May 9, 2005 Report

4.1 City Hall Accommodations Project, City Hall Renovation Plan and Downtown Accommodations Strategy - City Wide
http://www.city.hamilton.on.ca/clerk/agendas-minutes-reports/
committee-of-the-whole/2005/May09/PW03010c.pdf

4.2 Recommendation to Designate 71 Main Street West (Hamilton City Hall Civic Complex), Hamilton, Under Part IV of the Ontario Heritage Act (PD05036) (Ward 2) Planning and Economic Development Committee at its meeting of March 1, 2005 TABLED the recommendations in this report pending the consideration of a report regarding the necessary renovations/repairs and cost implications for the Main Street City Hall Building.
http://www.city.hamilton.on.ca/clerk/agendas-minutes-reports/
committee-of-the-whole/2005/May09/PD05036.pdf

4.3 GRIDS Presentation Document

Whitehead : ".I think I moved the motion to have the GRIDS presentation brought forward to the Committee of the Whole. And there are two pieces to it. I think one was the staff presentation and one was the advisory committee to make a presentation. Can I get clarification. Is that what we're hearing today?"

Braden [chair]: "Did you hear the question?"

Kelly : "My understanding is that Mr. Robichaud's presentation will include both of those. We talked about that at our last advisory committee meeting, and I think Steve's incorporated the status of the advisory committee and the public hearings in his presentation. Am I correct Steve?"

Steve Robichaud : "That is correct . [see scan of overheads of Mr. Robichaud] There's two parts to today's presentation. One is to provide an update on where we are in terms of the GRIDS process, and secondly a more detailed presentation and discussion on the triple bottom line evaluation tool. Council directed there be a presentation made to the Committee of the Whole on the evaluation framework for the GRIDS process and in this regard Rob Kerr from ICLEI [International Council on Local Environmental Initiatives] is here to do that part of the presentation. Just a brief recap. In March of this year, council adopted a report to move into the third phase of the GRIDS process. There are four stages to GRIDS - the strategic phase, background phase, evaluation phase and the documentation phase. The March report dealt with the revised population, household and employment forecasts, the draft growth options for the city of Hamilton , the triple bottom line evaluation tool, as well as the direction on public consultation. With respect to the evaluation phase, the evaluation phase will start looking at the detailed analysis of the growth management options available to the city of Hamilton, what are sort of the factors that are driving the growth options and the infrastructure issues related to those growth options, which will result in a short list of growth options that will be geographically based and mapped. At the conclusion of GRIDS stage three, there will be a report prepared and presented to council that will have the identification of the preferred growth option, a growth management strategy that will deal with the hard and soft infrastructure required to accommodate that growth, as well as a phasing and financing strategy to pay for the projected growth. They'll also incorporate a policy direction for the new Official Plan, and then a servicing requirement and a servicing strategy that will be implemented through the infrastructure master plans that are ongoing. Just to briefly remind council, based on provincial growth forecasts for the city of Hamilton , Hamilton is projected to have up to 700,000 people by 2031. This is a change of approximately 190,000 residents requiring 100,000 new households, and by 2031 employment, or the number of jobs in the city of Hamilton , is expected to increase to 310,000 or an increase of 100,000. That increase in employment will be spread among three sectors of the economy. There'll be population-related employment - that will be service and institutional employment related to the population. Office employment as well as manufacturing employment land type of employment, with the majority of the employment growth projected to occur in that industrial employment category. The growth options that were presented in March represent different urban structures for the city of Hamilton . They are not geographically based, but they rather represented different ways we could choose how do we grow. All of the options include a certain set of common elements. There are at least 14,000 units of intensification. Now that is less than the provincial target in Places to Grow but it is a starting point. It includes the urban retail and commerical uses associated with the residential areas. It assumes that the existing urban land use designations are maintained. That means the industrial areas along the bayfront would be maintained, the industrial business parks designations will be retained, residential designations that are stable residential areas would be retained to the fullest extent possible. The options are "status quo" [A] which would represent a continuation of current development patterns within the city of Hamilton . [B] To accommodate growth within the existing urban area. That would be based on the existing inventory. We have approximately 30,000 units on the vacant land inventory, so the city would be looking at devising a strategy to accommodate 50-70,000 new households. [C] Distributed development, where there would be series of urban boundary expansions distributed among the former communities in the city of Hamilton . [D] A downtown focus, which would ask the question how many more dwelling units could be accommodated within the downtown. There's sort of a low and a medium option and then the balance of that residential growth would be accommodated through a series of urban boundary expansions, or targeted urban boundary expansion in one area. [E] Nodal focus, which would reinforce the concept of a transit-supportive urban structure where we would have a series of nodes in the city that would be connected by a series of HOV high occupancy vehicle lanes and rapid transit lanes, not necessarily like a light rail transit system but would be maintained within the existing road network. These nodes would be based on institutional uses such as McMaster University and the area around there, the downtown of the city of Hamilton .peak commercial or employment areas such as Limeridge Mall, Eastgate Mall, or as in new employment areas particularly existing industrial business parks or ultimately at the airport with the advancement of the aerotropolis cluster. And then the final option [F] would be to build to the existing urban boundary limit, and stop. At that point council would have two choices. They could either continue with development based upon the approved neighbourhood and secondary plans, or the neighbourhood and secondary plans could be revisited to try and accommodate additional dwelling units. That would primarily be achieved by replacing where we have areas designed for low density residential use with more higher dense forms of housing, either medium or high density housing, as well as a direction towards smaller lots sizes within the existing neighbourhoods. What do the options mean? Well each of the options can accommodate a different provincial growth forecast. The reason why that is, is the provincial growth forecasts sort of represent a bundle, that whether it's a growth of 80,000 or 100,000 households is reflective on the unit mix as well as the degree of intervention on the munipal level, among regions and also at the provincial level. They have varying degrees of intensification, from a low of approximately 17% to a high of almost 50% intensification. As well as then there's also changes in the density at which these new neighbourhoods are developed. We'd be looking at either a continuation of current development patterns or seeking to develop much more dense communities and that would also have an overall impact of raising the density within the city of Hamilton overall. . most of the growth accommodated within the urban areas, we'd have to look at significant amounts of residential intensification which would result in the densification of our existing urban area. In adopting these growth options, which are drafts at this point in time and conceptual, council also directed that there be public consultation on the growth options and the evaluation framework. It's envisioned that for GRIDS there will be four key public consultation events. These will be in addition to targetted specific consultation events related to both work on the Official Plan and other infrastructure related activity. There'll be a spring consultation event, summer, fall and a late fall consultation event. The spring event has been tenatively set for May 30th and it will focus on the draft growth options that represent the different urban structure for the city of Hamilton as well as the triple bottom line evaluation tool. It is intended that this event will provide the public with an update on GRIDS, a roadmap on where we're moving on GRIDS for the balance of this year - council's direction that we complete GRIDS within this calendar year - and we'll be seeking public input on the work that has been done on GRIDS to date by asking a series of key questions to solicit public opinion on the growth options - which ones should move forward and which ones should not move forward into a mapping exercise. One of the issues or ideas about growth and the growth options - are there certain elements that the public would like with the growth option but they may not like all of the elements associated with the growth option. As well as three perceptions about infrastructure: what do we know based on the work that has been to date on the infrastructure master plans, in particular the transportation, the stormwater and the water and wastewater infrastructure master plan. Coming out of this event, in June, the week of June 20, there will be a series of three day events, three evening events dealing with each of the master plans, and that will focus on the transportation, storm and water and wastewater master plans. At these evening sessions all three of the master plans will be dealt with and that will actually represent the formal kickoff of the master plans under the environmental assessment act process. The public will be solicited on whether or not any issues have been missed, are they in agreement with the targets proposed in terms of environmental targets, and then what about the different options that are being proposed or looked at in terms of servicing to support the GRIDS growth options. During the summer there will be consultation with targetted workshop groups as opposed to having a public event because of the difficulties of engaging the public in the summer season, but we will be meeting in stakeholder groups, leading towards a consultation event in the fall of this year that will actually focus on the short list of geographically-based growth options, in the sense the options will be mapped and made available for public review. And we'll be looking on getting public input on the advantages and disadvantages of each of the growth options as well as the servicing requirements for the various growth options. And the fourst event will occur in November or December of this year which will actually result in the identification of the preferred growth option. A report will be brought forward - the growth management strategy that will recommend a growth option as well as include all of the infrastructure - hard and soft infrastructure - and the financing strategy to support that preferred growth option as well as provide an overall direction for the Hamilton Official Plan as well as the master plans which will be implmenting the results of GRIDS. And public input will be sought on that growth management strategy. In between each of these public consultations, there will be reports brought back to committee discussing what was the feedback received from the public as well as getting direction as to moving forward on the various growth options developed through the GRIDS process. In addition to this evaluation framework that council has adopted for the GRIDS process is the triple bottom line which seeks to achieve a balance among the three bottom lines of community wellbeing, economic wellbeing and social wellbeing. So in this regard, Rob Kerr is here from ICLEI, who has been directly involved with staff in working with that tool."

