Internet voting approved for 2026 municipal election

All right. Good evening, everybody. It is May 28. Tuesday, May 28, 2024. This is our city council meeting, and I'd like to just call the meeting to order. And right off the top, we're looking to move. Into a closed session. And it is under just a couple of items as listed on the open agenda. The first is. Titled May 2024. Public appointments to the advisory committees of council. That's under section 2392. B of the Municipal act. Personal matters about unidentifiable individual, including municipal or local board employees. And the second one is titled Service Rationalization Review. The centralization of back office support functions and that's under section 2392, bd and two bd and K of the Municipal act. Personal matters about an identifiable individual, including municipal or local board employees. Labor relations or employee negotiations a position plan, procedure, criteria or instruction to be applied any negotiations carried on or to be carried on by or

on behalf of the municipality or local board. Councilor Olef is willing to move both of those, and Clawson is willing to second. Thank you. Is there anything further on those items? If not, Doesn't look like it. I will call the vote then. Is anyone against moving into closed? That's a nobody. That's unanimous. So we will go have that meeting as a closed session and we'll do a review summary and anything else that comes from closed later. Thank you so much.

I'm just going to just let everyone know that we're now officially recessed. Until 06:00 I'll do the summary and all the open stuff to start kicking. Off at 06:00 for the open session, so just wanted to let everyone know we'll see everyone back here officially to start at 06:00 thank you.

All right. Good evening, everybody. It is 06:00 I'd like to call the meeting to order. It's Tuesday, may the 28th, 2024. And thank you so much for joining us, everyone, for our council. Meeting. Right off the top. I would like to. Disclose things that happen within camera because we have some rise in report. The motions that we'd like to bring out here on the items that we win in. Camera for earlier. Just to bring them out. Now, just so that everyone knows, I always like to try to do this just in case there's a counselor that had to declare a conflict. So, just so that everyone does know, There was disclosure made. In our in camera meeting by councilor Clawson in regards to a conflict. That she had. I'll formally sort of ask you to do that out here in a moment anyways. We have three motions that are going to come forward. We went to the in camera meeting. Based on May 2024, public appointments to advisory committees of council, and the second one

was the service rationalization review. The centralization back office support functions. I'd like to go. To councilor alt, if you don't mind. For? I believe the first one was that the heritage one? Yeah, I'll do that, but I just want to make sure. Is that the heritage one? Okay, so I'll just, at this time, ask, is there any disclosure or pecuniary? Interest or any general nature thereof for any items at all. I know that councilor Clausen. Is going to do one here. Does anybody else? No. Okay, so, Councilor Klaus, I'll. Turn it over to you to declare the conflict. Yes. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I'll be declaring conflict on the appointments to heritage wealth as my family member, my husband. Was one of the persons considered for the role. Great. And as I mentioned in that in camera meeting, councilor clause and wasn't even present in the room at all. So with that, I'll turn it over to you, councilor. Alt. If you wouldn't mind reading out the motion, that will. Thank you very much. Mayor Guthrie. If we could have either one of you. Either one of you, go for it. If we could just have the first motion on screen. Moved by me, seconded

by councilor Galler, that Kelly Caldwell and Alexander Crooker be appointed to heritage Guel for a term ending in May 2025, or until such time as a successor is appointed. Great. Thank you. So I'm going to call the vote, of course, with Councilor Kaufs. And not voting on this matter. So I'll call that. Now, is there anyone against. Okay, so that's a vote of twelve to nothing. So that's unanimous of the members that could vote. Thank you. And then I'll just keep rolling with you, if you don't mind, councilor. Alta. We have a second one of an appointment as well that is coming out of closed session. Would you mind doing that? Thank you. And I'll choose councilor Galler as my. Second or again, if he's willing that Samantha Helleran and Robert Forrest Smith be appointed. To waste Resource Innovation center public liaison committee for a term ending. In May 2025, or until such time as a successor is appointed. Great. Thanks. And is there anything further on that one, or can I call the vote on that one, then? Okay, I'll. Call the vote. Anyone against that? That's unanimous. That's 13 nothing. Thank you. And councilor alt. I'll just stick with you for the final one. That's coming. Excuse me, Mr. Mayor, pardon me. Just

to clarify, the vote results, I believe we are missing. One counselor, councilor Richardson. Okay, I'm sorry. So the result of that most recent vote is twelve zero. The result. Of the vote previous to that. The declaration is 1111. Okay. Sorry about that. I thought she was with us. Okay, thank you. For jumping in, okay? So, councilor alt, I'll turn it to you, if you don't mind. Just. Reading the longer of the not at all. Moved by me, seconded by Galler, that up to $150,000 from the tax. Rate contingency reserve be allocated to fund the centralization of back office support functions. Project as outlined in the service rationalization review. Centralization of back office support functions closed report dated. May 28, 2024. Savings achieved through the implementation of a centralized back office service model would be applied to the tax rate contingency reserve first to repay initial investments. Following repayment, savings would be applied prospectively to the operating budget. Thank you. And is there any questions on that one? No. Okay, I'll call the vote. Is there anyone against that? And again, nobody. So that would be

twelve, as I've been told to zero. Okay, so. That's unanimous as well. All right, so that's the update from the closed session. With all those motions coming out into the open session with that. It'd be great if everyone, if you're able to please stand to recognize our national anthem.

Great. Thank you. And now, just for a moment of silent reflection.

Great. Thank you. And our indigenous territorial acknowledgment. As we gather, let us take time to reflect on our privilege to live and work in dwell for city built over rich indigenous histories. We are guests here, and we should reflect upon the responsibility to care for this land. The people. Who live here today and the generations to come. If our actions today can move us towards reconciliation, we should take pause and make those decisions with intention and gratitude. This place we call Guelph has served as traditional lands and a place of refuge for. Many peoples over time, but more specifically the Anawaterok and the Hon. Honey. This land is held as the treaty lands and the territory with the Mississaugas. Of the credit first nation. Gulf flies directly adjacent to the Hollaman tract and is part of a long established traditional hunting grounds for the six nations of the Grand river. Many first Nations, Inuit and Mayti peoples. Who have come from across Turtle island called Guelph home today. With that. We have the confirmation of the minutes held April 9. And 16th, 2024 to be

confirmed as recorded and without being read. Would someone be willing to move that council. O'Rourke will move it. Councilor busted till we'll second. Thank you anything further on the minutes? Hearing and seeing none. I'll call the vote. Is anyone against? That sign. That's unanimous. Thank you. We also have. The consent agenda. Now, just so everyone knows, it was listed that we did have a delegate. For the 2023 year end operating budget monitoring report and surplus allocation and deficit funding. But that delegate has withdrawn, meaning that it can be captured now underneath the consent. Is there anyone that needs to pull anything from consent or may I look to my colleagues to. Move. Looks like no one wants to pull anything. Would you be willing to move, councilor? Work the consent. Okay. Thank you. And billings? Is going to. Second that. Is there anything further on consent? No. Okay, I'll call the vote. A comment before I call the vote. Go ahead. Thanks, Manda. Three for you to staff. I just want to commend staff on particularly. The surplus in terms of the capital budget when

there are overages on project, we hear a lot about it. And, in fact, we're sitting with the capital surplus and we're so close out to the operating and the capital budget in terms of percentages of. What was proposed, what was executed, and then with a slight surplus, I just want to congratulate. You on the management of the projects of the capital allocations. I think it is commendable. And thanks to you, we're in a good position. Great. Thank you. That's definitely worthy of a comment before I call the vote. Okay, so. I will call the vote then. Is there anyone against consent? That's nobody. So again, that is unanimous. Thank you. Look, before we go. To the one item. With delegations, I do believe we have a pretty straightforward and quick one. That we could take care of here on the agenda before we continue. It is the appointment. To the Downtown Guelph Business association board of directors. So if you don't mind. Council. I am going to jump to that one and just get that one just in case there's any staff that are needing to stick around for that item. So just for some

background before the motion is tabled, Councilor Galler. Has asked to be taken off that committee. And our structure here. Always. Has an appointment from war two anyways. And so, even though. We think it can be open for any member of council, whatever, really, it defaults to councilor. Clawson. But through that process, there wasn't anyone anyways that was interested or came forward to clerks, myself or anybody else. So is it kind of a default type of position? We're thankful that councilor Clausen has put your name forward. So I was wondering if I could have a member of council. Read out the motion for us. That would include councilor Clawson's name. So, councilor. You seem to be on a roll, so I'll turn it over to you. Thank you. Move. By me, I believe, and seconded by councilor Galler. That councilor. Clawson be appointed to the Downtown Gulf Business association board of directors for a term ending November 15, 2026. Perfect. Is there anything further on that do you want to say? Anything glorious before I call

the vote. Councilor Clausen. Well, I'm really excited to be representing the downtown I grew up. Downtown. And I had a business downtown, and so I'm excited to sit on the board and continue to represent the people of the downtown. And technically it's not default. Because I think ward three could also sit. On the board. Yes. My apologies. Warb two or three, yeah. I would win. What we should do right now is a point. That councilor Richardson, she's not here. Right. So it'll be award three surprise for her. Right? So you're right. Thanks for catching me on that one. I apologize. Okay, well, that's good. And I'm sure council and the community. And the DGPA looks for to you being on there too. So I'll call. To vote. Is anyone against countercloths and jumping on that board? Okay. No one. That's unanimous as well. So perfect. So that does leave us with the only and last item that is on our agenda that we do have several delegations for, titled on the Agenda. 2026 municipal election

alternative voting methods and accessible voting service. So, as I said, we have several delegations. I'm going to go through each person, and some people will be here in person, some people might be phone, some people might be on video, so we'll just take some time. I've had a couple of requests through to me just for some accommodation for some members. That are coming forward just to give a little bit more time due to. Some. Actually. Accessibility constraints. That they're waiting through, so we're going to honor that. And I would just ask that if there's members of the public that are looking to come forward if you signed up many of the names I recognize here. So you might know the process. But for some that might be new, you get no more than five minutes. Just so you know you will hear a tone at the four minute and 32nd mark that gives you a warning. That. You have only 30 seconds left. I really don't like cutting people off, so please don't go over the five. Minutes. And then after you're done, please just stick around in case there is a question from myself or my colleagues. And then we'll move on to the next person and the next. Person and so on. Although

we respect that everyone has obviously taken the time to get ready for their delegation here. I've said it often here as well. If a delegate happens to say something similar, that you were going to say? We don't mind ditto, either. And we, of course, have this room in this arena, both online and in here as wineware. Freedom of those opinions. Can be stated either one way or another. So with that, I'm going to kick us. Off by video. It's James. Brunet. And we'll just see if James Brunette joins us. Thanks. Okay. Hi, james. It's Mayor Guthrie here, and we can both see. And I could hear you as well. So you're coming through. Very well. Welcome, and I'll turn it over to you. Go right ahead. Yeah. Thanks a lot. So, my name is James Bernay. I have several years experience in software. Development, web applications, and networking in the public and private sector, and part of my work involved designing and delivering training on cybersecurity. In winter of 2023, I worked at Toronto Metropolitan

University, where I taught a course called cybersecurity and society, which explored the intersection of cybersecurity, public and private institutions and more. Since then, I have been a full time instructor at Carlton University. I'm a faculty member in Carlton School of Information Technology, where I teach courses about. Web application development and software project management. I'm also a graduate student, at least for now. As I'll be defending my thesis on June 7, so very, very soon, my area of academic research is this cybersecurity of online voting in Ontario specifically. And in the past two years, I've co authored three peer reviewed papers with other experts. In the field that specifically discuss online voting in Ontario and cybersecurity. This research consisted of me doing a variety of tasks. I performed cybersecurity analysis of online voting service systems that are available in Ontario. I facilitate focus groups with municipal clerks and other officials to discuss. The procedural steps taken. In these online elections, and I've also gathered information about incidents during the 2022 municipal election. And as part of this research, I've discovered multiple security vulnerabilities, both technical and

procedural. An existing online voting systems used in Ontario and collaborated with online voting companies to fix these vulnerabilities as some of you may know. There are currently standards being developed for online voting in Canada by the digital Governance Standards Institute. I've written part of this standard as a member of the technical committee for this online voting standard. I'll be presenting about election technology with Dr. Nicole Goodman and Dr. Alexander Essex at the annual EMCTO conference in June, with the name of our talk being when digital elections go wrong and how to fix it. I hope to see some of you there at our session and. In that session, we'll discuss. How we identified 18 different incidents involving online and telephone voting in the 2022 election. So that brings me to the topic that I'd like to specifically discuss. My most recent paper which we presented last fall at the 8th International Joint Conference on Electronic Voting in Luxembourg. It was called online voting in Ontario municipalities, a standards based review, and I uploaded this paper as correspondence. For this meeting. In this review paper, we compared the practices of online voting in Ontario with the best practices defined by the Council of Europe, which is

an intergovernmental body in Europe. These best practices include requirements around certification testing, procurement auditing, operation regulation, staffing, and a whole lot more. And in short, We evaluated whether municipalities, vendors and the province of Ontario do what is necessary, or at least what is considered necessary in other democracies for safe, transparent and fair elections. Unfortunately, our results found that municipalities in the province for broadly non compliant with these internationally recognized best practices. Only 14% of these Council of Europe directives were classified as fully met. Another 14% partially met, 46% broadly unmet. So the situation, Ontario is not great at the moment. It's far below the standard set. And other robust democracies that use online voting. And while it is up to city council to decide, and there are certainly benefits to online voting. I would caution you that there are numerous risks involved that are specific to online voting or a more severe in the online voting context. And little has been done at this point in Ontario to mitigate many of these risks. I'd be happy to answer any questions about that. I would also add, delegating the clerk to determine security and testing requirements

is giving someone quite a difficult task. This is an active area of academic research and there is no guidance from the province or canadian standard that currently exists, and it may be a reasonable outcome that no system meets the security requirements of the clerk for the reasons outlined earlier. And so. That's my presentation. Thank you so much for joining us. And we have one question from councilor clawson and a second from councilor busatill. Councilor Clausen. Yes. Through you, Mr. Meredith. Mr. Brunette. I had a question with regard to. If anyone in Ontario is doing it well. And then, if not looking beyond Ontario, who in Europe might be doing online voting? Well, Great question. So is anyone in Ontario doing it? Well, I mean, well is a subjective term, but. When we look at. These standards, unfortunately. There are six vendors that offered evoting services. In the last municipal election, two different municipalities. Now the vendors are changing. In the next election. One of these

vendors has declared bankruptcy. Another one is intending to leave the space, and there may be new vendors that enter the space, but in the past election, unfortunately, none of these vendors offered solutions that met these standards, these international standards. I would say. No. Now, looking beyond Ontario, who is doing well. Switzerland is a great example of a country that in many ways, I would say is a model. For the adoption of evoting. The federal legislature has put together. Essentially done a lot of consultation with academics, put together a detailed. Requirements document, which is enshrined in legislation for what sort of characteristics we need in this system and what sort of procedural requirements exist and if there were to contract a vendor, what sort of requirements that vendor would need to meet. And then has proceeded to build the system using swiss post, which is their crown corporation, essentially, for their postal service and have gradually rolled out. Voting, but allowing for public inspection of the source code as well as. For kind of like a testing period for academics and security researchers to see if there are vulnerabilities. In the system and then kind of

expanding gradually out to pilot projects. And then eventually with the idea of having this system available in federal elections in Switzerland. But they're not all the way there yet. That's a long and gradual process that they've been doing very different from what we've seen in Ontario. Okay, thank you. And to clarify, it's their federal election system that uses this system. Well, it's kind of like there's federal law that regulates the system. I think the end goal is to use it in federal elections. Some cantons, which are kind of like the provinces. Are running pilot projects with this sort of technology, so it's kind of like binding on lower levels of government as well. Obviously, we have a different legal situation in Canada. Okay. Thank you. I don't have any more questions. Thank you. And Councilor Bustill. Yes, thank you. And through the mayor, thank you for your delegation. I think I have the answer to my question. In the motion from the committee, the whole. It was the first motion, and you said something about. High risk. In the clerk's report, they reported. This way

of voting as a high risk. And I think what you just said now. Defines what that high risk is, that there is a lack. Of documents enshrined in a legislation. Is that a fair, does that kind of validate? What is high risk? There. Certainly. Is there are regulatory requirements of these standards. Right? So these standards require. That there be standards, essentially, that's part of the standard. And of course, we're not there yet in Ontario. And so certainly. That's a weakness. That's not directly a risk. Maybe not having a standard you could still be doing everything right. But unfortunately, other criteria are also not being met. Let me think here. When it comes to. Let's take a more specific example. There are, like, cybersecurity requirements. When it comes to these e voting systems that. Require ballot secrecy. To be protected through cryptographic mechanisms. But not all evoting vendors in Ontario do that. And so there's a

standard that sort of exists and sort of the academic literature about how to design evoting systems. And then we see a divergence in Ontario, where some vendors. They don't attempt. To have systems that meet those requirements that exist in other jurisdictions. Thank you. Thank you for that. Thank you. Or rourke. And then alt and then koran. Thank you. Mary Gusrie through your Mr. Brunette. Thanks for being with us and good luck on your thesis defense. I have two questions, and one is, when will we know? When will people who are on the fence and who are concerned, when will we know that there is an evoting solution that meets the right standards. Is it when Elections Ontario or Elections Canada adopt something, is it when? There's the standard. So when will the people who. Are perhaps more risk averse. Know the system is secure. Thanks for the question. So that's a difficult question to answer.

However, there are ways that you can evaluate. The safety of these systems. One thing that would be helpful is the existence of a standard. Relevant in Ontario. So if a standard existed, that would be a positive step forward, another positive step. Forward. Would be the existence of. Ideally of a certification body that's able to take a look at the standard. Take a look at the different evolving systems that are available and certified. Those systems is meeting the standard. That's something that exists in other jurisdictions, not something that we currently have in Ontario. Thank you. Thank you. Alt, please. Thank you very much. Thank you, Mr. Bernett, for attending through mayor Guthrie. To you. I briefly read the Elections Canada report on evoting that came out in February 2024 and from what I understand, Elections Canada is very clear that electronic voting can be a method, but. Is contingent upon. Independent, standalone machinery, if that's the way that I get it. Is that correct or am

I incorrect. Independent, standalone machinery. I wouldn't say that. That. 's necessarily. The key requirement for these systems. I would say, like, one requirement for these systems is this idea. Of independent verification. And so. With other methods of voting. When it comes to, like, a paper ballot election, for example, scrutinyers can be present to oversee the counting and see that the election results are counted up fairly. With electronic voting, it gets a little more difficult. To provide evidence that the results of the election was counted correctly. Computers aren't magical. There's no guarantee that essentially the system. Is working as intended. Sorry for my background there. Are ways to develop systems that use cryptographic proofs to prove.

