-
Working together with our community
Special Council Agenda The Corporation of Norfolk County
January 26, 2021 3:00 p.m.
Council Chambers*
Live Stream:
www.norfolkcounty.ca/watch-norfolk-county-meetings/
*Due to Covid-19 restrictions, there is no public access to
Council Chambers.Proceedings are web-streamed live and archived on
the County’s website. Deputationsare presented electronically.
5
1. Approval of Agenda/Changes to the Agenda
2. Disclosure of Pecuniary Interest
3. Deputations
4. Communications
A) 2021 Budget DeliberationsRe: South Walsingham Transfer
Station
George KinnearJanice LalondeJudy & Robert MabeeG
ChisholmDarlene ElligsenRosemarie CookPat MontroseMary
SaundersDanielle PierceBill MontroseKim CookWendy RowenStu
MackenzieBill and Sharon MacIntyreJohn and Patti MoorePhyllis
CalliganGord Christmas
https://www.norfolkcounty.ca/government/watch-norfolk-county-meetings/https://www.norfolkcounty.ca/government/watch-norfolk-county-meetings/
-
Jim Billo Peter Langer
11
37
39
41
B) 2021 Budget DeliberationsRe: By-Law Enforcement
Gaye HornellPatricia SpencerDaphne SchuylerGeorgina McLarenJamie
and Rebecca SuprunEd DertingerJim and Barb BeamishOrv SlackDebbie
FranceKalju and Merike MerimetsAnn and John FitzsimonDave
NicolleGary ArmstrongBeth and Ken SmithBarbara Taylor GagneGar
PurmaJan and Wilma HoogendoornGreg FranceRandy and Grace VisserJack
and Lyn HallemaCam Carter, Downtown Simcoe BIA
C) 2021 Budget Deliberations
Re: Bulk Item Pickup
John & Janet Sage
D) 2021 Budget Deliberations
Re: Heritage and Culture
Elizabeth Price, Multicultural History Society of Ontario
E) 2021 Budget Deliberations
Re: Arena Rental Rates
Debbie and Rick Maley
-
43
65
67
73
5. Reports of Committees
A) Budget Committee Minutes - January 6-7,12,19, 2021
6. Staff Reports/Discussion Items
A) Verbal DiscussionRe: Parking Downtown Simcoe
7. Motions
8. Notices of Motion
A) Motion to Reconsider - Councillor Van PaassenRe: Direction on
Hastings Drive Litigation Matter
9. By-Laws
A) By-Law 2021-11Being a By-Law to establish a Water and
Wastewater Billing and Collection Policy.
B) By-Law 2021-12Being a By-Law to Amend By-Law 2020-101 to
Establish User Fees and Service Charges.
10. General Announcements
11. Closed Session
A) County Solicitor MemoRe: Investigation Update
Pursuant to Section 239 (2) (b), (e) and (f) of the Municipal
Act 2001, as amended asthe subject matter pertains to personal
matters about an identifiable individual,including municipal or
local board employees, litigation or potential litigation,
includingmatters before administrative tribunals, affecting the
municipality or local board, advicethat is subject to
solicitor-client privilege including communications necessary for
thatpurpose.
89
12. Confirming By-Law
A) By-Law 2021-13Being a By-Law to Confirm the Proceedings of
the Council of Norfolk Countyat this Special Council Meeting Held
on the 26th Day of January, 2021.
-
13. Adjournment
Contact Information
Andy Grozelle, County Clerk
[email protected]
Meeting schedules available online at
http://www.norfolkcounty.ca/council_meetings/
-
Name George Kinnear
Please provide any further information I strongly oppose the
closing of the South Walsingham disposal sight. The result I fear
will be that ALL backroads of Norfolk will be littered with illegal
dumping. What tourist or Norfolk resident wants to see the
beautiful roads and natural sights of Ontario’s Garden covered in
garbage? Don’t let Norfolk become aTHIRD WORLD country!
Name Janice Lalonde
Please provide any further information Do NOT close down our
transfer station on concession 3. Our dirches will be a mess with
garbage if you take it away. I need a transfer station close to
home. That is what our raised taxes pay for.
Name Judy & Robert Mabee
Please provide any further information Please do not close on
the 3rd concession of South Walsingham. People are throwing enough
garbage in the ditches now and large items. Maybe you could take
vehicles away from county workers. Way to many on the roads. Where
are they all going ? Maybe decrease the numbers of emoyees leaning
on their shovels at work sites. Most jobs appear to be over
staffed. Does everything have to be in Simcoe? Hello we are here in
the large west region and we pay taxes to ! Let's get some action
going on our causeway and bridge before a crisis occurs with the
amount of people living on the Point
Name G Chisholm
Please provide any further information Do Not Close The
S.Waltsingham Dump. There will be dumping in every ditch for 30
klms around it.
5
-
Name Darlene Elligsen
Please provide any further information With regards to the South
Walsingham transfer station...please keep it open. It is a sensible
decision. If the county charged less, it would encourage those
dumping everywhere in the ditches to perhaps use it. Look at the
Halton model. $5.00 and you could use the dump. It has likely
increased since I lived in Oakville but it was user friendly and
used. Do not close this site.
Name Rosemarie Cook
Please provide any further information I just want to reinforce
the importance of the transfer station on Concession 3. We use it
all the time during the summer months. Please do NOT close this
location.
Name Pat Montrose
Please provide any further information Concerned to hear that
council is considering closing the SW transfer station Walsingham.
We need this transfer to remain open. Summer populations increase
and I do not want to see people throwing garbage, items into
ditches. We are tired of having council wanting everything
centralized to Simcoe and Port Dover.
Name Mary Saunders
Please provide any further information DO NOT close the South
Walsingham Transfer Station
6
-
Name Danielle Pierce
Please provide any further information With regards to the
recent slim margin vote to maintain the Walsingham dump station, I
am a property owner in Long Point (since 2001) and believe it is
imperative to keep this landfill open. I personally have used it on
a regular and ongoing basis over the last 20 years for all manner
of household items, renovations, tires, property leaves, brush,
etc. Closing this most basic community service not only eliminates
access to yet another important tax payer service but also puts tax
payers in a bind for ongoing and larger waste needs. Per the result
of the closure of the facility during Covid this past spring 2020,
having no local facility open encouraged dumping of many and sundry
waste articles in the ditches, and properties along the
concessions, as well as in the waterways - thereby polluting a
designated world biosphere and natural landscape marketed in
Norfolk as “Ontario’s Garden”. Pictures and comments were posted
regularly on FB pages throughout this time. Don’t do it!
Name Bill Montrose
Please provide any further information Do not close the SW
transfer station.
Name Kim Cook
Please provide any further information Please do not close the
transfer station on concession 3 in Walsingham
Name Wendy Rowen
Please provide any further information Please do not close the
transfer station dump in Walsingham, just outside of Port
Rowan...
7
-
Name Stu Mackenzie
Please provide any further information Re. Walsingham transfer
closure. Closing the station may result in short-term savings, but
will result in greater problems down the road and further
marginalize communities. Lowering the barrier to disposal plays an
important function in keeping waste out of people’s yards, in
ditches, ravines, and woodlands of our beloved county. Having to
drive to Simcoe (public) or Dover (private) increases cost and time
involved in waste mgmt for most constituents. Instead, why not
address waste mgmt as a whole and reduce pick up to every other
week, or some seasonal schedule to address summer peaks. The notion
of weekly pickup is a fairly privileged concept that is not
necessary. Reducing this schedule would result in immediate
savings, be applied homogeneously across the county, and create
incentive for household waste reduction, organization, composting,
and reduced packaging.
The County’s financial problems can’t be solved with nitpicking
- we need bold, innovative, creative leadership.
Name Bill and Sharon MacIntyre
Please provide any further information As a seasonal resident at
long point we use limited township services, however one important
service that we occasionally used is walsingham transfer station
Please do not close it
Name John and Patti Moore
Please provide any further information This is to request you do
not close the South Walsingham Transfer Station. We have to run to
Simcoe for everything. Please leave it open, even with limited
hours to save us more trips. Concerns it will lead to more roadside
and creek dumping of waste than there is now.
8
-
Name Phyllis Calligan
Please provide any further information I do not wish to have the
transfer station closed to the public. Im on Long Point.
Name Gord Christmas
Please provide any further information Concerning the closure of
the transfer station on Com.3 S/W . The impact on Long Point would
be considerable as well as other rural taxpayers
Name Tracey Burbie
Please provide any further information Do not close our Dump on
the third of walsingham its needed in our area - everyone uses this
dump from frogmore to port rowan and langton. Keep it open
Name Jim Billo
Please provide any further information Keep our weigh station
open. I already drive from port Rowan. Don't want to have to go to
simcoe
Name Peter Langer
Please provide any further information Please keep our transfer
station open
9
-
10
-
Wednesday, January 20, 2021
Norfolk County
Re: Councils Decision to Reduce staff at Bylaw Department
Open Letter to Members of Norfolk County Council and Residents
of Norfolk County
I wish this letter to be a matter of public record.
I request that all Councilors get a copy. Thank you
I have just read that five (5) members of Norfolk Council have
voted to reduce the bylaw department staff level by one. I would
ask members of Norfolk County Council to reconsider I do not
support reducing the bylaw staff. Based on various newspaper
articles over the past year the issue of non licensed and
overproducing “licensed” cannabis growers in Norfolk County is out
of control and having less staff will not solve the issue of
neighbourhoods having to deal with the problems of these
operations, such as smell, noise, lights, traffic and decrease in
property assessments.
Obviously the members who voted to decrease the staff have not
had the issue in their own back yard yet, but it will happen to you
or someone you know if you do not keep on top of it with sufficient
front line in the field by-law officers.