Rob Kerr [Director, ICLEI Canada]: presentation on TBL [see PDF of overheads]

Linda Harvey [Vision 2020 Coordinator]: presentation on application of TBL [see PDF of overheads]

Ferguson to Robichaud: "In your GRIDS presentation, I was picking up that the underlying theme was residential expansion. Was that true or false?" Robichaud : "Let me clarify that point. All of the growth options include an employment land component of approximately 2500 acres that are being assessed. It's a constant variable in all six of the growth options, though the residential growth options have a varying urban boundary expansion option. So the residential growth options have a various theoretical urban boundary expansion component, but all the growth options envision an urban boundary expansion for employment lands." Ferguson : "That's kind of like option one - urban boundary expansion for employment lands, is that what you just said?" Robichaud : "That's correct. There's two components to be considered. There's an employment lands component and then there's a residential lands component." Ferguson : "I just must state my position clearly. I am not in favour of any urban boundary expansion for residential development. Is that what you're saying?" Robichaud : "Sorry. There's six growth options. Each growth option says there will be an urban boundary expansion for employment purposes as part A. Part B then is will there be an urban boundary expansion for residential land, yes or no, and if yes, then how much land is required based on that growth option. But the growth options, ultimately they will come forward with a servicing and a phasing strategy as to when we should be doing which type of urban boundary expansion as well." Ferguson : "Given the projected growth, what is the current inventory within the current urban boundary?" Robichaud : "Residential side? Based on the existing land inventory as of December 31st 2004 there was approximately 31,000 units on the basic land inventory which would be sufficient lands, depending on the unit types, til approximately 2015. Some of the unit types will get depleted a little bit sooner. Other types there's a longer supply." Ferguson : "Would it be beneficial, would it be legal for this council to give direction to staff that no urban boundary expansion be considered if residential is a component of that urban boundary expansion?" Robichaud : "The provincial policy statement requires that municipalities designate and maintain a 10-year supply of land for residential and non-residential purposes. So until such time as we can make a business case to do an urban boundary expansion for residential purposes, based on our existing inventory supply, we would have a difficulty in the short term. In the medium to long term, there'll probably be a need to do an urban boundary expansion for residential purposes. On the employment side, the work that we've done on industrial business parks, the Hemson report in 2003, said that we had to maintain all of our existing industrial business park lands and we were short 700 acres. So from that study there's a shortage of employment lands til 2021, but we have more than sufficient lands in the short term for residential purposes." Ferguson : "Does the fact that 25,000 people a day leave here to work somewhere else factor into the requirement for residential property?" Robichaud : "Sorry, 25,000 people leaving Hamilton in a day would demonstrate why it's important to improve the employment situation in Hamilton , but we don't really have to address the residential side at this point in time." Ferguson : "The point is, I don't want to expand the urban boundary any more for residential purposes. That's the bottom line, or the triple bottom line." Robichaud : "Just to follow up on that, the province is also saying in their provincial policy statement that once lands are designated for employment purposes, they can only be redesignated to a non-employment use at the time of a comprehensive review. And they define that as being a five year review of an Official Plan. The province is recognizing that municipalities must designate, protect and maintain an ample supply of employment lands at all times in order to address that job-housing balance situation."

