought

01:06:49 Speaker 06: I would be giving someone some

01:06:50 Speaker 06: time to sort out the details

01:06:52 Speaker 06: of the second part of the

01:06:54 Speaker 06: question. Thank you. And through you,

01:06:56 Speaker 06: Warren Matrousovs. So correct this report

01:06:58 Speaker 06: does. county to building at this

01:06:59 Speaker 06: time. What it commits us to

01:07:02 Speaker 06: is responding to the survey to

01:07:03 Speaker 06: say that we are continuing to

01:07:05 Speaker 06: do our due diligence in the

01:07:08 Speaker 06: in working towards redevelopment. You, Warden,

01:07:13 Speaker 06: and just further to what Director

01:07:16 Speaker 06: Cornell indicated, it provides us with

01:07:19 Speaker 06: the opportunity as as the director.

01:07:21 Speaker 06: Just the opportunity, as as the

01:07:23 Speaker 06: director indicated, to respond to the

01:07:25 Speaker 06: survey deadline, which is fairly tight

01:07:28 Speaker 06: deadline of early next week, to

01:07:30 Speaker 06: say that we're continuing, but it

01:07:32 Speaker 06: allows us to do that further

01:07:34 Speaker 06: analysis and then bring back further

01:07:36 Speaker 06: information to this council prior to

01:07:37 Speaker 06: that March thirty first, twenty twenty

01:07:40 Speaker 06: six deadline, which is when we

01:07:41 Speaker 06: would have to enter into an

01:07:42 Speaker 06: actual development agreement with the ministry.

01:07:43 Speaker 06: So, so it gives us that

01:07:46 Speaker 06: period of time, is subject to

01:07:48 Speaker 06: obviously the direction of council today,

01:07:49 Speaker 06: and that. Today, and that's that's

01:07:52 Speaker 06: where staff are recommending option one

01:07:55 Speaker 06: to come back with that further

01:07:57 Speaker 06: analysis, so that we can provide

01:07:59 Speaker 02: that that information to council. With

01:08:12 Speaker 22: respect to the the the debt

01:08:13 Speaker 22: borrowing ratio, again, that analysis will

01:08:20 Speaker 22: determine how much we think, based

01:08:22 Speaker 22: on at least a cost a

01:08:23 Speaker 29: refined cost estimate of what that

01:08:25 Speaker 29: 128 bed facility would look like

01:08:28 Speaker 29: on the existing Gray Gable site.

01:08:29 Speaker 29: So. that's we won't know until

01:08:31 Speaker 29: we do that analysis of what

01:08:33 Speaker 29: the exact numbers will be. I

01:08:36 Speaker 29: think we could give you ballparks

01:08:38 Speaker 29: and maybe turning over to our

01:08:42 Speaker 29: finance staff or to, but it's

01:08:45 Speaker 29: it's it's tough to say at

01:08:48 Speaker 30: this stage in terms of what

01:08:52 Speaker 30: that percent will be. We just

01:08:54 Speaker 30: know that it'll be over our

01:08:58 Speaker 30: current policy threshold of ten percent

01:09:01 Speaker 30: that council has set. So that

01:09:02 Speaker 30: would have to be potentially revisited

01:09:03 Speaker 30: by council in terms of prior

01:09:06 Speaker 30: to and as part of potentially

01:09:09 Speaker 30: entering into. a development agreement in

01:09:10 Speaker 30: March 2026 next year. Oops. Okay,

01:09:12 Speaker 30: thank you. So we'll go next

01:09:17 Speaker 30: then to Councillor. Oh, sorry, Deputy

01:09:19 Speaker 30: CEO. My apologies. Information comes flowing

01:09:20 Speaker 30: in quickly when we're in meetings

01:09:22 Speaker 30: like this. So based on the

01:09:23 Speaker 30: cost. So, based on the costs

01:09:25 Speaker 30: within the report, director of finance

01:09:27 Speaker 30: has indicated it would be around

01:09:29 Speaker 30: about 13%. So, it would be

01:09:32 Speaker 30: about 3% over our policy set

01:09:35 Speaker 30: at the minute. Okay, thank you

01:09:38 Speaker 30: for sourcing that information for us,

01:09:41 Speaker 30: and we'll go to Councillor Greg.

