►
From YouTube: Environment Committee – August 22, 2013
Description
Environment Committee – August 22, 2013 – Audio Stream
Agenda and background materials can be found at http://www.ottawa.ca/agendas
B
B
So,
first
item
on
the
agenda:
our
declarations
of
interest:
are
there
any
declarations
of
interest
this
morning?
Seeing
none
confirmation
of
the
minutes
of
the
18th
of
June
2013?
Are
those
minutes
carried
carried
Thank,
You
communications?
We
have
responses
to
inquiries.
Councillor
hubely!
You
have
indicated
to
me
that
you
don't
want
to
remove
any
of
the
inquiries
to
the
agenda,
but
you'd
like
the
opportunity
to
staff
a
very
quick
question
on
the
record
and
I'm
happy
to
do
so
with
the
will
of
committee.
If
that's
all
right
with
committee
members.
B
C
D
Certainly
through
the
church
considerably
the
the
reason
that
the
tenders
were
assembled
on
all
in
kind
of
pricing,
so
that
all
of
the
contractors
and
bidders
were
required
to
provide
a
per
house
response
for
all
city
services.
Of
course,
those
being
garbage
recycling
organics
and
the
programs
such
as
the
incontinence
program
and
things
like
bulky
items,
so
each
contractor
is,
is
bid
in
that
manner.
D
And
so
it
is
not
possible
to
break
out
a
line
item
of
interest,
always
the
fact
that
we
had
anticipated-
and
it
was
part
of
the
contract
documents
that
we
would
see
approximately
two
percent
participation
in
this
and
we're
now
just
coming
over
the
two
percent.
So
I
think
the
the
program
has
been
very
well
received
and
is
tracking
well,
okay,.
B
You
very
much
and
I
forgot
to
mention
the
beginning
of
the
meeting
that
councillors,
homes
and
Chinna
Shenko
has
sent
their
regrets
today
and
I
apologize
for
not
mention
that
at
the
beginning.
So,
first
item
on
the
agenda
under
reports,
the
city
manager's
office,
city
clerk
and
Solicitor
Department
status,
update,
Environment,
Committee
inquiries
and
motions
for
the
period
ending
the
15th
of
August
2013.
Is
that
received
received?
Thank
you
item
number
two.
The
city
operations,
Environmental
Services,
Department
financial
statements
for
in
house,
solid
waste
collection,
external
audit
result
results.
B
2012
is
that
item
carried
carried
and
mr.
Caracas
if
you
could
relay
to
Brian
Madden
and
the
rest
of
the
QP
503
staff
on
that
contract.
Congratulations
on
behalf
of
the
Environment
Committee
and
our
thanks.
There's
significant
savings
as
a
result
of
the
work
that
they're
doing
and
we're
grateful
for
for
some
of
the
innovation
they
brought
to
the
table.
Thank
you
item
number
three
solid
waste
collection,
multi-unit,
residential
and
city
facilities.
Is
that
item
carried
carried?
Thank
you
very
much
item
number
four
PLAs
Co
long
term
waste
conversion
agreements.
B
Obviously
I'm
going
to
be
holding
that
item
and
that's
it
for
the
agenda
outside
of
the
completion
of
notices
of
motion
at
the
end.
So
the
only
item
that
we're
holding
today
is
the
PLAs
Co
and
what
I'd
like
to
do
at
this
time.
I
know
that
many
people
are
anxious
to
to
get
into
the
debate
and
so
how
we're
going
to
work
it
today
is
that
we're
going
to
ask
councillor
Moffat
to
take
the
mic
in
a
moment.
B
He's
got
a
motion
that
he's
going
to
table
that
we've
been
working
on
so
that
there's
a
motion
in
people
back
of
people's
minds
when
we're
having
the
debate
I'm
going
to
ask
our
city
manager
mr.
Kirkpatrick,
to
tee
up
the
reports
and
provide
us
with
his
advice
that
I'm
going
to
ask
mr.
Pradhan
if
he'd
say
a
few
words
before
we
start
the
debate
and
then
I'm
going
to
go
to
delegations.
If
that's
okay
with
committee
members,
so
I
know
that
what
very
anxious
is
a
city
to
see.
B
Pascoe
succeed
and
councilís
signal
that
this
term,
by
asking
our
city
manager
to
enter
into
formal
commercial
negotiations
with
PLAs
Co,
and
we
concluded
those
negotiations
at
the
end
of
December
as
a
matter
of
fact
December
the
14th.
But
we
know
as
a
result
of
the
very
strict
direction
that
council
gave
to
mr.
Kirkpatrick
in
allowing
for
a
commercial
agreement
that
council
not
only
wanted
its
will
carried
out
with
respect
to
contractual
agreements.
B
And
to
that
extent
we
have
to
acknowledge
the
good
work
of
both
the
city
solicitor
and
the
deputy
city
solicitor
and
making
sure
that
counsels
direction
for
PLAs
Co
matched
the
contractual
agreement.
But
we
also
asked
mr.
Kirkpatrick
to
continue
being
accountable
to
us
by
coming
back
to
committee
and
counsel.
If
ever
anything
was
going
to
change
in
those
agreements,
whether
it
was
a
material
change
or
anything
that
mr.
Kirkpatrick
felt
should
be
brought
to
the
attention
of
committee.
B
So
article
4.1
requires
that
PLAs
go
provide
proof
that
they
have
obtained
sufficient
financing
to
cover
the
construction
of
the
commercial
facility
and,
again
we're
going
to
hear
from
mr.
Kirkpatrick
whether
or
plas
Co
has
met
that
agreement
and
we'll
find
out
from
mr.
Brydon
many
details
surrounding
that
that
are
non
proprietary.
Anything
that
he
can
share
with
us
publicly.
B
Co
asked
for
another
extension
to
the
end
of
December
2014
and
obviously
that's
going
to
form.
A
big
part
of
our
debate
this
morning
is
discussing
whether
this
committee
wants
to
grant
the
extension
and
any
feedback
that
we
hear
from
our
city
manager
with
regards
to
any
risk
in
granting
that.
So
we
know
that
PLAs
Co
is
a
huge
part
of
our
local
economy
and
mr.
B
B
Gasification
technology
forms
a
part
of
the
city's
long-range
waste
plan
and
it's
an
inescapable
fact
that
trail
Road
has
a
finite
amount
of
capacity,
and
we
know
that
from
our
recent
debate
this
term
with
regards
to
service
delivery,
changes
that
that
hole
is
going
to
get
filled,
and
it's
going
to
last
for
so
long.
Our
recent
dollars
show
us
that
the
cost
of
a
new
landfill
is
approximately
a
quarter
of
a
billion
dollars,
and
we
also
know
citing
a
new
residential
landfill
in
Ottawa
is
going
to
be
very
difficult.
B
We
know
that
impossible
says
castor
human
and
we
know
that,
because
no
municipality
has
been
able
to
do
that
that
we
know
of
in
the
last
10
or
15
years,
and
when
we
look
at
Toronto,
they
actually
bought
a
private
landfill
in
Saint
Thomas.
So
Torontonians
garbage
is
being
trucked
down
the
401
to
Saint
Thomas.
We
know
in
the
case
of
the
ini
sector,
they're
trucking
their
garbage
somewhere.
We
think
upper
New,
York
State.
B
We
don't
have
control
over
that
waste,
but
we
do
know
is
that
we
need
better
solutions
to
manage
waste
in
the
city
of
Ottawa
and
we
believe,
as
a
council,
that
PLAs
Co
is
the
way
to
go
long
term.
But
I.
Think
I
speak
on
behalf
of
all
of
us
to
say
that
we
need
some
answers
today
to
find
out
where
we're
at,
in
terms
of
crystallizing,
that
long
term
vision
that
we
have
so
our
patience
is
not
infinite
and
we're
going
to
hear
that
today
and
again
councillor
Moffitt's
going
to
table
his
motion.
B
But
I
want
to
again
reiterate
that
I'm
here
today
with
an
open
mind-
and
my
colleagues
have
signaled
to
me
today
that
they're
also
here
with
an
open
mind.
We
are
a
strong
proponent
of
PLAs,
go
as
signaled
through
our
motions,
our
debate,
our
council
decisions,
but
we
have
many
questions
for
PLAs,
go
and
appreciate
the
fact
that
mr.
Brydon
is
here
today
to
ask
those
questions
and
in
particular
councillor
Moffat
is
going
to
ask
questions
with
regards
so
that
PLAs
goes
operations
to
date.
B
We're
going
to
look
at
an
explanation
of
why
more
time
is
required
and
certainly
we're
looking
for
solid
assurances
as
to
where
we're
going
to
go
and
again
speaking
on
behalf
of
Council
through
motion,
as
we
did
through
direction.
I
want
to
reaffirm
that
we
are
in
a
legally
binding
partnership
with
Bosco
and,
as
such,
I
asked
our
deputy
city
solicitor
to
attend
POSCO
today
to
look
at
financial
documents
that
would
be
of
a
proprietary
nation,
nature
and
I'm
going
to
ask
mr.
B
B
But
the
point
being
is
that
in
some
forms
we
can't
bring
forward
proprietary
information
that
could
jeopardize
contractual
obligations
or
relationships
that
Pasqua
is
entering
into,
but
by
the
same
token
we
have
a
thirst
and
a
desire
for
transparent
information,
and
so
we
found
a
way
to
get
some
transparency
to
the
table
at
the
very
least.
By
getting
the
assurances
of
the
deputy
city
solicitor,
who
has
reviewed
documents
this
morning,
so
with
these
comments
in
mind,
I'm
going
to
turn
the
floor
over
to
mr.
B
E
You,
chair
I'm
not
sure,
frankly,
that
I
can
do
much
better
job.
Introducing
the
subject
matter
than
you
just
have
in
fact
I'm
sure
I
can't
so
I'm
not
going
to
repeat
what
you've
just
done.
I
would
say,
though,
that
to
highlight
that
the
contract
that
was
executed
or
approved
by
a
council
to
be
negotiated
in
December
of
2011
and
was
executed
last
December,
provided
for
a
deadline
for
PLAs
code
to
identify
that
it
it
had
acquired,
was
succeeded
in
acquiring
the
financing
necessary
to
construct
the
commercial
facility,
and
there
were
three
tests
to
that.
E
The
first
one
was
that
the
Bosque
was
able
to
provide
commercial
documentation
regarding
construction
loan
financing,
as
well
as
equity.
Financing.
That,
in
total,
would
be
enough
to
cover
the
estimated
construction
cost
of
the
facility.
They
were
to
actually
have
made
a
draw
against
the
the
credit
facility
and
they
were
to
have
entered
into
commitments,
binding
commitments
to
purchase
materials
or
services
for
the
necessary
for
the
construction
of
commercial
facility.
Plas
Co,
as
mr.
Brydon
will
describe,
and
as
the
as
indicated
mr.
Carey
or
mr.
Thompson
will
be
able
to
also
speak
to
it.
E
Pasco
has
made
progress
on
the
towards
the
construction
of
commercial
facility,
particularly
with
the
third
test,
in
terms
of
commitments
and
expenditures
that
have
been
incurred
with
regards
to
the
commercial
facility,
but
they
have
not
yet
succeeded
in
finalizing
the
the
financing
for
the
construction
commercial
facility.
Mr.
E
Staff
are
recommending
that
the
committee
approve
the
request
for
the
extension
by
PLAs,
Co
and
I'd
say
probably
there's
two
main
points
to
why
staff
are
recommending
not
the
first
one
is
just,
as
was
the
case
in
December
of
2011,
and
previously
this
year,
when
council
considered
the
first
extension
staff.
When
you
look
at
all
of
the
potential
benefits
from
a
commercial
Glasgow
facility,
environmental,
economic
cost
and
potential
benefits
to
the
city
through
revenue
sharing
and
honorariums.
E
We
are
not
aware
of
a
better
technology
that
is
commercialized
or
close
to
being
commercialized
at
this
point
than
the
division
that
the
successful
Glasgow
commercial
facility
presents
to
the
city.
So
that's
the
first
piece
of
rationale,
the
second
one
which
is
I
think
as
important.
Maybe
more
important
I'd
like
to
highlight
for
committee
members
that
the
the
terms
of
the
contract,
the
other
timing,
concerns
and
in
particularly
a
very
important
one,
which
deals
with
a
deemed
operations
date,
do
not
change.
E
So
if
you
can
extend
the
deadline
for
the
the
financing,
it
does
not
extend
any
timelines
in
the
contract
for
performance
by
PLAs
Co.
The
contract
calls
for
an
Operations
date,
and
the
operation
statement
is
an
important
point
in
time,
because
there
are
other
thing
that
come
they're
set
from
that
into
the
future.
E
Whichever
is
greater
and
that's
an
important
governor,
it
was
talked
a
lot
about
in
2011
because
for
those
that
had
questions
about
well,
this
will
be
the
first
commercial
facility
in
the
world
what
if
it
doesn't
work,
what
if
it
gets
built
and
it
isn't
able
to
process
300
tons
a
day?
Are
we
tied
into
a
torrent,
long-term
commitment
with
no
ability
to
to
look
at
other
alternatives
if
it
doesn't
work
and
what
was
negotiated
and
plastic
agreed
to
in
the
negotiations?
E
Was
this
ability
for
the
city
if
it
had
its
option
to
reduce
its
contractual
commitment
to
provide
waste
to
PLAs
Co?
If
it
wanted
to
look
at
other
things,
that
date
is,
as
I
said,
five
years
from
the
operations
date
and
the
contract
says,
the
operation
state
is
the
earlier
of
when
PLAs
go
polls
there
or
converts
their
financing
to
long
term
financing
on
the
plant,
so
the
plant
is
being
built
or
at
the
latest,
March
31st
2016,
and
that
date
doesn't
change.
E
We
can
extend
this
date,
which
just
deals
with
the
evidence
of
the
financing,
but
it
does
not
change
the
operations
date
and
therefore
the
city
still
has
that
protection
as
early
as
2021
to
reduce
its
commitment
to
provide
waste
under
the
contract
with
fosco
based
on
PLAs
gos
performance,
and
so
for
those
two
reasons.
A
chair
staffer
recommending
the
request
from
fosco
for
the
extension.
Okay.
B
B
One
thing
is
you've
been
unequivocal
and
speaking
about
no
financial
risks
to
the
city
and
I.
Think
we
want
to
hear
you
speak
strongly
in
that
regard.
But
as
councillor
Moffitt
is
going
to
table
a
motion
in
a
minute,
we
do
believe
that
there
is
long-term
risk
to
the
city
if
technology
passes
us
by
while
we're
waiting,
and
so
with
that
in
mind,
I'm
going
to
ask
councillor
Moffat
to
introduce
his
motion
and
to
thank
counselor
Moffat
for
his
leadership
on
this
and
also
to
thank
the
clerk's
office,
mr.
B
F
You
chair
this
is
essentially
you
know.
We
hear
a
lot
about
there,
aren't
any
financial
risks,
but
I
mean
time
is
his
money
and
and
the
longer
you,
you
delay
finding
a
solution
to
trail
road,
the
more
it
could
cost
in
the
long
run
and
being
the
host
councillor
for
boost
railroad
facility
and
the
classical
facility.
Clearly
I'd
like
to
find
something
that
is
a
solution
for
trail
Road,
but
something
that
actually
works
and
two
dates.
We
don't
have
a
guarantee
that
that
PLAs
go
will
work.
F
So
I
just
have
a
a
motion
here
that
speaks
to
essentially
in
2005
the
city
was
going
through
a
request
for
expressions
of
interest
for
new
technology,
and
that
was
sort
of
cut
off
by
the
agreements
that
Council
at
that
time
set
up
with
Glasgow
and
all
just
get
into
the
into
the
motion
to
explain
it.
A
bit
better.
F
This
is
a
further
request
from
classical
to
extend
the
deadline
for
the
confirmation
of
financial
requirements
for
the
commercial
property
beyond
the
date
set
out
in
article
4.18
of
the
long-term
waste
conversion
agreement
between
the
city
and
PLAs
Co,
and
whereas
the
city's
Trail
Road
landfill
site
is
a
finite
asset
with
a
finite
capacity
and
whereas
it
would
be
prudent
for
the
city
to
be
prepared
for
all
eventualities
with
respect
to
its
waste
management
and
solid
waste
disposal.
Facilities
therefore
be
resolved.
F
That
Environment
Committee
recommend
that
council
approve
that
should
possibly
not
fulfill
the
set
it
in
article
4.1.
A
of
the
long-term
waste
conversion
agreement
with
the
city
city
staff
be
directed
to
immediately
commence
a
request
for
expressive
interest
process
for
alternative
technologies
to
handle
the
city's
released,
some
residual
solid
waste
and
that
the
results
of
the
ROI
be
subject
of
a
staff
report
that
is
brought
to
Environment
Committee
and
see
Council
for
the
for
consideration
at
the
earliest
opportunity.
Following
the
close
of
the
Ruy
process,
okay,.
B
So,
thank
you
very
much
councillor
Moffat
and
that
motion.
Obviously
we
will
debate
it
and,
and
if
this
committee
offers
the
extension
to
Fosco,
we
can
talk
about
when
that
motion
is
in
full
force
of
effect.
Before
we
go
to
mr.
bride
and
I'm
going
to
ask
mr.
Kirkpatrick
our
staff
worked
in
this
motion
and
I
know
that
you
were
perfectly
advised
about
this.
But
what
is
your
feedback
about
directing
staff
to
start
this
process
if
poss
was
given?
Another
extension
was
your
feedback
about
this
particular
motion
to
start
the
process
up
again.
E
B
So,
thank
you
very
much.
Mr.
Kirkpatrick
and
I'll
know
I
asked
mr.
bride
to
say
if
he
was
and
mr.
