170123 Council Budget AGDTable of Contents
Agenda 3
Minutes, January 10, 2017
170110 Council Budget MIN 8
2017 Draft Budget Package
Section 5 - Operations 181
Section 8 - Building, Planning & By-Law 208
Section 10 - Capital Budget Overview 218
Section 11 - Long Term Debt Repayment 222
Section 12 - Consolidated PSAB Summary 225
Section 4 - HR 226
FIN 17-03 Tax Rates Explained
FIN 17-03 275
FIN 17-04 Funding the Asset Management Plan
FIN 17-04 277
FIN 17-05 Reserves
FIN 17-05 278
Reserve Policy 280
FIN 17-02, Building Permit Cost Stabilization Reserve Fund
FIN17-02 Building Permit Cost Stabilization Reserve
Fund 283
RCP 17-02 Budget Issue Paper - Utility Cost Increases
RCP 17-02 Budget Issue Paper - Utility Cost Increases 285
The Mysteries of Electricity Pricing in Ontario 288
Guide to Electricity Pricing in Ontario 294
CAO-HR 17-02, Telephone System Upgrade
CAO-HR 17-02 – Telephone System Upgrade 310
Report CAO-HR 17-01 – Benefit Cost Summary
CAO-HR 17-01 Benefit Cost Summary 311
OPS 17-03 White Paper - Business Case for 1.0 FTE Mechanic
OPS 17-03 313
RCP 17-08 – Budget Issue Paper – Dog Park Project Update
RCP 17-08 - Budget Issue Paper - Dog Park Project
Update 315
DCS 17-03, Highway 3 Business Park Update
Report DCS 17-03 317
Attachment - Report DCS 15-01 320
RCP 17-06 – Budget Issue Paper Garden Bed Maintenance –
Contract vs. In-house
RCP 17-06 - Budget Issue Paper Garden Bed
Maintenance ? Contract vs. In-house 328
RCP 17-09 – Budget Issue Paper – Enhanced Beautification
RCP 17-09 - Budget Issue Paper - Enhanced
Beautification 330
1
RCP 17-10 Budget Paper – Beautification – Oxford-Broadway
Parkette
P 17-10 Budget Paper - Beautification - Oxford-
Broadway Parkette 334
RCP 17-07 – Budget Issue Paper – User Fee Surcharge
RCP 17-07 - Budget Issue Paper - User Fee Surcharge 336
FIN 17-06 Rates & Fees
FIN 17-06 Rates & Fees 338
2017 Community Grant Request Summary
2017 Community Grant Request Summary 339
By-Law 4075, To confirm the proceedings of Council
By-Law 4075 341
2
1.Call to Order
2.Adoption of Agenda
Proposed Resolution #1
THAT the Agenda as prepared for the Budget Council meeting of January 10, 2017 &
January 27, 2017, be adopted.
3.Moment of Silence
4.Disclosures of Pecuniary Interest and the General Nature Thereof
5.Adoption of Council Minutes of Previous Meeting
5.1 Minutes, January 10, 2017
170110 Council Budget MIN
Proposed Resolution #2
THAT the Minutes of the Budget Council Meeting of January 10, 2017, be approved.
6.Finance
6.1. 2017 Draft Budget Package
Section 5 - Operations
Section 8 - Building, Planning & By-Law
Section 10 - Capital Budget Overview
Section 11 - Long Term Debt Repayment
Section 12 - Consolidated PSAB Summary
Section 4 - HR
The Corporation of the Town of Tillsonburg
BUDGET COUNCIL MEETING
Tuesday, January 24, 2017
& January 27, 2017
9:00 AM
Council Chambers
200 Broadway, 2nd Floor
AGENDA
3
Council Meeting – Agenda 2
Proposed Resolution #3
THAT Council receive Section 5 (Operations), Section 8 (Building, Planning & By-Law),
Section 10 (Capital Budget Overview), Section 11 (Long Term Debt Repayment),
Section 12 (Consolidated PSAB Summary) and Section 4 (HR) of the 2017 Draft
Budget Package, as information.
6.2. FIN 17-03 Tax Rates Explained
FIN 17-03
Proposed Resolution #4
THAT Council receive Report FIN 17-03, Tax Rates, as information.
6.3. FIN 17-04 Funding the Asset Management Plan
FIN 17-04
Proposed Resolution #5
THAT Council receive Report FIN 17-04, Funding the Asset Management Plan;
AND THAT council directs staff to bring forward a capital budget in the fall using the
amount of the increase in property value assessment (growth) towards funding the
Asset Management Plan.
6.4. FIN 17-05 Reserves
FIN 17-05
Reserve Policy
Proposed Resolution #6
THAT Council receive Report FIN 17-05, Reserves;
AND THAT Council directs staff to bring forward an updated reserve policy;
AND FURTHER THAT Council accepts the general reserve fund to be reported through
the use of proposed reserves.
6.5. FIN 17-02, Building Permit Cost Stabilization Reserve Fund
FIN17-02 Building Permit Cost Stabilization Reserve Fund
Proposed Resolution #7
THAT Council receive Report FIN 17-02, Building Permit Cost Stabilization Reserve
Fund;
4
Council Meeting – Agenda 3
AND THAT Council establishes a Cost Stabilization Reserve Fund as an obligatory
reserve fund and related bank account.
6.6. RCP 17-02 Budget Issue Paper - Utility Cost Increases
RCP 17-02 Budget Issue Paper - Utility Cost Increases
The Mysteries of Electricity Pricing in Ontario
Guide to Electricity Pricing in Ontario
Proposed Resolution #8
THAT Council receive Report RCP 17-02, Budget Issue Paper – Utility Cost Increases,
as information.
6.7. CAO-HR 17-02, Telephone System Upgrade
CAO-HR 17-02 – Telephone System Upgrade
Proposed Resolution #9
THAT Council receive Report CAO-HR 17-02, Telephone System Upgrade, as
information.
6.8. Report CAO-HR 17-01 – Benefit Cost Summary
CAO-HR 17-01 Benefit Cost Summary
Proposed Resolution #10
THAT Council receive Report CAO-HR 17-01, Benefit Cost Summary, as information.
6.9. OPS 17-03 White Paper - Business Case for 1.0 FTE Mechanic
OPS 17-03
Proposed Resolution #11
THAT Council receive Report OPS 17-03, White Paper – Business Case for 1.0 FTE
Mechanic, as information.
Procedural Motion if Required:
THAT Council move into Closed Session to consider:
Person matters about identifiable individuals, including municipal or local board
employees (Operation Services).
5
Council Meeting – Agenda 4
6.10. RCP 17-08 – Budget Issue Paper – Dog Park Project Update
RCP 17-08 - Budget Issue Paper - Dog Park Project Update
Proposed Resolution #12
THAT Council receive Report RCP 17-08, Budget Issue Paper – Dog Park
Project Update, as information.
6.11. DCS 17-03, Highway 3 Business Park Update
Report DCS 17-03
Attachment - Report DCS 15-01
Proposed Resolution #13
THAT Council receive Report DCS 17-03, Highway 3 Business Park Update,
as information.
6.12. RCP 17-06 – Budget Issue Paper Garden Bed Maintenance – Contract vs.
In-house
RCP 17-06 - Budget Issue Paper Garden Bed Maintenance ? Contract vs. In-
house
Proposed Resolution #14
THAT Council receive Report RCP 17-06, Budget Issue Paper Garden Bed
Maintenance – Contract vs. In-house, as information.
6.13. RCP 17-09 – Budget Issue Paper – Enhanced Beautification
RCP 17-09 - Budget Issue Paper - Enhanced Beautification
Proposed Resolution #15
THAT Council receive Report RCP 17-09, Budget Issue Paper – Enhanced
Beautification, as information.
6.14. RCP 17-10 Budget Paper – Beautification – Oxford-Broadway Parkette
P 17-10 Budget Paper - Beautification - Oxford-Broadway Parkette
Proposed Resolution #16
THAT Council receive Report RCP 17-10, Budget Paper – Beautification –
Oxford-Broadway Parkette, as information.
6
Council Meeting – Agenda 5
6.15. RCP 17-07 – Budget Issue Paper – User Fee Surcharge
RCP 17-07 - Budget Issue Paper - User Fee Surcharge
Proposed Resolution #17
THAT Council receive Report RCP 17-07, Budget Issue Paper – User Fee
Surcharge, as information.
6.16. 2017 Community Grant Request Summary
2017 Community Grant Request Summary
Proposed Resolution #18
THAT Council receive the 2017 Community Grant Request Summary, as
information.
7.By-Laws
By-Laws from the Meeting of January 24, 2017 & January 27, 2017
Proposed Resolution #19
THAT By-Law 4075, To confirm the proceedings of Council at its meetings held on the
24th and 27th day of January, 2017, be read for a first, second and third and final reading
and that the Mayor and the Clerk be and are hereby authorized to sign the same, and
place the corporate seal thereunto.
8. Adjournment
Proposed Resolution #20
THAT the Budget Council Meeting of January 24, 2017 and January 27, 2017 be adjourned
on January 27, 2017 at _____ p.m.
7
ATTENDANCE
Mayor Stephen Molnar
Councillor Maxwell Adam Councillor Penny Esseltine
Councillor Chris Rosehart
Regrets: Deputy Mayor Dave Beres, Councillor Jim Hayes, Councillor Brian Stephenson
Staff: David Calder, CAO
Dave Rushton, Director of Finance/Treasurer Rick Cox, Director of Recreation, Culture & Parks
Jeff Smith, Fire Chief
Tricia Smith, Deputy Clerk
Regrets: Donna Wilson, Town Clerk, Kevin DeLeebeeck, Director of Operations, Geno
Vanhaelewyn, Chief Building Official
1.Call to Order
The meeting was called to order at 9:10 a.m.
2.Adoption of Agenda
Agenda item 7.1 Sections 5 & 8 were deferred to the January 24, 2017 Budget Council
Meeting.
Resolution #1
Moved By: Councillor Rosehart Seconded By: Councillor Esseltine
THAT the Agenda as prepared for the Budget Council meeting of Tuesday, January 10,
2017, be adopted as amended.
Carried
The Corporation of the Town of Tillsonburg
BUDGET COUNCIL MEETING
Tuesday, January 10, 2017
9:00 AM
Council Chambers
200 Broadway, 2nd Floor
MINUTES
8
Council Meeting Minutes, January 10, 2017 2
3.Moment of Silence
4.Disclosures of Pecuniary Interest and the General Nature Thereof
There were no disclosures of pecuniary interest declared.
5.Adoption of Council Minutes of Previous Meeting
5.1. Minutes of the Meeting of December 1, 2016
Minutes, December 1, 2016
Resolution #2
Moved By: Councillor Esseltine Seconded By: Councillor Rosehart
THAT the Minutes of the December 1, 2016 Budget Meeting, be approved.
Carried
6.Overview of the 2017 Proposed Budget – David Calder, CAO
The CAO provided an overview of the 2017 Proposed Budget.
Additional “white papers” will be coming forward for Council’s consideration.
7.2017 Draft Budget – Dave Rushton, Director of Finance
7.1. 2017 Budget Package
Section 1 - Introduction & Overview
The Director of Finance provided an introduction and overview of the 2017 draft budget.
Staff to provide the Tax Vacancy Rebate Rate to Council.
The new carbon tax will impact upon electricity and gas rates in 2017.
Staff is recommending allocating reserve funds for ease in tracking purposes and to
fund specific future projects.
Staff is recommending the liquidation of the non-cash reserve account to keep the cash
received in the reserve and put unsaleable land with parks.
Council recessed at 10:11 a.m.
Council resumed at 10:20 a.m.
9
Council Meeting Minutes, January 10, 2017 3
Section 3 - Finance
The Manager of Finance provided a review of the Finance Department Business Plan.
An increase in the availability of on-line services is being proposed.
Target date for the Debt Policy & Reserve Policy is the second quarter of 2017.
Customer Service Centre delivery model in progress. Staff will be bringing back a
report for the 2017 business plan deliberations.
A joint purchase is being considered with the County of Oxford for a telephone system
in order to achieve cost savings.
Staff to circulate the 2014 IT Strategic Review to Council.
Staff to provide council with historical data of Community Group Grant Requests.
Staff to provide a report to Council on the 2016 Cultural Advisory Committee financial
commitments.
Section 4 - Human Resources
The Human Resources Manager provided a review of the Human Resources Business
Plan.
Staff to provide a report to Council outlining the 5-year trend on Health & Dental costs
and note benefit package options.
Councillor compensation review to be included in the 2017 Human Resources Business
Plan.
Section 6 - Recreation, Culture & Parks
The Director of Recreation, Culture & Parks provided a review of the RCP Business
Plan.
Staff to report additional information on the revenues projected from the proposed user
fee levy surcharge to offset pool deck replacement costs and future improvements and
identify the collection period.
Staff to provide a report to council on options for the Carroll Trail repairs.
Staff to provide a report on the TCC Energy Retrofit pre-tender technical design to
council.
Staff to provide a report regarding the Beautification Working Group’s proposed
beautification efforts, as well as the analysis of costs and benefits of Town beautification
by Town staff or by contracting out.
10
Council Meeting Minutes, January 10, 2017 4
Moved By: Councillor Adam Seconded By: Councillor Esseltine
THAT the five-year update to the Parks, Recreation & Cultural Strategic Master Plan be
removed from the 2017 RCP Business Plan objectives and Budget ($30,000).
Carried
Council took a Lunch Break at 12:27 p.m.
Council resumed at 1:22 p.m.
Section 7 - Fire Services
The Fire Chief provided a review of the Fire Services Business Plan.
Staff to provide an interim report to council on the status of the Fire Strategic Plan.
Staff to bring forward the Fire Rescue Services By-Law in Q1 for amendment.
Staff to provide a report to council on the after-hours customer service support provided
by Fire Dispatch staff.
The rate of remuneration for Fire Fighters is to be circulated by staff to Council.
Section 9 - Economic Development & Marketing
The Development Commissioner provided a review of the Economic Development &
Marketing Business Plan.
Staff to circulate the Downtown Revitalization Study to Council.
Section 10 - Capital Budget Overview
The Director of Finance provided a review of the proposed capital budget.
Staff to provide a further review of the draft capital budget at the January 24, 2017
Budget meeting.
Council discussed time sensitive projects that required pre-budget approval.
Moved By: Councillor Adam Seconded By: Councillor Rosehart
THAT capital project X55 Riverview Reconstruction Stage 2 receive 2017 pre-budget
approval in the amounts of $420,000 (roads) and $197,500 (storm sewers) to prepare
tender documents in order to receive competitive pricing.
Carried
11
Council Meeting Minutes, January 10, 2017 5
Moved By: Councillor Esseltine Seconded By: Councillor Adam
THAT Council pre-approve the Indoor Pool Deck replacement and maintenance (X17
2017) in the 2017 budget and further that financing of the project be reviewed.