Warm regards,
Gaye Hornell
11
-
I wish this letter to be a matter of Public Record I request
that all councilors get a copy please.
While I do understand the need to be fiscally responsible in
this 2021 budget, I also recognize that such decisions require due
consideration. The proposed reduction in the number of bylaw
enforcement officers is a very serious concern requiring further
consideration.
Bylaws are developed to create the community and maintain it.
Bylaw officers are the frontline workers contacted by the
community's residents who are dealing with a perceived violation of
the established bylaws. This is a unique and essential role in the
maintenance of an orderly society by following established
procedures to reduce the vulnerability of the residents and the
liability of the community's governing body.
It was very troubling to hear in the recording of council's
proceedings on January 12, 2021, that while Norfolk Council members
acknowledge that the Bylaw enforcement department effectively over
the past year increased efficiency and speedier resolution of
complaints, it is now proposed that the position of a front line
enforcement officer should be cut so a message could be sent to the
union that would find efficiencies in the scheduling within the
collective agreement. Furthermore, I was very deeply concerned and
disappointed upon hearing Mayor Chopp state their (front line bylaw
officers) pay did not warrant the remuneration they received.
This reduction in bylaw staff is being proposed while knowing
that the number of complaints received from the community over the
past four years has dramatically increased by over 200% (714
increasing to 1819 in 2020). This is expected to further increase
in 2021.
This reduction is proposed while illegal cannabis operations are
increasing in the county with the bylaw enforcement office the
first point of contact by the residents negatively impacted.
OPP news reports advise that there is a criminal element heavily
involved in some of these illegal cannabis operations and our bylaw
enforcement front line officers are required to deal with these
individuals. Have Norfolk Council members considered the costs of
dealing with the ongoing legalities of such illegal operations both
within the county operations as well as the courts? Have they
considered the role of strong Bylaw enforcement in reducing these
costs? What is the 'opportunity cost' of the cutback?
I do not agree with the proposed staff reduction in the bylaw
enforcement department.
Respectfully,
Patricia Spencer
Simcoe ON
12
-
19 January 2021
I wish this letter to be a matter of Public record
I request that all Councillors get a copy.
Councils Decision to Reduce Staff Levels at Bylaw Dept.
I have observed the 2021 budget discussions and understand the
challenge it is for Norfolk County Council. I note that some
members of council support the idea of reducing the staffing levels
of the bylaw department.
Having read the Norfolk County website the following points must
be noted;
Purpose of bylaw enforcement is
1/ Develop and administer Norfolk County’s bylaws by providing
TIMELY response to bylaw complaints
2/ Enforce Norfolk County bylaws to ensure compliance in a
TIMELY manner using a professional, non-biased approach avoiding
the need for court action
During the year 2020 complaints received by the bylaw department
had increased by approximately 200%. The increase in the number of
complaints in Norfolk is consistent with other areas of
Ontario.
Norfolk County will continue to face additional complaints that
illegal Cannabis cultivation and Covid 19 will bring during the
year 2021. With a 200% increase in complaints and a clear
indication the number of complaints are going to continue to climb
during 2021, how can a reduction of front line officers be
justified? How is this going to assist in the TIMELY response to
bylaw complaints?
It is my understanding that adding a supervisor position to the
bylaw dept. does not equate to one addition full time position. It
is only .5 of a full time position. This indicates that the
suggestion of eliminating one front line officer would result in a
saving of $100,000.00 is NOT accurate.
On the positive note it is encouraging to see that staff in the
clerk’s office is doing some office related duties for the bylaw
dept. It is also encouraging to see the overall efficiencies in the
bylaw dept. have improved with the addition of a supervisor.
All of these steps that have resulted in some improvements will
NOT significantly make a difference on the front lines. Considering
a 200% increase in the number of complaints received by the bylaw
dept., it is the front line officer that must investigate and then
attempt to arrive at a satisfactory resolution for those involved.
These efforts require time!
13
-
To Mayor Chopp, Councillors Tom Masschaele, Chris Van Paassen,
Ian Rabbits and Ryan Taylor I would encourage you to reconsider
your support for the reduction of front line officers in the bylaw
dept. It is my hope that when you review the facts that were
presented during the budget deliberations you will agree common
sense does not support this idea.
Daphne Schuyler
Waterford
14
-
Dear Mayor and Councillors,
I wish this letter to be a matter of public record.
I would like it known that I am very disappointed at the
decision to reduce staff in the by-law department.
With this reduction in staff it will be very difficult to
implement the 5 point plan to address the illegal cannabis
operations that are currently in Norfolk County. This program
operated by the York Regional Police who work with the local by-law
departments has proven to be effective. I am not understanding why
Norfolk County Council are not helping to implement this program.
The number of illegal cannabis operations in Norfolk County is
becoming outrageous.
Please reconsider your decision to reduce the staff at the
by-law office.
Georgina McLaren Waterford
15
-
I am writing this today to object to the potential cuts to the
Norfolk County bylaw division. Mr. Millson along with his division
have been extremely responsive and helpful with many issues facing
downtown Simcoe, my personal property in Port Dover, and the issues
we faced with Seadoo rentals on Lake Erie this past summer. I
believe that cuts to the division and his team, will result in
underservicing, and more issues will reappear. Mr. Millson has been
exceptionally approachable and receptive to issues that I have
brought to bylaw, and I feel that he is finally moving this
department forward after years of neglect.
Thanks Jamie and Rebecca Suprun
suprunwealth.com iaprivatewealth.com
Jamie Suprun, Hon. B.Comm Senior Investment Advisor, Executive
Director - Private Client Group Suprun Wealth Management iA Private
Wealth, a division of Industrial Alliance Securities Inc. 49
Robinson Street, Simcoe, ON N3Y 1W5
[email protected]
16
-
Dear Council Members,
I trust this letter will be included in the public records. It
has been brought to my attention that council plans to reduce it’s
number of by law officers. I feel this move is misguided and hope
council reconsiders before the final vote. Presently we live 60
metres from a designated cannabis operation that grows thousands of
cannabis plants in a massive 3 acre greenhouse. We have been
informed by our by law officer that he has reason to believe it is
operated by a criminal organization. They purchased this greenhouse
knowing full well they were in violation of the county set back
requirements but went ahead anyways. These operations need to be
stopped and by reducing the number of by law officers trying to
enforce county by laws is moving in the wrong direction. It’s time
council got serious about enforcing their by laws before it’s too
late. The time to act is NOW ! Why bother making by laws if they
are not going to be enforced? This erodes the public confidence in
our institutions. So frustrated.
Sincerely,
Ed Dertinger
Sent from my iPad
17
-
LETTER TO COUNCIL @ NORFOLK COUNTY RE: DECISION TO REDUCE STAFF
AT THE BY-LAW DEPARTMENT.
January 18, 2021.
We wish this letter to be of public record.
We request that ALL Councillors get a copy.
OPEN LETTER TO MEMBERS OF COUNCIL AND RESIDENTS OF NORFOLK
COUNTY.
It is our concern that 5 members of the Norfolk Council have
voted to reduce the BY-LAW STAFF by one under the pretence to save
the taxpayers $100,000.
We would ask members of the Norfolk Council to consider the
facts that have been presented.
Mainly, there has been an increase in the number of complaints
received by the bylaw enforcement to 200 percent in the past
year.
Last year a supervisor was hired in the By-law department
because of these escalating needs arising. Some councillors voted
to reduce the frontline workers because a supervisor was hired.
However, a supervisor is not hired as a frontline worker where the
demands to serve the public are greater than ever.
Clerical staff are attempting to handle this 200 percent
increase of complaints to the By-law Department. These staff are
not frontline workers and thus their ability to meet the needs is
not enough. Frontline By-law officers must do field investigations
and to attempt to resolve the issues.
We commend highly Councillor Columbus, Councillor Martin, and
Councillor Huffman for recognizing the facts of this issue and
responding with common sense.
To the other Councillors, Rabbits, Masschaele, Van Passen,
Taylor and Mayor Chopp who voted to reduce the frontline By-Law
officers please reconsider to reduce staff from
18
-
other departments such as Finance which , in our opinion would
be less impacting than decreasing the frontline By-Law officers
right now in 2021 combatting major issues in our Norfolk County at
this time.
We as citizens,of Norfolk County understand the need to save
taxpayers money. However, it seems there must be a better way to
budget this considering the MAJOR ISSUES at hand including
operations of ILLEGAL CANNIBAS and COVID 19 which require
maintaining if not increasing staffing in the By-Law
Department.
Sincerely
Jim and Barb Beamish
Waterford, Ontario
19
-
15 January 2021 I wish this letter to be a matter of public
record.
I request that all Councillors get a copy. Thank You
Open Letter to Members of Norfolk County Council and Residents
of Norfolk County
Councils Decision to Reduce staff at Bylaw Department
I have just read that five (5) members of Norfolk Council have
voted to reduce the bylaw department staff level by one. This is
being proposed under the pretence as a means of saving the tax
payers of Norfolk County $100,000.00.
I would ask members of Norfolk County Council to consider the
facts that have been presented.
1/ During the past year complaints received by the bylaw
department have increased by 200 %.
2/ Andy Grozelle stated the Ombudsman office indicates the trend
in other areas show an increase by 200-300 % in bylaw complaints.
The increase of bylaw complaints as seen in Norfolk County is
consistent when compared to other areas. There was evidence
presented that would suggest these numbers are not going down.
Considering this County continues to deal with illegal cannabis and
Covid- 19 issues these numbers will go up as noted by Councillor
Mike Columbus.
3/ During the past year a supervisor has been hired which has
resulted in efficiencies within the department.