Brydon,
if
as
part
of
your
fault,
hello
up
to
mr.
or
councillor
Moffitt's
motion,
if
you're
prepared
to
speak
to
this
I'd
like
to
hear
as
with
committee
members
and
our
community,
if
you
support
councillor
Moffitt's
motion
as
well,
if
you
have
any
feedback
about
that,
so
mr.
B
G
In
the
event
that
Council
approved
an
extension,
then
the
the
contract
remains,
as
it
is
until
the
end
of
that
extension
caried
whatever
it
is
that
the
council
agrees
to
and
then
the
motion
would
have
alternatives,
possibly
identified
through
this
expression
of
interest,
but
that
would
not
affect
the
contract
until
the
end
of
the
period
that
the
council
has
agreed
to
extend.
That's.
B
Correct
mr.
Botha,
so
if
committee
agrees
today
to
mr.
Koo
Patrick's
recommendation
to
offer
an
extension
and
we
agreed
to
counselor
markets
motion,
the
idea
would
be
that
that
motion
crystallizes
in
the
event
that
plastico
does
not
fulfill
the
obligations
that
are
laid
out
so
essentially
I
see
this.
As
the
the
patience
is
running
out.
Motion
that
we
really
want
to
support
POSCO.
B
We
want
to
live
up
to
our
contractual
obligations,
but
if,
at
the
end
of
an
extension
period
we
don't
see
progress,
then
counselor
moppets
motion
direct,
stop
to
go
out
and
find
out
what
else
is
out
there
in
the
environment
so
that
the
city
is
not
lagging
behind
necessarily
a
year
from
now
year
and
a
half
from
now
with
other
technologies.
So
the
idea
would
be
absolutely
want
to
see
PLAs
go
succeed
and
we
hope
that
we
never
have
to
implement
that
motion.
G
G
Thank
you,
I
think.
A
very
important
factor
is
what
the
city
manager
has
pointed
out.
It
was.
There
were
two
things
that
a
position
on
our
on
PLAs
Co
site
in
the
position
of
the
city
side
represented
by
the
city
manager.
They
required
a
great
deal
of
discussion
in
our
contract
from
our
side
once
we
begin
to
put
major
dollars
into
the
project,
while
we
were
happy
to
have
specific
consequences
of
any
breaches
of
the
contract,
we
were
not
prepared
to
conflict
that
the
contract
could
be
cancelled
because
we
have.
G
We
would
then
have
money
going
into
a
highly
specific
facility
with
absolutely
no
purpose,
so
there
would
be
the
the
potential
that
for
the
equivalent
of
a
parking
ticket
in
a
violation
of
some
aspect
of
the
contract,
we
could
have
the
equivalent
of
a
death
sentence
for
the
parking
ticket
which
we
didn't
think
we
could
do
so
on
our
side.
Our
view
was
once
we
have
this
project
financed
and
have
gone
down
some
minimum
amount
and
a
proceeding
with
the
project.
It
can't
be
canceled,
and
that
is
what
the
contract
says.
G
The
the
origins
of
the
march
date
was
that
the
agreement
that
was
ultimately
settled
had
been
considered
in
what
we
internally,
we
called
an
abstracted
under
look.
Actually,
it
was
called
a
document
of
some
detail
as
set
out
all
the
terms
and
conditions
and
considered
by
council
and
approved
in
December
of
2011,
and
the
council
required
that
if
the
agreement
has
finalized
changed
from
that
it
had
to
come
back
to
council.
G
So
it
took
us
a
year
to
negotiate
that
contract,
not
saying
it
took
the
city
of
the
year.
It
took
us
both
a
year
to
negotiate
that
contract.
We
were
all
very
careful,
what's
important
to
us
and
important
to
the
city,
so
a
mark,
a
date
that
when
the
City
Council
approved
it
was
15
months
away
in
March,
2011
became
3
months
away
from
the
actual
contract
date,
so
in
December
just
before
Christmas.
In
fact,
like
real
close.
G
In
fact,
we
were
all
wrapping
presents
at
the
board
room
table.
While
we
were
working
on
the
last
parts.
The
contract,
figuratively
speaking,
the
choice,
was
don't
sign.
The
contract
in
December
2012
go
back
to
council
sometime
early
in
the
new
year
and
get
the
date
changed,
which
would
then
further
push
back
the
date
when
we
could
actually
commence
work
on
this
project.
G
Confident
that
the
only
thing
that
could
cause
us
to
be
cancelled
was
our
inability
to
finance
it
and
I
elected
to
sign
the
contract
with
the
date
in
it,
confident
that,
in
the
event
we
could
not
finance
within
three
months
from
the
date
it
was
signed.
That
council
was
not
looking
for
an
excuse
to
terminate
the
contract.
It
was
looking
for
protection
against
being
tied
up
indefinitely
or
from
an
acceptable
period
of
time
to
a
contract
that
wasn't
being
implemented
and
that
that
I
felt
would
not
be
a
significant
risk.
G
G
We
now
paid
just
a
few
dollars
short
of
five
million
dollars,
both
of
them
substantially
larger
than
the
commitments
that
we
would
be
required
to
make
under
Section
four
point
one
or
the
cash
that
we
were
required
to
disperse
under
four
point.
One
also,
a
part
of
the
construction
debt
has
been
signed
and
an
advance
greater
than
three
million
dollars
has
been
made
on
it.
All,
that
is
to
say,
I,
believe
the
council
should
see
this
as
real
progress
in
which
it
can
have
confidence.
G
I
am
NOT
suggesting
that
we
have
met
the
conditions
we
have
not
because
it's
very
clear
all
documentation
has
to
be
signed.
Subject
only
two
conditions:
precedent
that
are
usual.
We
have
not
done
that
so
I'm,
not
arguing
that
we
have
met
the
condition,
but
rather
to
say
the
purpose
of
the
condition
which
was
to
allow
the
comple
mark
the
council
to
be
confident.
This
project
was
proceeding.
We
have
done
more
than
that
condition
would
have
required
the.
G
The
key
factor
in
seeking
a
date
that
is
past
the
point
of
where
we
expect
to
be
fully
financed
and
in
construction
at
the
site
is
that
to
do
that
to
be
in
construction
at
the
site
makes.
May
we
need
to
continue
to
invent,
invest
in
that
project
every
day,
and
we
are
we're
spending
engineering
dollars
on
that
we're
spending
permitting
dollars
on
it.
G
We
need
to
get
the
engineering
details
from
the
supplier
now
and
to
do
that
we
have
to
make
payments
and
we're
doing
that
all
those
payments
come
from
equity
dollars.
They're
all
at
risk
equity
is
used
to
investing
in
projects
where
they
know
that
the
risks
or
the
projects
are
before
the
men
they
might
find.
It's
not
going
to
work
and
their
money
is
gone.
It's
very
difficult
to
add
to
that
a
risk
that
we
may
come
to
a
date
and
the
city
may
decide
to
cancel
a
contract.
G
So
what
we
ask
you
to
do
is
stay
with
the
operations
date,
which
completely
protects
the
city's
ability
to
right-size
down
all
the
way
to
zero.
If
we're
not
done
and
not
performing
so
to
stay
with
that,
don't
change
it
at
all,
but
move
the
ability
to
cancel
for
lack
of
meeting
all
the
provisions
of
4.1
to
a
date
which,
if
we're
not
done,
then
we
would
certainly
be
late
on
a
March
16th
operations
date
and
eliminate
an
artificial
date
in
the
middle
that
actually
would
slow
down
the
project
by
discouraging
the
equity.
G
G
I
was
relieved
that
it
wasn't
a
bailiff
and
the
the
purpose
of
the
visit
was
to
be
able
to
examine
the
records
of
the
company,
not
because
anyone
was
suspicious
that
the
summary
I
have
said
on
a
confidential
basis
to
the
city
manager
wasn't
correct,
but
because
it's
responsible
to
check
to
be
sure
it's
correct,
so
they
look
to
see
how
the
purchase
orders
or
payments
which
matched
the
amounts
that
we
have
said
have
been
paid
and
I
haven't
spoken
with.
That
counsel.
G
So
we
take
very
seriously
and
understand
very
clearly
why
the
city
needs
to
have
a
date
that
you
can
go
about
doing
other
things
I
think
it's
very
responsible
to
proceed
to
know
what
you
can
do.
What
else
is
out
there?
One
of
the
reasons
we
continue
to
have
equity
available
to
this
company
is.
It
has
been
excruciating,
ly,
slow
and
costly
in
development
of
new
technologies.
It
always
cost
more
in
takes
longer,
so
everyone
thinks
they've
budgeted
for
that,
because
it
really
knows
it
costs
more
and
takes
longer.
G
So
if
the
proponent
says
I
think
it's
a
dollar,
you
say
well
how
about
three?
They
think
it'll
take
six
months
how
about
six
years,
and
then
you
said
about
financing
well,
so
we
did
that.
Well,
it
cost
more
and
took
longer
than
that
and
we're
now
350
million
dollars
into
creating
what
is
the
best
technology
in
the
world.
We
have
absolutely
no
doubt
that
it
is
one
of
the
pluses
for
us
there
is
that
many
others
have
tried
and
it
failed
and
most
of
the
companies
actually
have
gone
out
of
business.
G
The
most
reason
one
which
is
reported
in
the
press,
the
public
company.
You
can
go
gather
to
have
them
comment
on
rather
than
to
say
there
was
quite
a
lot
of
press
on
the
euro
plasma
last
week
with
its
equivalent
to
Trail
Road,
which
they
were
about
to
start
up
and
it
didn't
perform
well,
and
there
are
so
the
reports
of
atom
in
the
press.
But
the
reason
we
continue
to
be
supported
with
equity
is
our
equity.
G
Investors
see
that
the
market
has
actually
improved
for
green
energy
from
waste
and
the
alternatives
have
not,
and
we
were
fortunate
in
Canada
to
have
another
company
enter
CEM,
which
has
also
been
working
at
this
for
a
very
long
time
there
in
Edmonton.
In
that
case,
Edmonton
has
made
significant
investment
in
the
project
and
preparing
the
waste
to
deliver
it
to
enter
camp,
and
the
problems
of
Alberta
has
made
significant
equity
investment
in
the
project.
G
In
that
case,
the
city
prepares
the
feedstock
by
first
separating
the
materials
recyclable
and
then
composting
the
rest
and
then
screening
the
result
and
the
results
that
stay
on
the
screen
and
are
not
composted
is
what
goes
to
enter
chem.
We
chose
to
develop
a
technology
which
would
take
the
waste
off
the
back
of
the
city
truck
rather
than
after
having
been
pre
processed
in
that
manner,
and
we
find
that
for
us,
there
has
been
a
very
good
response
to
that.
G
So
I'm
keen
to
respond
to
questions
as
the
council
may
wish
appreciate
the
cooperation
that
this
city
has
provided
to
PLAs.
Co
for
many
years
already
and
I
personally
believe
that
you
will
be
proud
to
have
the
facility
that
will
be
built
on
your
elected
site.
There
is
a
rendering
of
it
here.
That's
more
than
just
picture
that
Douglas
Cardinal
drew
because
I
needed
a
picture.
We
have
a
bid
which
we
haven't
yet
accepted
to
the
entire
facility.
G
That's
one
of
the
elements
of
a
total
of
103
million
of
our
total
costs,
which
are
now
subject
either
to
accepted
contracts
or
firm
quotes
that
we
have
yet
to
accept,
and
this
particular
design
is
the
design
on
which
that
bid
is
based.
So
while
it
still
may
change
a
bit,
that's
substantially
how
this
plant
will
look
and
of
the
total
costs
for
that
plant,
which
we
expect
to
be
a
bit
less
than
200
million.
G
B
You
very
much
mr.
Brydon
men
want
to
thank
you
as
well
for
allowing
our
staff
to
come
and
look
at
your
records
today
and
I
appreciate
how
you've
even
described
that
process
this
morning
very
transparent,
very
open
and
certainly
on
when
it
comes
time
to
ask
top
questions.
I
would
ask
mr.
Thomson
to
come
up
beside
mr.
B
Kilpatrick
to
speak
to
what
he
can
say
he
saw
this
morning,
but
certainly
not
that
we
don't
doubt
what
you're
saying,
but
we
also
want
to
hear
directly
from
our
deputy
city
solicitor
as
to
his
due
diligence
that
he
did
so
we're
going
to
go
to
our
only
two
delegations
right
now
I'm
going
to
ask
mr.
Duncan
burry
if
he
could
come
up
to
my
rights
where
it
says
public
delegations,
so
two
seats
away
from
the
CBC
and
is
Chris
Joe
Kowski.
B
Here,
yes
did
I
say
your
name
right,
sir
okay,
if
you
could
come
and
take
a
seat
beside
mr.
Burley
as
well,
and
if
there's
any
other
delegation
who
would
like
to
speak
this
morning
on
this
particular
staff
report.
You're
welcome
to
there
are
forms
to
my
right
at
the
front,
and
you
have
five
minutes
to
speak
if
you
do
so
other
than
that,
we
only
have
two
delegations
this
morning
so
welcome.
Mr.
H
Bouie,
okay,
thank
you
very
much.
I've
been
here
before
to
this
committee
and
wanted
to
make
a
few
brief
comments
on
this
proposed
extension.
I
would
urge
you
to
reject
the
staff
recommendation
and,
having
heard
councillor
muffets
proposed
motion,
I
would
give
some
some
suggestions
here
to
consider
that
very
seriously
that,
on
a
slightly
different
timetable,
the
head
soy
saga-
this
is
engagement
of
PLAs
ko
needs
to
be
brought
to
an
end.
H
Why,
after
the
2005
letter
of
agreement
and
launch
of
the
pilot
plant
and
over
a
year
and
a
half,
have
the
council
in
december
agreed
to
sign
a
contract?
This
PLAs
go
still
not
have
the
necessary
capital
to
actually
build
a
facility
now
and
what
could
possibly
happen
in
16
months.
That
would
change
their
clásico
has
a
signed
contract
guaranteeing
at
tip
three
of
eighty
three
dollars
and
twenty-five
cents.
H
It's
home
a
contract
of
180
million
dollars
over
20
years,
and
they
got
it
so
sourced,
but
they
still
can't
find
the
necessary
investors
to
back
the
project.
Vasco
has
successfully
and
I
might
add,
cleverly
passed
onto
the
city,
obligations,
risks
and
costs
associated
with
the
quality
and
the
composition
of
the
waste
delivered
to
the
facility.
H
The
city,
in
my
opinion,
has
naively
signed
commitments
in
the
waste
conversion
agreement
to
meet
moisture
content
requirements,
correct
them
with
dry
waste
if
necessary,
and
is
committed
to
keeping
out
of
the
waste
stream
materials
that
are
incompatible
with
the
carefully
calibrated
PLAs
Co
process.
These
requirements,
which
will
not
straightforward
and
will
come
at
a
cost,
but
despite
all
this
classical
still
can't
get
the
necessary
capital
funds.
So
so
what
can
possibly
be
wrong?
H
It
looks
like
a
slam
dunk
to
me
long
time
so
hundred
eighty
million
dollar
contract
with
risks
on
delivered
waste
paste
passed
on
to
the
city.
Most
investors
I
would
think
a
situation
like
that
would
be
lining
up
to
get
in
on
the
action,
but
apparently
they
aren't
so
why
not?
Perhaps
they've
actually
done
their
homework.
The
investors
and
and
exercised
for
necessary
due
diligence
and
actually
looked
at
more
detail
at
the
actual
PLAs
go
track
record,
perhaps
have
actually
done
an
independent
technical
review
of
the
pilot
program
results.
H
Something
I
might
add
that
I,
don't
think
the
city
has
done
and
determined
that
the
pilot
program
did
not
prove
that
plasma
gasification
works
for
municipal,
solid
waste,
emphasize
municipal,
solid
waste.
Plasma
gasification
certainly
works
in
many
other
situations.
Biomedical
waste,
hazardous
waste
in
unique
circumstances
like
onboard
ship,
for
example,
and
as
mr.
Biden
just
pointed
out,
people
have
been
trying
to
crack
this
not
for
a
long
time
and
nobody's
actually
done
it
for
municipal
solid
waste.
H
So
the
pilot
program
results
were
highly
problematic
and
poor
at
best,
and
perhaps
they've
actually
read
the
Stantec
thermal
treatment
technologies,
review
of
November
28
2011,
which
was
actually
released
during
this
committee
meeting
in
December
2011
and
the
report.
What
it
says
about
gasification
and
plasma
gasification
is
instructive,
so
none
of
us
is
quoted
in
the
staff
report
in
front
of
you.
But
let
me
quote
you
a
couple
of
things
quickly.
It
says
the
Stantec
report
said:
gasification
is
only
used
at
a
few
facilities
to
treat
MSW.
H
This
is
primarily
due
to
operational
issues
that
arise
due
to
heterogeneous
nature
of
the
waste,
as
a
gasification
process
requires
a
fairly
homogeneous
feedstock
more
detail.
Plasma
gasification
has
not
yet
been
used
at
a
commercial
scale,
so
this
is
something
we
all
know.
Waste
preparation,
pre-processing
is
required
for
a
technology
with
difficulties
in
accepting
variable
waste
streams.
H
This
is
frankly,
I
think
the
reason
why
plasma
gasification
is
not
yet
successfully
been
used
for
MSW
and
I
would
argue
that
plasma
hasn't
proven
I
can
do
it
either
and
perhaps,
more
importantly
or
remembering
this
was
written
in
November
2011.
After
several
years
of
pilot
program
operation,
limited
data
is
available
to
assess
the
operational
success
with
MSW
feedstocks
in
regard
to
a
technical
reliability
and
just
cost
you
mine
back
to
some
of
the
track
records
of
the.
H
So.