Carried
Moved By: Councillor Esseltine Seconded By: Councillor Adam
THAT Council defer Agenda Items 7.2, 7.3, 7.4, 7.5 and 7.6 until the Budget Meeting of
January 24, 2017.
Carried
8.Council Budget Discussions
9.2017 Tax Levy Resolution
Resolution #8
Moved By: Councillor Esseltine Seconded By: Councillor Adam
THAT Council receive the 2017 Budget Package, as information.
Carried
10.By-Laws
By-Laws from the Meeting of January 10, 2017
Resolution #9
Moved By: Councillor Rosehart Seconded By: Councillor Adam
9.1 THAT By-Law 4073, To confirm the proceedings of Council at its meeting held on the
10th day of January, 2017, be read for a first, second and third and final reading and
that the Mayor and the Clerk be and are hereby authorized to sign the same, and place
the corporate seal thereunto.
Carried
11. Adjournment
Resolution #10
Moved By: Councillor Esseltine Seconded By: Councillor Rosehart
THAT the Council Meeting of January 10, 2017 be adjourned at 3:28 p.m.
Carried
12
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
199
200
201
202
203
204
205
206
207
208
209
210
211
212
213
214
215
216
217
Contribution Grants Debentures Reserves DC Donation Miscellaneous User PayTaxationCommentsExpenditures to ReservesReservesDebtProject Listing 110 Finance X01 Computer replacments55,000(55,000)- X02 Replacement Server10,000(10,000)- X03 Telephone system replacement125,000(125,000)- X04 Future IT replacement55,000 55,000X51 Records managment storage10,000 10,000X78 CLASS replacement software - Complex & CSC100,000 (100,000)- X79 Purchase Order Software65,000 065,000X82 Website shopping cart8,500 (8,500)- Building Permit surplusTotal 110 Finance363,50065,000 (298,500)130,000120 CSC X39 2017 - Facade brick repair/restoration/refacing24,700 (24,700)- X40 2017 - Relocate water stack from server room8,000 (8,000)- X49 E-send: Tax Bills5,000 05,000Total 120 CSC37,700 (32,700)5,000130 Fleet X66 Replace Unit 29 - Pickup Truck500(500)- Funded through operating budgetX67 Replace Unit 25 - Pickup Truck35,000(35,000)- X68 Replace Unit 64 - Snowplow Truck275,000(275,000)- X69 Replace Unit 83 - Sidewalk Machine150,000(150,000)- X70 Replace Unit 44 - Service Truck160,000(160,000)- Funded from Oxford CountyX71 Replace Unit 42 - Service Truck500(500)- Funded through operating budgetX72 Replace Unit 85 - Street Sweeper280,000(280,000)- X73 Replace Unit 74 - Hydro Cable Truck300,000(300,000)- Funded from THIX74 Replace Unit 41 - Hydro Service Truck65,000(65,000)- Funded from THIX77 Service Expansion Unit 89 Updgrade - 55hp Tractor75,000(50,000)(25,000)- Total 130 Fleet1,341,000(480,000)(310,000)(25,000)0(1,000)(525,000)- 218
Contribution Grants Debentures Reserves DC Donation Miscellaneous User PayTaxationCommentsExpenditures to ReservesReservesDebtProject Listing 150 Fire X07 Bunker Gear Decontamination14,00014,000X09 Gas Detection and Air Monitoring26,000(26,000)- X10 Low Angle Rescue9,0009,000X30 Fire Communication Infrastructure20,000 20,000X31 Traffic Signal Priority System17,000 (17,000)- X32 Auto Extrication Equipment6,000 6,000X34 Breathing Apparatus25,000 25,000X35 Live Fire Training Simulator - Part 228,000(14,000)14,000X36 Fireground Equipment26,00026,000Total 150 Fire126,00045,000 0(26,000)(14,000)(17,000)114,000210 Engineering X61 Broadway & Glendale Ped X Cont'd50,000 (28,400)21,600X62 Broadway & Oxford Audible Accessibility Upgrades65,000 (65,000)- Gas Tax and County ContributionX63 OSIM Bridge Inspections40,000 (9,700)30,300X64 Quarter Town Line Corridor Management50,000 (50,000)- Total 210 Engineering205,000 (65,000)(38,100)(50,000)51,900220 Roads X54 Annual Paving Program250,000(50,400)199,600OCIF Formula based **X55 Riverview Reconstruction - Stage 2420,000(420,000)- Gas TaxX56 Newell Road Reconstruction787,500(437,800)(349,700)- Small Communities FundX57 Broadway Rehabilitation - Town Limit to North St.928,700(835,800)(92,900)- Connecting Link FundingX60 Potters Road - Sidewalk45,00045,000Total 220 Roads2,431,200 (1,744,000)(92,900)(349,700)244,600219
Contribution Grants Debentures Reserves DC Donation Miscellaneous User PayTaxationCommentsExpenditures to ReservesReservesDebtProject Listing 240 Airport X52 Self-Serve Fuelling Conversion50,000(50,000)- X53 Main Runway Crack Sealing30,000(7,400)22,600Total 240 Airport80,000(57,400)22,600260 Storm Sewers **X55 Riverview Reconstruction - Stage 2147,500147,500X56 Newell Road Reconstruction261,600 (261,600)- Small Communities FundX58 Paget & Rolling Meadows Drain Rehabilitation230,000 (230,000)- Clean Water and Wastewater FundTotal 260 Storm Sewers639,100 (491,600)147,500280 Solid Waste & Recycling X65 Transfer Station Improvements Cont'd130,000(21,000)109,000Total 280 Solid Waste & Recycling130,000(21,000)109,000300 CemX24 2017 - Cemetery Master Plan Implementation40,000(8,000)32,000X25 2017 - Joy Mausoleum repairs20,00020,000X41 2017 Rear Yard Fencing15,00015,000Total 300 Cem75,000(8,000)67,000450 Parks X23 2017 - Annual playground capital replacement program30,00030,000X81 Implementation of Memorial Park276,900 (88,000)(88,900)(50,000)50,000From Service ClubsTotal 450 Parks306,900 (88,000)(88,900)(50,000)80,000460 Rec - Programs X38 2017 - Update to Strategic Master Plan30,000 30,000Total 460 Rec - Programs30,000 30,000220
Contribution Grants Debentures Reserves DC Donation Miscellaneous User PayTaxationCommentsExpenditures to ReservesReservesDebtProject Listing 465 Rec - Bldg Mtce **X12 2017 - Roof repairs167,500 (167,500)- X13 2017 - TCC Fire Panel replacement20,000 20,000X14 2017 Facility Asset Management Planning50,000 (50,000)- OCIF Formula based X15 2017 - LLWP Outdoor Pool Maintenance50,000 (25,000)(25,000)- X16 2017 - Asbestos removal at water meter10,000 10,000**X17 2017 - Indoor pool deck replacement and maintenance100,000 (100,000)- Funded through increase in user feesX18 2017 - TCC Exterior Door replacements30,000 (30,000)- X19 2017 - O150 Community Capacity Grant - Aud/kitchen reno150,000 150,000X20 2017 - Rink LED conversion110,000 (20,000)(90,000)- Energy rebate programsX21 2017 - Design for energy conservation project (iceplant) in 201865,000 (43,000)(22,000)- X22 2017 - Physical security consultant - all facilities15,000 15,000Total 465 Rec - Bldg Mtce767,500 (70,000)(355,500)(47,000)(100,000)195,000475 Museum X45 2017 - Repair/paint ANHS eaves & fascia35,000(35,000)- From ANHS trustX46 2017 - Replace Museum program room floor tiles15,000(5,000)10,000Total 475 Museum50,000(5,000)(35,000)10,000505 EcDev X37 Hwy#3 Business Park - Hwy3 widening550,000(531,500)(18,500)- X83 Downtown Parking Study35,000(35,000)- Parking ReserveTotal 505 EcDev585,000(531,500)(18,500)35,000Total Project Listing7,167,900110,000 (2,458,600)(861,500)(1,580,000)(460,200)(50,000)(36,000)(625,000)1,206,600 ** - Projects marked with "**" are time sensitive; pre-budget approval requested to move forward with these projects specifically221
222
223
224
2016 Sub-Total Total 2017 Sub-Total Total
Budget Budget
REVENUES
Operating ($18,815,300)($19,732,342)
Capital (3,418,800)(7,277,900)
LESS:
Transfer from other funds 1,111,000 2,104,900
Proceeds on debenture issue 1,007,300 861,500
Proceeds on user pay debtenture issue 625,000
TOTAL REVENUE -13,278,200 (20,115,800)-8,863,042 (24,043,842)
EXPENSES
Operating 18,675,300 19,732,443
Non-Tangible Capital 558,700 110,000
Capital 5,322,000 7,167,900
LESS:
Transfer to other funds (709,500)(365,800)
Capital Expenses (5,322,000)(7,167,900)
Debt Principal payments (887,500)(983,121)
TOTAL EXPENSES 17,637,000 17,637,000 18,493,522 18,493,522
ANNUAL SURPLUS: before exclusions (2,478,800)(5,550,320)
EXCLUSIONS:
Amortization of TCA 2,339,700 2,413,600
Post Employment Benefits
Solid Waste Landfill Closure and Post-Closures
TOTAL EXCLUSIONS 4,679,400 2,339,700 2,413,600
ANNUAL SURPLUS: after exclusions (139,100)7,963,920 (3,136,720)
225
TOWN OF TILLSONBURG2017 Business PlanHuman ResourcesTuesday, January 10, 2017226
2HR ServicesRecruitmentSalary AdministrationHRISBenefit AdministrationPolicy & ProceduresEmployee RelationsHealth & Safety/WellnessLabour Relations2017 Business Plan | Human Resources233
32017 BusinessObjectives2017 Business Plan | Human ResourcesItem Owner Budget Value Target Date1.5 % Costing of Living IncreaseHR Manager $72,000 Q2-Q4Health & Dental renewal increaseHR Manager $43,000 Q1-Q4Payroll deduction increase (CPP, EI, WSIB)HR Manager $34,000 (FT) Q1 – Q4Compensation Review – Pay EquityHR Manager $10,000 Q4Compensation review -CouncilHR Manager $0 Q2Health and Safety/Management TrainingHR Manager $5,000 Q1-Q4Succession Planning Program Training and DevelopmentHR Manager $2,500 Q1-Q4240
4Risks•Competitive compensation pressures.•Changing health and safety legislation.2017 Business Plan | Human Resources247
5Opportunities•Increasing the cost of living supports recruitment and retention. •Succession Planning program to provide for business continuity. •Compensation review to ensure we are continuing to remain in compliance with the Pay Equity Act.2017 Business Plan | Human Resources254
6Future Departmental Directions: 3 year outlook• 2018 to 2020• Continuation of Succession Planning Program2017 Business Plan | Human Resources261
7Human Resources2017 Business Plan | Human Resources2016 2017Total FTE Requirements127.32 130.12Change from previous year- 2.8Department FTE ChangeBuilding & By-Law 0.33Clerk’s Department 0.33Economic Development 0.10Hydro Operations 1.33Operations 0.16Recreation, Culture & Parks 0.552017 FTE Changes by Department268
Report Title Tax Rates Explained
Report No. FIN 17-03
Author Dave Rushton
Meeting Type BUDGET MEETING
Council Date JANUARY 10, 2017
Attachments
RECOMMENDATION
THAT Council receives report FIN 17-03 Tax Rates as information.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
To explain the difference between Tax rates and the General Levy imposed by the Town.
BACKGROUND
There are two factors which affect the amount of taxes paid by residents of the Town. The first is the General Levy tax rate, and the second is the change in assessment value of a property.
The General tax rate is determined through the budget process. An increase in budget dollars will result in an increase of the general levy tax rate.
The change in Current Value Assessment (CVA or growth) is determined by MPAC based on a variety of
factors. MPAC performs reassessments every 4 years, in which 2017 is year one of the next
reassessment cycle.
Properties with an increase in CVA will see an increase of their property value phased-in over the 4 year
period. Properties with a decrease in CVA will see the decreased value in year one.
An additional impact is the weighting factor provided to each class such as multi-residential, commercial and industrial which are greater than the residential (RT) zoned properties. Farms are taxed at 25% of their value for property tax purposes.
The combination of these factors is what determines a change in tax dollars paid by a municipal taxpayer.
2017 Impact An increase in the budget of $603,200 is proposed. MPAC’s reassessment has resulted in an overall average increase in weighted CVA of 1.1%. A summary of changes in the weighted CVA has been
provided below. Residential class has seen growth in new homes and increased property values while non-residential have decreased. Based on last year’s tax levy, this means the residents will see an
increase of $150,000, before any budgeting impact is factored in.
Page 1 / 2 Tax Rates Explained
275
Since the proposed increase is $603,200 and $150,000 is accounted for through growth, the remaining difference of $453,200 must be funded through a general levy increase. This will result in an overall levy
increase of 3.3% over last year’s tax rate.
What will Residents Pay?
As you can see from the chart above, the value of residential properties has increased by almost 2%,
while non-residential classes combined have decreased by 15%. Unfortunately, when the CVA of
commercial, industrial, farmland or vacant land decreases, the residential class picks up the differential as this will always be our largest growing tax class.
The Median residential CVA increased from $221,750 to $226,000.
The average tax levy for the Median household in 2016 would have been $1,604.21. With the proposed tax dollar increase of $603,200, the same household will pay $1,689.36 in 2017, a difference of $85.15 per year, or $7.10 per month
As discussed in the Asset Management Plan, an increase in the levy is needed to build towards a plan
that will allow us to sustain the assets we have. Based on this year, $25.86 of the median resident’s tax
increase of $85.15 would go to capital.