4/ Some members of Council justified their decision to reduce
the number of front line officers at the bylaw department because a
supervisor had been hired during this past year.
5/ Responsibilities of a supervisor are to ensure the work is
completed and completed in a timely fashion. It is not the
responsibility of a supervisor to do the front line work. If a
supervisor is doing front line work, he is not supervising!
6/ Some bylaw clerical duties are being completed by staff in
the clerk’s office and for this I commend your efforts, however
considering the number of complaints received by the bylaw office
has increased by 200 % I remind you clerical staff members are not
front line officers. Front line officers must do the field
investigations and attempt to resolve the complaint.
I would ask members of Norfolk County Council to consider how
they would feel if they were a member of the Norfolk County bylaw
dept. You have just completed the year 2020 as an employee of
Norfolk County during which time you saw your work load increase
200 %. You didn’t complain but you did the work the best you could
during the year.
20
-
Then elected officials representing your employer come to you
and say, “Not good enough”! Despite you seeing a 200 % increase in
work load, we are going to reduce your staffing level!
Is it any wonder Norfolk County continues to witness good hard
working dedicated employees of Norfolk County make the decision to
work in other municipalities.
I am glad to see that Councillor Columbus recognized that
Norfolk County should increase staffing levels in the area of bylaw
enforcement based on a 200 % increase in the work load in the dept.
It is refreshing to see and witness an elected official in Norfolk
County making decisions based on fact and common sense.
It is refreshing to see that Councillor Martin expressed the
same concerns and stated in good conscience she could not support
the reduction of staff numbers in the bylaw dept. Councillor Martin
put forth an alternative that did not receive the support from some
of her colleagues. Another member of Council making decisions based
on fact and common sense.
It is refreshing that Councillor Huffman recognized that
reducing staff levels in the bylaw dept did not make sense based on
fact and common sense.
As I sit down and write this letter I have just read an article
in the Detroit News where the former Governor of Michigan has been
held accountable for his decisions he made related to the City of
Flint dating back to 2014 – 2015. Criminal charges have been filed
against the governor.
During this time 2014 – 2015 the city of Flint Michigan was in
financial trouble. Decisions were made to use water from the Flint
River while a regional pipeline from Lake Huron was under
construction. This decision was based on the sole purpose to save
money!
I make reference to this incident because the residents of Flint
Michigan are still coping with the effects of the decisions made by
their elected officials. Decisions that were made in an effort to
save money with little to no consideration of the other facts that
were present at the time.
To the five members of Council that voted to reduce the number
of front line officers in our bylaw dept. please reconsider! We all
want to save money. We all want responsible government, however,
when elected officials make decisions that are not based on fact or
common sense, responsible government is NOT what the people get in
return.
As a resident of Norfolk I want to see an effective and
efficient government, however, decisions should be based on fact
and common sense. Complaints received by the bylaw dept have
increased 200 %, not 2 % or 20% but 200%.
21
-
To Mayor Chopp, Councillors Tom Masschaele, Chris Van Passen,
Ian Rabbits, and Ryan Taylor I remind you to consider the legal
ramifications that must be considered when facts and common sense
are ignored. In the event Norfolk County is required to defend
itself in any legal proceedings, 100,000.00 is going to be an
insignificant amount. Take a lesson from the State of Michigan and
the position elected representatives put themselves and their state
in for the sole purpose of saving money! When facts and common
sense are sacrificed for money, the circumstances can be
tragic!
Orv Slack
Waterford
22
-
Comments on Proposed Bylaw Staff Reductions 18 January 2021 I
wish this letter to be a matter of Public Record I request that all
councilors get a copy, Thanks Kindly. Having read that it is the
intention of some members of Norfolk County Council to reduce the
staffing level at the bylaw department, I wish to share some
observations and concerns I have. First some excerpts from the
Norfolk County website. Purpose of by-law enforcement 1/ Develop
and administer Norfolk County’s by-laws by providing timely
responses to by-law complaints. 2/ Enforce Norfolk County By-laws
to ensure compliance in a timely manner using a professional,
non-biased approach avoiding the need for court action. Complaints
registered stem from a number of items ranging from clean yard,
snow, ice removal, animal control, dog barking, parking, zoning,
property standards, cannabis, signs, Covid 19 and more. A cut in
services will have a definite ripple affect on this team’s ability
to complete all types of complaints effectively. The numbers of
complaints that members the bylaw department have required to deal
with during the past few years have continued to grow. 2017 - 714
2018 – 1211 2019 – 1115 2020 - 1819 Based on the trend of the past
four years one should anticipate there will be an increase in the
number of bylaw complaints in 2021. The work load is currently
being handled by a 4 person team with 1 team member devoted to
illegal cannabis issues. With the addition of a supervisor this has
produced commendable results. However, the deletion of front line
officers will have a significant impact on the timely response of
front line officers as they address complaints. Having watched the
budget discussions I note that some members of council suggested
that when a supervisor was added to the bylaw team, this resulted
in the staffing level at the bylaw department to increase by one.
This is misleading. Considering staff adjustments that have been
made previously, the supervisor role was held with a .5 (full time
employee) compliment. This was later amended to give Mr. Millson a
full time supervisor role. Currently the complement is only ahead
by .5 of a full time employee!
23
-
Observing the budget discussions Mayor Chopp made some comments
that were very telling and caused me great concern. Mayor Chopp
stated the position of a front line enforcement officer should be
cut so a message could be sent to the union that would find
efficiencies in the scheduling within the collective agreement.
Furthermore, I was concerned upon hearing Mayor Chopp state their
(front line bylaw officers) pay did not warrant the remuneration
they received. The question begs to be asked, is the proposed cuts
to the bylaw department really about saving money or is it about
sending a message to the union? The illegal cannabis cultivation
issue will continue to be a concern in Norfolk County in 2021. In
2018 Norfolk County had 30 cannabis sites. On Oct 7/2020 Health
Canada representatives spoke with members of the Norfolk Police
Services Board. Health Canada stated Norfolk County has 525
cannabis registrations. They did not break down the numbers of
personal to designated prescriptions, however, based on this
information Norfolk County could have as many as 130 designated
growers. These numbers continue to grow today. It is a well known
fact that there is a criminal element heavily involved in some of
these operations and our bylaw front line officers are required to
deal with these individuals. I wish to thank Councillors Martin,
Columbus and Huffman for your common sense. I hope that Mayor
Chopp, Councillors Van Paasen, Taylor, Rabbits and Masschaele will
see and understand the merits of not reducing the staffing levels
of the bylaw department. I do not agree with this budget proposal
reduction and the suggestion that eliminating a position in the
bylaw department equates to a savings of approximately $100,000.00
for Norfolk. Thanks kindly Debbie France Simcoe, Ontario
24
-
Please do not reduce staff at the by law dept. Not only have
complaints to them have increased by 200% during the pandemic.
Hopefully with the vaccine this problem will pass, but the illegal
cannabis being grown in Norfolk County will ramp up with the warmer
weather and continue to affect neighourhoods for many years. This
has been ongoing for a long time and needs a better solution such
as the successful 5 Point Plan of York Reg. Police which has
presented to our PSB on Sept 23,2020. This needs serious
considerations and requires BY LAW to be affective, There are 5
greenhouse ones in my area alone!!! Kalju and Merike Merimets
25
-
We are alarmed and disappointed that several council members
have voted to reduce the bylaw staff by one in a cost cutting
measure. In light of what is occurring re: illegal growing of
cannabis in our area we believe this to be a short sighted
decision. Please rethink this. We would appreciate a copy of this
email being sent to all council members. Sincerely, Ann and John
Fitzsimon. Sent from my iPad Sent from my iPad
26
-
Greetings, Happy New Year and thank you for your time and
efforts in managing our great Norfolk County during these
challenging times. I read with significant concern that Council is
proposing to reduce the number of Bylaw Enforcement Officers as you
debate the upcoming budget. Amongst the many subjects that bylaw
enforcement has to investigate is the ILLEGAL CANNABIS CULTIVATION
in our County which has now become the home to approximately 150
illegal operations, the #1 county by far in Ontario and probably
all of Canada. This unattended subject has reduced many of our
County residence's property values and quality of outdoor life and
this needs to be urgently attended to by County Council, the Bylaw
Enforcement Department and the OPP. Please reconsider any reduction
in the Bylaw Enforcement Department and please get serious about
this ILLEGAL CANNABIS CULTIVATION crisis in our Norfolk County.
Sincerely and please take care, Dave Nicolle, Wilsonville
27
-
I wish this letter to be a matter of public record. The purpose
of this letter is to urge Norfolk council not to reduce the number
of front line bylaw officers for the year 2021. With
calls-for-service 170 per cent higher than 2019, as noted in a
report given to council by Jim Millson, supervisor of bylaw
enforcement, it doesn’t make sense to cut down the number of bylaw
enforcement staff. One of my main concerns however, is the need for
bylaw officers to help control the illegal growth, distribution,
and use of cannabis in Norfolk County. I remember when cannabis was
first legalized. The Honourable Bill Blair, former police chief of
Toronto, was the Federal Liberal Cabinet Minister responsible for
administering the Cannabis Act. Mr. Blair said something to the
effect that cannabis had to be legalized so growing, distribution,
and use of cannabis could be controlled. From the information I
have read, there is still a long way to go in Norfolk County. I am
not sure what role Norfolk County is expected to play. But, if the
present number of bylaw officers are needed, please do not cut
their numbers. As well, with Covid-19 still a huge problem, I do
not think it is the right time to be cutting bylaw enforcement
staff. Hopefully the Covid-19 pandemic will not be a problem in
2022 and then maybe one less bylaw officer will suffice. I for one
am willing to have a small increase in my property taxes if it will
help control the illegal growth of cannabis in Norfolk County. I do
not envy the job of Norfolk Council trying to set a budget for 2021
that will satisfy the majority of tax payers. Sincerely, Gary
Armstrong
28
-
We wish this letter to be a matter of public record. We add our
voices to those who object to the reduction of the by-law
enforcement effort of Norfolk County. It should be increased not
decreased. Any industry including Agriculture should be much more
responsive to the established by-laws of the community. If by-laws
are regularly ignored there is not much use having any. Flagrant
disregard of by-law requirements for cannabis grow operations
simply makes it easier to feed the black market and at the same
time pollute the environment around the grow-op sites. Beth and Ken
Smith
29
-
I wish this letter to be a matter of public record.