In
conclusion,
I
would
say
that
the
city
should
stop
wasting
as
time
on
this
counselor
contracts
commit
to
following
a
proper
process,
while
counsel
amorphous
motion
suggests
is
doing
a
proper
request,
which
questions
of
interest
and
I
think
you
should
complete.
The
waste
planning
exercise
do
a
proper
understanding
of
what
the
waste
disposal
needs
are
and
do
a
request
for
proposals.
Do
a
quest
for
tend
to
eventually
do
that.
In
fact,
Durham
Region
did
to
get
to
their
conclusions.
H
So,
finally,
I
think
this
has
gone
on
long
enough
by
the
time
you
get
to
the
end
of
this
road.
It
will
be
almost
a
decade
2005
to
the
end
of
2014
and
on
into
2016
over
a
decade
and
you,
frankly,
still
at
home
had
absolutely
nothing
to
show
for
it.
So
I
think
there's
a
fundamentally
flawed
dream.
I
think
that
punt
this
to
my
next
council
do
the
right
thing.
H
B
B
B
B
H
B
B
I
I'll
introduce
myself
I'm
Chris
shell
Cassie
I've,
been
in
the
city
for
some
time,
as
most
of
some
of
the
councillors
know
as
a
chair
of
eco
vision
in
the
past
and
currently
I'm
the
sustainable
development
specialist
for
the
federal
government,
Public
Works,
Government,
Services
Canada
I'm
here
neither
to
support
nor
oppose
mr.
Brighton's
endeavors,
because
I'm
just
here
to
in
some
ways
ask
the
same
kinds
of
questions
that
council.
Those
are
now
asking
a
reason.
I
I
actually
came
down
here
today,
was
partly
because
I
have
asked
these
kinds
of
questions
prior
to
this
information
from
my
own
councillor
and
didn't
receive
answers
and
sort
of
said
well.
I'm
gonna
leave
it
in
abeyance
for
now
and
I
thought
well,
I'd,
better
speak
up
now,
I'm
kind
of
pleased
to
hear
number
one.
The
motion
that's
being
proposed
and
I
would
encourage
that
the
motion
and
actually
start
its
investigation
now
and
seek
that
staff
report
at
this
point
in
time
in
terms
of
the
alternative
technologies,
I
think
mr.
I
Brydon
is
quite
correct
about
Canada
being
blessed
with
two
specific
companies.
So,
what's
in
my
slide,
presentation
was
the
timeline
for
enter
camp
and
also
for
PLAs
Co,
indicating
sort
of
the
differences
between
the
two
companies
and
and
their
current
ability
to
at
least
perform
to
what
they'd
hope
to
do.
In
addition,
there's
another
slide
in
there
that
talks
about
the
commitments
that
council
was
looking
for
the
goal
and
target
to
signing
this
contract
with
PLAs
Co,
which
had
to
do
with.
Obviously
things
that
are
your
chair
has
mentioned
about
reducing
our
waste
stream.
I
That
sort
of
thing
I
mean
I,
think
it's
important
to
note
that
every
year,
in
a
way
that
we
don't
have
something
that
diverts
this
feedstock,
this
component
of
waste
away
from
our
municipal
stream
could
be
costing
us
in
the
neighborhood
of
7.5
to
8
million
dollars
a
year.
So
there
is
a
cost
to
not
having
a
facility
up
and
running,
certainly
the
technical
aspects
that
has
some
interesting
discussions
with
it.
Intercom
is
fluidized
gas
process,
gas
bed
process,
which
does
also
produce
syngas
and
then
gets
converted
into
both
either
ethanol
or
methanol.
I
I
Yes,
we
got
a
better
deal
than
Edmonton
God
and
Alberta
god.
We
did
put
some
money
in
at
the
federal
level.
You
know:
there's
there
there
is.
There
were
some
funds
that
went
into
the
possible
investigation,
the
plastico
process
from
the
SD
st
the
sustainable.
Whatever
group
has
TV
as
dtc.
That's
right!
Thank
you
so
I
mean
that's
that's
there
as
well.
I
I
When
I
sent
my
questions
to
my
counselor
at
that
point
in
time,
I
I
I
didn't
get
an
answer
on
that
at
all,
and,
and
certainly
I
would
be
interested
in
seeing
sort
of
what
did
we
to
some
degree
investigate
in
the
past,
so
that
we
don't
make
the
same
mistakes
in
the
future
and
not
going
to
a
competitive
process.
When
we
got
this,
what
seems
to
be
a
relatively
sweet
deal
if
it
succeeds
and
I've
done
well
hope
it
does,
because
I
really
do
hope
it
does.
I
I
I'm
concerned
about
permitting
here,
I
still
haven't
seen
anything
with
regards
to
the
permitting
of
the
full
plant
or
whether
that's
in
process
or
not
I
I'm,
hoping
one
minute
we'll
see
that
and
in
addition
to
that,
the
financial
issue
that
you're
facing
I
think
to
some
degree
is
that
that
enter
CEM
is
backed
by
too
large,
both
front
end
and
back
end
part
of
the
waste
stream
process.
One
being
the
front
end
being
waste
management
and,
at
the
back
end,
they're
also
being
backed
by
an
energy
company.
I
Their
combined
capital
value
is
in
thirty
six
billion
dollar
range.
So
you
can
see
why
people
are
tad
nervous,
potentially
about
investing
money
in
something
where
their
competition
could
possibly
eat
them
alive
at
the
table.
So
that's
why
I'm
concerned
I
encourage
you
to
start
looking
for
Plan
B
now
today.
I
B
B
Okay,
I,
don't
see
any
bass,
so
I'm
now
going
to
draw
to
a
close
delegation,
dog
ations.
So
now
is
an
opportunity
for
members
of
committee
to
ask
questions
you
can
debate
if
you'd
like
to
or
we
can
ask
questions
and
then
debate
if
the
floor
is
open
to
anybody
and
then
I'm
going
to
ask
councillor
Moffat
at
the
very
end
whether
he
asked
questions
in
this
process
now
is
immaterial
but
I'd
like
him
to
wrap
up
on
his
motion
before
we
go
Cousy
Hume.
J
There
go
I
guess
that
the
only
real
issue
that
needs
the
answer
here
is
the
one
mr.
Burley
raised,
which
was
related
to
the
risk
that
we've
always
assumed
that
it
was
risk
or
cost-free
to
to
the
the
city
or
it's
been
portrayed.
That
way,
may
not
be
actually
that
way.
So
what
actually
is
the
the
risk?
That's
been
transferred
to
us
to
deliver
materials
that
are
specified
a
composition
and
how
would
that
differ
from
the
composition
of
the
material
that
we
received
today
at
at
Trail
Road,
and
do
you
understand
my
my
question?
Mr.
E
The
the
two
examples
of
risk
that
I
heard
mr.
Barry
mentioned
dealt
with
moisture
content,
which
also
relates
to
energy
content
of
the
waste
and
then
also
some
concern
about
the
city's
ability
to
deliver
waste
without
certain
elements
in
it.
So
I'll
speak
to
both
of
those
individually.
The
first
point
on
the
energy
/
moisture
content
issue
that
was
early
on
you
know.
Mr.
Brydon
talked
about
took
a
year
to
negotiate
this
contract.
There
were
some
difficult
issues.
E
One
of
them
was
in
and
at
the
beginning
that
the
city
we
were
talking
about
a
tipping
fee
that
would
be
scalable
on
the
basis
of
the
energy
content
of
the
waste,
which
is
significantly
affected
by
the
moisture
content
of
the
waste.
That
was
risk
that,
from
my
perspective,
the
city
did
not
want
to
take,
and
so
in
the
end,
we
we
arrived
at
a
contract
that
we
proposed.
You
know
2011
that
had
one
tipping
fee
and
there
is
no
obligation
of
the
city
to
deliver
a
waste
with
a
specific
energy
content.
E
Glascoe
takes
what
we
deliver
to
them
in
terms
of
moisture
content,
which
mr.
brewery
mentioned
where
we
arrived
at.
The
contract
does
do
with
moisture
content.
It
says
that
we're
to
deliver
an
attempt
to
our
best
efforts
to
deliver
a
waste
that
has
a
moisture
content.
Less
than
45%,
which
I
can
tell
you
with
source
separate
organics
staff
are
confident
that
that
will
be
met
on
an
ongoing
basis,
or
maybe
one
or
two
times
a
year
where
that
might
be
exceeded,
and
that's.
E
It
a
requirement
best
efforts.
Okay,
if
we
deliver
waste
it's
higher
than
45%,
then
the
contract
requires
us
to
deliver
additional
waste
up
to
a
maximum
of
ten
a
ten
percent
increase
from
the
nominal
daily
delivery.
It
does
not
require
us
to
go
out
and
source
other
waste.
If
the
waste
isn't
available
to
us,
we
don't
have
to
deliver
it.
So,
in
my
opinion-
and
we
talked
about
this
in
2011-
I'm
surprised
mr.
E
burry
didn't
hear
it-
we
have
significantly
capped
the
risk
on
energy
content
and
moisture
content
and
the
waste
we
need
to
deliver
to
Glasgow
on
the
issue
of
hazardous
materials,
I
think
anyone
would
expect
that
it's
reasonable
that
pasko
should
not
be
obligated
to
accept
waste
that
has
materials
in
it.
Hazardous
materials,
nuclear
waste
things
like
that
that
could
significantly
affect
either
their
operations
or
result
in
them
disqualified
on
their
permitting.
E
So
the
contract
speaks
to
unacceptable
waste
and
it
speaks
to
the
passcode
to
having
to
accept
materials
that
have
de
minimis
quantities
of
that
waste.
So
if
there's
the
odd
thing
in
there,
that's
something
that
is
pulled
out
on
the
sorting
floor
by
PLAs
go
and
the
contract
deals
with
how
PLAs
go
is
to
manage
deal
with
those
wastes
in
according
to
permitting
the
city
would
pay
the
cost
of
doing
so.
E
J
To
find,
though,
the
hazardous
waste,
as
we
would,
we
would
define
it
exactly
right
so,
from
a
from
a
a
residential
home
ownership
perspective,
the
waste
we
would
expect
to
receive.
If
it
has
these
hazards
in
it,
we
would
that,
therefore
it
has
a
requirement.
We
then
have
a
risk
that
we
would
have
to
do
something
with
that
class.
E
Co
has
the
ability
to
reject
a
load
if
they
see
more
than
de
minimis
quantities
on
the
sorting
floor
right
and
that
load,
then
we
have
to
take
back
to
our
landfill
and
put
it
in
the
landfill
like
we
do
right
now
and
I'm
assuming
water.
They
can
pull
the
de
minimis
quantities
out
and
manage
them
and
we
pay
the
cost
to
managing
them,
just
as
we
would
if
we
saw
them
on
our
own
sorting
floor
right.
J
And
if
we
saw
them
it
I'm,
assuming
that
if
we
saw
hazardous
waste
that
we
defined
it
on
the
sorting
floor,
we
would
not
be
taking
that
hazardous
waste
and
depositing
it
in
our
in
our
landfill.
Surely
we'd
be
we'd,
be
taking
it
out
and
depositing
it
in
a
in
an
environmentally
responsible
manner,
just
as
we
would,
if
it
if
it
hit
our
laughter
exactly
okay.
Okay,
thank
you,
ma'am
sure
thank.
C
C
G
This
is
an
area
that
the
province
has
been
reviewing
off
and
on
for
several
years,
as
you
know
so,
and
while
the
company
is
following
I
personally
am
NOT
as
familiar
as
I
would
have
been.
If
I'd
known
about
that
question
yesterday,
I
believe
it
is
the
case
that
the
definition
of
diversion
has
not
changed,
and
that
is
that
it
is
race
that
is
not
placed
in
the
landfill
and
it's
not
incinerated.
G
Obviously,
there
are
other
rules
about
what
else
can
you
do
with
waste
so
diversion?
Is
it
really
quite
broadly
defined,
not
in
a
landfill
and
not
incinerated?
We
certainly
are
not
incineration
and
that
none
of
the
waste
is
burned.
It
is
converted
into
a
gas,
and
then
the
gas
is
used
as
a
fuel
and
an
engine.
G
G
There
was
still
debate
as
to
whether,
even
if
we
did
have
clean
gas
that
was
used
as
a
fuel,
if
that
should
be
accepted
as
recovered
I
had
trouble
understanding
why
the
most
valuable
part
would
be
excluded
than
the
other.
Two
which
are
valuable
would
not
would
be
included,
but
then
I
wasn't
making
the
role.
We
were
just
commenting
on
it,
so
at
the
moment
I
don't
believe
any
of
that
has
actually
been
implemented.
There
is
a
constant
process
in
the
ministry,
trying
to
be
more
precise
about
exactly
what
diversion
is
to
my
knowledge.
G
The
percentage
of
the
ton
that
is
leftover
is
about
two
and
a
half
percent,
how
we
would
move
that
to
hazardous
waste
disposal
with
about
50/50
water
and
that
material,
so
that
it
is
not
dry
and
difficult
to
handle
without
it
being
a
challenge
for
the
worker
or
the
handling
process,
so
the
actual
weight
leaving
the
site
would
be
more
like
five
percent
but
half
of
that
water.
We
added
in
order
to
allow
other
ways
to
be
taken
off
the
site.
Okay,.
C
And
maybe
for
the
benefit
of
myself
and
others,
you
or
a
Kent,
maybe
good
answer
this
question
out
of
a
total
amount
of
tons
of
waste
that
we
have
in
residential
waste
when
you're
up
and
running
so,
let's
say
2016
2017
in
that
range.
How
much
of
that
total
amount
of
waste
will
be
going
to
PLAs
go
and
expect
it
to
be
processed
by
a
possible
well.
G
First
week
we're
on
a
program
which
intends
to
be
operational
in
2015
it'll
be
the
second
half
of
2015,
but
we
expect
to
be
operational
in
2015,
the
date
that
were
deemed
to
have
been
operational
and
all
the
consequences
begin
his
2016.
But
we
don't
expect
to
get
to
that
date
that,
without
being
operational,
the
amount
that
the
city
is
contracted
for
one
hundred
nine
thousand
five
hundred
tons
a
year.
The
amount
that
the
plant
will
be
able
to
process
is
about
a
hundred
and
forty
thousand
tons
year
and
the
difference.
G
The
city
has
a
right
of
first
refusal
to
supply.
We
need
to
give
them
notice
if
we're
going
to
sign
and
agree
with
anyone
to
supply
wood.
For
the
last
more
than
two
years,
we
can
take
short
term
commitments
without
going
back
and
forth
to
the
city
every
day,
but
if
we're
going
to
contract
for
longer
than
two
years,
we
must
give
this
a
the
opportunity
to
take
that
waste.
So.
C
D
Just
through
you
to
the
counselor,
the
the
total
amount
of
times
that
the
city
generates
varies
very
significantly
over
the
the
year
and
when
we
look
at
our
forecasts
through
increased
diversion
and
things
that,
through
our
waste
master
plan
in
the
early
parts
of
the
year,
January
February,
March,
sort
of
thing
Pascoe
will
be
taking
very,
very
close
to
a
hundred
percent
of
the
city's
projected
wastes.
Of
course,
that
changes
over
time.
D
But
that's
been
part
of
how
we've
been
establishing
what
the
capacity
is
that
the
city
could
commit
to
that
reduces
as
we
go
to
later
periods
of
the
year
and
the
overall
tonnage
generated
by
the
city,
increases
and
I.
Don't
have
an
exact
figure
on
that,
but
essentially
the
pinch
point
we
have
used
as
determining
the
capacity
of
what
that
commitment.
We
could
give
to
Bosco.
D
C
C
Weir
now,
if
I
could
I'll,
just
ask
a
couple
questions
on
the
councillors
motion
for
point,
one,
which
is
the
trigger
that
this
motion
would
ask
for
a
report
not
fulfilling
the
requirements
of
four
point,
one
that
would
not
happen
currently
until
after
December
2014
am
I.
Reading
that
correctly,
yes,
okay,
so
mr.
Kilpatrick,
could
you
or
mr.
D
Through
you
to
the
counselor,
I
think
what
we
would
this
suggestion
would
be
that
we
would
come
through
with
a
technology
review
very
quickly,
just
a
high-level
scan
if
you
will
and
then
the
going
out
for
a
request
for
expression
of
interest,
obviously,
is
would
take
longer
for
the
proponents
to
respond.
I
would
think
we
would
be
in
the
order
of
months
before
we
would
start
to
see,
be
able
to
tally,
solicit
review
and
tally
back
to
council
what
those
technologies
and
what
the
proponents
are
offering
in
terms
of
technology.
But
I
would
think.
D
C
C
Everything
happens
as
outlined
in
here
and
were
unable
to
get
to
that
point,
and
therefore
this
motion
is
triggered
before
the
city
could
be
ready
with
any
kind
of
an
alternative
would
likely
be
at
least
three
or
four
years
after
first
quarter.
2015.
Would
that
be
correct?
So
we
would
need
to
extend
the
landfill.
D
Know
if
I
can
I'll
pick
up
the
the
landfill
issue
first
right
now
going
along
as
we
are
in
terms
of
generation
waste
and
not
which
requires
disposal
at
the
trail.
Road
landfill,
we're
projecting
out
to
current
capacity
exist
to
2035
if
we're
able
to
to
target
and
meet
our
targets
in
the
waste
diversion
plan,
I
think
that
extent
set
out
another
seven
or
eight
so
years.
How
to
you
know
early
2004,
TS
and
stuff
in
that
order,
and
so
that's
the
life.
D
D
So
we
would
have
lots
of
time
to
to
facilitate
both
the
completion
of
this
re
IO
process
and
the
the
the
selection
of
a
proponent
and
environmental
assessments
that
follow.
It
would
take
some
years
to
to
implement
an
alternative,
fully
alternative
solution,
but
it
would
be
still
within
our
ability
to
accommodate
within
well
within
our
available
capacity.
