Manitoba Committee Hansard — 28 May 1974 (Management Commission Committee, Sitting 4, 30th Legislature, 1st Session)

30-1-ma4

Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)

Legislative Assembly of Manitoba HEARINGS OF THE STANDING COMMITTEE ON MUNICIPAL AFFAIRS Chairman John C. Gottfried, M.L.A. Constituency of Gimli 8:00p.m., Tuesday, May 28, 1974. Printed by R. S. Evans- Queen's Printer for Province of Manitoba

>IUNICIPAL AFFAIRS COM!1ITTCE d:Ou p.m., Tuesday, aay 28, 1974 Cl!AIR:1A:;: >!r. John C. Gottfried. :·IK. CuAIR.'1A,\I: The committee will come to order. This evening we have the following bills to consider. I'll read them for your convenience. Tlle first is i\o. 3b,

an Act to amend The City of Winnipeg Act (1). The scconJ, 1\o. 45,

an Act to amend

an Act to repeal

an Act to validate anti confirm a certain agreement between the Town of Dauphin and the Rural Hunicipality of J.Jauphin. No. 4o,

an Act to amend The City of Winnipeg Act (2). i,o. 5b,

an Act to amenJ The Municipal Act (2) ;,o. )Y,

an Act to validate rly-law 326\J of The Town of Dauphin. I've been requested this evening to withhold Bills No. 45 and 58. Is that a greed? (Agreed) Fine. 77 He' 11 begin then lvith Bill 3o and I would ask you again to speak clearlv into the microphone a3 the recorder has difficulty interpreting. oill 38. t1R. TALLIN: Could I speak for a moment? �·!R. Cu.AIRMAN: >fr. Tallin. MR. TALLIN: In Bill 38 there are a number of typographical errors for which tVe haven't prepared any amendments and as we get to those sections, I'll indicate that we arc making the cbrrections of the typographical errors. �!R. CllAIRHAN: Now that the amendments have been distributed, we 1 11 proceed.

Section 1--pass.

Section 2 -- Mr. Johnston. MR. F. JOhliSTON: The explanation we have on

Section 2 of the bill, it says the aml..!ndment clarifies the Lieutenant-Governor's power to change the Hard names and boun,:aries of the City. Now is that--we have withdrawn that or the similar type of legislation from the till 46. ls this the same type of

section here in Bill 38. >IR. SCtiH.I::YLR: �r. Chairman, this really relates to a

section that is already in the City of Winnipeg Act which doesn't relate to the proposed pmver of the Lieutenant Governor in Counci l to alter the boundaries of wards and community committees and tue numbers and therefore the numbers of councillors, etc., etc., but merely refers to ti1e already delegated autlwri ty to Cabinet to change names of �rards. And I believe it's only in that respect. hut that's in the existing Act, \fr. Johnston • . ·!H.. CtlAIR>1Ah: Proceed. (Sections 2 to 7 were read and passed.)

Section 8, 143.1--Mr. Tallin. :·IR. TALLir<: In 143.1 (1), clause (

d) there is a mistake. It should be Sectio n 417 ratner than subsection 434 (2). The typesetter has just brought down clause (

b) down as clause (d),

Section 477. :-!R. �I!AllUAri: We' 11 proceed. (Sections 8, 9 and 10(

a) were read and passed.) i·!!{. TALLI:;: Iu Clause (

b) the last word is misspelled. Should be "thereof" instead of "tlwrof". :·IR. �llA1Rt1AN: (Sections 10 to 19 IJere read and passed.)

Section 20--Hr. J oi1nston. MR. Jlli1i'1STON: This

section is the one that we mentioned previously that requires the city to include with its tax notices information supplied by the Minister. �r. Speaker, I don't really think that the senior government of any kind any more taan we woulJ \vant the Federal Goverlimcnt directing the Provi ncial Government as to 11llat tcwy wo ulu put out in tl1eir notices of any kind anJ l really think that the cm.•pu.i.sury p.in uf this

section enforcing the city U• ·i iiC luJe an? information Hhi.ch ls ,ksigaJ.ted ov tile ii;Jistcr shoulJ have to f,O out in the taxes without the city first appruvlag \Ollat goes out Hit.1 tiwir tax notices or il.ny other notices that they put out. And I k1101v this refers to tax notices onlv but I think that the compulsory ;>..1rt of this sectio1� is bad, I think it should be "may"but not on the basis that they "snail" include therewith any printed notice. :-az. Ctu\IR:IAN: Nr. Premi..:r. :·li{. su.r:tYLR: i1r. Ci1airman, some of the points that :·lr.

Johnston made have i:>een given due consiueration and one of them for certain has been incorporated into tl1e amenuwents. I refer to the ueletion of the

section with respect to Lieutenant Governor in Coum:il being empOIJere..l to es tablis!J numbers of wards, councils, etc. But in ti1is particular case I fail to see Hhat the real problem is because there is, I beli"vc f or one taing, Sir, that this is a direct transplant or lift jf you like from til<e l1etropolitcm Corporation of Greater Winnipeg Act, :<nd it's only a matter of auminL; trati ve common sense and convenience which we re merely continuing. It doesn 1 t

78 May 28, 1974 (MR. SCHREYER cont 'd) ..... happen every year but there's often cause for some parti cular statement or notice. MR. CHAIRMAN: Any further que stions . Mr . Johnston. MR. F. JOHNSTON : I still think--you'r e saying "shall" to the city in this respect and the Act previou s to this amendment gave-- the government would contact the city and ask them if certain information could go out with tax notices and the city could consider whether that information should go out or not . This doesn 't leave the city any leeway at all as far as what will go in the tax notices.

Now the Premier mentions the Metro Act, I'm sure he's right on that but I don't think because it happened before that this is the right wav to do it, it' s compulsory,and as I say , I don't really think that we would appreci ate it as a provincial government if somebody were to tell us what would go out in our notices without consid eration . HR. CHAI� �: Mr . Pawley. MR. PAI\TLEY : �lr. Chairman , when we deal with the municipalities outside of Winnipeg , we find that the tax bills are prepared and sent out by the Department of Municipal Affairs .

They 're prepared according to a certain form which is common to all the municipalties outside of Winnipeg; certain information may be incl uded on those forms , certain words , the important think is consistency throughout the municipalities outside the city. In the same way , Mr . Chairman, I would think that we would su rely aim to want to ensure that the city's material and information that was sent out , instructions, was consistent with that which the Department of Municipal Affairs is issuing outside the City of Winnipeg .

I would hesitate to think that we would proceed to a situation where we might find two dif ferent sets of tax bills going out, one within the City- one outside the City with two dif ferent forms or two different types of information . I think it's important to obtain this consistency throughout the province, both city and rural , and if we do not make this provision mandatory then we could very well find ours elves with a form which is quite inconsistent , in fact contradictory with the forms that are going to other Manitobans. MR. CHAIRMAN: Shall 1qe proceed . Mr . Johnston . MR. F. JOHNSTON : l�ell, Mr.

Chairman, is the Ninister saying that they can include whatever they want with the bills in the municipal or the rural part of the country for towns or municipali ties. I know that the city does pay or the province pays in many respects for the printing of the bills , etc. but the inclusion of information with the tax bills should be the consideration of the municipalities or the cities . I really don't see where the word "shall" is the right way to do it at this time because you 're paying for the tax bills or not.

You should be able I to , the cities or municipalit ies , should be able to say what goes in their notices. MR. CHA IRMAN : Mr . Pawley. MR. PAWLE Y: Mr. Chairman , certainly the municipalties can add to the form which is sent out from the Department of Municipal Affairs1can add an addition al f�rm with di fferent information. I believe the City of Winnipeg has done that this year, other municipalities will probably be doing like wise with forms sent out from the Department of Municipal Affairs b�t the basic form is one that is common to all municipalities outside of Winnipeg .

They do not vary ,one mu nicipal ity to the other, they 're basic in form and message.B ut if the individual municipal ity wants to add a second or third form, there 's nothing to prevent them .from doing it because they distribute it at the municipal leve l. But the basic form which is pr inted and sent out from the Department of Municipal Affairs is a basic common form to all muni cipalities in the province .

I would think that the aim here would be to ensure that the forms sent out within the City of lvinnipeg would not be dissimilar or inconsistent with the forms that are sent out to the municipalities outside the City of Winnipeg . Now each year , in answer to Mr . .bhnston 's qu estion , the form that is forwarded for mailing to the municipalities outside the city is brought to me for its approval before it is actuall y sent out and even in the information in respect to any updating of any tax information is also ap proved at the ministerial level prior to it being forwarded out to the areas outside of l'innipeg .

And again I repeat, I hesitate to think what inconsistencies could dev�lop to have two di fferent forms going out to Manitobans,. on"' in IVinnineg and a different form outside of llinnipeg . MR. CHAIRMAN: Mr . Schrever . MR . SCHREYER : Well, Mr . Chairman, I wouldn't have thought that this was really a problem because for one thing , as the Minister has indicated and Mr . Johnston I am sure is aware;that with respect to all of the municipalities in the province with the exception of the City of Winnipeg,not only is the matter of notices or the

May 28, 1974 79 (MR . SCHREYER cont'd) •.... type of notices or information provided for in a mandatory way but the very form itself is predet ermined to all municipaliti es . And this was done years ago, several years ago, as I would think a matter of administra tive common sense so that it could be done in one more convenient and efficient computer operation. So it's been done . And insofar as the City of Winnipe g is concerned it's a separate tax notice but the form of that is approvab le by the Minister unde r existing la w in any case and all this does is ensure that there is a minimum of time delay.