2017 General Levy PRELIMINARY
2017 2016
2017 2017 WEIGHTED/ WEIGHTED/
Phase - In TAX DISCOUNTED DISCOUNTED
CVA RATIO CVA CVA
RESIDENTIAL 1,292,511,258 1 1,292,511,258 1,256,827,097
MULTI-RESIDENTIAL 51,345,425 2.74 140,686,465 144,847,634
COMMERCIAL 142,270,968 1.9018 270,570,927 276,357,943
COMMERCIAL NEW CONSTRUCTION 9,915,950 1.9018 18,858,154 18,103,234
VACANT UNITS/EXCESS LAND 1,046,739 1.9018 1,393,482 1,760,791
VACANT LAND 1,983,250 1.9018 2,640,221 3,007,849
COM'L NEW CONST. - EXCESS LAND 34,300 1.9018 45,662 49,257
INDUSTRIAL 29,683,125 2.63 78,066,619 81,833,055
INDUSTRIAL NEW CONSTRUCTION 1,744,750 2.63 4,588,693 4,576,200
VACANT UNITS/EXCESS LAND 597,225 2.63 1,020,956 1,422,475
VACANT LAND 719,725 2.63 1,230,370 1,006,212
LARGE INDUSTRIAL 23,542,400 2.63 61,916,512 63,305,749
VACANT UNITS/EXCESS LAND 44,400 2.63 75,902 330,571
PIPELINES 5,011,500 1.2593 6,310,982 6,086,197
FARMLAND 7,941,475 0.25 1,985,369 1,703,325
FARMLAND DEV PH 1 1,306,075 1 587,734 533,385
1,569,698,565 1,882,489,304 1,861,750,973
Page 2 / 2 Tax Rates Explained
276
Report Title Funding the Asset Management Plan
Report No. FIN 17-04
Author Dave Rushton
Meeting Type BUDGET MEETING
Council Date JANUARY 10, 2017
Attachments
RECOMMENDATION
THAT Council receives report FIN 17-04 funding the Asset Management Plan;
AND THAT council directs staff to bring forward a capital budget in the fall using the amount of the
increase in property value assessment (growth) towards funding the Asset Management Plan.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
To explain the support in taxation for sustaining the asset management plan.
BACKGROUND
The Director of Operations and the Deputy Treasurer have reviewed the Asset Management Plan with council and proposed that a capital tax levy be put in place. This would work towards providing us with funding to replace assets as they wear out rather than through debenture.
We are proposing to use the growth in property value as the source for increased funding. With this plan,
the funding of asset replacement would be funded through the tax on the increasing value of real estate.
The overall growth this year, after factoring in the increase in residential real estate values and the
decrease in the assessed values of non-residential values, is a 1.1% increase. We would like to see this
method as a consistent funding source in our plan to have a sustainable Asset Management Plan.
The benefits of this would be to allow an increase annually to the capital budget that is predictable. With this information, we could bring a capital budget before council in the fall for approval prior to the operating budget. This timing would allow us to get better pricing on our projects as we find first to
market often sees better pricing in tenders. It also allows us a better schedule to start and plan work during the winter prior to busy construction seasons.
With direction from council, we can bring the capital budget forward in the fall of 2017 using the growth rate for funding.
Page 1 / 1 Funding AMP
277
Report Title Reserves
Report No. FIN 17- 05
Author Dave Rushton
Meeting Type BUDGET MEETING
Council Date JANUARY 10, 2017
Attachments Unrestricted Reserves and Reserve Policy
RECOMMENDATION
THAT Council receives report FIN 17-05 Reserves;
AND THAT Council directs staff to bring forward an updated reserve policy;
AND FURTHER THAT Council accepts the general reserve fund to be reported through the use of proposed reserves.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
To explain the value of separating the monies collected for various projects and activities.
BACKGROUND
“Reserves” are a provision or amount that is designated for a future purpose that extends beyond the
current fiscal year. Reserves are set up or utilized by resolution.
Prior to 2009, we maintained separate general ledger accounts for various reserves. In that year, we
reduced our tax rate and ended the year with a very large deficit. To assist with this, council directed that unrestricted reserves be used to offset the deficit. Since that time, funds have been put into the general
reserve fund rather than specific funds. In 2013, the attached Reserve Policy was established but general ledger accounts were not re-established. We would like to return to the practice of having unrestricted reserves maintained in the
same bank account but separate general ledger accounts. This will allow us to use the funds for the purpose for which they were collected and still leave them ultimately to the direction of council to redirect
them as necessary.
To demonstrate this, we have incorporated this in the 2017 Budget for information purposes. Some operating departments such as fleet, and beginning in 2017 IT, collect monies for future capital
purchases within their charges to other departments. We will be asking in the new policy for these funds
to be transferred into reserves for future year’s asset replacement.
With direction from council, staff will bring forward a revised “Reserve Policy” establishing the new
reserves. The policy will provide for direction of operation funds including monies collected for future projects and the use of reserves for surplus earnings or deficit.
Page 1 / 2 Reserves
278
UNRESTRICTED RESERVES
Reserve Investment Projected
Account Balance Transfers Transfers or Other Balance
Name 01-Jan-17 In - 2017 Out - 2017 Income 31-Dec-17
Income 20,000 20,000
Airport 57,450 57,400 50
Building - -
Council 13,400 13,400
CSC 32,703 32,700 3
Ec. Dev 849,271 531,500 317,771
Eng 38,156 38,100 56
Fire 14,000 45,000 14,000 45,000
Fleet 319,552 310,000 9,552
General 411,575 411,575
IT 302,192 65,000 290,000 77,192
Misc 220,000 220,000
Parking 180,214 36,000 144,214
Parks 21,918 21,918
Police 123,783 41,000 82,783
RCP 140,656 143,900 3,244-
Roads 92,754 92,900 146-
Roof 5,318 5,318
Museum 5,000 5,000 -
Election 44,000 44,000
Trans Stn 21,000 21,000 -
Non-cash 398,532 398,532
3,291,474 110,000 1,613,500 20,000 1,807,974
Page 2 / 2 Reserves
279
THE CORPORATION OF THE TOWN OF TILLSON BURG
RESERVE POLICY
APPOVAL DATE: REVISION DATE:
11/25/201 3
APPENDICES: N/A
Page 1
Page 1 of 3
280
BY-LAW No. 3779
OF THE
CORPORATION OF THE TOWN OF TILLSONBURG
A BY-LAW TO ESTABLISH A RESERVE POLICY
NOW THEREFORE THE COUNCIL OF THE CORPORATION OF THE TOWN OF TILLSONBURG
HEREBY ENACTS AS FOLLOWS:
1.0 DEFINITIONS
In this By-Law:
a) "Reserves" is a provision or amount that is designated for a future purpose that
extends beyond the current fiscal year. Reserves are set up or utilized by resolution.
All related interest earnings are reported as general operating earn ings.
b) "Reserve Fund" shall mean an amount set asid e by a by-law based on a statutory
requirement (obligatory reserve fund) or a specific designated purpose (discretionary
reserve fund). The Development Charges reserve fund, for example, is an obligatory
reserve fund, req uired by legislation that is maintained year over year to help fund
growth related capital projects. Or the Cemetery Maintenance Reserve Fund that is
maintained year over year to fund Cemetery repairs and maintenance expenditures.
Cash placed in a reserve fund earns interest.
2.0 POLICY STATEMENT
2.1 Objectives:
a. To establish reserves as approved by Council for:
i. future capital expenditures;
ii. operating projects or surpluses;
iii. sale of fixed assets or land
iv. unexpected or unplanned events;
v. th e reduction of debt financing;
vi. or any oth er pu rpose that Council designates;
Page 2
281
that would otherwise cause fluctuations in the operating or capital budgets.
b. To establish reserve funds through the adoption of a by-law for:
i. specific purposes as approved by Council.
c. All reserves held in cash will be held in a separate bank account.
3.0 ACCOUNTABILITY
The Director of Finance or his/her designate shall maintain accountability on behalf of Council
relating to the administration of reserves, including the process to transfer to and from
reserves once approved by Council.
Staff provides recommendations on the transfer of funds to and from reserves.
4.0 PRESCRIBED COUNCIL AUTHORITY
a. Establish new reserves;
b. Close existing reserves;
c. Amalgamate reserves;
d. Transfer funds to and from reserves via the approved annual budget;
e. Transfer funds to and from reserves through Council resolution not addressed through
the budget process.
5.0 REPORTING
Projected contributions and uses of reserves are provided as a component on the annual
budget process. Reserve and reserve fund balances are provided as a component of the
annual Town financial statements.
6.0 OTHER
Where any other By-law exists which is in conflict with a provision of this Policy, the provision
of this Policy shall be deemed to apply.
This Policy shall be reviewed and updated,y
date of its enactment. (
~Donna Wilson
DATED
Page 3
282
Report Title Building Permit Cost Stabilization Reserve Fund
Report No. FIN 17-02
Author JANELLE COSTANTINO
Meeting Type Council Meeting
Council Date JANUARY 9, 2017
Attachments None
RECOMMENDATION
THAT Council receives report FIN 17-02 Building Permit Cost Stabilization Reserve Fund as information.
AND THAT Council acknowledges the enabling authority of the Building Code Act and
establishes the Cost Stabilization Reserve Fund as an obligatory reserve fund.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
As indicated on page 18 of the Tunnock Consulting Ltd Building Permit Fee Review report
provided for the November 14th 2016 council meeting, Staff is requesting Council to formally
recognize the current accounting reserve for building surpluses as a Cost Stabilization Reserve Fund (CSRF).
BACKGROUND
Section 7(2) of the Ontario Building Code Act states “The total amount of the fees authorized
under clause (1) (c) must not exceed the anticipated reasonable costs of the principal authority
to administer and enforce this Act in its area of jurisdiction” meaning fees collected are to be
used to administer the Act; surpluses cannot be used to fund general Town expenditures, and deficits should be funded from a Reserve Fund.
As a result of the above section, the Building department must report their surpluses and deficits
to the industry as a separate entity.
For this reason, the CSRF is to be established to provide for capital expenditures and revenue stabilization, as building permit activity is highly cyclical.
Revenues to the CSRF are an annual budgeted allocation from Building Permit revenues, as
well as additional revenues added from Building Permit surplus as it occurs. As recommended by Tunnock Consulting Limited, the annual budgeted allocation from building permit revenues is recommend to be 20% of the cost of a building permit fee as this reflects
approximately the variation in the volume of fees over the past five year period. This allocation of
Page 1 / 2 Building Stabilization Reserve Fund
283
20% is still up for approval by Council. As such, the approval of this report and the CSRF does not approve the recommended allocation of building permit fees to the CSRF.
Expenditures from the CSRF are to stabilize the building permit revenue line in the Operating
Budget and to fund Building department capital expenditures. Currently, the Town has an accounting reserve in place where the annual building department
surplus from 2014 and 2015 has been deposited. However, as this reserve was simply set up for
accounting purposes, Staff is asking Council to formally establish this reserve through resolution
in order to enable the authority of the Building Code Act. Staff is requesting this fund to be set up as an Obligatory Reserve Fund as these types of funds,
by definition, are “monies set aside and legally restricted by provincial legislation, a municipal by-
law, or agreement. The funds are raised for a specific purpose and cannot be used for any other
purpose.” CONSULTATION/COMMUNICATION
The Town has consulted with Tunnock Consulting Ltd. in order to establish the building permit
revenue allocation to the CSRF. FINANCIAL IMPACT/FUNDING SOURCE
There is no financial impact as a result of formally recognizing this reserve as a CSRF.
Page 2 / 2 Building Permit Cost Stabilization Reserve Fund
284
Report Title Budget Issue Paper: Utilities Cost Increases
Report No. RCP 17-02
Author Rick Cox, Director of Recreation, Culture & Parks
Meeting Type Budget Meeting
Council Date January 10, 2017
Attachments •The Mysteries of Electricity Pricing in Ontario
•Guide to Electricity Pricing in Ontario
RECOMMENDATION
THAT Report RCP 17-02 – Budget Issue Paper – Utility Cost Increases be received for information.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Unit costs for utilities (electricity, gas & water) have risen over the last five years. Increases in
the budget allocation for utilities have not kept up with increases in actual costs. The largest
contributor to the increased cost is the increase in the unit cost of hydro.
BACKGROUND
The combined cost to the Town for utilities continues to rise year over year. 2012 was the last
year for which the annual budget allocation for utilities was not exceeded by actual utility costs.
The largest increase in cost that the Town is experiencing is for electricity. As an example, the amount the Town paid for streetlight hydro in 2012 was just over $186,000. By 2015 that
amount was almost $237,000, an increase of 27% over that time period.
Factors contributing to the unit rate of electricity:
The electricity price portion of the bill is broken down into two price components:
•Electricity Price: Also known as the spot price, the market clearing price (MCP) or the
Hourly Ontario Energy Price (HEOP)
•Global Adjustment: The global adjustment (GA) is the difference between the market
price and the electricity price contracted by the government. It is the “top-up” that most suppliers are paid when they generate electricity. This means that as the market price
goes up, the global adjustment goes down because suppliers are recovering more of their
Year Budget Actual*Difference
2011 905,999$ 915,051$ -1%
2012 935,383$ 881,010$ 6%
2013 843,630$ 895,679$ -6%
2014 866,250$ 872,656$ -1%
2015 949,921$ 966,254$ -2%
2016 980,500$ 1,052,837$ -7%
* 2016 value is projected as Jan-Nov 2016 actual plus 105% of Dec 2015 actuals
Page 1 / 3 RCP 17-02 Budget Issue Paper - Utility .docx
285
costs from the market. As a consumer, the Town pays
both the electricity price and
the global adjustment.
Publications prepared by the
Environmental Commissioner of Ontario and Bruce Power are
attached with this issue paper
as additional explanation.
This cost/kWh graph illustrates the unit cost increase that is being experienced for our
largest hydro accounts at the Complex and for
streetlights. For Jan-Nov this year, the cost for hydro at
the Complex is approximately $363,000 at an average
unit cost of $0.152. If the 2013 average price of $0.119 was in effect, the same hydro would have cost
approximately $287,000.
Efforts to reduce the cost:
As per the Town’s Energy Conservation and Demand
Management plan approved in 2014, there are continual efforts to reduce consumption of utilities
through operational process changes and selection of
new equipment. An example of a process change that
results in substantial annual consumption savings was delaying the start-up of the Memorial ice
rink until after the Shriners’ annual Pork BBQ. This collaboration between the Town, the Shriners and the Agricultural Society has permanently reduced the amount of hydro used at the
Complex during the period of Aug-Nov by 7-9% depending on the weather. While there has
been ‘cost avoidance’ this has translated into little actual cost savings, as the 2016 hydro cost
for that period is 21% higher for 7% less hydro than in 2013.
Other process changes that have been implemented include:
• eliminating winter use of Summer Place (hydro savings)
• using passive solar to pre-heat water for the Waterpark (natural gas savings)
Since hydro is such a large component of the overall town utility cost it has and continues to be hydro consumption reductions that is the main focus. Further, the largest hydro account is the Complex, so the majority of interventions and changes are being made there in order to realize
the largest proportional benefit.
The 2017 draft capital budget includes two energy conservation-related projects to continue
efforts to reduce consumption. One will replace the high-pressure sodium lights above both rinks with new LED technology. The second is the start of implementing the energy retrofit project for the ice plant and pool HVAC that has been developed out of the I. B. Storey Inc.
study. In 2017, the design will be completed and tendered to secure firm costs for construction
in the summer of 2018.
Page 2 / 3 RCP 17-02 Budget Issue Paper - Utility .docx
286
CONSULTATION/COMMUNICATION N/A
FINANCIAL IMPACT/FUNDING SOURCE
If the budget allocation for utility costs is inadequate, there is an impact on the Town’s in-year
financial position.
