Let’s dig into what went down at this month’s first council meeting. You can click here for the amended agenda from City Hall, and you can click here for the Politico preview. For the complete blow-by-blow of this month’s Committee of the Whole meeting, follow the breakdown posted below, and you can also watch the City’s own live-stream of the meeting here.

***

Mayor Guthrie calls the meeting to order.

Council met in closed session to discuss Municipal Franchise Agreement with Enbridge Gas Inc. Guthrie says there were no decisions made in-camera, just the receipt of information that was legal advice.

Staff Recognitions this month:

Chair Klassen takes over. We begin with Municipal Franchise Agreement with Enbridge Gas Inc. There are nine delegates, and no presentation from staff.

We’re beginning with Samantha Hicks, who says that she full supports a motion coming from Councillor Caron asking for Enbridge to cover the costs of putting their infrastructure into municipal ground. She says we’re facing a climate emergency thanks to fossil fuels, and we all need to own up to that fact so that people can be lifted out of denial.

Hicks says that she realises negotiating with a fossil fuel giant is more work, but it’s worth it given the climate and affordability crises we’re facing.

Morgan Dandie is next. She says that she hopes that council will not lock residents into another 20 years of covering the costs for subsidies for Enbridge. What can be achieved for affordability in a number of areas if Enbridge was forced to pay the full costs? She wants committee to defer this question until Schreiner’s private member’s bill passes at lease second reading.

Next, David Douglas. He says it’s “vexatious” that Guelph is subsidising a fossil fuel company and that’s disgusting. It should be a no brainer about what to do about it. Beyond the issue of the franchise, city council is at risk of breaching Canada’s commitments to meet climate action goals.

Douglas: We risk funding standard assets of a mid-20th century economy. He strongly encourages to work with council to end this “dreadful arrangement” with Enbridge.

Next: Indigo Moran and Abigail Walton, Youth Climate Anxiety and Climate Action. They’re both 17 and they say that we won’t get another chance like this for 20 years, and Guelph is very off-track with getting to it’s net zero targets with cuts to next year’s budget.

Moran compares this to Nestle Waters, when the community found out how little Nestle was paying for water, they were outraged. Walton says stoping a billion-dollar company from taking a free ride will pay dividends to the local economy and to a greener climate future.

Next is Gina Lammel, chair of Seniors for Climate Action NOW! She says that this agreement with Enbridge, as it stands now, will undermine climate action and will not increase access to clean and renewable energy. This agreement, and cuts in next year’s budget, are not consistent with a city that wants to take climate action. We need to urgently change our relationship with oil and gas.

Question from Councillor O’Rourke: Just to be clear, is Lammel aware that under section 9 the City can’t charge user fees. Lammel says she does get that, but knows that the Green Party has a bill to change that.

John Lawson, also from Seniors for Climate Action NOW!, is next. He says their message is simple: Burning fossil fuels is driving the climate crisis and this agreement that the city is forced to sign is fuelling an addiction to fossil fuels for 20 years. We need to quit this addiction now.

Lawson says that they need to find creative ways to fight back, and that council needs to signal some resistance. Maybe be can limit the period on the next contract: 10 year? 5 years? We should lock our kids into an unhealthy environmental future.

Gyruss Valeriote is next. He’s a grade 12 student, and says that he’s heard dealing with Enbridge is more painful than passing a kidney stone, so we shouldn’t let them push us around. We should be trying to create a sustainable future for everyone, and trying to create a future where everyone should be comfortable.

Councillor Busuttil thanks Valeriote for delegating and perhaps overcoming some [obvious] nerves.

Last delegate, Evan Ferrari of eMERGE Guelph Sustainability and appreciates the other delegates, especially the young people. He says eMERGE’s fingerprints are in the private members’ bill. This is about holding a large company accountable for their actions.

Ferrari thanks staff for their effects and says that he appreciates that their job is to be risk averse. It’s up to the community to propose bold action and then it’s up to council to put that in action. He says that in the past, staff have been hesitant to pursue many different environmental measures until the people demanded it. This is another one of those times.

Klassen warns that there’s no snapping or clapping the name of decorum.

Whoops, we finally got Chuck Castillo on the line. He says he doesn’t have a lot of background on this, but his take is that we’re in the middle of an affordability crisis and a climate crisis and we’re letting a private entity using City resources at no cost. Also, this is in the process of budget cuts.

Councillor Billings asks if Castillo was aware that Enbridge pays property tax. He says he does know that, but the supporting work of installing natural gas infrastructure. He pays property taxes but can’t close streets on his own.

Klassen thanks the delegates. She asks to put the staff recommendation on the floor:

Billings/Gibson move Recommendation:

1. That the report entitled Municipal Franchise Agreement with Enbridge Gas Inc. dated November 5, 2024, be received.
2. That Council approve the form of franchise agreement and draft by-law attached to this report and authorize the submission thereof to the Ontario Energy Board for approval pursuant to the provisions of Section 9 of the Municipal Franchises Act.
3. That Council request that the Ontario Energy Board make an Order declaring and directing that the assent of the municipal electors to the form of franchise agreement and draft by-law attached to this report is not necessary pursuant to the provisions of Section 9(4) of the Municipal Franchises Act.
4. That staff be authorized and directed to do all things necessary to give effect to the foregoing resolutions.