If this is not here then presumably there could be1 theoretically at least, there could be all kinds of games played - the form is not approvab le in the Minister's mind unless it is of a certain type, etc .� and this merely takes care of the problem by making a cle ar provision. MR. CHAI��: Mr . Marion. MR. MARION : Well, Hr. Ctairman, I recall that after the first year of exist ence of the City of Winnip eg , there were representations made with respect to this

section and I haven't heard after that dialogue, I do n't think that there were any further obje ctions brought forward by the official delega tion so I certainly on behalf of the Li beral Party have no hang-up against the section. MR . CHAI ID-IAN: Shall we proceed . Mr. Johns ton. MR. F. JOHNSTON : One more hang-up. A MEMBER: Let 's hear it. MR. F. JOHNSTON : The Ministers keep talking about the form and to me that's the tax form which is a tax notice or the form of a tax notice. This is information.

I think that I'd like to see that the information is information regarding the tax notice , I mean this is pretty loose as far as information is concerned; you could direct them to put any information at all in there and qu ite frankly , I think that's rather open. MR. SCHREYER: If the quest ion is that somewhere in that sentence there should be the term "tax related notice information or material", there would be no objection. I don't know if that poses a problem to Mr . Tall in . the words "tax related" . MR. PAWLEY: I suppose there would be no problem.

I can think of situations when one might want to send provi ncial wide information out about some other programs, it would be a good way of . . . (I nterj ection) -- So you'd send it out in a second envelope with all the extra -- (I nterj ection) - - Then we would be accused, Mr. Chairman of excessive spending and waste; we'd save postage that way. MR. F. JOHNSTON : Now the Minister is putting words in my mouth, I' m not putting them in his mouth saying that it should refer to information referring to the tax notices .

If we say that it's to be included with tax notices , I think the information should be about tax notices. !fR. CHAIR}IAN : Shall we proceed then. MR. SCHREYER : Yes, the intent here was cl ear all al ong, it's tax related so I would think that the words "shall include therewith any tax related printed notice information or material" •• • MR. CHAI� � :

Section 20, 350 .1 as modified--passed .

Section 20--pas s. Going forward. (Sections 21 and 22 were read and passed .) A MEMBER: Page by page . MR. CHAI�� : Fine. Page 7--p ass . Page 8-- I und erstand there's an amendment on Page 8. MR. SCHREYER: That is correction , Mr . thairman. On

Section 29 ad d-- on 29.1 and that has been distributed to honou rable members. At the request of the City, there would be a

section added here to provide for the app ointment of a build ing col'U1lision here? MR. CJ!AIR}IAN: Is there any discuss ion on the amendment? Is this an amendment MR. SCHREYER : Yes. MR . CHAIRMAN: Is there any discuss ion. Agreed? (Agreed) Page 8 as amended--p ass. Page 9. MR. TALLIN : There 's a misspelli ng on Page 9, the word 1 Tlicence" has an 11 S11 in it instead of a "c". MR. CHAI ID-IAN: Page 9, as corrected, passed. Page 10-pas s. Page 11- amendments. MR. SCHREYER : Page 11, Mr. (;hairman, there is the addi tion of

section 42.1, a provis ion to all ow a meeting preliminary to a public meeting, rezoning and sub division, and rather than reading it all , it's also been circul ated . Frankly , I think this proposed amendment lends itself to very eas·y

summary. It is to really make clear in law what I think should be cl ear in common sense if there is such a thing, and that is that members of a community committee or the

80 May 28 , 19 74 (MR. SCHREYER cont'd) •..•• standing committee mav , may clearlv take

part in discussio ns with an applicant for a zoning or subdivisio n app licatio n without in any way rendering their subsequent de cision-making inv alid. Now apparentlv there was some confusion in law under the existing Act as to whether thev could rightfullv hold such a meeting with an applica nt and then subsequentlv engage. in a qu asi- . ju dicial function. It woul dn't have occurred to me that this was a problem but apparently it was and so this

section is beinp. brought in . MR. CHAIRMAN: You've heard the amendment. Is there any discussion? Agreed? Page 11 as amended-- pass; Page 12--pass? HR. TA LLIN : There 's an amendment on Page 12 or rather a correction on Page 12. In 588 (5) strike out the words at the end of the second line and the beginning of the first lin e "of

Section 587." It's iust a repetition of 587(1) MR. CHAIR MAN: Agreed? Page 12 as corrected--pass: Page 13--pass. MR. SCHREYER: Mr. Chairman, at the verv bottom of the page there is an amencL:nent to bring in bv 'Way of - by adding after cl ause (e. 2) the follm •ing clau se . What is shown in the bill is to be deleted in its entirety and alter native wordinp, is brought in here as circulated . MR. CHAIRMAN : You 'v e heard the amendment . Is there any di scussion? Mr. Johns ton . MR. FRANK JOHNSTON: Mr .

Chairman, the motion as circulat ed, when we get down to reading this do you notice "or combination of all or anv number thereof, the council may by bylaw establis h requi rements for the conveyance of land or payment of money in li eu thereof." The explanatio n I 1vould like here is, once a bylaw is passed it's firm. At the present time the Citv , if thev want to say on a Manitoba Housing and Renewal Corporation, if thev want to 'Waive the charges in volved in this they can or if it's a senior citiz ens' home thev can .

Now I think that byla'W would hold this in to a very stable thing that would give no flexibilitv. I think that the bylaw should be - I don't think vou 'Want to pass a bvlaw on every zoning change either and I would say that the relief of payment should be written into the zoning agreement or there should - it could read ''made by bylaw ap prov inrc each specific rezoning,'' i.nstead of having a byla'W that would tie them into a firm de cision. If you pass a bvla'W vou are not going to be able to give relief on the charges as far as zoning is concerned . MR. CHAIRMAN: Do 'We have a reply ? Mr . Premier. MR.

SCHREYER : I think , Mr . Chairman, that the replv is that there is that rigidity all right . On the other hand the matter of required conveyance of land or payment of money in lie u certainly is1 and in future will become even more so1 an absolutely essential requi rement of anv urban develo pment proposal that it ought to be enshrined in legi sl ation . MR . CHAIRM AN: Mr . Johnston . MR. FRANK JOHNSTON : Mr . Chairman, I agree with the Premier when we're speaking of a very large land devel opment or change , payment or money in lieu . I have no argument with that at all and I think it should be done .

But at the present time there are considerations made by the city to certain organizations if thev find they 're charitable and that they do waive the pavment of money in lie u to the city. I 'Would say that they should have that fl exibility where charitable organiza tions are concerned. MR . CHAI�� : Mr. Premier. MR. SCHREYER: But , Hr. Chairman, in the latter case it is alwavs open to the city to exercise its author ity to make a grant, to make a grant of reimbursement or equivalent thereto. MR . CHAIRHAN: Is there any further discussion? Mr . Johnston . MR. ��K JOHNST ON: Mr.

Chairman , ju st before we go any further . I know you can make a grant but would that have to be in the agreement. I don't kno'W where this grant , the city gets the authority on the grant. MR. SCHREYER: It is part of the Citv of Winnipeg Act. It applies to any municipal ity. The muni cipality is empo'Wered to make a grant to any charitable or other organization to 'Which the majority of council agrees and the community organiza- tion . MR. CHAIRMAN: Agreed? Page 13 as amended--pass; Page 14--Mr . Premier. MR . SCHREYER: Mr .

Chairman, again this has been circulated and it' s a case of Paragraph 50 , 600 subsection (3 ) being deleted from the bill and the wording as contained in the circulated page substituted therefor. MR. CHAI� � : You 'v e heard the amendment ... MR. SCHREYER : Well perhaps members would wish a moment iust to peruse it. This is really to take care of the problem which in the years ahead 'Will be a

�!3y 2G, 1974 81 (HR. SCHREYER cont' d) . . grmvinP: proble:n of dedication in an outer zone municipal- ity., making it clear that the dedication is to the outer zone r1unici pali tv. :•JR. CHAIRHAN: Is there :mv discus sio n? Agreed. Page 14 as amended --pass. PaP:e 15--pass. Page 16-- HR. TALL IN: There are several nlnor cor rectio ns in this on P age Hi. First of all in clnuse (c) (il.i), the word or should he 'of'' so it wil l read. 'for the purposes of subsection 583(2) of subsect i on 578(1). (2) or -- no, that should be ' or" . A HENBER: :<o, i t ' s taken rirht out. i-lR.

TALLIN: Oh, ves, ''of. that's ri?ht. And th er e ' s a missnelli ng of the Greater Hinnineg l)evelopMent Plan, three lines further down. There's a r1i.sspelling of ''r:eferr.-11 in the third line of 607(3). And while I' l'l here, on Pap;e 17, t'1ere ' s a r1i sspel ll np: of ·receive" in 609(2.1). �·1R, CliA I R�!AN: Are there a nv q uesti on s? l1R. SCUREYER: Hhat line is that, Hr. Tallin? '1R. TALLIN: In the sixth line, sixth line of fi09(2.1) on P age 17, '·received this b il l f rom ' . '1R. SCHREYI:R: :·1R. CIIAIRtl&'l: Page 17, as corrected Oh, yes. Are there any q uPst i ons ?

