TABLE OF CONTENTS
REPORTS OF THE STANDING COMMITTEES
AND OTHER COMMITTEES
As Considered by
The Council of the City of Toronto
on December 16 and 17, 1998
STRATEGIC POLICIES AND PRIORITIES COMMITTEE
REPORT No. 26
1FIS/HRIS Project Update
2Yonge Dundas Redevelopment Project - Settlement ofExpropriation Claims: 317 Yonge Street, Toronto
(Downtown - Ward 24)
3Live Entertainment Corporation of Canada ("Livent")
4Sulphur in Fuels - Toronto's Fuels Purchase Program
5City of Toronto Grants Policy
6Contingency Grants Allocations
7Community Services Grants Program -1998 Reallocation of Funds
8Emergency Support Fund - Winter Allocation Recommendations
9The Toronto Heritage Fund Grants Program
10Toronto Zoo - 1998 Operating Budget Variance Report and Contingency Request
11Replacement of Police Vehicles
12Eatonville Library (Markland-Centennial - Ward 4)
13City Hall Renovations
14Funding for Bendale Neighbourhood Library Renovation Project (Scarborough City Centre - Ward 15)
15Sustainable Energy, Greenspace/Nature and Water Actions
16Decision of the Ontario Labour Relations Board ("the Board") - Bargaining Unit Structure, Description and
the Determination of Bargaining Agents Under the Public Sector Labour Relations Transition Act, 1997 ("the
Act") 16177
17Exemption from Phase-in By-law -188 Eglinton Avenue East ( North Toronto - Ward 22)
181999 Interim Levy By-law
19By-law to Amend Phase-In By-law
20Write-Off of Uncollectible Business Taxes and Water Charges from the Collectors Roll
21Payment in Lieu of Taxes for Provincial and Federal Buildings
221999 Schedule of Meetings
23Extending the Termite Control Program Across the City of Toronto
24Court Ordered Recount in Scarborough Malvern - Ward 18
25Wheel-Trans Vehicle Replacement
26Interim Spending Approvals for the 1999 Water and Wastewater Capital Works Program
27Official Plan: 1999 Funding Allocation
28September 30, 1998 Operating Budget Variance Report and Surplus Analysis
29Heritage Toronto 1998 Cash Flow
30National Child Benefit Supplement Reinvestment Plan
31Purchase of Community Volunteer Vehicle known as "Box 12"
32Sale of Paper Fibre from the Grey Box Program
331999 Capital Budget - Toronto Police Service and Toronto Fire Service Integrated Fire/Police Radio
Communication System
34Yonge Dundas Redevelopment Project- Joint Board Order (Downtown - Ward 24)
35Tax Appeals - Sections 442 and 443 of the Municipal Act -Creation of a Committee of Council for Tax
Appeals
36Release of Recreation Grant Funds
37Board of Directors for New Toronto Hydro Corporation
38Other Items Considered by the Committee
City of Toronto
REPORT No. 26
OF THE STRATEGIC POLICIES AND PRIORITIES COMMITTEE
(from its meeting on December 15, 1998,
submitted by Councillor Case Ootes, Chair Pro Tem)
As Considered by
The Council of the City of Toronto
on December 16 and 17, 1998
1
FIS/HRIS Project Update
(City Council on December 16 and 17, 1998, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)
The Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee recommends the adoption of the confidential joint report
(December 7, 1998) from the Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer, the Commissioner of Corporate Services, the
Executive Director of Human Resources and the Executive Director of Information & Technology, which has been
forwarded to members of Council under separate cover.
(Extract from the confidential joint
report dated December 7, 1998)
Recommendations:
It is recommended that:
(1)The appropriate City of Toronto officials be directed to enter into an agreement with SAP Canada Inc. for the
acquisition and implementation of FIS and HRIS software systems based on terms and conditions set out in this report.
(2)Funds, up to a maximum of #3 million, from the Transition Reserve Fund, be approved on a one time basis, to cover
the potential backfill of positions in Finance, HR and I&T or City departments participating on this project and ancillary
Y2K projects in 1999 and 2000. Use of the funds would be subject to a report to the Budget Committee in early January on
expected use of backfill in 1999 and 2000.
2
Yonge Dundas Redevelopment Project - Settlement of
Expropriation Claims: 317 Yonge Street, Toronto
(Downtown - Ward 24)
(City Council on December 16 and 17, 1998, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)
The Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee recommends the adoption of the confidential report (December 11,
1998) from the Commissioner of Corporate Services, which has been forwarded to members of Council under
separate cover.
(Extract from the confidential report
dated December 11, 1998.)
Recommendations:
It is recommended that:
(1)the final settlement with the property owners, John Mikrogianakis, Sofia Mikrogianakis, Tom Perdikis and Helen
Perdikis, for total compensation in the amount of $2,025,000.00 for their interest in the property located at 317 Yonge
Street, in return for a full Release, be approved;
(2)the final settlement with the tenant, Mikper Group Inc., for total compensation in the amount of $725,000.00 for its
interest in 317 Yonge Street, in return for a full Release and indemnity, be approved;
(3)the appropriate City officials be authorized and directed to take the necessary actions to give effect thereto.
3
Live Entertainment Corporation of Canada ("Livent")
(City Council on December 16 and 17, 1998, amended this Clause by adding thereto the following:
"It is further recommended that the following Resolution be adopted:
Moved by:Mayor Lastman
Seconded by:Councillor Filion
'WHEREAS consumers purchase tickets in advance, on a subscription basis and otherwise, to performances and events,
in good faith, in the belief that the performance or event will take place; and
WHEREAS the performing arts depends on such patronage for its ongoing survival; and
WHEREAS the North York Performing Arts Corporation (NYPACC), on behalf of consumers, initiated and pursued legal
action against Livent Inc. and the Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce, Ticket Master, and American Bond Holders, in
the aftermath of Livent's mass cancellation of its performances and events at the Ford Centre for the Performing Arts; and
WHEREAS the Ontario Court (General Division), on December 17, 1998, ruled against consumers; and
WHEREAS NYPACC is a local board of the City of Toronto; and
WHEREAS the City of Toronto considers it in the public interest for this court decision to be appealed; and
WHEREAS the NYPACC Chair concurs in this;
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT:
(1)this court decision be appealed;
(2)for this purpose, the law firm Cassels Brock Blackwell be instructed to appeal this decision on behalf of NYPACC and
the City; and
(3)the Ontario Minister of Consumer and Commercial Relations be petitioned immediately to amend the Ontario
Consumer Protection Act to ensure that purchasers of advance tickets are fully protected against cancellations by event
promoters and presenters.' ")
The Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee recommends the adoption of the confidential joint report
(December 11, 1998) from the Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer, and the City Solicitor, which has been
forwarded to members of Council under separate cover.
(City Council on December 16 and 17, 1998, had before it, during consideration of the foregoing Clause, a confidential
joint report (December 11, 1998) from the Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer and the City Solicitor, such report to
remain confidential in accordance with the provisions of the Municipal Act.)
4
Sulphur in Fuels - Toronto's Fuels Purchase Program
(City Council on December 16 and 17, 1998, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)
The Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee recommends the adoption of the recommendations of the Economic
Development Committee contained in the report (December 14, 1998) from the City Clerk which recommends that
the joint report (October 9, 1998) from the Commissioner of Corporate Services, the Medical Officer of Health and
the Director, Fleet Management Services, appended to the communication (October 19, 1998) from the City Clerk,
be adopted.
The Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee submits the following communication (December 14, 1998) from the
City Clerk:
Recommendation:
The Economic Development Committee recommends the adoption of the joint report (October 9, 1998) from the
Commissioner of Corporate Services, the Medical Officer of Health and the Director, Fleet Management Services
appended to the communication (October 19, 1998) from the City Clerk, and requested that its action in this respect be
forwarded to the Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee for its December 15, 1998 meeting.
Background:
At its meeting on December 11, 1998, the Economic Development Committee gave consideration to the communication
(November 16, 1998) from the City Clerk advising the Economic Development Committee that the Corporate Services
Committee on November 9, 1998:
(1)submitted the communication (October 19, 1998) from the City Clerk respecting Sulphur in Fuels to the Strategic
Policies and Priorities Committee, without recommendation;
(2)forwarded a copy of the aforementioned communication to the Economic Development Committee for consideration
and report thereon to the Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee; and
Re: (3) submission from the Canadian Petroleum Products Institute (CPP), titled "Sulphur in Gasoline"
Mr. T.R. (Bob) Clapp, Vice President, Ontario Division, Canadian Petroleum Products Institute, appeared before the
Economic Development Committee in connection with the foregoing matter.
The Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee also submits the following communication (November 16, 1998)
from the City Clerk:
Recommendation:
The Corporate Services Committee on November 9, 1998:
(1)submitted the communication (October 19, 1998) from the City Clerk respecting Sulphur in Fuels, to the Strategic
Policies and Priorities Committee, without recommendation; and
(2)reports having forwarded a copy thereof to the Economic Development Committee for consideration and report
thereon to the Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee.
Background:
The Corporate Services Committee on November 9, 1998, had before it a communication (October 19, 1998) from the City
Clerk, advising that the Board of Health on October 13, 1998, recommended to City Council, through the Corporate
Services Committee, the adoption of the joint report (October 9, 1998) from the Commissioner of Corporate Services, the
Medical Officer of Health and the Director, Fleet Management Services, wherein it is recommended that:
(1)City Council request that the Province eliminate the Provincial Fuel Tax from on-road diesel fuel when it is used in
off-road vehicles to encourage its use for that purpose;
(2)the City purchase on-road diesel fuel for its off-road vehicles if the Province eliminates the Provincial Fuel Tax for
that purpose; and
(3)when making bulk purchases of gasoline, on-road diesel fuel and off-road diesel fuel, the City should consider sulphur
content, as well as cost, as a selection criteria.