Whitehead : "My understanding from the report is there's going to be four public meetings and there's going to be consultations this summer, so the question's are (1) who decides on who the stakeholders are?" Robichaud : "We're in the process of compiling all of the stakeholder lists held by the city, by various city departments, and then making a determination as to what their interests are. Some stakeholders have indicated they only want to be consulted on transportation matters. Other stakeholders have indicated they want to be consulted on all events, so depending on the nature of that event, there'll be a decision. Well we sort of have two lists. We have one of individuals who've asked to be notified throughout the GRIDS process. Those individuals receive notification of everything that they want to be notified. In terms of the stakeholders, we're in the process of identifying which event did those stakeholders address the strongest desire . to be involved in and we will invite certain people based on that. Also depending on the nature of the event, if we felt that a certain group or groups of stakeholders have not been consulted on particular event, then we'd make sure they get an opportunity to participate if they also have, there's a group that's participated in one study, we may not invite them to one of the GRIDS events make sure that they've had an opportunity to get involved in the process." Whitehead : ".do we, the staff make that determination?" Robichaud : "We're in the process of putting together that list and that will be, staff will be sending out invitations to those groups, that's correct." Whitehead : "You also talked about the broader public consultations. Who in fact is going to be disseminating that information and is there another group . involved in the dissemination or is that just staff?" Robichaud : "Sorry, in terms of?" Whitehead : "The public consultation. You're going to go out to the community. There's a number of questions that've been asked. There could be feedback from the community. That information has to be disseminated. Whose taking that role? Who's responsibility is that?" Robichaud : "Staff will be the event, I mean everyone will be invited to those events, but staff will be listening to what the public are saying and then reporting back to council on the basis of what was heard at those events." Whitehead : "Okay, and, how are you advertising those public events and are we following purchasing policy in regards to the communications part?" Robichaud : "In terms of the communications plan, we're working with communications division developing that, but those individuals where we have their email addresses will be notified directly in terms of a event. The intent was to map out all four events up front so that we can then put a document on the GRIDS website indicating that this is the consultation plan so that people are notified. As well as we will be running advertisements in the Spectator prior to each of those events, so people will be notified." Whitehead : "I take it there's a budget for these public consultations? Is that laid out somewhere in the report?" Robichaud : "When the GRIDS study budget was set up in 2003, there was communications, consultation and meeting costs were built into that budget, that is correct." Whitehead : "Okay and my last question is, I'm trying to understand the role of the [Mayor's] advisory committee in relationship with staff. So can you just provide some clarification on exactly what the role is?" Robichaud : "The Mayor's Advisory Committee on GRIDS? They're there to help inform and provide strategic direction to staff. In terms of development of the consultation process, they provide feedback in terms of some of the work that's being done on the GRIDS process, as well as they were also in terms of making sure the right stakeholders were engaged, providing some feedback and making some suggestions, as well as they will have an opportunity to attend each of the events to the degree that they so choose, or attend those consultation events. Primarily the June event because it's the master plan event, I don't envision them as having a role at that event in particular, but in terms of the May, September and late Fall events, they could be able to attend those events." Whitehead : "Well I guess that creates another question in openness and transparency. Are we going to have the ability to see what that influence is with respect to staff that's provided through that particular committee? Is there like minutes or something we can follow?" Robichaud : "Yes, the agendas are forwarded to the mayor and all members of council, as well as the minutes will be forwarded to, er the minutes will be forwarded to the mayor and all members of council." Whitehead : "Thank you."

McHattie : Compliments staff on presentation, especially ICLEI representative. Says triple bottom line "is really leading edge. It allows us to make much better decisions than we have in the past, or at least to inform us with much better options. It's still up to us to make the much better decisions. We'll have to see how that plays out. But it gives us much better information and the cross review of issues." Asks about the committee that GRIDS reports to. Currently Strategic Planning and Budgets, and that resulted in recommendation to present to COW. "My sense is that GRIDS is important enough that it probably shouldn't be going to SP&B. It shouldn't be going to PED. It should be going to COW." Asks this be made a general rule "because we all need to know about this stuff. They're the most important decisions we're going to make in the next umpteen years I would think." Asks Robichaud "those growth options, are they mutually exclusive? I'm wondering about a downtown plus nodal combination. Does something like that make sense, or could it make sense?" Robichaud : "Yes . one of the elements of a growth option people may like but they may not like the entire package so there may be an opportunity to start developing hybrid options. So a downtown nodal focus with appropriately distributed development -something to that effect that would bring together the best elements of each of those growth options is something that will also be considered. And we'll be asking for public feedback on that. What do you like about an option and what don't you like about an option. To see if there's merit in developing the hybrid option or modification of one of the options that were developed." Harvey confirms this has been discussed. McHattie : "Last question I have is a little bit philosophical but I won't look for a philosophical answer . just logistically or almost legally, I'm looking at how the province views what Hamilton 's going to do. We know that they've got a suggestion that they want us to take an extra 200,000 people or up to a total of 700,000 in Hamilton . If we decide from a quality of life perspective, and looking at the carrying capacity of what Hamilton can handle, in terms of additional people. If we decided as a council and a community that we only want to go to 625,000 - and that number's picked totally out of the air - . does the province have sort of legal or higher level problems with that, or are they going to sorry Hamilton, you can't just take 125, we need you to take the full 200?" Robichaud : "The Places to Grow document sort of hints at our future in that regard in that it has a population forecast that sort of uses the middle forecast of 660,000 people for Hamilton by 2031, which is sort of, and then the document goes on further to say that through the development of a sub-areas growth strategy as part of the Places to Grow process there could be a further refining and redistribution of the allocation of population. So ultimately what would come out of the sub-area growth strategy process, whether the population would be less than 660,000 in the draft Places to Grow document, or more. Once that number though is set, and referred to the provincial policy statement, then you have that to maintain that supply of land to accommodate the projected growth. It would really be whether, how the population numbers for Hamilton gets allocated through that sub-area growth strategy process that dictates then what our growth would be ultimately going forward." McHattie : "That sub-area growth strategy, is that going to happen after we finish GRIDS?" Robichaud : "The timelines aren't official yet, but they'll probably be wrapped up in 2007, the numbers I'm hearing about sub-area growth strategy. So one of the things that we've come across though, is not necessarily having more population means more urban land requirements. . there is growth options that say depending on how we use the land, and the form of development we take, can have implications on the land that's required to accommodate our projected growth. So that's one of the things that we're starting to test through the GRIDS process, and also through the cost-benefit analysis. If it means a large infrastructure commitment to bring another area on-stream, then we'll have to make that decision as to whether or not it makes sense from a financial cost-benefit perspective where we say 'no, it's just too cost prohibitive and it doesn't make sense to pursue that growth option or that magnitude'." McHattie reminds mayor of motion to move reporting to COW.

Mitchell : "I support that idea of councillor McHattie's as well. . coming to the governance committee . I think three main sub-committees and bring back the idea of committee of the whole for ." Asks Harvey how long before we can use triple bottom line "and we can teach the province how to use it" on current value assessment. "Quit taxing seniors out of their homes". Harvey responds. Mitchell says "if they would have used TBL for the Greenbelt as well it might have looked a lot better for the agricultural community" and also this morning's decision on city hall "we might have thought of what we did just a little bit differently as well." Asks Robichaud when the public process will start for urban boundary expansion at the airport. Robichaud : "Staff are in the process of trying to schedule that public meeting, preparing the notice so they can meet their deadlines . so we can have that meeting as soon as possible .intent to have that meeting within the next couple of months . target we hope to have that meeting in June." Mitchell asks that the meeting be held in Mount Hope . "I'd like to have those meetings for the public up in that area, cause I think its going to draw a massive amount of people there."