Page 16. as corre�ted pass. �. SC!!REYER: No, Hr. Chairman, there is nn amendnent on Page 17 which is ouite signif i c-ant. It is to make permissive wh<'lt was <'! mandatorv provision 1-1ith resnect to the mailing of notices to all those within a certain radius or di.stance of a proposed zoning chan?:e, It was argued hv the Citv and fin allv ar:reed to that makinp. it mandatorv 1vould iniect a certain rigidity that 1vould make for departure of common sense from time to time. So it's bePn m11de nermissive. HR. Cl!A I RHA.'l: You ' v e heard the <'lmendment. Is there anv discussion?

Page 17, as corrected and amended--nass. Pa�e 18-- '·1R. SCHREYER: On page 18 the r e is an amendment as 1-1ell. Mr. Chairman, :iust let me clarify if there's any confusion on the r1atter. At the bottom of Pa ge 17, it's rather a sirmific-ant amendment. it is t!-je 11r1endment of 609 so as to make it permissi.ve rather than ma ndatory for the Citv to mail out notices to all residents within a 500 foot distance of anv proposed zoning change. -- (Interiection) -- Yes. reouested bv the Citv.

So then if there's no comment on that, t}jen on Pap;e 18, there is an amendment to fi09(4) cmd th at ' s a verv brief amendment there. That clause 609(4) as set out in

Section 55 h e amended --that's the verv top of the page, page 18 - hv adding after the word a scertain ed in the 4th line the wo r ds ' and comnHed in a rnailin?. list and then in the fith line, after the word addresses add the words "on that list', and then it carries on. '·!R. CliAIR�1Nl: You've heard the <'lmendMent. Is there anv discussion? Page lH--as amended. �·R. TALLIN: �<o, ther e ' s still another onP vet. 11R. Ci iA IRI·1A:� : A not her one . :!R. SC!IREYER: And then, '1r. '.:h<'lirman, 609(4.1) as set out in

Section 56 be amended bv adding immeuiatelv after the letters (

U) i n the 2nd li.ne, add the 1vord <'!m! (4)(d)•·. HR. CEAIRH.A�·;� Is t here anv discussion. �ap;e 18 •.• 'fR. TALL I:': There's another one. �P-�. CHAU\�11\:�: 1\nother one? l.'e hav e another anend:nent to Pa�� 18. �·tr. Premier. :·JR. SCdRI·:YI:R: Yes. \> ll, nr. Chairl"an, this one is a lit t l e lengthier and I 1wulJ refer r:Jef"lhers to tiH• ci rcul nt ed sheet . . ·lH. F. JOJI:lSTON· i10'J(i,,2), are He? >�r...

SCEEJ·:YEP: Yes . it:s rettllv a case nf llelr•tinn th� spctinn as it a�nen_rs -i:-1 t:if' :-)1:1, --,""('!.�) :!.�-lr•ti�1 ..... r-.·. ,� i·1 ·it::> r·r.tirr:tu 0-:-11.1 sl.l"l,stit·qti.·q_("l" t1H? r-;nr.-� i.n : of the cir·cnlnted <o;hcct. �!R. CF.\IR"/\.�;: ��r . lnl1nstn'l. ·m. F. JOil:l'�TO:l: '·lr. Cll-1iiTJ,1n,

section (

h) of that ••snhiect to snbsection (4.1) hv m;,ilinr noticPs to the owwrs 0r l:ml in tllP cnr'!Inunitv or com!l'tmi ti es !:IS sho\m on t1w asse�>s::oent ro lls of the Citv as of tl1e da t e of thP cnrno-,il,1tion of n mailinr, list fron those n1lls for tile purnos<' nf nai lino- notices '. Ht ·re ;uo:ilin. aren't ,;re into the saJn.e thin)c '"'' '.'lailin)', lic;ts and 1{0•ll''n't this nf'an if there uas a snall zonin'>. chang,e that snmehodv r•arle it <'In apnliciltion to havp a h."'i.rr1rPssinP: shon or sone sr1all zoninr chnnf'c cm their street. shoulc' it he neccssqrv to nail t'Je •·Thole citv.

And I think on l0r;u' proiects ves, but h<�re a.f'e�in He're. P:ettin;c into the nailinf' the whole citv on anv zoninr c-hanPe, :·IR. CHAIWlA:J: "'r. Pn•,ni er.

82 �!ay 28. 1974 HR. SCHREYER: Hell, Hr. Chairman, it mav he a little unorthodox but perhaps this, bv leave, members of the would he the ooportnne time for vou to call nn Hr. Lennox and Mr. Thomas of the City Legal Department. Thev had a pre.sentation to make with respect to this

section and one or two other sections of this bill that they did not make presentation on the other night. If members agree. I think it would suit their convenience and ours. HR. CIIAIRNA.'l: Is it ar,reeable. Hr. Thomas to approach the microphone. microphone and make vour presentation. (Agreed) T therefore call on 'lr. Lennox ,qnd Hr. Lennox, l�ill vou nlease cone to the MR. LENNOX: Thank you verY much, 'fr. Crnirman, for this onportnnitY. 1-Jith your permission I would .ius t perhaps make l�i th respect some comments on the

Section 600(4) which I know You have passed tonight, it's iust with reference to those words bv hv-law . He weren't concerned at �tl.l. about the onestion of the requirements for the convevance or the pavment of monev, it l�as thf' methodolo.�v of this that gave us concern because of the rigiditv of a bv-·lm·7 and there may be manv cases where the Ci.ty mav not, due to ci rctnns tances, wish to have anv conve.Yance or perhaps .i ust a partial convevance lesser thiln what the by-law establishes.

There may be cases of need, of hardship, of special circumstances, hut in i1 hv·-lalv of course, we're fixed in every case and we'd have to amend the bv-lalJ which l:'.av be of doubtful legal validity. So that it was iust a question of striking out those lmrds 'by by-law· and t.re would then would do it of course bv resolution. Now with respect to the question of notices, I know this is contentious and a troublesome matter and I'm sure you're rather sick of us talking i1bout it hut we're only talking now about the administration of this and trving to do a better iob for the CitY of Hinnipeg.

I would ask your permission and '·1r. Thomas could perhaps speak to this who has been handlinp- the matter on a day-to-dav basis and vith vour pemis sion I would ask Hr. Thomas to speak on particular 609(4.2). NR. CHAIRNAN: Is that agreeable? '1r. Thomas. HR. THOMAS: Nr. Chairman. and honourable members, there are tt{O problems involved in this notice section, it basicallv does two things; it starts out in 609 (4) on page 17 by sav in g that publication is 'llandatorv, there's no problem of that. It says that posting of the land affected bv the anendment is mandatorY, there is a potential problem with that.

If you're dealing with an individual parcel of land obviously you are going to post the land, however under the pronosed anendnent on Page 18, it's intended to give a measure of relief from posting of the land affected and it says that ·-�here a proposed zoni.ng change applies to the whole of one or more communities that instead of posting, you mail notices to all the m-mers in thCJt connn unity. Now one of the honourable members has indicated a potential prohle.�1 Hith th<lt in; for example, if •,1e �tre nsked to al"end all the residential r>rovisions in St.

Jatr1es, that is R 1, 2 and 3 districts to allmv for group foster home s for the Children's Aid Soc iety as conditional uses, that is not an amendment which apPlies to the \,•hole of one or more communities, it apnlies to part of a whole conmunit y, <Ill the houses in the area whether thev he single family or tt.ro-fanilv.

Since this 609(4.2) on Page 18 has no application then the net result is that in order to pass the text change that the Children's Aid SocietY wants, "'e have to send out a truck and post ever" house in St . .Tames and I don't think tve'd have the leral right to P:O on the propertv and n<Iil a si»:n on the house. So the end result is if lvP can't post it. ��e can't le gall v pro ceed with the .co:oning so \ve ean' t make the text dt<In::>e at all.

The other problem is that if we were allowed to make the text chanf,e and posting was disnensed with in that case, then we still h:we to mail notiees to every owner in the communitv, that would be perhars 20,000 notices in orrler to put group foster ho!:'es in as a conditional use and th e cost of that night be around SlO,OOO: we'd probably bill it to the Children's Aid SocietY, well thev would sav, we can't afford it. so they lvouldn't get their text change. Probablv what we lvould do is then sav, we'll make text changes once a vear onlv and vou'll h;ove to tVait till nPxt vear. you're too late. .

Again the problem is that even at that as it's atnePded, as it's pronosed now, we couldn't make the change at all without posting all of the houses which 1 think is - well it's a manifest imPossihilitv and it would aMotmt to tresnassinp; nn everv body 's grounds. Now we filed a brief last Tuesday, it's entitled Bill /16 and

section 609(4) which suggested a complete revision to

section 609(4) whi ch in essence said, ntililica tion is alwavs mandatorv. It said, and the notice will be given in additinn bv nosting. Now posting will be applied in almost every case but not in every one:and then we went on to sav, by mailing notices to the applicant if anv, etc.

Hay 28, 1974 (�fR. THmtAs cant '

d) I hmre some concern. too, about the statement that we mav mail notices to evervbodv within 500 feet. The effect of that wording ouite nossiblv will be if we said in a particular case '"e would like to mail to evervbodv within lOO feet or 50 feet or 'lhatever the Statute would sav, vou have to take vour choice. You mail 83 to nobodv or vou mail to everybodv within 500 feet which might be undesirable in some cases.

