Report: Governing Council - November 07, 2024

THE GOVERNING COUNCIL

THURSDAY, NOVEMBER 7, 2024

MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE GOVERNING COUNCIL

Thursday, November 7, 2024, 4:30 p.m.
Council Chamber, Simcoe Hall

Present: Anna Kennedy (Chair), Sandra Hanington (Vice-Chair), Wesley Hall (Chancellor), Meric S. Gertler, (President), Trevor Young (Provost), Sharleen Ahmed, Donald Ainslie, Luca Calabretta, Vikram Chadalawada, Jovan Bursac, Robert Cooper, Ann Curran, Liam Dravid, Samuel Elfassy, Ramy Elitzur, K. Sonu Gaind, Indi Gopinathan, Ankita Goyat, Maureen Harquail, Thomas Hofmann, Paul Huyer, David Jacobs, Sarosh Jamal, Linda Johnston, Audrey Karlinsky, Mark Lautens, Scott MacKendrick, Brian Madden, Rajiv Mathur, Joanne McNamara, Cameron Miranda-Radbord, Andrew Petersen, Maya Povhe, Danielle Skipp, Grace Westcott, Mary-Agnes Wilson, David Zingg, Sheree Drummond (Secretary of the Governing Council)  

Regrets: Aarthi Ashok, Amanda Bartley, Glen Bandiera, Akina Lalla, Kikelomo Lawal, Ron Levi, Douglas McDougall, Eha Naylor, Paul Huyer, William Verreault, Geeta Yadav

In Attendance: Julia Allworth (Manager, Innovation Projects), Katherine Beaumont (Senior Director, Global Learning Opportunities and International Student Success), Gwen Burrows (Assistant Vice-President, International), Dan Bowyer (College of Electors), Cecil Chikezie (Graduate Student), Andrew Ebejer (Senior Legal Counsel), Kim Eija (College of Electors), Geoffrey Hinton (University Professor Emeritus), Nadina Jamison (Chief Strategy Officer, Office of the President), Ihab Khalil (Chief Operations Officer, People Strategy, Equity and Culture), Bruce Kidd (University Ombudsperson), Julie McAlpine Jeffries (Associate University Counsel), Eric Noble (College of Electors), Robyn Parr (Executive Director, Office of the Vice-Provost, Students), Ann Perry (Senior Issues and Media Relations Strategist), Archana Sridhar (Assistant Provost), Jeff Lennon (Assistant Vice President, Planning and Budget), Kelly Hannah-Moffat (Vice President, People Strategy, Equity and Culture), Scott Mabury (Vice-President, Operations and Real Estate Partnerships), David Palmer (Vice-President, Advancement), Christine Szustaczek (Vice-President, Communications), Sandy Welsh (Vice-Provost Students), Terese Weisberg (College of Electors), Helen Wojcinski (College of Electors), Joseph Wong (Vice President International)

Secretariat: Emma Thacker (Recording Secretary), Cindy Ferencz-Hammond, Joanne Chou, Miranda Edwards

OPEN SESSION

1. Chair’s Remarks
   
   The Chair, Anna Kennedy, welcomed members and guests to the cycle one meeting of the Governing Council for the 2024-25 governance year. She offered a special welcome to Dr. Wesley J. Hall, University Chancellor. This was the Chancellor’s first Council meeting in his new role, which became effective on July 1, 2024. Chancellor Hall was formally installed as the 35^th Chancellor at a convocation ceremony on October 28, 2024.
   
   Before moving to appointments, the Chair reminded members of their shared responsibility to ensure civil engagement, maintain order, and encourage respectful debate. She noted that, as governors, they had all signed an acknowledgment and undertakings of confidentiality, which highlighted their fiduciary duties. Each member was expected to adhere to the highest levels of conduct in carrying out their responsibilities in the best interest of the University. The Chair also noted that the rules included provisions limiting governors to speaking once on each item, and generally for no more than three to a maximum of five minutes. She stated that these rules would be employed as needed to maintain order, and expressed confidence that, by working together, they would be able to create and maintain a productive and positive governance environment.
   
   The Chair announced several appointments that were approved at the October 28, 2024, Executive Committee meeting.

