Craig Walkington, Anne Perry, Alvena Cain, Owida Downey, Maureen Strickland, Clark Cromwell, Delaine Clyne, Bryan Darrell

Arthur Carter, Sharon Laframboise, Sharon Martin

Call to Order - The meeting was called to order at 6:12pm. Craig welcomed our newest member, Bryan Darrell, and all members introduced themselves. 

Review of Notes from June 29, 2004 Meeting - Moved by Anne seconded by Alvena to accept the notes from the 29 June 2004 meeting. Carried.

Matters Arising From June 29, 2004 Meeting :

a. Integration of Design Concept in to HRM Plans - At the last meeting Maureen asked Craig to determine what the process was to ensure that the design concept proposal is formally presented/incorporated into the HRM plans. Craig said he had sent an e-mail to Holly Richardson and she responded with the following e-mail on 9 July 2004:

If I understand your question, I think you are asking how to incorporate the communities/CLC's ideas for Cogswell into any future planning strategies? Essentially, the discussion that you and Jacqueline and I had back in May would apply to your question. A formal planning process has not been initiated for Cogswell specifically and no decisions have been made by Council to even consider moving forward with the redevelopment of the interchange.

As you know Capital District is in the process of completing a feasibility report that looks at how other cities have approached similar projects and what the realities would be of dismantling the interchange from a financial perspective. This report is meant to assist Regional Council in making a decision on how to proceed. Capital District intends to make a formal recommendation to Council this fall on next steps for proceeding with a planning process for Cogswell. Obviously Council's decision will be weighed along-side other regional infrastructure priorities like those that will be critical to implement HRM's future regional plan. A public report should be available within the next few weeks if you wish to see the results.

The CLC can in the shorter-term get involved in any ongoing formal public meetings and other consultation that may relate to Cogswell or the lands around it. Public consultation for the Halifax Waterfront Development Plan will get underway in the next couple of months which will be an opportunity to consider the Cogswell lands in the context of a larger development strategy for the waterfront. Meetings for the Plan will be advertised publicly including local newspapers and the Regional Planning and Capital District web-site(s). www.halifax.ca (follow the quick link to Regional Planning and Capital District)

As you and Jacqueline and I discussed back in May, the CLC could also submit a written proposal of sorts to Capital District outlining the concepts that have been designed. In future, if Council chooses to move forward with a formal planning process for the redevelopment of the interchange the CLC could also be identified as a formal stakeholder in the process. I would just like to point out that while the CLC and surrounding community have had some really interesting conceptual discussions with respect to Cogswell, the larger community has not. A

widespread public consultation strategy would be a fundamental element of a future planning process for Cogswell and we would encourage the CLC to get involved as one of many active stakeholders.

Craig said that he would contact George Rogers and Frank Palermo to ask them to produce the Design Concept in a written format suitable for submission to HRM.

b. Letter to Mayor Regarding CIF - Craig said he had written a letter to the mayor outlining that many people were concerned that the CIF money would not be available when the CLC finally tabled its recommendations to HRM Council. In the letter to the Mayor, he requested that the Mayor and/or Council make a public declaration that the CIF is guaranteed and that they make this declaration as soon as possible. No response has yet been received from the Mayor's Office.

The issue of expenses to conduct community consultation coming out of the CIF was raised. It is felt by the CLC membership that effective community liaison (newsletters, flyers, posters, meetings, etc) and successful integration of the plant into the community are HHS Project expenses and should not be deducted from the allocated CIF. Craig said that he would contact Ted Tam to raise this matter.

c. Interim Holding Account for CIF - Craig said he had spoken with the Budget Manager at the HHS Project and it is not possible to put the CIF into a holding account where it would earn interest pending the approval of the proposal. Craig has asked for a statement reflecting this status which could be used at future public meetings. No statement has yet been received.