And I realize this is somewh�t confusinq but I think the Point to remember is that '"hen vou have nandatorv notice provisions, that's the foundation for evervthing, if vou don't complv rigidlv with those notice provisions vour zoning's bad right off the bat, and nobodv can safel v put up a building or rel v on it. So I would submit that if possible consideration be given to the amendment that the Citv proposed in its brief last week or somethinR similar thereto that the Legislative Counsel might think woulJ accomplish the purpose. If there's anv questions. I can answer them. HR. ChAIRl'IAN' Yes.

Does anv meMber of the col'lrni ttee have anv ouestions for clarification. Mr. Pre� ier . ;m. SCi!REYER: Hr. Chairman, I 'm a little puzz)ed although I see the validitv of the presentation just made. But I was given to understand that this particular - well not just this

section - that this aJnendrnent as Hith �1ost amendl'lents came in bv Hay of sug;,ested chan;;e fr011 the Citv. l\mv if in tbe consHeratirm o' it or the t\."T'iqc� :.��- it �-H� h;�VC 1·;.�,-le son1c Sl_l.1\StantiV� Cll;�nro-r here. th,qt is SUhSt.?ntive}y rl.i.fferent fro'l thAt lvhich I.J'ls in i tiallv requested. 1ve cAn reconsicler this. flut does Hr. Thomas have the su�gcsted re>pl.1ce1"ent or suhstituti0n for this suhsecti.on. '1R. TllO'rAS: \,'ell ves T have. T fiJecl it J;o,st '!'uesdav in the forl'l of a brief �o�hich tms distributed, it bore the title Rill L,6 and

section 609(4) of Bill 38. He filed it together Hith a long letter froM Nr. Darke of the P lan ni ng Divisi.on explafni.n� sone of the problems.

A nd on Page 3 of th.3t I set out l'lV proposal for Secticm 609(4) l'hich i.s fai rlv short and simple but includes in it provision for all the tv 11 es nf notice that we might give.Anrl our suP:<>;estion T think •,•as)in an earl ier brief \vas that if this gover nment felt the ne eel to prompt the City into giving some particuL1r tvpes of notice, it's alwavs free to do so becausp the Hinister of course has a stron:c control over our zoning bv-lm·•s. he can sav in advance that we think you ought to give strong consideration to certain tvpes of notices because tve min.ht be disinclined to apnrove if vou don't do it.

I'm not savi.ng that the Citv has to be bludgeoned i nto doing a different tvpe of notice proceeding but I think that flexibi1itv is desirnble because in a n!lrtic::ular c<1se it mav Drove desirable to mail notices to evervbodv �o�ithin a certain . . . �!R. SCHREYER: Hel l in anv case, 'lr. Chairman, I take it that there is no contention lvith respect to (

a) and (c). it is onlv �o�ith respect to (b). ?!R. TllOH/.5: That's (

a) and (

c) of

section .• :vtR. SCllREYER: 609 (4.2) as pronosed. That is to sav renuiring a copv to be nublished in tHo ne,.•spaners. "!R. THOflAS: No. that's no ... :>!R. SCHREYER: No problem and (

c) the assurance that there '"ill be notice at least to the counc il of a rnunicinalitv which mctv bv hanpenstance be within an immediate ad;acencv if the pronosal in question is near a boundarv. HR. THO!"fAS: I don't think the ci tv tvo ul d hnve an obi ec tion to that because it's a simple nrocedure, it's not costly. I don't know if it need be put into the Act but if i t is we don't rind. ;rR. SC'lREYER' Fine. Hell then it's onlv (

b) that's in contention. T 'll ponder that for a noment. i•!". CHAIRNAN: Yes. Hr. Johnston. �IR. F. JOHNSTON: IJhen vou' re referring to proPosed amendMents to Bill 38 which you distributed, on Page 4 vou sav - right at the hottom here. From proposed fi09(4.2) the words following clause 4(

a) and substitute the words ;in such a manner the Citv dee� advisable·. !1lL THOMAS: This is on paRe 4 or page . . • l·le mav have filed rather a multitude . :·!R. F. JOJINSTON: Proposed amendment to Bill 38. :·m. T::m.1AS: h'e filed tHo briefs. 'IR. F . . JOJNSTON: Yes. !'IR. TiiO!!AS: I t ' s the second one we filed last week. :·!R. F. JOHNSTO:\: Yes hut this one refers to this :md in such a manner as the Ci tv dee1�s advisable. i·IR. TH0:1AS: \.Jell 1 think what '�e 've done is suggest two alternate wordings. You knmv we don't mind what the words are as long as thev accomplish the purpose.

84 Hay 28, 1974 (MR. THOMAS cont'd) . . . . You know we have at various times submitted a wording and then been told it wasn't satisfactorv, submitted another one and we've r,athered that maybe that one wasn't so we've tried a third one . Part of the problen is that in the preliminary considerations of drafting we're really not in the picture until we see the bill and the motions and then it 's a sort of a rush to try to get our foot in the door to explain the problems. Some of them are so technical and compl icated that it's hard to make a clear explanation and we file various let ters and briefs. HR. CHAIRMAN: Hhat is the intention then? no we vrithdra w

section (

b) and proceed with sections (

a) and (c)? What is the Hill of the Committee? MR. SCHREYER: Mr . Chairman, I take it that members of the Committee do have this document then that was circulated the other dav which if adopted here would have this effect, that (

c) would become (b) - (

b) would be del eted and (

c) would become (

b) and then there would be the additio n of a

section ••hich would read - a subsection which would read: ''and in any other manner the council deems advisable which may inclu de (

i) posting of a copy of the notice on or near any land, building or structure for at least two weeks before the meeting, (ii) mailing notices to the applicant or any other person or organization that has filed a request" etc. That would certainly take care of the drafting problem. Really the substantive point at issue here is whether a change, a proposed zoning change that is of a magnitude that affects the entirety, the whole of the community, does not merit the sending of notice to all owners of land in the community as shown on the assessment roll . That's my point of issue . MR .

THOMAS: My point is that if it does and the Minister so indicates to the City then the City knows that they'd better do it or they aren't going to get their bylaw through . But my point is that if it affected say only the single family homes in the community, the way it's drawn now we'd have to post it. If it was felt desirable and the Minister suggested we should mail a notice to the occupant of every single family home, we could do that .

But if for example all that the change says is that group foster homes may be permitted as a conditional use after a public meeting before the community committee, each one is dealt with on its merits as an indiv idual case . You're never going to have every house in the city a group foster home obviousl y so there may be five in St. James at the request of the Childr en's Aid Society in which case there would be five hearings somewhat like a variance hearing .

It might not be considered necessary to mail say 20 ,000 notices out to fill in a gap that's left in a bylaw where you know nobody had thought of group foster homes until recently and alo ng came the Child ren's Aid Society- I merely use this as an example - and said , this is a sociallv desirable thing . And we've said well we agree but there's nothing in the bylaw that provides for it. We can't put it in . You fall within the definition of institution and therefore you can only go into a commercial area or a multiple high rise area do"'fltown.

They 've said well we want to have four children in a single family home taken care of by the family and it generally doesn't seem to be publicly contentious . So that wa� a simple exampl e where to put this in was a simple amendment but under these pro- vis ions we'd wind up Jas I said,havi ng to post evervt hing1 which is impossiblelor mail out 20 ,000 notices which either the taxpayer at la rge bears it or the Childr en's Aid Society .

Now on the other hand the amendment might be such that it is a matter of, for example that famous case of trying to amend the definition of "family" which woul d affect every single family home and it had to do with communes and co-ops, etc. Now that might be a case where we should notify evervbody,I suppo se. �m. CHAI��: Mr . Premier. MR. SCHREYER : Mr. Chairman, one further point . I see other members wishing to raise a point as wel l. Your point , Mr .

Tho mas, is that in the event that a proposed zoning change seems to. have some greater magnitude to it that it is open in any case to the Minister to cause, before he approves of the change, to cause the city to carry out an all household or all owner notice. MR.

THOMAS: What I'm suggesting is if the government thinks this is a matter that they should discuss with the Planning Divisio n vour administrative people could be given some general instructions to discuss with them and come up with some guide lines and then you can lay down to the city, well this is what we think should be done and if you don't agree come in each particula r case and we'll work out a polic y. If it was the type of bylaw that affects the whole community in that we're going to rezone the whole of St.

James say, we're going to repeal the existing bylaw and re-e nact a new one, I think that's the type of thing that was contemplated by the words "if it affects the whole of the community." That's the case where the whole

Hay 28, 1974 (MR. THOMAS cont 'd ) ....• zoning qu estion is up for discu ssion and that would be a case where you'd only do it once every ten years perhaps and there there's no real problem about mailing notices to every body because it's a one-shot thing and if it costs $10 ,000 or $20 ,000 or whatever that's not a particular problem I don't think. But if it's a text change, somebody comes in and says you've left a lit tle point out in your bylaw, we'd like you to cover it, th ere's something wrong with your definition of drive-in restaurants for example .

Now that might be of interest to a very small number of people in the communitv and to mail out 20,000-odd notices seems a waste of money but if it was con�idered as a matter of polic y desirable then it could be done . I don't th:l.nk :l.t should be frozen in a notice provision in the Act which we probably can't change until next year . MR. CHAIRMfu�: Thank you. Mr . Enns . MR. ENNS: Hr . Chairman , I detect in the First Minister's response to the representat:l.on made by the representative from the City a wil lingnes s to appre ciate the problems that the City faces in this regard .