• Professor Susan McCahan was appointed Associate Vice-President and Vice-Provost, Digital Strategies and was reappointed as Vice-Provost, Innovations in Undergraduate Education. She would serve in these roles concurrently for a five-year term effective November 1, 2024.
• Professor Nicholas Rule was appointed Vice-Provost, Academic Programs, for a five-year term, effective November 1, 2024.
• Professor Mariana Mota Prado was appointed as Associate Vice-President and Vice-Provost, International Student Experience, for a five-year term, beginning January 1, 2025.

She congratulated Professors McCahan, Rule and Prado and thanked them for their service.

Next, the Chair advised members that, at its recent meeting, the Executive Committee considered notice of motions from two governors. She reminded members that pursuant to the By-Law the role of the Executive Committee was to determine whether such motions should be placed on the agenda of the upcoming Governing Council meeting or indicate some other action it deemed appropriate. The Executive Committee determined that given the mandate of governance it would not be appropriate for the proposed motions to be endorsed and forwarded to the Governing Council. 

The Chair reported that the Executive Committee noted that addressing hate speech, ensuring that terrorist organizations were not on the University’s campuses, the renunciation of the use of terrorism, and an unequivocal opposition to academic boycotts were matters that were already addressed in existing policies and practices of the University, and in some cases were also a matter of compliance with the law. The Executive Committee members had also discussed the importance of the University maintaining institutional neutrality. 

It was further noted that the President and the Vice-President & Provost had spoken to the deeply troubling upsurge in antisemitic acts and speech, across society and on university campuses, including at the University of Toronto, and that the University had acknowledged the harm that had been caused and had made it clear that it remained fully committed to addressing antisemitism, as well as all forms of discrimination and harassment. In the discussion, Executive Committee members noted their concerns about, and firm rejection of antisemitism and emphasized that their lack of support for the proposed motions to be placed on the Governing Council agenda should not be understood as otherwise. 

Based on the commitments made by the President, and the Vice-President & Provost in the discussion, the Chair reported that the Executive Committee passed a motion requiring the administration to provide periodic updates to Governing Council on its activities and initiatives to combat antisemitism, including: 

1. the development of an operational definition of antisemitism that is consistent with the mission of an academic institution.
2. the work on the review of and likely proposed revisions to the Statement on Prohibited Discrimination and Discriminatory Harassment; and,
3. ensuring compliance with Bill 166 (Strengthening Accountability and Student Supports Act, 2024). 

The Executive Committee had determined that this was an appropriate role for governance.

2. Report of the President
   
   The Chair invited the President to present his report. 
   
   President Gertler welcomed members and opened his remarks by introducing University Professor Emeritus Geoffrey Hinton, who had won the Nobel Prize in Physics on October 8, 2024, along with John Hopfield of Princeton University. He recognized that this was a momentous event in the history of the University of Toronto and would be celebrated for generations to come. 
   
   Professor Hinton has had a profound impact on multiple fields, including artificial intelligence (AI), machine learning, computer science, physics, and cognitive psychology. His research had introduced new ways of thinking about thinking and learning, and fundamentally transformed the world in ways unimaginable when he started his work decades ago. Over his more than 30-year career in the Department of Computer Science at the University of Toronto, where he became a University Professor in 2006, he had played a key role in establishing the University as a global leader in machine learning and AI. His work had recently expanded to include the ethical consequences and social impacts of AI, a topic he amplified with his Nobel Prize win. The President invited Professor Hinton to the podium.
   
   University Professor Emeritus Geoffrey Hinton
   
   Professor Hinton began his presentation by acknowledging the significant benefits AI would bring to the world, especially in healthcare and education. For example, AI could vastly improve diagnostic accuracy for doctors, and students could benefit from AI-driven personalized tutors. However, he warned of risks, particularly AI’s potential to surpass human intelligence. He stressed that while researchers agree AI would become smarter than humans, there was uncertainty about how to control it and that more research in this area was needed. He also highlighted several short-term risks, including increased societal division, more sophisticated cyberattacks, and growing threats of bioterrorism. Professor Hinton concluded that despite these risks, Canada could play a key role in AI safety research, with the University of Toronto operating as a major research centre. He emphasized the need to address both the long-term and immediate risks.
   