The Corporate Services Committee also had before it a communication (November 4, 1998) from Mr. T. R. (Bob) Clapp,
Vice President, Ontario Division, Canadian Petroleum Products Institute, requesting an opportunity to appear before the
Corporate Services Committee respecting the report regarding the City of Toronto's Fuels Purchase Program.
The following persons were unable to appear before the Corporate Services Committee in connection with the foregoing
matter; and submitted information respecting sulphur in gasoline for consideration by the Strategic Policies and Priorities
Committee and the Economic Development Committee when the Committees give consideration to this matter:
-Mr. Bob Clapp, Canadian Petroleum Products Institute; and
-Mr. Don Green, Independent Retail Gasoline Marketers Association of Canada.
--------
(Communication dated October 19, 1998,
addressed to the Corporate Services Committee
from the City Clerk)
Recommendation:
The Board of Health recommends to City Council, through the Corporate Services Committee, the adoption of the joint
report (October 9, 1998) from the Commissioner of Corporate Services, the Medical Officer of Health and the Director,
Fleet Management Services.
Background:
At its meeting on October 13, 1998, the Board of Health gave consideration to the joint report (October 9, 1998) from the
Commissioner of Corporate Services, the Medical Officer of Health and the Director, Fleet Management Services,
recommending that:
(1)City Council request that the Province eliminate the Provincial Fuel Tax from on-rod diesel fuel when it is used in
off-road vehicles to encourage its use for that purpose;
(2)the City purchase on-road diesel fuel for its off-road vehicles if the Province eliminates the Provincial Fuel Tax for
that purpose; and
(3)when making bulk purchases of gasoline, on-road diesel fuel and off-rod diesel fuel, the City should consider sulphur
content, as well as a selection criteria.
--------
(Joint report dated October 9, 1998, addressed
to the Board of Health and Corporate Services Committee from the
Commissioner of Corporate Services, Medical Officer of Health and
the Director of Fleet Management Services)
Purpose:
To respond to the Board of Health request to review the City of Toronto Fuel Purchase Program and report to both the
Board of Health and the Corporate Services Committee on the possibility of requiring that all fuels provided to the City of
Toronto and City Agency vehicles meet the 30 ppm (parts per million) standard recommended by the Board of Health for
sulphur in fuel.
Funding Sources, Financial Implications and Impact Statement:
See discussion.
Recommendations:
It is recommended that:
(1)City Council request that the Province eliminate the Provincial Fuel Tax from on-road diesel fuel when it is used in
off-road vehicles to encourage its use for that purpose;
(2)the City purchase on-road diesel fuel for its off-road vehicles if the Province eliminates the Provincial Fuel Tax for
that purpose; and
(3)when making bulk purchases of gasoline, on-road diesel fuel and off-road diesel fuel, the City should consider sulphur
content, as well as cost, as a selection criteria.
Background:
At its meeting of July 29, 30 & 31, 1998 the Council of the Corporation of the City of Toronto had before it Clause No.2
contained in Report No. 10 of the Board of Health, entitled, "Air Quality and a Federal Standard for Sulphur in Fuel". This
report provided compelling human health and socioeconomic arguments in support of a 30 ppm federal standard for
sulphur in gasoline and a 400 ppm federal standard for off-road diesel fuel. Council adopted this Clause without
amendment. Recommendation No. 4 requested that a review of the City of Toronto's Fuel Purchase Program be undertaken
and requested the Medical Officer of Health report to both the Board of Health and Corporate Services Committee on the
possibility of requiring that all fuel provided to City of Toronto and City Agency vehicles meet the 30 ppm standard.
Staff from Toronto Public Health and Corporate Services Department's Fleet Management Services Division prepared this
report in consultation with Financial Services' Purchasing and Materials Management Division.
Discussion:
The City of Toronto and its purchasing partners, will require more than 14 million litres of gasoline, more than 8 million
gallons of diesel fuel for on-road vehicles, and almost 4 million litres of diesel fuel for off-road vehicles for corporate use
in 1999 (see Appendix A).
At the present time, refueling of City vehicles occurs in several different ways. In some of the former municipalities, bulk
fuel is purchased and dispensed through City-owned fuel sites, usually in yards used by Works and Emergency Services or
Parks and Recreation operations, or through pumps located at emergency services stations or maintenance facilities. Other
former municipalities utilize private sector gas stations, while others use a combination of City-owned and private sector
refueling locations. When fuel is purchased at private sector locations, the sulphur content of the fuel purchased is
unknown. With bulk fuel purchases for City-owned fuel sites, information on sulphur levels is provided when fuel is
delivered.
Gasoline:
According to a report prepared by Environment Canada, there are three refineries and five importers operating in Canada
that sell gasoline with sulphur levels lower than 100 ppm. Because this information is considered proprietary and
confidential, Environment Canada can not identify the names and locations of these companies. However, staff have been
informed that the three refineries producing low sulphur fuel are western refineries that can not supply gasoline by pipeline
to Ontario. While none of the five importers are currently providing gasoline with sulphur levels of 30 ppm to Ontario, it is
possible that they could provide it from California or Europe. To buy gasoline from either the importers or the western
refineries, the City would have to pay for shipping by truck and storage in addition to the gasoline. It is expected that
transportation and storage costs would make these options prohibitively expensive and impractical at this time.
Within Ontario, there are five major refineries which provide gasoline with sulphur levels which range from less than 200
ppm to greater than 800 ppm. Once again, because this information is considered proprietary and confidential,
Environment Canada can not tell City staff which company is producing gasoline with the lower levels of sulphur. When
City staff contacted the companies operating refineries in Ontario, the companies indicated that they were unable to release
information about the sulphur levels in their gasoline.
Working in consultation with Public Health and Fleet Management Services, the Purchasing and Materials Management
Division has released a quotation for the purchase of fuel for 1999, which indicates that the City will consider both price
and fuel sulphur levels when awarding its tender. Suppliers have been asked to provide the annual average level of sulphur
in their gasoline when submitting their bids. If companies provide this information, the City will be able to weigh the
human health impacts associated with sulphur as well as cost when selecting fuels for corporate use. The deadline for bids
from suppliers was October 8, 1998. City staff will review the bids that meet the appropriate specifications, and report to
the Board of Health with any further recommendations.
Diesel:
The situation with diesel is different than with gasoline because there are currently two kinds of diesel readily available on
the market. Sulphur levels in diesel fuel to be used in on-road vehicles have been regulated at a maximum of 500 ppm.
Sulphur levels in diesel fuel to be used in off-road vehicles have not yet been regulated. The off-road diesel fuel has been
coloured red to distinguish it from the low sulphur diesel required for on-road vehicles. In Ontario, the average level of
sulphur in off-road diesel fuel is about 2,200 ppm, while the average level of sulphur in on-road diesel fuel is about
270 ppm.
The City could reduce its contribution to poor air quality by buying on-road diesel for its off-road vehicles. However,
on-road diesel fuel costs about 40.3 cents per litre; approximately 16 cents per litre more than off-road diesel. It would cost
the City approximately $637,000.00 more per year than the $947,000.00 per year it currently spends, to buy on-road diesel
fuel for the City's off-road vehicles. This is clearly prohibitively expensive.
Of the 16 cents per litre difference between on-road and off-road diesel, 14.3 is paid to the province as a provincial fuel
tax. The City could ask the Province to eliminate the provincial fuel tax when on-road diesel is used in off-road vehicles to
encourage owners and operators of off-road vehicles to select a cleaner fuel which has a lesser impact on human health and
the environment. The Province would not be losing money because it is not currently collecting tax on off-road diesel used
in these vehicles. If the province complied with the City's request, it would cost the City approximately $40,000.00 per
year to use the on-road diesel with lower sulphur levels in its off-road vehicles. The impact of this increase would be
reduced by savings expected from the reduction of the fleet size and related fuel savings.
On-road and off-road diesel fuels have been included with gasoline in the tender released by the City's Purchasing and
Materials Management Division. As with gasoline, suppliers have been asked to provide annual average sulphur levels for
both on-road and off-road diesel fuels. It is likely that there is a range in the sulphur levels in both the on-road and off-road
diesel fuels provided by companies operating in Ontario as well. It is recommended that the City should consider both the
sulphur levels and the price when awarding the tender for diesel fuels as well as for gasoline.
Conclusion:
To reduce the City's contribution to poor air quality, the City should consider sulphur levels in fuels, in addition to cost,
when evaluating bulk fuel purchases for City of Toronto and City Agency vehicles. City Council should request that the
Province eliminate the Provincial Fuel Tax from low sulphur diesel fuel when it is used for off- road vehicles to encourage
the use of cleaner fuel in off-road vehicles. The City should buy on-road diesel for its off-road vehicles if the province
eliminates the provincial fuel tax for that purpose.
Contact Name:
Swee Hoh, Fleet Management Services, Corporate Services, Tel: 392-7791
Kim Perrotta, Environmental Protection Office, Toronto Public Health, Tel: 392-6788.