The
joy
Road
by
pista,
yes,
I
Souls,
now.
C
G
So,
in
the
unlikely
event
that
the
city
should
be
short,
our
agreement
already
says
that
we
will
cooperate
with
each
other
source
waste
so
that
the
city
is
not
negatively
affected
by
the
fact
that
we
don't
have
it
from
them.
Long
to
get
it
from
somebody
of
the
waste
is
equally
effective.
So,
yes,
we
we
expect
that
our
permit
would
not
require
that
the
city
that
the
ways
to
originate
from
city,
okay,.
C
We
started
that
process
last
year
on
a
30-year
plan.
I
think
it's
very
important
that
we
stay
aware
of
what
the
options
are.
So
I
would
like
to
see
this
report,
if
possible,
delivered
to
this
committee
by
the
end
of
this
calendar
year
and
the
end
of
every
calendar
year
after
some
sort
of
an
environmental
scan
of
what
all
the
technologies
are
and
and
and
so
on,
would
that
be
possible?
It
would
that
be
a
friendly.
B
Councillor
qpm
I'm,
going
to
deject
here
for
a
minute
and
I
want
to
turn
the
mic
over
to
mr.
Thompson.
This
issue
was
raised
in
the
preparation
of
the
motion
and
there
are
possible
legal
consequences
to
suggesting
what
you've
suggested
so
I'm
just
going
to
ask
mr.
Thompson
if
he
could
provides
some
input
and
advice
as
to
owning
up
to
the
obligations
under
the
plastic
agreement.
If
we
agree
to
an
extension
or
going
out
there
and
there's
also
financial
cost
as
well
I'm
to
going
out
for
the
request
for
questions
of
interest,
I
didn't.
C
A
Chair
as
I
see
it
two
points,
then,
first
of
all
night
defer
to
mr.
weir
in
that
regard.
But
to
me
an
environmental
scan
is
different
from
the
reo
I
that
the
vice-chairs
motion
is
calling
for
in
this
particular
motion.
So
my
first
point
is
I
think
what
councilor
is
raising
is
actually
different
from
what's
set
forth
in
the
motion.
A
The
second
point
is
just
to
concur
with
what
you've
said,
that
is
to
say
that
in
preparation
for
committee,
not
only
did
we
look
at
this
motion
in
house
at
legal
services,
but
we
also
had
board
Widener
survey.
Our
external
lawyers
worked
with
us
in
the
negotiations
and
conclusion
of
this
contract
and
not
wanting
to
have
to
go
on
camera
to
to
comment
further.
A
I
would
just
say
that,
in
light
of
that,
the
motion
has
been
crafted
in
this
way
and
deliberately
in
the
operative
part
of
the
motion
we
have
not
put
in
a
date,
and
the
intention
simply
is
that
this
motion,
as
we
see
it,
is
complementary
to
the
existing
contractual
terms.
As
we
said,
the
extension
date,
as
mr.
Kilpatrick
has
indicated,
does
not
affect
other
dates
in
the
contract
in
favor
of
the
city,
and
so
I
would
be
concerned
about
revising
the
motion,
as
has
been
put
forth.
Certainly
with
regard
to
the
date.
B
C
It's
all
right
with
the
chair.
What
I'll
do
is
I'll,
let
the
other
councillors
speak
and
I
will
canvas
my
colleagues
to
see
if
there
is
support
to
get
some
sort
of
information
flowing
to
councillors
of
it's
not
what
I'm
not
trying
to
do
here
is
anything
to
hurt
the
PLAs
go
efforts
by
any
means,
I
just
think
it's
important
for
councillors
to
be
aware
of
all
the
options
and
I
think
it's
quite
clear
that
in
this
contract
there
are
points
in
time
where
we
may
change
technologies.
B
Socal
cqb,
it
would
be
acceptable
to
you
for
me
to
give
direction
to
mr.
weir
to
come
back
to
us
by
the
end
of
September
with
short
memos
or
a
briefing
note,
if
you
will
as
to
what
the
options
are
available
out
there,
with
no
overt
or
less
obvious
implication
that
were
undermining
Oh.
Would
that
be
acceptable?
Yeah,
absolutely.
C
B
Mr.
Weil,
would
you
take
that
as
direction
that
you
would
come
back
to
Council
through
memo
doesn't
have
to
come
the
committee
by
the
end
of
September,
the
absolute
latest
with
a
bullet
list?
If
you
will
of
any
technology,
that's
available
out
there,
any
other
options
for
the
disposal
of
residential,
solid
waste?
Would
that
be
direction?
You
would
accept?
Yes,.
A
As
you
know,
I
don't
I
don't
sit
on
this
twenty
any
longer,
but
but
I
appreciate
the
opportunity
to
be
here
and
I
appreciate
the
efforts
of
both
Council
Moffatt
and
Healy
I'm,
not
gonna.
Ask
questions
about
about
the
technical
process
this
morning,
but
I
have
some
confusion.
Aware
of
some
questions
are
to
go
back
to
the
beginning
this
process.
The
initial
vote
we
are
told,
was
very
urgent
had
to
be
done
for
the
purposes
of
getting
financing
in
place
and
moving
ahead.
A
So
we
voted
to
support
the
classical
endeavor
in
that
regard,
and
then
there
was
the
first
request
for
an
extension
which
was
again
a
bit
of
a
surprise
because
again
we
thought
the
urgency
of
the
first
vote
was
to
get
the
financing
place.
But
having
said
that,
it
was
my
understanding,
I
think
the
understanding
my
colleagues
has
presented
through
our
city
manager
that
he
passed
PLAs
go
with
coming
up
with
a
date
that
would
be
the
end
date,
the
last
date
and
I
think
he
challenged
you
mr.
A
Brydon
and
and
your
executive
team
to
to
come
up
with
a
date.
So
we
wouldn't
be
in
this
situation.
Again
and
I'll
go
back
to
my
first
comment
are
not
going
to
ask
about
process,
but
the
city
in
going
forward
with
this
is
not
only
investing
in
a
process.
It's
also
investing
in
a
business,
and
so
the
financing
of
the
plant
and
the
process
is
clearly
the
business
side
of
things.
It's
not
the
science
side,
it's
not
the
tech
side.
It's
the
business
side,
so
I
appreciate
that.
A
There's
some
things
you
can't
talk
about
and-
and
we
have
a
deputy
city
solicitor
here-
to
jump
in
if
I,
if
I
cross
a
line
but
I,
think
a
question
that
everybody
liked
the
answer
to
is
effectively
what
went
wrong.
You
gave
us
your
best
date
on
the
encouragement
of
our
city
manager.
Make
that
the
date
that
will
work
and
it
hasn't
clearly
it's
not
working
so
I
guess
I
have
a
two-part
question.
Why
is
the
financing
not
in
place
and
I
appreciate?
A
There's
some
things
you
may
not
be
able
to
tell
us,
but
if
you
can
give
us
sort
of
a
a
high
level
understanding
of
why
it's
not,
and
secondly,
as
a
business,
what
steps
are
Prosecco
tasting
to
make
sure
that,
if
this
extension
is
granted
to
the
end
of
the
year
that
that
financing
in
fact
will
be
in
place
because
to
echo
a
little
bit?
What
councillor
hubely
said?
Well,
we're
not
putting
direct
money.
A
Time
is
money
and
there
are
other
technologies
out
there
and
the
problem
isn't
going
to
go
away
to
deal
with
the
way
so
sort
of
what
went
wrong
at
a
high
level.
And
what
can
you
tell
us
today?
It
will
make
us
feel
better
about
that
it
will
be
fixed.
In
effect,
the
financing
would
be
fixed
by
the
end
of
the
year.
G
So,
if
really
treated
as
a
capital
asset,
having
the
contract
signed
was
an
essential
part
of
committing
that
25
million
dollars
of
equity.
The
early
stages
of
this
kind
of
project
equity
is
the
one
that
has
to
fund
it,
and
equity
was
unwilling
to
fund
unless
we
knew
we
had
a
contract
to
fund
into,
and
that
was
done
exactly
the
the
timing
of
having
long
term
debt.
Financing
in
place
was
too
optimistic.
G
G
So
it's
not
a
matter
of
a
problem
to
be
fixed,
but
rather
it
is
a
matter
of
that
as
projects
all
over
the
world
during
the
same
period
have
found,
particularly
in
waste,
it
has
taken
longer
than
was
forecast
to
get
this
done,
but
the
reason
the
project
continues
to
be
on
schedule
to
the
mid
2015
operation
state
a
year
before
the
date
which
was
important
to
the
city,
that
the
clock
begin
to
tick.
The
reason
that's
possible
is
that
equity
provided
by
our
shareholders
has
carried
this
project
forward.
G
I
was
interested
in
the
comment
from
the
intervenors
about
the
depth
of
waste
management.
It
securely,
as
fact
that
the
three
largest
funds
that
invest
in
and
most
applause
co,
they're
invested.
There
are
available
funds
for
investment
at
the
current
times
over
a
hundred
billion
dollars,
one
of
those
being
sold,
which
itself
is
about
twenty
seven
billion,
one
of
them
and
being
areas
which
itself
is
about
eighty
billion
and
a
third
one
being
West
phase
capital,
which
is
a
Toronto
and
New
York
based
fund
a
little
smaller
than
them,
but
still
huge.
G
What
is
needed
here
for
this
project
to
succeed
is
that
the
Trail
Road
plant
run
well
and
it
is
currently
operating.
We
put
significant
additional
dollars
into
that
plan
to
make
the
equipment
more
robust
so
that
it
not
only
would
do
scientifically
what
it
needs
to
do,
but
so
would
run
continuously
and
be
a
if
you
like,
a
faithful
original
of
what
will
be
repeated
just
down
the
road
at
white
pit.
Those
things
had
to
be
done
and
the
financing
of
new
technology.
A
G
G
The
the
expectation
that
we
could
get
all
the
elements
of
the
debt
in
place
between
March
and
August
was
not
realistic,
with
the
benefit
of
hindsight,
but
not
because
the
technology
is
any
different
than
we
expected
it
to
be,
but
because
funding
a
waste-to-energy
project
at
all
is
is
a
unique
challenge
because
of
the
nature
of
the
material.
Every
lender
is
concerned
about
the
plant,
that's
handling
material,
which
is
randomness
for
waste,
and
it's
compounded
by
the
fact
that
this
is
the
first
multiple
unit,
commercial
application
of
that
project
and
it's
been
a
slow
process.
G
G
G
What
is
you
one
of
the
many
things
unique
about
us
is
that
we
have
created
a
manufactured
assembled
product
for
the
processing
of
waste,
which
replaces
what
is
more
traditional
in
the
case
of
incinerators,
which
are
large
civil
works,
with
individual,
significant
elements
of
equipment
delivered
to
site
and
assembled
on
site
so
that
we're
producing
as
a
race
plant,
something
more
like
what
Bombardier
produces
as
a
train,
and
the
financing
of
that
is
is
likely
to
be
insignificant.
Part
supported
by
the
export
agencies
of
countries
that
have
significant
elements
of
equipment
embedded
in
our
product.
G
For
example,
it's
well
known
that
general
electric
gen
boxer
engines
will
almost
certainly
be
the
engines
that
we
use
to
process
our
gas.
Those
engines
are
produced
in
a
place
called
Gen
bak
Austria
in
Austria
has
a
Export
Development
Agency,
which
goes
by
its
initials
I,
don't
mean
what
they
stand
for
it.
So
ekb
were
in
discussing
with
them,
along
with
GE,
to
finance
those
engines
G's
interested
in
that
the
alternative
would
be
caterpillar.
G
That's
a
package
system
which,
if
we
actually
accept
delivery
on
that
which
we
have
a
deposit
on,
will
be
produced
by
a
company
in
Austria
in
Germany,
rather
Germany
has
an
export
development
agency
that
funds
the
export
of
package.
Gentlemen
equipment,
they're
very
aggressive
in
doing
that,
a
significant
share
of
the
equipment
comes
from
the
United
States.
The
plasma
torches,
for
example,
are
produced
in
Minnesota
there's
a
range
of
other
equipment,
Exim
Bank,
which
is
the
export
Bank
for
the
United
States,
is
in
the
business
of
doing
that.
G
That's
how
bowling
sells
most
of
its
aircraft
outside
the
United
States,
like
Bombardier,
with
its
planes
or
trains?
The
significant
share
of
the
the
manufactured
product
that
which
is
truly
completely
proprietary
to
plastico,
will
be
produced
here
in
Ontario,
the
first
one,
almost
certainly
by
Olson
fab
in
the
corn
law,
which
produced
the
one
that
is
now
operating
at
railroad.
That
is
very
likely
to
be
funded
by
Export
Development
Canada.
G
That
is
not
a
commitment
from
them
as
they're
a
part
of
a
group
of
entities,
and
it
is
a
very
common
way
in
which
an
industrial
product
which
integrates
the
components
from
a
number
of
countries
is
packaged
so
that
users,
all
the
world,
can
buy
the
product
with
a
financing
package,
and
then
they
have
to
go
about
putting
together.
The
cost
of
the
local
work.
Installer,
just
like
Lombardi
doesn't
build
the
stations
for
his
trains
generally
speaking,
so
that's
a
snapshot
of
what
is
going
on.
G
Not
unlike
what
will
happen
in
China
or
the
country
with
more
capital
than
any
other
country
in
the
world
is
also
choking
on
its
air
and
is
choking
on
the
air,
mainly
because
of
the
coal
they're,
bringing
to
both
power
and
heat
their
cities,
and
every
ton
of
waste
process
through
ours.
We
place
is
about
a
half
a
tonne
of
that.
So
it
matters.
G
F
G
We
completed
that
test
at
the
end
of
last
year
that
was
reported
on
by
the
independent
engineering
firm,
Black
&
Veatch,
which
was
reported
to
the
investors
who
had
stipulated
that
death
and
in
that
we
identified
specific
pieces
of
equipment
that,
in
order
to
run
for
a
duration,
that
would
be
twenty
years
or
more
for
a
commercial
plant
needed
to
be
upgraded.
So
since
then,
we
have
made
significant
additional
investment,
railroad
and
upgraded.
There
was
equipment
elements
for
that
purpose,
and
the
plan
is
now
running
with
those
upgrades.
So.
G
Environment
has
no
interest
in
that.
The
Ministry
of
Environment
is
interested
in
the
quality
of
the
air
emissions,
the
quality
of
the
water
and
whether
we
contaminate
the
land,
and
they
do
not
attempt
to
make
judgments
about
whether
a
project
is
commercially
viable
or
whether
the
equipment
is
sound.
Well,.
G
At
the
end
of
March,
but
then
in
discussion
with
the
ministry,
we
undertook
the
number
of
studies,
the
most
important
single
one
being
the
cumulative
health
effects
study
which
which,
as
being
has
been
done,
I'm
not
sure
it's
quite
completed.
It
will
be
completed
and
shortly,
if
it
isn't
done
now
and
prior
to
holding
the
first
public
meeting,
we
wanted
to
have
the
studies
that
were
required
for
us
to
submit,
along
with
our
environmental
screening
report,
either
completed
or
well
underway.
G
G
G
We
can
buy
the
equipment
as
on
particular
issue,
I,
never
get
to
say
that
and
we're
doing
that,
because
we're
confident
that
we
will
meet
the
requirements
and
we
will
receive
the
approval,
our
expectation,
it
will
be
determined
by
the
ministry,
but
our
expectation
is
late,
April
early
May
that
that
should
be
completed.
Cd.
F
G
The
the
screening
report
process
is
very
specific
and
has
several
specific
steps,
the
first
one
of
which
we
have
already
done,
and
that
timing
of
May
assumes
that
when
it
is
all
completed
that,
then
there
will
be
an
objective
who
will
appeal
and
request
a
bump
up
just
for
the
purpose
of
delaying
and
there's
60
days,
and
was
that
will
take
place.
So
we
built
that
into
the
schedule
as
well,
assuming
that
there
will
be
complaints
for
the
principal
purpose
of
causing
delay,
which
they
usually
are.
F
For
construction
design,
I
recall
in-
and
you
know
correct
me
if
I'm
wrong,
but
back
in
2005-2006,
I,
recall
that
comment
saying
that
Palacio
has
the
technology
to
or
will
out
of
technology,
to
be
able
to
site
a
location
inside
an
urban
area,
and
you
wouldn't
even
really
know
it
was
there
because
of
the
the
way
that
you
can
sort
of
scale
it
to
to
a
certain
community
that
there
probably
wouldn't
blend
into
the
Glebe
for
instance.
So
you
still
have
that
ability
of
you
away
from
that
or
am
I
wrong.
Now.
G
F
Again,
it
was
before
my
time
here
so
I
might
have
might
have
missed
everything.
The
you
spoke
briefly
about
Edmonton,
and
you
know
I
think
that
it's
hopeful
that
this
works
and
that,
if
this
works,
this
is
clearly
the
best
technology
that
exists.
If
it
works,
of
course,
how
far
behind
your
technology
would
you
say
that
the
evident
project
is
I.
G
Don't
know
as
chronologically
behind
it
all
they,
they
have
been
working
on
that
specific
site
in
Edmonton
for
several
years.
I
think
they've
actually
been
on
the
site
working
in
Edmonton
for
at
least
four
years,
and
perhaps
more
and
they're
very
open
with
their
information.
I'm
sure
Anakin
would
be
happy
to
give
you
specifics
on
where
they
are
I'm
a
little
reluctant
to
comment
on
where
they
stand
in
their
process.
G
I
know
that
they
have
kind
of
their
equivalent
of
trail
road
operating
in
Quebec,
which
processes
by
Hydra
poles
their
power
poles,
which
is
of
course,
a
consistent
material.