   In the question period that followed, the following points were raised:

• A member asked if North America was currently ahead of China in AI development. Professor Hinton responded that China was rapidly catching up, and would eventually surpass North America, due to greater investments into STEM education.
• A member asked about AI and social media. Professor Hinton noted that AI was already driving extreme social polarization through social media algorithms designed to maximize engagement.
• A member asked about AI safety. Professor Hinton argued that AI development would not slow down, and Canada should focus on AI safety research. He reiterated that the University of Toronto was well-positioned to research AI safety due to its strong research faculty and units such as the Schwartz Reisman Institute for Technology and Society.
• In a discussion about training the next generation of AI faculty researchers, Professor Hinton emphasized the importance of seizing key opportunities to recruit talent that had previously been overlooked, to further drive advancements in AI research.
• A member asked about human-AI collaboration in medical diagnostics. Professor Hinton responded that while he believed that AI would eventually surpass human diagnostic capabilities, there was still some time before AI would fully take over.
• A member asked about job displacement. Professor Hinton responded that while creative roles may survive longer, AI was already surpassing humans in certain tests of creativity. He has advised some to focus on occupations that require manual dexterity and human interaction, but he ended the session by emphasizing the uncertainty surrounding AI's future impact, noting that developments over the next decade were unpredictable.

The Chair thanked and congratulated Professor Hinton and invited the President to continue his report.

Chancellor’s Installation

The President began his report by noting that Dr. Wesley J. Hall had been installed as the University’s 35th Chancellor on October 28, followed by a reception in the Great Hall at Hart House. The President noted that Chancellor Hall had already presided over several convocation ceremonies and thanked those who had been able to attend the reception and celebrations.

World University Rankings, 2025

The President reported that in the latest Times Higher Education World University Rankings, the University of Toronto had once again been ranked 21st in the world, 10th among global public universities, and 3rd among North American public universities.  He noted that these results were remarkable in an era when competition from other universities continued to intensify, and thanked the many faculty, students and staff who continue to contribute to the University’s success. 

Government Relations

Federal Matters

Shifting to Federal matters, the President spoke to the government’s recent announcement to further reduce Canada’s intake of international students with an additional 10% reduction in new study permits for international students for the next two years. He noted that new master’s and PhD students would now require a Provincial Attestation Letter (PAL) in alignment with requirements for undergraduate students. The rules with respect to Post-Graduation Work Permits would also be changed, limiting eligibility for graduates of many college programs, which would have a significant impact on the college sector. The President reminded members that the responsibility for distributing PALs to individual institutions rested with each province, so specific details for Ontario were not yet known. The President noted that these recent changes had led to a significant decline in international students across the sector, although the University of Toronto had fared considerably better than others due to a well-executed diversification strategy and a concerted approach to recruitment and retention. He noted that the House of Commons’ Standing Committee on Citizenship and Immigration had agreed to study the recent decisions around international students, and groups such as U15 and Universities Canada had already been invited to speak with the Committee.

Provincial Matters

On the Provincial front, the President reported that the Honorable Nolan Quinn had been appointed as the new Minister of Colleges and Universities (MCU). Just prior to this appointment, the former Minister, the Honorable Jill Dunlop, had communicated the terms of the next Strategic Mandate Agreement (SMA) for 2025-30. The SMA process was designed to allow institutions to work with the Ministry to articulate institutional priorities, identify areas of distinctive strength, and to agree on performance metrics. The University was now working with the Ministry to prepare the next Agreement. 

The President noted that the Province’s Fall Economic Statement had been released the week prior. There were no notable announcements in terms of post-secondary education support. The University was now looking ahead to the Spring 2025 Budget and would continue conversations with the provincial government on advocating for increases to operating grants and base funding; the Tuition Fee Framework; the impact of the Federal government’s reduction in international students; and continue to advocate for a more properly differentiated treatment of the University of Toronto within the sector, as acknowledged by the Chair of the Blue-Ribbon Panel. He noted the possibility of a provincial election as early as Spring 2025.  

Retrospective Analysis related to the Encampment

The President provided an update on his commitment to commission a retrospective analysis of the University’s management of the encampment on the St. George campus in May and June 2024. This included inviting an arms-length third-party expert to assist with the analysis, as is consistent with the institution’s normal practices following major incidents. This would provide an opportunity to learn from the experience and to inform the University’s response to future challenges of a similar nature. There had been exploratory discussions with three external organizations. The University was in the final stages of discussion with consultants with expertise in crisis and emergency management as well as the post-secondary education sector. It was anticipated that much of the analysis would be completed before the end of the calendar year, and governors would be informed of its progress.