That the results of an election was counted correctly and that proof can be verified by independent experts. But we're not there yet in Ontario. Some of these systems do generate some sort of proof. So some of the vendors in Ontario, they have systems that generate some sort of proof. But they're not made available to the public or independent experts to verify. The election result. And so scrutiny is really don't have that level of. Access. And so to answer your question, I know it's kind of roundabout, but that's. Sort of independent verifiability. Is something that would be really desirable in these systems. And one last question. I've heard talk of blockchain technology I know nothing about. It. Can you explain how that might work? In e voting. Okay, blockchain. It's a good question. Blockchain is a technology that's used to create. Something called, like, an immutable distributed ledger. So it's a way to kind of. Have, like, a database that you can't change. That's visible to the public. Now. That's what blockchain is. You can build an evoting system that has some. Interaction with a blockchain.

And some vendors have done that in terms of the security guarantees that we're looking for. With evoting. I would say that many of the properties of blockchain are not directly relevant to e voting. That's kind of all I can say there. That blockchain is kind of like a mutable ledger so you could store all your. Votes, for example, on the blockchain, and then you could have some guarantee that those votes weren't changed. But you have no guarantee that the votes weren't changed before they were placed onto the blockchain. And so. It's not a sort of silver bullet to make elections more secure. Thank you. Councilor Koran and then Katen. Thank you for your delegation. You're one of the probably more qualified experts that we've had delegate on this. Issue. So I really appreciate you taking the time that. A very stressful week in your life. Your expertise, of course, is online voting and cybersecurity. In your research and your work, did you ever compare? The trust factor and the ability to manipulate other forms of

alternative voting, like a mail in ballot. Or telephone voting and compare them to the risk of online voting. Because one of the things that we're all grappling with here tonight is risk mitigation. There's risk with online, there's risk with mail in, there's risk with phone. There's risk with an in person. We're trying to balance all of the risks. In each type of voting platform. Wondering if you could add any commentary to that. Yeah, that's a really good question. What are the risks with other methods of voting? Academic researchers have referred to, like the in person paper ballots, kind of like the gold standard when it comes to. Safety. Mailing ballots. There are some potential concerns there for, like, voter corrosion, because you're not guaranteed to have privacy when you're casting your vote. It's possible someone takes your mail in ballot before you receive it. In terms of the academic research that I've done. My specialty hasn't been with mail in ballots and so I can't really comment super specifically about that, but what I will say is that attacks against mail in ballots are difficult to scale. And you don't have the same potential issue

with online voting. Where with online voting. Some of these systems, they don't produce evidence that. The count of the vote is correct. With mail in ballot, there still can be procedural constraints that you can put on. That allow for scrutinyers to observe the counting of the ballots that you can't really have with an online election. And that would extend, of course, the telephone voting as well, which is similar to online voteing in a lot of ways. And has potentially even more risk, but I don't want to really get into that. Yeah. I have heard of a technology. Where the and I can't remember. Googling. Not that that is academic research rigor that would normally. Be required of you. That an online vote can produce a paper ballot at the other end so that there is something produced that is recountable. In a physical form. Again. If it is reproducing, what? It receives in an online form. Is that considered any benefit? Then you run into the issue of how do you guarantee that what was

reproduced is what was actually cast by the voter. And so, unfortunately, like, printing out the ballots and having sort of, like, a paper method of doing a recount that wouldn't be like a rigorous. Way of ensuring that. The count is done correctly. I appreciate your time. Thanks. Councilor Keaton, please. Thank you. Through you, Mr. Mayor. Thank you for coming, Mr. Brunette. My understanding of what you're saying, and please correct me if I'm wrong, is that a combination? Of back end security and processes are what's needed to make something truly robust and secure. Correct. It's a combination of different factors. And so, yeah, having. Taking appropriate cybersecurity considerations when building an application. Is important. Having strong procedural controls. Can be very important with these systems, especially in systems that require trust than individuals. And, like, beyond that, there are, like, I think, special requirements for transparency

when it comes to online. Voting because it's such a difficult problem to give transparency into how computers do things. If someone were to. Make claims about an election. It can be difficult to prove them wrong. With online voting because it's hard to produce the evidence that the count is correct. Thank you. The mayor. So what do you think of the way that Halifax handles their online voting, where they have a judge who. Can take the key and go through the logs with specialized staff that they hire. Okay, I can't really comment super specifically about Halifax's system because. I don't have direct experience knowing exactly how it works. It's good that. There is some sort of procedural control there. But often how these systems work. I can speak in a general case, at least from what I know in the Ontario context is that vendors are selling a city a technology like online voting and the vendors kind of responsible for conducting much of the election, or at least administering a substantial part of the election.

And so often how these elections work is that the sort of results are presented by the vendor. To the municipality, and then the municipality reports the result. And so in terms of what's going on with the vendor, the city doesn't. Have as much insight into that. And while the vendor can provide logs and additional information to the city about the conduct of the election. That is still kind of boiling down to trust, which is not generally something that. We would expect. With other forms of voting. If it makes sense. Like, let's say you had. A particular polling location. Where the counting of the votes was subcontracted to some individual who went to the back. Room and they camped the votes and they came out and they reported the results as a particular result. And you have no really further insight other than that. That can be a difficult pill to swallow. If that makes sense. Yes, thanks. And to the mayor. Do you think that any company that's running an online voting software has a vested interest? In their software being secure because. It is

their livelihood. Yeah, of course. These organizations. Obviously, reputation matters a lot in cybersecurity. And so a cybersecurity incident would cause reputational damage to organizations. And so to an extent, I would say yes. Organizations. They certainly have a vet vested interest to not appear to have cybersecurity vulnerabilities. I will say, though, that we have incidents happen often in Ontario despite this. And so we've seen outages of evoting systems, not just in 2018, but in 2022 as well. Where voters were unable to cast votes. And had to wait until later to cast a vote. Now. That's presumably an outage that was occurred not through, like, malicious intent, but just through. An accident. But yeah. These sorts of incidents do happen in Ontario. And. That's certainly a risk. Thank you. And through the mayor. So an issue like an outage and server capacity that could be mitigated through having process like advanced voting only so you have multiple

days just in case of an issue like that. Correct. A mitigation. I would say. That could be considered a mitigation. If you're spreading voting over a longer period of time. Yeah, I suppose. But there are numerous other risks when it comes to online elections. Great. Thank you. Very much for your time. I don't see anybody else. So thank you again. I believe. Let me move this out of the way. James, thank you very. Much. For joining us and have a good night. Thanks for having me. Cameron Shelley is next. And is in person. Come on down. Thank you. And when the green light goes on there, you can go ahead and start. All right. What? Screenlight. Sorry. Okay. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Mayor and the members of the council. I'm a lecturer at the

center. For Society of technology and values in these systems design engineering department of the University of Waterloo. I have a master's degree in computer science with a concentration in artificial intelligence from the university. Of Waterloo when my PhD is in philosophy with a concentration in cognitive science, also from. The University of Waterloo. At the center, I research and teach courses in social aspects of technology and technological change. My interest in evoting stems from the fact that it is a great case study. Of the issues that arise in my research courses that I teach. Let me briefly explain why I believe evoting is not appropriate for adoption at this time. Evoting is more accessible to voters for whom polling stations or paper ballots are not. Accessibility is also an important aspect of election integrity. If that were the only consideration, there would be little debate. Evoting is not likely to increase turnout. Figures compiled in 2022 for voter turnout in Ontario municipalities where evoting had been used for at least two elections show an overall decrease in turnout. In 2019, a group of cybersecurity experts, including James's supervisor, examined the evoting systems worldwide and revealed numerous

and substantial cybersecurity failures which allow attackers to change election results surreptitiously. Their conclusion. Quote, we do not know whether any paperless evoting system will ever prove itself. Adequate for government elections. Thus far, none has. End quote. Some nontechnical weaknesses in evoting require little effort or expertise. So consider voter targeted phishing. Voters receive emails or text messages reminding them to vote. And giving a link to an official looking website. The site may simply dispose of the votes that voters think they have cast, or it may apply login credentials that voters have been tricked into leaving and let others impersonate them or vote in their place. No doubt you have encountered such messages yourselves. This attack is also similar to the one perpetrated by Michael, Sona and Guelph. In 2011 when he used a robo calling machine to deliver deceptive messages to wealth. Voters. Phishing messages can easily be applied for the same purpose. Artificial intelligence such as chat. GPT has made such attacks even easier. This AI can help anyone. To research and prepare this in other attacks step by step and assist with each step, such as encoding an official looking website, which I tried

myself. So I invite you to have a go at. That evoting also results in voter coercion and vote taking. In Ontario's 28 municipal elections, instances came to light of parents casting ballots on behalf of their children, spouses casting partners ballots, and even people gifting their voting credentials to others. As is the case with accessibility, this issue may affect a small number of voters, but remains a significant concern. As the staff report for Welsh 2026 election points out, evoting provides little to no verifiability, which we were just hearing more about. There is, quote, no external way. To verify whether results reflect the proper majority of votes cast. Votes are counted accurately and only valid votes are counted and upheld. This inscrutability exists because providers of e voting systems do not allow anyone to examine their code or oversee its performance. Essentially evoting operates in a black box, and voters have only the assurance of vendors. That announced election results are accurate. So imagine that the city outsourced its paper balloting. Under these conditions, contractors make records. As voters bring ballots to polling stations at the end of voting, they destroy the ballots, take their records into

a private backroom, then emerge and announce the winners and losers. They refuse to divulge how they calculate the results and refuse to allow anyone to examine their records. Also, since the original ballots were destroyed, no recount is possible. Such an arrangement would violate the Ontario Municipal Elections act. In numerous ways, it's clearly unacceptable. Why then is it okay if it's done over the Internet? We have arrived in this strange place due to the inaction of the Government of Ontario. In 2012 after the government abandoned its pilot project to explore evoting in provincial elections due to the sorts of concerns that have been raised earlier. It inexplicably allowed municipalities to adopt, devoting, without laying down any regulations, standards or providing any support. Without the resources to deal properly with the challenges of e voting. Ontario municipalities have adopted a mosaic of voting methods of varying levels of quality. This inconsistent situation is unfair to Ontarians and threatens to erode trust and engagement in municipal elections. So instead of adding to the current nest and saddling well, fights with an unacceptable remote voting method. The city should be advocating for its residents and demanding that the provincial

government get off its butt when it comes to evoting adoption. All right. Thank you so much. And I have a question for you from councilor Kate. Thank you. Thank you very much for your delegation, Mr. Shilly. So you work for the University of Water lead, correct? Thank you. Through the mayor. My understanding is that University of Waterloo has a pretty fantastic computer science program. Very renowned. Yes. University of Waterloo uses online voting. They use simply voting. Can you explain why they chose that for the university? I wasn't privy to that. I know. I use online voting all the time. I'm not sure if it's simply voting. We have department meetings and faculty meetings, council meetings, and some various sorts, and we have different tools. That we use. But. That's all right, in part because our standards are very low. We would otherwise just be sitting in the same room and having a show of hand, so. We're not particularly choosy when it comes to evoting within the faculty meetings. And that sort of thing. It

was not just for faculty voting. Is what I saw in the university website. So you're not aware of why they chose that system? No, I'm not privy to that information. I wasn't part of the selection process. Okay. Thank you very much. And councilor Alton and Busatool. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Through you to the delegate. The fundamental issue that we're dealing with here is accessibility for those that have difficulty voting. I'm wondering if you could please outline what you would consider to be a safe and secure system. Because I've heard you talk about your concerns about evoting as that what? Do you think would work? I don't have a particular recommendation. And wine, I think, as I said in my delegation, I think the appropriate system would be the one that meets an appropriate set of standards, and those that be, as Mr. Bernay outlined, validated by an appropriate validation authority. So. Whatever standards. An appropriate process arise at. And are enforced, if you like, by an appropriate body. I think that would be the standard

to go with. Thank you so much, Councilor Busatil. Mayor. Thank you, Cameron. I think councilor alt asked my question. You started your presentation with at this time? And so my question, but I think you gave the answer to councilor alt is about standards. Independent, having regulations and so on. Can you expand a little bit more? Or perhaps. On the standards themselves. No at this time. What you're presenting is that not for this municipal election. Is that never is it next election. What does it at this time? Are we close? Is it some indication of that? Yeah. Thank you for that question. Yes. The time when an appropriate process has concluded. So, as James Bernay pointed out, when you look abroad at the different processes that governments had engaged in. So Switzerland was an example that he used. I mean, Estonia would be another one. Those

countries have engaged at a high level and with. Broad popular engagement, engagement of cybersecurity experts, engagements of the various people who be served and maybe put at risk by voting systems. And over the years have developed something that are developing something that they can all live with. So it makes the trade offs that they're all happy with. When I look back, historically, that's how we got the paper balloting system. We have now, it wasn't something that appeared overnight. It was developed over a period, and in the light of problems with previous voting methods, such as the show of hands that was very popular back in the day. And so those security mechanisms that we have with paper balloting were kind of evolved over a process based on. Previous. Systems, and I would expect. The next round of technological change would look similar if we're done. Sort of. On a broad basis and with appropriate resources. Thank you. I'd be happy if evoting happened, if it

were done in that manner. Thank you. Great. Thank you. And we're going back over to Councilor O'Rourke, please. Thank you, Mayor Guthrie. Through you to Dr. Zoe. So Guelph had online voting for advanced polls in 2014. And so some people say to me. Well, we did it before, and so why can't we do it now? And so I'm wondering if you could describe. Is the environment different? Is there more fishing, et cetera. So can you help me understand if the context has changed? Well, since 2014. I don't know. Maybe there's two parts to that question, if I understand it. One is. Why has voter turn out decreased since that time? My understanding and Cam crack me if I'm wrong. The 2014 election was kind of the Erbicon election and my Iraq collection. Is that that figure? Very well. And so voters are quite motivated to turn out because there was what's called a ballot issue, right? So they came to throw the bumps out, and they did so. That may be one reason why 2014

was kind of a peak, and I don't know. That has much to do with the e voting. As far as the risks are concerned. There are a number of things I'm not an expert on. The amount of fishing. But. The news is always full of more phishing attacks. The Toronto library had to close down is still recovering from a cybersecurity breach that was as a result of a phishing attack, I think London drugs. Is still recovering from something like that. There's no shortage of it. And unfortunately, I think that, as I mentioned in my spiel. That artificial intelligence, language models and so forth are simply making the process easier. And I read this from other researchers all the time. They automate the process of sort of hooking people in. Constructing phishing messages, the kinds of things that people will visit. And so forth. So it is expected to get worse, according to. Those sources. So that part of the scene certainly isn't promising. Okay, thanks.

Okay. I'm choosing not to respond to. Why about that 2014 election other than to say it wasn't people getting thrown out, it was called democracy, and there was good people running. In all candidates. So with that, there's no more questions. And so I will say thank you and thank you appreciate it. Okay, next is. Angesky Kohli. I see you, Anne, and thank you for coming. Welcome.

Again and nice to see you. Thank you for coming. And you have up to five minutes if you need it, go ahead. Good evening, councilor, staff and citizens of Guelph. I am concerned about. Our democracy. Especially when a presidential candidate next door to us has spoken publicly of weaponizing the justice system. To punish his political foes. And what happens in the US often leaks out here. I'm concerned, the use of Internet voting. At this time could put a risk or ability to verify the voting intentions of voters with online voting in a tight race between candidates where a recount would be necessitated. It would be impossible. To verify the results because there's no paper ballots to actually look at. And ascertain a voter's intention. Election results that cannot be scrutiny or puts at risk democratic elections. In an election with paper ballots, all eyes on the ballot can discern voter intentions because you can have

a candidate scrutiny looking physically at the ballots themselves, which have to be agreed upon by all persons witnessing the count. Internet voting eliminates a candidate or their representatives from testing the process. This is a grave danger. If you think that no one would be interested in Reagan or interfering illegally in a gruff election. I urge you to think again. I have seen up close how large boulevard election signs, which is the candidate's advertising. Has been disappeared the night before voting day, when placement has been within legal limits in a systematized operation. We all know Gualth was ground zero for the largest election interference crime in canadian history. Whereby voters were falsely directed to nonexistent voting stations using the national conservative database, which happened across the country, and only one person faced conviction for. Perhaps you might recall how women candidates in the 2014 municipal election faced attacks on them that ended up with the women candidates coalescing together to face the misogyny that they were

subjected to. Politics in Gulf has a considerable history. Of viciousness, allowing unverifiable voting that there is no recourse to get at the truth of a voter's intention would be the icing on this already combative. Cake. My family has lived experience supporting a disabled person. My son, a flight risk requires supervision. At the polling station. There is. A protocol in place for family and friends supporting disabled persons that need assistance in the voting booth. In these specialized circumstances. Said supports are required to swear an oath under which the ballot must be marked according to the elector's wishes. I have taken this oath in multiple municipal elections in which I am held. To uphold the secrecy of the ballot. No one can go behind the screen to observe someone's. Vote, except. In these exceptional circumstances. And after the person votes, the ballot is stuck in a privacy folder. My son then hands the file to the staff person where he is able to see it go into the tabulating machine, and when I vote, he is supervised

by a staffer because of his flight risk behavior. There has never been any barrier to him accessing the voting system. Staff have always been accommodating to his needs, informed and dispersed their duties professionally. I have the fullest confidence in the staff to accommodate my disabled son's right to vote. And he has always been treated with utmost respect as a citizen and as a voter. We need to continue working to accommodate fully the spectrum of needs of disabled persons so they can exercise their voting rights. But I would caution against without compromising the security of the vote and putting the election at risk. Internet voting at this time would make everyone's vote insecure. Please do not adopt Internet voting until such time as ballots can be scrutinized and verified. Thank you. Thank you, Ann. Is there any follow up questions for Anne? Okay? Yeah. Councilor Cayton, please. Thank you. Through you, Mr. Mayor. So, Ms. Kazarski.

Kali. I know that you have an association with the NDP. Do you? Know that. Were you aware that the NDP uses online voting? They use the simply voting system. The same one the University of Water Lou uses? Yes. Through the mayor. Do you feel that the NDP's elections have been compromised? Yes, they were. In fact, they were compromised at the 2011 Federal Leadership Convention which I attended in Toronto, and it disrupted voting on that voting day for a significant period of time. I understand. The culprit was never, or culprits were never caught. I've also seen in. The following federal leadership convention, where yes, people were given creds to vote at home online. And I was actually kind of stunned because I thought that that would increase voters turn out and I was stunned that only half the voters who could have voted. In that election, and very handily and very easily. Failed to do so. Simply voting wasn't the system that was being used in

2011, though, correct? Yes. The one in 2011. So not the one that they're currently using. I assume that you would not. Stick with a system. If it was. I couldn't answer that question for you, but I do know that the. Labor unions. Are resorting now to doing their elections by mail ballot because of the concerns the labor unions have around online boning. Thank you very much. Thank you, Anne. Appreciate your time. Thank you very much. That's it. Thank you. And next, everybody.