It
has
a
pretty
consistent
level
of
moisture
which
is
relatively
low
and
it's
wood,
but
what
they're
doing
in
Edmonton
as
I
understand
it?
I
have
not
physically
gone
to
look
at
it.
G
I
have
talked
to
the
company,
but
as
I
understand
it,
they're
raw
material
is
material
that
remains
after
recyclable
materials
have
been
removed
first
and
everything
else
is
composted,
then
the
resulting
material
is
screened,
and
that
was
didn't
decay.
The
compost
remains
on
the
screen,
and
that
is
what
is
then
prepared
by
the
city
and
delivered
to
Edmonton.
To
enter
CEM
to
make
first
into
synthetic
gas
and
then
that
gas
goes
to
another
step
which
converts
it.
G
F
G
A
very
it's
an
entirely
different
method
of
handling
waste
in
both
the
city
and
most
other
cities
in
the
world
do,
and
it
may
well
be
the
wave
of
the
future
I
don't
know,
but
it
is
quite
different.
Certainly,
the
the
method
of
handling
the
waste
means
that
the
city
would
have
very
significant
investment
in
the
race
before
it
was
handed
over
to
the
process
by
owner
Kim.
Thank
you.
B
Thank
you
very
much
Kelso
Martha
and
thank
you
for
your
motion.
Before
we
go
to
our
next
speaker,
I'm
wondering
if
mr.
Thompson,
you
could
provide
us
with
a
thorough
update
with
regards
to
your
visit
to
Alaska
this
morning
and
if
questions
come
up
as
a
result
of
your
presentation
feel
free
to
interject
as
we
did.
If
you
need
to
speak
or
was
that
something's
proprietary
or
not,
but
I'm,
going
to
ask
that
you
tell
us
as
much
as
you
possibly
can
buying
and
you
need
to
go
in-camera
which
I
don't
want
to
do.
B
A
You,
madam
chair
I,
will
so
just
to
briefly
review
a
new
direction
in
the
direction
of
the
city
manager
and
with
the
consent
and
cooperation
of
mr.
Brydon
I
did
attended
PLAs
COEs
officers
earlier
today,
and
so
I'll
start
with
the
bottom
line.
First,
to
say
to
you
chair
and
to
your
colleagues
that
I
was
satisfied
with
the
due
diligence
review
that
I
conducted
on
behalf
of
the
city.
A
There
were
also
two
other
individuals
at
the
meeting
and
mr.
Cook
short,
who
is
the
director
of
the
supply
chain?
There
was
also
mr.
Chris
Clark
who's,
the
director
of
financial
reporting
and
planning.
It
was
the
first
time
I
met
both
of
these
individuals,
but
my
impression
of
each
was
that
they
were
knowledgeable.
They
were
forthright
and
the
material
that
they
had
with
them
in
the
board.
Group
was
well
organized.
It
had
been
put
into
six
groups
of
files.
I
did
not
make
extensive
notes
of
the
documents
that
were
there
for
several
reasons.
A
Similarly,
I
was
advised
that,
with
some
of
the
contracts,
there
was
a
preferred
pricing
and
that
was
provided
to
PLAs
go
because
of
the
dollar
amount
of
the
contract.
Again,
that
is
something
that,
in
my
experience,
is
customary
to
a
number
of
purchasers,
including
the
City
of
Ottawa,
when
we
make
a
significant
volume
purchase
from
a
supplier.
A
A
They
had
the
documentation
pertaining
to
invoices
for
expenditures,
as
well
as
contractual
commitments
that
PLAs
Co
has
made
with
regard
to
the
design,
the
fit
up
and
construction
of
the
commercial
facility,
the
invoices
and
contractual
documentation
for
the
commitments
that
was
shown
to
me,
evidenced
purchases
and
commitments
that
were
made
in
late
2012
and
also
an
early
mid
2013,
and
that
was
in
the
millions
of
dollars
from
suppliers
and,
for
example,
one
of
the
suppliers.
Mr.
A
Brydon
just
mentioned
GE
Energy
for
I
believe
the
gen
BOC,
if
that's
simple
and
occur
in
Jim,
Bakker,
correct
pronunciation
of
the
engines
that
would
be
used
in
the
commercial
facility,
and
so
I
saw
an
invoice
pertaining
to
that
with
a
significant
down
payment.
That
is
in
the
amount
of
3/4
of
a
million
dollars
that
was
expended
already
by
PLAs
Co.
A
So,
based
on
that,
madam
chair,
what
I
can
say,
as
I
mentioned
at
the
beginning,
having
been
requested
by
you
and
the
city
manager
to
carry
out
that
due
diligence
due
diligence,
investigation
I
was
satisfied
with
it.
I
was
certainly
satisfied
and
pleased
with
the
cooperation
shown
to
me
by
the
classical
individuals.
A
B
K
Well,
I
think
a
lot
of
my
colleagues
and
I
are
worried
about
is
the
risk
and
what
we
understand
today,
correct
me
if
I'm
wrong,
is
that,
aside
from
the
actual
timing
of
this,
and
perhaps
other
technologies
coming
in
the
risk
for
the
city
financially
is
is
very
little.
That
said,
the
the
impacts
might
be
different
on
in
terms
of
capacity
at
our
landfills
and
where
we
land
in
the
next
couple
of
years,
depending
on
this
technology.
K
So,
on
most
bases
and
I,
the
question
I
had
arise
and
it
was
answered
a
while
back,
but
I'm
still
wondering
if
this
technology
works
in
the
end
aside
from
us
being
able
to
use
it
if
it
works
in
other
cities,
do
we
get
a
percentage
back?
We
get
a
dividend
back.
Was
there
an
element
of
that
at
some
point
in
the
discussion.
E
Yes
sure,
there's
a
an
honorarium
that
the
city
can
benefit
financially
in
two
ways
in
terms
of
revenue
that
would
offset
tipping
fees
paid,
one
is
revenue
sharing,
but
on
the
there's,
an
honorarium
that
the
city
would
receive.
It's
based
on
the
number
of
tons
of
municipal,
solid
waste
to
be
processed
by
facilities
in
north
america
for
a
10-year
period,
right.
K
And
based
on
the
conversation
and
the
motion,
that's
coming
forward,
what
does
that
mean
for
us?
So
we
go.
We
continue
to
research
technology
other
technologies,
while
we
hope
that
classical
continues
and
really
establishes
its
its
plant.
Is
that
kind
of
what
I'm?
What
I'm
hearing
from
from
the
motion
in
the
discussion
with
councilor
DubLi.
E
My
understanding
of
the
motion
from
councillor
Moffat
speaks
to
a
different
process,
a
request
for
expression
of
interest
that
would
be
initiated
in
early
2015
if
Glasgow
is
not
successful
in
meeting
the
conditions
in
4.18.
What
councillor
hubli
was
speaking
to
I
believe
was
a
high-level
technical
review
where,
on
an
annual
basis,
staff
would
report
what
other
thermal
technologies
are
in
existence.
What's
what's
their
status
in
terms
of
commercialization,
and
that
would
be
background
information
for
committee
and
council
to
have.
Thank
you.
K
So
I
guess
to
summarize
my
point
is
that
the
we
can
continue
to
research
and
we
should
into
this
magic
pill
just
like
my
link
to
the
healthcare,
but
we
should
continue
to
use
our
programs
and
our
resources
now
for
diversion
and
continue
to
increase
that,
and
we
can't
lose
that
message
relating
to
recycling,
green
bin
use
and
and
the
increase
of
tonnage
there.
So
it's
important
to
have
yes
look
at
other
technologies
and
see
if
there's
an
alternative
to
landfills,
but
the
actual
diversion
conversation
is
front
and
center.
In
this
overall
discussion.
B
Said
you,
okay,
mr.
Kilpatrick
I,
just
wanted
to
clarify
that
the
memo
that
I'm
asking
mr.
bjur
to
provide
to
counsel
is
not
just
the
thermal
technologies.
It's
anything
that's
out
there.
The
counselor
Fetty
makes
a
good
point
that
we
there's
a
lot
that
we
need
to
keep
doing
in
terms
of
diversion.
But
the
one
thing
that
we
haven't
spoken
about
is
the
number
one
thing
we
can
do
to
reduce
waste,
which
is
our
own
personal
responsibility.
So
we're
talking
about
dealing
with
waste
that
we
ourselves
produce.
So
we
can
talk
about
these
technologies.
B
We
can
divert
we
can
separate,
but
at
the
end
of
the
day
we
are
all
personally
responsible
and
I.
Think
that's
a
big
component
to
the
education
that
we're
doing
tell
us
their
homes
and
the
mayor
and
I
are
doing
an
event
next
week
with
regards
to
a
pilot
project
for
some
on
Street
recycling,
to
make
it
more
available
to
make
it
easy.
But
at
the
end
of
the
day,
we
produce
it
and
as
part
of
our
meetings
with
Minister
Bob,
the
councillor
Martha
and
I,
made
it
very
clear
with
mr.
B
weir
that
we
had
expectations
also
with
regards
to
the
ICN
I
sector
in
with
their
dealing
with
their
waste.
But
also
packaging
is
a
huge
component
of
what's
left
now
in
our
garbage
bags
for
residual
waste.
Every
second
week
are
things
we
cannot
recycle
so
I
think.
As
part
of
the
broader
debate,
we
have
to
keep
reminding
ourselves
of
the
fact
that
we're
producing
that
waste.
Mr.
Kilpatrick
Thank.
E
You
chair
and
that
you've
reinforced
council
Flurry's
point
and
I'd
like
to
reinforce
it
as
well.
Council
was
very
clear
over
the
last
six
years
that
we've
been
working
with
Bosco,
that
this
was
a
technology
that
would
be
applied
to
residual
waste
following
any
and
all
diversion
activities
that
the
city
was
able
to
undertake.
I
just
wanted
to
make
point
out
that
mr.
Weaver
was
talking
earlier
in
terms
of
response
to
councilor,
who
believe
about
tonnage.
L
You,
madam
chair,
my
questions
are
for
the
city
manager
wondering
if
you
could
elaborate
on
what
a
plan
B
would
look
like
just
at
a
very
high
level,
because
I've
heard
some
remarks
that
I
think
are
very
rosy
in
their
assessment
of
what
would
be
involved
to
stop
things
in
their
tracks.
At
this
point
and
move
on
to
a
plan
B
that
I
think
would
be
very
contentious
and
there
certainly
would
be
no
guarantees
of
an
outcome
and
there
would
be
a
lot
of
mileage.
L
I
think
we
would
first
of
all
need
to
choose
the
technology,
be
satisfied
with
the
technology.
We
then
have
an
RFP
process.
We'd
have
to
site
the
location
of
whatever
technology
we
would
have
from
waste
energy.
We
would
need
all
the
regulatory
approvals,
I'm,
sure,
federal
and
provincial.
We
would
need
to
get
a
buy-in
from
the
local
community
which,
if
you
do
use
the
Durham
example,
that's
extremely
hard
to
get,
and
we
have
that
at
this
point
in
time
and
I,
don't
think
we
should
take
light
of
that.
L
We
also
need
to
look
at
the
long-range
financial
plan,
because
the
beauty
of
this
plan
is
that
there's
little
there's
no
capital
required
by
the
taxpayer
to
get
this
off
the
ground
and
we
know
in
other
models
and
other
jurisdictions.
We
likely
would
have
to
put
some
capital
and
some
big-ticket
capital
into
a
new
technology.
And
so
we
need
to
look
at
our
long
reach
financial
plan
and
see
how
a
big-ticket
item
would
fit
in
there.
So
maybe
I've
done
that.
L
But
I'd
want
to
hear
your
answer
in
terms
of
what's
going
to
be
involved
in
a
plan
B,
and
is
it
a
rosy
process?
I,
don't
think
it
is
and
just
touch
on
how
long
you
think
it
would
take
and
what
would
be
some
of
the
major
milestones
in
it
because
I
think
that's
what
we
need
to
hear
today,
because
we
have
a
request
for
an
extension
that
I
that
I'm
inclined
to
support
because
I
know
the
door
we
open
as
an
alternative
is
not
it's
not
going
to
be
an
easy
road.
E
Chair
I
think
the
I
don't
in
terms
of
timeframe.
Mr.
weir
spoke
earlier,
something
like
five
years.
I
think
that's
probably
reasonable.
Maybe
a
bit
optimistic.
The
point
is
I,
think
it
you're
I
I'm
hearing
you
believe
it's
a
lot
of
work
and
it's
not
a
straightforward
exercise
and
I
totally
agree
with
that.
I
think
in
term.
In
the
entero
context,
right
now,
I
mean
we
hope.
Mr.
E
Brydon
spoke
to
how
enter
CEM
is
a
and
the
public
delegations
of
spoke,
but
how
it's
a
very
well
resourced
company
and
we
hope
and
expect
that
they'll
be
successful.
But
it's
a
technology
that
is
integrated
with
a
very
different
waste
management
approach
in
Edmonton
versus
Ottawa,
in
terms
of
the
ability
to
take
miscible
solid
waste
from
the
curb
into
an
energy
from
waste
facility.
E
The
in
the
Ontario
context,
I
think
in
terms
of
being
able
to
move
forward
with
something
that
is
doesn't
have
the
same
commercial
commercialization
risk
that
PLAs
go
currently
has
and
enter.
Cem
currently
has
you're
talking
incineration
and
the
best
example
of
that
in
Theriot
context
is
the
the
Covanta
incinerator
in
Durham,
which
I
believe
Dixon
just
got.
Cfa
approval.
D
E
Think
to
your
point,
there
is
a
very
significant
political
issue
in
terms
of
incineration
versus
other
thermal
technologies,
so
it
would
be
a
very
long
process
without
a
clear
outcome
at
this
point
in
my
mind,
and
that's
part
of
why
I
said
at
the
beginning
of
this
meeting-
that
in
my
view,
if
we
look
at
all
of
the
benefits
that
Bosco
would
deliver,
if
successful
there
isn't
today
something
that
I
would
say,
we
could
easily
move
towards
consideration
of.
Thank.
L
You
and
I
don't
think
we
should
underestimate
and
an
undervalue.
What
again,
what
opening
plant
that
the
door
of
Plan
B
would
involve
so
I'll
be
supporting
the
extension
I,
don't
mind,
looking
at
alternative
technologies
that
we
that
are
out
there,
this
planet
is
a
smart
planet.
There's
a
lot
of
jurisdictions
that
are
are
trying
to
wrestle
with
this.
L
So
it
is
always
good
to
keep
our
eye
out
for
alternatives,
but
I'm
not
hearing
that,
there's
anything
that
it
would
even
come
close
to
what
we
have
achieved
at
this
point
and
I
certainly
would
not
want
to
import
the
durum
experience
to
the
City
of
Ottawa,
which
I
think
would
be
very
divisive
and
I
think
would
exceed
a
five-year
period.
Thank
you.
Thank.
B
You
very
much
Kosovo,
certainly
well
teed
up
by
yourself
and
and
added
to
by
mr.
Kirkpatrick.
We
know
the
Durham
experience
also
involves
the
expenditure
of
all
their
gas
tax
revenue
to
fund
the
capital
project,
they're,
taking
in
waste
from
another
jurisdiction
and,
speaking
to
mr.,
we
are,
if
we
were
to
ever
consider
incineration
we'd
have
to
feed
it
24/7
and
that
could
involve
taking
in
as
much
as
all
of
Eastern
Ontario's
waste
and
on
that
line.
Mr.
Kilpatrick
and
mr.
Brydon
I
wonder
mr.
Brydon.
G
The
emissions
from
the
landfill
at
Trail
Road
are
significantly
greater
than
the
emissions
that
will
come
from
the
engines,
processing
that
same
waste
and,
of
course,
at
the
landfill
at
railroad.
The
city
is,
it
is
a
prototype
of
how
to
manage
a
landfill,
so
well-managed
landfill
and
what's
more,
it
does
collect
methane
and
produce
power.
But
the
amount
of
power
that
would
be
produced
from
waste
deposited
in
a
landfill
is
typically
about
one-sixth
of
the
net
saleable
power
that
would
be
produced
by
the
same
ton
of
waste
going
into
the
plas
Co
system.
G
That's
largely
because
it's
only
the
organics
that
produce
methane
that
go
into
the
engines
will
reprocess
everything
that
came
in
and
secondly,
of
the
the
land
of
the
emissions
that
come
from
the
landfill.
The
methane
that
comes
out
about
42%
of
it
is
actually
collected
and
the
rest
escapes
the
collection
process.
So
the
greenhouse
gas
effect
is
entirely
elimination
of
methane
and
the
substitution
of
power
for
the
alternative
source.
G
If
you
assume
that
Ontario
would
always
substitute
the
next
least
desirable,
then
there
is
about
a
ton
of
weight
of
emissions
per
megawatt
that
would
be
eliminated
so
both
on
greenhouse
gases
and
air
emissions,
it's
much
much
better
than
either
landfill
or
any
alternative
that
is
available.
In
addition
to
that,
the
incinerator
application.
What
they'll
actually
do
I
don't
know,
but
the
application
for
Durham
says
that
they
permitted
to
take
100
228
liters
of
water,
clean
water
per
ton
of
waste,
and
then
they
returned
sir
grade
water
to
Durham.
G
We
will
take
no
water
except
water,
we
use
for
potable
water
at
the
plant
and
we
will
return
in
clean
water
to
the
environment.
So
it's
the
inverse
on
this
effect
on
water.
That's
not
terribly
important
in
Ottawa
it
will
cost
money
to
deliver
clean
water,
but
it's
very
important
in
many
parts
of
the
world.