A member asked whether those engaged in this analysis would consist of external consultants and when their report would be expected. The President responded that he expected to receive the report either by the end of the year or early in the new year. He noted that the consultants came highly recommended, and that they had been engaged by other institutions for analogous projects.

A member asked about the possibility of an external, arms-length review of the University’s Policy on Sexual Violence and Sexual Harassment. Professor Sandy Welsh (Vice Provost, Students) responded, noting that the administration was finalizing the process for this review and that the administration was considering appropriate external reviewers to ensure they moved forward as per student feedback.

The Chair thanked members for their questions and the President for his report.

3. Presentation: Documentary – International Students: First 48 Hours in Canada

The Chair invited Professor Joseph Wong (Vice-President, International) to the podium. Professor Wong began by emphasizing how the University of Toronto had successfully attracted the talent of many international students and shared his personal interest in understanding their experiences when first arriving in Toronto. Inspired by this, a documentary was created through the International Student Experience Fund and the Innovation Hub to document the first 48 hours of several international students' after arriving in Toronto. The film, which was being screened across the three campuses, highlighted their experiences, the wide range of the University's support systems, and served to celebrate their incredible talent. The trailer for the documentary was then shown.

Julia Allworth (Manager, Innovation Projects, Innovation Hub) explained the process of making the documentary, praising the collaboration between students, the University’s International Student Centre, and the film's director, Cal Campos. She emphasized how the documentary, featuring personal stories of students arriving from around the world, was deeply moving and meaningful.

Cecil Chikezie, a PhD student in Biomedical Engineering from Kenya, shared his experience as one of the students featured in the documentary. He recounted the difficulties he faced during his long journey to Canada, including a three-day delay, and how he felt welcomed by the University upon his arrival. He also spoke fondly of his first experiences on campus and the warm reception he received from the Innovation Hub, which helped him feel part of the University community.

The presentation concluded with congratulations from a member on the documentary's success.

4. Report of the University Ombudsperson for the Period July 1, 2023 to June 30, 2024 and Administrative Response
   
   The Chair indicated that the Report of the University Ombudsperson, and the Administrative Response were presented annually to the Governing Council for information.
   
   At the invitation of the Chair, Professor Emeritus Bruce Kidd (University Ombudsperson), acknowledged the challenging and turbulent times but noted a decrease in the overall number of complaints compared to the previous year. There had been an increase in complaints from undergraduate students, administrative staff, and post-doctoral fellows, although not all complaints had been substantiated. He reported that no systemic concerns were brought forward in this year’s Annual Report, and there were no new recommendations for the administration.
   
   Professor Kidd highlighted the decline in graduate student complaints and noted the improvement in the culture of graduate studies and the enhancements to graduate student supports developed by the School of Graduate Studies. He expressed appreciation for the administration's response and acknowledged the work on various recommendations from previous reports. He also commended the upcoming review of the Code of Behavior on Academic Matters and emphasized the importance of the University's commitment to respectful and fair discourse, as seen by the ongoing important work of Professor Randy Boyagoda (Provostial Advisor on Civil Discourse). Finally, he announced the upcoming 50th anniversary of the Office of the Ombudsperson, thanking the Council for its continued support.
   
   The Provost, Professor Trevor Young, thanked the Ombudsperson for his report and service. He acknowledged the thoroughness of the report and expressed satisfaction with the decline in complaints in some areas while recognizing potential concerns related to the broad category of student services. The Provost reaffirmed the University's commitment to improving student services and noted that although there were no new recommendations in the report this year, the administration was following up on previous recommendations (i.e., communications, academic integrity, culture of civility, policy renewal). He updated the Council on the implementation of the new Policy Management Framework to ensure that policies remained current and underwent regular review. Lastly, the Provost extended his gratitude to the Ombudsperson for agreeing to extend his term as Ombudsperson for another year.
   
   A member expressed surprise at the decrease in complaints, despite heightened campus activity over the last year. He mentioned information he had received from Hillel (a Jewish student organization, with U of T Chapter), which reported 500 complaints across nine campuses, with 75 at the University of Toronto. He highlighted concerns about the difficulty students faced when trying to submit complaints within a complex, decentralized system. He shared a student's experience of being passed between various offices leading to frustration. The member suggested that the administration streamline the complaint process and create a centralized system to make it easier for students to file complaints.
   