d. Effective Date for the D&D Water Solutions Contract - Craig said that he had e-mailed Ted Tam to inquire about the Effective Date (i.e. the start date when the contract to build the Sewage Treatment Plants begins). Craig received the following e-mail response from Ted Tam on 12 July 2004:

We have received the bonding and insurance documents from D&D Water Solutions. Our insurance consultant is reviewing and dealing with the insurance company. Once HRM is satisfied with the document, we will have the effective date. We are very very close to declaring the effective date ( within a day or two). Will let you know ASAP.

e. Employment Opportunities with STP Construction/Operation - The CLC is concerned that there is an expectation that the CLC will do something in this area; however, this area is not within the mandate or control of the CLC and should be handled by the HHS Project. Craig said he sent an e-mail to Ted Tam and Councillor Sloane requesting that they handle this issue in future. Craig has been advised that a response is being prepared to his e-mail.

It was felt that a newsletter could best deal with this issue and other frequently asked questions. Craig said that he would discuss with Deborah Story about preparing a newsletter. It was also suggested that D&D Water Solutions should conduct a public meeting to directly answer questions relating to employment opportunities and to discuss any other issues. Craig said he would talk to Ted Tam on this matter.

f. New Contact List - The new list will be available in the very near future and will be distributed by e-mail and/or regular mail.

Community Planning Model Proposal - Net Steps :

a. Door-to-Door Canvassing by Clark - Status Report - It was agreed at a previous meeting that Clark would canvass support by going door-to-door in the community. Clark said that it was going well and that he had received 32 signatures of support. This raises the support of the proposal as follows:

Yes: 119   No: 13   Spoiled Ballot: 1 Clark will continue to solicit support.

b. Delegation to CLC Members of the Request for Support Letters List- The list of potential recipients of letters requesting support for our proposal was divided up amongst the members. Members were asked to take the letters and personally deliver them to the recipients. Responses are to be forwarded to Craig.

c. Getting on HRM Council Agenda - In a previous meeting, Maureen had asked Craig to determine how we can be placed on Council's Agenda for the late August-September timeframe to present the proposal. Craig said he had contacted Deborah Story and received the following e-mail response on 8 July 2004:

I spoke to Ted Tam this morning about the procedure and he felt that your proposal could be attached to a information report from the Harbour Solutions staff and submitted to be included on the agenda. The recommendation would come from the CLC and not the HSP Office. We could request a time for the CLC to make a presentation to Council if you wish to do that in conjunction with the written proposal. I have contacted the Municipal Clerk's Office to confirm that this is the best way to proceed. I should hear back from them by tomorrow and I will let you know what they recommend. I have received a copy of the draft proposal from Maureen and I have forwarded a copy to Ted. The main thing we would be looking for is that there is nothing in the proposal contrary to HRM policy and procedure.

There is some concern about ensuring that the proposal is approved right away when presented to HRM Council. We want to ensure that it is not deferred or referred to Staff for a report. As such, it is important that the our submission be covered by an endorsing Staff report. The CLC membership asked if both Ted Tam and Deborah Story could come to the next CLC meeting to discuss this matter along with other issues.

d. Proposal Update - Maureen provided an update on the draft proposal. A draft was circulated to various people and she had received good feedback, in particular from Holly Richardson, on how to strengthen the report. Maureen circulated Holly's feedback and asked selected members to prepare sections for insertion in the final draft.

e. Next Sub-Committee Meeting - The next meeting will be at 6:00pm, 20 Jul 04 at Maureen's house.

Other Business :

a. Craig said that he had booked meetings for every two weeks on Tuesday evenings starting at 6:00pm. The George Dixon Centre will be closed during the first part of September. As such, there will be no meeting on September 7, 2004. If we need to meet, Craig will contact Sharon Martin to find another location.

Next Meeting Date - 6:00pm on Tuesday, July 27, 2004 at the George Dixon Centre. 
 

Adjournment - The meeting adjourned at 7:15pm.