Appendix A
Estimated Annual Requirements (in Litres) for Fuel
Location |
Gasoline |
Low Sulphur Diesel |
Coloured Diesel |
Fleet Management
Services |
3325000 |
6170812 |
54424 |
Parks and Recreation |
865000 |
260883 |
426403 |
Toronto Police Service |
7240000 |
120000 |
80000 |
Toronto Fire Services |
75000 |
892633 |
35246 |
Toronto Hydro
Electric Commission |
1300000 |
|
|
Works and
Wastewater Services |
240000 |
|
|
Ambulance Services |
385000 |
220000 |
5000 |
Exhibition Place |
120000 |
|
75000 |
Toronto Zoo |
50000 |
22500 |
500 |
Toronto District
School Board |
500000 |
|
|
York University |
150000 |
|
|
Property Services |
|
|
3450 |
Non-Profit Housing |
|
|
15725 |
Toronto Housing |
|
|
44450 |
Transportation |
|
|
400000 |
Community Services |
|
|
27100 |
Works and Emergency
Services |
|
392687 |
2723027 |
Corp. and Human Res. |
|
|
16900 |
TOTAL |
14250000 |
8079515 |
3907225 |
The Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee also had before it the following reports/communications which were
forwarded to all Members of Council with the agenda of the Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee for its meeting on
December 15, 1998, and copies thereof are on file in the office of the City Clerk:
-(October 9, 1998) from the City Clerk forwarding the action of City Council on October 1 and 2, 1998;
-(July 22, 1998) addressed to the Environmental Task Force from its Chair;
-Clause No. 2 of Board of Health Report No. 10, entitled "Air Quality and a Federal Standard for Sulphur in Fuel", which
was adopted by Council on July 29, 30 and 31, 1998;
-(November 4, 1998) addressed to the Corporate Services Committee from T.R. (Bob) Clapp, Vice President, Ontario
Division, Canadian Petroleum Products Institute;
-(October 26, 1998) addressed to Mr. John A. Honderich, Publisher, The Toronto Star and Ms. Christine Stewart, The
Minister of the Environment from Mr. Michael T. Budd, Executive Vice-President, Independent Retail Gasoline Marketers
Association of Canada (IRGMA); and
-Submission from the Canadian Petroleum Products Institute (CPP), titled "Sulphur in Gasoline".
5
City of Toronto Grants Policy
(City Council on December 16 and 17, 1998, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)
The Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee recommends the adoption of the recommendations of the Municipal
Grants Review Committee contained in the following communication (October 26, 1998) from the City Clerk:
Recommendation:
The Municipal Grants Review Committee on October 26, 1998, recommended to the Strategic Policies and Priorities
Committee the adoption of the attached report (September 16, 1998) from the Commissioner of Community and
Neighbourhood Services respecting the City of Toronto Grants Policy.
--------
(Report dated September 16, 1998, addressed to the
Municipal Grants Review Committee from the
Commissioner of Community and Neighbourhood Services)
Purpose:
To seek approval of a grants policy for the City of Toronto.
Funding Sources, Financial Implications and Impact Statement:
Not applicable.
Recommendations:
It is recommended that:
(1)the City of Toronto Grants Policy be adopted as presented in Appendix 1;
(2)the Anti-Racism, Access and Equity Policy Guidelines be adopted as presented in Appendix 2;
(3)the Commissioner of Community and Neighbourhood Services, in consultation with the appropriate officials, be
directed to prepare the administrative guidelines described under Section XVI of the proposed policy for the review of the
Municipal Grants Review Committee at its October meeting; and
(4)the appropriate City officials be authorized to and directed to take the necessary action to give effect thereto.
Council Reference/Background/History:
At its meeting of February 4, 1998, City Council directed the Commissioner of Community and Neighbourhood Services
to undertake the research and consultation necessary to develop an integrated Municipal Grants Policy, including revised
grants policies for each service area.
At its meeting of March 4, 1998, City Council established the Municipal Grants Review Committee with terms of
reference that included, inter alia, steering "the development of an integrated Municipal Grants Policy for implementation
in 1999 and, after consultation with the relevant Standing Committees, recommend approval of the policy to the Strategic
Policies and Priorities Committee".
At its meeting of July 27, 1998, the Municipal Grants Review Committee had before it a report from the Commissioner of
Community and Neighbourhood Services providing an overview of the work to date on the development of a Municipal
Grants Policy. The Committee endorsed the direction being taken as set out in the that report.
Discussion:
Why the City Makes Grants:
This question could be asked in a different way--"why does the City not deliver all services to residents itself?" While
some may see making grants as "giving money away", this policy takes the view that grants are strategic tools that move
the City closer to its social, economic and cultural goals and reduce the onus on the City to provide all services directly.
They do this by using community organizations that are more efficient, have lower operating costs, and are closer to the
people they serve.
In some cases, community organizations are better equipped to serve community needs than the City. Organizations
serving ethno-racial and Aboriginal communities, for example, are better suited to deliver culturally-appropriate services.
In other areas, services may be better accepted if delivered by community agencies and not the perceived officialdom of the
City.
There are some key benefits to investing in the community with grants. First, a strong voluntary sector provides meaningful
opportunities for residents to participate in governance and civic life. Second, grants help communities build their own
capacity by drawing upon their own talents and resources to identify needs and develop solutions. Third, there are
considerable economic spin-offs from the City's investment: employment, ancillary spending, and, in the case of culture,
economic development and recreation grants, the benefits that tourism brings to the City.
Key Concepts:
The policy is based on the premise that grants are a form of partnership or investment that helps the City achieve its goals
for its residents. Although it must remain sympathetic to all worthy causes within its boundaries, the City should not
consider its grant-making activities as charity. Rather, this policy establishes a framework for the evaluation of its granting
programs in light of their contribution to the City's strategic plans.
Another underlying premise is the idea that the grant is only one of many tools available to the City in any given policy
area. Often grants are used in combination with other tools. For example, the City supplements its extensive recreation
programs with grants to organizations that deliver community-based services.
While it may be tempting to compare grants programs to each other, these comparisons are less important than
comparisons between the various tools that may be used in any one policy area. Instead of comparing resources and
practices between grants programs, the more important issue in grants policy is to determine how much should be allocated
to grants versus other policy instruments in any given area.
The Approach:
This report contains two appendices. The first is a general policy for all of the City's grant-making activities. The second
contains Anti-Racism, Access and Equity Policy Guidelines called for in Section VI of the policy.
The policy begins with a preamble that is meant to establish the City's beliefs about its grant-making activities. It
categorizes five different types of grants, from the grants programs administered by departments, to the ad hoc grant
requests received directly by Council throughout the year. The policy establishes principles and procedures for each of the
types.
Section XVI of the proposed policy calls for the development of administrative guidelines to further guide the city's
grant-making activities. The work on these guidelines is not complete, but it is recommended that these guidelines be
prepared for the October meeting of the Committee.
Similarly, Clause No. (2) of Section IX calls for the development of procedures for the review and administration of
line-item and ad hoc grants. These too will be prepared for the October meeting.
Conclusions:
This report sets out a policy governing the administration of the City's grant-making activities. The policy represents the
general, over-arching principles that govern grant-making. Specific policies for each of the grants programs will be
submitted to Council under separate cover.
Contact:
John Elvidge, Tel: 392-9046, E-Mail: john_d._elvidge@metrodesk.metrotor.on.ca
--------
Appendix 1
(Revised)
City of Toronto Grants Policy
Contents:
I.Preamble
II.Scope
III.Purpose
IV.Authority
V.Definitions
VI.Access and Non-Discrimination Policies
VII.Grants Programs
VIII.General Policies for the Administration of Grants
IX.Administration of Line-item grants
X.Use of City Grants
XI.Repayment of Grants
XII.Unused Grants
XIII.Accounting
XIV.Limitation of Liability and Indemnification
XV.Further Conditions
XVI.Administration Guidelines
(I)Preamble:
The City of Toronto believes that grants are an important means of achieving its social, cultural and economic goals. It
recognizes that not all services and programs that benefit its residents should be provided by the City alone. Similarly, it
recognizes that not all services can be provided by the private sector.
The City is committed to making grants to help communities draw upon their own talents and resources to identify needs
and develop appropriate programs and services.
The City of Toronto is committed to a strong and vibrant voluntary sector. By supporting a City-wide network of
community organizations, the City encourages its residents to engage in civic life and participate in decision-making.
The City recognizes that community organizations can deliver many services more efficiently, and with a greater degree of
community acceptance. Furthermore, it recognizes that City grants help leverage other resources from the community,
business and other governments.
The City of Toronto's grant-making activities will be guided by the following core values:
(1)Accessibility - All qualified applicants will have the opportunity to make application to City of Toronto.
(2)Fairness and equity - No organization or individual will receive less favourable treatment on the grounds of
geography, race, nationality, age, religion, gender, sexual orientation disability or ethnic origin.
(3)Openness and transparency - The City of Toronto will make information about the evaluation processes and criteria
publicly accessible.
(4)Accountability - The City of Toronto will make information about its granting activities available to the public and
will ensure that grants made by the City are used for the purposes for which they are provided.
(5)Responsiveness - The City of Toronto's will involve the community in the ongoing review of community needs and
will ensure that its grants programs are able to meet new and emerging needs.
(II)Scope:
This policy applies to all grant-making activities of the City of Toronto as further described in this policy. It does not apply
to purchase-of-service arrangements.
(III)Purpose:
The purpose of this policy is to establish standards and common practices for all of its grant-making activities to ensure
consistency and fairness.
(IV)Authority:
The general municipal grant-making authority is derived from section 113 of the Municipal Act which states:
"...the council of every municipality may, subject to section 111 [which prevents bonusing], make grants, on such terms
and conditions as to security and otherwise as the council may consider expedient, to any person, institution, association,
group or body of any kind, including a fund, within or outside the boundaries of the municipality for any purpose that, in
the opinion of the council, is in the interests of the municipality."
Section 34 of The Planning Act provides additional grant-making authority related to carrying out community improvement
plans:
"... the municipality may make grants or loans to the registered owners or assessed owners of lands and buildings within
the community improvement project area to pay for the whole or any part of the cost of rehabilitating such lands and
buildings in conformity with the community improvement plan."