Guthrie asks for the recommendations to be split.

Councillor Caron notes that for her recommendations to come forward this have to fail. Number one here is the same as hers, but she asked it be amended to read:

1. That the report entitled Municipal Franchise Agreement with Enbridge Gas Inc. dated November 5, 2024, be received for information.

Councillor Gibson asks if there will be opportunities for questions. Klassen says she’ll call a vote on #1 and then there’ll be time to ask questions on the rest.

Vote on the amendment passes unanimously. Vote on the amended #1 also passes unanimously.

On #2, Klassen asks for questions. Gibson asks for clarity on the Ontario Energy Board’s roll: The rates are set by the cost of the delivery of service plus a basic rate. Staff says the OEB has a broad mandate for all areas of energy delivery. Gibson asks if those companies go through a rate review. Staff says that wasn’t part of the research they did for this.

Councillor Allt asks for clarity: For ratepayers that don’t use gas, they’re still underwriting subsidies to Enbridge. Staff says they can’t speak to that as a “subsidy”, but Enbridge does pay property taxes their pipeline properties and for some inspections, but they can’t speak to what is and isn’t a subsidy.

Busuttil asks for clarity from clerks, this needs to fail before alternative motions. Clerk McMahon says that’s the gist, but they can be amended.

Billings asks about the 20-year agreement, if the act changes doesn’t the agreement then change? Staff says they would not be restructureed from charging those fees, so they could renegotiate the agreement or they could continue with the current one. There are ways but in to renegotiate though.

Billings asks if there’s a line item in the budget showing a subsidy? City Engineer Terry Gayman says no.

O’Rourke asks if they vote against this motion, what happens next? Staff says the current terms would continue, and either the City or Enbridge can being an order through the OEB to extend the current agreement.

Comments? Gibson says he wants to support the staff recommendation because it’s his understanding is that the OEB protects the consumer, and the revenue goes up with the growth of customers. He acknowledges that revenues are going up, but they’re clear on their website that some of that is driven by the carbon tax. He’s not saying that’s right or wrong, but that’s the reason.

Gibson says if the private members’ bill passes it will have a material impact on a regulated industry, and any new costs will be accounted by the OEB at the next rate review. He’s not an MPP, and this will impact ratepayers in the future.

Councillor Caton says that we tax all sorts of things that impact our health, like cigarettes, so taxing things that impact climate change is of that piece. If the legislation changes, it’s completely fair to collect the income as other provinces do, but either way we pay and they would rather pay for something that benefits the future.

O’Rourke says things are changing so quickly that she can’t support a 20-year contract and that should be flagged. The City charges all kinds of user fees and believes this is a signal that will make ONgov taking a closer look. This will not change things tomorrow, but it should kickstart a conversation.

Caron (in response to Gibson) says it maybe the case that ratepayers are impacted, but that will be more transparent. We’re supposed to be disincentivising fossil fuel use.

Allt says it’s important to recognise environmental consideration, and this should be seen as a cost to people who don’t use gas that he thinks *are* paying a subsidy. There are certain things that are up to the ONgov, but they can send a message.

Billings says Gibson is being realistic, if the act changes, costs will go up and cost of living will go up. If they don’t pass clause #2, Enbridge will just appeal and they’ll end up paying anyway.

Busuttil says council needs to push back in a formal way.

Guthrie asks about the contract, it expires in May but how long might legislation take? DCAO Holmes says they don’t know. Guthrie asks if there’s any risk not making a decision today? Can they defer? Staff says they don’t have to make a decision today though they don’t want to speak to risk in the open session.

Guthrie says he will vote in favour of the recommendation, but he’s in favour of doing something more performative too. He doesn’t like the 20-year horizon, but he doesn’t like dumping staff time into this when it’s presently at a premium. He know what the outcome is going to be.

Councillor Chew says this is complicated, there are legal frameworks in place and he rejects the idea that they’re getting away “Scott free”. There may be inequities, but he doesn’t think it’s true the City is subsidising them. He also appreciates the intention of the private members’ bill and Caron’s efforts to educate.

Klassen thanks staff for the work and the back-and-forth. She says it was challenging to wrap her head around it, and there’s an opportunity here to send a small message.

Klassen adds that recommendations 3 and 4 are connected, and if 2 fails it will be moot. So on the 2-4 slate: the motion fails 3-10 with Guthrie, Billings and Gibson in favour.

So now we turn to Caron’s motions (keep in mind the first one is already passed):

Goller seconds. Caron says she asked in June when the agreement was do and started working with staff knowing that this is coming. Toronto and Ottawa have already passed something like this, like Heads and Beds levy, obsolete policy needs to change and Enbridge is not going to undertake those efforts on their own. Imagine entering a 20 year agreement on your old flip phone.