I am very concerned that the finance committee is planning to
reduce the number of front line bylaw officers. It has been
reported that the bylaw complaints in Norfolk have increased by
200% during the past year. I do realize that the present situation
has contributed to the voicing of many complaints that could have
been resolved privately. Other factors that have impacted the
increased complaints are population growth and illegal cannabis
operations in Norfolk.
The illegal cannabis operations in Norfolk have required a
strong bylaw enforcement team and will continue to do so.
I cannot imagine that Norfolk County plans to withdraw services
that are necessary to combat illegal cannabis cultivation. My hope
is that there is consideration being given to another tactic that
will compensate for the reduction of frontline bylaw staff.
Thank you for opposing the suggestion to reduce staffing.
Barbara Taylor Gagne
Waterford ON
30
-
Gary Purmal Port Dover, Ontario
Sunday January 19th 2021
Attn: Kristal Chopp, Mayor & Norfolk City Council ( Please
note that I wish this letter to be a matter of public record )
I wish to address an issue which was voted on by the finance
committee on January 12th
2021 which effectively reduced the front line by-law enforcement
in Norfolk County. I understand these are incredibly tough times
for any government on any level to showanything but fiscal
restraint in their respective administrations. I must however,
point out thatcuts to certain areas are ill advised and may even be
considered irresponsible. Such is the case with respect to
enforcement of the laws of society be they IndictableCriminal
offences, or municipal by-laws. It is the perception of law and
order that prevents chaos and anarchy from ruling the world.Once
this perception is reduced, then boundaries are crossed by those
who might otherwise bereigned in. I believe strongly that there has
been a steady reduction in the rule of law and beliefthat there are
no longer the resources to control crime effectively. I further
beleive that this fact isat least partly to blame for the rampant
explosion of gun violence we see today, not just in the bigcities,
but even with some incidences here in Norfolk County. I have been
told that by-law complaints have increased 200% over 2020, and yet
councilfeels it can reduce the workload of front line officers. If
community complaints are not addressedefficiently, then perceptions
may lead people to the belief that they are on their own and
tocorrect situations themselves. This is a very dangerous
situation. Even more seriously, it is my perception, right or
wrong, that both the Federal and Provincialgovernments are
reluctant to tackle the very serious problems we face regarding
criminal gangs,who come from some distance, ignoring what laws
there are governing the legalized marijuanaindustry. Norfolk County
Council, to their credit, have tackled the situation the only way
they can bythe implementation of strict by-laws to curb the abuse.
Is it reasonable then to curb anyenforcement we can provide to
control these armed hoods who are working with apparentimpunity to
desecrate and bleed this great community which I have been so proud
to call homefor the past 25 years? It is my strong hope that this
council will reflect on the potential damage any reduction in
by-law enforcement may cause, versus the money saved, and consider
a reversal of this decision.
Respectfully:Gar Purmal
31
-
I wish this Letter to be a Matter of Public Record Dear Members,
It is our understanding that there are plans to reduce the number
of front line bylaw officers by one person. In light of the added
work load that comes with controlling and fighting the production
and trading of illegally produced cannabis in our county we do not
think that this is a good thing to do. So .....the workload goes up
and the number of people available to control it goes down? How can
this make sense. At the same time we realize that it was Norfolk
County who allowed all these cannabis producers to start producing
a crop that causes so many problems. By that, we mean, health wise
(addiction) and the attraction of criminality. Many of these
production “facilities” produce very bad odour, are not well kept
and attract people that don’t think twice of using their guns
(which seem to be readily available). Norfolk County issued these
“businesses” their permits and cashed in on the fees applicable. On
top of that many of these greenhouse operations were purchased at
inflated prices and I am sure the county collects taxes on these
increased values (they always do) but in return the county does not
want to spend any of that increased revenue to police them. For
these reasons we strongly disagree with the proposed reduction in
staff as proposed. We urge you to reconsider and decide not to take
away any staff members from this very important issue. Sincerely
yours, Jan & Wilma Hoogendoorn
32
-
To whom it may concern, I'm writing to express my concern on the
proposal to reduce bylaw officers in Norfolk county (with the final
vote being Jan 26). I, myself have seen the benefit that bylaw
offers bring the county and feel a reduction, while a short term
cost savings, will ultimately do more harm than good to the quality
of service this department can provide to Norfolk county. I ask
that you please take this into account when making your final vote.
Thank you for your time and consideration. It is truly appreciated.
I wish this letter to be a matter of Public Record and that a copy
be sent to all councillors and mayor. Take care, Greg France
Simcoe, Ontario
33
-
I wish this letter to be a matter of Public Record I request
that all councillors get a copy, Please and Thank you.
We do not agree to the proposed decrease in staff to Norfolk’s
bylaw team. The Reformer stated on January 14/21 that there was an
increase in bylaw complaints from 2017 - 2020 by 714 to 1819. Over
these 4 years that is an increase of 255%. In his report,
Supervisor of Bylaw, Jim Millson stated that complaints through
September to December 2020 more than doubled from in 2019.
Enforcement officers investigate issues relating to clean yard
policies, dog barking, parking, Covid 19, zoning, cannabis and
more.
Adding a supervisor has produced commendable results but the
deletion of a “boots to the ground front line enforcement officer”
will have a significant impact on the improvement of service
accomplished by the efforts of Mr. Millson this year.
The largest issues currently with the designated medicinal
cannabis grower can be evidenced by the OPP Press release of
January 6, 2021 copied beneath.
Ontario Provincial Police - News / Nouvelles
How can we ever gain control of the complaints stemming from
these operations unless we have a bylaw team that has a complement
of staff to do their jobs? These employees deserve the support of
their council to effectively do their jobs in a timely manner.
We do not agree to the suggested $100,000 saving that the
council says it will realize. The bylaw department is a service
that is directly related to assisting the public with areas of
conflict.
Randy & Grace Visser
Simcoe ON
34
http://opp.ca/news/#/viewnews/5ff716ed6fc4b
-
I wish this letter to be a matter of public record.
I read in the Reformer that the Norfolk Council voted to reduce
the bylaw department staff by one to save $100,00.00. I am all
about being prudent and responsible and would be in favour of my
taxes being lower but I do not think this is a place where
reduction of staff is advisable. I read in the report that the
bylaw office has had an increase of 200% in complaints. I also read
that a supervisor has been hired to assist this department. It is
my belief that a supervisor could well have part of this division
but a supervisor sees that the work is completed not 'hands on"
where it is so badly needed in Norfolk County with all the illegal
cannabis operations popping up that are totally destroying so many
peoples livelihood. It truly makes no sense at all when an office
has a 200% increase of work load to reduce the staff. I hope that
you will reconsider your decision and reverse it. I commend our
Councillor Kim Huffman for voting against this motion.
Respectfully
Jack and Lyn Waterford
35
-
Downtown Simcoe Business Improvement Area 26 Peel St, Simcoe ON
N3Y 1R9 [email protected]
519-426-5150
Sent by E Mail January 20, 2021. Mayor Chopp and Members of
Council Norfolk County 50 Colborne St. South Simcoe, ON N3Y 4H3
Dear Mayor Chopp and Councillors, I am writing to you on behalf of
the Downtown Simcoe BIA Board of Directors and our members to
express our concern about the potential reduction of 1.0 FTE in the
front line by-law enforcement staff. We recognize the challenges
you have faced throughout your budget deliberations, however we
respectfully request that you consider maintaining the present
compliment of by law officers. Over the past couple of years, the
Simcoe BIA has been working closely with the By-Law Enforcement
Department in resolving some of the problems that we are
continually faced with in the downtown core such as garbage
removal, parking, building infractions, and out of town landlords.
We have experienced some successes but there is still a great deal
of work to do and we need the by-law enforcement staff available to
us moving forward. This is an important part of making our downtown
a safe and an attractive place for our residents and visitors to
enjoy and shop. We would appreciate your support in maintaining
this same level of service. Sincerely,
Cam Carter President Downtown Simcoe BIA
36
-
In the deliberations regarding the issue of bulky item pickup
for a fee, I'm all in favor, and have no objection to paying the
extra. As you can see by the picture I've attached, some wouldn't
agree with it. This is a small example of what we see at our
properties' edges and county ditches , ( Mabee's Corners, Mabee
Sideroad and Concession 1STR. Middleton ). As the roads employees
would attest, the discarded items cover a wide range of no longer
wanted items. I'm not sure if availability of disposal with a fee
would help or exacerbate this. In our particular case ,we are close
to Tillsonburg, and know full well this is where some of what we
see originates. We all know people know better, but for whatever
reason don't seem to care. Maybe a stiff financial penalty would be
a deterrent . We try to be vigilant, but, you know how that goes.