01:09:43 Speaker 30: Thanks, Jen, for the report, and

01:09:46 Speaker 30: you know, I'm sitting here just

01:09:50 Speaker 30: entertaining everyone's comments and thoughts. Yeah,

01:09:53 Speaker 30: we did have that budget meeting

01:09:57 Speaker 30: yesterday. Of that budget meeting yesterday,

01:09:59 Speaker 30: and we went through the long-term

01:10:01 Speaker 30: capital planning, and we realized that

01:10:04 Speaker 30: while we are not at the

01:10:07 Speaker 30: bottom end of the spectrum in

01:10:10 Speaker 30: terms of investing in our

01:10:14 Speaker 30: assets and operational investment, we're not

01:10:17 Speaker 30: at the top end. We're somewhere

01:10:19 Speaker 30: in the middle. So we perform

01:10:22 Speaker 30: well with our comparators. That said,

01:10:25 Speaker 30: in the last three years locally,

01:10:27 Speaker 30: there was a new long-term care

01:10:29 Speaker 30: home built in Owen Sound, and

01:10:32 Speaker 30: this is no slight. On sound,

01:10:36 Speaker 30: and this is no slate to

01:10:39 Speaker 30: staff whatsoever. But that build, that

01:10:41 Speaker 30: private home build in On Sound,

01:10:46 Speaker 30: was effectively fifty percent the cost

01:10:47 Speaker 30: of Rockwood Terrace. And you have

01:10:50 Speaker 30: to question at what level can

01:10:54 Speaker 30: we continue to build out and

01:10:56 Speaker 30: add new assets. I have one

01:11:00 Speaker 30: line here written down, and it's

01:11:04 Speaker 30: optimizing our current assets. We know

01:11:07 Speaker 30: that Gray Gables afforded the opportunity

01:11:09 Speaker 30: to build. an extension. I do

01:11:12 Speaker 30: understand that. I mean, we we

01:11:13 Speaker 30: removed the assisted living portion of

01:11:16 Speaker 30: Rockwood Terrace because it had clamored

01:11:20 Speaker 30: up to around 125 million dollars.

01:11:23 Speaker 30: I think when we clawed it

01:11:26 Speaker 30: back, it's different when you're constructing

01:11:27 Speaker 30: new versus even entertaining, rehabilitating an

01:11:30 Speaker 30: existing footprint. So if you could

01:11:33 Speaker 30: maybe make a business case that

01:11:35 Speaker 30: you. break even on building new

01:11:36 Speaker 30: with assisted living. You are really

01:11:39 Speaker 30: going to struggle to perhaps use

01:11:44 Speaker 30: the same business case to show

01:11:47 Speaker 30: that you're going to break even

01:11:50 Speaker 30: on rehabilitating an existing 30, 35

01:11:52 Speaker 30: year old property. You just don't

01:11:55 Speaker 30: get those same efficiencies. You have

01:11:58 Speaker 30: higher costs. I think whatever pathway

01:12:00 Speaker 30: gets us back to if we

01:12:01 Speaker 30: have to resubmit. another application to

01:12:04 Speaker 30: optimize the current gradeables to 128,

01:12:06 Speaker 30: that's the pathway that we need

01:12:10 Speaker 30: to choose and pursue. Another 128

01:12:12 Speaker 30: building plus the assisted living is

01:12:15 Speaker 30: just an amount of debt that

01:12:19 Speaker 30: continues to go in front of

01:12:21 Speaker 30: this council and future councils, and

01:12:22 Speaker 30: it just prohibits. I mean, those

01:12:28 Speaker 24: are tough discussions we're having yesterday.

01:12:30 Speaker 24: budget, and and the more debt

01:12:34 Speaker 24: you continue to add on, those

01:12:37 Speaker 24: discussions just get harder and harder.

01:12:41 Speaker 23: And we maybe none of us

01:12:44 Speaker 23: will be here to have them,

01:12:47 Speaker 23: but it'll be brutal discussions for

01:12:52 Speaker 23: for future councils on on what

01:12:55 Speaker 23: you can afford to provide for

01:12:57 Speaker 23: your residents. So I think I

01:12:59 Speaker 23: did lean towards option three, the

01:13:00 Speaker 23: one the one line. I had

01:13:04 Speaker 23: under underlined was part of a

01:13:07 Speaker 23: new standalone facility, not an extension

01:13:10 Speaker 23: of the current building, on page

01:13:12 Speaker 23: two. And the question then is,

01:13:15 Speaker 23: why is that there? I think

01:13:17 Speaker 23: you kind of explained it because

01:13:18 Speaker 23: it needs a new application. But

01:13:21 Speaker 23: I think that's the pathway we

01:13:24 Speaker 23: need to pursue: is that new

01:13:29 Speaker 23: application to get those 62 beds

01:13:31 Speaker 23: and pursue the expansion to opt.