(V)Definitions:
(1)"Administration grant" means a grant made towards the administrative or overhead costs of an organization.
(2)"Grant" means a transfer of cash by the City to a third party under section 113 of The Municipal Act.
(3)"Grants program" means a program that has its own Council-approved guidelines and has a pre-determined budget
allocation provided in the City's annual operating budget from which individual grants are allocated.
(4)"Ongoing grant" means a grant made to an organization on an annual basis.
(5)"Line-item grant" means a grant that does not fall within an established grants program that appears as an itemized
grant in the City's budget and accounting system.
(6)"Program grant" means a grant made for a specific service or activity of an organization.
(7)"Project grant" means a grant made for a specific, time-limited activity.
(VI)Access and Non-Discrimination Policies:
(1)The population of the City of Toronto is made up of people from diverse communities and equity-seeking groups, e.g.,
women, people with disabilities, ethnocultural and racial minorities, immigrants and refugees, faiths, the poor, Aboriginal
peoples, lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgendered persons. In recognition and support of this diversity, the City of Toronto will
ensure that:
(a)it provides access for organizations representing these communities to the grants programs provided by the City of
Toronto. This includes access to grants information, applications, staff resources, decision-making and funding; and
(b)the services, programs and decision-making provided by organizations receiving grants are accessible to all residents
of Toronto and that organizations receiving City grants are free from discrimination.
(2)This policy recognizes that the changing nature of the population has implications for the operation of the City's
grants programs as well as the delivery of services supported by City grants. In this context, the City recognizes that:
(a)barriers to services exist for members of the City's diverse communities, particularly for equity-seeking groups;
(b)organizations representing equity-seeking groups (e.g., women's organizations, Aboriginal organizations,
ethno-specific and disability organizations) must continue to play a critical role in service delivery; and
(c)the City of Toronto must act as a positive force in assisting the elimination of these barriers by providing support to
both mainstream and equity-seeking organizations through the change process.
(3)The City of Toronto will establish guidelines to assist organizations receiving City grants in their efforts to integrate
anti-racism, access and equity throughout their operations.
(4)The City of Toronto will establish guidelines to assist City staff responsible for grants administration in their efforts to
integrate anti-racism, access and equity in grants programs.
(VII)Grants Programs:
(1)The City of Toronto will establish and provide grants in the categories described in the following schedule:
Schedule A - City of Toronto Grants Programs
Type |
Includes: |
Existing Programs |
I. Service Sector Grants
Programs |
-
Grant programs that have a predetermined
budget allocation in the annual operating
budget.
- Grant programs that have pre-announced,
fixed deadlines.
|
- Arts and Culture Grants
- Community Services Grants
- Recreation Grants
- Drug Abuse Prevention Grants
- AIDS Prevention Grants
- Access and Equity Grants
- Economic Development
Partnership Programs
- Commercial Research Grants
- Festivals and Special Events
Grants
|
II.
First-Come-First-Serve
Grants Programs |
- Grant programs that have a predetermined
budget allocation in the annual operating
budget.
- Grant programs that process applications on a
first-come-first-serve basis
|
- Termite control grants
- Heritage fund grants
- Yonge/Dundas Commercial
Facade Improvement Program
|
III. Designated Special
Needs Grants |
- Grant programs that have a predetermined
budget allocation in the annual operating
budget.
- Grant programs where applications are
distributed to a targeted or limited applicant
base on an invitational or request-for-proposal
basis
|
|
IV. Annual Line-Item
Grants |
- Grants that are itemized in the annual
operating budget
- Activities that are do not fall within the
mandates of Type I, II, or III grants
|
|
V. Non Recurring, Ad
Hoc Line-Item Grants |
- Grants that have not been provided for in the
annual operating budget.
- Activities that are do not fall within the
mandates of Type I, II, or III grants
|
|
(2)Only Council may establish or delete a grants program.
(VIII)General Policies for the Administration of Grants Programs:
(1)For each of its grants programs, the City of Toronto will provide all potential and returning applicants with the
following information:
(a)program goals and objectives;
(b)eligibility criteria;
(c)evaluation or assessment criteria;
(d)expectations of grant recipients;
(e)procedures for obtaining and submitting applications;
(f)procedures for the review and evaluation of applications; and
(g)the total amount of grants available, range of grant amounts, number of grants made annually, and the duration of
grants.
(2)For each of its grants programs, the City of Toronto will:
(a)provide staff assistance in advising applicants and in devising applications prior to the application deadlines;
(b)involve individuals with appropriate expertise in the review process, which may include a peer/citizen review
mechanism;
(c)provide an appeal process and provide review results in writing in time for applicants to exercise any rights to appeal;
(d)provide for staff follow-up and evaluation of how funding was used;
(e)develop evaluation and monitoring strategies to ensure that individual organizations achieve their outcomes and that
funding programs achieve their stated objectives;
(f)collect only the information related to the review and monitoring processes; and
(g)make all granting decisions publicly available.
(IX)Administration of Line-Item Grants (Schedule A: Types IV and V):
(1)Criteria - All applications must meet the following minimum criteria:
(a)Consistency with City's objectives - The activity or outcomes for which funds are sought must support one or more
goals of the City of Toronto;
(b)Financial Need - The applicant must demonstrate that it does not otherwise have the resources necessary to undertake
the activity for which funds are sought;
(c)Not-for-profit status - The applicant must demonstrate that the activity for which funds are sought will be organized
without financial gain for its members or directors; and
(d)Status of the organization - The applicant must be in good-standing with the City of Toronto, having met the terms
and conditions of any previous grants provided to the applicant by the City.
(2)The City of Toronto will establish guidelines for the review and administration of line-item grants.
(X)Use of City Grants:
(1)The grant shall be used only for the purpose approved by City Council, as further described in the grant recipient's
grant application form. The grant recipient shall notify the City of any proposed material changes to the nature of, or
budget for, the activities for which the grant has been made and shall use the grant for such altered activities only with the
prior written consent of the City or the Commissioner designated by Council to act on its behalf.
(2)The grant recipient shall not transfer or assign the grant or any part thereof to another organization or individual,
without the prior written consent of the City or the Commissioner designated by Council to act on its behalf.
(XI)Repayment of Grants:
(1)The grant recipient shall, at the request of the City, repay to the City the whole or any part of the grant as determined
by the City, if the grant recipient:
(a)ceases operating;
(b)ceases to operate as a non-profit organization;
(c)winds-up or dissolves;
(d)merges or amalgamates;
(e)commences, or has commenced against it, any proceedings in bankruptcy or is adjudged a bankrupt;
(f)has knowingly provided false information in its grant application;
(g)uses grant funds for purposes not approved by City Council;
(h)breaches any of the terms or conditions of the grant; or
(i)breaches any of the provisions of the Ontario Human Rights Code in its operations.
(2)The grant recipient shall notify the City of the occurrence of any of the events referred to in clauses (1)(a) through
(1)(e).
(3)The City may, in its sole discretion, require the grant recipient to pay interest on any amount required to be repaid
pursuant to this section at the prime rate of the Royal Bank of Canada from the date of the request for repayment to the date
of repayment.
(XII)Unused Funds:
Any unused portion of a grant remains the property of the City. If an unused portion of the grant has already been paid by
the City to the grant recipient, it shall be repaid by the recipient to the City on request.
(XIII)Accounting:
(1)The grant recipient shall keep and maintain all records, invoices and other documents relating to the grant in a manner
consistent with generally accepted accounting principles and clerical practices, and shall maintain such records for a period
of three (3) years from the date of approval of the grant by City Council.
(2)The grant recipient authorizes the City and its agents at all reasonable times to inspect and copy any and all records,
invoices and documents in the custody or control of the recipient which relate to the grant, for a period of three (3) years
from the date of approval of the grant by City Council. This right of inspection includes the right to perform a full or partial
audit of the aforementioned records, as considered appropriate by the City.
(XIV)Limitation of Liability and Indemnification:
(1)The City shall not be liable for any damages, injury or any loss of use or profit of the recipient arising out of, or in any
way related to, the grant recipient's operations.
(2)The grant recipient shall indemnify the City, its officers, employees and agents, against all costs, damages and
expenses incurred as a result of a claim or proceedings related to the grant recipient's operations.
(XV)Further Conditions:
The City shall be entitled, at any time, to impose such additional terms and conditions on the use of the grant which, in its
sole discretion, it deems appropriate.
(XVI)Administration Guidelines:
To ensure the City is consistent in all of its grant-making activities, the City of Toronto will establish guidelines for all
departments, agencies, boards and commissions with respect to the following administrative matters:
(1)Guidelines for the use and preparation of terms and conditions, grant agreements, contracts or other legal instruments
between the City and the grant recipient.
(2)Guidelines for record keeping necessary to assist the work of the City Auditor
(3)Guidelines for record keeping necessary to meet the obligations of the Municipal Freedom of Information and
Protection of Privacy Act.
(4)Guidelines for accounting and financial reporting procedures.
Appendix 2
City of Toronto Grants Policy
Anti-Racism, Access and Equity Policy Guidelines
(I)Policy Statement:
The population of the City of Toronto is made up of people from diverse communities and equity-seeking groups, e.g.,
women, people with disabilities, ethnocultural and racial minorities, immigrants and refugees, faiths, the poor, Aboriginal
peoples, lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgendered persons. In recognition and support of this diversity, the City as a funder will
ensure that:
(1)it provides access for organizations representing these communities to the grants programs provided by the City of
Toronto. This includes access to grants information, applications, staff resources, decision-making and funding; and
(2)the services, programs and decision-making provided by organizations receiving grants are accessible to all residents
of Toronto and that organizations receiving City grants are free from discrimination.