Okay. Mike is going to be joining us by video. Now, I happen to know Mike, and I've never tried Mike. I don't know. If you're going to join us here. Can you guys hear me? Yes. All right. I'm going to ask you to help me with your last name because I don't. Want to be embarrassed. How do you say your last name? Mike. I've never tried it. Ashkowi. Okay. Thank you. I was close, but I'm glad I didn't try it. Thank you, Mike, for joining us. Did you want to have yourself on video, too, or are you just going to do audio? I'm just going to do audio as I don't have a camera currently set up. No problem. Just wanted to make sure I was providing that option for you. Okay, so I'll. Turn it over to you, Mike. You have up to five minutes and go right ahead, okay? Perfect. Well, I don't have all the technical expertise that some of the previous dele. Delegates have. I can only speak to my lived experience as. A disabled person. I'm a fairly well known. Around, Guelph. Always driving around in my wheelchair. But I wasn't always as mobile. Once upon a time, especially after

my amputation. That happened to me back in 2017. Online voting to me would be. Extremely accessible, particularly with my particular. Disability. There are times where I simply can't get outside either due to. Sometimes wheelchair malfunction. Other times. I just can't do it due to medical reasons of various kind of natures. So having an accessible. Easily. Reachable service such as online voting would allow me to participate in the democratic process in a manner that works for me. And I was thinking about some other members of my family. That would find this easily accessible and encourage them to participate in the democratic process. Some of them suffer from several. Disabilities that are mental that prevent them from going to crowded places like they may be agoraphobic. Or they have. Other issues such as that, where they just simply don't like to be around people. And they trust in the process enough that they feel their vote is

being counted. They feel that their vote is being seen because they trust the people putting together the elections enough that they're willing to say. I'm willing to put forward my vote and my choice. To this particular. Election. And like I said, I don't have the technical expertise to kind of do this. And I can understand. Yeah, there could be some bad actors in municipal elections. But I'd like to think that. The city. The municipality has done their due diligence to prevent that from happening. That my vote will be safe, my vote will be secure, and that my participation in the democratic process matters. Because I like to think that. You and everybody else is doing everything possible to make sure that my voice is heard, that I am allowed to do my democratic duty to elect those who. Represent me in the best possible manner. However. That may be accessible to me. And. I really hope council will stick with their decision to allow online voting in some capacity, even if it was only for

advanced polls. That certainly helps me. It would certainly help other members of my disabled community. Am I disabled? Family because. It works for us. And I know there are other members in the disabled community from the city. That pretty much feel the exact same. And I hope when other members of the disabled community speak up, they'll share similar thoughts. But if they don't. I completely understand. As we have heard from delegates, you do have superior. Technical knowledge, but I don't think our lived experience should be discounted as well. I guess with all that being said, I can take any questions. Great. Thank you for joining us in your presentation. To us. Let me see. I don't think I see any hands up right now, Mike. So. Yes, you are good. Thank you for joining us. Thank you, guys. Take care. Take care. Susan Watson is here, is coming to the podium, and Jennifer Cameron is in the wings. You're? Next after Susan.

And you can start whenever you're ready. Head up first. Thanks so much. So, Mayor Gothary, members of council, I'd like to try and address some of the. Deficits and emissions, and information shared with you via the staff report and arley at the committee of the whole meeting. I am completely in support of the recommendations of the staff report. However, there is a very serious though, I'm sure. Unintended omission in the staff report. Staff writes, there are no proven instances of an Internet voting system being hacked or tampered. In fact, this is not actually true, and I'm going to share five established cases of hacking and tampering with you that happen to be ones I personally know about. Okay, next slide. It's not advancing.

Okay, so I press again. If this clock could be stopped, I'd be appreciative. Okay. I think it's more than ten. Can you play? So I press play? Computer security problems affect everyone. Problems like Internet voting. And Internet censorship go to the very root of what makes democracy work. We investigate how they could be attacked and how we're going to defend them. In 2010, Washington, DC held a pilot of a new Internet voting system. They invited us and other members of the public to try to hack in within 48 hours of the start of the test. We had complete control over their voting servers and were able. To change all the votes. We even rigged the system to play the Michigan fight song every time. Somebody voted, and as a result, Washington, DC decided not to

use it in its upcoming election. So. That's actually one of the most famous hacks, and if it went by fast, I want to make sure that you heard that within 48 hours, Alex Halderman and his team had complete control over the election servers and were able to change all of the votes undetected. Another hack that took place close to home in our own community was at the University of Guelph. When some students went to vote, the system told them that they had already voted when they hadn't. An investigation actually did reveal serious security oversights. So that election was canceled and the whole thing. Had to be reorganized in person with paper ballots. In Alberta during the United Conservative Party leadership vote, there were such serious irregularities that a criminal investigation was launched. That election was run by Intellivote, who is one of the vendors who provides Internet voting in Ontario municipal elections. Police found evidence of suspicious votes but weren't able to amass enough evidence to lay. Charges. If you think that just having advanced Internet voting will magically solve bandwidth throttling issues, perhaps you

haven't heard of something called a distributed denial of service, or Dos attack and that was what Anne was referring to in 2012. When that election was the target of a malicious Dos attack. And. That particular election was run by Sidle, the vendor, who's now declaring bankruptcy. Probably a better known Dos attack was the takedown of the grade ten literacy exam in 2016. The perpetrator was never caught caught. And experts observed that it could have been orchestrated by a teenager in a basement. Lastly, many of you will remember the core premise of the robocall crime in 2012 misdirecting people to a nonexistent or incorrect polling station. The potential for fishing fraud combined with Internet voting and the advent of AI is truly disturbing. In 2014, the city of Sudbury put out an advisory warning of copycat fake voting sites. Luckily, no pin numbers were stolen because the creator of the site was trying to make a point about election vulnerability, not steal votes. And so these are just five examples of successful hacking and tampering. That I happen to know. About. My concern is. In the

staff report. If they put likelihood of a malicious attempt. As rare. Or actually, I think it was too unlikely it was done, considering that there were no known cases of this when in fact they are. And these are just the ones that I know. Of and Mr. Brudain was referring to others. I'd like to point out that despite numerous claims made about the security and safety of Internet voting by people who are advocating for it. No supporting. Data or peer reviewed research has been provided by advocates of this position, either to you or to the public for review on the public record, and I was also unable to find anything in the materials provided by the Accessibility Advisory committee, and while reference was made to experts, the only person expert in favor of. Internet voting publicly identified to date is Ms. Root, and unfortunately, she appears to be at odds with many other experts in the field. Internet voting is not ready for prime time. We need to find ways to make voting accessible to everyone. Without compromising the integrity of our elections and local

democracy. Great. Thank you for your presentation. And is there any questions as a follow up? Hearing and seeing none. Thank you so much. Thank you. Jennifer. Cameron, you were in the wings. Welcome. And we'll accommodate you as you come down there. No problem. And then Meg Harding is going to be in the wings, but on video as our next guest.

Mr. Mayor and councilors, thank you. I'm a longtime resident of Guelph and has. Multiple disabling conditions which make life more challenging. My adult children do as well. Current statistics point out that at some point in our lives, 80% of us may end up in a position of experiencing life with a disability. If you look around the room, that's a lot of people. This is our daily experience. Over the years, our family has met with numerous challenges when it comes to voting. Sadly, of the three levels of government, we vote for the municipal elections. Are always and have always been the most difficult. To access. This past election was no exception. Mail and ballots are a good idea. But did not actually allow. My adult children to vote independently. The envelope itself had laid text in

the seal. The enclosed envelope was in direct contact with the ballot. So the ballot itself with latex contaminated. So they were not able to be independent. In the last election, I went to a polling station. Which was very difficult to access due to construction and closed sidewalks. When I finally made it into the building. Election staff had no idea that there were problems outside. I'm not sure how they accessed the building, but we certainly had problems. There was such a backlog of people waiting to vote that we'd stand around for more than 30 minutes waiting for an opportunity to vote. There were no accommodations for voters with physical disabilities that were left standing for so long. As a person with mobility challenges. I found this unnecessarily painful. And the whole experience very frustrating. Everything should

have been planned better. I won't go into all the violations of anteriorians with disabilities act. There were many. But I will say that my frustration peaked to the point that I actually started the process. And considered filing a complaint with the Human Rights Commission. If it happens again. I won't hesitate to follow through. Before the last election, the city council voted to wait. On established, accessible voting measures, claiming there wasn't time to do so. I was encouraged when I heard that the vote had gone through. I was very disappointed to learn that it was back for further debate. In 2014. The last time that our city offered accessible loading. All of our family was able to vote almost independently. This hasn't been true since. Voter turnout at elections has been at an all time low.

When we need every eligible voter participating. Residents while living with disabilities. Deserve, want and need. Accessible. Voting now. Not another four years down the road. The city council gets around to addressing accessibility. Please don't. Delay. Inclusive, accessible. Voting again. Great. Thank you, Jennifer, for coming. And let me see if there's a follow up question. For you. It looks like councilor alt. Go right ahead. Thank you very much, Mr. Mayor. Through you to Ms. Cameron. Ms. Cameron, I'm very sorry. For the difficulties that you've experienced municipally, provincially and federally. I have two questions. The first one is. Why is the municipal election so much more difficult? As you had identified. Because the clerks in charge of the process, federally and provincially. Have processes in place. And are quick to act to accommodate people with different needs. And I have not ever had that experience with the city of Guelph. Thank you. And. Follow up, what accommodations

would you like to have for those with disabilities who do wish to cast a paper ballot. What suggestions could you offer? Well. You're looking at many disabilities. My neighbor is legally blind. For her. She doesn't have the assurance. When she goes to vote. For us. It's getting safely into a building. Where voting happens and where the ballots aren't kept or supplies kept with elastics around. Them. The severity of my kids allergies is such that a stretched elastic across the room and. They'll experience anaphylaphylaxis. So what I'm hearing you. Say, be mindful to environmental sensitivities. And also make certain that buildings actually are accessible. Yes. Thank you. And councilor collar is next. Thank you through your worship to Ms. Cameron. Thank you for taking the time to delegate today. What we've heard from the other delegates that are sharing concerns are talking about. The risk for the elections to be tampered with if they're held online.

What do you think about that? What are your thoughts on the risk versus the benefits? I am not personally qualified to make decisions or recommendations on that for me personally. I think that online voting would be the most accessible. For our family and for many others. It would also allow people with disabilities to use their own. Technology at home without. The city having to provide multiple types of technology to accommodate people that need to vote. Thank you for that. I appreciate it. Thank you, worship. Thank you. Thank you, councilor. And that's it. And so, thank you. So much for joining us tonight. Thanks for presentation. All right, Meg Harding is next. And then in the wings we have by telephone, it would be. Pia mucchal. I hope I'm saying that name right, but Meg Harding, I think I see you on camera there. Did you want to try your audio? Yeah, you're coming through. Great. Thank you so much. Welcome. And I'll turn it over to you. You go right ahead. Thank you so much,

everyone. Hi. My name is Meg Harding. I am a digital accessibility specialist and I have worked in the field for almost a decade. I train people each and every day on the technical aspects of digital accessibility. As well as the social aspect of understanding disability. And the human complexities around that. So I'm someone who advocates for disability rights as an accessibility professional and I am also a disabled person myself. So I really applauded our city when I heard that online voting was coming back and I'm here today to urge you to stand by that decision that was made earlier in the month and to keep this accessible option available to people who need it. It's not about taking away any preferred method of existing voting. Anyone who isn't comfortable enough with technology, or anyone who prefers an in person experience still has that option of a physical voting location with in person volunteers. But to pass a vote earlier in the month that gave disabled people an option to vote. And now to say that maybe we don't want it. That is taking away a voting method from disabled people in our city. I work

with online digital accessibility each and every day. And one of the biggest things to understand about people who require accessible solutions is that their digital assistive technology that they use is unique. And tailored to them. So some people need to use that. Some people can't leave their homes, as was mentioned. Before. Some people who do manage to get to a voting station might have to rely on the volunteers that they don't know. I know that everyone is trained at the stations, but for example. A blind person, someone with low literacy, someone who can't read or see because of cognitive barriers. They have to rely on people that they don't know. At a physical station, and there's no way for them to verify that their ballot has been filled out how they've specified. That it's been placed where it needs to be placed, and we still use this method. So on an issue like an outage, for example. We really can't separate or. I don't think we should separate digital from physical. In that case, in my opinion, Historically, as was just mentioned, Our physical voting

stations that advertise is accessible. Physical areas have not been, and we still use this method. So there's no secure guarantee for disabled people using an in person voting station. An online option for people to use their own assistive tools that have been tailored to them. That are familiar to them, that are comfortable to them, is hugely important. It's an accessible option that gives disabled people the dignity. The independence and the equity that abled people have to vote, which is our right as disabled. People who cannot get to a physical station to vote. Disabled people in our city, if memory serves. Number over, probably 30,000. And we don't want to be ignored. We don't want to be forgotten. We don't want to be overlooked. And we're tired. If we were the first place to try this or the only ones to be implementing this option. I would absolutely understand the reservations. In moving forward with something like this, but we're not many other places do this

and do it successfully. And securely. I really do hope that Guelph can move forward with this option for the sake of those who are really going to benefit from it and who need it. And that's all I have. Thank you. Thank you. Meg, thank you so much for joining us in your presentation. Let me see if there's a follow up for you as well. There isn't. But thank you for sticking around and telling us your perspective. Thank you so. Much. Have a good day. Okay. Pia is next by telephone. And then in the wings is Ron east, who I saw. Walk in earlier, so. Thank you, Ron. Are you able to hear me? It's Merrich. And to unmute your phone just to make sure it's star six.

Hi, Pia. It's Mayor Guthrie. Can you hear me okay? And again. If you can hear me, you just got to hit star and then the number six. To unmute.

Good evening. This is Pima Chala. Can you hear me? Yes. You're coming through. Great. Thank you very much for joining us. I'll turn it over to you for your presentation. Go right ahead. Thank you very much. Good evening, mayor. Got three members of council and fellow growthites petitions around Internet voting at city council seem to be coming down to risk assessment and risk tolerance. The ranking of working. Of Internet voting as high risk compared to other methods is being questioned by proponents of Internet voting. I'd like to comment on this particular aspect of the file because my work involves constant risk and threat monitoring. I am a scientist working for the federal public health, and I monitor the emergent spread and risk of infectious diseases at. Work. One method we use to determine the risk of diseases is by assessing the likelihood of their occurrence and the impact of that particular occurrence. When you look at the city of Guelph Enterprise risk management framework. Air making assessments based on these two same two factors. Impact, which is assessed on a scale of one to four, from minor impact to catastrophic impact and likelihood, which is assessed on a scale of one to five, from rare

to almost certain. A number of people had pointed out that the electoral crimes and fraud can occur with all methods. Of voting, but the risk assessment is a result of the interaction of these two factors. The impact and likelihood. Attempting to alter the outcome of the election by manipulating vote or the in person voting process involves a high degree of risk for the perpetrators. It's like someone doing a break and enter on my house versus some variation of online. Financial fraud, which has very low risk for the perpetrator. Especially with our optical scanners. It would be challenging, if not impossible, to feed extra ballots to. The machines without other people in the room noticing, even if. You successfully stuffed one ballot box or added ballots to one voting tabulator, it would still be 45 other tabulators across the city unaffected. It would require laudal coordination and a lot of people to carry out this kind of crime on a large scale. Internet voting has a single point of failure or vulnerability. It just takes one person anywhere in the world to hack in and change the total vote unnoticed. Or efficient fraud, which has been mentioned earlier using hacked based sites and could encourage hundreds

of people to vote at fake voting sites, preventing their legitimate vote and harvesting their pin numbers. Internet loading allows these kind of crimes to happen at scale in a way that analog voting does. Not. The impact, in my opinion, is correctly been assessed as catastrophic by staff. And even with a situation like someone pouring into a ballot box, and I think this was mentioned, at a committee meeting. At least you know you have a problem. The catch with Internet voting is that you may never know a fraud has happened. And there are no paper ballots to verify the results. My concern is that the likelihood of malicious actors posing as a security risk is actually underestimated staff only assigned that risk a rating of two, meaning unlikely in the context of the federal inquiry on foreign interference. I do find this rather astounding. The threat environment in terms of online fraud and. Hacks of what kinds of institutions, including a growing list of Ontario cities, is rapidly accelerating. Just raising that Internet voting malicious actor risk rating to three, or somewhat likely would more accurately assess interference by a malicious actor as a high risk.

Staff also give technical reliance outside of city control, a high risk rating that's based on both the catastrophic consequences as well as past experience. Their report staff outline how bandwidth throttling created problems in municipalities across the province in 2018 and 2022. So again, In my opinion, to have correctly assessed this as likely. If city engineers told that a bridge had multiple points of weakness in the infrastructure and was at risk of failure. You wouldn't say. Sure, I can live with the risk. Let's. Open the bridge. Likewise, our voting architecture is a kind of infrastructure. The experts are telling you that the infrastructure of Internet voting is not safe. Please listen to them and make a decision. That will protect the reliability and the integrity of our municipal elections. As one last observation, I noted with interest that the city of Mississauga is only offering. In person voting, vote by proxy, bedside voting and assistive devices for their upcoming Merrill and ward five by election on June 10. And with that, close my delegation. Thank you, Pia. Thank you very much for your presentation. To us,

and I'm just looking around to see councilor. Oh, go ahead. Thank you. Very much Merrigutri through you. Ms. Michelle, I don't know if you're the correct person to ask this. But the question that came up for me. If there are resident viruses or trojans in a person's computer, iPad or whatever, Do they pose a threat to Internet voting or Internet banking or anything? Internet. I don't know if I'm really qualified to answer that question, but I would. Say yes. Well, thank you for your candor. Because I certainly don't know. That's just. My humble, garden variety response, not really knowing computers that well. Knowing infectious diseases absolutely well, but just not those. How they interact. Computers. We'll put you on the list for when that comes forward, but hopefully it doesn't. Hopefully it doesn't. Hopefully it doesn't. Yeah, we had enough of that already. I know. You're totally right on that, Pia. Thank you so much. I don't see any. Other questions. So thank you for joining us. Thank you. Take care. Ryan. Come on. Come

on. Forward. Thank you for being here. Lynn, you're in the wings. So the two of you. Can come one right after the other there, okay? And welcome. Ron. You just go right ahead. Whenever you're ready.

Okay. Thank you, Mayor Guthrie, councilor. Councilors, city staff and fellow Guelph fights. Thank you for this opportunity. My presentation has a title. So it's a question. Is the tail wagging the dog. I attended the committee of the whole meeting on May 7 to listen to the discussion on voting. For the upcoming election. I knew that the strong mayor's powers did not extend to voting practices. So I felt that this would be a lively democratic discussion. Reminiscent of debates prior to provincial interference in our municipal affairs. The city clerk presented an excellent report. And recommended that Guelph does not go ahead. With Internet voting in the upcoming election. His reasoning was compelling. And deserved thoughtful consideration.