COMMUNITY STRATEGIC PLAN (CSP) IMPACT
This issue paper provides information in alignment with the following Objective of the Community
Strategic Plan:
• Objective 1 – Excellence in Local Government
Page 3 / 3 RCP 17-02 Budget Issue Paper - Utility .docx
287
The Mysteries of Electricity Pricing in Ontari
Posted on February 20, 2013 by ECO
There is much confusion, misunderstanding and misrepresentation with regard to what the price of e
Ontario, and how we set that price. It seems to me that we must establish a clear understanding of
matter in order to have an intelligent public discussion on the topic. Accordingly, this blog will attemp
basics of electricity pricing. To be clear, I’m just going to focus on the mechanism that sets the price
electricity on your bill. I am ignoring the delivery charge, the regulatory charges and debt retirement
they tack on afterwards.
Hourly Ontario Energy Price (HOEP)
One key element in setting the price of electricity is called the Hourly Ontario Energy Price, or HOEP
“hope”). This price is set on a market, which works like this:
The Independent Electricity System Operator (IESO) predicts the demand of electricity for the next h
with this information, generators (for instance natural gas plants, nuclear power plants, or wind farm
bid to supply electricity to meet this demand. Also in theory, the cheapest suppliers would get contra
demand rises, the price would also rise, and more expensive generators would enter the market.
But this is not a free and open market that Adam Smith would recognise. The invisible hands in this
rummaging in our pockets. Almost all the generators playing in this market have prices that are fixed
or subsidized – so they will never lose money, no matter how low the market goes.
So lets look at a graph of the monthly weighted average HOEP from 2005 to 2012 to see how this w
Page 1 of 6The Mysteries of Electricity Pricing in OntarioEnvironmental Commissioner of Ontario
12/21/2016https://web.archive.org/web/20151022090256/http://www.eco.on.ca/blog/2013/02/20/the-...
288
You can see that the highest HOEP was actually in 2005, where it touched 10¢/kWh. After that, the
off to between 4¢ and 6¢/kWh for a few years. When the economy collapsed in 2009, demand fell a
dropped, and has fluctuated in the 2¢ to 4¢/kWh range for the last 4 years.
The key point here is that (outside of some of our older large hydro-electric facilities), no generator c
sell power at 4¢/kWh. So how is this possible?
Global Adjustment
This magic is done using a marvellous invention called the Global Adjustment (GA). This is an addit
charge collected from consumers to pay for those fixed prices, guarantees and subsidies if the HOE
So let’s plot the Global Adjustment on the same graph as above.
Page 2 of 6The Mysteries of Electricity Pricing in OntarioEnvironmental Commissioner of Ontario
12/21/2016https://web.archive.org/web/20151022090256/http://www.eco.on.ca/blog/2013/02/20/the-...
289
We see that the Global Adjustment displays an almost opposite pattern to the HOEP. With one inter
exception (when it went negative), the GA for 2005 to 2009 varied between zero and 1¢/kWh. But th
HOEP price crashed, the GA jumped up to the 4¢/kWh range – and subsequently has crept even hi
going on here?
Remember that the Global Adjustment is the price guarantor for the generators. It actually went neg
2005, when high HOEP meant that Ontario Power Generation’s nuclear and large hydro plants were
more from the market price than their guarantee, and they had to kick back money. But for most of t
2009 period, the market HOEP was high enough to satisfy the pricing needs of the generators. It is
note on the graph that during that period when the HOEP hits 6¢ the Global Adjustment goes to zer
But that was a different economy. In 2009, Ontario saw a drop in demand, largely due to the recess
increase in supply (from new gas plants coming into service). The change in the supply-demand ba
that almost no generator could make their money on the HOEP, so the price guarantees kicked in, a
Adjustment became as large and then a larger hourly charge than the HOEP.
So what is the real price of electricity?
So to get the real price of electricity, you have to add the HOEP and the Global Adjustment together
that looks like on the same graph.
Page 3 of 6The Mysteries of Electricity Pricing in OntarioEnvironmental Commissioner of Ontario
12/21/2016https://web.archive.org/web/20151022090256/http://www.eco.on.ca/blog/2013/02/20/the-...
290
The red line is the real market electricity price for the period 2005-2012. You can see that the price s
almost 8¢/kWh in heady days of 2005, but then fell back to the 5¢ to 6¢/kWh range through 2006-20
been gradually creeping upwards until the 2005 peak was exceeded, and it broke through 8¢/kWh in
Confusion reigns
This concept – that the HOEP is not the real market price, because you have to add in the Global A
the basis of a lot of confusion in the media and in various public discussions. And this is understand
of the way the information is presented. Take for example this screen shot of the IESO website:
Page 4 of 6The Mysteries of Electricity Pricing in OntarioEnvironmental Commissioner of Ontario
12/21/2016https://web.archive.org/web/20151022090256/http://www.eco.on.ca/blog/2013/02/20/the-...
291
Follow
Follow Environmental Commissioner of Ontario
Get every new post on this blog delivered to your Inbox.
The site is very informative on a number of levels and you can clearly see the current level of the glo
adjustment. But the HOEP is presented as the “Hourly Price” and there is no attempt to add the HO
Global Adjustment together. So in this example, the public would conclude that the market price of e
2.5¢/kWh and not the correct 6.27¢/kWh.
I hope you now have a better understanding of the basis of wholesale electricity pricing – but we are
on your bill yet. To explain your bill we have to get into the intricacies of Time-of-Use pricing and the
Energy Board. And those will have to be the topic of another blog posting.
RELATED POSTS
◾Consciously Uncoupling: A Short-Term Solution to a Long-Term Problem
◾Reduce, Reuse, Recycle – can this mantra fit into our energy planning model?
◾The Time-of-Use Conundrum
◾Promoting Electricity Pricing Literacy (Part 3 of 3)
◾Promoting Electricity Pricing Literacy (Part 2 of 3)
This entry was posted in ECO Commentary, Energy Conservation and tagged electricity, energy
ECO. Bookmark the permalink [/web/20151022090256/http://www.eco.on.ca/blog/2013/02/20/th
of-electricity-pricing-in-ontario/] .
Page 5 of 6The Mysteries of Electricity Pricing in OntarioEnvironmental Commissioner of Ontario
12/21/2016https://web.archive.org/web/20151022090256/http://www.eco.on.ca/blog/2013/02/20/the-...
292
Join other followers:
Enter email address
Sign me up!
Page 6 of 6The Mysteries of Electricity Pricing in OntarioEnvironmental Commissioner of Ontario
12/21/2016https://web.archive.org/web/20151022090256/http://www.eco.on.ca/blog/2013/02/20/the-...
293
Your guide to electricity
pricing in Ontario
A guide designed to help you understand and decipher
the components of your electricity bill for your Ontario-based
commercial or manufacturing business.
- Samira Viswanathan, Market Regulatory Affairs Advisor, Bruce Power Direct
294
2Your guide to electricity pricing in Ontario
Table of Contents
Part 1: The Electricity Basics 3
kW versus kWh 3
Components of Your Electricity Bill 4
Major Energy Players in Ontario 4
Part 2: Factors that affect electricity price in Ontario 5
What makes up the electricity price? 5
Electricity Supply 7
Electricity Price 8
Weighted Average Example 8
Part 3: The Impact of the Global Adjustment on Electricity Price 10
What is The Global Adjustment and How Does it Impact Electricity Price? 10
The Role of the Independent Electricity System Operator (IESO) 11
Part 4: Types of Electricity Charges on Your Bill 13
1. Delivery Charges 13
2. Regulatory Charges 14
3. Debt Retirement Charge 14
4. Ontario Clean Energy Benefit (OCEB) 14
Part 5: Quick tips to reduce consumption and costs 15
For More Information 16
295
3Your guide to electricity pricing in Ontario
Part 1: The Electricity Basics
ELECTRICITY BILLS ARE COMPLEX
It can be frustrating to consistently pay for something you don’t understand or don’t
have the transparency to verify. It’s even more painful when your electricity bills continue
to go up without a clear explanation of the cause. What is driving the electricity cost
increase? How can you reduce costs in this situation?
The first step to solving a problem is understanding it. This guide will help you understand
the main parts of your bill, how the electricity price is derived, and what parts of the bill
you can realistically influence and control.
Eventually, you will be able to use this knowledge to help with things like reducing your
demand charges, conserving electricity, making more informed investment decisions
and ultimately, helping you define key performance indicators (KPIs) for your business.
THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN ENERGY (kWh) AND DEMAND (kW)
1 kilowatt (kW) – this is a measurement of energy
1 kW is like saying your car can go 1 km/hr – think of it like speed. In the electricity world
this is known as power, capacity or demand.
5 kWh is like saying your car went 5 km over a period of time – think of it like distance.
In the electricity world this is called energy or consumption.
So, if you are a business with a 1,000 kW demand, you may consume, over the course
of a month 1,000 kW × 30 days per month × 24 hours per day = 730,000 kWh in a month.
However, you may not always be going at a speed of 1,000 kW so to accurately measure
how far you have gone, your local distribution company (LDC), also called a utility, will
come and read your meter. Your electricity meter is like the odometer of your car.
Your electricity price is made up of both
demand (speed) and consumption (distance) charges.
296
4Your guide to electricity pricing in Ontario
COMPONENTS OF YOUR ELECTRICITY BILL
Utilities vary how they display
your information but generally,
your bill is grouped into the
categories outlined in the
charts below.
BILL COMPONENT TYPE OF CHARGE
Electricity (includes the global adjustment) Consumption
Delivery Demand
Regulatory Charges Consumption
Debt Retirement Charge Consumption
HST Consumption and Demand (based on entire bill)
MAJOR ENERGY PLAYERS IN ONTARIO
Prior to deregulation, the electricity sector was essentially Ontario Hydro.
However, since deregulation in May 2002, the sector is now composed of:
1. Government of Ontario: controls overall direction and policy.
2. Ontario Energy Board: regulatory body.
3. Ontario Power Authority: electricity planner.
4. Independent Electricity System Operator (IESO): grid operator.
5. Hydro One: Transmitter and distributor. It is the only one of the 77 utilities
that is entirely owned by the province.
6. Ontario Power Generation (OPG): electricity generator. It is one of many
generators in Ontario, but is the only one to be entirely owned by the province.
7. Bruce Power: electricity generator. It is the largest nuclear plant in the world
responsible for 30% of the Province’s energy supply.
43%
13%
24%
9%
5%
6%
GA
HOEP
DELIVERY
REGULATORY
DEBT RETIREMENT CHARGE
HST
297
5Your guide to electricity pricing in Ontario
Part 2: Factors that affect electricity price in Ontario
WHAT MAKES UP THE ELECTRICITY PRICE?
This is the consumption portion of your bill where you are billed
by a rate at c/kWh based on your meter reading, usually monthly.
The electricity price portion of your bill is further broken down into two price components:
1. Electricity Price: Also known as the spot price, the market clearing price (MCP),
or the Hourly Ontario Energy Price (HOEP)
2. Global Adjustment: This used to be the called the Provincial Benefit
Both of these prices are constantly changing but you are charged the weighted-average
price over the course of the month.
The electricity price is determined by the intersection of electricity demand and electricity
supply. Both demand and supply are constantly and simultaneously varying.
ELECTRICITYPRICE BROKEN DOWN
43%
13%
24%
9%
5%
6%
43%
24%
GA
HOEP
DELIVERY
REGULATORY
DEBT RETIREMENT CHARGE
HST
298
6Your guide to electricity pricing in Ontario
ELECTRICITY DEMAND
Demand varies based on things like weather and economic activity. Things like air
conditioning and heating increase electricity demand. In exceptional circumstances
even a hockey game can influence demand.
The graph below shows electricity demand on a typical Sunday (shown in grey) and
compares it to the Sunday when Canada beat the U.S. in the ice hockey 2010 Olympic
finals (shown in orange). Demand during the game was overall lower than a typical
Sunday, as many people were gathered together in one room to watch the game.
Spikes are noted during intermissions where people left where they were gathered to
cook food, turn on lights, or use the bathroom – all things which increase demand.
ONTARIO ELECTRICITYDEMANDFEBRUARY 28, 2010
FACE OFF FIRST INTERMISSIONBEGINS
SECONDINTERMISSIONBEGINS
THIRDINTERMISSIONBEGINS
CROSBYSCORES!
OVERTIMEBEGINS
TYPICALSUNDAY
SOURCE: IESO
299
7Your guide to electricity pricing in Ontario
ELECTRICITY SUPPLY
Electricity supply comes from different fuel types, like wind, solar, hydro (waterpower),
natural gas, and nuclear. These fuels types have different supply characteristics, all of
which are needed to meet Ontario demand:
• Base-load supply includes sources like nuclear and hydro. They are low-cost,
reliable and supply electricity 24-7.
• Intermittent supply includes sources like wind and solar. They provide electricity
when the wind is blowing and the sun is shining.
• Peaking supply sources like gas and peaking hydro are used when demand
is at its highest – they are flexible but costly.
Different fuel types also have different trade-offs when looking at costs, environmental
aspects and reliability. There is a need for different types of supply but it is important
to recognize that among these sources, there are drawbacks and benefits.
The Ontario government looks at these trade-offs (shown below) to help them develop
energy policy in the province.
ONTARIOELECTRICITYSUPPLY
MORE FAVOURABLE LESS FAVOURABLE
*Denotes new generation plants Source: Electric Power Research Institute and Ontario Ministry of Energy
ENERGY
TYPE*
ELECTRICITY
COSTS
CAPITAL
COSTS FLEXIBILITY CARBON
EMISSIONS AVAILABILITY
Gas
Solar
Wind
Water
Nuclear
300
8Your guide to electricity pricing in Ontario
ELECTRICITY PRICE
The price for electricity in Ontario is set every 5 minutes based on the intersection of
supply and demand and fluctuates like stock prices. This is called the market clearing
price (MCP). It is set in the following way:
• Electricity supply is offered into the market at its operating cost. Offers of supply
are stacked up from least costly to most expensive to meet demand. Where they
intersect is the market clearing price (MCP).
• In each hour there are 12 MCP’s, and the hourly average of the MCP is called the
Hourly Ontario Energy Price (HOEP). This is what you get charged by your local
utility.
On your electricity bill you see a volume-weighted average* HOEP, when in reality the
price fluctuates on a 5 minute basis. Many large industrial users attempt to estimate
upcoming hourly prices and adjust their consumption in light of changing hourly prices,
to avoid the highest priced hours and reduce their costs. Is there anything you can
adjust in your facility to avoid the highest priced hours of the day?