01:13:33 Speaker 23: Sue the expansion to optimize Gray

01:13:36 Speaker 23: Gables, not 128 plus whatever it

01:13:38 Speaker 23: might cost to add the assisted

01:13:40 Speaker 23: living. I don't think we can

01:13:43 Speaker 23: afford it. Okay, thank you. Are

01:13:45 Speaker 23: there any further comments? I I

01:13:47 Speaker 23: see a finger pointing. Oh yes,

01:13:49 Speaker 23: sorry, Director Cornell. Thank you, and

01:13:52 Speaker 23: through you, Ward and Matrysovsk. I

01:13:56 Speaker 23: I I wanted to just. flag

01:13:59 Speaker 23: that the per bed cost to

01:14:03 Speaker 23: build is a difficult number to

01:14:09 Speaker 26: nail down without doing this research

01:14:14 Speaker 26: and these these assessments that staff

01:14:17 Speaker 26: are suggesting would be part of

01:14:22 Speaker 26: a report coming back, and part

01:14:24 Speaker 26: of the reason for that is

01:14:29 Speaker 26: that we're we're rarely comparing apples

01:14:30 Speaker 26: to apples, so the Onsound building

01:14:34 Speaker 26: was not green space. It maybe

01:14:37 Speaker 26: had services already. It maybe didn't

01:14:40 Speaker 26: require earthworks. So just as an

01:14:43 Speaker 26: example, and as we were working

01:14:45 Speaker 26: through the process for Rockwood Terrace,

01:14:46 Speaker 26: doing very similar work, trying to

01:14:48 Speaker 26: find comparators, so there'd be a

01:14:52 Speaker 26: building happening in the Arnprior area,

01:14:53 Speaker 26: but they were being attached to

01:14:56 Speaker 26: a hospital that already had existing

01:14:58 Speaker 26: kitchen and laundry. So that had

01:15:06 Speaker 26: an impact on the cost per

01:15:08 Speaker 06: bed. for example. So just to

01:15:10 Speaker 06: share that with council, that those

01:15:12 Speaker 06: are the items that we are

01:15:14 Speaker 06: currently working with information from 2019

01:15:16 Speaker 06: and in the height of the

01:15:20 Speaker 06: pandemic. Having the opportunity to

01:15:23 Speaker 06: gather more recent, current information and

01:15:24 Speaker 06: bring that back will facilitate a

01:15:27 Speaker 06: discussion that has more useful and

01:15:29 Speaker 06: relative, relevant information. Okay, thank you.

01:15:30 Speaker 06: We'll go to Councillor Dobrin. Thank

01:15:34 Speaker 06: you. Through you, just one more

01:15:38 Speaker 06: question. Then, through this evaluation that

01:15:39 Speaker 06: you're proposing, option one to re

01:15:41 Speaker 06: to continue to plan and reevaluate,

01:15:43 Speaker 06: does the province allow us to

01:15:46 Speaker 06: build a 62 bed facility adjacent

01:15:48 Speaker 06: to us? Would that be something

01:15:51 Speaker 06: that would be explored and could

01:15:55 Speaker 06: come back as part of that

01:15:57 Speaker 06: planning? Just as I'm not asking

01:15:59 Speaker 06: for an answer right now because

01:16:01 Speaker 06: we don't know what the province

01:16:03 Speaker 06: is going to do ever, but

01:16:09 Speaker 06: but I'm just wondering if that

01:16:10 Speaker 06: would be something that would be

01:16:14 Speaker 06: explored as an option when it

01:16:16 Speaker 06: does come back to council. Through

01:16:17 Speaker 06: you, Warden, and thank you for

01:16:20 Speaker 06: that question. Depending, obviously, we'll take

01:16:21 Speaker 06: the direction from Council in terms

01:16:23 Speaker 06: of if that wants, if if

01:16:24 Speaker 06: Council wants that to be part

01:16:28 Speaker 31: of the analysis, as Director Cornell

01:16:31 Speaker 31: indicated, based on previous conversations and

01:16:31 Speaker 31: correspondence with the province, that would

01:16:33 Speaker 31: be a full new application. So

01:16:35 Speaker 31: there's the there's the potential risk

01:16:40 Speaker 23: there that the current bed allocation

01:16:43 Speaker 23: of the 62 beds would be.

01:16:45 Speaker 23: potentially lost, but but for sure,

01:16:48 Speaker 23: if council directs us to include

01:16:50 Speaker 23: that as part of the analysis,

01:16:54 Speaker 23: if that's part of say option

01:16:59 Speaker 23: one or a version of option

01:17:01 Speaker 23: one in terms of bringing looking

01:17:05 Speaker 23: at both a 128 bed facility

01:17:09 Speaker 23: plus or a 62 bed facility,

01:17:12 Speaker 23: recognizing that that triggers a new

01:17:16 Speaker 23: application and a new funding model,

01:17:20 Speaker 23: and there's no guarantees that we

01:17:24 Speaker 23: might get that. sixty-two bed allocation

01:17:28 Speaker 23: as a result of that application.