This policy recognizes that the changing nature of the population has implications for the operation of the City's grants
programs as well as the delivery of services supported by City grants. In this context, the City recognizes that:
(1)barriers to services exist for members of the City's diverse communities, particularly for equity-seeking groups;
(2)organizations representing equity-seeking groups (e.g., women's organizations, Aboriginal organizations,
ethno-specific and disability organizations) must continue to play a critical role in service delivery; and
(3)the City of Toronto, as a funder, must act as a positive force in assisting the elimination of these barriers by providing
support to both mainstream and equity-seeking organizations through the change process.
Access to services is the ability or extent to which communities or residents can attain needed services and achieve full
participation in the planning, development, administration and delivery of those services. Access includes consumer/client
access and organizational access.
To achieve this:
(1)The City of Toronto will ensure its diverse communities, particularly those facing barriers and other forms of
discrimination and disadvantage, have equitable access to its own services, resources and decision-making in order that all
communities can fully participate in the City's social, economic, cultural and political life.
(2)The City of Toronto will also require organizations receiving City grants to undertake planned and co-ordinated
activities aimed at enabling diverse communities, particularly those facing barriers and other forms of discrimination and
disadvantage, to participate fully in their services, programs and decision-making.
(3)The City of Toronto undertakes this because it believes that when every individual makes a conscious effort to bring
about equality and to engage in egalitarian practices, the City will be able to effect the systemic and social changes needed
to create a community where all people live with dignity and peace. The City of Toronto also believes that its diverse
communities need to partner with and assist each other in developing actions to eradicate discrimination and attain equality
in our society and that the City can play a proactive and supportive role in this process.
(II)Implementation:
To implement these principles, the City of Toronto's grants programs will ensure that:
(1)all organizations receiving City grants are non-discriminatory and promote the goals of anti-racism, access and equity;
(2)all organizations receiving City grants take reasonable steps to ensure their services, programs and decision-making
reflect the community they serve;
(3)the City of Toronto's grants programs are accessible to organizations from Toronto's diverse communities, including
organizations representing equity-seeking communities; and
(4)all required documentation and conditions will be reasonable and grants will not be withheld if the applicant is taking
reasonable steps to comply with City policy.
Actions required to do this are described below.
(1)Declaration of Non-Discrimination:
Every person has the right to live, work and serve in an environment free of individual as well as systemic harassment and
discrimination. Regarding the operation of the City's grants programs, the City of Toronto requires that all individuals and
organizations adopt a policy of access and non-discrimination based on the City's Human Rights Policy as a condition of
receiving a grant or other support from the City's grants programs. Under the Ontario Human Rights Code, discrimination
means someone is being treated unfairly because of her/his race, colour, ancestry, place of origin (where a person was
born), ethnic background, citizenship, creed (religion), sex, disability, sexual orientation, age, marital status and family
status. In some cases, discrimination also means someone is being treated unfairly because he or she receives welfare, or if
the person has been pardoned for a criminal offence. The declaration (copy attached) must be completed by individuals and
organizations applying for grants or other supports.
Discrimination could occur on the basis of employment, services, contractual arrangements, or membership in unions. It is
essential to develop complaint/mediation policies for incidents that could occur between employees, employees and
management, employees and volunteers, employees and consumers, as well as between agencies.
(2)Anti-Racism, Access and Equity Components:
The following components are provided as guidelines to assist organizations receiving City grants in their efforts to
integrate anti-racism, access and equity throughout their operations. The components address anti-racism, access and equity
in the following areas: (a) Governance; (b) Employment; (c) Services; (d) Choice; (e) Training and Education; and (f)
Information and Communications.
(a)Access to Governance - Organizations receiving City grants will ensure that members of the City's diverse
communities have equitable access to the organization's decision-making process. This includes decision-making,
policymaking, budgeting and allocations. The Board of Directors, its volunteer committees and staff need to be
representative of the diversity of the community it serves, as well as be responsive to the changing demographics. New
board members should be educated and trained to effectively govern the organization. The Board has to be accountable to
its members and communities.
(b) Access to Employment - Organizations receiving City grants will ensure that members of the City's diverse
communities have equitable access to employment. This includes recruitment, selection, staff development, performance
evaluation, retention, promotion, termination. It also requires the identification and removal of systemic barriers so that the
organization's staff are representative of diverse communities and are able to serve the needs of the changing population.
(c)Access to Services - Organizations receiving City grants will ensure that they undertake planned and co-ordinated
activities aimed at making their services and programs accessible to diverse communities. This includes examining and
making appropriate changes to those who provide the organization's services, those who are receiving services and the way
in which services are provided to ensure they are non-discriminatory and promote the goals of anti-racism, access and
equity. In this context, the organization's outreach, communications, and structures for intake, referral, needs assessment,
program planning, monitoring and evaluation must be examined and appropriately changed.
In addition, organizations receiving City grants must take into consideration provision of services to disadvantaged
individuals, low-income persons, families in poverty, and equity-seeking communities.
(d)Access to Choice - Organizations receiving City grants will ensure that their services, programs and decision-making
provide a range of service options that enable the consumer or the community to make their own decisions about their lives
and their community issues.
(e)Access to Training and Education - Organizations receiving City grants will ensure that those involved in the delivery
of services and programs are able to participate in appropriate education and training aimed at improving their knowledge,
understanding and skills in order to work with and provide services to members of diverse communities, particularly
equity-seeking communities.
Such training and education may involve Board members, staff and volunteers and include orientation and development in
the areas of anti-racism, human rights, accommodation for people with disabilities, sexual orientation in the workplace and
the community, etc.
(f)Information and Communications - Organizations receiving City grants will ensure that information on its services,
programs and decision-making and how they can be accessed as well as all of the organization's communications
appropriately portray and are accessible to diverse communities. This includes external and internal communication and
must address multilingual requirements as well as accommodate those who are sight and hearing impaired.
It is essential that the components listed above are implemented with an anti-racist approach. In this context, organizations
receiving City grants will be involved in the development and promotion of unbiased attitudes, beliefs, policies and
procedures as well as the identification and elimination of derogatory behaviours, actions, and practices of Board members,
staff, volunteers, community members, residents and the organization's policies and procedures that have a direct or
adverse impact on Aboriginal, ethno-racial and linguistic minority communities.
(III)Access To City Grants Programs:
In terms of the City's responsibilities, each City grant program will include the following into the operations of their grants
programs:
(1)Environmental Scanning and Priority Setting:
This will require all grants programs to identify demographic, community and service trends, priorities of other funders,
gaps in service and program delivery. This is done to enable grants programs to establish priorities for funding on a regular
basis and, thereby, to encourage grants applicants to establish programs and services which meet community issues and
needs.
(2)Allocation of Funds:
This will require all grants programs to undertake to provide funding based on both indicators of community need and
community demographics. The issue of need as well as community demographics are determined in the environmental
scanning process. In considering the allocation of funds, each grants program will need to determine the demographic
make-up of the organizations seeking and receiving funding and undertake to ensure an equitable distribution of funds.
Particular consideration will be given to organizations representative of equity-seeking communities.
(3)Outreach and Community Development:
This will require all grants programs to determine the most appropriate strategies to provide community outreach and
development. Each grants program will ensure a planned and co-ordinated approach to these activities in order to increase
the capacity of diverse communities and their organizations, particularly those representing equity-seeking groups.
(4)Setting Performance Standards and Monitoring Results:
This will require all grants programs to establish performance measures to guide the administration of grants programs and
to set ways in which the grants administration process can be reviewed, assessed and improved. Monitoring results of
grants administration is also essential to ensuring such programs are achieving their objectives, particularly respecting
equity-seeking groups.
(5)Assessment of Organizations:
This will require each grants program to ensure that its funded organizations or recipients of other supports fulfil the
anti-racism, access and equity policy outlined above. The policy is designed to ensure full civic participation of all
communities and specifically to engage in efforts to achieve equality for all of Toronto's communities.
In addition, each grants program will require organizations receiving funds to develop access and equity action plans and to
submit a report on this annually along with the grants application form. This information will be used in the grants
assessment as well as become part of the information which will be analysed and submitted to Council.
(IV)Policy Implementation:
All of the City's grants programs are required to integrate the above policy and principles within their operations. This will
be done in ways that are appropriate to the operations of each grants program and their capacity to undertake the activities
identified above. To ensure this is being done, all grants programs will report annually on actions being taken to implement
this policy.
In addition to reporting out annually, all grants programs will work together to streamline requests from organizations
receiving grants from more than one City grant program.
In terms of organizations receiving grants:
(1)all organizations will be required to file a Declaration of Non-Discrimination;
(2)organizations with total annual operating budgets greater than $25,000.00 will be required to submit documentation
regarding their anti-racism, access and equity policies; and
(3)organizations receiving one-time grants will be required to include in their grant request how they intend to address
the City's policy principles.
The City of Toronto recognizes that inequities, discrimination and disadvantage are generated and maintained through
various means, including individual and systemic practices. To address this, the City recognizes that it, as well as
organizations seeking and receiving City grants, needs to support the creation of an equitable society. Failure or
unwillingness to engage in such activities could result in negative consequences and result in the withholding of City
funding or the rejection of an application for funding.
--------
The following persons appeared before the Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee in connection with the foregoing
matter:
-Ms. Stacey Papernick, Volunteer Board Member, The AIDS Committee of Toronto; and
-Ms. Joan Anderson, Board Member, The AIDS Committee of Toronto.