I als o detect in the First Minister's response the question that a matter of consider able substance is at 85 issue and I am somewhat concerned about making a somewhat hasty deci sion at Committee stage at this stage of the bill , if a flexible cl ause could be left in the bill at this particular time which would allow the kind of consultation to take place prior to cementing something firmly into legis lation . I'm just a lit tle nervous at the response that I hear coming from the minister responsible for the bill, namely the First Minister in this instance .

There seems to be a genuine case of concern here that has not at least previously obviously been brought to the full attention either to the members at the dis cussion stage of the bill, on the second reading of the bill in the Chamber or here . I .i ust make that observation Hr . Chainnan.

I cion' t thinl<: 1·.,,. ;· '·'"' '"'·rr ' 1," feel ourselves so bound to - not necessary give us proper and due time to consider the matter and I think we would caution the Comnittee to take whatever steps, or caution the First '1inister to take whatever steps are necessary to not necessary delay the remainder , portion of the bill, the rest of the bill but to certainly not to feel obl igated at least from members of the opposi tion to come to a hasty conclusion with this particular clause. I think the representation from the City was well received by the Committee. HR. CIIAIRHAN : Hr . Premier. MR.

SCHREYER: That's well put.I think that in the case of 609 (4 .2 ) (

b) that we would want to ju st lay this over and hopefullv hear the City on the remainder of its presentation go on to other sections and then by the end of our deliberations this evening , or on the next day, have alt ernative wording . MR . CHAI RMAN: Mr. Pawley . MR .PA\,'LEY: I just wanted to ask one more question . I would like to get a response from the City. Rather than dele ting the requ irement for mailing notices to all owners of land in a community or communities and I can see the argument thousands of notices being sent out to the entire community. He was talking about St.

James.When we're only dealin g with one home within the St. James area for example, I can see that;but here I'm wondering what the response would be to the notices being forwarded out to all those homes within a certain radius of the home which is the subject of the zoning applica tion , within a 500 ft. radius for instance. Well why are we going from one complete extreme to the other is my concern because it seems to me that the �ople within the immediate notice area of the home affected should receive individual notices . That would be my first gl ance at this. HR.

THOMAS : �.Jell the amendment that is proposed in the Bill says that mail ing notice to everybody within 500 feet of a property affected would be optional at the discretion of the City. MR. PAI\TLEY : Should it be optional though? MR. THOHAS : Well I th:l.nk, my personal opinion is yes it should be. You know there may be a circumstance in which we are dealing with a plan of subdivision on the bald pra irie let's say and if you draw a line 500 feet around the land being affected you take in a vast swath and part of the problem that we elucida ted in the letter that Mr .

Darke filed was that if you implement this in legis lation today, with the number of zoning applic ations we have backed up and even if we can hire a staff of about 20 people , it will take us about 9 months to get over the backlog so we'll stop all residential zoning in Winnipeg for about 9 months and then having managed to get over the backlog , if we then can find the staff and train them, it's going to take a minimum of two weeks to do the preparation of

86 Hay 28 , 1974 (MR. THOMAS cont 'd ) ..... maps in order to find out the people within 500 feet and to make it mandatory in every case , we are going to have to set up another bureaucracy of we estimate something around 17 employees with a budget, well $200 - $300 ,000 a year .

Now it may be that there will be cases where this is desirable and I think if there's enough flexibility in it we can embark on a study of what' s involved and find out in practical terms where it is necessary and where it isn't and together with representatives of this gove rnment some kind of a policy can be worked out;but to make it mandatory right now in legis lation when we don 't really know all the proble ms we can forecast some of them as for example with the amount of work that has to be done to get this together , we will run into about 9 months where we'l l ju st have to stop taking applic ations and ali sorts of sub divisions etc . will stop .

There won't be houses built and that 's not, vou know ju st raising a smokescreen ,that 's the practical resul t, well immediate result and then again where we talk about changes that affect part of a community like the residential R-1 area , it' s not any indiv idu al house that 's affected , it may be that any one of 5,0 00 houses might be the subject of an applica tion for a conditional use and all the amendment does to the bv-law is provide the fact that this is a conditional use under the lis t of condi tional uses and it nay be the subject of a public meeting but to send 20 ,000 notices out to tell everybody in the community that as of tomorrow you have the legal right to ask for permission for a widow to do hairdressing in her house , if she does n't have signs outside etc. that' s a tremendous expense to go to when what actually is going to happen if one person applies for the right to do that, then there 's going to be a hearing on that subject and it may be desirable to notify the people within a certain radiu s perhaps not 500 feet which can take in a tremendous number of people , particularly if you happen to run into an apa rtment block and it may be of immediate concern to a lesser number of people but to forecast and put down a rule I think is going to cost a tremendous amount of money , which perhaps isn't the major concern .

It can involve delay but the kinds of dollar s you 're talking about too aren 't trivial and .•• MR. PAWLEY : I have no reservations about the reference to the entire community. I think that is very extensive . My only concern Mr . Chairman is the resid ents within the very immediate area and who may not in fact be living within that immediat e area and you indic ate that that will be within the discretion of the city to determine whether or not the notices be forwarded to those within the very immediate area. MR.

THOMAS : Yes, well that is proposed in the amendment and we are in agreement with the idea that it be dis cretionary .

I hi\J,f� suggested that if you are getting into situations where you think there should be some guidelines as to when you should mail to everybody within 500 feet, then that can be done1 but you know the re- zoning of a prope rty may be a matter of some consider able public moment that would suggest this type of notice or it may not and to do it in every case means that if you 're doing a subdivision and re-z oning for single farnilv housing in a particular area, you draw a line 500 feet around the area and vou may bring in 10, 00:1 to 12 ,000 people and if you multiply that by the nt�ber of subdivisions going on at any one time, you 're running into a vast jo b of searching out the owners from an asse ssment role .

It 's not a simple matter . You have to take the atlas maps and then plot from that and out of the assessment role you have got to piece top,ether all the legal descriptions and try to cover everybody in that area · which means you 'v e got to have somebody trained like Land Tit les ' cl erks and understanding descri ptions and put this alt ogether into a ma ilin g list. Now that' s going to take 2 or 3 weeks or if it's a big subdivision a month and generally speaking , if you 're merely creating a sub division for single family housing , the people around it are probably not particularly upset about it.

The la nd owners around there are usual ly happv because it neans their area is dev elopi ng and their land valu e is going up , that is the neopJe Hho own land but Jo n't live ther e . Ilut in anv ev ent , all I' ;'C sug('.esti ng is if you put it in as mandatory as propos ed , the immedi.ct te problet:' will he that it t�i 11 take so long to catch up it will stop ever ythin�. Now that aJone I think is enough to suggest that it shouldn 't be made mandatorv in the Act at the present time.

If there's some way of phasing this in , if it's considered desirable , after some more study as to what it really means then I think some other method night be found but to i�ple ment it now as ma� datory, if you have time to read Mr . Darke 's letter I think you can see in detail what will happ en . MR. CHAIRMfu�: Are there any further questions? Mr. Premier . MR . SCHREYER : Mr . Chairman I suggest that we lay over to subsequent con sideration 609 (4 .2 ) (b) .

:1ay 28, 19 74 87 MR. THOMAS : }1y remarks also relate to page 17 609 (4) because the two are tie d toge ther really . It 's the fi rst sectio n that makes posti ng mandatory in all cases and is rel ieved against parti all y by the sect ion that says you don't have to post it if it affects the whole community , so really the two go toget her and I thin k the legislati ve couns el has a sect ion we su ggested that would in effect replace the whole of sect ion 609 (4} including (4.1) (

b) if I remember correc tly . MR . Cl!AIR.MA."l: Are there any other qu est ions ? - MR. SC HREYER : It 's part of the same piece . It 's a ca se of laying over 609

(4) MR. CHAIR.MA."l: On behalf of the commi ttee I wish to thank Mr . Lennox and Mr . Thomas for their contribut ion . Is it the wish of the commi ttee to set aside pages 17 and 18 (6 09) (4) to be cons idered at a later date and (6 09 ) (4 .2 ). He 'l l go on to page 19 . MR. SCHREYER : He ll Mr . Chair man , ju st to be cle ar on what we are sett ing asid e · 609 (4) and 609 (4 .2 ) is that corr ec t? MR. CHAIRMAN: 609 (4) and 609 (4 .2 ). Is that agre ed? Page 19 pass . We have an amendment on page 19 . HR . SC !IREYER: On page 19 there is an amendment to sectio n 615 - it 's a case of deleti ng in its entirety 59 (

a) and (

b) and substi tutinp, therefor the amendment contained in the ci rculated sheet which has (

a) and (b) , subs ectio ns (

a) and (b) . MR. CHAI&�: You 'v e heard the mo tion , is there any disc uss ion? Page 19 pa ss . MR. TALL IN : Further down on that same page , subsectio n 61 5 (4) clause (

a) in the se cond li ne there 's a refere nce to sec ti on 600 :it should be 609 (4) ins tead of 600 . MR . CHAIRMAN: That 's the only one and on page 19 as amended and corrected , pa ss . Page 20 p ass . MR. TALLIN : There 's a minor spelling error in the second last line of 61 6 (1) ''responsible "is spelled wrong . MR . CHAIRMAN: The second last li ne of 616 (1) agre ed. Page 20 as correct ed,p ass . Page 21 pa ss. Page 22 pass. MR. TALLIN : There are three minor changes on page 22.