01:17:33 Speaker 23: Okay, we'll go to Councillor Dickerd

01:17:35 Speaker 23: and then over to alternate Councillor

01:17:39 Speaker 23: Allwood. Thank you, Warden Metcalf, and

01:17:40 Speaker 23: thank you, Jen. During our meeting

01:17:46 Speaker 23: yesterday, there was one of the

01:17:49 Speaker 23: questions was the the allowance that

01:17:51 Speaker 23: we get from the province operating

01:17:55 Speaker 23: once the facility is up and

01:17:56 Speaker 23: running. So, if we add sixty-two

01:18:00 Speaker 23: beds to our stock, what kind

01:18:02 Speaker 23: of impact is that going to

01:18:04 Speaker 23: have on our levy going forward?

01:18:07 Speaker 23: Because my understanding was we were

01:18:09 Speaker 23: not getting reimbursed to the amount

01:18:12 Speaker 23: of the costs. Thank you, and

01:18:15 Speaker 23: through you, Madam Chair, I just

01:18:18 Speaker 23: want to clarify in terms of

01:18:19 Speaker 23: operating or the the actual build.

01:18:21 Speaker 23: This would be the operating after

01:18:24 Speaker 23: it's happened. Thank you for that

01:18:26 Speaker 23: clarification. So there. there is still

01:18:28 Speaker 23: a levy impact to operate Rockwood

01:18:30 Speaker 23: Terrace and Lee Manor. What we

01:18:32 Speaker 23: do see is efficiencies in operating

01:18:35 Speaker 23: 128 beds compared to the 66

01:18:38 Speaker 23: beds. So a lot of funding

01:18:41 Speaker 23: is per resident day, per resident

01:18:45 Speaker 23: month, per resident, and so there

01:18:48 Speaker 23: is opportunities for. efficiencies of of

01:18:50 Speaker 23: of purchasing items of the funding

01:18:53 Speaker 23: that comes in. So, for example,

01:18:55 Speaker 23: infection prevention and control is a

01:18:56 Speaker 23: is managers is a good example.

01:18:59 Speaker 23: The province introduced funding to support

01:19:01 Speaker 23: the hiring of those positions in

01:19:05 Speaker 23: long term care. When there's 150

01:19:08 Speaker 23: beds or 128 beds, often the

01:19:09 Speaker 23: fund Beds. Often, the funding is

01:19:11 Speaker 23: enough to support a full time,

01:19:13 Speaker 23: an FTE. When there's 66 beds,

01:19:14 Speaker 23: it's there's enough funding to support

01:19:16 Speaker 23: a a part time FTE. And

01:19:19 Speaker 23: so then comes the discussion in

01:19:23 Speaker 23: operations. We discuss with committee of

01:19:26 Speaker 23: management: Are we able to secure

01:19:27 Speaker 31: and recruit someone part time? Then

01:19:28 Speaker 31: we're if we're not, then we

01:19:30 Speaker 31: look at the we're required to

01:19:31 Speaker 31: have that position on staff, but

01:19:33 Speaker 02: aren't. able to recruit. So then

01:19:42 Speaker 02: there becomes a potential levy impact

01:19:46 Speaker 32: to be able to recruit someone

01:19:47 Speaker 32: full time, where the funding only

01:19:55 Speaker 32: supports part time. Those are the

01:19:57 Speaker 32: kinds of barriers when there is

01:20:00 Speaker 32: a when it's a smaller number

01:20:03 Speaker 32: of residents. The other challenge with

01:20:06 Speaker 32: Great Gables in terms of efficiencies

01:20:12 Speaker 32: is that the home areas are

01:20:17 Speaker 32: 22 residents per home area, where

01:20:18 Speaker 32: the. maximized efficiency, which we're building

01:20:20 Speaker 32: at Rockwood Terrace and we see

01:20:24 Speaker 32: at Lee Manor, is 32 residents

01:20:25 Speaker 32: per home area, and that allows

01:20:30 Speaker 32: for a sufficient staffing complement to

01:20:32 Speaker 32: support the residents in an efficient

01:20:34 Speaker 32: way. When there's 22 people living

01:20:36 Speaker 32: in a home area, you still

01:20:39 Speaker 32: need that base number of staff