Again, we have no issue paying for bulky item pickup . We usually
make a trip once a year to Norfolk Disposal in Waterford and pay to
dispose of items not acceptable as garbage or too large for the
recycle truck. As for the transfer station in South Walsingham,
it's something that we would use maybe periodically, maybe more if
it was open certain hours. It wouldn't need to be open full time,
as long as the hours were regular and the fee communicated clearly.
I suppose it really all comes down to making the best financial
decision while still providing a service and maintaining Norfolk as
the best county in Ontario to live.
Thanks for your time, John & Janet Sage Stone Veil Farm
Inc.
37
-
38
-
39
-
40
-
From: rick maley Sent: Saturday, January 16, 2021 11:44 AM To:
Mayor Subject: Jan 14 article in Norfolk and Tillsonburg News 'Ice
Time'
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization.
Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the
sender and know the content is safe.
I strongly support your efforts to increase arena rental rates.
We (my wife and I) strongly support your efforts to control
spending in all areas in Norfolk county. We appreciate there are
many difficult decisions to make.
It was mentioned in this article that you "...by the end of
2022-she would like a program in place to subsidize families who
have difficulty affording hockey and figure skating for their
children." My wife and I applaud your sentiment but, feel any
attempt to subsidize families is a big mistake. Where does the
money come from in an era of restraint? What group (civil
servants?) decides which families are to get funding and how much
to each? How can you/council insure "fairness" between deserving
families in Simcoe vs. Delhi vs. Port Dover and so on? I see this
becoming a very bothersome headache for all council members. There
will be winners (receiving benefits) and losers (not receiving
benefits). The losers will not be too happy with their councilor.
Councilors represent areas. It would only be human for each
councilor to want "their share" for their respective area. Five
years after implementation, I predict that more money is allocated
to deal with "exceptions". There could also be expansion of the
program because there will always be voices asking for somebody
else to pay for something that benefits my family Once you start
something like this, how do you control the spending and the
expansion of who gets benefits over time?
For these reasons (and probably others) we strongly oppose any
subsidy by Norfolk Council to families having difficultly affording
hockey and figure skating. For your information, we raised a family
of four children and are now in our sixties.
Debbie and Rick Maley
Simcoe
rick
41
mailto:[email protected]
-
42
-
Working together with our community
Budget Committee Minutes The Corporation of Norfolk County
January 6, 7, 12 & 19, 2021
9:00 a.m. Council Chambers*
2nd Floor County Administration Building 50 Colborne Street
South, Simcoe
Present: Mayor Kristal Chopp, Tom Masschaele, Michael Columbus,
Chris Van Paassen, Ian Rabbitts, Ryan Taylor, Amy Martin, Kim
Huffman
Absent with Regrets: Roger Geysens Also Present: Jason Burgess,
Kathy Laplante, Jason Godby, Shelley
Darlington, Brandon Sloan, Marlene Miranda, Paula Boutis,
Kathryn Fanning, Megan Soles, Lucas Cracknell, Tyler Wain, Bill
Cridland, Nikki Slote, Sarah Page, Gord Stilwell, Erin Anderson,
Brent Wallace, Andy Grozelle, Heidy VanDyk-Ellis, Kevin
Klingenberg
Chair Rabbitts provided introductory comments to the 2021
Operating Budget Deliberations. Approval of Agenda/Changes to the
Agenda (Item 2) 1. (Masschaele/Taylor) THAT the agenda of the
Budget Committee meeting be approved with the following additions:
(Item 5) Communications A) Randy Goudeseune Re: Budget B) Stella
Walker Re: Library Budget
43
-
Budget Committee Minutes – January 6, 7, 12 &19, 2021 Page 2
of 21
C) Leonard Patterson Re: Budget Considerations D) Martin
Jefferson, Norfolk Minor Hockey Association Re: Recreation User
Fees – Arenas E) Garfield Eaton Re: Feedback Proposed 2021 Budgets
Operating and Capital F) Wesley Wilson Re: Supporting Norfolk
County Heritage and Culture
Carried. Disclosure of Pecuniary Interest (Item 1) None were
declared. Presentations (Item 3) (3:00pm)
A) Norfolk County Library - Heather King 2. (Martin/Huffman)
THAT the presentation from Heather King regarding the Norfolk
County Library be received as information.
Carried.
Deputations (Item 4)
A) Les Anderson Re: 2021 Funding Request for Lynnwood Arts
Centre Board
3. (Huffman/Taylor)
THAT the deputation from Les Anderson regarding the 2021 Funding
Request for Lynnwood Arts Centre Board be received as
information.
Carried.
i. Staff Information Memo – Ryan Fess, Financial Analyst Re:
December 8, 2020 Deputation – Lynnwood Arts Centre Board
4. (Columbus/Martin)
44
-
Budget Committee Minutes – January 6, 7, 12 &19, 2021 Page 3
of 21
THAT Staff Information Memo from Ryan Fess, Financial Analyst
regarding the December 8, 2020 Deputation – Lynnwood Arts Centre
Board be received as information.
Carried.
B) Steve Scheers Re: 2021 budget and effects on the
community
5. (Huffman/Masschaele)
THAT the deputation from Steve Scheers regarding the 2021 budget
and effects on the community be received as information.
Carried. Communications (Item 5)
A) Randy Goudeseune Re: Budget
6. (Columbus/Martin)
THAT the communication from Randy Goudeseune regarding the
Budget be received as information.
Carried.
B) Stella Walker Re: Library Budget
7. (Columbus/Martin)
THAT the communication from Stella Walker regarding Library
Budget be received as information.
Carried.
C) Leonard Patterson Re: Budget Considerations
8. (Columbus/Martin)
THAT the communication from Leonard Patterson regarding Budget
Considerations be received as information.
Carried.
D) Martin Jefferson, Norfolk Minor Hockey Association Re:
Recreation User Fees – Arenas
9. (Columbus/Martin)
THAT the communication from Martin Jefferson, Norfolk Minor
Hockey Association regarding Recreation User Fees – Arenas be
received as information.
Carried.
45
-
Budget Committee Minutes – January 6, 7, 12 &19, 2021 Page 4
of 21
E) Garfield Eaton
Re: Feedback Proposed 2021 Budgets Operating and Capital 10.
(Columbus/Martin)
THAT the communication from Garfield Eaton regarding Feedback
Proposed 2021 Budgets Operating and Capital be received as
information.
Carried.
F) Wesley Wilson and Jim Norman – Delhi Chamber of Commerce Re:
Heritage and Culture Budget 2021
11. (Columbus/Martin) THAT the communication from Wesley Wilson
and Jim Norman – Delhi Chamber
of Commerce regarding Heritage and Culture Budget 2021, be
received as information.
Carried.
Staff Reports/Discussion Items (Item 6)
A) Staff Report CS 21-02 Re: Proposed 2021 Levy Supported
Operating Budget
Jason Burgess, Chief Administrative Officer, introduced the
proposed 2021 budget. Shelley Darlington, General Manager Corporate
Services and Kathy Laplante, Treasurer provided an overview of the
budget. Megan Soles, Kathryn Fanning and Tyler Wain presented to
Committee with the
aid of a PowerPoint presentation.
Staff presented to Committee with the aid of PowerPoint
presentations and responded to questions of Committee regarding
division specific proposed levy supported operating budgets.
Committee recessed at 4:09 p.m. to reconvene at 9:00 a.m. on
January 7th. Committee reconvened at 9:00 a.m. on January 7th. 12.
(Taylor/Van Paassen) THAT the agenda be amended through the
addition of the following new correspondence: G) Frank and
Catherine Schonberger Re: Bunkhouse Inspection fees
46
-
Budget Committee Minutes – January 6, 7, 12 &19, 2021 Page 5
of 21
H) Cassandra Chromczak Re: Bunkhouse Inspection fees I) Sue
Downs, Simcoe Chamber of Commerce Re: Heritage and Culture Budget
J) Kae Elgie Re: Heritage and Culture Budget
Carried.
Communications Continued (Item 5) G) Frank and Catherine
Schonberger
Re: Bunkhouse Inspection fees 13. (Masschaele/Van Paassen)
THAT the communication from Frank and Catherine Schonberger
regarding bunkhouse inspection fees, be received as
information.
Carried. H) Cassandra Chromczak
Re: Bunkhouse Inspection fees 14. (Masschaele/Van Paassen)
THAT the communication from Cassandra Chromczak regarding
bunkhouse inspection fees, be received as information.
Carried. I) Sue Downs, Simcoe Chamber of Commerce
Re: Heritage and Culture Budget 15. (Masschaele/Van Paassen)
THAT the communication from Sue Downs Simcoe Chamber of
Commerce, regarding the Heritage and Culture Budget, be received as
information.
Carried. J) Kae Elgie
Re: Heritage and Culture Budget 15. (Masschaele/Van Paassen)
THAT the communication from Kae Elgie, regarding the Heritage
and Culture Budget, be received as information.
Carried.
47
-
Budget Committee Minutes – January 6, 7, 12 &19, 2021 Page 6
of 21
Staff Reports/Discussion Items Continued (Item 6) A) Staff
Report CS 21-02 ` Re: Proposed 2021 Levy Supported Operating Budget
i) Option 1A – Recreation User Fees - Arenas 16. (Chopp/Van
Paassen) THAT Committee endorse staff recommendation of Option 1
representing standard increases for Arena User Fees as outlined on
page 2-2 and 2-3 of the budget package; AND THAT staff be directed
to present a further report in 2022 with options for a targeted
subsidy for the economically disadvantaged for Arena User Fees to
be instituted in the Fall of 2022. AND FURTHER THAT Committee
provide staff direction to establish a 65% cost recovery
methodology in developing the User Rate for 2021 Summer Ice
Fees.
17. (Martin/Masschaele) THAT the rules of order be waived to
allowed recorded votes to allow for recorded votes at a Committee
meeting.