In subs ec tion 621 (7} sec ond last line the word "and" about a third of the wav from the end of the line should be "but" and in the last line it should be "vo te -the order shall be made" instead of "an order "·a nd then further down in the heading to se ctio n 62 2.1 it should be Notic e of Heeting instead of Notic e of Hearing , and I belie ve there 's an amendment to this page as well . MR. SCHREYER : Yes Mr . Chai rman that 's corr ect .

For purposes of clarificatio n under se ction 621 (7) immediately after that , there would be the inclusion of the fol lowing 67 --the fol lowing subs ection� "Su bsectio n 621( 12) of the Act is amended by add ing there to , at the end there of , the words 'b ut in the event of a tie vote , the order shall be made dismissing the ap peal '", and that 's clari fying in the event of a tie vote in the Commi ttee on Envir onment . MR. CHAIR}urn : You 'v e heard the amendment , is there any disc us sio n? Page 22 as amended and corr ect ed, pa ss . Page 23. MR.

TALLIN : On Page 23 in 62 2.1 (5) third last word of the second la st line should be "but"' so that it will read ''but in the" ins tead of "and in the" and on the last line of 622 .1 (5) it will read "event of a tie vote the order" instead of "an order" . MR. CHAIR}1AN : Page 23 as corre cte d , pa ss . Page 24 , pa ss . There 's an amendment . MR. SCHREYER : Well Mr . Chair man , there is at the bo t tom of page 24 an amendment here which would make permissi ve rather than manda tory the mailing of noti ces ; except I' m not sure now if Mr .

Thomas ' presen tatio n thi s evening causes us to change 609 whether then mutatis mutandis or whatever the ex press ion is , wouldn 't make this amendment irreleva nt . So I' m not sure if it 's in other words consequential or does it st and by it self? Well Mr. Chairman , I' m advised that the proposed amendment here is not in conf lict with any possible change to 609 and that it sta nds by itse lf and that would be then that 63 7 (15) in the bill be that 637 (15) (

c) of the Act as set out in sectio n 76 be amended by stri king out the words"by mailing noti ces to" in the fift h li ne or in the first line of (

c) by st riking out "by mailing notices to" and subst itut ing therefor the wor ds"in any other manner the council deems advisa ble , and in it s discr etio n it may mail no tic es to'' . l'IR. CHAI&"'AN: You 'v e heard the amendm ent . Is there any disc ussion? Mr. Thomas , would you please come forw ard .

88 May 28 , 1974 MR. THOMAS : It might result in a small discr epancy depending upon what you do with the provi sions regarding no tic es on zoning because there we 'v e sugges ted that we have the di scretio n to mail noti ces to everybody withi n 500 feet or a greater area or a smaller area , whatever appears to be des ir able . l'hereas if this goes through I think that the result is that if we 'r e going to mail to anybody w� 'l l have to mail it to everybody within 500 feet . We could n't pick a smaller area or say adj us t it fl exi bly .

Now that might ju st mean that we 'd have to gi ve the greate � of the noti ces . That is in the case of subdivis ion if we dec id ed to mail we 'd have to mail to everybody within 500 feet

whereas in the case of the zoning under the amendment we proposed it might be that af ter we look at it in the light of exper ien ce , the Min ist er tells us , well we think it should be everybody within 200 feet in this

part icu lar case . In other words I thin k whatever you -do � ith 60 9( 4) for the sake of consiste ncy and avoiding confusion on the part of admini str ative people who have to unravel all this and keep it st raight that they should be consi stent . Again I would suggest an amendment that is similar to the amendment that I men tio ned the legislati ve counsel has in front of him . MR. CHAIRMAN: Mr . Premie r. MR. SCHREYER : Well then , Mr .

Chair man , it is as I suggested , consequential or at leas t consequential for the sake of cons iste ncy wit h 609 (4) so I would sugge st that this be set asid e as well . MR. CHAIRMAN: Committ ee agree that the amendment be set asid e? That Sect ion 76 be deal t with at a later date . (Agreed) Going on then to Page 25 . Sect ion 77 has an amendment . MR.

SCHREYER : Yes , Sect ion 77 of the bill is amended as fo llows : that su bse cti on 637 (15 .1 ) of the Act as set out in Sec tio n 77 of the bill be amended by adding immediately thereafter the letter s (ii) in the second lin e thereof the word , num ber and letters "and (4) (d) . MR . CHAIRMAN: Yo u'v e heard the amendment . Any disc ussio n? Page 25 as amende d--pas s. (Pages 26 to 32 were read and passed) Page 33 - Mr . Premier . MR . SCHREYER : Yes , Mr . Chai rman , there is an amendment he re .

That Sectio n 102 of the bill be deleted and the fol lowing substi tuted : That Sectio n 659 of the Act as amended - this has been ci rculated - by repealing subsection (3 } thereof and subst ituti ng therefor the follo wing : The City and the Rural Muni cipa lit y of Sprin gfie ld , The Rural Municipa lit y of Tache , the Local Government Distr ict of Reyn olds may enter into an ag reement pursu ant to sub sectio n (2} for the payment of a grant in lieu of taxes by the City to each of those municip alitie s and LGD in addi tio n to the amounts set out in this subsec tion , but the Cit v shall in any event annua lly pay to each of those munic ipa litie s and local gove rnment district and their su ccessors in lieu of taxes or rates for the water supply , aqueduct and railroad right-of- way the amounts set out op posite their respec ti ve names as fol lm•s : The Rural Muni cipali ty of Springfield - $15 ,0 00 .0 0 The Rural Muni cip alit y of Tache - $3 , 750 .0 0 The Local Gove rnment Distr ict of Reyno lds - $2,5 00 .0 0.

The purpose of this amendment is as reque sted to make it possi ble to negotiate an agree ment that might be differ ent from that which was hit herto provided fo r in st atut e. Both parties to this agreement have ind ic ated a des ir e to be able to negotiate some alter native level of payments but in order to insure that in the event that there is fa ilure to reach an agreement that the amount pai d shall be at leas t the amount that is now set out in sta tute and no t be a completely tax exemp t situ ation . MR . CHAIRMAN: Is there any di scuss ion? Is everyone agreed? Sectio n 102 agreed? (Agre ed) .

The next amendment - Mr . Premie r. MR. SCHREYER: Mr . Chairma n , the last amendment is with respect to the last sectio n , the Commencement of the Act . The bill reads the Act comes into force on the day it receives Royal Assent and there 's an amendment to simplv add - I' m sorry - that that sect ion be repealed and the fol lowing subst ituted : This Act, except Sectio n 102 , comes into force on fue day it receives Royal Assent , and 102 comes into force on a day fi xed by Proc lam atio n . MR. CHAIRMAN : Is there any di scus sio n? �1r . Joh nst on . MR. F. JOHN STON : Not on that.

There 's another sec tion on Page 33. Have you got the other amendmen ts? MR. SC HREYER: There are no other amendmen ts. MR. F. JOHNS TON : I wanted to speak on Sec tion 105 , Mr . Chairm an . MR. CHAIRMAN: That 's on what page ? MR. F. JOHNSTON : Page 33 .

May 28 , 1974 89 MR. CHAIRHAN: Proceed ttr . Joh nston . MR. F. JOHNSTO N : Mr . Chairman , this is retroactive legi slat ion back to January 1st , 19 72, which was the begin ning of the Bill , 36 . I think that this parti cular sectio n is going to cause a lot of problems to the Cit y when we talk about designated rank of any person. In this parti cular case when vou tal k about rank vou could conceiva bly have , bec aus e there is no change in sa i ari es , you could con ceivably have a first class fi reman working be si de another fir st cl ass fi reman who is making lie utenant 's wage s.

The same thing could certainly apply when the pol ic e depa rtment has its amalga mation . Now I know there has -b ut I don't know where the co urt case sta nds at the present time but there is a fi reman who has taken the City to cou rt . A �lliMBER: It's withdra wn . MR. F. JOHNSTON : It 's withd rawn is it? Well that 's one thing I ment ioned while we were in second reading , that pass ing legisl at ion while there 's a court case and that 's withdra wn .

But the reas ons I have given here , that going back retro actively to 19 72 and as fa r as rank is concerned vou can have an awful mix-up in sa laries and you can have an awfu l mix-up in coordination regarding the employees of the Cit y that are under contr act . Here we have a situ atio n where the bill says there 's no change in salary and now we 'r e going to say there is going to be a change in rank .

Now what is happening the Outer--City men not having the seniority in many cases of the Inne r-City men are certai nly moving into the posit ions of lieut enant s, captains , etc . yet the lie ute nants and captains in the ot her areas or any one of them that happen to drop down , they drop down , they lose their rank but they don't lose their pay and you have men working sid e by side with the same rank and di fferent pay schedules and I can only see that in tcim<!'l this is going to move evervbody up again to that pay

schedule and I think we ' re putti ng the Ci tv in an a\vkward posit ion by putti ng this in . l don' t think that it would be ·· I thi nk it 1-1ould be more advisable to consider it st arti ng now than going back retroacti vel y . HR . CHAIRMAN: Hr . Premier. HR . SCHREYER: Mr . Chairm an , there 's a number of points I could make in connect ion with 105 .