* WEIGHTED AVERAGE EXAMPLE
TIME ENERGY (kWh) HOEP (¢/kWh) COST ($)
9:00 AM 1400 1.43 19.95
10:00 AM 1500 1.81 27.20
11:00 AM 1600 2.38 38.05
12:00 PM 1600 3.24 51.90
1:00 PM 1500 3.35 50.27
TOTAL 7600 N/A 187.36
Weighted Average HOEP ($187.36/7600 kWh) = 2.47 ¢/kWh
HOURLYONTARIOENERGYPRICE
DEMAND (MW)$/MWh12 am 3 am 6 am 9 am 12 noon 3 pm 6 pm 9 pm 12 am
BASELOADNUCLEAR & HYDRO
INTERMITTENTWIND & SOLAR
PEAKINGNATURAL GAS & PEAKING HYDROMARKETCLEARINGPRICE
301
9Your guide to electricity pricing in Ontario
The average HOEP for 2013 was 2.5 cents/kWh, and although you don’t see it reflected
in your bill, this 2.5 cents average is based on a lot of volatility over the year:
If you avoided the top 100 most expensive hours in 2013 you could lower your average price by 6%.
Price volatility was recently evident in the January 2014 polar vortex which caused major
price spikes.
As previously mentioned, the electricity price is derived from the intersection of supply
and demand. Supply of electricity comes from different sources which have their own
characteristics and trade-offs between costs, environmental friendliness, and reliability.
Demand changes based on weather and economic activity. As both supply and demand
are highly volatile the price fluctuates wildly on a 5 minute basis; however, the electricity
price you see on your bill is the hourly weighted average over the month.
MONTHLYCHARGE IN GLOBAL ADJUSTMENT(¢/kWh)
MONTHLYCHARGE IN GLOBAL ADJUSTMENT(¢/kWh)
-20
-10
0
10
20
30
40
50
HOEP cents/kWh01-Jan-1301-Feb-1301-Mar-1301-Apr-1301-May-1301-Jun-1301-Oct-1301-Jul-1301-Nov-1301-Aug-1301-Dec-1301-Sep-1360
70
HOEP cents/kWh27-Jan-1421-Jan-1415-Jan-1409-Jan-1425-Jan-1419-Jan-1413-Jan-1407-Jan-1403-Jan-1423-Jan-1417-Jan-1411-Jan-1405-Jan-1401-Jan-1440
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
-5
302
10Your guide to electricity pricing in Ontario
Part 3: The Impact of the Global Adjustment on Electricity Price
Since suppliers offer their supply at their operating cost, the market clearing price can
often not be high enough for them to cover all of their costs. For example, the average
HOEP in 2013 was 2.5 cents/kWh, which was not enough for suppliers to cover the
costs of operating their plants.
To ensure Ontario has enough electricity supply, the government has signed long-term
contracts with most suppliers to make sure they will invest in Ontario, build power
plants, and be paid enough to cover their costs (plus a reasonable rate of return).
These costs are recovered through the global adjustment.
WHAT IS THE GLOBAL ADJUSTMENT AND HOW DOES IT IMPACT
ELECTRICITY PRICE?
The global adjustment is the difference between the market price and electricity price
contracted by the government. It is the “top-up” that most suppliers are paid when they
generate electricity.
This means that as the market price goes up, the global adjustment goes down as suppliers
are recovering more of their costs from the market and less from the global adjustment.
As a consumer, you pay both.
For example, if the Hourly Energy Ontario Price is 2 cents/kWh, and an electricity generator
has a contract with the government for 8 cents/kWh, the global adjustment is 6 cents/kWh.
You, as a consumer of this electricity are charged a total of 8 cents/kWh.
GLOBAL ADJUSTMENT
¢/kWhAverage Electricity Costs HOEP + Global Adjustment
8
9
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
HOEP
GA
303
11Your guide to electricity pricing in Ontario
Suppliers have individual contracts, so the amount of the global adjustment will change
depending on which suppliers are meeting demand. One contract may be for 13 cents/kWh
while another is for 5 cents/kWh. The actual payment to a supplier will be the amount of
their contract multiplied by how much they generated:
13 cents/kWh * 300,000,000 kWh/month = $M 39/month
5 cents/kWh * 1,000,000,000 kWh/month = $M 50/month
Typically, the more expensive resources produce less kWh as they are used
at “peak” times, when Ontario consumption is at its highest.
THE ROLE OF THE INDEPENDENT ELECTRICITY SYSTEM OPERATOR (IESO)
Ontario’s grid operator, the Independent Electricity System Operator (the IESO) calculates
the monthly global adjustment which is then used to determine electricity price and billing.
They make two estimates and then provide a final actual amount:
• The 1st estimate is provided on the last business day of the month for the next
month (e.g., 1st estimate for October is published on Sept 30)
• The 2nd estimate is provided on the last business day of the month for the current
month (e.g. 2nd estimate for October is published on Oct 31)
• The final rate is published at the middle of the following month (e.g., the final October
rate is posted around November 15).
These preliminary estimates need to be made in advance of the final so that the LDCs
can bill their customers on time by using the 1st or 2nd estimate and then truing up their
customer in the following bill cycle. The majority of customers in Ontario are billed using
the first estimate of the global adjustment.
If we look at the September 2013 1st estimate, the IESO had to:
• Estimate the amount of supply and the “top-up” money that will be paid to suppliers
(millions of dollars each month) = $M 666.7, and divide it by;
• Estimate of monthly of all Ontario consumption = 7,647,396 MWh, to arrive at
$63.08/MWh (or 6.308 cents/kWh)
*Note: 1 MWh = 1000 kWh.
This is no simple task and is why there is often a deviation between both estimates and
the actual rate. You can find the IESO’s global adjustment information here.
http://www.ieso.ca
304
12Your guide to electricity pricing in Ontario
There is also variation in the global adjustment
month over month, as illustrated in the graph below.
It is difficult to predict the variation in global adjustment but it is clear that the global
adjustment is on the rise. It will continue to rise as suppliers with government contracts
build projects that require this “top-up” to the market price. The graph below shows the
increase in yearly global adjustment since 2009:
MONTHLYCHARGE IN GLOBAL ADJUSTMENT(¢/kWh)
YEARLYAVERAGE GLOBALADJUSTMENT(¢/kWh)Monthly Change in Global Adjustment (¢/kWh)JanJanMayMayOctOctFebFebJunJunNovNovMarMarAugAugJulJulDecDecAprAprSepSep3
2
1
0
-1
2012 2013
-2
-3
Yearly Average Global Adjustment (¢/kWh)2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
7.0
6.0
5.0
4.0
3.0
2.0
1.0
0.0
3.1
2.9
4.1
5.1
4.9
305
13Your guide to electricity pricing in Ontario
You pay the global adjustment based on how much you consume. This amount varies all
the time as it is based on the “top-up” paid to suppliers of electricity and total amount of
consumption in the province for a given month.
Both the global adjustment and HOEP are energy consumption based charges.
If you had a monthly January 2014 meter reading of 730,000 kWh you would
get billed:
1. Electricity Price = 730,000 kWh * 5.7 cents/kWh (weighted average HOEP) = $41,61
2. Global Adjustment = 1,000,000 * 3.626 cents/kWh (GA 1st estimate) = $26,280
3. Total Electricity Charge = $67,890/month
Part 4: Types of Electricity Charges on Your Bill
1. DELIVERY CHARGES
This is the portion of your bill that utilities charge
to deliver electricity from a generator (e.g., Bruce
Power’s nuclear power plant) to the transmitter’s
system (e.g., Hydro One), to the distributor’s system
(e.g., Toronto Hydro), then to your business, as
depicted in the illustration.
There are 77 utilities that deliver electricity directly to homes and businesses in Ontario.
http://www.ieso.ca/imoweb/siteShared/local_dist.asp
The delivery charges on your bill cover the costs for a utility to build, operate and maintain
infrastructure, such as transmission lines, distribution lines, towers, poles and transformers.
It also includes costs that the utility needs to recover for billing, administration, day-to day
and emergency services, or any other service it provides.
The delivery charge is comprised of a fixed monthly charge and a variable charge.
For business and industry, both charges are based on your demand (kW).
The rate charged by utility companies is regulated by the Ontario Energy Board (OEB),
an independent government agency that serves the public interest. These rates are
determined on a five year cycle. The OEB reviews each rate application through a public
process, and then sets the rates for the distributor to charge. The rate application is
based on a distributor’s costs
306
14Your guide to electricity pricing in Ontario
2. REGULATORY CHARGES
Regulatory charges are the costs of administering the electricity system and market,
maintaining the reliability of the provincial grid, and covers administration fees of the
IESO and the OPA. Utilities collect this charge and pass it through to the IESO who
operates the Ontario grid and the OPA who manages long term planning.
3. DEBT RETIREMENT CHARGE
The Debt Retirement Charge of 0.68¢ /kWh pays down the residual stranded debt of
the former Ontario Hydro. Utilities collect this money and pass it through to the Ontario
government. Although the debt was acquired in the past, it is paid by today’s electricity
customers since the electricity generation and transmission infrastructure financed by
the debt continue to be used by all Ontario’s electricity consumers.
By law, the Debt Retirement Charge will end when the government’s assets and the
estimated value of its other dedicated revenues from the electricity sector are sufficient
to service and retire the remaining amount of debt and other liabilities. The government
estimates that the Debt Retirement Charge will likely end between 2015 and 2018.
Click here for more information.
http://www.fin.gov.on.ca/en/tax/drc/index.html
4. ONTARIO CLEAN ENERGY BENEFIT (OCEB)
The Ontario Clean Energy Benefit takes 10% off the cost of up to 3,000 kWh/month
of electricity use. A medical exemption from the 3,000 kWh/month cap is available.
Medical Exemption.
http://www.energy.gov.on.ca/en/clean-energy-benefit/#qme#qme
Click here for more information.
http://www.energy.gov.on.ca/en/clean-energy-benefit
The OCEB expires on December 31, 2015.
307
15Your guide to electricity pricing in Ontario
Based on the information in this guide, there are 6 things you can do to start reducing
consumption and saving money for your Ontario-based business today.
1. The electricity component of your bill is charged on a weighted consumption (kWh)
basis, so the less you consume the lower the portion of your bill will be. However we
now know that it also matters when you consume, so the best thing to do is avoid
consuming in times when the price of electricity is high. This typically happens in the
“peak” hours of the day from 7am to 7pm. You can also sign contracts with an electricity
retailer like Bruce Power Direct for a set price of electricity over a longer period of
time (e.g., 1 year).
2. Similarly, consume less during peak hours of the day. The global adjustment is
charged on a weighted consumption (kWh) basis, so the less you consume during
peak hours of the day, the lower this portion of your bill will be.
3. The delivery component of your bill is charged on a demand basis. Some utilities like
Toronto Hydro charge you based on your maximum demand and your demand during
peak hours (7am – 7pm on weekdays). Other utilities use your average demand. De-
pending on your utility, lowering your maximum, peak, or average demand will lower
your delivery costs.
4. The regulatory component makes up about 5% of your bill. The majority of this
charge is billed on a consumption basis; therefore, the less you consume, the less
you pay.
5. The Debt Retirement Charge is also a consumption based charge – the less you
consume, the less you pay.
Part 5: Quick tips to reduce consumption and costs
308
For More Information
For more information on anything included in this guide, or advice on how to reduce
costs and consumption even further, please contact Bruce Power Direct:
CHRIS LOUGHREN
Manager, Commercial Energy Solutions
Bruce Power Direct
Email: chris.loughren@brucepower.com
Phone: 416-786-7336
Toll Free: 1-855-247-1122
BECOME AN EMPOWERED ELECTRICITY CONSUMER.
Let us help you understand electricity pricing in Ontario and start saving today.
309
Report Title Telephone System Upgrade
Report No. CAO-HR 17-02
Author Ashley Andrews, Manager of Human Resources
Meeting Type Budget Meeting
Council Date JANUARY 24, 2017
Attachments N/A
RECOMMENDATION
THAT Council receive Report CAO-HR 17-02 – Telephone System Upgrade as information.
BACKGROUND
There are several reasons as to why the telephone system within the Town requires an upgrade;
the most pressing of these reasons is due to the phone system being past end of life. Avaya, our
current phone manufacturer stopped support in October of 2015. They have continued to provide support to third parties, such as Unity, who we currently use, until October of 2018, but
because this is an aging phone system, trying to locate parts when they are required is very
difficult. Due to this, should a main component breakdown, we may be looking at the phone
system being down for quite some time while we try to locate the appropriate part.
Another concern with the current phone system is the way in which the phone lines work with
our current hardware. We have had a number of issues over the last year or so with the number
of lines available and receiving a busy signal. There are upgrades that can be done to our
current system to help with this, but the cost would be significant and as stated previously, the
system would continue to be unsupported.
It has been 15 years since we put our current phone system in place, along with the Business
Communication Manager (BCM) and technology has changed significantly since then. Many of
the features that would help to enhance customer service are just not available through our
current BCM. Some of these features include receiving voicemail through email, allowing your office phone to connect to your Blackberry, enhanced VoIP features, etc.
FINANCIAL IMPACT/FUNDING SOURCE
The associated cost of $125,000 has been funded through the use of IT Capital reserves and
included in the 2017 proposed draft budget.
Page 1 / 1 CAO-HR 17-02 – Telephone System Upgrade.docx
310
Report Title Benefit Cost Summary
Report No. CAO-HR 17-01
Author Ashley Andrews, Manager of Human Resources
Meeting Type Budget Meeting
Council Date JANUARY 24, 2017
Attachments N/A
RECOMMENDATION
THAT Council receive Report CAO-HR 17-01 – Benefit Cost Summary as information.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Council requested information on the cost of benefits over a five year period.
BACKGROUND
A benefit cost summary for 2013 – 2017 is provided for Council’s information.
Health Dental Life AD & D Dependent Life Total Cost
2017 291,089.64 123,374.15 43,723.17 5,313.07 3,997.19 469,514.21
2016 255,845.95 120,438.32 39,098.38 4,946.59 3,742.20 426,087.44
2015 247,675.91 127,970.94 43,017.19 5,287.83 3,545.64 429,512.50
2014 274,409.60 126,274.85 60,437.08 5,388.37 4,126.08 472,649.97
2013 298,661.64 134,700.54 56,196.89 5,471.80 3,831.62 500,875.50
The most significant increase with regard to benefits within the 2017 draft budget is for extended
health benefits, which include prescription drug costs. The factors affecting this increase include
both an aging workforce, as well as our experience/utilization rating. The cost and utilization of
prescription drugs claimed by employees is continuing to rise.
The Senior Leadership Team has met to review options available by the plan carrier, as well as
additional carriers, and recommends remaining status quo. The plan utilization and experience
will continue to be monitored closely throughout the 2017 year. Options will be reviewed to
determine what actions may be required going forward to reduce costs where possible.