Caron says the difference is whether the City accepts the old terms of the franchise agreement or stands up and fights it. Our underground real estate has value. We charge right-of-way easements for patios, why not gas pipes? And then there’s the climate change questions to consider. And yes, this is about redistributing revenue too.

Caron says that this is a long game, if they do nothing now they will get nothing. So let’s do something.

Guthrie asks if staff any concerns/need for clarity on this? Holmes asks about “negotiate” because the OEB is regulated, what’s the process? Caron says that during conversations she would like to see the three points under recommendation #2 in the new agreement and if the negotiation is unsuccessful, let it fail so that the status quo continues till ordered by the OEB.

Holmes asks for a moment.

Staff says they understand the objective, but what about level of effort or timing? Does Holmes have discretion to say when they’re not successful. Caron says she wants to give Holmes discretion.

Guthrie asks if there should be amendment to give Holmes that clear authority? Holmes gives a thumbs up. Guthrie will type up that amendment and Busutill says she’ll second it.

Amendment in recommendation #2 (in bold) approved:

Guthrie says he’s always been in favour of this part, which is advocacy. In fact, cc’ing the Ontario Big City Mayors was his idea, and he still has issues with the 20-year framework. This makes sense and the timing is good with the private members’ bill.

Gibson says there were a lot of people agree at councillors voting against the staff recommendation and some of them voted against the staff recommendation here. He says it’s a teaching moment. Gas bills are going up, and the costs have double because of carbon tax. People experiencing housing crisis are going to get impacted the most and the rate at which we’re trying to change is already hurting people, and the federal government is even acknowledging that.

O’Rourke proposed an amendment to clause #3 about supporting the bill “in principal.” Doesn’t know how it might play out if ever municipality can negotiate its own rates, and there may be other impacts we don’t know about. Guthrie says he’ll second:

Caron says he’s understands why, but she’s voting against because she read the bill and it’s like one page. The amendment passes 8-5 with Allt, Caron, Caton, Downer, and Goller against.

O’Rourke says that this is about their responsibility to the corporation, and it’s assuming that there are a lot of changes coming to the environmental landscape in the years to come. She’s confident that Guelph won’t be the last.

Allt says he loves teachable moments! He thanks eMERGE, Caron, and the delegates. Twenty years is a long time, and his grandchildren will be voters by then. Fossil fuels had their time, but the time has passed.

Caton says the time for change is now when the contract is up, and we shouldn’t lock themselves into a new 20-year contract. No public feedback on the staff recommendation here, but it’s clear the community stands behind this.

Caron says ditto to the community and to keep up the good work spreading this around.

The amended slate of motions is approved 11-2, Gibson and Billings only dissenters.

Second and final item: Blue Box Transition Status Update. Nectar Tampacopoulos, GM of Environmental Services and Cameron Walsh, Division Manager of Solid Waste Resources, will present.

2025 is a transition year:

• Circular Materials, through Waste Management Corporation of Canada, begins managing Blue Box collection in Guelph
• Circular Materials, through City of Guelph, provides depot collection at the WRIC
• Guelph’s Materials Recovery Facility ceases processing
• Non-eligible sources are served on interim basis during user fee study

The full implementation period will begin in 2026:

-List of recyclable materials list expands and harmonizes across Ontario
-Blue Box expands to eligible properties not previously collected by City
-Non-eligible sources managed and funded independent of Circular Materials system

The six key elements of the transition:

Next steps:

• As part of the transition plan, continue to monitor and participate in the transition rollout across the province
• Support staff transition
• Finalize sale of assets
• Roll out communications and supports
• January 1st, 2025, is Guelph’s transition date

One delegate for this matter, Greg Dorval… Who isn’t here. Moving on.

O’Rourke/Allt move the recommendation: That the report entitled Blue Box Transition Status Update, dated November 5, 2024, be received.

O’Rourke asks how robust the communications strategy is, there’s a fractured communications market in Guelph. Walsh says there’s a multi-pronged approach through the end of the year, and then they relaunch in January. He knows getting saturation is important so they’re trying to back things up with customer service. The intent is to make this seamless, starting with keeping current collection days (with later times) and the focusing on additional blue box collection items.

O’Rourke says that about 30 per cent more items will be able to go in blue bin. Walsh says it’s 25. This will be more of a focus as they count down to 2026.

Allt asks if we’re going to be seeing expansion of blue bin? Walsh says it will be the same, they’re buying the usual compliment and expand with growth.

Allt: So no condos using private service.

Allt asks about diversion rate changes. Walsh intensifies a 25 per cent increase, which will be a 75 per cent total diversion rate.

Klassen asks how a resident would go about getting a new blue cart and other potential day-to-day changes? Walsh says you would call the service provider, but if you do call the City they can refer you. And any changes will be communicated though them too with support from the City.

Klassen asks about changes downtown. Walsh says they will remain the same as now for 2025, and then council will get options following the user fee review, which comes back in Q3 next year. The aim will be to make that transition as seamless as possible too.

Recommendation approved unanimously.

Announcements? Guthrie reminds everyone about his budget town halls this week.

Meeting adjourned.

END OF RECAP!