DiIanni : Thanks presentors and supports TBL. ".especially as we try to have not only council but other groups see the total picture that TBL represents and not just a piece of the picture . in the past we've talked about the stools . that people have used those words to beat the other two legs up rather than to cooperate . the success or failure will be in the implementation. . Turning to the Mayor's Advisory Committee, and I'm not sure where councillor Whitehead was going with the openness and transparency. You chair that committee, councillor Kelly. How many meetings have there been of that committee?" Kelly : "Uh, well we were delayed as you know Mr Mayor because we were waiting for some provincial information. As you remember the original timeline that Minister Caplan and Minister Gerretson told us that they were going to have their legislation in place by last November. They were delayed and it was actually March, I guess, before we finally got some of those details. That's not to say that Steve and his staff weren't busy working with the province anyway, but it did hold up work for the Advisory committee. So we're back on stream right now. We've met twice, I think, in the last little while with updates about TBL. We're also, of course, working with the TBL sub-committee, with Lynda [ Harvey ] of course, who's wearing two hats in these processes. And we, last meeting we decided on the public consultation process and set up a meeting schedule for that and we'll have another meeting coming up in the next little while to get updates with ICLEI." DiIanni : "So you do circulate the agendas and minutes for that" Kelly interrupts: "And when we do start the public consultation, just to touch on the point that I think a couple of different people have brought up, it's our intention that all of the information that's acquired at those public information sessions will be included in the report which will be distributed to everybody." DiIanni : "But I'm interested in the answer to the question did you circulate the agendas and the minutes of those meetings?" Kelly : "Yep." Robichaud interrupts: "As an oversight on my part, the first agenda was not circulated, but the last agendas for the meeting were circulated and once the minutes are received by the committee they may be made available to the mayor and members of council." DiIanni : "And the meetings are open to the public?" Robichaud : "To the best of my knowledge, yes." DiIanni : "Well I would like that to be the case so that would relieve any concerns about" interrupted by Kelly : "And as for reporting, Mr. Mayor, you may recall when you set this committee up, it was your suggestion that it go to Strategic Planning, but I fully concur with councillor McHattie. Now that we're getting down to the short strokes in moving forward on this, I think that maybe changing that and having some report to the committee of the whole might be a bit more expeditious process." DiIanni : "Okay, thank you." Whitehead : "The discussion in Strat Budgets in fact was around that yes it should go to committee of the whole, one, and two, we need to understand, in respect to what staff's doing with the advisory committee, what influence it has on that process and how do we monitor that influence. That's all the question was about. So we don't get to see that because there is no minutes. There is no agenda. At least we haven't seen one yet, so it was in the context of let's understand what role the advisory committee is providing, and what influence it's providing with staff with regards to direction. We have no way back to that information at this point in time." DiIanni : "Well I suggest that you attend the meetings and be part of that, councillor Whitehead. In fact, we have a couple of vacancies and we'll have to shore those up. I will speak to the chairman about that. I'd like a recommendation that we receive the report ."

Committee moves into camera to receive legal advice [on the Lister Block deal]. DiIanni : "And just to respond to the question I've been asked, we're going to ask the clerk to monitor us that we'll reserve the in camera items to what needs to be in camera, and then we'll have an out of camera discussion on the report. And also the reports will be made public, depending on what council decides, but there's intention to release the report in its entirety as well."

Lister Block deal:

5. PRIVATE AND CONFIDENTIAL - Council approved releasing this report to the public

5.1 Lease - 28-50 James Street North , 5-21 and 33-35 King William Street , Hamilton , LIUNA Local 837 Lister Ltd. Partnership - Ward 2 http://www.city.hamilton.on.ca/clerk/agendas-minutes-reports/
committee-of-the-whole/2005/May09/Lease%20Lister%20Block
%2028-50%20James1.pdf

The council met in camera on this item, after which an open session was held where each councillor expressed their position on the Lister Block deal. The transcript is provided below. At the end of the meeting, after voting 13-3 to accept the deal, the councillors also voted unanimously to release the confidential report (see link above) to the public.

Councillor Whitehead : ".I'm in support of the report and I don't want to hide behind the fact that a, it is an investment and the fact a, that it will cost more to support the Lister Block. I believe that the Lister Block is.symbolic of what's wrong with our downtown and we heard it loud and clear from the public and other stakeholders in the downtown that a, they needed action and I think that's to the credit of yourself (DiIanni) and asking - that having discussion with LIUNA to a, to a put this in play. Um, I don't want to hide behind the fact that this is gonna cost us more, but I think it's defendable in the sense that a, we're, we're we're trying to build on a renaissance of downtown. We've had a lot of good news stories on the downtown and this is a continuation of those good news stories. Ah, we hear that this is phase one, which would suggest potentially that there might be a phase two. We know that a, this facility will in fact be paying taxes, at least the non-exempted portion of the building and we know that a for new buildings, there's no real comparatives in this community, other than a, the federal building, in new space. We, we heard that that new space is probably grossing around, I think I heard $48 per square foot. But that's the only real comparative in regards to new development in, in our downtown. Everything else is a different class of a office space. Not necessarily the most functional space. And a, if we're really committed we have to show leadership and sometimes we have to take a hit from some of our critics for making those kinds of decisions. But I think they're leadership kinds of decisions in respect to where we're moving in the downtown. We've identified the downtown as a, as a priority and I think, a, by supporting this particular report that's in front of us this afternoon that a, we are saying we are in fact saying that we are committed to developing downtown. Thank you.

Councillor McCarthy (hear a voice off mic) Yes, on the other hand. I won't be supporting this proposal. There's absolutely nothing in here that makes any sense to me at all. When we are dealing with budgets around this table, we're dealing with infrastructure that's decaying. It makes no sense to me at all to play Santa Claus to a developer who bought a piece of property. If he can't make a go of it, that's his problem, not ours. Ah, we know that we got property in the downtown that are going begging for a lot less than this, which would be more than adequate to serve us, our Staff. We've got a potential Cadillac version that we're supposed to be standing behind and supporting a partnership with a developer. I think this is a very, very slippery slope. I think legally that's a very, very slippery slope. Ahm, I'm gonna ask for the second time today: Did we come into some money that I don't know about? There's no way I can go door to door and defend something like this. We're throwing money away on a single proposal for a developer in the downtown. We have got all kinds of programs in the downtown to redevelop, to a, to create incentive packages. We've got plenty of carrots going. There's an awful lot of money going in the downtown core. Ah, this, I feel like, I feel like in a different time zone here because I've obviously missed something during the budget process that's crucial, that we feel that we can play with this kind of money. Anyway, no, I won't be supporting that application. Thank you - and I'd like a standing recorded vote.