I suppose the first one is that \ve take the pos itio n, and I belie ve the Cit y takes the positio n as well , that Sec tion 666 of the Cit y of Winnipeg Act was clear all along and that it provided for the Cit y not to be bou�d to contin ue title or rank, bu t some li tigatio n was started on this, to the dis may of the City . That lit igatio n has now been wit hdrawn . Notwi thsta nding the fact that it ' s withdra wn , we still want to take adva ntage of the opportunity to clari fy further that partic ular sect ion .

It 's not a case of reversing a former int ent , it 's a case of buttressi ng and clarifying the ini tial intent and this sec tion comes in with-- not only with the concurre nce , I be lieve that at the request of and the suggestion of the City whi ch' we were qui te prepared to do and therefore it 's in this bill . The concept of a pay level being assur ed while title or rank is not necessarily assured is not a new concept -n ot that 's any good argument -b ut it 's in the federal public service for several years now .

It 's a concept known as red circli ng or blue circling or call it what you like� depending on your politic al &ripe , you can call it red or blu e ci rcling . But this is merely in cla rifi catio n of the intent that was intended all along . MR. C!IAIRMAN: Mr . Marion. MR. MARION : I really don' t ,.,ant to add much to that except the last words which the First Mi ni ster mentioned by saving it was intended all along .

I think if we refer spe cifi call y to the amalgamation that was made of the Winnipeg Fir e Depart ment then I think we 'r e making this re troactive bec ause the steps that are bein g taken now with the amalga mation of the police for ce will perhaps not ne cessit ate as much red cir cl ing - I 'i ke the terminology of that - red circ ling as was the case and is the case with respect to the Fire Departmen t. So , you know, we 'r e coverin g something that has been done really with this amendment in �ction 105 . MR. SCHREYER : And intended all along . HR. CIIAI�IAN : Are there any fu rther questio ns ?

Order pl ease . Are there any further questio ns with respect to Page 32? Hearing none - Page 33 as amend ed- pa ss. I understand this is as far as we can go with the bill as it is so we 'l l have to set it aside till the next meeti ng . sectio ns . MR. SCHREYER: Bill 38, yes, we 'l l be sett ing it aside-- of those two MR . CHAIRMAN: He 'l l withhold it until the next meeting .. We 'l l pr oceed next with Bill 45 , I bel ieve . }ffi. TALLIN : Bill 46 , I think , Mr . Ch ai rman .

90 '!av 28 , 19 71, !1R . C!IAIIU1AN : Bil l 46 ,

an Act to amend the City of WinniT'ef! !\e t (2) . Is it agreed page by page? .Shall we proceed page bv page? Agreed? Page 1-- NR . SCHREYER : Mr . Chairman, at the verv bottom of Page 1 there is an amendment that reads as foll ows, That Bill 46 be amended by repealing

Section 3 and substituting therefor the fol lm•ing :

Section 9 of the Act is further amended bv adding thereto immediatel y after subsection 1 thereof th� follo wing subsection 9 (1 .1 ) The mayor shall be elec ted by the electors of the citv, which reallv replaces back what 's in the bill now. But it 's necessitated by style and bv dr afting stvle , I supp ose. HR . C!IAIR MAN: Yo u'v e heard the a:11endmen t, i.s there anv discus sion? MR. SCHREYER : Well the effect, "1r . Chairman, i.s to remove (1.2 ) which would have empowered the Lie utenant Governor in Council bv order in council to establ ish the number of councillors and to make consequential va riations . I in di cated we would withdraw that

section , it is accordingly withdrawn . MR. CHAIRMAN: Page 1, as amended--p ass; Page 2--pa ss ; Page 3-- MR . SCHREYER : Mr . Chairman , on Page 3, there is as an amendment as follo ws . That Bill 46 be amended by adding immed iately after

Section 11 thereof the follo wing

section : 11. 1.

Subsection 18. 1 of the Act is amended bv adding imrnediatelv at the end thereof the words "and council may provide an ad dit ional indemnity to anv member of cou ncil who has ad ditional respo nsibilities for t.rh:i.eh no ad dit ional remuneration has been provided in this section." That is ju st , I might explain , that is .iust to make it completel y clear that council while it is now empowered in the Act to alter the level of inde mnities , there are some who interpret that to mean that they must alter all or none and this is making it clear that they may alter it with respect to an individual council lor or several cou ncillors depe ndent on addi tional duties that council assigns to them or el ects them to.

It 's ju st cl arification . MR. CHAIRMAN : Any further dis cussion . Mr. Marion . MR. !1ARION : This would certainlv take care of anv indemnities that council would wish to pay the Deputy Mayor because of the addi tional function. HR. SCHREYER: Preciselv - the Deputy Hayor , the Chairmen of Standing Committees that thev assign addit ional -- Vice Chairmen , it 's ooen to council to decide . MR. CHAI RMAN: Committee agreed ? Page 3, as amended--pa ss . Page 4- Another amendment? }ffi. SClffiEYER: Yes , there is an amendment at the bottom of Page 3.

This foll ows immediatel y after the amendment with respect to council being empowered to vary or alter the level of indemnities to individuals and now Bill 46 be amended by repealing

Section 13 thereof and substituting therefor the fol lowing sections :

Section 20 of the Act is amended (

a) by adding thereto immediatel v under the ward "Kilnorth" in cla use (1) (

c) thereof the ward ''Riverton" and the ward''Talb ot'· ; (

b) by adding thereto immediat ely under the �1ard "Arlington" in clause (l) (

f) thereof the ward "Norquay" and the ward "Strathcona" ; and (

c) by striking out cla use (1) (

j) thereof; (

d) by striking out clause (2) (

f) thereof; (

e) by striking out clause (3) (

f) thereof. And then 13. 1. Notwithstanding any other provision of this Act , where anv proceeding , matter , or thing is required to be done by this Act or has been commenced pursuant to this Act in , before or by the St. John 's Communitv Co mmittee that proceeding , matter or thing shall be deemed to be a proceeding ,matter or thing done in , before or by the Lord Selkirk Community Committee or the East Kil donan Community Committee or both as the Council shall de termine in its discr etion -- and it goes on . In sort of simple lay man's terms, this flo ws from the--t his amendment is necessitated by the fact that we have withdrawn the

section empowering Li eutenant Governor in C�uncil or Cabinet to make these changes so we're incorporating it right into the bill. It is incorporating that one recommendation of the Boundaries Commission, the supplementary report , that St. John's Community Committee be dis established ; two wards go into Lord Selkirk , two wards into East Kil donan and this is all consequential thereto. }ffi. CHAIRMAN: You 'v e heard the amendment. Mr. Tal lin . MR. TA LLIN : There 's a littl e technical draf ting problem in this and that is what appears as 13. 1 here should become subsection 20 (6) of

Section 20 of The City of Winnipeg Act and if you 'd allo w me ju st to make a minor draf ting change of that but I won 't recite it here . But there'l l be no change in the wording of the thing; it's a dr afting matter only in which I take great pride .

�1ay 28 , 1974 91 MR. SCHREYER : He ��ouldn't want to hold a tale nted craftsman from his crafts. �m . CHAIR}� : You 'v e heard the amendment, is there any disc ussion. Page 3, as amended--pa ss. Page 4 -- Yes , Mr. Marion . Mr . Johnston . . MR. F. JOHNSTON : On Page 4, the deletio n of

Section 44 and in the Act its responsibilities to the hoard regarding commissioners .• MR. SCHREYER: I' m sorry , what section? MR. F. JOHNSTON :

Section 44 .

Section 44 of the Act as repealed . �m . CHAI� :

Section 17 �ffi. F. JOHNSTON :

Section 44 notwithstanding subsection 1, each appointed commissioner is responsible to the chief commissioner , the board of commissioners and to standing committee of which he is req uired by this Act to report for the supervis ion and operation of the specific departments and services assigned to him by the Act or by council. Now I do n't know why the commissioners wouldn 't be reQuired to report to the chief commissioner and to the standing committees to which he is required by this Act to report for the supervisio n and operation of the speci fic department and services assigned to him.

I can 't for the lif e of me see why the commissioner should not have to report to those committees. MR. CHAI�N : Mr . Premier. MR. SCHREYER : Wel l, Mr . Chairman, the point raised by Mr . Johnston is not the point that we ·were attempting to chang e. The reason for the repeal of

Section 44 is because it certainly le ft an ambiguity as to ju st what the lines of reporting and authority were. It is not as though there are not other sections of the Act which make it cl ear ju st what the delegation or li nes of authority are . For example Sections 53, 54 and 56-i n the Act I mean not the bill - make clear provision and

Section 44 was a redundancy and in being redundant it was also ambiguous . Because it reads , to give you an idea of why we felt it was ambiguous , it reads : Each appointed commissioner is responsible to the chief commissioner, the board of commissioners and to the standing committee to which he is required by this Act or council to report. And even repealing

Section 44 ,

Section 56 still requ ires the appointed commissioners to report to their respec tive standing committees.

