Rahul Mehta, Resident asked the following question(s):
Question 1 (regarding item 7.2):
As an aside I wish to note that there were 13 additional slides after the cohesive slide deck (slides 21-33) which I do not think were supposed to be included, which left me very confused seeing different dates and data repeated, unclear as to the actual metrics meant to be reported. Putting these errors aside for now, there was repetition of a more important sort which came up throughout this CCAP update, and that was the central role of the City's transportation fleet and facilities as a major and growing part of our GHG emissions. While no plan was given as to if and how emissions will be reduced anywhere near the 2030 target, as by your own admission we are drifting away from that (now set to be even more ambitious) target with rising total and transport emissions since 2022, there is clearly still much the city, and Environment staff, can do to steer us in a better direction. Considering this - is your team making sure to recommend the strongest possible budget to increase MiWay service hours for the 2024 budget, as well as future budgets for accelerated growth, new garages and fleet electrification? The most recent meeting on the budget and proposed transit increase confirmed a "potential" maximum service/budget increase to MiWay of 6%, yet the Mayor is proposing a more modest 4%. We need leadership from City staff and I hope your answer will provide that in light of our growing challenge of rising corporate emissions that make it impossible to ever meet our 2030 and 2050 climate targets.
Question 2 (regarding item 7.3):
There have been multiple greenhouse facilities, community gardens, urban agriculture projects, tree nurseries, food forests and ecological learning spaces proposed within multiple city/regional plans, specifically the Britannia Farm Master Plan and Credit River Parks Strategy, yet little in regards to results. The public has felt left in the dark and very much let down with the lack of progress in the construction of facilities, trails and educational programs in those plans, poorly funded due in part to repeated austerity budgets - general updates have been lacking too. Limited investment in these well-thought-out existing plans has had a cascading effect over the years in regards to addressing the issues of food security, public health, education of food and environment, local food procurement and farming initiatives at scale to name just a few. Thus, the question, why are these plans not mentioned in updates and planning of the Urban Agriculture Master Plan? Specifically, is the city coordinating with these dated, largely unrealized and sorely underfunded plans, to see them "bear fruit" which in turn will support the UAMP and CCAP?
A written response will be provided to the resident.