Councillor Braden: I agree with the former speaker. I want to just get a few points in mind here. Um, first of all, let's just assume we've had a presentation and the presentation is involving high quality space, perhaps the best space in town. Um, we've had enough warning, I think, from our City Manager, and certainly head of finance, to be careful about what we're doing in terms of our operating and long term costs. And frankly, I don't need first class office space myself, I don't think my assistant does, and I don't think we do as a corporation. In particularly you have to pay a big premium for that, so I don't see, I think it's very difficult to compare the space that we might have here or Stoney Creek or the old Right House building, whatever premium space is. Secondly, if we go ahead and promote the building of more space, and I'm all for that if that's part of a trend. It would seem to me since there are so few new buildings going up that taking the high quality space may in fact reduce rents as opposed to increasing everybody else's rent, 'cause really, we want the economy to improve for everybody, not, not just for our employees. Thirdly, I'm on the Children's Aid Society - and we just - everybody has a problem that's growing, so we bought some space and way down in Stoney Creek . right across from Home Depot, in Hamilton, on Centennial . we probably bought that space for about 3 years worth of rent - don't quote me on that, but there are real deals in this town because not everyone has done so well economically. So there are opportunities staring us in the face, that you can purchase really, really cheaply, and they're relatively modern. That building's probably only 10 or 15 years old. Um, we know that there is space available right now. We don't know what it's going to be worth tomorrow, but right now, people are paying, all costs in, $19.60 (per square foot). Now this isn't substandard space, this is acceptable space, for $19.60, everything in, today. Let's assume that the competition wants $35 a square foot. That number is in fact not a proposal number, that's my number. The difference over 60,000 square feet equates to almost a million dollars more per year. Just for that space. Those numbers I've created. Of course the proposal we have heard may be better or worse. That's a $1,000,000 per year. That doesn't include jigging the taxes 'cause that might affect it a little bit, but it will certainly be more than $900,000 per year. Um, if you read the Toronto Star on the weekend, you see the article about Welland. I mean, it's very much like Hamilton, that our economy from being a primary industrial and secondary industrial type City is a little bit fragile, and we're trying to make this change from one kind of economy to the other. Little changes are important because they have a big effect on the local economy and the direction that we might give. And I think we've gotta be really careful. I have been on record and will continue to spend money, it's not part of my world, to try to get the downtown moving again. The program we got down the street, you know, they create the old dentists' office into accommodation. That seems to work. It's a reasonable amount of money, rolls over, we get, we get real results. It isn't very sexy, but it gets change and I think we're really doing something. If my numbers are correct here, there might be one singular project that needs $1,000,000 a year for 15 years. That's what I call a subsidy. It's $15,000,000 just for one project. Well, if that project was gonna boom to 100 others, this would be worth it. But if it doesn't, that's an exorbitant amount of money for one singular project. There's some sacred cows in this town. I still don't understand them. The idea of this project is worth doing, but just today we continue to not going ahead with not building a new City hall. That's probably worth about 5 or 10 million right there in 15 years. It's a historical designation between 5 and 15 million, so just round that off at 10, and this project here over 15 years -- $15,000,000. So those are things that we, in fact, didn't want to see coming, but we're spending more money here per minute than we were on the whole budget deliberations. And in fact, for simply one project to come out of this, at that kind of money. I can imagine it's a tough sell in the City; it's obviously impossible where I'm from. This is just money we don't have. Again, you heard 2 hours ago, we don't have the money to do these projects, we just go ahead and do them anyway. That $15,000,000 is coming right out of my neighbors pocket and your neighbors. Unfortunately, we shouldn't have got this far down the project. We're just living in a fantasy world. Thank you.

Councillor McHattie : I just want to say that I'll be supporting this as well. It's again, as Councillor Whitehead indicated, it's definitely more expensive than some other options, then again, it's not as expensive as another new development, the newest development we've had which is the Federal Building. They're paying more ah, per square foot in that a, facility than a we would be in the case of the Lister Block. So we know there are some different comparisons to make. Ah, I understand the previous speaker's comments. Um. It is a difficult a, thing to do in terms of the cost involved, but it is very much an investment. I think we have to think in terms of investment in the, in the future of the downtown creating confidence with the Lister Block development. For other, other developments to happen around it as well and throughout the downtown. So it's, it's clearly a financial investment on our part, but also an investment will spin off, I believe, in additional development throughout the downtown, particularly thinking back to the Places to Grow a, focus, where, where downtown Hamilton is a ah, is a priority growth area, so we know there'll be some investment from the province eventually in downtown Hamilton. And we just had a presentation earlier on on our GRIDS process and the downtown redevelopment focused heavily on that as well as a possibility for development. So I think this all fits together in that. I'll be watching closely, Mr. Mayor, to, to make sure the heritage aspects are well-respected. Ah, those are critical to this and we - that's one of the reasons we're investing in this, is is to have a redeveloped Lister Block that has the heritage aspect. We'd like to see that whole area be heritage district, either formally or in just in name. We also need to have this adhering to the design guidelines that are part of the downtown secondary plan as well. So there's a number of checks and balances that we have, ah, that will put this project to the test to make sure it adds to the downtown. It looks the way it does now, and it looks better than it does now rather, like it used to and provides that heritage aspect to the downtown, so all in all it's certainly an investment, one I believe we can support. Thank you.

Councillor Jackson : Ahm, I will be supporting this recommendation here before us today ah. We've known for the last a several years that a Council of the past and current and possible future was probably gonna have to do something to help prime the pump with regards to the Lister Block and which is such a key cornerstone of any downtown revitalization. So the fact that this is here before us, I don't think is really new to most people around this table who have been here the last 4, 5, 6 years. Actually since LIUNA bought the Lister Block and took it over in 1999 I believe. Ahm, a lot of this is a tremendous faith as well in LIUNA. I have seen so many times and having visited the LIUNA Station, the former CN Station, for various banquets and functions down there since it's been converted with millions of dollars of their money a towards their restoration. I have seen tremendous spin-off affects, both from the human standpoint and the economic standpoint for that area of our City. I've seen people come back to attending a convention, a banquet there at LIUNA Station, who just marvel at what's been done with the conversion and it has caused them to have a different opinion on that part of our City and upon our City overall as we're trying to change the image of the City of Hamilton. I mean through all the workshops we've had since amalgamation, if I recall at the top or near the top was the image of Hamilton. That's come out consistently, loud and clear. So you know sometimes to brand yourself differently, to change the image in a positive way, you've gotta spend some money. And this is gonna be one of those occasions where I believe strongly, that we're gonna have to spend some money to be part of changing the image of Hamilton, particularly our downtown, to continue the momentum that has begun the last several years, both from a residential standpoint, from a commercial standpoint, from a niche standpoint, with regards to particular events that occur downtown, that are attracting people back downtown by the way of thousands and hundreds, whether it's for a hockey game, concert, whether it's for the opera, theatre. We're seeing some good things happening downtown. Here we got a local community group, a union, who have had long established history in this community, that are believing in different components in different locations of the downtown and I believe they are also part parcel of something in the future coming from, with the Connaught, the former Connaught Hotel as well. So here's a union, here's a group of thousands of employees, part of this union, who believe and have been putting their money where their mouth is and now they're saying they cannot do this one alone and we either have to believe in this or else we just will simply probably whittle away a glorious opportunity to help further enhance the image of Hamilton. And not only did um, not only did we through the capital budget the last couple years, but also this Council, approved secondary plans for Hamilton and its downtown. And if I recall just a couple months ago, King William St. is one of those commercial types specialty districts that we designated through our capital budget, through the policy planning that Mary Lou Tanner and others brought before this Council. We all talked about oh how wonderful this is, how potentially positive and exciting this could be for an area of our downtown that has needed it. And let alone the established businesses who have hung in there, as long as they have such as the Reardon Meats and many others in our downtown community who have continued to believe in Hamilton, in spite of many of the others migrating to other parts of our City and beyond, we need to do this as well for them. So for me once in awhile, you need to try to be part of something that is big that could have such a positive domino ripple effect across our community, and I believe not only in helping to restore the Lister Block but will attract potentially more commercial tax dollars. We've talked about attracting, enticing commercial tax dollars to our community. We need to do more of that, and I - LIUNA is already trying to get some new tenants as part of a phase two down the road that will bring this City commercial tax dollars that will mitigate the amount of dollars that this is potentially going to cost us to be part of this partnership. And so I believe overall, that um, we need to do this on behalf of our community who are watching and are looking to see. We are doing waterfront trails. We're doing the Hughson St. conversion, has all been done beautifully. We need to walk down Hughson St. and see the connections we're building between the harbour, the waterfront park, Gore Park, the Go Station, the Chateau Royale. All these connection pieces are building and this is a major cog, right there in the heart of it and we need to be part of this exciting proposal and sometimes they'll cost some dollars in cash, but I believe in the long run our overall image of Hamilton will benefit enormously and that's why I'm proudly supporting it here today. Thank you.