Carried.
Councillor Martin requested a recorded vote upon the motion
proposed under Option 1A. The Motion CARRIED on the following
recorded votes: Yeas: Chopp, Taylor, Masschaele, Huffman, Van
Paassen, Martin, Columbus, Rabbitts Total: 8 Absent: Geysens Total:
1 ii) Option 1B – Recreation User Fees – General
48
-
Budget Committee Minutes – January 6, 7, 12 &19, 2021 Page 7
of 21
18. (Van Paassen/Chopp) THAT the 2021 rates as outlined under
Option 1 B) for Recreation User Fees Option 1B as outlined starting
on page 2-8 of the budget package be approved; AND THAT staff be
directed to present a report to Council with a comprehensive review
upon Recreation Services provided prior to December 2021; AND
FURTHER THAT Family passes policy be amended to be allow for four
(4) children that are not siblings.
Carried.
iii) Option 2 - Donation Revenue
19. (Van Paassen/Martin) THAT the option to establish donations
to support abandoned cemeteries be
endorsed as outlined on page 2-18 of the budget package. AND
THAT Staff be directed to present a fee associated with Courtesy
Slips.
Carried.
iv) Option 3C – HNHU – Inspection User Fees
20. (Martin/Van Paassen) THAT Committee endorse Alternative #4
upon page 2-38 to apply a 2% increase
to existing fees be endorsed.
Councillor Martin requested a recorded vote.
The Motion CARRIED on the following recorded votes: Yeas: Chopp,
Taylor, Masschaele, Huffman, Van Paassen, Martin, Columbus,
Rabbitts Total: 8 Absent: Geysens Total: 1
49
-
Budget Committee Minutes – January 6, 7, 12 &19, 2021 Page 8
of 21
21. (Chopp/Taylor) THAT Committee endorse Alternative #2 upon
page 2-37 to require consultation
with Haldimand County and report back upon business license and
user fees. Mayor Chopp requested a recorded vote. The Motion
CARRIED on the following recorded votes: Yeas: Chopp, Taylor,
Masschaele, Huffman, Van Paassen, Martin, Columbus, Rabbitts Total:
8 Absent: Geysens Total: 1
v) Option 7 – South Walshingham Transfer Station
22. (Van Paassen/Masschaele) THAT Committee approve option 7
alternative 1A) as listed on page 2-50 of the
budget binder respecting the South Walshingham Transfer Station;
AND THAT staff be directed to seek alternative service providers
and not dedicate capital funds towards scale refurbishment. Mayor
Chopp requested a recorded vote. The Motion was DEFEATED on the
following recorded votes: Yeas: Masschaele, Van Paassen, Martin,
Columbus Total: 4 Nays: Chopp, Taylor, Huffman, Rabbitts Total: 4
Absent: Geysens Total: 1 23. (Huffman/Chopp) THAT Committee approve
option 7 alternative 1bas listed on page 2-50 of the budget binder
respecting the South Walshingham Transfer Station; AND THAT staff
be directed to not dedicate capital funds towards scale
refurbishment. Chair Rabbitts requested a recorded vote.
50
-
Budget Committee Minutes – January 6, 7, 12 &19, 2021 Page 9
of 21
The Motion was DEFEATED on the following recorded votes: Yeas:
Masschaele, Van Paassen, Martin, Columbus Total: 4 Nays: Chopp,
Taylor, Huffman, Rabbitts Total: 4 Absent: Geysens Total: 1 24.
(Masschaele/Martin)
THAT Committee approve option 7 alternative 1b as listed on page
2-50 of the budget binder respecting the South Walshingham Transfer
Station with the amendment that the Transfer Station be only open
for 7 hours on Saturdays;
AND THAT staff be directed to not dedicate capital funds towards
scale refurbishment. Chair Rabbitts requested a recorded vote. The
Motion was DEFEATED on the following recorded votes: Yeas:
Masschaele, Huffman, Van Paassen, Martin, Rabbitts Total: 5 Nays:
Chopp, Taylor, Columbus Total: 3 Absent: Geysens Total: 1 25. (Van
Paassen/Martin)
THAT Committee approve option 7 alternative 2 as listed on page
2-50 of the budget binder respecting the South Walshingham Transfer
Station.
AND THAT staff be directed to not dedicate capital funds towards
scale refurbishment. Chair Rabbitts requested a recorded vote. The
Motion was DEFEATED on the following recorded votes: Yeas:
Masschaele, Huffman, Van Paassen, Martin, Total: 4 Nays: Chopp,
Taylor, Rabbitts, Columbus Total: 4 Absent: Geysens Total: 1
51
-
Budget Committee Minutes – January 6, 7, 12 &19, 2021 Page
10 of 21
vi) Option 10 A) Phone Repair Costs Pilot 26. (Chopp/Van
Paassen)
THAT phone repair savings target as listed on page 2-57 be
increased to $10,000.
Carried.
vii) Option 19 – Reduce Annual Transfer to the Council
Initiative Reserve
27. (Van Paassen/Huffman) THAT sufficient funds be placed in the
Council Initiative Reserve to regain the one million dollar balance
at the beginning of the 2021 year. Councillor Columbus requested a
recorded vote.
The Motion was CARRIED on the following recorded votes: Yeas:
Van Paassen, Huffman, Masschaele, Taylor, Chopp Total: 5 Nays:
Rabbitts, Columbus, Martin Total: 3 Absent: Geysens Total: 1 viii)
Option 22 SCOR Membership
28. (Columbus/Van Paassen)
THAT SCOR (South Central Ontario Region Economic Development
Corporation) membership be withdrawn for a period of one year; AND
THAT the benefits of membership be reevaluated beyond 2021.
Councillor Columbus requested a recorded vote. The Motion was
CARRIED on the following recorded votes:
Yeas: Martin, Huffman, Masschaele, Taylor, Chopp Total: 5 Nays:
Rabbitts, Columbus, Van Paassen Total: 3 Absent: Geysens Total:
1
52
-
Budget Committee Minutes – January 6, 7, 12 &19, 2021 Page
11 of 21
Committee recessed at 4:50 p.m. to reconvene at 9:00 a.m. on
January 12, 2021. Committee reconvened at 9:00 a.m. on January 12,
2021. 29. (Martin/Chopp) THAT the agenda be approved with the
following additions: 5. K) Rick Levick, Long Point World Biosphere
Reserve Foundation Re: Heritage and Culture in 2021 County budget
L) Katrina Marques, Multicultural Heritage Association of Norfolk
Re: 2021 Budget – Heritage and Culture M) Andy Putoczki Re: Delhi
Tobacco Museum and Cultural Centre N) Mary Jane Kekes Re: Delhi
Tobacco Museum and Cultural Centre O) Leigh Burbridge Re: 2021
Budget – Heritage and Culture
P) Jim Norman Re: 2021 Budget – Heritage and Culture Q) Wes
Wilson Re: Petition 2021 Budget – Heritage and Culture
Carried.
Communications Continued (Item 5) K) Rick Levick, Long Point
World Biosphere Reserve Foundation Re: Heritage and Culture in 2021
County budget 30. (Martin/Chopp) THAT the correspondence of Rick
Levick, respecting the 2021 Heritage and Culture in 2021 County
budget, be received as information.
Carried. L) Katrina Marques, Multicultural Heritage Association
of Norfolk Re: 2021 Budget – Heritage and Culture
53
-
Budget Committee Minutes – January 6, 7, 12 &19, 2021 Page
12 of 21
31. (Martin/Chopp) THAT the correspondence of Katrina Marques,
Multicultural Heritage Association of Norfolk respecting the 2021
Heritage and Culture in 2021 County budget, be received as
information.
Carried. M) Andy Putoczki Re: Delhi Tobacco Museum and Cultural
Centre 32. (Martin/Chopp) THAT the correspondence of Andy Putoczki,
respecting the 2021 Heritage and Culture in 2021 County budget, be
received as information.
Carried. N) Mary Jane Kekes Re: Delhi Tobacco Museum and
Cultural Centre 33. (Martin/Chopp) THAT the correspondence of May
Jane Kekes, respecting the 2021 County budget be received as
information.
Carried. O) Leigh Burbridge Re: 2021 Budget – Heritage and
Culture 34. (Martin/Chopp) THAT the correspondence of Leigh
Burbridge, respecting the 2021 County budget be received as
information.
Carried.
P) Jim Norman Re: 2021 Budget – Heritage and Culture
35. (Martin/Chopp) THAT the correspondence of Jim Norman,
respecting the 2021 County budget be received as information.
Carried. Q) Wes Wilson Re: Petition 2021 Budget – Heritage and
Culture
36. (Martin/Chopp) THAT the correspondence of Wes Wilson,
respecting the 2021 County budget be received as information.
Carried.
54
-
Budget Committee Minutes – January 6, 7, 12 &19, 2021 Page
13 of 21
Staff Reports/Discussion Items Continued (Item 6) A) Staff
Report CS 21-02 ` Re: Proposed 2021 Levy Supported Operating
Budget
ix) Option 24 Target Labour Reductions
37. (Columbus/Masschaele) THAT Committee convenes in Closed
Session at 10:20 a.m. pursuant to
Sections 239 (2) (b) and (d) of the Municipal Act 2001 as
amended as the subject matter pertains to personal information
about identifiable individuals including municipal or local board
employees and is a matter of labour relations or employee
negotiations.