G
So
it's
a
significant
part
of
the
element,
and
the
other
part
is
that
about
20
percent
of
waste
in
an
incinerator
may
be
25
depending
how
you
counted
the
20
to
25
percent
of
the
waste
delivered
is
then
taken
off
to
a
landfill
as
ash,
and
in
our
case
that
is
converted
into
a
very
valuable
abrasive
for
which
there's
a
world
demand
and
a
shortage
of
supply.
So
it
is
by
far
by
far
the
most
complete
reuse
of
waste
that
any
technology
provides
today,
but
you're
all
completely
correct.
It
does
work.
G
The
science
is
not
science
anymore.
It
works
and
the
Trail
Road
plant
has
been
continuously
upgraded
six
years,
including
this
year,
and
we're
now
feeling
confident
that
we
that
we
are
able
to
demonstrate
that
this
can
be
confidently
predicted
to
work
for
twenty
years
or
more,
but
it
is
the
durability
that
is
the
the
challenge
with
this
technology.
The
were
comfortably
resolved
that,
but
again
we
recognize
until
we're
done.
G
B
Thank
you
very
much
mr.
Brian,
but,
given
that
some
of
the
elements
of
alternatives
that
I
have
gathered
today
or
what
the
environmental
scan
will
bring
back
on
the
table,
I
think
it's
important
that
we
remind
ourselves
why
this
council
chose
almost
two
years
ago
to
enter
or
ask
the
city
manager
to
enter
into
commercial
relationship
with
PLAs
Co
and
certainly
I
appreciate
your
comment
about
saying
how
well-run
or
troubled
facility
is
and
the
manager
of
solid
waste
services,
as
actually
here
today,
miss
MS
Jenelle
and
it
is
a
well-run
landfill.
B
J
J
2035,
with
all
the
respect
to
my
colleagues,
that's
Plan
B,
because
you
know
we
have
2035,
it
is
the
cheapest
way
to
dispose
of
our
ways
are
not
so
I'm,
and
so
mr.
Kilpatrick
I'm
really
concerned
that
we're
going
to
go
out
in
2015
for
a
request
for
information
for
alternative
technologies
when
I'm,
not
I'm,
not
sure
how
you
and
good
conscious
could
recommend
that,
given
that
we
have
an
asset
that
has
such
long
life
to
it,
that
is
well.
E
J
No
great
that's
great
diverted
from
landfill
it,
which
is
a
disposal
technology
diverted
from
landfills.
One
thing
embracing
an
alternative
disposal
technology
is
absolutely
another
and
I'm
not
sure
that
that's
what
councils
direction
has
been
councils
direction
has
not
been
I,
believe
abandoned
landfill
for
Covanta
incinerator.
J
The
council's
direction
has
been
diverted
from
landfill
to
extend
its
life.
That's
not
what
well
due
respect.
That's
the
the
expression
of
interest
process
for
alternative
technologies
to
handle
the
city's
residual
solid
waste.
That's
not
diverting
from
landfill!
That's
an
alternative
disposal
technology!
That's
closing
our
landfill
and
buying
an
incinerator
buying
some
other
disposal
technology
and
with
I'll.
Come
back
to
my
original
question
with
you
know,
decades
left
on
our
original
asset.
Why
would
you
be
saying
close
that
asset
and
advance
and
embrace
another?
Why
would
you
recommend
that?
Because
I
don't
understand
that
chair.
J
Not
asking
what
I'm
asking
you,
as
would
you,
given
the
circumstances
that
we
find
ourselves
in
today
becoming
to
counsel
in
the
normal
course
of
events
and
saying
counsel,
I
recommend
that
you
go
out
and
request
an
expression
of
interests
for
alternative
disposal
technologies
in
2015,
because
we
have
to
I'm
trying
to
understand
why
we
would
why
I
would
want
to
embrace
this
motion
because
I'm
not
sure
it's
something.
You'd
recommend.
E
Well,
I
have
my
own
view
at
the
moment
about
as
I've
spoken
to
Cantera
this
morning
about
what's
available
today.
Do
I
believe
that
it
will
change
significantly
by
the
end
of
this
calendar
year
or
next
calendar
year.
No,
however,
you
know
there's
a
direction
to
to
have
a
high-level
technology
review.
E
I
think
my
understanding
is
that
the
will
of
this
council
and
it's
expressed
in
the
support
of
Pascal
for
last
six
years
and
I
believe
the
support
of
Plaskett
here
today
committee
is
we
wish
to
do
something
other
than
landfill
our
residual
waste
and
were
prepared
to
pay
more
than
the
the
nominal
cost
of
land
filling
at
our
own
landfill
facility.
Even
though
there
is
capacity
there
to
do
that
and
I
think
the
intent
of
the
motion
is
we
want
to
support
Costco
and
make
sure
that
we
do
everything
we
can.
E
J
You
know
I
understand
the
the
evolution
of
PLAs
go
and
why
it's
here
and
how
it
got
here
and
I
think
that
there
were
a
lot
of
factors
other
than
the
expansion
or
the
the
keeping
our
landfill
open
in
a
in
a
longer
operating
longer.
So
I
think
there
are
a
lot
of
things
that
reasons
why
we
would
have
encouraged
the
plastico
technology.
J
E
J
E
Honest
well
and
I
may
be
wrong,
but
I
think
it
I
guess
at
the
at
worst,
council
would
have
the
benefit
of
the
information
that
would
come
from
a
request
for
expression
of
interest
in
order
to
make
the
decision
cost
environmental
benefit
and,
within
with
our
policy
context
that
wanted
to
look
at
it.
Yeah.
J
J
E
J
Say
if
you're
gonna
go
out
to
the
market
and
ask
Wheelabrator
to
come
back
and
tell
them
what
tell
us
what
it
cost
is
and
all
that
type
of
thing
only
to
tell
them.
Okay,
now
we're
it's
so
expensive,
we're
real
happy
with
our
landfill
costs,
which
are
very,
very
low,
I'm,
not
sure
I'm,
not
sure.
If
you
wanted
to
go
out
and
say:
listen,
I
want
you
to
explore
diversion
technologies,
things
that
would
divert
reduce
the
amount
of
waste
at
the
curb
a
way
to
recycle
styrofoam
array
to
recycle
film
plastics.
J
E
E
An
film
to
landfill
if
Glasgow
wasn't
successful,
the
military
I
know
the
councillor
understands
the
difference
between
request
for
expression
of
interest
and
request
for
proposal
like
this
is
tell
us
we're
interested
in
understanding
what
alternatives
there
are
to
landfill
in
Ottawa.
Tell
us
your
level
of
interest
about
what
your
product
your
technology
might
be
able
to
do
in
that
regard.
That's
the
extent
of
it
and
if
Community
Council
wanted
to
exclude
from
that
mass
burn
incinerators,
we
could
do
so.
B
Mr.
Kilpatrick,
along
those
slides
that
I
appreciate
councillor,
Hume,
really
fleshing
out
the
notion
of
what
the
expectation
is
going
to
be,
and
certainly
incineration
would
never
be
on
my
agenda.
But
I
want
to
confirm
that
mr.
weir
can
jump
in
here.
My
understanding
that
the
requests
for
expressions
of
interest
for
the
exact
thing
that
councilor
market
moved
was
started
back
in
2004
2005
and
when
you
brought
PLAs,
go
the
plastic
or
opportunity
to
the
Bob
schroer
Council.
At
the
time
that
particular
request
was
shoved
in
favor
of
doing
a
demonstration
plant
with
Glasgow.
B
Is
that
accurate
cherry,
that's
correct?
Okay,
so
I'm,
not
sure
mr.
Kilpatrick
or
mr.
Wheeler
can
either
one
of
you
elaborate
why
that
was
being
brought
forward
at
the
time?
What
was
the
expectation
and
intention
because
councillor
Hume
is
right?
What
is
the
expectation
that
the
community
will
have
if
we
go
out
and
do
it?
Environmental
scan
I
attentively
with
you,
mr.
Kirkpatrick,
that
you'll
get
the
information
just
to
show
us
what's
out
there
in
the
event
that
the
plasma
technology
is
not
available
for
commercial
use
at
that
time?
B
B
D
It's
my
understanding
that
the
request
for
expressions
of
interest
were
done
commenced
in
a
situation
where
the
capacity
at
the
trail
Road
landfill
may
not
have
been
expended
at
that
point
and
that
we
were
looking
there.
Staff
we're
looking
for
a
city
was
looking
for
an
alternative
solution,
understanding
that
the
life
is,
as
that
you
know,
was
nearing
closure.
I
think
but
I
think
the
important
thing
to
understand
here
and
I
think
councillor
both
councillors,
flurry
and
Hume
have
pointed
out-
is
that
there
isn't
one
solution
fits
all.
D
We
will
need
to
continue
and
the
city
has
been
very
adept
at
implementing
a
number
of
solutions
that
talk
to
all
of
the
R's,
the
reduce
the
reuse,
the
recycle
and,
at
the
end,
though,
there
is
a
residual
and
there
is
a
trail
Road
landfill
site
that
has
a
finite
capacity,
and
to
avoid
some
of
the
discussion
that
we've
had,
we
need
to
understand
the
alternatives
to
extend
that
life,
to
the
extent
that
we
can
and
I
see
the
risk.
The
request
for
expressions
of
interest
after
a
high-level
scans
as
a
means
of
understanding.
D
What
is
the
technology
environment
out
there
and
and
at
what
cost
and
at
what
commitment
we
could,
then
you
know
understand
where
we
would
go
from
there.
It
isn't
a
commitment
or
certainly
wouldn't
be.
My
understanding
there
would
be.
The
intent
is
a
commitment
on
on
the
part
of
Council
to
move
forward
with
an
alternative
solution.
It
is
just
to
make
sure
that
council
would
be
in
a
position
to
make
an
informed
decision
at
that
point
as
to
how
best
to
proceed.
If
and
only
if
the
plastico
facility
doesn't.
B
Thank
You
mr.
Reyes
I,
wonder
and
again.
This
is
something
for
the
mover
of
the
motion
to
ponder,
perhaps
mr.
Kilpatrick
and
mr.
Thompson,
and
keeping
in
mind
this
counsels
I
think
what's
ultimately
going
to
be
continued
expression
of
continued
with
our
partnership
with
PLAs
Co.
Today.
If
there's
any
wording,
we
can
change
or
add
to
that
motion.
That
makes
it
very
clear
that
that
direction
is
not
to
be
miss
misunderstood
by
anyone
that
we're
asking
the
city
manager
to
come
back
with
recommendations
about
technology.
B
It's
very
clearly
just
an
opportunity
for
our
staff
to
get
more
information,
because
mr.
wasn't
until
last
week
that
AI
was
even
aware
that
there
was
the
2005
request
that
was
shelved
in
favor
of
the
plastic
Oh
dental
site
and
also
I
was
unaware,
and
it
makes
sense,
but
that
there
was
a
significant
cost
involved,
which
is
why
you
would
need
this
motion
from
Council
to
get
involved
with
the
request
for
expressions
of
interest,
because
companies
would
actually
have
to
expend
money
to
to
bring
that
information
at
the
level
you'd
want.
E
Chair
the
mr.
Brighton's
confirmed
that
he
does
he's
not
concerned
about
he's
not
concerned
about
the
wording
of
the
motion
in
terms
of
the
any
potential
problems
that
it
might
cause
classical
in
the
interim.
I
know
that
wasn't
your
question,
but
that
that
was
earlier.
One
area
of
concern
about
the
motion
he's
he's
comfortable
with
the
current
wording
in
terms
of
counsel's
concern
that
an
REO
I
might
express
a
level
of
interest
in
in
technologies.
That
might
be
too
strong.
E
E
Councillor
Humes
concerned,
and
the
committee's
concern
is:
what
message
might
we
be
sending
with
an
expression
of
interest
and,
as
I
said
earlier
in
response
to
councillor
Humes
question
I
think
we
could
very
clearly
adjust
the
expectations
in
the
introduction
of
the
reo
I
before
or
while
prior
to
its
issuance,
to
make
sure
that
the
industry
and
the
public
understood
what
councils
level
of
interest
was
prior
to
its
issuance
I?
Don't
think
you
need
to
deal
with
it
in
a
motion
today.
B
But
council
speaks
through
motion,
as
does
committee
mr.
Kilpatrick
I
mean
we
do
have
limited
minutes
available,
but
I
think
it's
important
that
that
that
particular
point
be
expressed.
I
know
when
cancer
Moffitt's
and
I
worked
with
stop
on
this
motion.
The
intention
is
not
to
come
back
with
a
shopping
list,
but
the
intention
is
to
not
have
lost
opportunity
either
so
that
if
something
does
happen,
mr.
Biden
would
like
to
weigh
in
I.
G
B
Agree
that
was
surprising.
The
the
intention
is
to
not
damage
your
potential
for
more
opportunities
for
financing
by
this
council,
sending
mixed
messages
so
we're
in
favor
of
PLAs
go,
but
we're
not
sure-
and
certainly
the
intention
of
this.
This
motion
is
not
to
send
a
message
out
to
the
community
that
we
want
to
proceed
with
any
particular
technology.
We
just
want
that
information
so
that
a
POSCO
is
not
at
the
table
at
the
end
of
2014.
Let's
go
find
out
what's
out
there,
but
with
more
details.
So
it's
one
thing
to
direct
mr.
B
riah
to
come
back
with
the
board
at
shopping
lists.
Here's
what's
happening
in
Canada.
There
are
very
few
incinerators,
for
example,
Durham
is
one
of
the
newer
ones
by
in
terms
of
other
technology.
Anything
else
that's
available.
I
think
the
whole
idea
is
is
that
we're
not
being
left
behind,
because
we've
been
engaged
with
the
plasti
process
for
quite
some
time
and
and
that
would
be
the
kind
of
friendly
amendment
or
not
friendly,
but
I'm
wondering
councillor
Moffat.
B
If
there's
an
opportunity
to
change
the
motion
in
such
a
way
that
reflects
that
were
not
directing
staff
to
come
back
with
a
recommendation,
it's
just
to
come
back
with
information.
If
we
can
clarify
that
I'm
not
sure,
if
there's
a
way
to
do
it
or
not,
and
can
we
have
a
Mike
forecaster,
Moffat
I
think.
F
By
definition,
a
request
for
expression
of
interests
clarify
that
I,
don't
see
a
need
to
change
this,
to
make
it
more
clear.
A
request
for
a
specialist
of
interest
is
not
binding
in
any
way
whatsoever.
It
is
merely
an
opportunity
to
gather
information.
We
go
through
I
realize,
maybe
not
you
know
over.
They
come,
but
I
know
that
we
just
did
one
for
Dickinson
square.
It
tied
us
to
nothing.
It
gave
us
their
information
as
to
what
we
might
want
should
be
going
to
an
RFP.
It
doesn't
bind
you
to
going
out
to
an
RFP.
F
J
F
Like
something
but
anyways
so
I
just
don't
see
why
why
you
wouldn't
do
this?
It
does
absolutely
nothing
to
plasto
I
mean
best-case
scenario.
Is
you
never
even
have
to
do
this
and
plastico
works
and
we're
all
good
and
we
move
forward?
And
it's
not
it's
not
an
issue.
This
is
merely
to
put
us
back
to
where
we
were
before
we
entered
into
the
agreement
with
Glasgow
I
I.
Don't
again,
I,
don't
see
the
need
to
change
this
motion
and
I
wouldn't
support
changing
it.
So
Thank.
B
E
E
B
K
This
discussion
has
certainly
taken
a
few
twists
since
I
first
pushed
my
button
so
long
ago,
and
I've
almost
lost
track
of
what
my
original
SATs
were,
but,
but
maybe
to
start
with
some
mr.
Kirkpatrick
I
must
agree.
I
do
agree
with
you
you're
the
way
you
I
think
described
the
way,
we're
doing
our
waste
management,
the
handling
of
waste
management,
diversion
alternate
technologies
and
methodologies.
K
In
my
mind,
they
are
they're
geared
at
prolonging
the
life
of
our
our
dumps,
our
landfill
sites
and,
to
me
this
is
just
another
approach
of
trying
to
keep
as
much
capacity
as
we
can
for
the
future.
So
we
don't
have
to
vote
and
get
another
landfill.
Having
said
that,
mr.
Brydon
I'm
gonna
make
a
couple
of
comments
and
then
I
do
have
questions
both
for
for
legal
and
for
environmental
staff.
K
We
do
want
you
to
succeed.
We
want
to
ride
your
coattails
on
your
success.
I
guess
we
can
keep
this
dance
going
for
a
long
time,
but
there
is
a
point
where
this
becomes
wishful
thinking
and
I
think
that
we
need
to
be
cautious
like
as
long
as
it
doesn't
cost
us
anything.
It's
easy
to
keep
the
dance
going,
but
there
is
a
point
where
we
need
to
be
cautious
in
terms
of
how
we
move
forward
and
I.
Think
the
the
Moffatt
motion
gives
me
some
of
that.
Some
of
that
caution.
K
Some
of
that
relief,
because
the
staff
report
as
it
stands
I
would
not
I'm
not
on
this
committee,
but
I
wouldn't
support
it
at
Council.
So
this
gives
us
some
relief
but
I
think
councillor
who
pleased
actually
on
to
something
in
terms
of
when
do
you
move
forward
and
start
looking
at
alternatives?
And
you
know
as
I
look
down
previous
reports
and
I'm
not
going
to
go
through
the
whole
chronology
of
how
we
got
here
and
how
this
all
came
to
pass
in
the
first
place,
but
mr.
dicks
mr.
K
we're
in
the
in
December
2011
when
we
dealt
with
a
report
that
Todd
did
actually
reference.
There
are
other
technologies
out
there
and
initially,
if
I,
remember
correctly,
you
can
you
can
correct
me
if
I'm
wrong.
Initially,
staff
was
indicating
there's
really
no
other
technology
out
there
and
then
on
that
side
of
the
room.
