Loading...
170124 Council Budget MINATTENDANCE Mayor Stephen Molnar Councillor Maxwell Adam Councillor Penny Esseltine Councillor Jim Hayes Councillor Chris Rosehart Councillor Brian Stephenson Regrets: Deputy Mayor Dave Beres Staff: David Calder, CAO Donna Wilson, Town Clerk Dave Rushton, Director of Finance/Treasurer Rick Cox, Director of Recreation, Culture & Parks Kevin DeLeeBeeck, Director of Operations Jeff Smith, Fire Chief Ashley Andrews, Manager of Human Resources Geno Vanhaelewyn, Chief Building Official Cephas Panschow, Development Commissioner Corey Hill, Manager of Parks & Facilities Tricia Smith, Deputy Clerk 1.Call to Order The meeting was called to order at 9:02 a.m. 2.Adoption of Agenda Resolution #1 Moved By: Councillor Hayes Seconded By: Councillor Adam THAT the Agenda as prepared for the Budget Council meeting of January 24, 2017 & January 27, 2017, be adopted. Carried The Corporation of the Town of Tillsonburg BUDGET COUNCIL MEETING Tuesday, January 24, 2017 9:00 AM Council Chambers 200 Broadway, 2nd Floor MINUTES Council Meeting Minutes, January 24, 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, January 10, 2017 170110 Council Budget MIN Resolution #2 Moved By: Councillor Rosehart Seconded By: Councillor Hayes THAT the Minutes of the Budget Council Meeting of January 10, 2017, be approved. Carried Moved By: Councillor Adam Seconded By: Councillor Rosehart THAT for the purposes of the Council Budget Meeting of January 24, 2017, and as provided for in Procedural By-law 3511 that Councillor Hayes, be designated as Chair for purposes of conducting the said meeting in the absence of the designated Chair (Mayor). Carried 6.Finance 6.1. 2017 Draft Budget Package Section 5 - Operations The Director of Operations provided a review of the Operations Business Plan. Streetlights will be added to the Engineering Design Criteria. Staff to continue discussions with the Ministry of Infrastructure regarding the new requirements for Asset Management and funding opportunities. Capital Infrastructure projects identified in the Airport Comprehensive Review to be added to the 3-year outlook. Staff will be providing a report to Council regarding the drainage channel as part of the Paget & Rolling Meadows Drain Rehabilitation Project. Councillor Adam left the meeting at 10:50 a.m. Council recessed at 11:09 a.m. Council Meeting Minutes, January 24, 2017 3 Council resumed at 11:21 a.m. Section 8 - Building, Planning & By-Law The Chief Building Official provided a review of the Building, Planning & By-Law Business Plan. Staff to look into putting conditions into place regarding the use of poster pole sleeves. Staff will be providing a report to Council regarding Phase 2 of the Central Area Design Study. Section 10 - Capital Budget Overview Section 11 - Long Term Debt Repayment Section 12 - Consolidated PSAB Summary Section 4 - HR Resolution #3 Moved By: Councillor Hayes Seconded By: Councillor Rosehart 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. Carried Council recessed for Lunch at 12:00 noon. Council resumed at 12:50 p.m. 6.2. FIN 17-03 Tax Rates Explained FIN 17-03 Resolution #4 Moved By: Councillor Hayes Seconded By: Councillor Rosehart THAT Council receive Report FIN 17-03, Tax Rates, as information. Carried Council Meeting Minutes, January 24, 2017 4 6.3. FIN 17-04 Funding the Asset Management Plan FIN 17-04 Resolution #5 Moved By: Councillor Stephenson Seconded By: Councillor Esseltine 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. Carried 6.4. FIN 17-05 Reserves FIN 17-05 Reserve Policy Resolution #6 Moved By: Councillor Stephenson Seconded By: Councillor Esseltine 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. Carried 6.5. FIN 17-02, Building Permit Cost Stabilization Reserve Fund FIN17-02 Building Permit Cost Stabilization Reserve Fund Report to be added to the January 27, 2017 Budget Council meeting Agenda for deliberation. Resolution #7 Moved By: Seconded By: THAT Council receive Report FIN 17-02, Building Permit Cost Stabilization Reserve Fund; AND THAT Council establishes a Cost Stabilization