Chair Rabbitts requested a recorded vote. The Motion CARRIED on
the following recorded votes: Yeas: Chopp, Taylor, Masschaele,
Huffman, Van Paassen, Martin, Columbus, Rabbitts Total: 8 Absent:
Geysens Total: 1 At 12:05 p.m. Chair Rabbitts announced to the
public that Committee would
recess until 12:45 p.m. for lunch and then resume in Closed
Session. 38. (Martin/Columbus) THAT Committee reconvene in open
session at 1:25 p.m. Chair Rabbitts requested a recorded vote. The
Motion CARRIED on the following recorded votes: Yeas: Chopp,
Taylor, Masschaele, Huffman, Van Paassen, Martin, Columbus,
Rabbitts Total: 8 Absent: Geysens Total: 1
39. (Columbus/Huffman)
THAT the reduction associated with By-Law Services be removed
from the 2021 budget.
Chair Rabbitts requested a recorded vote.
55
-
Budget Committee Minutes – January 6, 7, 12 &19, 2021 Page
14 of 21
The Motion was DEFEATED on the following recorded votes: Yeas:
Huffman, Columbus, Martin Total: 3 Nays: Chopp, Taylor, Masschaele,
Van Paassen, Rabbitts Total: 5 Absent: Geysens Total: 1
40. (Chopp/Van Paassen)
THAT Committee endorse staff recommendation respecting the
museum reductions; AND THAT staff be directed to negotiate an
agreement with the Lynwood Arts Management Group to include up to
$50,000 in grant funding; AND THAT the grant fund from existing
levy funded dollars; AND FURTHER THAT staff be directed to present
an agreement to Council respecting the future use of lands and
buildings at the Lynwood Arts Centre
Councillor Martin requested a recorded vote. The Motion was
CARRIED on the following recorded votes: Yeas: Chopp, Masschaele,
Huffman, Van Paassen, Taylor, Rabbitts Total: 6 Nays: Martin,
Columbus Total: 2 Absent: Geysens Total: 1
41. (Chopp/Martin) THAT Chief Page be directed to locate $50,000
in levy departmental savings to paramedic service with no impact to
front-line services.
Chair Rabbitts requested a recorded vote.
56
-
Budget Committee Minutes – January 6, 7, 12 &19, 2021 Page
15 of 21
The Motion CARRIED on the following recorded votes: Yeas: Chopp,
Taylor, Masschaele, Huffman, Van Paassen, Martin, Columbus,
Rabbitts Total: 8 Absent: Geysens Total: 1
Missing motion:
4#. (Chopp/Columbus) THAT the 2021 Levy Budget savings target
for Option 24 be reduced to $750,000 with no impact to front line
paramedic services.
Chair Rabbitts requested a recorded vote. The Motion CARRIED on
the following recorded votes: Yeas: Chopp, Taylor, Masschaele,
Huffman, Van Paassen, Columbus, Rabbitts Total: 7 Nays: Martin
Total: 1 Absent: Geysens
Total: 1 Committee recessed at 2:59 p.m. on the January 12, 2021
to reconvene at 9:00 a.m. on January 19, 2021. Committee reconvened
at 9:00 a.m. on January 19, 2021.
42. (Taylor/Huffman) THAT the agenda for January 19, 2021 be
approved as presented.
Carried.
43. (Huffman/Van Paassen)
THAT Council approve the Council Initiative Reserve minimum
target level be maintained $1,000,000 and the estimated transfer to
maintain this balance be adjusted annually during budget
deliberations based on the projected balance at that time.
57
-
Budget Committee Minutes – January 6, 7, 12 &19, 2021 Page
16 of 21
AND THAT the 2021 transfer to the Council Initiatives Reserve be
reduced to $281,400 to maintain the forecasted opening reserve
balance at the minimum target level.
Chair Rabbitts requested a recorded vote. The Motion CARRIED on
the following recorded votes: Yeas: Chopp, Taylor, Masschaele,
Huffman, Van Paassen, Rabbitts Total: 6 Nays: Columbus, Martin
Total: 2 Absent: Geysens Total: 1
44. (Columbus/VanPaassen) THAT project 5332010 Rooftop Solar Net
Metering Pilot Project in the amount of
$30,000 be funded from the tax levy as part of the 2021 Climate
Change Adaptation Program for $100,000
AND THAT staff provide a subsequent report outlining the
utilization of the
remaining $70,000 for the 2021 Climate Change Adaptation
Program. Chair Rabbitts requested a recorded vote. The Motion
CARRIED on the following recorded votes: Yeas: Chopp, Taylor,
Masschaele, Huffman, Van Paassen, Rabbitts, Columbus, Martin Total:
8 Absent: Geysens Total: 1 45. (Columbus/Masscahele) THAT the
$95,000 in Infection Control Prevention and Control Funding from
the
Ministry of Long-Term Care be accepted; AND THAT $85,500 of this
funding be utilized to purchase 14 Needlepoint
Bipolar Ionization units and that the remaining funding of
$10,000 be allocated to the 2021 Levy Supported Operating Budget to
offset the budgeted purchase of dining room tables.
Chair Rabbitts requested a recorded vote.
58
-
Budget Committee Minutes – January 6, 7, 12 &19, 2021 Page
17 of 21
The Motion CARRIED on the following recorded votes: Yeas: Chopp,
Taylor, Masschaele, Huffman, Van Paassen, Rabbitts, Columbus,
Martin Total: 8 Absent: Geysens Total: 1
x) Option 25 – Delay or Remove Levy Funded Capital Projects 46.
(Van Paassen/Masschaele) THAT the 2021 Capital Budget be amended as
follows: 1. Brush Chipper – deferral - $60,000 2. LED Street
Lighting Retrofit Program – reduction - $50,000 3. Turkey Point
Gateway Sign – remove 2021 project - $13,000 4. Cedar St.
Electronic Sign – deferral - $31,000 5. Digital Info Sign –
deferral - $15,000 6. Pool Entrance Turnstile gate – removal
combine with another project - $27,000 7. Kinsmen Park Concrete Pad
– deferral - $12,000 8. Concrete pads Port Rowan Skate Park –
deferral - $7,000 9. Rail Trail Directional Signage – reduction -
$4,000 10. Cedar Street Pedestrian Cross-over – reduction - $27,000
11. West Street Pedestrian Cross-over – reduction - $20,000 Chair
Rabbitts requested a recorded vote. The Motion CARRIED on the
following recorded votes: Yeas: Chopp, Taylor, Masschaele, Huffman,
Van Paassen, Rabbitts, Columbus, Martin
Total: 8 Absent: Geysens Total: 1
xi) Option 26 Shifting Funding from Levy Supported to Debt
Funded
47. (Masschaele/Taylor) THAT the 2021 Capital Budget be amended
through the issuance of debt for the following projects: 1. 2021
Drainage Engineering and Construction 2. Pedestrian Cross-over West
St. Simcoe 3. Pedestrian Cross-over Cedar St. Simcoe
59
-
Budget Committee Minutes – January 6, 7, 12 &19, 2021 Page
18 of 21
4. Culver/Argyle St. West Municipal Parking 5. Culver/Argyle St.
E Side Municipal Parking
Chair Rabbitts requested a recorded vote. The Motion CARRIED on
the following recorded votes: Yeas: Chopp, Taylor, Masschaele,
Huffman, Van Paassen, Rabbitts, Columbus, Martin Total: 8 Absent:
Geysens Total: 1
xii) Option 27- In Sourcing Capital Projects 48. (Van
Paassen/Masschaele) THAT the following levy funded paving and
resurfacing 2021 Capital Projects be completed internally: 1. Port
Dover Arena Parking Lot – Surface Treatment 2. Parking Lot
Refinishing – Delhi Quance Parking Lot 3. Roadway Resurfacing –
Oakwood Cemetery 4. Simcoe Kinsmen Park – Phase 2 (paving work
only) Chair Rabbitts requested a recorded vote. The Motion CARRIED
on the following recorded votes: Yeas: Chopp, Taylor, Masschaele,
Huffman, Van Paassen, Rabbitts, Columbus, Martin Total: 8 Absent:
Geysens Total: 1
xiii) Levy Stabilization Loan From Legacy Fund 49.
(Masschaele/Van Paassen)
THAT Committee approve of the one-time loan from the Legacy Fund
in the amount of $5,000,000. AND THAT as outlined on page 2-94 of
the budget binder the loan be assigned a two year no interest free
period followed by a 10-year amortization at a 3.7% interest
rate.
Chair Rabbitts requested a recorded vote.
60
-
Budget Committee Minutes – January 6, 7, 12 &19, 2021 Page
19 of 21
The Motion CARRIED on the following recorded votes: Yeas: Chopp,
Taylor, Masschaele, Huffman, Van Paassen, Rabbitts, Columbus Total:
7 Nays: Martin Total: 1 Absent: Geysens Total: 1
50. (Huffman/Martin) THAT Committee approve Option 1 in respect
the Norfolk Public Library as outlined on page 4-5 of the budget
binder for a 2021 budget reduction of $144,230. Chair Rabbitts
requested a recorded vote. The Motion was DEFEATED on the following
recorded votes: Yeas: Chopp, Taylor, Masschaele, Van Paassen,
Total: 4 Nays: Martin, Huffman, Columbus, Rabbitts Total: 4 Absent:
Geysens Total: 1 51. (Martin/Huffman) THAT a 7.5% reduction
compared to the 2020 budget be applied to the Norfolk Public
Library Boards 2021 budget for a reduction of $216,300. Chair
Rabbitts requested a recorded vote. The Motion was CARRIED on the
following recorded votes: Yeas: Chopp, Taylor, Masschaele, Van
Paassen, Martin, Huffman, Columbus, Rabbitts Total: 8 Absent:
Geysens Total: 1 52. (VanPaassen/Chopp) THAT an exemption be
granted to Council’s established Compensation By-Law respecting
salaries for Mayor and Council Members for no increase in 2021.