Councillor Pearson : What else can I say to you after Councillor Jackson's comments. I certainly will be supporting this. It is an investment in our community and our future of Hamilton. I think that this is something that has been on the books for an awful long time, even before LIUNA purchased this land and it's always been the intent and the hope of many residents in this community that it be maintained. And I think what we can do to put forward, understanding yes, it will cost, but it will also generate a lot more improvement coming behind it and a, we will see much greater improvement to all of the City with this. I will be supporting it.

Councillor Mitchell : LIUNA Station is a beautiful spot, and we've all been down there, and LIUNA Gardens in Winona, in my ward, is a beautiful spot as well. They've done incredible work. But today, I'm a little frustrated, because the decision comes to us to be made today, and I think we should have some presentations made before, to go along with this. I know there's different sets of numbers out there. But some of my concern, and I think next year we're all gonna feel it, and I'm gonna need the support next year of my Councillor colleagues, and we haven't done it yet, to go to the province and say, for an aging industrialized City, Current Value Assessment (CVA) tax shift is not equitable at all. I represent a ward that has a huge amount of residential development and people are buying town homes and densities are comin', and next year the tax increases that that ward's gonna hit to the everyday people who have been here, we're taxin' them out of our homes and I haven't seen any support for that. So, if you have an area of the City that doesn't get a tax increase and another area that does, if the new people or new Toronto money, or new people comin here, and you tax them, that's fine. But for the existing people when they're bein' taxed out of their homes, and they don't see that money stayin' there, they see a huge increase, service level decrease, and the money doesn't stay there to help them. It goes. And where. Here. And I support downtown Hamilton recovery, but it starts to appear, because of CVA, I will use that, I don't want to criticize my Councillor colleagues here, mostly CVA, it's an inequitable tax base that's coming from those existing people who have paid for everything once already, paid for their town halls, paid for their fire halls, (tape turnover).it'll be coming from those rural areas because of that inequity and as much as everybody wants it to recover - (interrupted by Mayor DiIanni ) that's an inequity. That's the reason why - Mayor: You've made your point, but your colleagues are asking me to put you on the agenda, at least to steer you towards the item before us - Mitchell: towards the item. Ok. I've made my point. There is an inequity here. We do know we have to correct that and I can't support it for that reason. That kind of expenditure for one business downtown when not everybody's helping pay for it.

Councillor Merulla : Just a clarification. I've heard 2 issues being presented, one being CVA obviously has an impact on the residents in Councillor Mitchell's area, which I agree. But I also heard in the same breath that its this Council and its expenditures that are being ???, so I'm not quite sure which one .(interrupted by Mayor)

Mayor : Ok. So that's a different topic altogether so we'll have our discussion at the appropriate time on that issue.

Councillor Samson : Certainly I'm in total agreement with what Councillor Jackson said. I guess for me all I have to do is walk down James Street and quite frankly, for the last number of years I've been embarrassed to walk down James Street and look up. When I look up and see what's happened to the Lister Block over those years, I used to go into the Lister Block. My parents used to have a lawyer who was in there, and it was a beautiful building. And we were proud of that. But it hasn't been that way, I mean it hasn't been up kept for the last probably 15 years and certainly in the last 10 years it's become a, I don't want to call it a disgrace, but I guess that's what it is. As we look right down in our downtown core - I mean, right across the road was the previous location of the City Hall and now we have the building, people coming back to Hamilton and looking up and seeing the Lister Block, and they just must shake their head. And the sooner that we can get that building going and if this proposal's gonna do that, I think it's a very, very small cost. And I have no hesitancy whatsoever on going, on getting on board this one.

Councillor Kelly : A number of great points I think have been made about this so far. And it all comes down to downtown revitalization. And we seem to be faced with a bit of a problem. We hear about the number of successes that are occurring downtown, we talk about 1000 new units of market ??? with people moving down there, we talk of new restaurant development, we talk about some of the improvements in BIA's, and invariably the critics, and there are critics that say yea but, look what's going, look at the Lister Block. You haven't done anything about the Lister Block and a number of my colleagues have already talked about. It's become the flashpoint about everything that's wrong with the downtown, and clearly, we're not gonna turn people's ideas around about this City until we get this project fixed. We entertained the idea a few months ago. I think it was Councillor Merulla who brought up the idea of actually buying the building, and seeing if we could fix it up. Clearly we - we, and that didn't go too far simply because of the financial situation. Time and time again when the media talk about what's wrong with Hamilton, they point to the Lister Block, whether it's in the print media, the ah, the ah, the electronic media, whatever the case may be - when are they going to do something about it. Well, here's our opportunity to do something about it. And what invariably, when people call those shows or write into the Spectator, whatever the case might be, they come up with these ideas, all good ideas about what we need to do, but what we have to do at this table is - ok, how do we pay for it. 'Cause it's gonna cost money. Someway. Do we buy the building and fix it up and renovate it and look for tenants? Yea, I s'pose we could if we had those resources. Do we try to encourage private sector money to come into it? Certainly we do because it's a privately owned building. We have an opportunity here to be a tenant. We're not renovating the building. We're not building the building. Somebody else is putting the money into that. The same people who, as Councillor Jackson alluded to, have fixed up LIUNA Station the same people who are investing in the Connaught Hotel are coming to the table with other partners and they're saying Yah, we're gonna put our money on the table 'cause we believe in downtown, and they've already shown that with their track record. But we want the City to be committed to this as well. This is not unique. Other cities have done this in other parts of the country and it's all gone towards the rejuvenation of downtown. This is the price tag that has to be paid and I don't necessarily agree with some of our other colleagues that there are a bunch of numbers out there. There's a lot of speculation. Made up numbers by people. Well, here are the facts, right here. And ah, I'm comfortable with the numbers here and I'm comfortable with the long term result. By the way - and - and I - from the discussions a number of us have had with owners of the building. We're not the only tenants in this building and we don't have to wait for phase two. This is the whole, this is the beginning of a series of developments down there. We talked about our secondary plan for King William Street, we talked about having 2 anchors at either end of it, and we've seen the development at one end, of course, with the Dofasco Centre for the Arts, ah, which ah, spurred the development of the Junction restaurant right across the street. A lot of money went into that building. Ah, we've seen other developments going on down there, CityView and City Places, uh, er, residential developments right around the corner from that. You see how investing in one aspect of it has spurred growth in other aspects of it and it's starting to move down the street. We need an anchor at the other end. We need an anchor at King William and James and we always looked to the Lister Block to be that anchor. This is an opportunity to finally clean up this property, in companionship of course, with LIUNA and with Hi-Rise and with other partners who are gonna be involved in this and will soon be announced by the LIUNA people. I'm happy to support this at this time, and I would advise all our colleagues, for the sake of the betterment of downtown and the long term development, to support it as well.