Instead. This report was followed by another report from a spokesperson for the disabled community. In my view. This presentation was entirely dismissive of clerk's recommendations. And again, In my view. Was riddled with inaccuracies, both with regard to the security of Internet voting. As we have heard tonight and the lack of security. Using paper balloting. Was the tail wagging the dog. The discussion that ensued, I felt. Entirely dismissed the clerk's recommendations and was followed by a resolution. To implement. Internet voting. I was shocked. I therefore, using my professorial research skills. Proceeded to look deeper into the use of Internet voting. I had the opportunity to talk to experts in the field of Internet security. These individuals

provide security systems to large international companies around the world. They said that. The Internet at this time is 90% safe. Attempting to get a higher level of security is both very difficult and very expensive. Would we use paper voting if there was a 10% chance that it could be tampered? With. I think not. I do believe that Internet voting will come, but until the provincial voting act enacted in 1995, Is redrafted to include Internet voting standards and a standardized system for voting via the Internet. Is developed, we should not consider using this method of voting. When the discussion took place at council, methods of voting were referred to as alternatives. I believe that once the

voting public realizes that. Internet voting is available. Then this will be the primary method of voting, not an alternative. And it must be available to everyone. It is simply. More convenient. Research into prior Internet elections has shown that it will not in itself result in an increase in turnout. Actually, issues of importance to the electorate are the primary reason for increased turnout. Please take this opportunity to reconsider employing Internet voting. It is. At this juncture. Simply not. Safe enough. I am cognizant of the difficulties this will cause. For disabled individuals. And I really feel. Very proud of the fact that people who are disabled. Are really trying to get out and vote. I think that's exciting. So we must provide methods to assist everyone who

needs it. But jeopardizing the entire election to accommodate these electors is not a viable solution. Thank you. Thank you, Ron. Let me see if there's a follow up for you. And there is not. But thank you again for your presentation. And Lynn. Lynn grist is next.

And Dr. James Beer. I hope I'm saying that right is going to join us by video after Lynn.

Welcome, Lynn. Thank you. And you can go ahead whenever you're ready. Okay?

Does this work? Can you hear me? Okay, make all three council staff and fellow Gulf citizens thank you for the opportunity. To speak to you on this issue. There are all the delegates who have spoken this evening who are experts in cybersecurity. And will speak to issues related to Internet voting. I have absolutely no experience in this area, and so rely on those experts to provide me and every other voting member of the public with advice. On what is and. What is not safe and secure in a voting system. Like most adults in 2024, I use the Internet for a number of personal transactions. It's convenient and efficient. In spite of the fact that I'm old, I'm. Actually not in the 20th century. I'm in the 21st. I'm 78 and yes, I can use a computer. However. There are a number of pieces of software I need to put in place to ensure that my system is not hacked by either mischievous or malicious actors. A personal computer, cybersecurity system and a firewall. My personal opinion is that we will eventually be able to cast

our votes in elections at all. Levels, federal, provincial and municipal, on the Internet. When our cyber experts are able to create and build systems which protect the safety and security of the ballot box in order to do that. Our governments need to put in place standards which any company wishing to deliver digital election services must meet at this time. There are no standards. In fact, the legislation related to municipal voting hasn't. Been updated since 1995, so I believe the first step. Would be for elected municipal officials like yourselves is to ask the provincial government to update the legislation. Once new legislation is in place, companies who wish to participate in elections would be able to develop software, which could be independently assessed to ensure that it met those standards. In the meantime, however, I would suggest that our municipally elected politicians need to. Ensure three really important things. One, the safety and security of the

ballot box. Two, accessibility for all eligible voters and three. Public trust in the voting system that is put in place. All three of these are important, however. It is the issue of trust that is critical in this discussion. At this time, we cannot be assured that on light voting is safe and secure from tampering. Which means that we would not be able to trust that the politicians who are elected are in fact, the legitimate representatives of the community. If we do not trust those politicians as being. Our legitimate representatives of the community. How can we possibly trust that they will fairly represent the Guelph community? At this time, I would urge you not to vote for online voting until. There are cybersecurity systems in place that it will ensure that the voice of the electorate has truly and accurately been recorded. Thank you. Thank you, Lynn. And let me see if there's any questions. There

is not. So thank you very much for your presentation and time as well. Dr. James baer. And again, I'm sorry if I'm saying your last name wrong. James is joining. Us by video. James beer. Great. Well, welcome and thank you. We can hear and see you, so I'll turn it. Over to you. You go right ahead. Sure. Thanks so much. Members council. My name is James Beer. I had a different delegation prepared, but there have been some things said in some of the delegations. Against online voting that I feel like I should try to address. I've been following this issue for a number of years. I was extremely pleased with council's recent decision to approve of online voting for the next municipal election per the satisfaction of city clerks and. I think that's a very important part of the motion as it was written. We did here in other delegations. About hacking of a 15 year old test trial. I guess to that, I would

say that was a good test. We should do those tests. Let's do those tests. If we stop here, we don't allow clerks the opportunity to do those tests. I don't believe we actually heard about. A successful malicious interference. Of using online voting in a municipal election. We also heard about election interference that happened with other types of voting methods, that online voting would also possibly be susceptible to. And the takeaway there was that we should not get rid of those methods, but that we should have a double standard for this second method of voting. We heard that many aspects, many other aspects of our lives are also susceptible to online hacking, but we continue to use these, and these are. Things that we don't have control of. The motion as written. We have control of this. We can go and find. And test. If this is going to be possible. I guess my main thought.

Kind of boils down to, are we willing to actually. Absolutely disenfranchise. Members of the disabled community by not offering online voting. On. Chance. In my opinion, it's a small chance. That others may be disenfranchised. Are we willing to actually do it to people? Now, I know counsel in the clerk's office. They don't want to do that. They do not want to disenfranchise anyone. With how the motion is currently drafted. It allows clerks the opportunity to do their hardest to find a way to make online voting secure. Enough. For our own standards. We have heard many times how. There aren't currently set standards. To me. That's okay. We can make our own standards. And I believe the motion as written is that? The standards that we come up with would. Have be clerks would have to

be satisfied with. I've actually assisted someone with voting. In the last twelve municipal election. They are a person that sometimes has trouble reading. They also have issues. With their immune system. So to vote. I went with them. And. Excuse me. Ask if we could have a ballot and vote outside. At no point was I asked to show any form of identification. Any, take any oath. Do anything other than. Show her where to mark the ballot for the person that they want now. I feel. Very honored to have someone that trusts me enough to do that. But it's not something that. I feel like anyone should have to do. So I'm really hoping tonight that. You all will uphold the motion as it is and allow

clerks to at least try to find a way. To allow the most people possible to vote. Thank you. Thank you so much. Dr. We appreciate your presentation. And let me see if there is a follow up for you. Oh, yeah, we do. We have. Councilor Richardson, please. Thank you, sir. Merrick Guthrie. And thank you for your delegation. Mr. Beard. You mentioned that we should be setting. Our own standards. Do you have a sense of what those would look like or what they would be or how we would go about doing that. I don't, but I believe. We heard from our first speaker. What those standards should be. And it sounds like there is actual guidelines on what these standards should be and what they should look like? It is not in legislation, but I don't see why we need legislation to tell us. How to do this. If we know what will be most likely to succeed. Okay. Thank you. Thank you, councilor. See nothing

more. And thank you so much for your delegation. And richard enset. Is next. Also joining us by video. And then in the wings is Stan Kozak. I don't know if I saw Stan. Walk in or not? Yes. There you are. Meeting my classes, but there you are. Thank you. And so is Richard available to join us by video. I believe so. Yeah, we both see and hear you, so thank you very much for joining us. I'll turn it over to you, okay? My name is Richard Anstett. I live here in Guelph. Obviously, I'm. 78. My wife is 82. Just to give you some reference. To what I'm about to say. Mayor Guthrie, councilors, city staff and fellow citizens thank you for the opportunity to speak on this issue. I note that the accessibility advisory committee provided input to council during the committee of the whole meeting. On February 6, 2024, the chair of the committee explained that the committee was advocating on behalf of between

one and 2% of the voting population of Guelph. The latest available. Figures from Elections Canada show that there are 107,980 eligible voters in Guelph. So one or 2% is a sizable number. Between 1079 and 2158 eligible voters. I am here to speak about another group of eligible voters who may also need special consideration with respect to voting in the upcoming 2026 municipal election, seniors, people over the age of 65 represent some 24% of the population of Guelph. The latest population figure show Guelph as having. A population of 143,740. All seniors are of voting age, so 34,498 people. Eligible to vote over the age of 65. The clerk's office did reach out to the Guelph Wellington Seniors association with a membership of 2000. I am here tonight to speak on issues which may affect the ability to vote. Of the other 32,498 seniors. We seniors are definitely not a homogeneous group. Some of us are fit

and healthy. Others may have mobility issues apportion may have other disabilities which are not necessarily related to the aging process. We live in a variety of situations. 862 live in long term care facilities. The numbers capped by the province. Others live in residential care facilities. There are no accurate numbers for this. However, Guelph was approximately 20 such facilities of varying sizes. There are no publicly available numbers available for this group of seniors at some of the facilities are privately owned, either for profit or nonprofit, and this data is not shared. Since there are 34,498 of us as of 2021, I believe it is safe to assume that most seniors live in their own homes, either owned or rented. So providing voting services that help to meet the needs of such a substantial portion of the voting population, I suggest would be important to. This council. All of them who vote will have experience with paper ballots and may well be able to continue to vote in person at their designated polling station. Some will have mobility issues, and it will be important to ensure that

all polling stations are accessible. To those with physical mobility issues. Some may find it difficult to leave their homes, so making postal voting available to them would be a good option. I noticed that the committee of the whole meeting that the accessibility committee spokespeople mentioned. That there was a problem with the glue used on the return envelope sent out by the city. In the last election. I would respectfully suggest that we either change the glue or make it clear to all postal vote recipients that water in a brush be used to close the return envelope. Others may not have access to computer to a computer or be comfortable using a computer. It is important that council does not inadvertently disenfranchise this portion of the population. By offering them a voting option that they either cannot or do not comfortably use. I am aware that there are concerns about the safety and security of Internet voting, but do not have the technical expertise to comment on this matter in detail, except to say that the provincial and federal governments do not use Internet voting at this time because their research indicates that they cannot guarantee the

safety and security of the. Vote. I would respectfully ask council to refer this matter back to the city clerk and his staff. Who have so much skill and experience organizing and delivering voting options for the Guelph citizenry. And have them to come back to council with suggestions to support voter turnout in this age. Cohort. Thank you very much. Thank you, Richard. We appreciate your presentation. And let me just see if there's a follow. Up. And there is not. But thank you again. And have a great night. Thank you very much. And you too. Thanks. Take care. Stan is coming right up to the microphone here. Colin Perkins is going to be joining us by video after you stand welcome and I'll turn it over to you. Thank you very much, mayor and council, as always, thank you for your civic leadership. It's much appreciated. Let's take it as a given that we all want to increase. Voter participation. And the question is, how do we do that? I'm not in favor of Internet voting. I

don't think that the technology. Is needed for security. Is able to prevent it from being corrupted. Our current methods of voting allow us to determine if there is electoral fraud. Or some influence that's occurring, whereas Internet voting does not. With paper ballots. I've been a scrutinyer. I've been able to watch the vote take place. I've been able to look at ballots to determine whether they are okay. Or not. I've seen something physical. In the voting process. I can go into the private space, mark my ballot. And then take it and see it put into the ballot box without. Any interference. It is a private vote. About ten years ago, I received one of the robo calls with the old technology that was. Trying to direct me to a different poll. And maybe get me not so that I wouldn't vote. I could find out, though quickly, that that was incorrect. And I could go to

the right place. It was easy to figure out. The point of these examples is that they all have some physical observable check in place. To ensure that voting is free. Fair and uncorrupted. That's not possible with the Internet. It's a black box. You don't understand it. I don't understand it. And the whole point is. On whether it's people's site examples as to whether we've had fraud. We wouldn't know. We don't know whether it's occurred. It's so easy to get. Done. Just like money coming out of bank accounts, which is happening all the time. Some noteworthy quotes from the gurus at Stanford from the perspective of election trustworthiness. Internet voting is a complete disaster. The whole goal of an election is to satisfy the people who lost the election, that they lost fair and square, and that the candidate who was elected is legitimate. From a 2022 review academic review of electronic voting. The Internet is unsuitable for transmitting ballots and currently, there is no realistic

mechanism to fully secure the casting of votes and tabulation of election results from cyber attacks. Computer engineering at Western University. Secure and verifiable Internet voting remains one of the most challenging open problems of cybersecurity despite numerous potential social benefits. The technological risks are many in the democratic stakes remain high. So for voting safety, paper ballots are the gold standard. Let's keep it that way and let's find ways of getting as many people as possible using them. Finally, I note that your school board colleagues are not in favor of moving to Internet voting and I also note that you are not legally required to consult them. But I'll paraphrase the biblical saying. Do unto your school board colleagues as you would have the provincial government. Do unto you? You don't need to stoop to the level of disregard the provincial government has for municipalities. Show us

a better way. Take time to negotiate with. Our other elected officials. Thank you so much. Great. Thank you for your presentation. And let me see if there's a follow up. So thank you again. Thanks. And. Colin perkins. By video and then in the wings of video. Is scott frederick. Colin. Wondering if you can turn on your video for us. Perfect. Let me just see if we can hear you, Colin. Can you? Hello, everyone. Can you all hear me? Yeah. We can both see and hear you. Thank you for joining us. I'll turn it over to you. And you can go right ahead. Thank you. Hello, everyone. Mayor Guthrie, counselors, people of wealth. Thank you very much for allowing me to delegate here today. My name is Colin Perkins. I'm a citizen of Guelph. I live here in the ward and I work downtown. I've. Been following this issue for several years now. In fact, I've delegated to council. Before. In favor of online voting in the remote accessible vote by mail option in 2021.

I was very excited and very grateful, therefore, to hear about the motion passed this month to allow Internet voting in the 2026 municipal elections. I have several friends in Guelph's disabled community. I'm grateful on their behalf that they will finally be able to feel that their rights and ability to vote will not be jeopardized. I'm grateful on my own. Behalf and on behalf of my friends and family who don't currently need accessible voting options. But might well one day. And I'm grateful on behalf of the city that I've always been proud of as a place committed to equity and justice. I. Would therefore like to urge council to fully ratify this motion and commit to putting the accessible online voting in place. We are so close. I just want to be able to breathe a sigh of relief and know that the people of Guelph will be able to exercise the right to vote and do so without having to go through a dangerous and difficult experience. I just want to know that our reputation as a fair and equitable city will remain intact. And make no mistake, people across Ontario are paying attention. I heard a blurb about this very debate on the CBC this morning. In the decade plus, now that we've been going over this issue in Guelph, more than half of the Ontario municipalities have adopted online voting in some form. I want to live in a city that's seen as a leader in equity, not one dragging its feet. Now.

I know that has raised a lot of concern over the security and logistics issues around online voting. But. If we have a real commitment to a fair democracy, we will recognize these as just some of the challenges that go along with holding elections, which is fundamentally a difficult undertaking, a lot of work goes into holding free and fair elections from elections officials, city staff, volunteers. They don't do it. We as a society don't do it because it's easy. We do it. Because. It is necessary for fair democracy and universal enfranchisement. Please don't run. Ag on our commitment to adopt accessible voting because we're afraid to take on this challenge. As mentioned by previous delegate moving from elections as a show of hands to a paper secret ballot. Was once in itself an innovation. I'm sure there was difficulties in. Implementing it. Does that mean we should have stuck with a system where the only voters were the wealthy landowners that could all fit in a room together. Expansion of enfranchisement always comes with challenges. If other Ontario municipalities are not doing it right. Then let's take the opportunity to lead by example and set good standards for others and help build these robust systems for the future. I mentioned before that I have friends and

family in the disabled community who need accessible voting options. Well, I have a new one. Just recently, my cousin underwent a heart transplant a couple of weeks. Ago. He'll need to be on immunosuppressants for the rest of his life. I know very well just how much of a nightmare trying to brave a crowded polling station can be if someone coughing in your direction can kill you. As an aside here, when I've accompanied disabled friends to the polls before. They've been very inconsistent. In their provision of accessible options. I've definitely seen times where the elections volunteers seemed overwhelmed. They forgot about O's. They had to search around for binder, trying to find out what the policies for offering assistance. For voting are. Sometimes that system fails. So, counselors, please remember. It's not just those who are asking for equity now that we are doing this for. Though. That should be enough. It could be you, your cousin, your mom or dad next week or. In a decade. Building a more accessible city, a more accessible world, benefits us all. That's why I was very happy, very grateful to hear that we're finally moving. Forward with the motion to adopt a method of Internet voting, and I would humbly ask council to please follow through with this

commitment. Thank you. Well, thank you very much. And let me see if there's a follow up for you. There is. Councilor Galler has a question for you. I'll turn it over to. Him. Thank you through your worship. Thank you for your presentation. I really appreciate you sharing your experience about. Your personal and your family members. I want to post to you some of the concerns that have been shared. About then what happens if there is a risk, if there is tampering? We lose faith in the electoral process. There is that concern. Could you speak to that? I mean, faith in the electoral process. We have to believe in order to have faith in the parole process, we have to believe that our elections are secure. But we also have to believe that. Our loved ones won't be excluded by something that might come up. Like you can say. There's risks to online voting. There's also, like I said, risks like this was the last federal election, I brought my friend along. There were so many people. There was a line. Out the door. We couldn't get up the wheelchair ramps because they were blocked by people. Nobody was. I think this was still during masking require. Requirement. People weren't. That wasn't being enforced again, the.

The elections volunteers, I'm. Sure they work very hard. But, you know, they, they seemed overwhelmed. They didn't know what to do. So, like the systems can always break down. The response is not to. To retreat from our commitment to. Fairness and. And universal enfranchisement. It's to make sure we're. Doing our due diligence, whether towards security or towards equity or towards whatever, because, again, this. Has to be a societal priority for us. Thank you very much. I appreciate that. Great. And that's it. There's nothing more. No more questions for you. So thank you very much. Thank you. Okay. Scott Frederick is going to now also join us by video. And Matt Saunders is in the wings, who I saw walk in earlier. So I know that you're here. Thank you. Thank you, Matt. So we'll just wait. For Scott Frederick to join us by video.

Hi, Scott. It's Cam marigothri. Sorry. Can you hear me okay? Our clerks are indicating that you have entered the sort of the right virtual spot to be in. But.