6
Contingency Grants Allocations
(City Council on December 16 and 17, 1998, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)
The Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee recommends the adoption of the recommendations of the Municipal
Grants Review Committee contained in the following communication (November 21, 1998) from the City Clerk:
Recommendation:
The Municipal Grants Review Committee on November 20, 1998, recommended to the Strategic Policies and Priorities
Committee the adoption of the attached report (November 19, 1998) from the Commissioner of Community and
Neighbourhood Services respecting the final set of 1998 Contingency Grants allocations.
--------
(Report dated November 19, 1998, addressed to the
Municipal Grants Review Committee from the
Commissioner of Community and Neighbourhood Services)
Purpose:
This report recommends the final set of 1998 contingency grants allocations.
Funding Sources, Financial Implications and Impact Statement:
Finance staff have confirmed that sufficient funds exist within the 1998 consolidated grants budget for the allocation
amounts recommended.
Recommendations:
It is recommended that:
(1)funding in the amount of $5,000.00 per agency be restored to Cabbagetown Youth Centre, Central Neighbourhood
House, St. Christopher House, St. Stephen's Community Centre, and University Settlement House;
(2)a one time allocation of $6,145.54 be made to the Company of Ocean Venturers Incorporated;
(3)the National Broadcast Reading Service Inc. not receive funding under the contingency grant program as it does not
meet the program criteria;
(4)the grants contingency not be used to make donations and, therefore, a $5,000.00 donation to "Jesse's Journey" not be
made from the grants contingency; and
(5)the appropriate City officials be authorized and directed to take the necessary action to give effect thereto.
Council Reference/Background/History:
At its meeting of June 11, 1998, the Municipal Grants Review Committee approved a report, titled "Grants Contingency",
which provided basic guidelines for the administration of the grants contingency. The Grants Contingency report
recommended the application of five criteria in determining whether or not to recommend ad hoc grant requests, including:
that the requests clearly be one time only, that the activity for which funding is being requested is within the City mandate,
that the activity not be eligible for support through the established City grant programs, that needs arising from transition
be considered, and that all applicants be required to submit financial information.
Comments and/or Discussion and/or Justification:
Review Process:
The practice this year has been for the Committee Chair, Committee Clerk, or the Mayor's Office to refer requests to the
Commissioner of Community and Neighbourhood Services. The Commissioner then forwards the requests to the most
appropriate grants service area for review and comment. Those requests which do not fall within a specific service area are
reviewed by staff of the Community and Neighbourhood Services Department.
In addition, all requests, regardless of their appropriateness for consideration as a grant, have been referred to staff
responsible for the grants contingency. Based on past grants best practices, requests for donations, capital expenditures, and
the purchase of fundraising tickets have not been considered under the grants contingency. Staff have responded to these
requests by indicating that there is no existing source of City support for such activities or initiatives.
Funding requests which appeared to meet the basic criteria established by the Municipal Grants Review Committee were
provided with a standard contingency grant application form and a copy of the criteria. Upon review of the completed
applications by the most appropriate staff, allocation recommendations were developed for consideration by the Municipal
Grants Review Committee.
Allocations:
Only two completed applications were received by staff, one of which was determined to be eligible for funding and the
other not eligible.
The Company of Ocean Venturers Incorporated provides youth with education, trade skills, work ethics and employment
opportunities. The program was piloted in 1998 with eight youth, age 15 to 23 participating, six of whom either secured
employment or have returned to school. The agency has requested support for program costs associated with the Shipmates
pilot program in the amount of $6,145.54. The agency has also clearly indicated that this is a one time request for costs
associated with the pilot and that it will not be requesting financial support from the City in the future. The agency will
raise all income from the private sector and the application submitted indicates the agency's ability to do so in the future.
The agency meets the criteria and is recommended for funding.
The National Broadcast Reading Service Inc. is a non-profit charitable organization dedicated to making media more
accessible for people who are blind or low-vision and for seniors. The agency has requested funding to provide media
materials for the Toronto Public Library. After discussion with staff of the Toronto Public Library, the applicant was
advised that should the Toronto Public Library choose to purchase the materials it would do so out of its operating budget
and that it would not be appropriate to provide grant funding for these purchases. The agency is not recommended for
funding.
Jesse's Journey:
City Council at its meeting of July 29, 30 , and 31, 1998, referred to the Municipal Grants Review Committee a motion by
Councillor Adams recommending that the City make a $5,000.00 contribution to Jesse's Journey. Jesse's Journey is a
registered trademark of the Foundation for Gene and Cell Therapy. This recommendation was made as a result of Mr. John
Davidson's appearance before Council on July 30, 1998. Mr. Davidson was in the midst of an 8,300 kilometre walk across
Canada to raise public awareness and funds for genetic research.
The Municipal Grants Review Committee referred Council's recommendation to the Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer
since the recommendation referred to the allocation of funds from the Corporate Contingency Fund. The Chief Financial
Officer and Treasurer has advised that should the Council choose to allocate the $5,000.00, it would be appropriate to
provide the funds from the grants contingency rather than the Corporate Contingency fund.
As indicated above, there is no source within the City budget for donations. The grants contingency has an established set
of criteria and application process based on the grants best practices. Should the Municipal Grants Review Committee wish
to recommend that a donation be made from the grants contingency, it will need to vary the current criteria and break
precedent with regard to the use of the grants contingency to date. It is not recommended that the grants contingency be
used to make donations. Therefore, it is recommended that a $5,000.00 donation to "Jesse's Journey" not be made from the
grants contingency.
Use of Contingency Fund Related to Difficulties Arising from Transition:
The transition to the new City brought many changes that had impacts on past practices. Centralized grants administration
was established in all grants programs and some oversights occurred. In particular, five Major Recreation Grant Recipients
whose individual grants exceeded $60,000.00 were reduced by $5,000.00 each; however, proper notice was not given
resulting in these organizations having no opportunity to appeal this decision in a timely manner. The reduction of these
grants occurred in order to fund returning recreation applicants as directed by Council in the report "Administration of
Municipal Grants" approved at its regular meeting on February 4, 5 and 6, 1998. In the past, it was possible to reallocate
funding from within the former City of Toronto's General Grants Budget as in 1997, but this flexibility was no longer
available as grant programs were clearly separated. Also, emergency funding formerly available to recreation applicants
was no longer included in the Recreation Grants Budget.
The five organizations affected are St. Christopher House, Cabbagetown Youth Centre, University Settlement House,
Central Neighbourhood House and St. Stephen's Community Centre. Staff have met with these agencies to hear their
concerns and discuss possible options. The agencies emphasized that the severe cutbacks from other funders and now the
reduction in City support have jeopardized their recreation programs for the balance of the year. City grants are used for
staff salaries who deliver these services.
This situation has arisen as a result of the transition from six recreation grants administrations to one centralized recreation
grants administration. As this was a primary focus for use of the Contingency Fund and sufficient funds remain, it is
recommended that the grant reductions to the five agencies noted above be reinstated. It is further recommended that an
additional $25,000.00 be available in the 1999 Major Recreation Grants Budget to prevent such reductions from occurring.
Conclusions:
This report provides final allocation recommendations under the 1998 contingency grant program. At year end a full review
of the 1998 contingency grant program will be undertaken to determine if the need for an ongoing contingency grants
program exists. This review should be carried out by the proposed Corporate Grants Team and submitted to the Municipal
Grants Review Committee at its first meeting in 1999.
Contact Name:
Chris Brillinger, Tel: 392-8608.
7
Community Services Grants Program -
1998 Reallocation of Funds
(City Council on December 16 and 17, 1998, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)
The Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee recommends the adoption of the recommendations of the Municipal
Grants Review Committee contained in the following communication (November 20, 1998) from the City Clerk:
Recommendation:
The Municipal Grants Review Committee on November 20, 1998, recommended to the Strategic Policies and Priorities
Committee the adoption of the attached report (November 2, 1998) from the Commissioner of Community and
Neighbourhood Services respecting the Community Services Grants Program - 1998 reallocation of funds.
--------
(Report dated November 2, 1998, addressed to the
Municipal Grants Review Committee from the
Commissioner of Community and Neighbourhood Services)
Purpose:
This report recommends the reallocation of funding to three agencies under the 1998 Community Service Grants Program
(C.S.G.P.).
Funding Sources, Financial Implications and Impact Statement:
Sufficient funds for the 1998 C.S.G.P. exist in the Community Services Grants Programs component of the Corporate
Grants appropriation.
Recommendations:
It is recommended that:
(1)the reallocation of $20,000.00 under the 1998 C.S.G.P. to: Macaulay Child Development Centre ($14,500.00); and
Welcome Baby Support Program for Etobicoke ($5,500.00) be approved;
(2)the allocation of $10,000.00 to the Woman Abuse Council of Toronto be approved; and
(3)the appropriate City officials be authorized and directed to take the necessary action to give effect thereto.
Council Reference/Background/History:
On July 8, 9 and 10, 1998, City of Toronto Council approved the report, titled "Community Services Grants - 1998
Allocations and Appeals" (Clause No. 9, Repot No. 10 of The Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee). In this report,
1998 grant allocations were approved for Common Ground Women's Centre ($15,000.00) and Toronto Children's
Breakfast Club ($15,000.00). Circumstances changed for both of these organizations whereby they are no longer eligible
for support through the Community Services Grants Program.
This report recommends that funds totalling $30,000.00 from the two aforementioned organizations be reallocated to the
following three organizations, Macaulay Child Development Centre, Welcome Baby Support Program for Etobicoke and
the Woman Abuse Council of Toronto.