Page 1 / 2 CAO-HR 17-01 Benefit Cost Summary.docx
311
FINANCIAL IMPACT/FUNDING SOURCE
The associated cost of $43,000 for the increased 2017 benefit premium cost has been included
in the 2017proposed draft budget.
Page 2 / 2 CAO
312
Report Title White Paper – Business Case for 1.0 FTE Mechanic
Report No. OPS 17-03
Author Senior Leadership Team
Meeting Type Budget Meeting
Council Date January 10, 2017
Attachments
RECOMMENDATION
THAT Council receive Report OPS 17-03 White Paper – Business Case for 1.0 FTE
Mechanic as information.
SUMMARY
Fleet Services is responsible for the stewardship of the Town’s fleet of vehicles and equipment
including compliance with applicable legislative requirements for various Town departments.
Services and responsibilities include:
•Preventative Maintenance
•24 hour / 7 days per week On-Call Service
•General Repairs and Documentation as per CVOR Reg 424
•Warranty Recovery & Tracking
•Recall Notification & Tracking
•Fuel Inventory Management
•Parts & Supplies Inventory Management
•Replacement Specifications and Bid Evaluation
•Surplus Vehicle Disposal Administration
•Vehicle Licensing, Registration and Insurance
•Motor Vehicle Inspection Station requirements as per HTA 601
•Annual Vehicle Inspection and Report as per HTA Reg 611
•Review all Driver Daily Inspection Reports as per HTA Reg 199
•Conduct Immediate Repairs of any critical defects reported as per HTA Reg 512
•Documentation of the Drivers Hours of Service as per HTA Reg 555
•Review Driver and Carrier Abstract as per CVOR Reg 424
•Vehicle Accident Damage Administration
The dedicated hard work of current staffing resources within Fleet Services is no longer
sufficient to regain and maintain compliance with the requirements of the Commercial Vehicle
Operator Registration (CVOR) Reg 424 for the Town.
The increased administrative demands as a result of changing legislative requirements to the
CVOR and various regulations under the Highway Traffic Act (HTA) has not only increased the
work load, but also the backlog of outstanding repairs, resulting in service level issues to user
departments (i.e. Roads, THI, Fire, Parks, etc.) that provide services to the community.
Page 1 / 2
313
Some of the risks associated with continuing status quo include:
• employee burn-out
• increased repair backlog
• increased/continued service level issues to user departments
• continued non-compliance with CVOR and HTA regulations
CONSULTATION / COMMUNICATION
As part of the 2017 draft budget development Senior Leadership discussed the possibility of
outsourcing mechanic services, but determined that contracting out would not alleviate the need to backfill during vacation or illness, nor assist with succession planning. In addition, due to the
nature of Town business, internal prioritization, knowledge, and expertise is required to ensure
operator and public safety. The Senior Leadership Team also discussed the importance of the
additional staff resource within Fleet Services to help mitigate service level issues to user
departments, prevent employee burn-out, and the importance of regaining CVOR compliance.
FUNDING IMPACT/ FUNDING SOURCE
The associated cost of $75,000 for the 1.0 FTE Mechanic has been included in the 2017 proposed draft budget.
Page 2 / 2
314
Report Title Budget Issue Paper: Dog Park Project Update
Report No. RCP 17-08
Author Rick Cox, Director of Recreation, Culture & Parks
Meeting Type Budget Meeting
Council Date January 24, 2017
Attachments •
RECOMMENDATION
THAT Report RCP 17-08 – Budget Issue Paper – Dog Park Project Update be received for information.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
As part of the 2016 Budget and workplan, funds collected from late fees on dog licenses were
contributed towards building a reserve to implement a dog park. This report provides Council
with an update on the status of this project.
BACKGROUND
At the Council meeting of May 11, 2015, the following resolution was adopted.
Moved By: Councillor Adam Seconded By: Deputy Mayor Beres
THAT Council receive Report RCP 15-20 - Tillsonburg Dog Park Recap as information; AND THAT consideration be included in the 2016 budget deliberations;
AND THAT the matter be directed to the Parks and Recreation Advisory Committee.
Carried.
In the 2016 budget through the the 2016 Rates & Fees By-Law, late fees collected from dog
licenses were allocated to a reserve. The intent of the ongoing collection for this reserve is to
assist with funding the implementation of a dog park, and then once built, to fund the maintenance costs of the dog park. The 2017 draft budget includes a continuation of this. The implementation schedule proposed in the 2016 budget was to plan for a 2018 construction
project.
The Parks and Recreation Advisory Committee struck a sub-committee which has been working
on the issue since late 2015, including a public consultation process in 2016. The sub-
committee has been providing regular updates to the Advisory Committee and has a further report on the Committee’s agenda for an upcoming meeting.
The Dog Park project has been added to the 2017 RCP workplan as an amendment to the copy
originally distributed.
CONSULTATION/COMMUNICATION N/A
Page 1 / 2 RCP 17-08 - Budget Issue Paper - Dog Par.docx
315
FINANCIAL IMPACT/FUNDING SOURCE At the end of 2016, there was $3,425 contributed to reserves from dog licence late fees. The
current development charge reserve includes $36,000 that has been collected for implementing
a dog park. The Development Charge Study assumes a $40,000 implementation cost, of which
the $36,000 funds the eligible 90% portion.
While the implementation costs are not yet clear, the funding plan is designed to implement and maintain the dog park without use of taxation. Construction would not proceed until there are
adequate reserve funds in place through multiple years of license fee contributions and potential
supplementary fundraising by proponents of a dog park.
COMMUNITY STRATEGIC PLAN (CSP) IMPACT This issue paper provides information in alignment with the following Objectives of the
Community Strategic Plan:
• Objective 1 – Excellence in Local Government
• Objective 2 – Culture & Community
Page 2 / 2 RCP 17-08 - Budget Issue Paper - Dog Par.docx
316
Report Title Highway 3 Business Park Update
Report No. DCS 17-03
Author Cephas Panschow, Development Commissioner
Meeting Type Council Budget Meeting
Council Date January 24, 2017
Attachments Report DCS 15-01 Highway 3 Business Park Development Plan
RECOMMENDATION
THAT Report DCS 17-03 Highway 3 Business Park Update be received for information.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The purpose of this report is to provide Council with an update on the development plan for the
Highway 3 Business Park as part of Council’s consideration of the funding requested in the 2017 budget.
BACKGROUND
A number of reports have been provided to Council over the past few years; including most
recently:
Report DCS 13-44 Industrial Land Update – Highway 3 Business Park (June 13, 2013)
Report DCS 15-01 Highway 3 Business Park Development Plan (January 22, 2015)
At the time of the last report, staff identified a number of steps to move forward with the
construction of the Highway 3 Business Park:
Item Work Involved
Final Design &
Environmental
Assessment
Highway 3/Clearview Drive Intersection
Storm Water Management Pond
Clearview Drive South
Street “C”
Phase 1: Hwy 3
Interchange
improvements
Construction of Hwy 3 InterchangeImprovements
Phase 2: Construction Clearview Drive South (Partial)
SWM pond construction
Phase 3: Construction Completion of Clearview Drive South and Street “C”
Page 1 / 3
317
Progress on the development of a new business park has been stymied by a number of factors including the Highway 3 reconstruction undertaken by the Province of Ontario in 2015 and the
requirement by the Ministry of Transportation that the consultant for the final design of the
intersection have Ministry certification under their Registry, Appraisal and Qualification System
(RAQS).
In order to meet the requirement for a RAQS approved consultant, staff released a Request for Proposal (RFP) on March 30, 2016 with a response deadline of May 31, 2016. However,
despite providing the RFP to the complete list of RAQS approved consultants in the Province of
Ontario, the Town did not receive any proposals by the deadline. This left the Town in the
unfortunate position of not being able to move forward due to the lack of a suitably qualified
consultant.
In order to move forward staff have been working with the Town’s existing Engineering
Consultant, CJDL Engineering, to find a RAQS certified consultant. In that regard, staff is
anticipating a proposal shortly and anticipate moving forward with the final design and
environmental assessment for the intersection in the near future.
The 2017 budget contains funds to move forward with the construction of the Highway 3/ Clearview Drive intersection once the final design and environmental assessment is completed.
The completion of the intersection upgrades to Ministry of Transportation requirements will
essentially remove any barriers to marketing the business park to investors as, once a land sale
occurs, the construction of Clearview Drive South and the Storm Water Management (SWM) Pond could proceed in conjunction with any new developments (although they would be required to be completed prior to occupancy of any new building). The Town could also decide expedite
the next phases of the project in order to improve the marketability of the business park. This
would be subject to Council approval at a later date.
Report DCS 15-01 recommended that Council move forward with the development of the Highway 3 Business Park for the following reasons:
Industrial vacancy rates across Southwestern Ontario are declining and this will lead to
increased interest in Greenfield development opportunities;
Manufacturing employment is increasing and this points to decreased capacity within
existing manufacturer facilities in the region;
Some local manufacturers have been contemplating expansions to meet demand;
Improving the “shovel-ready” status of these lands will make these lands more attractive
to prospective purchasers and improve the likelihood that the Town will be successful in
attracting investment and in a shorter timeframe.
These reasons are still valid and, in fact, even more so as industrial vacancy has continued to decline, manufacturing employment has continued to grow and many local manufacturers are approaching capacity. Further, the Town of Tillsonburg realized the sale of its shovel ready
industrial lands in 2016 resulting in the construction of two new industrial buildings totalling over
86,000 square feet and 56 jobs initially and increasing to over 100 jobs in the future.
Page 2 / 3 CAO
318
Increasing the supply of shovel ready lands will enable the Town of Tillsonburg to remain
competitive in terms of attracting investment and building the Tillsonburg economy.
CONSULTATION/COMMUNICATION
The Town’s Development Committee has discussed the supply of shovel ready industrial lands on a number of occasions and is strongly supportive of moving forward with this project.
FINANCIAL IMPACT/FUNDING SOURCE
The 2017 draft budget contains $550,000 for the Highway 3/Clearview Drive intersection with
$531,500 in funding from the Industrial Land Reserve and $18,500 in funding from the
Development Charge Reserve. There is no impact to taxation for this phase of the project.
COMMUNITY STRATEGIC PLAN (CSP) IMPACT
The development of a new business park is in keeping with the vision of the Community
Strategic Plan theme of Economic Sustainability as outlined in Goal 2.1:
Support new and existing businesses and provide a variety of employment opportunities
Page 3 / 3 CAO
319
STAFF REPORT
DEVELOPMENT & COMMUNICATIONS SERVICES
Report Title: HIGHWAY 3 BUSINESS PARK DEVELOPMENT PLAN
Report No.: DCS 15-01
Author: CEPHAS PANSCHOW
Meeting Type: COUNCIL BUDGET MEETING
Council Date: JANUARY 22, 2015
Attachments:
RECOMMENDATION:
“THAT Council receive Report DCS 15-01 Highway 3 Business Park Development Plan;
AND THAT the development plan as outlined in Report DCS 15-01 be considered as
part of the 2015 budget discussions.”
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The purpose of this report is to seek Council approval through the 2015 budget process to move forward with a development plan for the Highway 3 Business Park with the goal of
facilitating investment in Tillsonburg and creating jobs and tax revenue. These lands have
been in the Town’s ownership for decades although constrained until 2012 by a restrictive covenant in favour of the County of Oxford due to the former landfill located to the rear of
these lands. Two residential properties were acquired in 2008/2009 in order to enable full
ownership of the property. Although the acquisition costs for the subject property were
zero as the property was already owned by the Town, there have been expenditures of
$827,636 incurred to date for the development of the business park due to the purchase of
two corner residential properties as well as costs for the preliminary design and approval
processes (Plan of Subdivision).
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
On June 13, 2013 staff provided Report DCS 13-44 Industrial Land Update – Highway 3
Business Park to Council for information purposes. The report provided an overview of the
actions undertaken with respect to the development of the Highway 3 Business Park.
320
On February 27, 2014 the following motion regarding an extension in the period to obtain
plan registration was approved by Town Council and subsequently provided by Oxford
County:
That Tillsonburg Council advise Oxford County that the Town supports a 3 year
extension to the draft approval of the Town Industrial Plan of Subdivision, (32T-
09004), for lands described as Part Lots 1 &2, Concession 5 (Middleton), Town of
Tillsonburg, to March 9, 2017.
Staff is recommending that Council move forward with the development of the Highway 3
Business Park for the following reasons:
Industrial vacancy rates across Southwestern Ontario are declining and this will lead to increased interest in Greenfield development opportunities;
Manufacturing employment is increasing and this points to decreased capacity within
existing manufacturer facilities in the region;
Some local manufacturers have been contemplating expansions to meet demand;
Improving the “shovel-ready” status of these lands will make these lands more attractive to prospective purchasers and improve the likelihood that the Town will be
successful in attracting investment and in a shorter timeframe.
With the extension in the draft plan approval, the Town has an additional three years to obtain registration of the plan. Registration of the plan typically requires the installation of
all roads/services. The cost estimate for the construction of the Highway 3 Business Park
(2009 prices), including Highway 3 improvements and costs incurred to date, is
$2,862,626.
As this is a significant financial outlay with no offsetting revenue from land sales at this time, staff is recommending that the Business Park be constructed in phases as follows:
Phase Steps Timeline
Final Design Engineering Department to complete road/services design
CJDL to complete Stormwater Design & Servicing
Report
Q1
Q1
Marketing Obtain design/build options for speculative industrial
building construction through RFQ process
Obtain appraisal of value for lands
Reface existing sign on site
Q2
Q3 2015 Q4 2015
Hwy 3
Interchange improvements
Monitor status of Ministry of Transportation Hwy
improvements and timing
Release of Tender for Town led Hwy 3 Interchange
Improvements
Construction of Hwy 3 Interchange Improvements
Q1 – Q2
Q3
Q3 – Q4
Phase 1: Release of Tender for Partial Construction 2016
Page 2 / 8 CAO
321
Construction Partial road/SWM pond construction
Phase 2:
Construction
Completion of Construction 2017
The following steps have been identified for 2015:
Step Timeline Comment
Confirm financing plan for
Final Design and Construction
Q4 14 Funded primarily through Debentures with
design funded by Industrial Land Reserve. Goal is for all costs to be offset by future
land sales.
Obtain Council approval for
financing
Q1 15 As per Report DCS 15-01
Final design of Stormwater
Pond and updated Servicing Report
Q1 15 CJDL Engineering to handle Stormwater
pond revisions and servicing report
Final design of road/services Q1 15 Engineering Department to schedule in-
house completion of final design for
road/services
Develop Phasing Plan Q1 15 Based on revised servicing report
Hwy 3 improvements Q3 – Q4 Engineering to prepare and manage
tenders for both road and pond and also
do contraction administration and
inspection (with some CJDL support for SWM pond as needed). Savings estimated
at $80,000.