We just can't see you and we can't hear you. At a minimum, could you make sure that you're unmuted. Yeah. So, Scott, if you can hear me, we're going to skip you. Matt, if you. Don't mind coming down, we'll go to you, Matt. And we'll come back to you, Scott, okay? Thanks, Matt, for being accommodating there, jumping up. So appreciate nice to see you. Thank you for coming. I'll turn it over to you whenever you're ready. Okay. All right, thanks. Good evening, mayor and council. Excuse my voice is a little bit raspy. Thank you. All for your time tonight. Luckily I get to speak late in the evening. Many points have already been made, so I won't. Bore you with them again. You've already heard, and you will hear presentations from a number of accessibility advocates and accessibility experts. Their expertise and their lived experiences are invaluable to this discussion. I'm here. To ask you today to please listen to them. It is patently clear that the city does not do nearly enough to make voting accessible to everyone. This is unacceptable. Ultimately, we all have more faith and trust in our democracy. When everyone's

voice is heard. But online voting is not the answer. Online voting breaks our democracy. We've heard from several delegates tonight about the three inviolable constraints that a voting system must meet to earn the faith and trust of voters. Constraint one. To prevent fraud, we must all be sure that every voter gets one and only one. Vote. To prevent coercion constraint two, we must all be sure that every voter's vote is private. And constraint three. We must all be sure that every vote cast has been counted. With paper ballots. We know these constraints are met. For every ballot cast, but online voting violates all three. Online voting forces voters to trust blindly where we've never needed to trust before, and that is a fundamental change. In the digital age, where trust in government is nearly gone, where charlatans already shout nonsensical claims of election fraud at

an international scale. We simply cannot risk bringing forth even more questions of election illegitimacy. So, yes, please listen to the accessibility experts who need better ballot access. But also listen to the tech experts who tell you about the dangers, the pitfalls and the false promises of security. And please listen to the election experts who tell you that this is not a simple change. This is not male in this is not advanced polls or extended hours or mobile voting or any number of accessibility options that you can consider. Online voting is different. Online voting is a fundamental breaking change. To the way our democracy works. That's all I have to say. Thank you. Thank you. Matt. Let me see if there's a follow up for you. There is not. So thank you very much and thanks for being here. I appreciate it. Thank you. I'm going to try Scott Frederick again. Scott, it's Mayor Guthrie wondering if your. Video can be turned on. I know you're trying to join us by video. And if you can't get the video working, if you want to do star six and maybe you could do audio only. Unless you're

using through the computer. Okay, we're going to skip you for now. Continue to try coming back, Morgan dandy. Is going to try to join us by video. If we could have Morgan maybe try to join us.

I'm sorry. All right, Morgan, we see you. We see you. So you're in. Thank you. And do you want to just try your audio for us? Yeah, we can hear you as well. Thank you, Morgan. We'll turn it over to you. Go right ahead. Mayor, council staff and fellow Gulf fights. I find it appropriate that we're talking about. Online voting as an accessibility issue during National Accessibility week. I'm grateful. For the accessibility available to delegate by video. Because my invisible, intermittently debilitating, degenerative genetic disorder has made it necessary for me to stay home due to pain and mobility issues. Every day. My functionality. Is a surprise. Eller's danlow syndrome is a dynamic disability. A disability which tends to fluctuate in severity. Pain. Energy, et cetera. In a difficult to predict manager. Those with a dynamic

disability are able to do certain tasks at one time. But unable to complete those tasks. At another time. That's where I find myself today. I've heard and I understand all of the concerns people have regarding security of e voting. I've shared some of these concerns. Now that I have a greater insight. About how much a disability. Well, multiple disabilities. Impact day to day life. I now believe the human right of being able to independently. Mark a ballot supersedes the concerns of the maybes. Everybody presents as reasons to not allow evoting as a means of providing accessibility. Can we look at this issue specifically from an accessibility lens as a human rights issue? Is it not possible? To create procedures to have Internet voting be a purely matter of accessibility. Can the vote from home parameters

not be extended to Internet voting? The current chair of our provincially mandated accessibility Advisory Committee's specific expertise in the intersectionality of cybersecurity and accessibility. Why are we not listening? To in house expert advice. People have mentioned that scrutiny is not possible with Internet voting. An average person may not be able to perform this. Yet individuals with code expertise may. Is providing evoting to a limited number of people. Not possible. No one seemed overly concerned about the approximately 10% of mail in votes that didn't. Get counted in 2022. Why not provide advanced pull only, limited enrollment to online voting to the disabled community? If there's an identified issue with e voting, those votes could be nullified as matter of procedure. I am appreciative of all the

people who have raised their voices in concern. I am grateful to everyone who keeps watch over the security of our votes. Now it is time to review evoting options with human rights as the main lens and provide the 25% of your constituents who are statistically disabled. The ability to vote municipally, the level of government most involved in day to day life. In an independent manner. Regardless of the outcome tonight, I'm glad this conversation is occurring and I look forward. To the clerks coming back with their findings. Thank you. Thank you so much, Morgan, for your presentation. And I'll just see if there's a follow up for you. There is not. So, again, thank you very much for joining us and take care. I'm going to go back to Scott Frederick again. If Scott Frederick is available. Want to jump on the screen or at least do audio for us, Scott. All right, we're going

to keep moving forward. Ian Flet is going to join us. By video. And we're down to our last three after that. Adam Donaldson is here in the building, of course. So you're in the wings, Adam, but Ian flet has joined us. Hi, Ian. Thank you so much. And can you just check your audio for us? Good evening, Mayor Guthrie, members of council. Can you hear me? Yes, thank you very much. See and hear you perfectly. So I'll turn it over to you. You go right ahead. Thank you. My name is Ian Flet. I'm a municipal lawyer based in Toronto. And I'm representing an informal group of Guel citizens who are concerned about local democracy. They want to have all possible information in front of you for this important decision. It's telling that the staff of the city of Guelph have independently reached a similar conclusion as the staff in the city where I'm located here in Toronto, as Toronto. Staff conducted a comprehensive study. Recommending the rejection of Internet voting for. Internet voting in the past. One of the authors of that report. Expanded that conclusion in an email to one of our clients just last week, writing, Internet voting was examined for the 2014

election found not acceptable regarding privacy and security of the vote. Continued research has made clear that. The significant vulnerabilities and technical challenges identified in past staff reports. Remain innumerable and unresolved. Here's an important sentence. Currently there is no Internet voting service that can guarantee. Security, ballot secrecy and vote integrity. Therefore. They write. Internet voting will not be an option for the 2026 election. Tornado elections will continue to investigate Internet voting for future elections. Wells City staff final recommendation to you was to have vote by mail and vote from home as the alternative voting methods for the 2026 municipal and school board elections. We believe this is the correct way for you to proceed. City of Guel staff concluded Internet voting is not capable of meeting the requirements of the Municipal elections act on its own. And established through case law. This opinion, by the way, is not unique to Guelph, where the city of Toronto also found that Internet voting would severely compromise the principles of the municipal elections. Act and the clerk's ability to

deliver an election that protects the rights and votes of voters with disabilities as matters of law and speaking for our clients, we. Agree. I would like to highlight for you those principles of the Municipal Elections act which are compromised. By Internet voting. The first principle is the secrecy of the ballot. There are two concerns here. The first is the risk of identifying voters based on login credentials so that an elector's choice on their virtual ballot may be linked to their name. The second concern is the inability to determine if voter information was accessed by a malicious actor. Each major hack we hear about in the news reveals to me and perhaps also to you, the way hackers. Are one step ahead of our best efforts at security. And to add insult to injury, we only find out about the hack at the time of their choosing. The Municipal Elections act also demands integrity of the voting process to maintain the legitimacy of the outcome. Issues raised by earlier speakers concerning the 2014 and 2022 elections point to how easily the legitimacy of an election can slip from our grasp. You do not have the evidence before you to suggest that the integrity can be maintained. With Internet voting. The third principle is the need for

certainty that the results of the election reflect the votes cast. Internet voting leads no paper trail to unequivocally capture the votes. Mr. Clerk has thoughtfully expressed concern about this issue. In effect, isn't he asking to be equipped to defend the result of the election he has charged with conducting. Democracy, as you know, is founded on the principle that governments are formed by the choice of the majority of voters. Therefore, it is essential to accurately count valid ballots and reject invalid ones. Municipal clerks must be equipped to ensure secret ballots and justify the count if called upon to do so. From the delegation you've heard tonight and the reports before you, it's evident that Internet voting as it exists today cannot achieve this. You're being asked to balance the need for citizens to access their ballots with the need to preserve the secrecy and the integrity of those ballots. These principles are not at odds. You can vote to reach for a standard of excellence in performing the mutual duties of ensuring accessibility and integrity. However, one without the other is not tenable. And all the evidence before you points to one conclusion. Internet voting cannot

definitively maintain vote integrity. Thank you. Great. Thank you very much. I'll see if. There's any questions. I know that I've got a couple. But councilor, all will go first. Thank you very much, Mayor Guthrie. Through you to Mr. Flet. The delegate. Mr. Flet, thank you very much for your presentation on behalf of others. I think I heard you state justify valid ballots. There's a corollary to that. I think. And that is, what about the scrutiny and recounting of ballots? I was wondering. If you could comment on that and Internet voting. Well, all I can do is provide you with. The established protocol. It is in the Municipal Elections act that provides for the attendance. And the act is specific. There are only a number of specified individuals who can attend at the counting of a vote and that includes scrutiniers on behalf of the different candidates. And that's a significant measure. And one of the great traditions of our democratic system is ensuring that the vote is observed and observable. I can speak from personal experience of having one's been a scrutinyer in law school.

And working for Elections Canada. And there you are in a room with people ensuring that the paper reflects the vote. And, of course, you're looking at a piece of paper. That has no identifying marks on it, and so you have a ballot that stands for one person's. Vote without knowing who that person is, and it cannot be impeached so that is a significant element that is lost through Internet voting, especially if, and I think I'd heard from one speaker. You can have people with specialized expertise. Fulfill the role of scrutiny. Well, that's not the point. The point is. For the whole system to be accessible to verify the outcome. Thank you. I have one more question, and I was wondering if you could please explain through your. Understanding what the duty to accommodate means. Does that mean the same thing to everyone, or what? Without wanting to give advice to the corporation of the city of Guelph. My sense of what that duty is is that. The Municipal Elections act is going to require a level of accessibility for all electors within the district where

an election is being conducted. It doesn't get into a deep analysis of the level of accessibility, but. It's unquestionable that accessibility is required. My sense from reading the cases is that. Then you take a couple steps further that it becomes a positive common law duty on a municipality to ensure that electors could get to the polls. And this is also going to be reflected within the Ontario Ontario's with Disabilities act. And as one of your previous speakers wrote, There would be people who probably could make a claim under the human rights code if. They could not. Reach. A polling polling station or couldn't find an effective way to vote. So. My sense, and this was the concluding comments, is that Guelph can put much more emphasis. On ensuring accessibility. In fact, in my role with Elections Canada as an independent person in those days, one of the things we did was examine polling stations to ensure they were meeting accessibility codes. And immediately addressing any issues with lack of accessibility. You heard from Ms. Cameron, who I think gave a very compelling presentation to you about concerns around accessibility. And it seems to me that.

Might be. Where Guelph would put more emphasis is ensuring that polling locations are indeed accessible. Without. Any barriers. Okay. Councilor Ald is finished. Councilor O'Rourke, I think I saw your hand. Go up. Do you have a question? Thank you, Mayor Gusrie, through to Mr. Flet. So everyone would like to provide the maximum accessibility. Some proponents of online voting believe the city clerk's office could provide all of the testing penetration testing, threat assessment, all of those things. To ensure that's secure. And I'm wondering, in your estimation, is it reasonable to. Expect the city clerk's office in a midsize city to be able to meet. That threshold. I've done a lot of work in wealth in my role as a municipal lawyer and I found that the staff of the city wealth routinely punch above their wave are excellent, provide excellent. Reports and do excellent work on that, I have no doubt. What you are asking. Is you have a staff who have written in a report. Here are the challenges that we face. And we're not

actually really sure that we can meet the challenge. We're not sure that we can do this. So you have a staff that is candidly. Telling you that notwithstanding its own expertise and notwithstanding the estimation of what the cost of the penetration. Studies would be they're not sure that they're actually able to deliver. An election with full integrity. And so their words speak for themselves without any reflection on their abilities. Or their resourcing. They don't think they can do it. And I think you should take them at their work. Okay. Thank you. See nothing further. Just for myself. I perked up a little bit when you said you're here on behalf of clients. Are you being paid to be here right now? I'm a lawyer. I pay to appear places. Of course. Okay. And you're the same lawyer that was here several years ago that represented. People against the, I think the project that had like a market and affordable senior housing. As well. Is it the same group that's hired you? No, it's not the same group. There are similar individuals, but it's not

the same group. Okay, so who are you? As I understand, Mayor Guthrie, that project failed at the Ontario land tribunal. Because of heritage issues and also because of shading onto the school. And as I understand the school also had issues with not being able to provide renewable energy. I'm not sure that there was any guarantee that the affordable housing. Affordable housing only to get the facts straight, with respect. Yeah, we hear you on that, Ian. Thank you. I just wanted to try to figure out the context of who you were, if I remembered. Correctly about how you represented others before. So who are your clients in this case? I'm representing Ms. Watson, who you've heard from. Cameron Shelley, Anne Gersby Kaulee. Ron easton lingriss. Thank you so much. No further questions. And we appreciate your delegation and your presentation. Take care. Adam. Adam dawson, you're up next. Thank you. David suffering. Is on video next. Then it's Laura lie route if you are listening, everybody, and then I'm going. To try to go back to

Scott again. Maybe before the end. I'll try shoving Scott in between. To try a couple more times, but I did say adam was next, so I'm going. To go, adam. Scott, if you can hear me, I'm going to try you again after Adam. If not. David Sufflink is on video after that. But, Adam, thank you. Go right ahead. It's, all yours. Thanks. Mayor Guthrie. I'm once again required to do my favorite thing in the world, which is public speaking. I first want to commend Guelph's wonderful luddite mafia, who have come out in force tonight. A well organized effort to convince us all and convince you to throw going to privilege your body. Stop for a second. It looks like we're on the same wavelength. Let's just. Make sure we're creating an atmosphere. And if the clerks could just please stop the time. We don't want to have any kind of disparaging, even cheeky disparaging. Remarks. Against anyone because we want to create an atmosphere where anybody on different opinions can come forward. Adam I appreciate that. I know that you know that. So if you could start over for us, I'm. Going to give you the full time there because you're only 8 seconds in. Maybe just skip over that part. And we would appreciate you not saying things like that. Okay. Thank you sure?

How about our wonderfully technologically concern? Concerned constituency. Thank you. It's a well organized effort to convince us all to throw our bodies and. Our devices onto the machines and onto the gears and on the wheels to make them stop. We have heard tonight, though, that this is a matter of democracy. It's important to keep in mind that democracy is a combination of two greek words, people and power. And what I have gathered from 18 months of attending AAC meetings is that there's a group of people in our community who want to participate. They are engaged, active, and they. Feel powerless. They are asking for the opportunity to vote. They have that. But they are actually asking for as an opportunity to exercise their franchise with personal security, autonomy and independence. They've said that the most direct way to do that is Internet tablets or Internet. Ballots. I want to imagine for a minute if we address food insecurity the following way by having someone bring some random groceries to your house. Cook you a meal, give you some portion of it, and then take the leftovers and leave. Yes, we fed that person. Did we

offer them dignity? Did we offer them independence? How many strangers do any of us welcome? Into our home on a daily basis. Let's call this what it is, ableism. It's the preposterous notion that those of us without disability can tell those of us with a disability. How they should live their lives instead of following their lead. It's. A violation. Of their. What's that term? Human rights? I'm not mitigating the security concerns either. They exist and they're no different than the cybersecurity concerns that the staff in this building face on a daily basis. The danger is no greater and worse on election day. Hackers aren't waiting for one. Special day every four years. They're not wizards casting a spell. They're always looking. For weaknesses and opportunities, and I just want to go off script for a minute because we've. Heard a lot tonight about. It would be nice if the Ontario government came up with standards. I agree. I think one of the. Great failures of government, and I don't think Guelph government. I don't. Mean Ontario, I don't mean Canada, but generally in the western world, one of the great failures of the last 20 years is that governments have been able unable to keep up with technological change and innovation with legislation and regulation.

I fear this may be one of these times where the cracks have fallen through down onto you. They're trying to address that. In some small way by taking the first step. Perhaps if enough municipalities get out there and offer Internet voting. It will spur the upper levels of government to finally cement those standards. But I'm going to go back to my notes. At the beginning of this month, council made a promise. To our disabled community that they will explore. For the next election and Internet voting option if council renegs on that promise tonight. I think it'll be a backhanded slap to the face of an equity seeking community. I should also point out, and this has been pointed out already, it is accessibility week. There are people here tonight who have asked you to turn your back on the disabled community during accessibility week. In 2026. Many of you, perhaps all of you. I'm not making any judgments. I'm going to go out in the campaign trail and talk about how every vote counts. Does it. Because it certainly sounds like we're leaving some votes out there waiting to be collected and how many times do we have to tell people? That we don't want

their votes. We don't want to meet them where they are. And how many times do we tell them that before they just stop participating altogether? Again, no mitigation of security concerns. No one is ignoring them. But I think as Ms Dandy said. This is fundamentally a human rights issue. Does every citizen in this community have a right to choose their government. If they do, then I think we can take the relatively small accommodation that this represents. If we can't. I hope our friends. Will be able to look. Those members of our community who have a disability in the eye and tell them why they can't participate in the way that they want. I'm going to end on a personal note. I used to tack more to the anti Internet boning camp, but I have honestly been persuaded by the passion and drive of people like cherbrute. Mr. Ashway. And some of the people who have disabilities, who have delegated tonight. And other members of the aec. Nobody has to earn the right to vote. But I think, my goodness, I think they have earned the right to have access to the ballot. In 2026. This is a fight we've been having for twelve years. I

think maybe the time has come, that's all. Okay. Thank you very much, Adam, for your presentation. Councilor alt, please. Yes, thank you, mayor Guthrie. Just rising on a point of privilege. I do take exception with the term ableism coming from council as a person who could, I suppose, be categorically defined as disabled because of my eyes, my ear and my ear drum transplant. My one kidney and my heart. Condition. I would think that that does not necessarily apply either to me or others in this on this council who might have similar infirmities. I think it's very important that we be understood to be assessing, not accessibility so much as what we are doing right now is determining. The appropriate. Technology. For accessibility. Many of my friends who are active in the accessibility community agree to disagree with me. And probably others here. I think it's very important to recognize that council is making a reasoned decision and might have different approaches, but nobody is excluding anybody from. Voting. We are trying to find the best alternative. May I respond? No, I'm going to just leave

it at that as a personal point of personal privilege. But I heard you have a column on Saturdays. Councilor Businto, I believe you have a question, though. I'm going to pass. Okay. Is there any questions? Okay, Councilor Downer with a question, please. I actually would like to hear Mr. Donaldson's response. I think that's a fair. Question because something was stated to him. My question is, what is your response to that? Thank you. Just before you continue. Sure. I'm going to allow it as the chair. I'll make that ruling. That's fine at this time, but I also don't. Want this to spur into back and forth, okay? So respectfully. Go right ahead. Got him. Thank you. Thank you. Mayor Gothary through councilor. Downer to you. I'll try to keep this as formal as possible since I've. Straight so far off the path tonight. No offense was meant. I don't think my comment was directed to counsel, and I apologize. If it was taken as such. I meant more of the overall idea that to have for people who do not have disability and look, I've had

conversations with Cher Root where she said, You have glasses so you could qualify as somebody with a disability. And I said, thank you. I will not take that. On. But the idea. Of people who are not disabled, prescribing how people should who are disabled should interact. With the community. My concern is that that is ableistic. By all means. I'm not an authority. On what is ableism, what is not, but just from my point of view. There have been times during the debate on this. Where it has walked up to that line. So it was not. A personal judgment on counsel, on anybody. It was more about the idea. Okay, thank you. You've explained that. Thank you. Thank you, councilor Downer. You're? Okay with any further questions? No. All right. Thank you, Adam. Appreciate it. Let me see if Scott Frederick is available. Scott, it's Merrich again. I think third time is a charm here, my friend. We're trying to see if we can get you on video or at least audio. Scott, can you hear