   The Provost acknowledged the decentralized system's shortcomings and the need for efficient complaint processes. The University planned to undertake consultations to improve this, making it easier for complainants to navigate the system. Professor Kidd added that he had spoken to Hillel and noted the University had implemented improvements in its complaint intake process since the initial difficulties in October 2023, but emphasized the importance of a transparent, supportive, and streamlined process.
   
   A member raised a question about measuring the effectiveness of the complaint resolution process and whether a navigation system would help guide complainants. The Provost discussed a top-down navigation system for complaints, similar to those in student mental health and sexual violence policies.
   
   Finally, a member asked about performance improvement within student services, particularly regarding the quality and timeliness of services. Professor Sandy Welsh (Vice-Provost, Students) explained that student services were continually improving through data collection, surveys, and collaborations with faculty to assess and enhance care. Regular meetings with student societies and external reviews were also part of their ongoing efforts to improve services.
5. Minutes of the Previous Meeting of the Governing Council (June 27, 2024)
   
   The Chair advised members that, at the request of a governor, the minutes of the previous meeting, and the following item, ‘business arising from the previous meeting’ were moved from the consent agenda to the regular agenda.   
   
   A member asked for the floor, regarding a correction to the minutes. The member described the June 27 Governing Council meeting as a public embarrassment, while commending the minutes for their acknowledgement of antisemitism, and the University’s commitment to do a better job in addressing antisemitism. The member commented that at the June meeting, Council members were subjected to a situation that interfered with the proceedings of the Council, requiring Campus Safety to escort members out of the building. The member said that the University of Toronto, despite its commitment to inclusivity, had failed to protect Jewish members of its community, who endured threats, intimidation, and harassment. The member cited physical assaults, hate speech, and reputational damage to the University due to these acts of antisemitism. The member emphasized his view that although the administration recognized the problem of antisemitism, the University’s policies were inadequate in this regard.  
   
   The member indicated that at the last meeting a motion had been put forward that had called on the Governing Council to issue a formal statement condemning antisemitism but that this was ruled out of order. He argued that ruling the motion out of order was in violation of By-Law Number 2. The member read for members Section 53 of By-Law Number 2, and requested that the following motion be put to members:  
   
   THAT:  
   
   The Governing Council of the University of Toronto condemns the acts of antisemitism that occurred at the encampment as well as ongoing antisemitism on its campuses; and that the administration implement strategies to effectively protect students, faculty, and staff from this form of discrimination. 
   
   The member asked for the Council’s support in adding the motion to the agenda and requested a recorded vote on the motion. The Chair clarified that Section 53 of By-Law Number 2 allowed for members to add a matter to the agenda with the agreement of two-thirds of members present but that it does not pertain to the introduction of a motion to be tabled. She advised that as previously noted the process was, as per Section 54, for motions to be considered by the Executive Committee. She indicated that that there was no procedural error at the last meeting, and no factual error in the minutes of the previous meeting (June 27, 2024). The member stated his view that the terms matter and motion were used interchangeably in the By-Law. The Chair advised that the interpretation she had provided was consistent with the Council’s practice and had been reviewed by legal counsel.   
   
   The Chair advised that the discussion of the motion should be considered under the next agenda item – ‘business arising.’ Sheree Drummond (Secretary of the Governing Council) acknowledged that while the member and at least one other member held a different interpretation of the By-Law, the Chair had indicated the interpretation and her ruling on the matter.  
   
   The member indicated he wished to challenge the Chair on her ruling as in his view members had the authority to bring forward motions in a meeting. Another member indicated that he shared the view that there was a mechanism for members to bring forward motions in a meeting and that this was outlined in Section 53. He asked the Chair to share a detailed legal opinion on this matter. In response, the Chair read an excerpt from a previous communication with the member that had been provided to him following consultation with legal counsel. It was as follows: “To ensure that there is clarity around moving forward, Section 53 allows a matter to be added to the agenda with the agreement of two-thirds of the members present. Section 53 is to allow for urgent matters to be discussed - it does not pertain to the introduction of a motion to be tabled, which was in fact what you were requesting. Section 54 provides for the process to follow. In these situations, a member's request would be considered by the Executive Committee for inclusion on the agenda of a subsequent meeting or other action as deemed appropriate. This is the process followed when a member wishes to have a matter brought before the Governing Council for a vote.” 
   
   In the discussion that followed a member stated that he was not aware of any corporate or not-for-profit board that did not permit members to bring forward motions. The Secretary clarified that it was not that motions could not be brought forward by members, but that the process involved the Executive Committee, which had an important role in making decisions about what comes forward to the Council. 
   
