Skip to content

Northshore Sports expansion reconsideration on agenda for Tuesday’s City Council meeting

Mayor says Coun. Bruni voted against the proposed sale, but actually wanted to vote in favour
2019-07-02 Sutherland Building DH
Northshore Sports and Auto Inc. David Helwig/SooToday

Ward 4 Couns. Marchy Bruni and Rick Niro will ask City Council next week to reconsider a confused vote that refused to sell city-owned 69 Old Garden River to a neighbouring powersports business.

As SooToday reported earlier this week, the disputed vote effectively blocked the sale of the property to Northshore Sports and Auto Inc., which wanted to expand its business there with a new warehouse, distribution centre and commercial plaza.

Mayor Christian Provenzano wrote the following to councillors the day after the perplexing decision.


Council:

I am writing with respect to item 6.14 and the associated bylaw at 11.1.5 of yesterday’s agenda (sale of 69 Old Garden River Road).

I note that Coun. Shoemaker is not included on this email because he declared a conflict on this matter.

I reviewed the recorded vote (eSCRIBE) this morning with the clerk.

In favour: Mayor Provenzano, Councillor Christian, Councillor Dufour, Councillor Gardi and Councillor Scott (5); Against: Councillor Niro, Councillor Bruni, Councillor Hollingsworth, Councillor Hilsinger and Councillor Vezeau-Allen (5).

Since the recorded vote was tied, the resolution did not pass. The prevailing side, therefore, was against.

It appeared to me, when I asked for a show of hands, that Councillor Bruni was in favour of the resolution.

In light of his recorded vote (against) we reviewed the video of the meeting and it is clear that, when I asked for a show of hands, Councillor Bruni voted in favour.

I spoke to Councillor Bruni this morning and he did, in fact, intend on supporting the motion. That noted, the eSCRIBE vote is the recorded vote so Councillor Bruni’s vote against is the governing vote.

In order to address this matter property, in accord with our procedural bylaw, we would need two motions at the next meeting, as follows:

1. A motion to suspend the procedural bylaw in order to discuss and debate a reconsideration (the procedural bylaw requires that a reconsideration be brought as a notice of motion before it is debated and voted on by council). Any two councillors could move and second this.

2. A motion to reconsider the matter. A reconsideration has to be moved and seconded by two members who voted on the prevailing side, so two of: Councillor Niro, Councillor Bruni, Councillor Hollingsworth, Councillor Hilsinger and Councillor Vezeau-Allen..

I believe Councillor Bruni will move the reconsideration. He would need one of the prevailing side to second it and I hope, in the circumstances, one of you would consider doing that so that the matter can be discussed and determined.

I note that you can second the reconsideration motion and still vote against the main motion (whether or not to sell the property to the successful proponent as recommended by staff).

Upon confirmation that we have the necessary movers/seconders for the motions, the clerk's office will draft the motions for the review of the movers/seconders and they will be placed on our next agenda.

I welcome any of you to connect me should you have any questions or concerns.

Sincerely,
Christian Provenzano
Mayor

Next week's City Council meeting will be held on Tuesday because of the Thanksgiving holiday.

The meeting will be livestreamed on SooToday starting at 4:30 p.m. Tuesday.
 


What's next?


If you would like to apply to become a Verified reader Verified Commenter, please fill out this form.


Discussion


David Helwig

About the Author: David Helwig

David Helwig's journalism career spans seven decades beginning in the 1960s. His work has been recognized with national and international awards.
Read more