us? We have the delegate in via phone now, Marigotri, and if they're able to. Unmute with star six, they should be able to speak with council. All right, Scott. Star six. My friend. Are you going to join us? Star six is enabled. Can you hear me? The stars have aligned. Perfect. Thank you. Don't hit anything. Don't touch anything. You're perfect. Please. Did he just mute Scott? Can you hear me? We were so close. Okay, Scott, it's Marigot three, hit star six. One more time for me. And then talk. Hi, there. Can you hear me now? Perfect. Go ahead. You have up to four. It's okay. First, I want to thank staff and the Accessibility committee for their thorough research and work that's. Gone into this. Staff made a very clear recommendation against Internet voting based on their work. It's worth noting that it's rare for

council to. Reject a recommendation from. Stop. I personally have concerns with Internet boating. Internet boating depends on two tests. One is the authentication of the voter. And the second is maintaining ballot secrecy. These two tests are in conflict. It's possible, using cryptographic methods under development, to satisfy. These tests, but not in a way that layman. Without advanced mathematical training can understand. And that is, in my opinion, a fatal flaw in Internet voting. People need to be able to see how the process works. Otherwise there'll be an erosion. Of trust in the process. That's why the Irish have visible counts. They want to be able to see its value. For them to be able to see the count happen. You can't have a black box where votes go in and then results come out with. No way of verifying. That both was cast accurately or being

able to do a third party recount. All current Internet voting methods are black boxes. Third party recounts are essential in case something goes wrong with the initial vote and things will go wrong. Things always go wrong. I've been working with computers since the. I've seen a lot of things go wrong. I saw something go wrong this morning. Numerous examples have been posted about Internet voting disasters without the possibility of a third party recap we could have a failed election. And that we do not want that. Dapa said that paper ballots of the gold standard one. Of the major benefits of paper validates are the possibility of a recount. So I recommend maintaining. Paperball. That concludes my presentation. It's a bit disjointed because I completely rewrote the thing. But I did have one final comment to make, so I've noted some loose talk around the possibility of our Internet voting being hacked and. I've heard. Talks. Such as? We've never been hacked before. So what's the problem? And wealth? Is small and insignificant. No one will

want to hack us. Statements like that are treated as a challenge by hackers, so please. Don't do this. They will hack us senseless. So that's what I have to say about that. Thank you. Thank you, Scott. Just so you know, we didn't hear anything. You forgot to press star sign. No, I'm. Just kidding. Little levity a couple of hours in, so, Scott, we appreciate you. You're trying to make sure your presentation was heard, so thank you very much. I have a question for you, Scott, though, from councilor alt. Okay, just 1 second. Go ahead. Thank you, Mary Guthrie. Through you to the delegate, Mr. Frederick. Mr. Frederick, you might be the last. Chance. I have to ask the same question. Are viruses, trojans, and whatever they are, which might be resident on any device you use to vote. Do they potentially pose the challenge? Of invading the voting software or whatever. I don't even know how to put that because. I don't know enough about computers to speak about it. I doubt if it would

be a problem. For the site that's recording the vote. Yeah, I don't think a virus. Is going to affect your own machine, it's not going to affect. The server. Great. Thank you. But that's not the only problem you're going to face. Okay, great. Thank you. Thank you, Scott. Thank you, Councilor alt. And we'll just move on to our last couple. Thank you again for your presentation. David Sufflink is going to join us by video. And then our last is Laura lie. Root also by video. David, I can see you on video. Can you just check your audio for me. You are coming through. Great. Thank you, David, for joining us. I'll turn it over to you go right ahead. Thank you Margotri councilors and assembled people of Guelph, thank you for taking the time to hear me speak. By way of background, I earned a degree from the University of Wealth in computer science, where I graduated with distinction. I have a decade plus of industry experience, including code security, auditing, antimalware and applying machine learning to email attachment antivirus. I hail from Waterloo, a

tech savvy city where we have rejected Internet voting. I also live with a serious disability. I spend my days living in code, so I think it's. Safe to say I'm not a Luddite, but I do know the limitations of. My craft. If this that follows seems a little disorganized, I apologize. A lot has already been said, I do have to add, I'm not speaking on behalf of my employers, present or past my feeling about. E voting and safety is worse than it was last time. Guelph considered this issue. We know a lot more now about what governments, and especially unfriendly governments, are capable of and doing in this space. It's clear that some actors are happy to interfere with elections. Even if they're caught red handed. You can see the United States for an example. Of that. We're seeing ransomware attacks on critical institutions, including hospitals. Supply chain attacks where someone will infect, for example, a library that is relied on by lots of other software. Have become much more of an issue. Recently, XZ was found to have a back door. XZ is in everything. So that's a pretty big problem. My feeling, speaking

with colleagues, is that there is a consensus among computer scientists that current evoting vendors are not trustworthy. Blockchain is a solution. Looking for a problem other than organized crime. And it does little to address the concerns in this space. As people have been saying loudly for many years, I would refer you to Randall Monroe's comic. Xkcd@xkcd.com 2030. An interviewer asks an expert in technology. They say they fixed it with something called blockchain, to which the expert replies, ah, bury. It in the desert. And his colleague adds, wear gloves. Xkcd.com four six three. Saying there's antivirus software on voting machines. Is like going to a parent teacher conference and having the teacher assure you that they always wear a condom malt teaching? Technically, it's safer than the alternative, but is that someone you. Want doing that job. Internet voting is not like Internet banking. Basically because of the secret ballot, we don't have a ledger we can check. So it's no wonder that people claim there's no evidence of a hack in. A live election. I have serious doubts about vendor competence. You'll know, for example,

that there's no regulatory college supervising computer scientists, so there's no externally verifiable measure of basic competency. These people probably have no security clearances. So you don't know who's potentially disloyal or more importantly, subject to. Influence because, for example, of unlawful behavior, financial problems. Or relatives who may be subject to pressure by foreign governments. Most competent people in this field believe this shouldn't be attempted, which makes me wonder who's actually building these things. Nobody, as far as I know, is auditing the broader security practices. They're keeping the source code. Secret, basically. But are they doing it securely? Are they using a secure build process? Are they looking at the dependencies that they integrate. I seriously doubt it. Because no one's looking over their shoulder. It's all considered. A proprietary trade secret. No one but them can look. Only the vendor can look at problems, both at design and after. An election. Only they can look for evidence that there's been a hack, but they have. A vested interest in not finding that evidence. So you can bet that locking and auditing will be performative rather than effective. That pretty much voids any interest they have in

their reputation being an assurance for you. As people have said, you wouldn't hire a company to count ballots by hand in a secret room, and this is probably more vulnerable than that. I won't get into chain of custody issues because I don't think I have time. I want to say that your black box audit, which is to say an audit where people can use the system but not look at its internals tells you very little about the security of a system. Security, we say, has to be baked in. It can't be bolted on and that's. Very hard to verify without open access to design artifacts. You can see I'm running. Out of time. I guess my biggest point will be that interference doesn't have to be invited. There are military signals intelligence agencies that almost certainly have the ability. And if you get the right number at the end of your election, it's because they didn't take you up on the invitation. In that sense, it's not a hypothetical risk. And of course, if people doubt the outcome, it doesn't matter, because. You don't have a peaceful and orderly transition of power. I could go into more on that, but I won't. Yeah, I'm sorry. I'm. So sorry to jump in that. The final bill

of your five minutes just jumped off there. I apologize. No, it's okay. And I hate doing it, but I do have to cut you off. There. But please don't leave, just in case there's a question, okay? Actually, there is not a question. Oh, no, there is. I'm sorry. Councilor Richardson, please go ahead. Thanks, Mayor Guthrie, and through you to the delegate. Could you help me understand the chain of custody? Yeah. So if we were doing a paper election and ballots were cast in one place that counted. In another. There would be careful security over the ballot box as it traveled from one place to another and that would be necessary, because without that, the vote wouldn't have any meaning. You wouldn't know what was being counted at the other end. The problem with voting with electronic equipment is that unlike, say, a paper ballot where you can look at it and see that it's blank or a gulf pencil, where I mean, I'm. Not sure how you'd compromise a golf pencil. It's not going to mark. The wrong box on you. With computer equipment. It's very difficult to look at it and see that it's going to do what it was supposed to do, even what it was intended to do. Without getting into very

complex investigations. So, for example, if this equipment that is running your election is not being monitored, Between the time it's prepared and the time it's used. Someone can potentially interfere with that equipment, either remotely or in person. And there's really no way to defend against that unless you're going to have very well vetted people monitoring it around the clock. So that's that question. Thank you. Thank you very much. Great. Thank you again. David, we appreciate your presentation and your time, and thanks for waiting all the way through to the end there to join us. Take care. Thank you. Okay, everyone, we're at our last of the signed up delegations. Laura, lie root. And I have been made aware, as a request to me, as the chair, just to give a little bit of grace in regards to the accommodations for Lorelai to speak to us. She's aiming for the five minutes, but if it goes over a little bit there's. A little bit of GRAce there that I'm going to afford that to Laura lie.

So, Laura lie, can you just check your audio for us? Yes. Can you hear me? Barely, actually. Let me try something. No, that's good. We got you good. You can hear me now? Yeah, totally fine. Great. Awesome. Thank you. I will turn it over to you. Okay. You go. Right. Ahead. Thank you so much, everyone. I know this has been a long meeting, and I really want to be respectful of everyone's time. So I'm not going to go over a lot of the things you've heard. Me say in the past. You already know that I'm somebody with many of the exact same qualifications as many of the previous delegates when it comes to the technical side of this conversation. So I'm not going to get into the technical things. You've also heard me. Delegate on behalf of the AAC, and I'm not going to get into that tonight. Either. Although, of course. You're absolutely welcome to ask me any questions you have about those things. I just didn't. Want to waste anyone's time. So tonight I wanted to use this time just to speak to you as a disabled citizen of wealth during National Accessibility week who cannot currently vote independently. I think a great place that I want to start, and probably my biggest note that I want to hit is just to say thank you. Sorry. I'm going to run out my time

trying not to cry. I apologize. I know that dissenting voices can be loud. In fact, I'm sure that's something council is aware of more than most. I think that if some of the discourse that I've seen in the past few weeks from some of the delegates who somehow found my contact information and have sent me very colorful messages is any indication of what your inboxes look like? I'm sure you're no. Strangers to the fact that dissenting voices can sometimes be the loudest. But I'm hopeful that you won't let their volume drown out the grateful voices. That have also showed up here today to thank you for your decision earlier this month. I think it's a decision that moves us toward a more inclusive society and shows a commitment to building a Guelph that is as vibrant and diverse as the people who call it home. And I really can't thank you enough for that, and I hope you will stand by. That decision tonight. I know that some people have mentioned security concerns, and like I said, I'm not going to really get into that right now, but I do think that it's worth mentioning that there is a portion of the motion that states the system used is going to have to meet. The satisfaction of city clerks. And our city clerks have some of the most thorough security standards. I've seen. I think it's very obvious how dedicated they are. To the integrity of our elections process, and I think that we really need to be confident in their ability to be rigorous

and attentive in their implementation of this voting method. The main thing I wanted to talk to you about tonight, though, is what it's like. To be a disabled individual advocating for this right. And I apologize in advance if this sounds melodramatic or overly emotional, because I don't mean to come across that way, but. I do think I owe it to myself and to other disabled advocates to honor our experiences by recognizing how hard this advocac. Advocacy can be. We face not only systemic barriers, but also the weight of responsibility of providing forward momentum to a conversation about our dignity, our rights and our place in this world, which we deserve. I want to take this opportunity to be transparent about that, but also about the positive impact that the removal of systemic barriers can have. So one thing that's been very difficult. In this conversation has been hearing people talk about the importance of secrecy in democracy when they are aware that people like me don't have access to a private or independent voting method, and then hearing them say that they're okay with it staying that way for another election cycle. Respectfully, the only community members that I've heard saying this are people who already do have access to independent and secret voting options

themselves. People who buy some random cosmic roll of the dice are heir to the privilege of not having to see the world through our eyes. Or live it through our experiences. And that privilege is not an inherently bad thing. It's just something that we owe it. To one another to be aware of and put effort into leveling the playing field. And tonight, is one of the times we have a chance to do that. But, yeah, there have been times throughout the past decade where I've really struggled with this. Advocacy, not just with the fact that I haven't had access to independent voting that's. Part of it, but I've also struggled with what it means to be a person. From an equity seeking group who advocates so tirelessly for her needs to be met and at times. Hasn't seen any movement forward. I've struggled with what it means, about what society thinks about people like me and where disabled people fall in the unwritten hierarchy of the world and how much we sometimes matter to other people. I've struggled with what this means for my family, my parents, as they get older, my niece and nephew as they grow up in this world. And I'm not blaming anyone on council or on any previous counsel for

those struggles. You have an incredibly difficult job. And sometimes. I'm so sorry. You have an incredibly difficult job, and sometimes grappling with really big feelings is just part of what it means to be disabled in a world that is largely built by and for non disabled people. So I guess what I'm trying to say is that conversations like this one impact the disabled community in more ways than just legislative and in bigger areas than just our vote. They send bigger messages that impact our hearts and our mental health and our sense of belonging. On the flip side of those. This is my last sentence. Is that all right? Yes. Finish off. On the flip side of those difficult feelings, there have also been some really positive moments in this journey. I'm never going to forget how cool it felt to be able to independently vote. In 2014, and I will never forget the next time I'm able to either or the people who helped me get there. I appreciate you all more than words can say, so I'll. Leave it there. But thank you for your decision earlier this month. It's another moment. I won't forget. And I hope you'll stand by that decision tonight. Thank you. Thank you, Lord. I appreciate it very much.

Let me go to Councilor Quran, please. You belong. You matter. And I know here tonight you were sharing your lived experience, and in previous delegations, you were in the rule of the chair of the accessibility advisory committee. But I do know that you also have some security expertise, and I'm wondering if you could. Add any other security information about online voting. You've heard all the delegates tonight with concerned about security, and I just wondered if you had anything to add to that discussion. Thank you. I find that far easier to talk about than my feelings, honestly. Thank you. Through you, Mayor Guthrie, to Councilor Koran. I actually do have some thoughts on some of the security information that was brought forward by other delegates who share the same qualifications that I have. I don't work in academia, so I can't claim to have authored any specific papers. But aside from that, I am a full stack engineer. As. My technical qualifications. Somebody earlier spoke up about chat GPT being used to teach people how to

hack. That information. Was actually, I believe, edited out of that letter to the editor after the fact, because it is measurably false if anyone were to go to chat GPT and test that out. It's pretty easy to see. That chat. GPT will not offer any information about hacking. There were some inconsistencies in some of the information I heard about the process available. For in person voting security. I personally, every single time I have ever voted, other than the time I voted online, I walked in with someone who was not asked any questions. Was never asked to swear any oaths, not asked what they were doing. Came behind the screen. With me, marked my ballot for me, and then we left. So I am confused. Why? One earlier delegate mentioned that there are like oaths to be sworn. And id to be shown because it has never, ever happened. And I voted every time I could. And. The other main one. Would be that. I heard from Ms. Watson. A very thoughtful delegation. Where she was concerned that staff may have missed some things in their report. And with a technical knowledge of the subject matter

and with the conversations I've had with staff. I can very confidently say that they did not miss anything. First of all, I think the city of Guelph has exemplary clerks. And just beyond capable stuff. And the five examples that were given in that video, all five of them were not examples of online systems being hacked, a few of them. Were examples of something called penetration testing. Like, for example, the first video, which was over a decade old, I believe, and was not for a municipal level election, but it was about an online system. Where some students attempted to hack it. This is a progress or a process. It's a penetration testing type of process called white hat. Ha. Hacking, where you will often hire hackers to try to hack a system, and if they can successfully hack a system, you now know where to fix that system. So those are very normal things. To happen in the process of coding any piece of software at all. And they were not specific to municipal elections. Staff were absolutely correct in their assertion that there has never been example of a hacked election. In Ontario, I believe in all of Canada, was their assertion, and that's what I know. To be true. There was discussion of a

university of election, but that was not a hacking that was a technical error where students couldn't log in, and I believe we're offering we are looking to offer online voting as an advanced polling option, which, again, That would mitigate some of the risks if there was an issue to students or to voters. Being able to log in. But again, that was not a municipal level like government election. That was an internal school student. Election that was run with, I believe, their own software. The UCP vote that was referenced as well. There was a five year long investigation into that. And it was found that there was no fraud by the election company or there was no fraud. By anyone. The claim was that people had signed others up using false emails. And I believe that at the end of that very long, lengthy investigation. And court proceedings, they found that even if that had happened, people still would have needed to use their id in order to get their pin to vote. So that was all dismissed. So those examples were all. Difficult. For me to sit through because I don't feel that there are accurate examples of things that the clerks have missed in

terms of security. But again, I know that some of the delegates tonight mentioned that I am the only one who believes this. And the only technical specialist who feels this way. But I am not. I have many colleagues who feel this way as well, and I think it's very easy to find people to delegate. On either side of a topic if you look hard enough. Those are my thoughts. Oh, I did also want to say someone mentioned that the AAC disagreeing. With clerks was dismissive. In the last meeting, and I did want to say that the AAC is legislated. To chime in on our opinions on these matters. We never mean to be dismissive of. Clerks. And our opinions are valid and are not a tail wagging a dog or a dog. We are legislated to have a voice on these topics because we deserve to have a voice and our opinions are valid. So I did want to say that. Sorry. That was a long sorry. Well, we've got a really big decision to make tonight. So take the time you need to answer the questions thoroughly. My second and last question is. I was one of the ones who voted against proceeding with Internet voting in the last election and I did so for a whole host of reasons, and some of these

same reasons. Are being articulated tonight. So I'm juggling with. The. System set of arguments on both sides. But one thing that I have heard has changed since the last election. Is blockchain technology, and I am not a coder. I am not an engineer. I'm not a computer scientist. I will never profess to understand some of the language that. We're expected to understand, to make this decision. So I wonder if you could simplify. For me. Blockchain technology and the ability for someone to go into and modify. Data or coding. And the traceability of that in the advancements that have been made to blockchain. Since we last considered this decision four years ago. So not going back 15 years ago because I know things have changed, but in the last four to five years, traceability. Is my understanding. Is significantly advanced. And that's going to help me make my final decision tonight. Absolutely. Thank you for your question. Blockchain technology is definitely not the only advancement in

anti penetration protocols and cybersecurity protocols that have been updated in the past, even year, even six months. But one thing that I found particular. Particularly interesting about blockchain technology, which, again, I don't actually know if the vendors that we're looking into are implementing or using blockchain technology. I do believe it's. One of the current gold standards for online voting systems. But online voting methods are very hesitant to tell us exactly what type of protocols they're using because that makes it. Easier for people to challenge those protocols. Right? So we may not know exactly which protocols they are. Using. However, yes, blockchain technology is. A newer idea that a lot of people associate with cryptocurrency, for example. It's basically where different blocks of data are connected on a chain. Syllabet. Any change made to any of these blocks of data. Is very directly. To change data without knowing who changed it and when and without. Multiple parties simultaneously agreeing to that change being made. So it's

just another standard that's? Now being used in cybersecurity, but there are many others, too. That are being used. And it's really difficult for me to explain blockchain. Without feeling like I'm being condescending to people or telling them things they might already know, so I apologize if I'm doing that to anyone here. That's okay. I'm not interested more in the technical aspect, and I'm interested in the traceability factor. Yeah. Incredibly traceable. I personally don't believe that. There is. I don't believe there is. Risk involved in the current protocols. I know that anything technically could maybe somehow be hacked and that's one of the conversations that was had by some of the other cybersecurity experts that were brought back in 2018 on a panel that I spoke at, at the city. Everyone kind of shared the opinion that we will never tell you something is secure because. We are in cybersecurity. We being they. I'm not a cybersecurity. Specialist. I'm a digital accessibility specialist with a background in cyber. I heard them all say that we will never tell you this is secure, because that doesn't. Exist.