   A member asked the Chair for a recess so that members could have additional time to read the minutes of the previous meeting in the context of the current discussion. The Secretary reminded members that they were being asked to approve the minutes, unless there were factual errors. She noted that no one had indicated that there were any factual errors in the minutes about what had transpired at the last meeting and that the discussion about what took place at the last meeting should be discussed under business arising. She further noted that the current discussion about what was said at the last meeting and views on the Chair’s ruling would be reflected in the minutes of this meeting.  
   
   Following a brief recess, on motion duly moved, seconded, and carried, 
   
   IT WAS RESOLVED,
   
   THAT the minutes of the Previous Meeting (June 27, 2024) be approved.   
6. Business Arising from the Report of the Previous Meeting
   
   In response to an invitation from the Chair to comment further, a member challenged the Chair’s ruling that motions must be brought forward to the Executive Committee for consideration, stating that this was not consistent with the By-Law.   
   
   Sandra Hanington (Vice-Chair) stated that if the Chair determined that a challenge would constitute a suspension of the rules, the Chair may invoke section 75, and with the support of a Council member the challenge would be defeated, and that she would be prepared to provide that support. Another member read from section 29 of the University of Toronto Act (1947), which vested the government, conduct, management and control of the University in the Board, which he said would now be read as the Governing Council.  
   
   In the further discussion that followed, some members expressed confusion with regard to the various interpretations of the By-Law, acknowledged their lack of expertise with respect to by-law interpretation, and indicated that they would benefit from advice of legal counsel. Others commented on the importance of the concerns around antisemitism and acknowledged the work that was being done by the administration to heal the rifts of antisemitism and racism. Some members expressed disappointment and frustration with the meeting, feeling that, while antisemitism was an important issue, time spent on the issue of whether motions could be put forward was detracting from other governance matters. A member expressed his view that the unicameral system was not functional and indicated that he disagreed with the Executive’s decision not to add the proposed motions to the agenda. He said that all racism should be eradicated, and that antisemitism needed to be acknowledged by the Council. Several members expressed disappointment with the breakdown in decorum and the lack of respect for other members. Another member shared his concern that the discussions had not been helpful to Jewish students, that people’s views of the encampment were diverse and varied, and that as a student leader he was invested in effecting meaningful change on a variety of matters of interest to Jewish students.   
   
   The Secretary reminded members of the role of the Chair and that the Chair had ruled on the matter of whether motions could be put forward by members from the floor. The member reiterated his motion to challenge the Chair and asked for a vote. Members asked for clarification as to what a vote in favour or against would mean, and the Chair explained that a vote in favour would indicate agreement with the member that the Chair’s ruling was incorrect and that a vote against would indicate support for the Chair’s ruling. The motion was seconded, and the vote was taken. The motion was defeated. 

CONSENT AGENDA 
 

The Chair noted that of the items listed on the Consent Agenda, one item, Item 7, was for approval. All other items were for information only.

On motion duly moved, seconded, and carried

IT WAS RESOLVED,

THAT the consent agenda be adopted and that Item 7 be approved.

7. Revisions to the UTM Academic Affairs Committee Terms of Reference
   
   The revisions to the UTM AAC Terms of Reference were approved, effective immediately.
8. Reports for Information 
   
   Members received the following reports for information:
   1. Report on Approvals Under Summer Executive Authority
   2. Report Number 65 of the UTSC Campus Council (October 7, 2024)
   3. Report Number 67 of the UTM Campus Council (October 8, 2024)
   4. Report Number 280 of the Business Board (September 25, 2024)
   5. Report Number 252 of the Academic Board (October 10, 2024)
   6. Report Number 242 of the University Affairs Board (October 9, 2024)
   7. Report Number 552 of the Executive Committee (October 28, 2024)

END OF CONSENT AGENDA

9. Date of the Next Meeting – Thursday, December 19, 2024 at 4:30 p.m.
   
   The Chair advised members that the next Governing Council meeting (Cycle 2) was scheduled for Thursday, December 19, 2024 at 4:30 p.m., in the Council Chamber, Simcoe Hall.
10. Question Period
    
    Members had no questions.
11. Other Business
    
    There were no items of other business.

The meeting adjourned at 6:52 p.m.

November 27, 2024