Cost-sharing through Local
Improvement Bylaw
Q1 – Q2 15 Process for cost sharing with adjacent
property owners to be determined
The cost estimate originally prepared for the Highway 3 Business Park construction is from
2009 and staff will be requesting an updated estimate from CJDL Engineering Limited based
on the final servicing report.
Staff are also recommending that the Town obtain an appraisal on the value of land in the
Business Park, and specifically, land parcels of different sizes and locations within the park.
One issue relating to the attractiveness of municipal industrial land sales in Southwestern
Ontario is the low gross commission payable to a real estate broker/agent who brings a client to the Town. A comparable sale in a larger city would result in a commission that is
much higher than in Tillsonburg. An example of this is shown in the below table.
As one can see in this illustration, commercial real estate brokers are incentivized by an difference of $115,000 to prefer larger communities over smaller communities based on the
simple fact that prices per acre are higher in larger communities. One of Tillsonburg’s
competitive advantages (low prices) is potentially reduced by this disincentive. One way
that Tillsonburg can overcome this disincentive is to pay a higher commission on land sale
transactions.
Page 3 / 8 CAO
322
Community Size of Parcel Price/Acre Total Price Commission
Payable @ 5%
Tillsonburg 10 Acres $70,000 $700,000 $35,000
Larger City 10 Acres $300,000 $3,000,000 $150,000
Instead of lowering the asking price/acre to generate interest in the Highway 3 Business
Park, Council could approve an increased commission rate for land sales and, by so doing,
generate increased interest from the broker/agent community.
If Council were to approve an increased commission rate as follows, the overall impact
would be slightly higher costs, but also increased sales and revenue. Council may want to
consider the following criteria:
Increased commission for first 10 acres purchased only;
10% commission rate (would result in commission of $70,000 in above example
instead of $35,000 – almost half of larger city example);
Applicable to first few land sales only.
CONSULTATION/COMMUNICATION
The recently approved Community (Based) Strategic Plan identifies the value of promoting
environmentally sustainable living (Culture and Community Goal 4.3). Although this particular goal relates to public transportation, staff has investigated what other
communities are doing in terms of incorporating sustainability into the development of new business and industrial parks. Although there are not a lot of examples of this yet, they
have been able to find some information on environmental features that are incorporated
into either the development of the park or in the actual buildings within the park.
Page 4 / 8 CAO
323
Boxwood Business
Park
David Johnston
Research &
Technology Park (University
of Waterloo)
McMaster
Innovation Park
Environmental
Features
Conducted public
workshop to collect ideas on how to
incorporate green or
sustainable features into infrastructure and
building design
Protection of
trees/vegetation
LED Street Lighting
Future Transit stop
Trails
Large buffer zones from natural features
Accommodation for
passive solar
Included corridor for
future district energy
system
Improved Stormwater
Mgmt
Use existing
topography where
possible
109 hectare
(269 acre) Environmental
Reserve along
Laurel Creek
Provide a
rehabilitation
and
management
plan for the preservation
and
enhancement
of
environmental
functions of
the reserve
Bicycle lanes incorporated
into road
structure
Permeable hard
surfaces to increase water
infiltration and
reduce runoff
Rainwater
collection for
grey water and
irrigation use
Drainage swales where needed
Walking paths
(future)
Sustainable Features in
Buildings
Optimize building to street ratio
Water conservation
features
Increased vegetation
for aesthetics and site
energy
Buildings are encouraged to
make use of
environmental
best practices
such as passive
and active solar
technology, green
roofs and environmental
Utilize a ground source heat
pump system
with eco chillers
and boilers to
heat and cool
the entire park
(three buildings
so far) with a district energy
Page 5 / 8 CAO
324
Maximize natural light
Provide green areas
between lots and pedestrian linkages
Financial incentives for
green building
features including fast
track permits, reduced development charges,
and rebates
wastewater
processing
systems
Primary landscape
areas should
convey a strong
sense of
environmental responsibility and
corporate image
system.
Two of the
buildings have been built to
LEED Silver and
one to LEED
Platinum
standards.
Several features
of the park and
buildings incorporate
locally sources
products, or
health and
vitality to our
tenants (such as
an onsite fitness
centre)
Although there are not a lot of examples of sustainable business parks in Ontario, a number
of Ontario municipalities provide for new development to include sustainable design
features above and beyond the building code. For example, Toronto has a green strategy
for commercial buildings, Caledon has a development charge incentive for green design,
Hamilton has a green Tax Incentive Grant program, and East Gwillumbury has an extensive
list of features that are incorporated into plans during the Site Plan Review process. Typically the goal is to create commercial or industrial areas that are more efficient and
raise the standard of sustainability, which ultimately reduces the impact on the natural
environment. Other benefits include lower costs to operate the building, greater employee
comfort/productivity/satisfaction.
Tillsonburg could proceed with the development of the park in keeping with the principles of
Low Impact Development, or LID, which has emerged as a highly effective and attractive
approach to controlling stormwater pollution and protecting watersheds. LID stands apart
from other approaches through its emphasis on cost-effective, lot-level strategies that natural processes and reduce the impacts of development. By addressing runoff close to the
source, LID can enhance the local environment and protect public health while saving
developers and local government money.
It is staff’s intention to work with the Long Point Region Conservation Authority to
incorporate as many practical features related to Low Impact Development as possible in
the new business park subject to meeting satisfactory cost/benefit analysis. These features
would then be incorporated into the final design of the industrial park.
It may also be desirable to engage the community in the naming of a business park that will ultimately benefit the whole community. In this regard, one suggestion that Council
Page 6 / 8 CAO
325
may want to consider is a naming contest for the overall Business Park. Currently, the
Town has two business parks (the VanNorman and Forest Hill) with the VanNorman
Industrial Park being named after one of the founding families of Tillsonburg. The Town
could lead a process to have an open competition for the business park naming, and in so doing, engage the community in this significant project. An additional benefit could be the
marketing coverage obtained through this unique initiative.
FINANCIAL IMPACT/FUNDING SOURCE
The estimated construction costs for the Highway 3 Business Park are as follows:
Item Cost
Earth Grading & Site Preparation $365,000
Storm Water Pond $100,000
Sanitary Sewer $142,000
Storm Sewer $269,000
Watermain $117,000
Roadwork $417,000
Detailed Design $75,000
Tendering, Inspection, Supervision & Administration (Third Party)** $80,000
SUBTOTAL $1,575,000
MTO Required Improvements to Highway 3** $460,000
TOTAL $2,035,000
*Cost estimate from July 1, 2009 and does not take into account any changes in prices nor
impact of reduced Storm Water Management requirement due to development of 1
Clearview Dr site. **Third party engineering/inspection costs included in these figures
The 2015 draft Economic Development capital budget contains a plan to fund these works over the next three years with completion in 2017 and full registration of the plan of
subdivision. Debentures would be used to fund the works in 2015 and 2016 with Phase 3
being financed by land sales once development is able to proceed in the business park.
Overall, the goal is to recoup all or a significant portion of these costs through future land
sales. The benefit of developing these lands is the generation of new tax revenues once
development occurs.
In terms of alternative financing, a portion of these costs could possibly be financed through the Industrial Land Reserve although proceeding in this regard should be
considered cautiously as the current balance of the account is $495,960.21 (2014) and
there are other commitments on these funds. Costs incurred to date for land acquisition, design, and approvals total $827,626. When
construction costs are added to this, the estimated grand total to develop these lands is
$2,862,626 or $78,001 per developable acre.
Page 7 / 8 CAO
326
APPROVALS
Author
Name/Signature CEPHAS PANSCHOW Date: JAN 2, 2015
Chief
Administrative
Officer Name/Signature
DAVID CALDER Date:
Finance
Name/Signature DARRELL EDDINGTON Date:
Page 8 / 8 CAO
327
Report Title Budget Issue Paper: Garden Bed Maintenance –
Contract vs In-house
Report No. RCP 17-06
Author Corey Hill, Manager of Parks & Facilities
Meeting Type Budget Meeting
Council Date January 24, 2017
Attachments •
RECOMMENDATION
THAT Report RCP 17-09 – Budget Issue Paper Garden Bed Maintenance – Contract vs In-house be received for information.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Council requested an analysis be completed that compared the current budget for contracted out
garden bed maintenance work versus the cost of providing those services by Town Staff.
BACKGROUND Through pre-budget Council tasked RCP Staff to report on the cost of managing and executing the scope of work that is currently contracted out for garden bed maintenance, and an analysis
of costs for contracting the work versus doing it in-house.
The contract for garden bed maintenance was awarded in 2014 and expires at the end of 2018.
The contract consists of a flat rate for a spring clean-up of specific garden areas, optional weeding throughout the season and an hourly rate for additional duties as requested (i.e. clean-
up/maintenance of areas not listed in the contract). It is important to note that this contracted out
work consists of basic garden bed clean-up/weeding. There is no planting of new
flowers/shrubs/beautification within the scope of work of the contract unless authorized by staff
on an individual basis and those costs are billed at an extra hourly rate plus mulch/planting material. The following is a list of all the garden bed locations listed within the scope of the
current contract:
Town Gateways (Hwy 3 & 19) Oxford & Broadway St Parkette
Customer Service Centre Trottier Park Gateway
Fire Hall Station Arts (west of building)
OPP Station Veterans Memorial Walkway Gateway
LLWP & Summer Place Bidwell St (along municipal lots)
Participark Gateway Corner of Concession St & Park St
Coronation Park Gateway Gibson House
Westmount Park Gateway Concession St E & Maple Lane Triangle
Glendale Park Gateway Annandale Diamonds (by building)
Cranberry Park Gateway Skatepark
Southridge Park Gateway Fourth to North TCT Gateway
Mineral Springs Carroll Trail Gateway
Page 1 / 2 RCP 17-06 - Budget Issue Paper Garden Be.docx
328
The annual spending on the garden bed maintenance contract is as follows (including extra work as authorized by the Town):
Year Spring Clean-up Weeding Additional Hourly Work Total Spend
2014 $2,960.00 $800.00 $4,070.00 $7,830.00
2015 $2,960.00 $1,600.00 $5,620.00 $10,180.00
2016 $3,256.00 $0.00 $6,022.00 $9,278.00
The next step was to determine the approximate cost of performing this same scope of work
utilizing Town Staff. Hourly calculations were done per location at a base rate of approximately
$20/hr, referencing current costs for the supply and delivery of black gardening mulch at $800/15 yd. load as well as utilizing existing Parks vehicles and equipment. The following shows the
base contract pricing for 2017 and the corresponding in-house costs.
CONTRACT COSTS IN-HOUSE COSTS
Spring Clean-up
(includes mulch)
Bed
Weeding
Extra Hrly Rate
(+ materials)
Spring Clean-up
(includes mulch)
Bed
Weeding
Extra Hrly Rate
(+ materials)
$3,256 $880 $40 $3,000 $720 $20
Note - The final year of the contract (2018) includes increases to the all contracted rates ($3,581
for spring clean-up, $968 for weeding and $45/hour rate).
CONSULTATION/COMMUNICATION
N/A
FINANCIAL IMPACT/FUNDING SOURCE The above calculations show that performing the contracted scope of work, assuming it could be
provided within existing Parks staffing levels and utilizing current Parks vehicles/equipment, the
overall cost would be lower utilizing Town staff. Additionally, having Town staff manage and
perform this work would gain more control over the quality and thoroughness of the work.
There is no penalty clause in the existing contract for terminating the contract. However, there
are specific reasons that would enable termination and a change in service delivery model is not
one of them.
COMMUNITY STRATEGIC PLAN (CSP) IMPACT This issue paper provides information in alignment with the following Objectives of the
Community Strategic Plan:
• Objective 1 – Excellence in Local Government
• Objective 2 – Economic Sustainability
• Objective 4 – Culture & Community
Page 2 / 2 RCP 17-06 - Budget Issue Paper Garden Be.docx
329
Report Title Budget Issue Paper: Enhanced Beautification
Report No. RCP 17-09
Author Corey Hill – Manger of Parks & Facilities Rick Cox – Director of Recreation, Culture & Parks
Meeting Type Budget Meeting
Council Date January 24, 2017
Attachments •
RECOMMENDATION
THAT Report RCP 17-09 – Budget Issue Paper – Enhanced Beautification be received for information.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
An enhanced town-wide in-house beautification program is a service level increase that was
recommended by the Heritage, Beautification & Cemetery Advisory Committee (HBCAC) to be
included in the 2017 budget. The initiative is not included in the draft presented to Council. This report outlines a service level increase that could be implemented as a trial for a 2 year period (2017 –2018) and then be re-evaluated for future viability. The proposed program would also assist with
the celebration of Canada’s 150th by implementing a red and white theme to town-wide beautification
initiatives in 2017.
BACKGROUND
Through presentations from the HBCAC, consideration of implementing an enhanced Town-wide in-
house beautification program through the 2017 budget process was requested. This program would include the base scope of work currently contracted out as a part of the garden bed maintenance
contract plus enhanced services as outlined in this report. RCP staff, with the assistance of
Operations staff, prepared an implementation estimate that includes the operational and capital
impact of the enhanced program.
The contracted garden bed maintenance consists of basic garden bed clean-up and weeding. There is no planting of new flowers/shrubs/beautification within the scope of work of the contract unless
authorized by staff on a case-by-case basis and billed at an hourly rate plus the cost for supplies.
The following is a list of all the garden bed locations listed within the scope of the current garden bed maintenance contract:
Town Gateways (Hwy 3 & 19) Oxford & Broadway St Parkette
Customer Service Centre Trottier Park Gateway
Fire Hall Station Arts (west of building)
OPP Station Veterans Memorial Walkway Gateway
LLWP & Summer Place Bidwell St (along municipal lots)
Participark Gateway Corner of Concession St & Park St
Coronation Park Gateway Gibson House
Westmount Park Gateway Concession St E & Maple Lane Triangle
Page 1 / 4 RCP 17-09 - Budget Issue Paper - Enhance.docx
330
The proposed in-house Town-wide beautification initiative would redeploy the approximate $10,000
annual spend on contracted garden bed maintenance. The contract with Natures Choice expires at the end of the 2018 season. The proposed program includes an enhanced level of service and adds
locations that are not included in the garden bed maintenance contract. The expanded list of
locations includes all areas listed in the garden bed maintenance contract plus the following areas:
Cranberry TCT Gateway Memorial Trees
Bert Newman Park Keep Tillsonburg Beautiful Tree Sites
Library Parkette Clock Tower
Gyulveszi Park Gateway Public Works
Bloomer St Bridge (Van St) Elliot Fairbairn
Pumptrack Cemetery
In addition to the above, the downtown flower urn initiative would be within the scope of work. In 2016, 8 large flower urns were placed in the downtown area as a trial by the Beautification Working Group. The urns were well received and their presence enhanced the beautification of Broadway
Street. As a result, the urn program is planned to increase to 22 large pots in year 1 (2017) and
another 22 medium sized pots in year 2 (2018).