Reserve Fund as an obligatory reserve fund and related bank account. Council Meeting Minutes, January 24, 2017 5 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 Resolution #8 Moved By: Councillor Esseltine Seconded By: Councillor Stephenson THAT Council receive Report RCP 17-02, Budget Issue Paper – Utility Cost Increases, as information. Carried Discussion took place regarding the status of the Cultural Improvement Alliance (CIA) program. Staff to ensure that information posted on the CIA website and monitors is up to date. 6.7. CAO-HR 17-02, Telephone System Upgrade CAO-HR 17-02 – Telephone System Upgrade Resolution #9 Moved By: Councillor Esseltine Seconded By: Councillor Stephenson THAT Council receive Report CAO-HR 17-02, Telephone System Upgrade, as information. Carried 6.8. Report CAO-HR 17-01 – Benefit Cost Summary CAO-HR 17-01 Benefit Cost Summary Resolution #10 Moved By: Councillor Stephenson Seconded By: Councillor Esseltine THAT Council receive Report CAO-HR 17-01, Benefit Cost Summary, as information. Carried Council Meeting Minutes, January 24, 2017 6 6.9. OPS 17-03 White Paper - Business Case for 1.0 FTE Mechanic OPS 17-03 Resolution #11 Moved By: Councillor Hayes Seconded By: Councillor Rosehart THAT Council receive Report OPS 17-03, White Paper – Business Case for 1.0 FTE Mechanic, as information. Carried 6.10. RCP 17-08 – Budget Issue Paper – Dog Park Project Update RCP 17-08 - Budget Issue Paper - Dog Park Project Update Report to be added to the January 27, 2017 Budget Council meeting Agenda for deliberation. 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 It is anticipated that the construction of the Highway 3/Clearview Drive intersection will be completed by year end. Proposed Resolution #13 Moved By: Councillor Stephenson Seconded By: Councillor Esseltine THAT Council receive Report DCS 17-03, Highway 3 Business Park Update, as information. Carried Council Meeting Minutes, January 24, 2017 7 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 Resolution #14 Moved By: Councillor Esseltine Seconded By: Councillor Stephenson THAT Council receive Report RCP 17-06, Budget Issue Paper Garden Bed Maintenance – Contract vs. In-house, as information. Carried 6.13. RCP 17-09 – Budget Issue Paper – Enhanced Beautification RCP 17-09 - Budget Issue Paper - Enhanced Beautification Staff to provide Council with a copy of the MOUD between the Town and the BIA. Resolution #15 Moved By: Councillor Stephenson Seconded By: Councillor Esseltine THAT Council receive Report RCP 17-09, Budget Issue Paper – Enhanced Beautification, as information. Carried 6.14. RCP 17-10 Budget Paper – Beautification – Oxford-Broadway Parkette P 17-10 Budget Paper - Beautification - Oxford-Broadway Parkette Resolution #16 Moved By: Councillor Rosehart Seconded By: Councillor Hayes THAT Council receive Report RCP 17-10, Budget Paper – Beautification – Oxford-Broadway Parkette, as information. Carried Council recessed at 3:05 p.m. Council resumed at 3:14 p.m. Council Meeting Minutes, January 24, 2017 8 6.15. RCP 17-07 – Budget Issue Paper – User Fee Surcharge RCP 17-07 - Budget Issue Paper - User Fee Surcharge Resolution #17 Moved By: Councillor Hayes Seconded By: Councillor Rosehart THAT Council receive Report RCP 17-07, Budget Issue Paper – User Fee Surcharge, as information. Carried 6.16. 2017 Community Grant Request Summary 2017 Community Grant Request Summary Resolution #18 Moved By: Councillor Stephenson Seconded By: Councillor Esseltine THAT Council receive the 2017 Community Grant Request Summary, as information. Carried 7. By-Laws By-Laws from the Meeting of January 24, 2017 Resolution #19 Moved By: Councillor Esseltine Seconded By: Councillor Stephenson THAT By-Law 4075, To confirm the proceedings of Council at its meeting held on the 24th 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 8. Adjournment Resolution #20 Moved By: Councillor Esseltine Seconded By: Councillor Stephenson THAT the Budget Council Meeting of January 24, 2017 be adjourned at 3:46 p.m. Carried Table 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