Comments and/or Discussion and/or Justification:
In the Community Service Grants Program, organizations are assessed annually to determine operational and service
effectiveness. At the time of the review, agencies are provided advice and might receive conditions in order to improve
their effectiveness. However, agencies occasionally encounter organizational difficulties which may warrant tough
decisions in order to meet their financial and legal obligations or ensure their survival. Common Ground Women's Centre
and Welcome Baby Support Program of Etobicoke are two agencies funded under the 1998 C.S.G.P. which found
themselves experiencing serious financial problems this year.
Common Ground Women's Centre:
Common Ground Women's Centre has been funded by the municipal government for many years, in addition to receiving
core funding from the provincial government. Earlier this year, the agency lost a provincial stabilization grant of
approximately $45,000.00 for the 1998/99 fiscal year. The organization developed a fundraising strategy to minimize the
loss of its provincial grant. Municipal staff encouraged the agency to pursue appropriate restructuring opportunities, given
the insecurity of long-term funding from current sources. The organization has withdrawn its application for 1998
municipal funding because it has closed its doors for service. The Centre provided services to low income women and their
children and was located in the former City of York. The agency has requested that their Community Services grant be
reallocated to low-income women and children.
Toronto Children's Breakfast Club:
In the past, the Toronto Children's Breakfast Club has received funding through the former area municipal community
services program. In 1998, Toronto Public Health allocated $1,310,500.00 to child nutrition programs across the new City
of Toronto. This agency is now eligible to access municipal support from the Public Health Division. The agency received
a 1998 grant of $17,715.63 from Public Health for the 1998/99 school year.
Year End Allocation:
On occasion, approaching year-end, grant monies may remain unexpectedly if agencies cannot meet their grant conditions
and/or the monies are returned by funded agencies. These unexpended grant dollars may be reallocated to agencies which
meet the eligibility criteria and have no performance issues. Macaulay Child Development Centre and Welcome Baby
Support Program are two currently funded agencies which have been identified for reallocation of available funds. A third
organization, the Woman Abuse Council of Toronto, is also being recommended for the reallocation of grant monies.
Macaulay Child Development Centre:
The Macaulay Child Development Centre provides a range of programs designed to "foster the optimal development of
children in partnership with families and community", including licensed childcare and family support programs.
Currently, the agency is funded for $16,333.00 under the 1998 C.S.G.P. to provide two family resource programs, a
caregivers resources program in the Junction area and a teen parent/child drop-in program in the former City of York. The
agency is requesting additional funding to support three parent/caregiver resource programs in under-serviced
neighbourhoods.
The agency is requesting funding to supplement existing programs and to operate a parent-child program at Trimbee, a
Metropolitan Toronto Housing Company Limited site, located at Weston Road and Eglinton Avenue West in the former
City of York. Trimbee is a very diverse, under-serviced neighbourhood; 35 percent of the units are subsidized and more
than half of the 250 households are of single parent families; one-third have children below the age four. The program will
address the development needs of the children and the social support needs of the adults.
Macaulay Child Development Centre is recommended for an additional $14,500.00 to support the teen/parent drop-in,
caregiver resources program and the Trimbee site.
Welcome Baby Support Program For Etobicoke:
For the past 12 years, Welcome Baby Support Program of Etobicoke has served first-time high-risk mothers, 21 years old
and younger. With two part-time staff, they facilitate a community support network which match the young mothers with
trained volunteers to reduce the isolation and stress of the new mothers. The agency received a 1998 C.S.G.P. grant
totalling $18,415.00 and has no other government support. The agency has been funded by the Trillium Foundation and the
Toronto Community Foundation, however, the monies are for specific initiatives. The agency provides a unique model of
service delivery which has been effective in reaching a high risk population and has been short-listed nationally by the
Fraser Institute (Wm. Donnor Memorial Award) for excellence in community service.
Currently, Welcome Baby Support Program is experiencing financial difficulties due to some unforseen changes in
revenues and expenses. The agency has developed a financial strategic plan and increased its fundraising efforts. An
additional grant of $5,500.00 is recommended for this agency to help sustain it in the short-run. In addition, the
organization is encouraged to enlist the assistance of a Community Development Officer to help with the financial strategy
to ensure its ongoing viability.
Woman Abuse Council of Toronto:
The Woman Abuse Council of Toronto (W.A.C.) was established in 1991 (as the Metro Woman Abuse Council of
Toronto) to create a Metro-wide integrated community response to woman abuse. The need for the initiative was
established through research and community consultation that identified that the response to woman abuse by community
and institutional services was inconsistent and fragmented. Municipal government has played a key role through
participation on the Council with other service providers, and additionally, through the provision of in-kind resources to
support some of the basic operating costs.
At the current time, the Council consists of 18 members (including Toronto Public Health and the Toronto Police), and a
further 175 organizations participate in various committees and initiatives. City of Toronto Council Members are also
active in a variety of Women Abuse Council initiatives. The W.A.C. efforts in developing protocols and monitoring the
implementation of innovations in systemic responses to woman abuse has provided an effective and efficient way to
co-ordinate community input on this crucial issue. The 1998/99 organization activities include ongoing initiatives such as
the Specialized Domestic Courts and the Male Batterers' program, as well as projects such as a Court Watch Project and
responding to the Provincial Coroner's Inquest into Domestic Violence.
Since amalgamation in January, 1998 the W.A.C. has continued to access in-kind support through the Community and
Neighbourhood Services, Social Development Division budget. This support has included office space, access to office
equipment and supplies, printing, telephone service and other resources related to the administration of the W.A.C. Due to
expansion of Ontario Works, the W.A.C. was required to move in early 1998, and the organization has been relocated to
rent-free space at 590 Jarvis Street. Non-space, in-kind administrative resources are estimated at about $20,000.00 per year.
As an independent body, the W.A.C. is unique in being able to draw on departmental administrative resources. In order to
regularize the relationship, it is recommended that the in-kind administrative support be replaced with a grant of
$10,000.00, to reflect six months of administrative costs starting in January 1999. The W.A.C. will apply for continuation
of this support through the 1999 Community Services Grants Program. The in-kind provision of space would not be
affected by this change, as it is governed by the current space use policy administered through the Corporate Services
Department.
Over the life of the W.A.C., staffing support has come from a variety of sources, including provincial ministries. Due to the
changing funding climate and reduced funding from previous sources, the W.A.C. has requested that the City allocate
operating and administrative costs of $115,000.00, over and above the currently received in-kind support. The organization
has been asked to submit any request for additional funds through the Community Services Grants Program in 1999, where
it can be reviewed in the context of the City's overall support for community organizations. Staff has also provided
information to the organization on other sources which may be approached regarding this substantial funding needs.
Conclusions:
The Common Ground Women's Centre and the Toronto Children's Breakfast Club were approved for 1998 C.S.G.P
funding totalling $30,000.00. These two organizations became ineligible for funding under the C.S.G.P. for different
reasons and the 1998 grant monies could not be allocated to them. The unexpended C.S.G.P. funds are being recommended
for reallocation to Macaulay Child Development Centre, Welcome Baby Support Program of Etobicoke and the Woman
Abuse Council of Toronto.
This report recommends that funds totalling $30,000.00 under the 1998 C.S.G.P. be approved for reallocation to Macaulay
Child Development Centre ($14,500.00), Welcome Baby Support Program of Etobicoke ($5,500.00) and Woman Abuse
Council of Toronto ($10,000.00).
Contact Name:
Chris Brillinger
Tel: 392-8608/Fax: 392-8492
e-mail address: chris_brillinger@metrodesk.metrotor.on.ca.
8
Emergency Support Fund - Winter Allocation Recommendations
(City Council on December 16 and 17, 1998, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)
The Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee recommends the adoption of the recommendations of the Municipal
Grants Review Committee contained in the following communication (November 20, 1998) from the City Clerk:
Recommendation:
The Municipal Grants Review Committee on November 20, 1998, recommended to the Strategic Policies and Priorities
Committee the adoption of the attached report (November 9, 1998) from the Commissioner of Community and
Neighbourhood Services respecting the Emergency Support Fund - Winter Allocation recommendations.
(Report dated November 9, 1998, addressed to the
Municipal Grants Review Committee from the
Commissioner of Community and Neighbourhood Services)
Purpose:
The purpose of this report is to provide allocation recommendations for additional services and programs to the homeless
population for the winter of 1998/99.
Funding Sources, Financial Implications and Impact Statement:
Sufficient funds for the Emergency Support Fund (E.S.F.) - Winter Allocations exist in the Community Services Grants
Program component of the Corporate Grants appropriation.
Recommendations:
It is recommended that:
(1)the attached allocations totaling $264,352.00. for agencies described in Appendix A be approved;
(2) the outstanding agency requests for Emergency Support funding be referred to the United Way for consideration
under the enhanced Winter Relief program; and
(3)the appropriate City officials be authorized and directed to take the necessary action to give effect thereto.
Council Reference/Background/History:
The 1998 consolidated grants appropriation included an amount of $1,200,000.00 for services for people who are homeless
and socially isolated. As indicated in the report titled, "Community Service Grants Program (C.S.G.P.) - 1998 Allocations",
an amount of $264,352.00 was reserved for 1998 E.S.F. Winter Allocations.
During the 1998 Community Services Grants Program all 1997 recipients of E.S.F. received flatlined allocations. A broad
range of services and programs across the City of Toronto have already been funded to maintain the core infrastructure of
drop-in, outreach and information services for the homeless population. Additional requests were not funded during this
process. Agencies who received additional funding during the 1997/98 winter allocations of E.S.F. and new applicants
were informed that these requests would be reviewed through the 1998/99 E.S.F. Winter Allocations.
Comments and/or Discussion and/or Justification:
In 1997, a number of municipal strategies were undertaken to respond to mounting concern regarding homelessness in the
City of Toronto. Strategies for the winter of 1997/98 included the securing of municipal space to operate overnight shelters
as well as enhance funding for drop-in programs and services especially during underserved times and in under-resourced
locations. The E.S.F. Winter Allocations were used to fund a range of daytime programs across the City to respond to the
need for day time shelter, information services and outreach programs.