61
-
Budget Committee Minutes – January 6, 7, 12 &19, 2021 Page
20 of 21
Chair Rabbitts requested a recorded vote. The Motion was CARRIED
on the following recorded votes: Yeas: Chopp, Taylor, Masschaele,
Van Paassen, Martin, Huffman, Columbus, Rabbitts Total: 8 Absent:
Geysens Total: 1 53. (Chopp/Masschaele) THAT the 2021 Levy Budget
Options and Levy Relief Strategy be approved as
amended by the Budget Committee. Chair Rabbitts requested a
recorded vote. The Motion was CARRIED on the following recorded
votes: Yeas: Chopp, Taylor, Masschaele, Van Paassen, Martin,
Huffman, Columbus, Rabbitts Total: 8 Absent: Geysens Total: 1
54. (Huffman/Taylor)
THAT Report CS 21-02 Proposed 2021 Levy Supported Operating
Budget be received as information; AND THAT the 2021 Levy Supported
Operating Budget, with a Net Levy Requirement of $104,635,500 be
approved; AND THAT the 2020 surplus generated from General
Operations be contributed to the Contingency Reserve; AND THAT
Council direct staff to establish a formal staff working committee
to ensure potential service options and deliverables are met and to
provide quarterly status reports to Council; AND THAT Council
adopts a policy statement that assessment growth revenue be applied
for infrastructure purposes until reserve funds are positive and
asset management obligations are fully funded; AND THAT Council
adopts a policy statement setting the County’s own debt and
financial obligations limit at 15% of own source revenues;
62
-
Budget Committee Minutes – January 6, 7, 12 &19, 2021 Page
21 of 21
AND FURTHER THAT Council adopts a policy statement that Norfolk
County no longer allow operating deficits to occur.
Chair Rabbitts requested a recorded vote. The Motion was CARRIED
on the following recorded votes: Yeas: Chopp, Taylor, Masschaele,
Van Paassen, Martin, Huffman, Columbus, Rabbitts Total: 8 Absent:
Geysens Total: 1
Adjournment (Item 9) 55. (Huffman/Martin)
THAT the Budget Committee be adjourned at 12:39 pm. Carried.
__________________________ __________________________ County
Clerk Mayor
63
-
64
-
_________________________ _________________________ Defeated:
Carried:
THE CORPORATION OF NORFOLK COUNTY
RESOLUTION # DATE: January 26, 2021 NOTICE OF MOTION MOVED BY:
Councillor Van Paassen________________________________ THAT
Recommendation No. 34 of September 22, 2021 be reconsidered:
34. THAT Council approve the direction provided to the County
Solicitor in Closed Session as outlined in the memo presented,
respecting the Hastings Drive Litigation Matter.
65
-
66
-
The Corporation of Norfolk County By-Law 2021-11
Being a By-Law to establish a Water and Wastewater Billing and
Collection Policy.
WHEREAS Section 391 of the Municipal Act, 2001 authorizes a
municipality to pass by-laws imposing fees or charges on persons
for services or activities provided or done by or on behalf of the
municipality;
AND WHEREAS Section 398(2) of the Municipal Act, 2001 authorizes
a municipality to add outstanding fees and charges imposed by the
municipality to the tax roll for the following property in the
local municipality and collect them in the same manner as municipal
taxes: in the case of fees and charges for the supply of a service
or thing to a property, the property to which the service or thing
was supplied.
AND WHEREAS Ontario Regulation 581/06 gives fees and charges
added to the tax roll under Section 398(2) priority lien
status;
NOW THEREFORE the Council of The Corporation of Norfolk County
hereby enacts as follows:
1. That a Water and Wastewater Billing and Collection Policy as
attached hereto asSchedule “A” be adopted for implementation in
March 2021.
2. That the effective date of this By-Law shall be the date of
passage thereof.
ENACTED AND PASSED this 26th day of January, 2021.
Mayor
County Clerk
Authority: Council, Resolution 19 Meeting: November 17, 2020
Staff Report: CS 20-36
67
-
By-Law 2021-11 Schedule A Page 2 of 5
POLICY #: FS-49 Water and Wastewater Collection Policy
Corporate Services
Approval Date: November 17, 2020
Approval Authority: Council
Effective Date: March 2021
Revision Date/s: N/A
Purpose:
The purpose of this policy is:
1. To ensure the municipality is in a position to manage water
and wastewateraccounts receivable effectively by utilizing
collection activities to minimize debtsowed to the
municipality.
2. To provide consistent and equitable treatment to debtors.
3. To establish the protocol for collection of accounts in
arrears including theschedule of certain collection activities.
Policy Statement:
Norfolk County recognizes the importance of strong fiscal
management policies that incorporate consistent business practices
and efficiencies that are fair to water and wastewater customers,
property owners and to the municipality.
68
-
By-Law 2021-11 Schedule A Page 3 of 5
Definition:
Primary Account Holder – the person, persons or business name to
which the account is registered. A primary account holder may be
the property owner or a tenant/occupant.
Secondary Account Holder – a landlord/property owner registered
with the billing agent for the purposes of receiving notice of a
tenant’s arrears only.
Property Owner – a holder or proprietor of land, landowner
Landlord – the owner of a house, apartment, condominium or real
estate which is leased to a tenant or lessee.
Tenant – a lessee, a person who leases property or who occupies
land or property leased from the owner of the property.
Implementation Procedure:
Water and Wastewater Account Collection Process
1. Norfolk County has a service agreement with a billing agent
for the provision ofwater and wastewater billing and account
collection services. This policy isadministered by the billing
agent pursuant to the service agreement.
2. Invoices are issued by the billing agent and include a
payment due date.
3. Six (6) days following the due date if the account remains
unpaid an automatedreminder via telephone will be issued to the
primary account holder.
4. Thirty (30) days following the due date if the account
remains unpaid a remindernotice will be issued to the primary
account holder.
5. Forty-five (45) days following the due date if the account
remains unpaid a noticewill be issued to the primary account holder
and to the secondary account holderif applicable, warning of
pending transfer to the applicable property tax accountfor the
service address.
6. Sixty (60) days following the due date if the account remains
unpaid the billingagent will notify Norfolk County to add the
outstanding amount to the property taxaccount. A notice will be
issued to the primary account holder and to the
69
-
By-Law 2021-11 Schedule A Page 4 of 5
secondary account holder, to confirm the account has been
transferred to the applicable property tax account for the service
address.
7. An administration fee related to the tax roll
addition/adjustment will be added tothe tax account in accordance
with the current user fee By-Law.
8. Payments by mail will be processed by the billing agent as of
the date thepayment is received. The customer is responsible to
ensure that payments arereceived on or before the payment
deadline.
9. A service charge shall be applied by the billing agent if a
payment is dishonouredby the bank for any reason.
Rental Properties
Where a landlord-tenant relationship exists the account may be
registered to the landlord (property owner) or the tenant.
Regardless of whether the account holder is a tenant or landlord,
accounts in arrears for sixty (60) days will be transferred from
the billing agent’s receivable ledger to the applicable property
tax account for the service address.
Where the account holder is the landlord (property owner)
notices will only be sent to the landlord at the address filed with
the billing agent.
Where a tenant is the account holder notices will be issued to
the tenant at the address filed with the billing agent. The
landlord may register with the billing agent as a secondary account
holder to be notified when the account remains unpaid for
forty-five (45) or more days.
Notices to the secondary account holder will include the
applicable service address and the amount due. Notices to the
secondary account holder will not include the tenant’s name or
private information.
Outstanding Debts prior to March 2021
Arrears accumulated by a tenant account holder prior to March
2021 will be transferred to the collection agency if not paid or in
the event of a defaulted payment arrangement.
70
-
By-Law 2021-11 Schedule A Page 5 of 5
Arrears accumulated by a tenant account holder prior to March
2021 will not be transferred to the property owner’s property tax
account.
All previous debts for Norfolk County water and wastewater must
be paid in full before a new account may be set up with the billing
agent. Proof of payment or confirmation from the collection agency
will be required.
71
-
72
-
The Corporation of Norfolk County By-Law 2021-12
Being a By-Law to Amend By-Law 2020-101 to Establish User Fees
and Service Charges.
WHEREAS Section 391(1) of the Municipal Act, 2001, S.O. 2001, c.
25, as amended, provides that a municipality may pass By-Laws
imposing fees or charges for services or activities provided, for
costs payable by it for services or activities provided or done by
or on behalf of the municipality and for the use of its property
including property under its control;
AND WHEREAS the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c.P.13, as amended,
and the Building Code Act, S.O. 1992, c.23, as amended, and various
other statutes provide municipalities with authority to impose
various fees and charges;
AND WHEREAS the Council of The Corporation of Norfolk County
has, from time to time, established various fees and charges for
information, services, activities and use of County property;
AND WHEREAS the Council of The Corporation of Norfolk County
deems it expedient to enact a comprehensive By-Law establishing and
requiring the payment of fees for information, services, activities
and use of County property;
AND WHEREAS on December 8th, 2020 Norfolk County Council
deferred consideration of some fees, which were temporarily
assigned a $0 increase for 2021 until amended by Council;
comprising of fees 24, 28, 51-91, 99-101, 105-120, 122-133,
146-152, 162, 163, 173-182, 313-355, 419, 423, 427, 438, 453, and
534;
NOW THEREFORE the Council of The Corporation of Norfolk County
hereby enacts as the following amendment:
1. That fees numbered 24, 28, 51-91, 92, 99-101, 105-120,
122-133, 146-152, 175-182, 313-355, 453, and 534 are hereby
repealed in its entirety and the attached schedule is submitted
therefor;
2. That the effective date of th