K
There
are
a
couple
of
people
that
came
forward
and
said:
whoa,
there's
all
kinds
of
other
things
happening
in
this
world
and
it's
evolving
quickly
give
us
an
update
and
then
I
think
you
came
back
and
said:
yeah
there
are
numerous
technologies
available
to
Surma.
We
process
solid
waste,
including
plastic,
but
there's
no
other
technology
really
available
that
would
serve
us
or
suit
us
at
that
time.
I
think
that's
if
I
might
have
I
got
that
correctly.
D
K
And
that's:
that's!
That's
legitimate!
That's
fair!
But
in
the
meantime
those
the
clock
keeps
ticking
there
are
things
are
evolving
quickly
and
there
are
other
opportunities
out
there
and
that's
why
I
think
the
Moffatt
motion
gives
us
a
little
bit
of
that
that
relief
that
alleviates
some
of
those
concerns
that
we
have
but
I
want
to
move
over
to
legal
and
mr.
Thompson.
You
talked
about
you
throughout
the
the
cautionary
note
about
our
legal
obligations,
our
contractual
obligations.
In
my
mind,
though,
we've
met
every
contractual
obligation
on
the
part
of
the
city.
Is
that
correct.
A
Chair
that's
correct
and
if
I
could
just
add
briefly
and
I,
so
it's
trite
to
say
this,
but
and
I'm
I
know
that
you
and
the
members
of
your
committee
appreciate
this,
but
just
to
say,
as
mr.
Kirkpatrick
had
mentioned
in
his
opening,
that
we
are
parties,
the
city
is
a
party
to
a
contract
with
PLAs
Co,
and
so,
as
a
result
of
that,
yes,
we
have.
A
The
city
has
met
its
obligations
to
date
in
that
regard,
but
since
we
are
parties
to
that
contract,
just
like
any
other
parties
to
a
contract,
there
are
certain
obligations
and
restrictions
to
which
both
the
city
and
PLAs
Co
are
subject
to
that
are
not
present.
When
parties
are
negotiating
a
contract
and-
and
so
that's.
K
Okay-
but
maybe
you
can
help
me
here
in
terms
of
the
contractual
obligation
that
we
have-
there
are
some
very
specific
dates.
There
are
some
deadlines
and
specific
dates
that
were
included
in
the
initial
report
and
that
were
extended,
and
here
we
are
but
before
us
again
and
we're
talking
about
a
further
extension.
But
if
we
didn't,
if
we
were
not
to
agree
to
that
extension,
we
wouldn't
be
in
violation
of
our
contractual
obligations.
K
We
would
be,
we
would
be
within
our
right
to
say
no,
we've,
we've
we've
done
this
dance
long
enough
and
it's
time
to
you,
know,
cut
bait
or
fish
or
whatever
expression
you
want
to
use.
So
you
keep
dangling
in
front
of
us
as
all
you
got
to
be
real
careful
because
you
could
get
your
partner's
here
and
you
could
have
some
legal
issues.
I,
don't
see
it
that
way
at
all,
I
see
us
as
being
able
to
say
right
now
we
have.
K
We
have
met
our
obligations,
we
can
walk
out
that
door
and
we
don't
have
no
further
responsibilities
in
this
regard
and
we're
not
on
the
hook
for
anything.
That
was
always
the
premise
that
that
we
were
not
on
the
hook
financially
or
in
any
other
way,
and
that's
why
we've
come
this
far
without
going
through
every
step
of
the
chronology.
A
K
Well,
I
guess:
I'll
restate
what
I
said
initially
I
think
this
motion
I
would
not
be
supportive
of
the
original
staff
report
that
came
forward.
I.
Think
this
motion
does
provide
some
some
alleviation
of
all
the
issues
and
concerns
out
there,
but
I
do
think
councillor
who
he
was
on
the
right
track
in
terms
of
trying
to
accelerate
but
accelerate
that
and
saying.
Let's
get
some
information
on
the
table.
Aye
think
that
we
were
missing
back
in
December
of
2011.
Thank
you
thank.
B
You
very
much
counselor
blow
us
some
wonder
mr.
Thompson,
if
you
can
further
elaborates
some
of
the
comments
that
you
made
with
regards
to
good
faith,
because
counselor
Flores
raised
a
very
good
point,
David
in
the
true
spirit
of
the
letter
of
the
law.
If
we
were
to
extract
the
the
contractual
agreement,
the
finite
terms
in
it,
we
could
direct
you
and
suggest
that
the
contract
has
come
to
an
end
because
there's
a
failure
of
x--
clause.
B
However,
our
city
manager,
who
spent
a
year
ago,
seen
that
contract
with
with
yourself
and
with
class
Co,
was
very
clear
in
saying
that,
irrespective
of
what
is
in
the
contractual
document,
an
extension
that
classical
asked
for
will
have
no
major
impact,
no
material
change
on
what
was
agreed
to
in
December,
2012
and
and
your
comment
about
good
faith
and
and
again
I.
Don't
want
to
put
words
in
your
mouth.
But
my
interpretation
is
that,
yes,
you
could
put
in
the
contract
to
an
end.
It's
your
legal
right,
however
PLAs
go.
B
Is
our
partner
were
in
a
relationship
with
PLAs
Co?
There's
really
no
reason
that
was
provided
to
us
by
staff
not
to
allow
an
extension
and
in
that
particular
instance
PLAs
who
could
come
forward
and
say
it's
bad
place,
we're
looking
for
an
extension
of
of
another
year
or
so
to
get
more
financing
at
the
table.
We
underestimated
how
much
time
it
would
take.
There's
no
material
impact
on
the
outcome
of
what
the
true
and
the
result
of
the
contract
is,
which
is
got
that
support
of
landfill.
B
But
the
whole
purpose
of
entering
into
a
commercial
agreement
with
Prosecco
is
to
actually
buy
a
service
from
them
and
that
the
notion
are
exiting
a
long
term
agreement
when
they've
come
forward
to
ask
for
an
extension
to
get
financing
that
our
own
city
manager
says
is
something
he
strongly
recommends,
because
it
will
not
impact
us
in
a
material
way
that
could
be
perceived
as
being
in
bargaining
and
bad
faith
or
acting
in
bad
faith.
If
we
were
to
end
it
today,
council
next
week,
is
that
accurate.
A
Show
in
essence,
yes
and
I
just
wanted
to
reiterate,
because
very
very
clear
and
yes,
I
and
Borden
Ladner
survey
spent
extensive
time
with
the
city
manager
and
mr.
Brydon
and
his
legal
counsel
negotiating
this
agreement
and,
as
mr.
Kilpatrick
has
said
previously
very
clearly,
there
is
a
significant,
robust
protection.
That's
in
place
in
the
current
agreement
in
favor
of
the
city,
and
that
should
committee
today
and
council
subsequently
agree
to
the
extension
and,
moreover,
should
they
pass
the
motion
of
councillor
Moffitt.
A
It
will
not
affect
those
rights
will
not
affect
those
other
dates
that
are
currently
in
the
agreement
in
favor
of
the
city.
That
being
said,
given
the
comments
that
mr.
baudin
has
made
with
regard
to
PLAs
Coch
efforts
to
date
to
continue
to
advance
the
work
on
the
project
and,
moreover,
to
obtain
the
construction
financing
for
the
full-scale
commercial
facility.
A
My
comments
with
regard
to
good
faith
and
the
issue
that
was
looked
at
with
regard
to
councillor
Moffitt's
motion
had
to
do
with
that
to
endeavor,
subject
to
the
political
will
of
committee
and
council
to
make
sure
that
the
motion
from
a
legal
perspective
could
not
be
viewed
as
something
that
was
enacted
in
bad
faith,
and
so
bottom
line
were
comfortable.
That
should
committee
and
council
passed
the
motion
with
the
proposed
amendment
of
information
for
consideration
that
that
would
be
the
case.
Be.
B
Sure
and
yourself
you
did
a
10-plus
go
this
morning,
and
the
context
of
that
again
was
that
mr.
Brydon
had
made
some
undertakings
in
his
letter
to
council
and
outside
of
hauling
the
box
of
documents
and
looking
ourselves,
you
went
out
and
acted
on
behalf
of
the
act
on
behalf
of
the
city
manager,
to
make
representations
to
us
and
and
and
I
like
the
fact
that,
in
your
presentation,
you
spoke
who
was
there
the
capacity?
What
was
written
on
these
documents
from
a
proprietary
point
of
view,
etc,
etc.
B
So
you've
brought
that
information
back
to
us
that
says:
hey,
they
are
making
progress,
and
the
point
here
is
that,
outside
of
mr.
Brighton's
admission
that
perhaps
some
of
the
timeframes
way
back-
maybe
we're
a
bit
too
robust
and
and
it's
it's
unfortunate
for
all
of
us-
that
that
things
didn't
move
along
more
quickly.
I,
don't
see
how
councils
very
strong
23
to
one
position
in
December
2011
has
changed
significantly
to
say:
we
don't
want
this
technology
in
Canada's
capital,
there's
a
benefit
to
us
to
dispose
of
our
residual
waste.
B
There's
a
benefit
to
the
environment
that
we
have
heard
again
from
mr.
Brydon
there's
an
opportunity
for
us
to
benefit
from
licensing
agreements
with
the
technology,
and
certainly
there
are
opportunities
for
continued
employment
in
the
area.
We
could
go
on
about
the
benefits
of
why
we
want
Costco
to
work
and
again
mr.
Thomson
I,
don't
see
anything,
that's
changed
since
December
2011
in
terms
of
information
councils
been
given.
Why
we
would
no
longer
support
a
partner
that
not
did.
We
only
make
recommendations
to
the
city
manager
to
enter
into
a
contractual
agreement
with
the
incus.
A
So
Charlie,
certainly
from
a
legal
perspective
based
on
the
due
diligence
review
this
morning,
as
I
said
earlier,
Glasgow,
certainly
the
their
staff
the
documentation
that
they
provided
to
me
by
May
certainly
evidence
good
faith
on
their
part.
As
far
as
moving
towards
getting
the
construction
financing
to
build
the
commercial
facility
and.
B
This
is
a
very
serious
legal
undertaking
that
you're
providing
us
here
today
with
regards
to
what
you
observed,
it's
as
good
as
if
we
could
have
those
documents
in
our
bus,
and
you
could
show
them
ourselves
so
mr.
Kirkpatrick,
before
we
ask,
will
go
to
councilor
glide
from
our
questions,
so
I
just
say
to
the
core
of
my
eye.
B
Can
you
remind
us
again
about
the
lack
of
financial
risk
because
again
I
think
we
want
to
underscore
that
the
points
that
you
made
earlier
just
to
bring
us
back
to
what
your
your
short
little
report
spoke
to,
but
but
we've
been
through
the
opportunity
risk.
We've
heard
our
legal
staff
talked
to
us
about
potential
legal
issues
remind
us
again
why
you
are
so
supportive
of
offering
paschal
and
extension
to
the
end
of
December
2014,
especially
with
regards
to
financial
risk.
I.
Think
you
need
to
hit
that
one
out
of
the
ballpark
okay.
E
Well
then,
I
sure
I
won't
reiterate
the
two
points
I
made
at
the
beginning,
which
dealt
with
the
nothing
better
on
the
horizon,
that
we
can
see
an
immediate
view
and
and
the
fact
that
none
of
the
dates
and
the
agreement
that
relate
to
the
city's
ability
to
turn
down
its
commitment
to
provide
and
pay
for
the
processing
of
waste.
Those
dates,
don't
change.
You
asked
me
to
focus
on
the
financial
risk
is
cut
and
the
financial
risk
that
the
contract
has,
which
is
very
minimal.
We
pay
Pascoe
to
process
waste.
E
B
A
Thank
you,
madam
chair.
This
is
this
a
question
for
legal
counsel
and
it
rises
over
the
exchange
between
the
chair
and
yourself
just
a
few
moments
ago.
What
I'm
hearing
from
you
that
you're
not
coming
up
and
seeing
it
directly
and
I,
appreciate
that
your
lawyer,
I,
was
a
lawyer
so
I
understand
you
have
that
got
the
couch.
A
Is
that
what
I'm
hearing
sure
no
and
I
apologize
if
I
left
that
impression,
as
the
city
manager
and
I
have
both
said
and
to
be
clear
currently
in
the
agreement,
council
committee
and
council
would
be
free
to
turn
down
this
request
for
an
extension
that
right
is
there
and
it's
very
clear
in
the
current
agreement
that
that
decision
by
the
city
would
not
be
subject
to
the
current
dispute
resolution
provision.
That's
in
the
agreement.
A
My
comments
with
regard
to
bad
faith,
if
you
will,
is
that
that
is
a
consideration
that
came
in
when
staff
was
consulted
by
councilor
Moffat.
With
regard
to
the
motion
and
again,
I
have
to
be
careful
of
what
I
say
and
I
don't
want
to
have
to
go
in
camera
with
committee,
but
suffice
it
to
say
is
legal
is
satisfied
that
the
motion
that
has
been
crafted
by
councilor
Moffitt
with
the
input
of
operational
staff
and
legal
staff,
he
could
not
be
successfully
challenged
as
being
enacted
in
bad
faith.
Though.
A
The
agreement
I
get
that
and
they
appreciate
I
appreciate
that
part,
but
my
quiet
again
rising
from
the
exchange.
My
question
is
more
particular
to
the
vote
on
the
report
so
for
the
record
you're
saying
that
if
this
committee
or,
if
Council
as
a
whole
votes
against
the
recommendation
to
extend
that,
does
not
open
up
the
opportunity
for
us
to
be
sued
for
bad
faith.
Yes,
madam
chair,
my
opinion
is
because
we
can
never
guarantee
we
won't
be
sued.
Opinion
is
that
we
would
not
be
successfully
challenged
or
sued
on
the
basis
of
bad
faith.
B
J
You
I'm
I,
know
I'm
going
to
be
a
voice
in
the
wilderness,
but
I'm
gonna
ask
you
to
vote
against
the
Moffitt
recommendation,
because
I
think
it
sends
a
sense,
the
wrong
signal.
It
sends
us
in
the
wrong
direction
if
we
wanted
to
go
out
for
an
RFI
on
diversion
technologies,
a
new
technology
to
divert
more
waste
from
the
waste
stream.
J
I
think
that
that,
in
the
short
term
and
medium
term
would
be
the
right
thing
for
the
city
to
do,
but
to
go
out
and
say
when
you
know
we
have
an
extended
landfill
opportunity
to
answer
now.
We
want
to
explore
new
diversion
technologies,
new
disposal,
technologies,
Thermal
disposal.
We
want
to
find
out
how
a
Wheelabrator
incinerator
would
work
in
Ottawa
how
much
it
would
cost
I
think.
That's
not
the
right
thing
to
be
doing.
J
I
think
that's
a
productive
exercise
in
the
short
term
I,
quite
frankly,
don't
believe
that
that
exploring
alternative
disposal
technologies
is
a
productive
exercise
for
council
to
undertake
when
I,
don't
because
I
don't
believe
that,
at
the
end
of
the
day,
when
we
get
all
this
information
that
anything
is
going
to
change,
I
do
not
believe
that
we
are
going
to
say:
we've
got
great
information.
Now
we're
going
to
go
out
and
we're
going
to
build
an
incinerator.
J
I
mean
we're
going
to
take
ten
years
and
build
it
into
a
mass
burn,
an
incinerator
because,
first
of
all,
we
would
need
it.
We
have
a.
We
have
an
existing
landfill
and
a
second
of
all.
It
is
a
horrendous,
horrendous,
horrendous
costs.
So
you
know
what
I
think
that
if,
if
this
were
2025-
and
we
were
starting
to
say
to
ourselves-
we
don't
have
any
landfill
space
left
and
there
is
no
opportunity
on
the
horizon
to
extend
the
land
that
the
life
of
that
landfill
in
2025.
J
You
know,
yes,
we
should
be
looking
for
alternative
disposal
technologies
what's
out
there.
What
can
we
do
because
we
have
to
replace
an
asset
that
we
we
don't
have
we're
not
there
in
2013
we're
not
even
close
to
to
being
there
and
I,
don't
believe,
we've
maximized
the
diversion
opportunities
that
would
extend
the
life
of
if
we
were
talking,
madam
chairman,
about
alternative
technologies
to
increase
green
bin
diversion,
you
know,
I
think
you
know
yeah.
You
know,
that's
probably
a
good
thing
to
do:
to
expect
how
to
get
metals
out
of
our
waste
stream.
J
J
You
know
the
the
meat
liners
that
are
throwing
the
garbage,
what
composes
the
gut
the
residual
garbage
that
exists
today,
and
how
can
we
divert
that
that
would
be
a
good
investment
of
time
and
money
and
staff
effort
and
a
good
plumbing
of
the
marketplace
to
see
what
what
is
what
is
out
there,
because
I
think
that
council
would
be
interested
in
looking
at
the
opportunities
to
implement
some
of
those
diversion
technologies
in
Ottawa.
But
that's
not
what
this
motion
is
doing.
J
This
motion
is
sending
us
literally
on
a
chase
for
an
incinerator
or
some
other
thermal
technology
that
may
be
somewhere
that
we
don't
that
I.
Don't
fundamentally
believe
when
we
get
that
information
back,
that
we're
really
going
to
do
anything
with
it,
because
we
have
an
existing
asset
and
I
think
all
of
our
energies
would
be
better
off
on
the
diversion
side
than
on
the
disposal
side.
So
I
can't
support
the
motion.
B
D
K
Thank
you,
madam
chair
and
I,
do
think
we're
slipping
away
a
little
bit
from
the
the
agenda
item
before
us,
but
I
just
want
to
make
sure
in
councillor.
Humes
comments
certainly
raise
some
other
questions
and
and
I
think
we're
all
on
the
same
wavelength
in
terms
of
you
know
looking
for
alternatives
in
terms
of
diversion
prolonging
or
landfill
life.