In our field that does not exist in our industry, nothing is ever 100% secure. So I can't tell you that blockchain makes things completely traceable, I can tell you. That it is a huge leaps and bounds progress from what we've seen in the past. I know some people have claimed there are also increases to phishing attacks and things like that. But fishing. Isn't something that's used to hack online election systems. That's more like I clicked a link that was bad in an email and someone got access to my Facebook. There are different types of cybercrime, and certainly cybercrime is advancing, but absolutely the protections against it are advancing as well. Thank you. Those are all my questions. Thank you. Thank you. I think. Councilor Busatill. Had a question. Yes. Thank you, Lorlai, for. Your very passionate presentation. I do have family members. Who are disabled. I guess I don't know you very well. If you can speak to. Because there was. Another delegation as well, Meg Harding, that talked about digital accessibility. Kind of specialist. I'm not clear what exactly that is. If you can

expand a bit. On them. On that. Yeah, certainly. I have a background as an engineer. My current roles. Are. I work. At a company in Guelph called Eagles Flight. I'm their digital accessibility specialist. Basically. I'm making sure that all of their publicly facing content is. Accessible to people who want to use it, who may have disabilities. So it can be things like creating colorblind access for people who are colorblind or adding subtitles to videos things of that nature. I also make sure that all of their internal systems are secure. And accessible. I've also worked with a variety of AAA game development studios in the past. I've worked for a number of game developers in making their video games more accessible to users with disabilities. In those systems. I absolutely have had much more of a background in security because. The level of cybersecurity anyone will tell you in the games industry is massive because leaks and things like that threaten their entire livelihood and are taken very seriously. So that's for me. I'm not actually

aware of Meg's work or. What she does, but basically a digital accessibility specialist is someone with a background in some sort of. Engineering technology and is trying to make things more accessible to people with disabilities, specifically things of a digital nature. So some people it's websites, some people it's video games, some people. It's online voting systems. Thank you for that. And so you're a software engineer, then? Yes. Okay. Thank you. So I have a couple of quick questions, because for me, this boils down into risk. The big basket for me is risk. And I've put 16 years of my life into special Education Advisory Committee for Accessibility FMI equity in the Upper Grand District School board as a school board. So I have a couple of quick questions. Is there a standard in Ontario for the development of online voting software? I'm so sorry. You cut out there for a second. Is there a standard? And then. You cut out in Ontario for online voting software development. I'm not aware of a standard. I know that. Earlier delegates are aware of more specifically voting standards, and I know that the clerk's office is aware of

the current standards available. They split into the AAC about it. Is there a certification body. For online voting software. I don't believe there is. Not in Ontario, but I'm not 100% sure. I'm not a voting specialist. And the next one is. Are you aware of any legisl? Legislation, anything. That kind of wraps around. Online voting. Procedures. There was another delegate who talked, I thought quite eloquently about the architecture for online voting as infrastructure. Are you aware of anything? That kind of guides and secures, because when we do things, we want rules and procedures and standards and things like that. Are you aware of any of that? Yeah, I know Elections Canada has come out with some guidelines. I could pull them up. I don't actually have them, but I could email them to. You. I don't think that'll be helpful tonight. Yeah, I do know selections Canada. I'm just wondering if there was something a little bit more specific I think that is. Kind of the standard that we're working with at this time. Thank you. I'm glad that you know what it. And also thank you for your work on the school board. I'm

aware of your accessibility advocacy there from previous years. I appreciate. Thank you. That's all. Thank you. All right. Well, thank you. I don't see any other questions. So, Laura lie. Thank you for your delegation tonight. I would say more. As just. An individual than in your role as the ACC chair, like you did a committee. So we appreciate that. And thank you for your presentation. Thank you. Okay. Take care. Okay, everyone, let's take a break. Okay. What time is it right now? You know what I keep looking up there for? The clock that used to be there. You would think by now. It wouldn't be there. So it is. 907. Let's do a 13 minutes break. 20 after nine. All right, let's come back and we will get going on our decision. Thank you so much.

Okay. I'd like to call the meeting back to order, please. Can you just confirm I have quorum there, clerks? Yeah, looks like we're good. Okay. So.

Let's get the motions up on the screen. But over the break, I was notified, rightly, that we may want to just switch the orders. A little bit. Due to like if one section passes before another. And so, clerks, have you put this up as is, or have you changed anything? This as is. Okay. So could I just at least start by having someone. Move this for me and get it seconded, and then on the floor. Councilor Galler. Would be happy to move it. Councilor Katen would be happy to second it. Thank you. So what was just described to me during the break that I'll just say out loud? Here is. Some people, I think rightly. Sorry, everybody. Two things. One, a lot of people. Would like the all four to be split, so I'm going to say yes to that. Okay, so one, do they work? Split? However, four is going to go before three. And I think the reasoning which makes sense is that dependent on the outcome of number four, That may choose

how. People vote for number three. Okay. So is there. Any pushback to that. I mean, that makes sense to me. Okay, so, clerks, would you mind? In this moment while I go around with a horseshoe. You just kind of switching those 1234? Into that order for us, okay? Let's stick to. Just remember our timing here, everybody, okay? And I would like us to. Please stick to questions. And if you have a question and you'd like to do a comment at the same time. I'm cool with that, okay? We can do that if need be. Let's try not to also ask a bunch of questions that may have already been answered. Either found in the report, found through committee, or found tonight. Or in any correspondence that we've been getting, like, if you know the answer, Let's try to just go off of that. And I just want to say one thing. And I see you, councilor goller. It's all good. I'll go to. You first. No problem. Because there was a couple of candidates. Or not candidates. Sorry, a couple of delegates. That I found.

Maybe said a couple of things tonight and also. I even some correspondence over the last, like, two, three weeks, too. It is important for everybody to understand that our process is working perfectly. Right now, we have committee. Committee is where we do heavy lifting. Debate, move motions, amendments, whatever. And between committee and council, tonight is where we can get more informed, have new information, new discussions. And so this process. Is working as it should. And so that's why you may have people that said something a committee are looking at. A new angle this way because they've been informed differently. That process is exactly working as it should. So I just want to make sure that that was stated, because I think some people have thought, like, well, you did it a few weeks ago. You said this, and so you should be doing it now. On this. And that's fair. You can say that. However, the process that we have, which is the right process allows forgive and take. And a little bit of differences between the beginning and the end. This just happens to be the end now. So I just wanted to make sure that was stated out loud because some people might

think, like, oh, we're changing our mind, or a member of council is changing their mind. They could. And guess what? That's the process. That's literally the process. Okay, so. I just want to make sure that that was stated up front with that councilor goal. I promised you. I go to you first, so let's make our questions quick. And let's keep moving along. Go for it. Your worship, for the sake of process, might I ask that we go ahead and vote in number one and two. Get those out of the way because I have questions about. Vote by mail that may no longer be relevant. After we vote. Can we just throw up that? You might be on to something there. Can you just throw up the motions for everybody? Clerks. Do you mind? Let's just see if we can wade through at least one or two. Okay, so the first one is that council approved the free Gulf Transit service and free parking at marquee parcade. Market park eight on election day to support access and remove barriers to voting for the 2026 municipal and school board election. I think you might be right. Councilor Galler, everyone. Are we good to just call a vote on that one. Yes. Okay, I'm going to do that

right now. Is anyone against that? Number one. No. So that's unanimous. Okay, perfect. Could you throw back up number two for me, please? Number two is that council approved the use of vote tabulators in the 2026 municipal and school board election. Is there anything on that one? I feel like that one could also be voted on. Yes. Okay, I'm going to call the vote. Is anyone against? Number two? That's unanimous. Okay, can you throw the screen back up for me here? So this number three is now the new number. 03:00 a.m.. I, right? Clerks. You fixed it okay. That Guelph City council directs the city clerk's office. To offer Internet voting as an alternative voting method for the 2026 municipal and school board elections. Subject to all security requirements and testing, meeting the satisfaction of the city. Clerk. I would imagine this one will have some nuances on it. So Councilor Galler is. This the one that you wanted to ask a question on? Know, your worship. It's the next one, but go ahead. Now that we've got here. Okay, so you're good if I ask anybody else on number three? Okay, is there any.

Questions on number three. Or question or. Sorry. Or comments. Sorry. Did you want to number three, like the last time I think I'd rather go to four first, because if four passes, then I just sent a. Motion that I'd like to see devote my mail removed. If Internet voting passes, no. I think our clerks have changed it appropriately. Okay, so you've already switched it around, okay? It took the time to do that for us. Okay, so you're good? I think everyone's good on. Now, the order which talks to exactly what you're asking about. Given the new information in the memo we received in the package. Yeah. Okay, so, questions and if. You want to throw in a comment? I'm good, councilor Bustitil for sure. Go for it. Thank you. And thank you to the clerk. For their follow up memo, section number 8.2.1. I just want to be very clear or have the clerks respond to me? That if council directs clerks to proceed with online voting, that we are accepting the risk and can

you define for me? I know it was on page eleven, I think, of the original report, but. Can you articulate? What is the risk for me, please? Through you. Mayor Gustri to Councilor Busatill. Yes, I think councilor you alluded. To it correctly. That's the thrust of the report that was provided at committee. The whole. We've talked about verifiability, we've talked about the dependability. We've talked about the reliability as sort of the sort of three kind of key factors that we've evaluated. That's where we believe the risk is. It remains. I can dive deeper into specifics if you have questions, but I'm worried that I. Might meander a little bit. No, thank you. And that's what I took away from the original report, is that it? Is about risk and that if. You could just. If my understanding is clear that the basis for the clerks not recommending online voting. Was due to an unacceptable level of risk. Through you. Mayor GuThrie yes, that's effect, what

we're saying. I mean, it's, a risk with what we see to be a shrinking marketplace. It's a risk with the verifiability, and, for lack of better term auditability of a process once it's concluded. It's a risk. Of the reliability that we have when we look at. The inherent and required linkages between an Internet voting platform and other systems. And those vendors and their reliance on other vendors that we don't have direct oversight over. Be that cloud based server solutions or the data in transit bodies that are out there. Internet service providers across Canada that are backboned by the big three telcos in Canada. So those are all the risks that we've identified. With online voting. And in your crystal ball for the future. If standards were developed. A certification body for online voting software. Legislation, things like that. Do you think that online voting could be something that might come back to municipal government elections

in the future. Through you, Mr. Mayor? Yes. I think if we saw voting standards come into place that we could. Then provide to the market and say we require a platform that does and meets all these requirements. And I think there's probably a good chance that. There'd be a good degree of confidence that furthermore, if we saw. Senior election authorities, election administrators echo that and implement that in trial or pilot methods. We would see that as a positive step. So, yeah. The short answer to that is yes. Thank you. My final question is about accommodation and. Can you speak to the clerk's department's commitment? To accommodation. Your awareness, your commitment. In the clerk's department for accommodation. Through your mayor Guthrie. Thank you for the question, councilor Busatilla, because again, we hear the same delegates that you hear, and we have. The same. Cause for pause when we hear that there's members of a community that feel they haven't been able to access voting. What I can say is. Utmost commitment to accessibility. We've gone so

far. As to work with individual electors to try and accommodate them in. With the most dignity that allows them to access a voting system with the utmost level of autonomy. And independence. I can give good examples of that from past elections. Our challenge is actually quite some, frankly, sometimes when we do have to rely on folks that we train that are our colleagues in the community, and they serve at voting locations, and they may not be as comfortable as perhaps the folks you see here at the table with me. To provide. Really direct levels of support and accommodation. But that's the structure we have, and that's the method we operate within. I think an extremely admiral job of training those staff. We depend on them significantly to staff those locations. So there sometimes is a bit of a disconnect. I will acknowledge that between what we would see as the utmost accommodation and what might actually be delivered at a voting location, but. It's not for not working very diligently to ensure that every member of the election day staff is well trained and understands their responsibilities to make sure that folks are accommodated when they attend to a voting location. And just through the

mayor. Thank you very much. Thank you, councilor. Is there any other questions at all? Okay, I'll go downer. Downerc, please. And I'm sorry. You can give a comment here. This is kind of one of the main ones. It's talking about Internet photos. So if you have a comment on this particular motion, go ahead. So just through you, Mr. Merritt. To Mr. O'brien. So the motion says, like, you're going to come back, so. There are certain security standards that are being worked on. For online voting? Is that what I'm hearing? That even these are new vendors. I recognize that. That you will be working with. And if they can't meet these thresholds. Then you'll be coming back to us and. Will that be? What's the timing of that? I think it might have said that in a memo, but. I'm just sort of asking again. Yeah. Thank you. And through you, Mayor Guthrie. So the way that the motion is written currently, it doesn't require an explicit report back. But I mentioned it at committee as a whole when we were with you earlier this month.

You will likely see a bylaw tabled at an upcoming council meeting. Enacting the decisions you make tonight. What we foresee happening is as we continue down the journey of engaging with the marketplace. And some of those requirements that we outlighted in the memo for tonight's tonight's. Agenda are the things that we will probe that market to make sure that they are able to respond to that and that they are able to meet those requirements if they are not. Or we don't get any responses to a call for proposals or something to that effect. Then, as I mentioned earlier, at the beginning of the month, I foresee us then having to table a bylaw to then request that council repeal that. Decision of alternate voting methods, okay? Council is in the full authority to ask questions of those bylaws. I don't. Want to preclude that, but. I don't know if we foresee ourselves drafting a formal report. I mean, we have. To ultimately walk down this roadway a little bit until we see. What is sort of coming back from that call to the market, because we've already stated it to your satisfaction? That's sort of the decision our decision has made. If you're not satisfied, then it's just a repeal of that bylaw. Through, Mr. Mayor. That's correct. And we attempted in the memo that

you see before you. Tonight to articulate what that satisfaction would look like, okay? Thank you. Councilor Busatill, I think when I mentioned that. If someone wanted to say a comment, I could see you on the screen saying, like, hey, I've kind of forgot to do that. Do you want me just to go to you right? Now and then I'll go to councilor work. Want me to do that? Okay, go. Ahead. Councilor Bruce till. Thank you. Thank you very much for that. I kind of didn't want to butt in again. But I guess for me, At the risk of all the comments. Thank you, Mayor. For setting the tone, being a risk affair averse and not fair and all these other things. That I heard. I too am really passionate about this. Passionate about democracy. Passionate about it. We're going to do this. I really believe that. We need the standards, the certification that wrap around to really provide. That assurance in the democratic process. And the vote and so on. So. I don't feel comfortable.

I trust the clerks completely. But I think the wording of the motion. Is very clear that council directs the city clerk's office. And quite honestly, that original report. Met my threshold. I was comfortable and reassured. By clerk's department's work on this around the risk. And I just can't support this because of the lay of the land politically and things. That are going on. I would feel much better if there were the standards, the certification of the software process. Legislation somewhere that wraps around this. So until that's there, I really, honestly can't. Support. This because my experience also has been with the Municipal Elections act when there have been inconsistencies. And pork clerks. As a candidate, I'd be calling up and saying, this is happening, and it's about enforcement as well. And that the monitoring of the process. So I think we need to have that

framework. In place before. We jump into this? So I can't support the motion. Okay. Thank you so much, councilor. Thank you for your comments, and I'll now go. Over to council O'Rourke. Thank you. Mary Gusari through you to Steph. I'm just wondering if you can. Explain to me on page four of your memo. It says two vendors currently meet base security requirements. That would allow Internet voting to be offered. Similar to 2014, these require integration with the city's. Voters list database to offer two step registration live voter strike off at the time. An online ballot is cast. And then there's another line about the city's voter. List. Database provider has indicated that new integrations are not planned ahead of 2020. Six. Sheer ignorance on my part. Can you just help me understand what that means, please? Of course, through you, Mr. Mayor to Councilor O'Rourke. Two of the fundamental security requirements that we implemented in 2014. Was. Two step registration that requires that someone can check their information and verify it against the voters list. And that requires integration between an Internet voting platform. And

that database. And the other one that we were. Looking. To. Apologies. And the other item just ensures live voters strike off at the time that an individual casts the ballot online. So again, that integration is required so that at the time someone casts a ballot, they are struck off the voters list such that they can't walk into a voting location. Moments later and then receive a second ballot, so that integration is quite vital and. Only two vendors in the market that we're aware of meet those base requirements at this time. Thank you. And through you, Mayor Guthrie. So clearly, we've had conversations between committee the whole and now spoke with a neighbor who's a cyber risk expert. He was saying you can't do the penetration testing. Just the one time. It's. Only good for the one time you did the penetration testing. You need to be doing threat assessment. And penetration testing all the time. Is that what's foreseen in our approach and in the budget. Through, Mr. Mayor to council work. That's a great

question. My initial thought goes to that I would be very reticent to be allowing even a third party security vendor. To be testing a platform once it's live. And so this is indicative of the other challenge we face is that these voting methods are not apples to apples comparisons. And I'll give you a really good example. When those tabulators are tested, they're a not connected to any device in the voting location. They're simply plugged into a wall. We don't download and modem the data back to city hall or anything to that. Effect. So what we do do is when we receive those tabulars from the vendor. We set up a process that is, quite frankly, viewable by candidates. There's the ability to scrutinize the process, so to speak, of how we conduct logic and accuracy of testing. Once those devices are tested, from a logic and accuracy standpoint, we lock them away. Under very tight security controls. Double access doors. They are not accessible by anyone corporately, other than. City clerk staff. And there is a great degree of security we place on that, and we're able to do that because. Then that testing and