Section 53 requires them to report to their respec tive standing committees:

Section SI) requ ires the commissioners to atte nd their respec tive standing committees and

Section 54 (1) provides for di rection of the commissioners , permits the Chief Commissioner to direct any other appointed commissioner or emploYee in the performance of his duties and responsibili ties . So �Je don 't feel that we' re le avin!! a gap in terms of line of authority . HR . CHAIR.'iA�: Is that satisf actorv? Page 4 also has an amendment , I underst and . Mr . Marion . MR .MAR ION : I would 1 ike through you to offer a suggestion to the First Minister with respect to

Section 16 where the deputY mayor becomes ex officio member of the board of commissioners . I think that in the presentations that were made to us of course the present Deputy Mavor felt that thts was fulfill ing a useful rol e inasmuch as the poltti cal link between executive polic y committee and the board of commissioners was being properly carried out . It would seem to me and we had the mayor at one and the same time state that he insisted that the deouty mavor should take over his role or act in his capacity when he was out of the citv physi call y . I wonder , with respect to

Section 29 (7) , I' m verv much in favor of that

section wherebY the physical absence or the phys ical non presence of the mayor immediatel y makes the deputy mayor the chairman of executive policy committee. And I ��onder if this would not be the proper kind of way of proceeding with the membership of the deputy mayor on the board of commissioners. The moment that the mayor himself is not capable for one reason or another, whether or no t he is in the city but no t capable of being present at the board of commissioners , could then the ex officio--the deputy mayor ex officio status come into play . MR . CHAIR.�� : Mr. Enns . }m . ENNS : Mr .

Chairman , . comment I believe that this would have danger of transgressing on the mayor's spititual presence . MR. CHAIRMAN: Hr . Premier. MR. SCHREYER : Hr . Chairman , I' m aware of the suggestion that the presence of the deputv maYor at board of commissioners is something that could be le ft to the standing arrangement that app lie s in the case of the absence of the mayor from any function or dutv , but that 's not really the only thing that was being attempted here .

It 's felt that for the sake of liai son . and heaven knows there 's always a great chore of liaison and coordination involve d, that for a period of time we would certainly want to ensure that there is some testing or experimentation , if you li ke ,

92 May 28, 1974 (MR . SCHREYER cont 'd ) ..•. as to whether in fa ct some thing is not gained , some thing is indeed ga ined by vi rtue of having the deputy mayor as a member of the board of commissioners , hopefu ll y for the sake of improved coordination and the reasoning that two is better than oneJ bu t fr ankly it 's not something about which we would want to hold up this bill about . It 's felt that it's desirable to see whether this is ben efi cial and the only way we can fi nd out is to trv it for a year . MR. CHAIIU-IAN: Mr . Mario n. MR. MARION : I certa inly won 't be adamann th en.

I wouldn 't want to hold up the bill for that sp ec ific clause but I think that we 'r e all aware of a sit uatio n that exists in the City of Winn ipeg , one that I feel is because of a person ality clas � as it was put by the mayor himself .

I' m wonde ring if we 'r e not going about regulating this .And becaus e of the si tuation that we have , it would see m that if the mayor 's off ice were one that were well oiled and capable of working togeth er, we woul dn 't have to ins ert this kind of a clause and it could be alo ng the same lines as 29 (7) whereby the physicial presence or absence of the mayor , the deputy mavor merely watching - in spir it and in body , Mr . Chairman . MR. CHA IR. II1AN: Mr . Premie r. MR . SCHREYER : Well, Hr.

Chairm an , the point is that this tvas also intended for cla rifica tio n because I feel it 's a fa ct and you perhaps know better than anyone el se, Mr . Mari on , the deputy mayor had come into the cus tom or habit of at tending these board of commiss ioners meeting in anv case and rather than leave that as a vague or a�:�ibiguo'.ls part of the Act , it was felt bet ter to cl arify what was alreadv be coming a pract ise . Is it not already a practi se , M� . Marion? MR. MARION : Ye s, I belie ve it 's the pra ctis e now. MR . SCHREYER: I' m prepared , Mr .

Chairman , to set this asid e since we 'v e set as ide two sectio ns fr om the other bill . MR . CHAIRMAN: Is it agreed that we set this aside then? I bel ieve there is also an amendment for this page - Page 4. Mr . Premi er . MR. SCHREYER: Ye s. Still on Page 4. Is that cl ear then , Mr . Chairm an, we set aside . . . MR. CHAIRMAN: I think we have agreed to that . MR. SCHREYER : Sect ion 16 is set as ide for the moment . Sect ion 18, there is an amendment by means of adding immed iatel y afte r Sectio n 18, the follo wing - 18 .1.

Sect ion 123 of the Ac t is amended by numbering the Sec tio n as subsection (1) and by addi ng thereto at the end thereof the fol lowing subs ectio n ;

(2) Notwiths tanding anything contained in Sectio n 618, where the Coun cil in pass ing a by- law , ord er, or resolu tio n, has acted fraudulent ly or in bad fa ith , any person who has suf fere d damage by reason of the by-law , order or resolutio n shall have a right of action against the Cit y to recover those damages , provided that no such act ion shall be brought un til one month 's notice in writing of the intention to bring the actio n has been gi ven to the City, and every such actio n shal l be brought agains t the City alone , and not agains t anv person act ing under the bv-law , order or res olutio n .

MR . CHAIRM&�: Are there any questions? Agreed? (Agreed ) Page 4 as amended exceptin g Sect ion 16--pas s. Page 5--p as s. Page 6--p ass . MR . SCHREYER: Excuse me -- I'm sorrv , proceed . MR. CHAIRMAN: Page 7--p ass ; Page 8--pass ; Page 9--p ass ; Page 10-·-pa ss ; Page 11-- there is an amendment . MR. SC HREYER : Yes , there is an amendment there , Mr . Chair man . Mr . Talli n have a technical amendment? MR . CHAIRMAN: Mr . Tallin . MR . TALL IN: No . MR . SCHREYER : No. Mr .

Cha irman , on Page 11, a mot io n of amendment that Bill 46 be amended by adding af ter Sectio n 40 thereof the fol lowing ' 40 .1 Sectio n 618 of the Act is repealed and the follo wing se ctio n is substi tuted therefor : 618.

Af ter a zoning by-la w has been approved bv the Hini st er and gi ven third readin g and fi nally passed , it has ef fect as full v to all intents and purposes as if the provisio ns of the bv--law had been enacted bv the Legisl ature and shal l conclusively be deemed to have been within the power of the counc il to enact , and the validity and legal ity of the by-law sh all not be quest ioned in any actio n , suit or proceedi ng in any court for any cause whatsoe ver .

This is really consequential on the sect ion back on Page 4 and 618 as it is presently worded in the Act uses much the same language and this is mere ly in greater elabora tio n and clarif icat ion thereof . It reads now that af ter a zoning bv- law has been approved by the Ninis ter and given third reading and pnss ed, it has eff ect as

�lay 2C>� 197 4 (:-lR. SCt!REYi'R cont 'd ) .. . if it 1.rere ennc tf'd as part of this Act . �·m .. CI:A1R "·TA!'J: You 'v p heP�r 2 the rt mendmen t, is there nnv d iscussio n? ,\gre ed? (Agre ed) I bel ieve there is a further amendme nt on page ... ;.m. . S CHRJ:YER: ::-lo. '!R . CHAIR�·IA. " : Page 11 as amended-·-prtss ; l'age 12 --pa ss : l'ap:e 13 -- 93 �1R . SCHREYER: There is an ar.>enc.lment on 13. 1' m sorry , excuse me for one f"Omtnt . Okav , Hr . Ch 3.irman. the ;unendment is merelv rtdding Hords to the last sect ion of the bill .

It 's se cti on 51 of Rill 46 be amended bv striking out the words and f igur es Se ctio n 20 is" in the thir d lin e thereof and substit ut ing the refor the words and figures Sect ions 20 and 40 .1 are" . And then evervthing else as is. �m. . CHAIRHAN : Is there anv disc ussion? P11ge 13 as amended- -p<lss . I believe we '"ill have to set lli 11 46 asid e unt il f, t is complete d and we '1 1 proceed on then if it 's the \vi sh of the commi tt ee to llill 58 . Bill 58 ,

an Act to amend The Municipal Act .. n ME�!BER : No , that 's held ov e r. HR . CHAIR��: That 's held over . Bill 59 .

an Act to vali date by- law 3269 of the T own of Dauphin. Mr . Johns ton. MR. F. JOHNSTON : Mr . Chairman, was there not a- - did n't vou mention at the beginning of the meeting 58 would be . . MR. CHAT� ": But I was requ ested to . Jl-ffi.. PAHLEY : It was 45. HR . CHA IRMAN : It 's Bill 59 . (Sections and 2 were read and passed .)

Schedule A--pas s; Title --p ass ;

Preamble--pas s; Bill be reported . HR. PAHLEY : Hr . Chairman, on the other Dauphin bill , I would li ke to ju st ind icate to the committee because I know that we're all sharing common concern about this bill be caus e we 'v e more or less as committee members been in bed with this bill for the last three years . I'v e asked for it to be deferred because I want to obtain some assessment and tax information and provide to the committee when we look at the various alt ernatives as to how we deal with the Dauphin and R. M. bill . So if we could defer it, Mr .

Chairman , for this evening until such time as we have the ad ditional information , it might be of assi stance in weighing the al ternative s. MR . CHAIRMAN: I believe that completes our sl ate of business for this eveni ng . Committee rise .

Document details

Collection	Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)
Citation	30-1-ma4
Type	hansard
Volume / chapter	30th 1st hansardpdf ma4.pdf
Language	en
Format	pdf
Source	PROVINCIAL
Identifier	d920662f1e4e38756731179803e6987f43d43737

Source file is stored in the law ingest library (pdf).