Councillor Bratina : I promise I'll be brief. It's a very important day for Hamilton. This is a City that's been down on its luck for a long time and I'm really tired of Hamilton being used as a movie backdrop for Bagdad or some American ghetto City or something like that. We gotta move past that. You know, someone said around the table it's not our problem. Everything in Hamilton is our problem. If there's a problem, whether it's a crack houses or disadvantaged people or the homeless, we take it on as our problem. We can do things a lot cheaper, we could probably rent school portables or Quonset huts and do our business there until City Hall is repaired. But I'd rather reflect on the Europeans who completely rebuilt their cities and their nations after the war. And a recent example was the bridge in M??? was destroyed. A great old 500 year old bridge, shattered into pieces into a river and they picked it up piece by piece. They could easily have just dropped a Bailey bridge across the space and said sure. They wanted their bridge back. Mr. Mayor, I want my City back

Councillor Ferguson : One question to Mr. (Tim) McCabe (Staff) : If this is approved, when do you anticipate construction begin? Or destruction? McCabe: Within 6 months or before the end of the year. Ferguson : It's pretty well all been said and I'll be very brief. Downtown core goes, so goes the rest of the municipality. I think it's time we got rid of pigeon hotel. I'm supporting this, not because of the accommodation, we all know we need accommodation. It's the market rate. It's going to increase taxes, but more important, it's gonna be the economic development and the accompanying spin off that's driven by that in that particular area and indeed throughout the whole municipality, so I'll support it.

Councillor Bruckler : Just a question to Staff here. Is this building eligible for any of the downtown incentive programs it -- Mayor DiIanni (interrupting): We had that question before and we don't - go ahead Lea Ann. Lea Ann Coveyduck: There is a heritage tax incentive program called TIP that this building was eligible for under a previous application. So, depending on whether or not it can be restored to this extent, it could apply for that. I do not believe ERASE will apply to it because the ERASE program does not apply in the downtown although we're working towards that and the Enterprise Zone may apply, however I don't believe the Enterprise can be accommodated if the heritage TIP is applied; we can't use both programs. Bruckler: Thank you. The reason that I asked that is I think it's incumbent that we, we participate as a full partnership and I think there are programs within this community, ah that may not qualify for that and a, the short while that I've been around this table, I mean the Lister Block has been extremely, extremely active as far as concerns around this table. It's coming up over and over again. And I for one don't want to continue to, to sit here and talk about what would we, what could we do about the Lister Block. And I think this is an opportunity to go from albatross to phoenix and a, I think if we can give it that extra little push, ah, so be it. I think it will enhance the survival, revival of the downtown. People from all parts of this City say 'I don't want to go downtown anymore'. I think if we can give them some reason to come downtown, and this may be part of it. I think we have to be very positive about that and at some point in time we have to stop. We have to say this may be, this may be the ticket for it so I would be in support of that Mr. Mayor.

Councillor Collins: It's very difficult to argue against and rally against a brand new City hall for the last several years with the price tag of about $100 million and then conversely, ah, you know, not support ways and means in which to accommodate our Staff within the centre of the City and so when I looked at this proposal, um, with the information that we received from our Staff in regard as to where this falls in regards to market rent, in regards to how many employees we need to accommodate in the interim over the next number of years, and for all the other reasons that have been mentioned by some of the other Councillors, especially Councillors Jackson and Bratina and Samson. I mean, I mean, I'm of the nature where I don't recall the downtown being at its peak. I wasn't around to, to see those days. I want to hear the good stories that many of my constituents and my colleagues um, have told me. Um, it's difficult to, to hear them and then at the same time look at what we're faced with today. Um, and we all know what baggage has come with Lister and some of the other buildings in the core area, um, fires, um, pigeons, the boarded up ah, windows, the ripped posters, the graffiti. I think every instance or every opportunity we have to address some of those issues, bearing in mind that there is a financial cost, but one in which our Staff have clearly illustrated, and I think we have come to the conclusion around the table, it's one that's financially affordable and one that we can support for all of those reasons. So Mr. Mayor, I'm a, I want to thank our Staff and you and your office, ah, for taking up the torch, um, with this project. I just hope that there are others that will follow it and we can make the same business case, and same, ah, come to the same conclusions that in fact, um, the partner that we're dealing with today is someone who has a proven track record in the downtown, not with just LIUNA Station and perspective the Connaught, but let's not forget the retirement home in the core here and their own office building on Hughson St. where they've done um, some tremendous work. And so I'm looking forward to this, um, over the next several years and seeing it come to fruition and hoping that there are other, others on the horizon where we can be a partner and stakeholder.

Councillor Morelli: I wasn't planning to speak, but, ah, I will. As you know, I strongly support this project and certainly see it as a key investment, ah, in our community area. I think that for me everything starts with, with need and obviously, ah, I think this fits the, within the scope of being a critical need. You know, sometimes when you, you look at the City as a - unfortunately or unlike Councillor Collins I do remember the glorious days of downtown and I ah - I was just saying to Councillor Merulla that the original Vic Tanny's was in the Lister Block, ah, years ago an, and the old shoeshine, ah, people on the bottom floor but I think it starts with need and quite frankly, when you take an aerial view of where we've come with the City, given the fact that it's been on a downturn in the little last while this is a more critical component than ever because we, we have worked well in the west, we've got the old federal building uh, set up, we got the new hotel, we got some things going down at the, ah, ah, Main and James, and I think we see things south, I think that we're into it with the Chateau Royale, we got the harbour, an 'ere's that one piece in the middle, an if you move again east towards King William - it all comes together and I think that, that's the part where we can now see others hopefully come forward and start to see the potential on infill. And so I think it's a, it's a important to see it from that perspective. I certainly ah, will be, ah, looking forward to this moving forward. I think the other part that's critical for me, is that a, anytime you develop a plan or you decide to do something that responds to need, the the critical piece is the implementation. And quite frankly, I ah, we have a group here that ah, I think the comment was made that they believe but they do put their money where their mouth is, and I think that ah, and we can feel fairly confident, not just in what they say but what they've done and what I expect they will do here. And so I think that that component - in fact I'd rather take a great player than a good plan. I think that I'm fairly confident that in that fact here and I see it also as a ripple effect. You know this is not just for Hamiltonians; this is ah for people that come to this community. I know in the last few years we've tried to sell some conventions and brought people here and I can tell you that ah, the more they can traverse the downtown core, because they don't often get to our neighbourhoods, an, and get a good impression and see it develop, the more they'll go away and see Hamilton in a greater light and even potentially consider coming here. So I think this is a continuation of a great piece that ah we're moving forward with. I salute you, I salute Staff and I salute this Council for having the courage to hopefully, ah, support this thing and see it come to fruition.