the outcomes of that testing is almost embargoed. You're quite right. That testing. A live system on online voting platform ought to require us to have that. Ongoing threat risk assessment, penetration testing, denial of service testing that we would want to do. But once we deploy those voting tagulars in the voting location, it's election day. And they're out there. They've only ever come to us, gone through logic and accuracy testing, been sequestered. And then deployed. We would want to offer something similar to that on online voting, and I don't think that we would have the ability to allow, for example, ongoing. Threat risk assessment in the full sense of what that means. In a live voting environment, we would be getting updates from a vendor about any threats that may come across. But the ability for us. To really levy a full degree of threat risk assessment while voting is being conducted on a live platform. An online voting platform, I think would pose some challenges for vendors. I don't know. We would have to determine that through the market. I don't. Know if vendors would be able to deliver on that. Okay. Thank you. So I have a comment. Marigol three. So I want to support online voting to provide accessibility. Disabled people deserve. I

absolutely do. And many delegates ask us not to discount their lived experience. I have huge respect for Cher route and her passionate advocacy regarding online voting. And in his correspondence, Dr. Shelley wrote, if accessibility were the only consideration, then there would be no objection to adoption of evoting. I think everybody wants that level of accessibility. But it's not the only consideration. So we heard from Mr. Brunette, who's an expert that the standards are in development. In Ontario, there are no provincial standards and no certification. Just this April. So it's very recent the province of Quebec ended their evoting project. To test Internet voting during the 2025 municipal elections. Elections Quebec said the companies that answered a call for ten years to set up their infrastructure were not able to meet the necessary requirements. And that their pilot project in 21 municipalities was always conditional on having a reliable, secure, and accessible solution. Neither Elections Canada nor Elections Ontario currently allow online voting, and neither do the cities of Ottawa or Toronto. The city of Toronto again recently indicated there's no Internet voting service that can guarantee security, ballot secrecy and vote integrity. And so Internet

voting will not be an option for the 2026 election. All of these electoral agencies want full participation from everybody in their communities, and they are finding that the trade off in terms of. Security of the online voting is not where it needs to be. That security is just not there. So when our motion says, per the satisfaction of the city clerk, We're asking our clerk's office to do more than the province of Quebec was. Able to do until very recently, the city of Toronto have already done and they found no secure options. So at our May 7 committee meeting as a whole, I voted against the amendment to add the online voting, but I supported the package of recommendations at the end of the meeting because it was clearly the will of council. I wanted to be hopeful. I wanted to say, clerks, go and give it a shot. And I've had a number of conversations with people spoken with accessibility people and cyber risk. Folks. And of course I'm listening tonight. And I know some of my constituents believe that. My concerns are valid but overstated. But others are concerned about the integrity of the outcome of the election, a number of seniors were concerned that fishing could direct them to even. If they hadn't signed up for online voting, they're concerned phishing could

direct them to the wrong place. And it's a real concern. And all of those concerns together, the lack of cohesion and standards means. It undermines the trust in the entire process. So, like Councilor Bouzatale, until there's greater confidence and validation in the endtoend process. I won't support this motion. Okay. Thank you. And is there any other questions or comments on this particular one before I call? The vote. Okay, let's go with. Sorry, Carly. I was about to call them. Yeah, Koran and then Keaton. Thank you. Yeah, I was one of the ones who voted against at the last election for all the reasons that have been outlined. I think what I've learned tonight. I'm trying to weigh the balance of security versus accessibility and. Those are really. The two things we're trying to balance in our decision making tonight. The one thing I did learn over the course of the last month, since the report came out, since it came to committee as a whole. And since we've been here tonight, is that. There is no such thing as an election that is 100% risk free. Malin phone in person online. There's no such thing

as a risk free election. So I'm just trying to balance the risks as I'm making my decision, right? Down to the wire. And those two things. They're at the 50 50 mark for me. But the motion includes a clause to the satisfaction of the clerk. Which I trust our clerk. I have full confidence that they will go out and look at the two. Remaining vendors. With a lens to the issue that we've identified, which is risk of security. But I'd like to see that work done before we close the door on this issue. Thank you so much, Councilor Caitlin. And then alt. She's a passion from all the delegates for secure and accessible election. I don't. Think anyone is against voter security or accessibility, but I would be remiss not to call. Out the ableism I've seen in some of the online community conversations. Questioning an individual's access, needs, or validity of their disability. When our diverse committee of people with lived experience appointed to advise us on accessibility, has explained that the existing options

are not a one size fits all situation is not okay. We can all care about security without going down that road. I appreciate that staff and council have. Not done that no voting method is without risk. Clerks have wrapped each method and process and respond. Each term to issues that arise to make it more robust and accessible. There are 217 municipalities who used online voting in Ontario in the last election, and the sky has not fallen. The worry about potential for risk. Does not away harms created by existing access needs not being met. We need to wrap online. Voting and process just like we would any other method, and treat it with a risk tolerance that acknowledges the right to vote is paramount. A write up about proposed election process for online voting on the Elections Canada website stood out to me on the topic of verification. They said while adequate steps should be taken to ensure that those using an online voting system are in fact, entitled to vote. The Supreme Court of Canada has found that overly onerous steps in perfection are not a requirement. The system strives to achieve accessibility for all voters, making special provision for those without identification to vote by vouching election officials are. Unable to determine with absolute accuracy who's entitled to vote. Poll clerks do not take

fingerprints. To establish identity. A voter can establish canadian citizenship verbally, by oath. The goal of accessibility can only be achieved if we are prepared to accept some degree of uncertainty that all who voted were entitled to do so, and then they have the case name and I'm not. Going to be able to pronounce that name, so I'm not going to try. Equity matters, and I appreciate everyone's consideration as we balance rights with uncertainties that can be mitigated with standards and process. Human rights should not only exist for those privileged enough to hire lawyers. It is our place to ensure that happens right now. Thanks. Thank you, Councilor Alt. Thank you very much, Mayor Guthrie. I wasn't going to speak. But I think it is important to consider a couple of things. The first and foremost is that I believe that this is a decision that we, as a council, must make, and I appreciate that we are going to be, if this is successful, referring it to clerks. But I think in some senses that responsibility lies here right now, and I believe that. This is such an important decision. And as councilor Quran said, it's a decision where it's a 50 50. Decision for some people that I cannot support this. I think it's

incredibly important. The issue of equity and accessibility is one that certainly the Supreme Court and any other court can weigh in on, but it's very, very clear that courts determine issues not based necessarily on. The absolute letter of the law, but also on possibilities and potentials. There is no assurance that any court decision would go one way or the other. There is, however, some assurance that. Cybercrime is going to continue to occur, and it is occurring more often. Now than it has in 2014 when we first used this and when I first supported it, I believe it's absolutely imperative to guarantee to the people of guelph that whatever method of voting that we use that we have made the utmost effort to ensure that it is safe. And secure. And I liken this to a barn, and I liken it to barn doors. The more doors that you open, the more capacity there is for the horse to bolt. I'm not. Prepared to open more doors at this point, I am going to vote against this. Thank you so much. For your statement, too. Is there anybody else before I call to vote on this? No, it doesn't look like it. Okay, well, I got

just a couple of things to say, and then I'll call the vote then. I just want to say that there's some of my colleagues here. They've stated that they're not going to vote for it, but I just want to say out loud. These colleagues I know full well care about the accessibility of people in the community. So any kind of narrative out there that they don't. Is ill advised and not correct. And. I just want that to be really clear so sometimes we can be put into these camps and. It's completely unfair. There is some validation that has come from, like Councilor Bustedill, Councilor O'Rourke. Councilor alt or maybe some others here that might want to not vote for it that I also too. Can't dismiss either. I mean a reasonable person. I think I am. Seized at different elements that is here on this issue. But I will just reiterate what I said at committee, which for me is flowing to this moment now, which is? There is risk. I'm comfortable with the tolerance of that risk. To date. And with the way the motion is worded that there's more to come, because there's

going to be some testing and some suitability of the methods through the clerk's. Office, whom I also trust. And so that's where I land on this. But I think it's important that. I stick up for? If I could say that for my colleagues, that may be different. Just to reiterate that they, too, care very deeply about the process, the system, democracy. Accessibility. And. I just kind of want to go to bat for them because. There has been a lot of narratives between sort of the beginning of this month and today. About putting people into camps. And I have not seen that at all from any members of council. Or staff. I think that's been reiterated by someone else who said that, but it's, out there in the community. I just want to, as the mayor, just kind of jump on that a little bit, just to kind of try to bring some unity together on the issue. No matter where we land on a particular vote. So thank you. Thank you for letting me state that. Of course, I am in favor. Of course. That risk tolerance I talked about? I'm comfortable with it. And.

I think this is, for me, the right decision to move forward, and I'm hoping that things. Are to the satisfaction of the clerk so that we can offer. This for people in the 2026 election. With that. I will call the vote then. So, is anyone against this one? So I'll go busatil. And Richardson, and then alt, and then O'Rourke. Okay. Want to make sure? That's it. Okay. So that one passes. And then let's put up number four, if you don't mind. Now, this isn't. This is also kind of an important one as well. Yeah. Let me just read it out loud and then I'll go to you. Okay, councilor. Yeah, hold on. I got to go up here because it's blocked off at the bottom. That's why I kept missing councilor Richardson when she had her hand up earlier. Because. The text at the bottom blocks her off. That council approved the use of vote by mail and vote from home as the alternative voting

method for the 2026 municipal and school board elections. So let's just concentrate on this one. If you'll recall. This was sort of a last minute discussion we had at committee. We got a little bit of a memo. In between that as well. And I know that councilor Downer has an amendment, too, so I did see councilor. Alt's hand go up. But before I go to you, did you want to say something? Steven. Yes, thank you, Mr. Mayor. Go ahead and threw you to council. I don't know where council wants to go on this. We're certainly supportive of however, council wishes to proceed. Given the passage of the last motion around satisfaction of myself and our team. I'm just mindful of this. If this was to be defeated. Then would there be some wording that council might consider so that if we were to come. Back to say that Internet of voting wasn't to the satisfaction that we could add something. Back in. So I admit I'm not in the center there to help you out with. Wording of that. Someone is very capable of doing that. I just put that out there for council to consider and contemplate. Councilor alt. I'm seeing a couple of hands go up here. Can I just ask? What your intent is on your amendment, councilor Downer, just because I

think that would give good context as we move forward. So it was to remove the vote by mail because we've. Got a memo that talks about the extra cost of it. I have questions also about the security of vote by mail, actually. In about people understanding, thinking that they voted that they haven't. But given. What? Clerk o'brien says. I would probably change it to something like if council approve. Vote by mail, sort of in the event. That Internet voting isn't available and vote from home as an alternative voting method. Something like that. I don't know if that works. Maybe I can. I would change the wording. Yes. That addresses what Steven O'Brien just said. So could I leave that with you as. A moment as I just kind of go around the rim a little bit, because as I recall, and I don't want to put words into council. Altima. But I think I felt what he said. That committee was warranted. Was this too. Is another option. And so I think. We need to debate and discuss that as well. So go ahead, Councilor Holt. Thank you, mayor. Guthrie in fact, I was going

to make comments to that effect. I think it's very important that council does support this, because, as we've already said, we are unanimous in believing that accessibility is important. What we have done in the last motion is disagree on a method. Male ballots provide people who are perhaps. Not able to use a computer or not willing to use a computer. With another alternative, they might actually like to keep Postman employed, for all I know. I don't really know, but. Nonetheless, if we are recognizing that we're looking at accessibility, the issue should never be cost. The issue should be accessibility to voting and conseque. Consequently, we must leave this open for those who. Are fearful of casting their vote on computer or just don't want to do it and don't have the opportunity to get to the polls. Okay? And then Rodrigo. I'm sorry, councilor. I haven't moved it yet, no. I didn't speak to the motion currently right now, if you could put the motion back. Up. I just want to make sure. We're literally 95 yards down the field here, everybody, so just want to try to make sure. We get over the finish here. That council approve so currently on the floor is

that we are approving. Now, the memo stated, hey, if you do the Internet voting, you might want to do this and the costs and the capacity and stuff like that. Councilor Alt's position is to actually embrace number four, to not change it, and to say that, no, you know what? We should approve it. As well as the fact that we just approved Internet voting as well. And he's given his reasonings. I must say, I tend to lean towards what counts are all the same. So what I could maybe do is why don't we just test the waters? If you don't mind councilor Gallards trying to move it along, why don't we? Test the waters on council Downers amendment. Because let's see if we can get a seconder for that. Actually, I haven't. Moved it yet. I know. So let's see. I'm not moving it. You're. Not going to. Just given. Mr. O'Brien. What are you saying? I think there's probably going to be a time issue. We might as well just prepare for both. Let's let Steven address that. That's a good question. Go ahead. Through you, Mr. Mayor? Certainly. If council approves that number four motion as written, then it will stand. We will. Offer all of those methods. You will see. A corresponding

budget request increase, I think. That's a fair statement. And I think councilor also alluded to council's contemplations around that. It certainly does give a little bit of, for lack of a term, a bit of security for council, I believe. And if we get to the point where the market's not really coming, back with a positive response on the availability of Internet voting to the standards that we might all expect and want, then. We would simply remove Internet voting as a method and we would fall back on this motion, should it pass that vote by mail and vote from home be offered. So, could I ask a question? I know this is probably in your purview as the returning officer and not something we can dictate or anything, but given that 10% of the ballots didn't make. It back. That were mailed out. People thought they put it in the mail. They came in afterwards. And I know that's true with the federal, that happens a lot. I don't. Know what the stats are. But. Is there any way that. You can lengthen the time, the deadline for when they have to mail it in, because I think it's just five days or a week. I don't know what it is. But. The reliability on Canada

Post to get that ballot back to the returning office. Is not always the best. Yes, sir. You, Mayor Guthrie. So this is tied, interestingly, to some advocacy positions we've had as a sector with the government of Ontario. They've moved nomination day. That severely limits our ability to get ballots produced. So we're beholden, actually, by a date that's. Set by the provincial government. On when we can have ballots, nominations to conclude and when we can have ballots prepared, we've been very strong as a sector in advocating for that to move back earlier in the term. What I will say is we do take what I would call extra steps to ensure that electors can get those ballots back to us. So we had some questions from members of council. We do allow, folks. To return vote by mail kits in person to city hall. If they so choose. That can be in person during voting hours. We have a secure and safe Dropbox that's monitored by City of Guelph security 24/7 where electors can cast those vote by mail kits. At the Dropbox here at city hall and we could investigate other opportunities. You're right. That it's within our purview to maybe offer that at some other facilities of the city. That's something we could look

at. But. It doesn't diminish the fact that if you're an elector, that's. Out of province or out of country, and you're relying on vote by mail to cast a ballot. We're really beholden by the timelines that are set by the government of ONtarIo as to when ballots can be produced. And so that's sort of the shortened short story. Just for those online, there seems to be some heads nodding in the room around, maybe letting number four just stand. But I see a question from councilor Galler and then councilor O'Rourke. Okay, go ahead. Color. Thank you to your worship. To the cleric's office. One of the main concerns that I've heard from delegates about vote by mail is the envelopes and that some people have reactions to them. Is there an ability to. Maybe ask people if they want a latex free envelope. Is that something that could be implemented? For these elections. Through Marigustria. I think we would look to procure envelopes that. Are as accessible as possible. I will admit that hearings from some of the delegates today about. Rubber bands or elastic bands in a voting location and how severe some anaphylactic reactions

can be just by being exposed to that. I'm very concerned about that myself, but it's certainly something we can evaluate as we go through the process. We will look to mitigate and reduce as much barriers to access voting, be it with the envelopes that we procure to use for vote by mail kits and any other aspect that we look at. So we will certainly look into it and absolutely be considering it. Based on what we've heard tonight. Okay. Thank you very much. Thank you, worship. Thanks. Councilor and O'Rourke, please. Thanks, Mayor Guthrie, for you. To Mr. Brian. That's my understanding that we already have kids. Vote by mail kits remaining from 2022. Right? So it's the least expensive voting method. That we have. Is that correct? Through Mr. May yeah. In terms of equipment, probably certainly the least expensive. It is time, as Ms. Osborne can attest to. She was instrumental in ensuring that those got out in a timely manner. And it is a tedious manual process. We opted to ensure that we could fulfill those packages in house because it gives us a higher degree of control, and it may give us a higher degree of control over some of the aspects that councilor Galler just raised. Okay. And so, Margustri, just a.

Comment, I feel strongly that we should ret. Retain the vote by mail option, in part because some of the commentary from accessibility advocates. There are people who are housebound, who have limited mobility, who will trust a vote by mail. Option. More so than an online option. And I think it's an important alternative for those folks. Thank you for that. Is there anything further than on number four as it stands? Now I see some heads shaky. Very quickly. I think I voted differently on this. Committee. But I know I was kind of hesitant because of what councilor alt brought up at committee. Originally about this issue, so I'm glad we've kind of landed on the discussion. With this, so I think we should maintain it. That's my position, so I'll. Call the vote. Is anyone against? Number four. No. Okay, so that's good. That covers that off. So anything further on this matter at all. No. Okay, good. We are done with that. Thank you. That

was respectful and good discussion. Bylaws Councilor Richardson. Do you mind bringing those forward? Would you like me to read them out or do you have. Them in front of you or do you could put them up on the screen? That would be. Great. Or you can read them out whatever you like. We'll put them up on the screen. Or do you mind? The clerks have asked me to read them. I'll do that for. You. So it is. Bylaws 2002 420947 and 2002 420948 be approved. Subject to 2.84.114 the Municipal Act. And that is it. It's moved by yourself Richardson, who is going to second that for her. How about your award, mate? Councilor alt. There you go. Anybody want to discuss the bylaws? Any issues? Seeing? None. I'll call the vote. On the bylaws. Anyone against. That's nobody. That's unanimous as well. I actually have no announcements. Except councilor Downer does. So don't go anywhere. Councilor downer and councilor Koran, I think, have an event coming up. Go ahead. Tell the world about it. We have a town hall next. Wednesday, June the fifth, at

Primary Park Public school in the library. And that's on Scottsdale. Avenue. And the first hour we have. Cameron Walsh from the. Solid waste. And he is going to talk about the blue box transition. We know municipalities will be changing. In. 2025. And what does that mean for guelphan residents here in the second hour? There's been a lot of talk in ward five in the last week about the closure. Of. College in Edinburgh, and so we have staff from traffic and engineering who will be there to answer. Questions and. Give some information as well. Great. And I think maybe just if you want to yell it out one more time. Is it? Ward. Ward five. Ca. Five. Ca as the number five, I believe. Okay. And then. I'm sorry. Councilor Chu, did you say you have an announcement? I do. You do? My. Memory. Through you. Yeah, just quickly. Word six. Also as a town hall,

but it'll be here in council. Chambers on July 17. June 17. Sorry, it's late. June 17. From 630 to 08:00 p.m.. And we're going to be talking. More so on capital improvements, gorn street improvements, and also just the state of housing and health. And wellness if time permits, and you can email both councilor Tom O'Rourke or myself for any details. But stay tuned for that. And hopefully. Our lovely members of the press can capture that for us. Thank you. Great. All right, well, with that. I think. That's it for the evening, so I'm looking for adjournment, please. I haven't gone to councilor billings yet. How about you? All right. How about you, Councilor Gibson? Haven't gone to you yet all night. Want? To second that. All right, perfect. Is anyone against adjournment? No. Great. Have a great night, everyone. Thank you very much. Take care. Bye bye.