To determine the overall operational impact of the proposed program, hours and supplies were allocated for year 1 (2017) and year 2 (2018) for the expanded locations list (including the capital
and operational cost of the downtown flower urns) including
• a start of season clean-up/bed preparation/planting of annuals/perennials/shrubs/grasses
etc.,
• ongoing watering/bed maintenance, and
• an end of season clean-up.
It quickly became clear that it was not possible to deliver this new level of service with the current Parks staff team. Staff calculated that at minimum, a new horticultural seasonal staff position from
mid-March through mid-October would be required, supplemented by one additional summer student
position for May through August.
In addition to the staff, there would be costs for plant and landscaping materials, mulch, and some additional small equipment. There are additional costs to secure an appropriate used 1 ton truck
and watering trailer (exists within Town Fleet) to deliver watering at the various sites around town
and to take on the downtown flower urn watering duties as recommended by the HBCAC.
Glendale Park Gateway Annandale Diamonds (by building)
Cranberry Park Gateway Skatepark
Southridge Park Gateway Fourth to North TCT Gateway
Mineral Springs Carroll Trail Gateway
Page 2 / 4 RCP 17-09 - Budget Issue Paper - Enhance.docx
331
The following costs have been developed by RCP and Operations staff:
Year 1 - 2017
Expense Item Operations Capital
Supplies (flowers/landscaping/mulch/urn flowers) $30,000
Downtown - 22 large flower urns $6,160
Fleet Costs (water trailer) $500
Fleet Costs (used truck) $8,500
Commercial gardening equipment $2,500
Seasonal and summer staff $43,000
1-ton truck (used) $40,000
Total $84,500 $46,160
Revenue sources
BIA/Hort contributions (assumed reallocation) -$9,500
Reduction in contracted services spending -$10,000
Reallocation of Strategic Master Plan funding -$30,000
Net 2017 budget impact (from current draft) $65,000 $16,160
Year 2 - 2018
Expense Item Operations Capital
Supplies (flowers/landscaping/mulch/urn flowers) $31,210
Downtown - 22 medium flower urns $3,520
Fleet Costs (water trailer) $500
Fleet Costs (used truck) $8,500
Seasonal and summer staff $43,000
Total $83,210 $3,520
Revenue sources
BIA/Hort contributions (assumed reallocation) -$9,500
Reduction in contracted services spending -$10,000
2018 budget requirement $63,710 $3,520
An assumption was made that Town would be able to negotiate a contribution from the BIA and the Horticultural Society equivalent to their current spend on watering downtown flowers. The recommendation in consideration of the idea that the program will be a 2 year trial is to utilize an
existing older water trailer and purchase a used truck to minimize upfront start-up costs. If the
program is extended beyond 2018, the water trailer and truck should be incorporated into the Fleet
life cycle replacement program. The estimated cost of the used truck was selected anticipating an approximate life cycle of 4-5 years before replacement is required.
Page 3 / 4 RCP 17-09 - Budget Issue Paper - Enhance.docx
332
The combined operational and capital implementation cost was included in the initial preliminary
draft budget. Subsequent discussions by SLT resulted in the decision to remove the initiative from
the draft budget presented to Council due to the significant cost and the associated FTE increase
which SLT felt are lower on the list relative to other priorities.
CONSULTATION/COMMUNICATION
The Fleet requirements referenced within this report were developed in consultations with Town Operations staff.
FINANCIAL IMPACT/FUNDING SOURCE
The new impact to taxation of the proposed enhanced beautification program would be $111,160 in
year 1 (2017) and $67,230 in year 2 (2018). If the program was extended beyond 2018, the
expenses would be reduced to similar operational expenses as shown for year 2 (2018) until such
time as the water trailer and truck are identified for life-cycle replacement. The revenue sources identified in year 1 (2017) and year 2 (2018) tables include:
• $9,500 re-negotiation of BIA/Horticultural Society funding (2017 and 2018)
• $10,000 re-allocation of the current garden bed maintenance contract (2017 and 2018)
• $30,000 re-allocation of Capital funding from Strategic Master Plan update (2017 only)
COMMUNITY STRATEGIC PLAN (CSP) IMPACT
This issue paper provides information in alignment with the following Objectives of the
Community Strategic Plan:
• Objective 1 – Excellence in Local Government
• Objective 2 – Economic Sustainability
• Objective 4 – Culture & Community
Page 4 / 4 RCP 17-09 - Budget Issue Paper - Enhance.docx
333
Report Title Budget Paper – Beautification - Oxford-Broadway
Parkette
Report No. RCP 17-10
Author Corey Hill, Manager of Parks & Facilities
Meeting Type Budget Meeting
Council Date January 24, 2017
Attachments •
RECOMMENDATION
THAT Report RCP 17-10 Budget Paper – Beautification – Oxford-Broadway Parkette be received for information.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The Heritage, Beautification & Cemetery Advisory Committee (HBCAC) recommended 2017
operational funding be allocated to the Recreation, Culture & Parks Department for the re-design
of the parkette located at Oxford & Broadway Streets.
BACKGROUND
The HBCAC presented a multi-year plan for Town-wide beautification to Council in November
2016. Within this plan, there was a specific recommendation for a maximum of $8,000 to be
allocated to the Recreation, Culture & Parks Department’s 2017 operational budget for the design phase of the redevelopment of the parkette located at Oxford & Broadway Streets (informally known as the Sears Parkette). The HBCAC feels the current parkette is not being
utilized to its full potential and is inconsistent with the desired look and heritage feel of the
downtown area. As such, the HBCAC recommends creating a new amenity space within this
area that is more useable to the public while adhering to downtown Tillsonburg’s character. The parkette would be designed for pedestrian use, but be visually appealing to passing motorists as a gateway to the downtown core.
This project was not included in the draft 2017 Parks budget and workplan.
CONSULTATION/COMMUNICATION
Ron Koudys Landscape Architects Inc. was consulted to identify the design scope of work and
related costs which was the basis for the requested budget.
FINANCIAL IMPACT/FUNDING SOURCE
The cost for the proposed beautification design work would be a maximum of $8,000. The
actual design work would be issued in compliance with the Town of Tillsonburg’s Purchasing
Policy so financial efficiencies may be achieved through the competitive pricing process.
Page 1 / 2 P 17-10 Budget Paper - Beautification - .docx
334
COMMUNITY STRATEGIC PLAN (CSP) IMPACT This issue paper provides information in alignment with the following Objectives of the
Community Strategic Plan:
• Objective 1 – Excellence in Local Government
• Objective 2 – Economic Sustainability
• Objective 4 – Culture & Community
Page 2 / 2 P 17-10 Budget Paper - Beautification - .docx
335
Report Title Budget Issue Paper – User Fee Surcharge
Report No. RCP 17-07
Author Rick Cox, Director of Recreation, Culture & Parks
Meeting Type Budget Meeting
Council Date January 24, 2017
Attachments •
RECOMMENDATION
THAT Report RCP 17-07 – Budget Issue Paper – User Fee Surcharge be received for information.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
As part of the 2017 draft Budget and draft Schedule of Rates & Fees, a user fee surcharge on
pool and waterpark admissions, lessons and memberships is proposed as a mechanism to fund
capital repairs and improvements in those facilities.
BACKGROUND
In the fall of 2016, RCP staff became aware of other municipalities in South-Western Ontario
that charge a user fee surcharge (UFS) on a variety of user fees. A similar model has been
implemented in Tillsonburg to collect monies for a dog park by allocating a portion of late fees from dog licenses to a reserve for the future construction and maintenance of the dog park.
The proposed flat-fee UFS of $1 for Tillsonburg residents and $1.50 for non-residents continues
the approach implemented in 2014 for resident and non-resident waterpark passes of charging
non-residents more than residents.
The proposed UFS would be applied to swimming lessons, pool and waterpark bookings, public admissions and passes, water-based fitness classes, and pool memberships. Each registration
or admission would have the levy applied.
The fee would be collected and placed in a designated reserve to fund capital repairs and
improvements, either directly or by contributing to the financing costs of debentures taken out for
repairs and improvements.
If a UFS of this type had been in place for 2016,
approximately $33,000 could have been
collected. The calculation of this assumes that
all single public swim and LLWP admissions are
residents because home address information is not tracked for those fees. Based on the
residency of participants, over half of this money
would come from non-residents.
Page 1 / 2 RCP 17-07 - Budget Issue Paper - User F.docx
Rate Resident Non-Resident
Aqua Memberships $254 $258
Swim Registrations $1,984 $2,922
Aquatics advanced $123 $188
Public Swim Admissions $3,130 $3,130
Pool Rentals $27 $35
LLWP Season passes $351 $3
LLWP Admissions*$10,180 $10,180
2016 Total $16,049 $16,715
* not applied to Town camp program admissions
336
CONSULTATION/COMMUNICATION RCP staff reviewed the UFS implementations in St. Marys and Elmira.
FINANCIAL IMPACT/FUNDING SOURCE
Implementing the proposed UFS will provide a source of funds for a designated reserve to make
improvements and repairs to Tillsonburg’s aquatic facilities. There is a chance that the
increased cost may cause some to look elsewhere for their pool bookings and lessons.
COMMUNITY STRATEGIC PLAN (CSP) IMPACT
This issue paper provides information in alignment with the following Objectives of the
Community Strategic Plan:
•Objective 1 – Excellence in Local Government
•Objective 2 – Economic Sustainability
•Objective 4 – Culture & Community
Page 2 / 2 RCP 17-07 - Budget Issue Paper - User F.docx
337
Council Grant Request summaryGroup2017 Request 2016 Grant 2016 Request Tillsonburg & District Multi-Service Centre39,022 10,000 10,000 Tillsonburg Station Arts Centre35,000 35,000 35,000 Town of Tillsonburg Cultural Advisory Committee*10,000 10,000 10,000 Big Brothers Big Sisters of Ingersoll, Tillsonburg & Area 4,000 3,000 3,000 Lake Lisgar Revitalization Committee4,000 - - Heritage, Beautification & Cemetery Advisory Committee8,000 - - Upper Deck Youth Centre7,000 2,000 2,000 Cross Country Jeepers5,000 - - Tillsonburg Turtlefest25,000 10,000 10,000 Family Day Organizing Committee 2,500 - - Tillsonburg Fair12,000 - - Christmasfest- 3,000 3,000 Special awards- 300 - Tillsonburg & District Historical Society- - 22,100 Total requests for Council deliberation151,522 73,300 95,100 Tillsonburg Business Improvement Area - tax levy123,900117,500 112,350 Tillsonburg Business Improvement Area - FIP25,00025,000 - Tillsonburg Police Services Board13,5008,500 13,500 Community Transportation Steering Committee50,000 - - Tillsonburg District Chamber of Commerce (in EcDev budget)4,000 4,000 4,000 Canada Day Fireworks *Included as part of Dept 455 in 2017- - 5,000 Total requests already in budget216,400 155,000 134,850 * 2016 Cultural Advisory Committee Grants - These 3 were the only applications the committee received and grantedOptimist Club3,300 bands in the paradeThe Family Day Committee**2,500 Carnival Zone 2017 The Craft Guild/Station Arts Center250 Caricaturist for the March 2017 event6,050 **Please note that the Family Day Committee was granted $2,200 at the December meeting in 2015 for Family Day 2016339
Historical grantsGroupBig Brothers Big Sisters of Ingersoll, Tillsonburg & Area Tillsonburg District Chamber of CommerceTown of Tillsonburg Cultural Advisory CommitteeLake Lisgar Revitalization CommitteeTillsonburg & District Multi-Service CentreTillsonburg Station Arts CentreUpper Deck Youth CentreHeritage, Beautification & Cemetery Advisory CommitteeCross Country JeepersTillsonburg Turtlefest Family Day Organizing Committee Yes, $3,000 in 2014, $10,000 in 2015 and 2016 for general event fundingYes, $1,500 in 2014 and 2015; $2,200 in 2016 for Facility rental costs*Granted from the Cultural Advisory Committee fundsYes, $35,000 in 2014, 2015 and 2016 through a Service Agreement with the Town-services and amenitiesYes $2,000 in 2014, 2015 and 2016 towards monthly facility costs (utilities, taxes, insurance, maintenance)NoNoYes, $10,000 in 2014, 2015 and 2016 for to support literacy program and volunteers, as well as purchase of materials and technology.Has the Town Granted funds in the past 3 years?Yes, $3,000 in 2014, 2015 and 2016 for mentoring programsYes, $4,000 in 2014, 2015 and 2016 to share the direct event costsYes, $10,000 in 2014, 2015 and 2016 for to support cultural initiatves in TillsonburgNo340
THE CORPORATION OF THE TOWN OF TILLSONBURG
BY-LAW NUMBER 4075
BEING A BY-LAW to confirm the proceedings of Council at its meetings held
on the 24th and 27th day of January, 2017.
WHEREAS Section 5 (1) of the Municipal Act, 2001, as amended, provides that the
powers of a municipal corporation shall be exercised by its council;
AND WHEREAS Section 5 (3) of the Municipal Act, 2001, as amended, provides that
municipal powers shall be exercised by by-law;
AND WHEREAS it is deemed expedient that the proceedings of the Council of the
Town of Tillsonburg at this meeting be confirmed and adopted by by-law;
NOW THEREFORE THE MUNICIPAL COUNCIL OF THE CORPORATION OF THE
TOWN OF TILLSONBURG ENACTS AS FOLLOWS:
1.All actions of the Council of The Corporation of the Town of Tillsonburg at its
meetings held on January 24, 2017 and January 27, 2017 with respect to every
report, motion, by-law, or other action passed and taken by the Council, including
the exercise of natural person powers, are hereby adopted, ratified and confirmed
as if all such proceedings were expressly embodied in this or a separate by-law.
2.The Mayor and the Clerk are authorized and directed to do all the things necessary
to give effect to the action of the Council of The Corporation of the Town of
Tillsonburg referred to in the preceding section.
3.The Mayor and the Clerk are authorized and directed to execute all documents
necessary in that behalf and to affix thereto the seal of The Corporation of the Town
of Tillsonburg.
4.This by-law shall come into full force and effect on the day of passing.
READ A FIRST AND SECOND TIME THIS 27th DAY of January, 2017.
READ A THIRD AND FINAL TIME AND PASSED THIS 27th DAY of January, 2017.
________________________________
MAYOR – Stephen Molnar
________________________________
TOWN CLERK – Donna Wilson
341