Councillor Merulla: I just wanna I guess emphasize my support for this project. I know that, um, I know that people alluded to LIUNA and their involvement in this and I think that everyone recognizes how much they've contributed to this community. Having said that, I'm not going to be shy to congratulate their efforts and having taken the risks to obtain this particular project. I know that, ah, the proposal to both Councillor McHattie and I brought forward would have cost the City a significant amount more, had we pursued the housing iniatives in conjunction with commercial iniatives ah, by purchasing that particular building. So in essence from our perspective we're saving a significant amount of money. Having said that, I noticed that, ah, looking at the negative comments in the brief time this proposals been thrown out publicly, some of the same people have used the Lister Block to politically disadvantage this Council are the same ones using it to politically disadvantage moving on with this particular project. And I find that hypocritical and unacceptable, but laughable at best. And I will tell ya, the investment aspect came up and it's unfortunate that people aren't looking at this as an investment because I think everybody at one time or another in the last 10 years around this table referenced the Lister Block as a key component of our revitalization and really symbolically showing this City where we're going. But I'll tell ya one other thing. I've been interviewed on a couple fronts on this issue by the Hamilton Spectator, and one thing I know for certain now, more than ever before, when you're negative with them, you get print. When you're positive you never get print. Thank you Mr. Mayor.

Mayor DiIanni: Oh Gosh. Let me make a couple of comments (laughter) on that. First of all, let me, let me acknowledge all of the comments that have been made today and ah, and ah acknowledge the fact that I think that everybody speaks ah, for what they see to be the best interests of this Council. That's what makes, that's what makes democracy interesting, is that we throw all our ideas on the table. At the end of the day, we take a vote on move on. But I want to congratulate the supporters of this project especially, ah, because, sz sz, you are not going to be surprised I'm going to be supporting this. I think, ah, I think we are on the verge of making a decision that will determine a legacy for this Council and will provide a legacy for this community. As this project is redeveloped. I'm convinced of that. Ah, anda, I do know that it is the role of local government, government at every level ah, to intervene for the betterment of the community when a, when they deem that they can and should intervene. And that's essentially what we're doing here. Ah, we're, we're becoming players and becoming partners ah, to move the revitalization of our downtown to the next level. And some of you have spoken quite eloquently about the positive signs that we're seeing, although there has been this gap, it's not the only gap, but it's a significant gap, ah, in the Lister property, ah, that we've heard about ta, um. All of us have known about it, we've lived through - my first pair of glasses, ah, was purchased at Tait Gibson's and every time I drive by and I see the faded sign it's sort of a symbol of, of what's happened and people around this table will have different - same glasses, yes, I know (laughter) will have different experiences. Just on Saturday night, in fact at the ah, ah, yesterday, not Saturday night, yesterday afternoon at the Convention Centre, a veteran came up to me and he said Mr. Mayor, he said, I'm a Hamiltonian. I've lived in Burlington for the last 20 years. This is the first time I've come back to downtown Hamilton - which tells another story by the way - and it's disgusting. And he pointed specifically to the Lister Block, to the Lister Building and I'm tired of having to apologize for our downtown. And, and it is our world. One of the previous speakers said, you know, it's not my world, it is our world, just as our world is West Flamborough and Marrit Hall in Ancaster, and Memorial Hall in a, in a, in Waterdown. Our world is our community and our community is defined by every square inch of it, not just one part of it. And so I think that as, as we partner, we're following the legacy of other Councils. City Views, City Places would not have been in existence if it hadn't been for the investment of taxpayers dollars in those 2 locations. Ah, Jackson Square I would say would not be in existence if the Council of the day hadn't participated with a developer to allow the development to go on on some City properties. (Comments off mic) and that - well - you - however you, however you deem that decision, Council did participate similarly with the Sheraton Hotel. It would not be in existence today if the Council of the day had not participated in that decision. So consequently we're being asked to participate in the redevelopment of the Lister Block. I personally would have wished that the private sector would have looked after it. But if, if the private sector wasn't in, in the mood, or if there was a market to do it by itself, it would have been done a long, long time ago. I came to the conclusion when we all said, you know, let's pick - and Staff said, let's pick a project that we want to move off the ground, I came to the conclusion that it would not have been possible if we had not become partners or engaged in some discussion to become partners in this. So I, I'm, I'm pleased to support this. I just want to point out, 'cause this been talked about in the media, that the negotiations for this were done by Staff, you've heard, in a private session, that the secret negotiators were our regular negotiators. There are the ones who have been meeting with, with our Staff with, with the other side to, to come to this deal. So this was totally drafted by Staff and I want to congratulate them and thank them for that as well. So I'll be pleased to, to support this at the appropriate time.

Councillor Whitehead : (second time speaker): What I didn't put enough focus on when we talked about the market, we talked about the symbolism, we've talked about, we've heard a lot about that around the table. There was really light mention on the heritage component. The Lister Block was the first indoor mall in Canada. In fact, it was a, being considered for national designation by the federal government. The a - and it was absolute clear to consultation that to preserve - we saw, you know we saw the old City Hall go down, saw the old Forum go down. Heritage buildings were going down at an alarming rate, not just in Hamilton but right across the country. And it's certainly clear and evident that to preserve heritage buildings means that the public sector has to be involved, because there's really not a strong business case from the business community. I know that certainly the consultation I participated, it was loud and clear, ah, if you want to preserve those buildings, it has to be public ah, ah, partnerships or public ah, public involvement. So I want to just focus on that, ah , in the context of making this decision, we are in fact, and I know the good work LIUNA does and LIUNA Station is an example of that will be preserved in respect to the façade and the things we feel so important in respect to that building. And the other piece I want to talk about. It was mentioned, but there's a couple other ah, buildings. We have LIUNA Gardens, we have LIUNA Station, we have retirement on Napier, we have one on Upper Paradise, and, and White Rose Plaza on Upper James are all -

Mayor DiIanni : Thank you, I'm sorry. Councillor Ferguson?

Councillor Ferguson : I'd like to defer to Councillor Bratina.

Mayor: Councillor Bratina and then the question will happen.

Councillor Bratina : Your Worship I'd like to move that we accept the recommendation of Staff regarding LIUNA.

Mayor: Thank you. Moved by Councillor Bratina , seconded by Councillor Ferguson . All in favour - standing and recorded vote - sorry.

For : Councillors Bratina, Bruckler, Collins, Ferguson, Jackson, Kelly McHattie, Merulla, Morelli, Pearson, Samson, Whitehead, Mayor DiIanni

Against: Councillors Braden, McCarthy, Mitchell

Motion passes. 13 for, 3 against

End Lister Block vote.