Everything
else,
but
I
want
to
make
sure
that,
as
your
department
moves
forward,
that
one
of
those
alternatives
isn't
shipping
our
waste
offshore.
We've
done
this
in
the
past,
we've
shipped
plastics
over
to
China,
etc.
K
Technically,
it's
a
diversion.
It
prolongs
our
but
prolongs
our
landfill
life,
but
it's
not
really
a
viable
alternative.
It
cost
us
dearly
in
the
past.
I
know,
markets
change
and
everything
else
and
I.
Guess
you
make
an
argument
that
you
can.
You
know
there's
empty
containers
going
back
going
back
to
China,
but
that
should
not
be
one
of
the
options
we
should
be
looking
at
me.
We've
got
to
manage
your
own
waste.
We
don't
ship,
it
should
be
shipping,
it
offshore,
so
I'm
sure
you're,
not
looking
at
that
as
an
alternative
right.
That's.
D
C
You,
madam
chair
I,
just
also
want
to
clarify
something
here
with
mr.
weir.
If
we
could
councillor
Hume
points
out
that
2035
as
the
current
expected
life
of
the
landfill,
we
already
know
that
that
life
span
has
been
changed
at
least
once
significantly.
In
the
last
ten
years.
Correct
I
believe
I've
read
reports
where
it
tells
us
that
it
would
take
it
probably
at
least
10
years
to
open
another
landfill
and
that's
being
very
optimistic
and
counting
on
a
council
that
would
all
agree
to
move
ahead.
Is
that
correct,
yesiree.
C
You
so
I'll
share
what
my
colleagues
that
normally
I
would
pay
a
lot
of
attention
to
what
councillor
Hume
says:
I
gotta
put
you
on
notice.
I
will
not
support
you
on
your
change
to
counsel
them
off
its
motion
based
on
that
or
you
want
to
vote
no
on
councillors,
I'm
not
going
to
support
you
this
time.
Peter.
C
The
I'd
also
want
to
take
an
opportunity
to
thank
the
chair
for
her
direction,
the
staff,
it's
saving
me
having
to
do
a
motion
given
what
councillor
damoff,
that's
going
through
on
his
motion,
I'm,
very
happy
that
we
were
able
to
resolve
that
as
a
direction,
but
I
do
want
to
if
I,
based
on
some
of
the
discussion
I've
heard
around
here
in
the
last
two
hours
that
what
I'm
looking
for
is
information
on
everything,
diversification
and
disposal.
We
I
want
to
keep
council
up
to
date
on
what
alternatives
are
being
developed
out
there.
C
B
Sure
so
councillor
he'll
be
what
the
direction
mr.
weir
is
that
he
will
come
out
with
a
very
short
bulleted
list
of
what
else
is
out
there
in
the
environmental
scan.
So,
for
example,
as
we
know,
there
may
be
an
opportunity
for
the
City
of
Ottawa
to
become
a
regional
site
for
recycling,
depending
on
where
the
province
goes.
Things
like
that
and
again
I
think
mr.
weir,
my
question
to
you,
but
the
management
plan.
B
These
puts
that
back
on
our
agenda
that
we
are
coming
back
later
this
year
with
the
draft
of
the
management
plan
that
we'll
get
into
more
detail
about
what
the
options
are
that
are
out
there.
But
in
no
way
does
the
list
suggest
that
the
next
step
is
to
go
to
any
particular
technology
or
any
type
of
recycling.
It's
just
a
list
of
whether
people
are
doing
what's
out
there.
So,
for
example,
this.
C
Agreement:
let's
stop
you
right
there
and
agree
with
your
time
vote.
There's
no
last
question
related
to
that
direction.
The
staff
is
when
you're
ready
with
that
is
that
coming
back
to
committee,
or
because
this
is
a
question
I'm
asking
but
you're
also
a
walking
away
from
here
with
us
as
a
direction
from
the
chair,
so
I
want
to
make
sure
this
information
is
coming
back
to
me.
B
F
You
again
I
said
before
I
think
I
think
the
motion
before
you
is
pretty
self-explanatory,
I
mean
hopefully
and
I.
Think
most
people
in
the
city
will
hope
that
we
never
need
it.
It's
not
that
it's
not
important
to
do.
You
know
the
the
technology
that
we
have
with
Glasgow,
hopefully,
is
that
it
allows
us
to
extend
the
life
of
our
landfill
by
potentially
40
more
years.
That's
my
interest.
F
I
I,
don't
I
don't
want
to
have
to
worry
about
it,
then
yeah
I,
don't
expect
I'll
be
a
counselor,
then
I
don't
want
to
have
to
worry
about
it
at
that
time
to
say
well
now
we
have
to
worry
about
what's
next,
if
plastico
doesn't
work,
we
need
to
know
where
we're
going,
and
you
heard
the
example
of
Toronto
they
tried
for
ten
years
and
then
it
wasn't
successful.
If
we
started
2025,
it's
we
look
for
10
years
and
we're
not
successful
and
we
don't
extend
the
life
for
landfill.
F
2035,
no
landfill,
we're
no
different
than
waste
management
and
carp
where
we
are
trying
to
do
something,
but
we
have
no
options
and
now
we're
chucking
garbage
to
Moose
Creek,
the
Rochester
or
whether
we
have
to
do
it.
It's
going
to
cost
more
in
the
long
run
further
when
it
comes
to
landfills.
Let's
be
honest:
landfills
don't
go
in
urban
warts.
Most
people
have
to
put
their
put
their
garbage
at
the
Enel
anyway,
it
gets
picked
up
and
the
story,
don't
the
worry
berries
anymore.
F
If
you
live
in
West
Carlton,
if
you
live
in
Laredo
Goulburn,
if
you
live
in
Oz
good
word,
if
you
live
in
Cumberland,
even
even
though
it's
what
I
think
the
Navin,
the
the
left
hills
and
isn't
in
this
Ward
you
have
to.
If
they're
worried
about
where
we're
a
landfill
might
be,
we've
got
two
currents:
I
see
and
I
landfill
applications
ongoing
in
the
City
of
Ottawa.
Do
we
want
an
application
for
a
new
residential
landfill
I?
Don't
I
want
a
solution
that
allows
us
to
extend
what
we
have,
which
is
a
great
landfill.
F
You
know
a
haunt
railroad
right
invaded
Woburn.
If,
if
POSCO
is
that
option
right
next
to
it,
that
allows
us
to
do
both
in
concert
for
the
next
50
to
60
years,
then
then
great.
If
it's
not
that
I
want
to
find
something
else.
That's
going
to
help
us
extend
the
life
of
the
landfill
I.
Personally,
don't
feel
that
landfill
is
the
future
I
realize
the
cheapest
cost.
I
don't
want
to
open
up
a
new
landfill.
My
ward
is
744
square
kilometres.
F
I
was
talking
with
Chad
Kajri
last
night
and
my
ward
is
46
and
a
half
times
bigger
than
Statesville
Ward.
We
have
a
lot
of
space
for
new
landfills,
that's
likely
where
they
go
and
that's
off
the
table.
For
me,
I
don't
think
we
should
wait
for
2025
to
talk
about
that.
I
think.
If
this
doesn't
work
and
like
I
said
I,
say
a
hundred
times,
I
hope
it
does
I
hope,
you're,
successful
and
I
hope
you
up
and
running
in
by
2016.
F
So
we
can,
you
know,
put
this
this
whole
debate
to
bed,
but
if
it
doesn't
I
want
to
talk
about
where
we
go-
and
you
know
maybe
it's
not
next
term
of
council.
Maybe
it's
not
the
term
after
that.
It
actually
has
to
happen
that
we
actually
have
to
go
and
do
it
but
I'm
not
looking
at
well.
I'm
gonna
be
a
counsellor
to
2014.
So
who
really
cares?
What
happens
afterwards?
F
If
I
happen
to
get
reelected
in
a
year
from
now
and
and
I'm
there's
a
2018,
you
know,
I
can
only
worry
about
2018,
I
suppose,
but
2050
2060
does
matter
and
we
are
elected
to
plan
for
the
future.
Sorry
I
didn't
make
any
rumblings
I
didn't
make
any
rumblings
when
you're
speaking
I
just
sat
here
still
and
and
listened
appreciate
the
same
in
return.
I
personally,
don't
feel
that
that
we
should
be
looking
short-term
I
think
you
should
look
long-term
and
I.
F
Think
this
motion
does
that,
but
again,
hopefully
we
don't
need
it
and
that's
again,
I!
You
know,
I
most
of
us
have
some
confidence
that
there's
it's
varying
degrees
of
confidence.
Obviously,
with
with
delays
you
you
get
a
little
skeptical,
but
the
last
the
2016
date
has
not
been.
It
has
not
been
requested
to
be
extended.
We
are
no
different
now
than
we
were
in
2011
in
terms
of
our
timelines,
so
I'm
I'm
hopeful.
That's
that
everything
works
out
with
plasto.
We
don't
need
this,
but
I'm
I'm,
very
supportive
of
this
and
I
hope.
F
The
council
supports
as
well,
because
I
feel
that
it
gives
us
our
contingency
to
begin
or
sorry
should
resume
what
we
were
doing
in
2005
when
the
opportunity
came
up
with
classical
I
mean
you
look
at.
Why
did
we
do
that?
2005
I?
Maybe
it's
coincidence.
Maybe
it's
not,
but
out
of
that
rose
Prosecco.
So
isn't
it
conceivable
that
out
of
another
one
could
rise
another
another
solution
that
we
don't
see
today.
So
thank
you.
J
A
matter
of
privilege,
madam
chairman,
the
previous
speaker
in
his
wrap-up,
alluded
to
those
in
opposition
of
the
motion
as
a
incredibly
short
term
and,
and
he
ascribed
motives
that
were
not
within
the
comments
that
were
made
by
people
in
opposition
to
the
motion
and
I.
Think
it
impedes
it's
a
matter
of
privilege
and
I.
J
Think
that
the
member
should
withdraw
those
comments,
because
in
no
way
did
anyone
in
opposition
or
questioning
ever
indicate
that
they
should
only
everyone
should
speak
or
think
in
such
short
Ward
based
terms
and
abandon
the
the
big
picture
and
ascribing
those
comments
to
those
members
is
inappropriate
and
is
a
matter
of
privilege.
Thank.
B
F
B
You
so,
first
of
all,
I
want
to
thank
members
of
committee
and
council
who
came
down
today
to
join
committee
for
a
very
vigorous
question
session,
a
very
vigorous
debate
about
many
different
issues.
Again.
This
is
certainly
an
interesting
topic,
but
it's
a
topic
that
brings
out
a
lot
of
passion,
a
lot
of
great
ideas,
an
excellent
exchange
of
information.
We'd
also
like
to
thank
mr.
Brydon
for
being
here
today
and
for
being
very
transparent
and
accessible
to
our
staff,
especially
allowing
them
access
to
your
confidential
business
records
today.
Mr.
B
Brydon,
certainly,
you
can
make
a
few
debates
go
away
if
you
could
just
go
away
and
get
POSCO
a
complete
and
again
I
think
this
council
has
placed
tremendous
support
behind
you
by
directing
our
city
manager
to
enter
into
that
contractual
obligation,
and
there
should
be
no
perception
in
the
public,
whether
it's
your
investors
in
your
company
or
the
residents
of
Iowa.
That
councilís
position
has
changed
materially
in
that
regard.
But
what
has
changed
is
that
some
of
the
benchmarks
have
not
been
met.
B
Yet
you've
asked
for
an
extension
and
we're
here
to
consider
that
element
of
it
and
I
regret.
I
want
to
thank
staff,
especially
mr.
Thompson
and
mr.
Kilpatrick
and
mr.
Weah,
for
their
diligence
on
this
I
know.
Mr.
Thompson,
you
spent
the
better
part
of
an
entire
year
working
on
the
legal
agreement
for
PLAs
Co.
Certainly
mr.
Kilpatrick,
we
are
holding
your
feet
to
the
fire.
B
But
you've
also
been
very
clear
in
your
expectations
with
regards
to
the
financial
risk
to
the
taxpayer
and
you've
continued
to
do
that.
So
again,
I
see
no
risk
in
extending
the
deadline,
so
I
will
be
supporting
the
city.
Manager's
recommendation.
We're
saying
that,
yes
to
PLAs
Co,
if
we
vote
yesterday
that
we're
saying
not
indefinitely
yes
so
go
out,
get
it
done.
We'll
continue
with
the
agreement
that
we
have
in
place,
and
we
also
expect
to
see
if
this
motion
or
the
report
carries
demonstrable
progress
by
the
end
of
2014
in
mr.
Brydon.
B
When
I
read
your
letter
of
August,
the
8th,
you
gave
us
some
dates
as
to
when
you
think
you
could
get
things
done
and
I'm
really
hoping,
but
that
we
do
have
an
opportunity,
with
this
term
of
counsel,
to
actually
break
ground
on
the
new
commercial
facility.
I
was
there
when
we
broke
ground
on
the
camera,
the
site
that
you're
doing
testing
on
the
demonstration
site,
and
it
would
certainly
be
a
great
way
to
conclude
a
term
of
council
that
we
could
actually
get
this.
B
B
weir
to
come
back
with
so
information
in
the
solid
waste
management
plan
that
we,
we
hope
to
see.
The
draft
of
of
this
fall
another
big
guiding
document,
but
certainly
want
to
be
very,
very
clear
that
my
support
of
asking
for
that
step
to
be
taken
is
not
to
be
misconstrued
with
my
point
earlier
that
we
are
responsible
for
the
waste
that
we
produce,
whether
we
are
he's
producing
it,
whether
we
go
on
by
packaging
that
we
spread
as
residual
waste.
We
are
responsible
and
I
think
we
have
to
remember
that.
B
That
is
where,
where
we
start
with
our
own
behavior-
and
we
look
at
those
3
R's
and
mr.
Brydon
has
brought
the
fourth
art
to
the
table,
if
you
will,
in
terms
of
the
power
that
we
generate
from
from
getting
rid
of
this
residual
waste.
So
again,
today
is
an
issue
of
fiscal
responsibility
and
accountability.
And
again
the
Trail
Road
landfill
has
a
finite
capacity.
B
We're
optimistic
that
plasto
is
the
way
to
go.
We
have
certainly
put
our
strong
support
behind
it
and
again,
mr.
Kilpatrick,
if
this
report
carries-
and
we
do
have
an
extension
in
play-
I'm
going
to
expect-
as
you
have
done
regularly
since
the
December
2011
report-
constant
reporting
back
to
me
as
to
where
we're
at
in
the
process
I
think
every
time
mr.
mm-hmm
can
call
you
mr.
Broderick
I
apologize
mr.
fried
and
every
time
you've
left
town
to
go,
do
something
you've
had
a
meeting
and
you
report
it
back
to
the
city
manager.
B
I
can
assure
you
that
he
has
reported
back
in
to
me,
so
he
sees
definitely
keeping
me
in
the
loop
and
making
sure
that
there
are
no
surprises
so
that
when
you
did
come
forward
to
look
for
an
extension,
it
didn't
really
surprise
me
that
that
came
forward.
So
mr.
Kirkpatrick
I'm
going
to
ask
that
you
continue
doing
that.
So
something
does
material
change,
material
change,
we're
back
here
right
away
and
we
can
decide
what
the
next
steps
are.
B
So,
having
said
that
committee
members
again
I'm
going
to
recommend
that
we
support
the
staff
recommendation
and
I'll
be
offering
my
support
of
councilor
Moffitt's
motion
based
on
again,
the
cavae
at
bat.
Going
out
to
ask
for
information
is
not
the
same
as
having
a
report
coming
forward
with
recommendations,
we're
just
getting
a
shopping
list
of
what
we
could
access
in
the
event
that
this
revolutionary
technology
is
is
not
moving
forward
at
the
pace
that
we
have
expected
so
again.
Having
said
that,
I'd
now
like
to
go
to
councillor
moppets
motion.
B
Okay,
so
before
we
call
on
the
boats,
counsel
Manette
just
wanted
me
to
invite.
There's
a
delegation
here
today:
who's
the
Canadian
capital
conference,
so
welcome
to
Ottawa,
City
Hall
and
certainly
welcome
to
the
wrap-up
of
a
vigorous
debate
about
how
we
can
revolutionize
how
we
deal
with
solid
waste,
so
you're
coming
in
at
the
tail
end
of
what
was
a
vigorous
debate
today.
So
welcome
to
Ottawa
folks.
B
So,
having
said
that's
on
the
market
motion,
so
the
mouth
of
motion
is
carried
with
the
descent
of
councillor.
Hume
noted
on
the
report,
as
amended.
Is
that
carried
carried
with
no
dissents?
Okay?
So
thank
you
very
much
committee
members
very
much
appreciate
your
patience
today.
Again.
This
is
a
very
passionate
issue
for
the
media.
There
will
be
media
availability
with
mr.
Brydon
myself
and
mr.
Kirkpatrick
at
the
end
of
the
committee
meeting.
So
we
do
have
an
area
that
is
available
for
questions
and
want
to
make
it
clear.
B
L
L
B
Thank
you
very
much,
miss
econ,
safe
daddy.
Are
there
any
other
inquiries?
Okay,
seeing
none
is
there
any
other
business
I
see,
none
suggest
your
remaining
members
of
committee.
Our
next
committee
meeting
is
Tuesday.
The
17th
of
September
wish
everybody
a
very
happy
long
weekend
coming
up
next
week
for
Labor,
Day
and
again
just
want
to
thank
committee
members
for
a
vigorous
debate
and
mr.
Brydon
you've
got
the
marching
orders
between
now
and
council
and
certainly
will
be
available
to
the
media
and
a
couple
of
minutes.