It was supposed to be a nice, smooth meeting. The only thing on the agenda were reports from Committee of the Whole meetings that needed to be ratified, and aside from the two or three delegations, this meeting should have been over and done quickly. And yet, sometimes when you think the meeting is over, it’s not really over, especially when a member of council has a very specific motion they want to table. Here’s the recap…
Regular Meeting of City Council – September 24, 2024
On the surface it looked like there was not going to be anything terribly controversial at this month’s regular meeting of council. The agenda was entirely made up of reports from the two Committee of the Whole meetings in September, and the only new insights were going to come from delegates.
And then there was a surprise/not-surprise additional motion.
Three of the consent agenda items were pulled due to a delegate wanting one last word. Morgan Dandie relayed a personal story about the importance of the Indigenous Relations Framework, Mike Darmon wanted to raise awareness about future trail connectivity in relation to Downtown Streetscaping, and then Dandie came back to thank staff and council for the hard work on Improving Access to Public Washrooms Downtown.
On the council side, Mayor Cam Guthrie alluded to a motion that he was interested in bringing that would have maybe saved some money on sidewalk construction, but since no one wanted to put it on the floor we will never know what the mayor’s idea was. There were also some questions about getting feedback from the Accessibility Advisory Committee when it comes to the use of pavers (and their fumes) plus keeping the Basic Needs Table in the loop when it comes to the development of washrooms downtown.
All the reports were approved, and that brought us to the weekly bylaws. But wait! As Columbo would say, “There’s just one more thing…”
Councillor Erin Caton said that she had a motion, not directly tied to the Downtown Streetscaping project, but tangentially connected. She wanted council to make a statement about the Ontario government’s plan to regulate where municipalities are allowed to place bike lanes, which is how it was connected to Downtown Streetscaping because protected bike lanes are part of that plan. Caton had apparently made council aware she was bringing the motion to this meeting, but she wasn’t sure how to work it in procedurally.
Guthrie took some share of the blame and proposed that council suspend the Procedural Bylaw so that they could re-open the agenda and discuss Caton’s motion, which asked the mayor to write a letter to the premier, key cabinet ministers, AMO, Ontario’s Big City Mayors and Guelph MPP Mike Schreiner to oppose the reported legislation as it’s counter to the City of Guelph’s own goals, from Vision Zero to economic expansion. The motion also asked the Ontario government to focus on investing in public transit.
Councillors Goller and Klassen moved the suspension of the Procedural Bylaw and almost all of the members present approved, easily vaulting over the two-thirds council majority needed. Caton explained that this proposed legislation would “micromanage” city planning, and that it was too Toronto-centric in its implications because not all cities have side streets that run parallel to main streets. She also noted that the recent passing of Susan Bard, a cyclist who died as a result of a collision on Victoria Road North earlier this month, justifies why bike lanes are so desperately need.
Mayor Guthrie said that he was “not really down” with responding to legislation that hadn’t even been tabled yet and that he was not going to vote in favour of the motion. Goller countered by noting that there have been times when the Ontario government has asked for feedback and then approved legislation within days after a comment period closed without ever seeming to take that feedback into account.
Caton’s motion ended up being approved with Mayor Guthrie and Councillor Michele Richardson voting against.
In one finally bit of commentary before the meeting wrapped, Guthrie told council that it’s important to have a high degree of transparency when it comes to sharing correspondences to council, and he specifically referred to one piece of correspondence that had “caused some friction.” He said that while everyone should be careful when addressing each other, it’s still important that constituents should be heard in an uncensored way. Another mystery for the public (turns out it’s this one).
Click here to see the complete recap of the meeting.
Guelph Politico 