Senior management staff are working together to develop a co-ordinated emergency response to this crisis for the winter
months. As a result, a high priority has been placed on securing additional hostel bed space, ensuring all elements are in
place for the Cold Weather Alert program and increasing Public Health support to homeless service providers. One
element of the municipal response is to provide E.S.F. funding to key elements of the community-based services system.
The Emergency Support Fund Winter Allocations:
Following these City strategic directions this report provides recommendations for funds totalling $264,352.00. The
allocations approach used was to determine cold weather service priorities in consultation with the United Way of Greater
Toronto and staff of the Shelter Housing and Support Division of the Community and Neighbourhood Services
Department. The recommendations reflect the strategic direction to fund a limited number of key services at appropriate
levels rather than attempting to spread the available funding to all of the outstanding applicants.
The recommendations provided in Appendix A will support services, including the provision of a 24-hour street Helpline
service for members of the homeless population, service providers or other concerned individuals; additional Roving Patrol
outreach services to connect with homeless individuals on the streets to provide warm blankets, food and information and
transportation; support day-time drop-in programs and outreach services from the municipal site on Richmond Street in
order to continue this 24-hour service up to April 30, 1999; and the provision of a weekend drop-in at The Toronto
Friendship Centre which has operated during the winter of 1996 and 1997.
Additional Funding for Winter Relief Services:
Over the past few years the former Metro, the United Way of Greater Toronto and the former City of Toronto have shared
information and attempted to co-ordinate grants allocations in order to provide a basic level of service, especially over the
cold weather months. The joint support of this infrastructure is important for the success of programs such as the City of
Toronto Extreme Cold Weather Alerts and Out of the Cold. An amount of $1,000,000.00 has been dedicated by the United
Way for the support of services and programs to the homeless population. This fund is part of the $3,850,000.00 charity
casino revenue made available by the Province that is to be administered by the United Way of Greater Toronto. Similar to
the allocation process for the E.S.F., the United Way and the City are collaborating on the dispersement of these funds. The
administration and allocation of these funds will include a review of all applications submitted through the E.S.F. and
Winter E.S.F., United Way Winter Relief Program as well as the identification of specific service providers to respond to
identified gaps and needs. The priority areas identified include:
(i)street outreach programs that would enhance the street patrol/roving patrol program, working in partnership with
Community Information Toronto;
(ii)services to communities which are underserved;
(iii)services during underserved times; and
(iv)services in under-resourced locations.
Conclusions:
The collaboration of the City with the United Way in the allocation of the respective funding programs has allowed for a
co-ordinated response to the provision of funding of day time programs across the City. The need for a 24-hour help line
linked with street outreach services across the City of Toronto has been identified as a clear priority area as is the need for
the continuance of the 24-hour shelter and drop-in at the 60 Richmond Street site. The $1,000,000.00 to be administered
through the United Way will allow for the funding of many of the programs supported through the E.S.F. winter program
in 1997/98, as well as new requests. The 1999 consolidated grants budget request will contain $1,200,000.00 for the
support of services and programs for the homeless population. Staff will initiate discussions following the release of the
Mayor's Task Force on Homelessness Report and develop strategies for a comprehensive approach to this sector
recognizing that homelessness is an issue 365 days of the year.
Contact Name:
Manjit Jheeta, Tel: 392 8684/Fax: 392-8492.
Appendix A
1998 Community Service Grants Programs
Emergency Support Fund - Winter Allocation Recommendations
Agency Name |
1997
C.S.G.P.
Approved
Allocation |
1998
C.S.G.P.
Approved
Allocation |
1998
C.S.G.P./E.S.F.
Winter Allocation
Recommendations |
1.Anishnawbe Health Toronto |
$139,171.00 |
$131,000.00 |
$80,000.00 |
2.Central Neighbourhood House |
162,096.00 |
162,854.00 |
74,352.00 |
3.Community Information
Centre of Toronto |
444,654.00 |
438,065.00 |
60,000.00 |
4.Toronto Friendship Centre
Inc. |
83,593.00 |
83,593.00 |
50,000.00 |
Totals |
829,514.00 |
815,512.00 |
264,352.00 |
--------
(A copy of the attachment to Appendix A, referred to in the foregoing report, was forwarded to all Members of Council
with the agenda of the Municipal Grants Review Committee for its meeting on November 20, 1998, and a copy thereof is
on file in the office of the City Clerk.)
9
The Toronto Heritage Fund Grants Program
(City Council on December 16 and 17, 1998, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)
The Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee recommends the adoption of the recommendations of the Municipal
Grants Review Committee contained in the following communication (November 20, 1998) from the City Clerk
subject to amending Recommendation (2) by adding the words " or its successor" after the words "Heritage
Toronto" so as to read:
"(2)Heritage Toronto, or its successor, continue to administer and manage the Toronto Heritage Fund grants
program on behalf of the City of Toronto;"
The Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee submits the following communication (November 20, 1998) from
the City Clerk:
Recommendation:
The Municipal Grants Review Committee on November 20, 1998, recommended to the Strategic Policies and Priorities
Committee the adoption of the following Recommendations Nos. (1) to (5) contained in the attached report (November 4,
1998) from the Managing Director, Toronto Historical Board:
"It is recommended that:
(1)the Toronto Heritage Fund grants program be expanded to cover the entire City of Toronto;
(2)Heritage Toronto continue to administer and manage the Toronto Heritage Fund grants program on behalf of the City
of Toronto;
(3)Heritage Toronto, or its successor, report back to Council in one year with a review of the program and an appropriate
long-term strategy for managing the Fund;
(4)applications be reviewed on a competition basis; and
(5)a representative of each former municipality be invited to participate in a cross-jurisdictional review committee."
The Municipal Grants Review Committee reports, for the information of the Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee,
having deferred consideration of Recommendation No. (6), viz:
"(6)to successfully operate the expanded program, Council include an immediate contribution of $100,000.00 to the
fund.",
pending receipt of:
(i)a further detailed report from the Managing Director, Toronto Historical Board, on the expansion plan; and
(ii)the detailed report requested of the Commissioner of Community and Neighbourhood Services on the establishment
of priority service areas for the 1999 Municipal Grants Program, and on other requests for levelling up across all grants
program areas.
Background:
The Municipal Grants Review Committee had before it the following report and communications:
-(November 4, 1998) from the Managing Director, Toronto Historical Board, respecting the Toronto Heritage Fund
Grants Program;
-(November 19, 1998) from Ms. Allison Koturbash in support of the Toronto Heritage Fund Grants Program; and
-(November, 1998) from Ms. Eva Guinan in support of the Toronto Heritage Fund Grants Program.
--------
(Report dated November 4, 1998, addressed to the
Municipal Grants Review Committee from the
Managing Director, Toronto Historical Board)
Purpose:
This report describes the expansion of the Toronto Heritage Fund Grants Program, administered by Heritage Toronto, to
the entire City of Toronto
Funding Sources, Financial Implications and Impact Statement:
It is recommended that, in order to successfully operate the expanded program, a $100,000.00 contribution by City Council
is required.
Recommendations:
It is recommended that:
(1)the Toronto Heritage Fund Grants Program be expanded to cover the entire City of Toronto;
(2)Heritage Toronto continue to administer and manage the Toronto Heritage Fund grants program on behalf of the City
of Toronto;
(3)Heritage Toronto, or its successor, report back to Council in one year with a review of the program and an appropriate
long-term strategy for managing the Fund;
(4)applications be reviewed on a competition basis;
(5)a representative of each former municipality be invited to participate in a cross-jurisdictional review committee; and
(6)to successfully operate the expanded program, Council include an immediate contribution of $100,000.00 to the fund.
Council Reference/Background/History:
At its meeting of May 4, 1998, the Municipal Grants Review Committee requested Heritage Toronto to consult with
stakeholders about expanding the program to cover the entire City of Toronto. Staff prepared a discussion paper, entitled
"The Toronto Heritage Fund Grant Review, July 1998," that outlines the challenges arising from expanding the program.
The paper was circulated to staff and LACAC representatives of the former municipalities, and to representatives of the
restoration industry and former grant recipients for comment. Interested parties were invited to attend a meeting held on
August 18, 1998, by Heritage Toronto, to discuss the questions outlined in the report.
Comments and/or Discussion and/or Justification:
At its meeting of Wednesday, October 21, 1998, Heritage Toronto (BD98-205) adopted the above-mentioned
recommendations.
Heritage Toronto has reviewed and recommended grants under the Toronto Heritage Fund grants program on behalf of the
former City of Toronto for over 12 years. The Toronto Heritage Fund grants program allows the municipality to aid owners
of properties designated under the Ontario Heritage Act with approved restoration/conservation projects.
Property owners often ask what advantage there is for them to have their properties designated. Preserving historic
buildings is a public benefit, yet private property owners bear the burden. Toronto Heritage Fund grants have been one way
for the City to help. A total of $443,364.00 has been spent on 65 projects with an additional $90,000.00 committed to
approved projects. On average, in the last five years, for every dollar of Toronto Heritage Fund grant money spent, the
owner contributes five.
When the program's geographic scope is widened, two concerns raised are: (a) the depletion of the fund; and (b) ensuring
there are opportunities to attract money from new sources to support the program.
Meeting with Stakeholders:
Heritage Toronto hosted a meeting on August 18, 1998, with representatives from the heritage community to discuss the
issues related to expanding the program. In preparation for this meeting, Heritage Toronto prepared a paper that outlined
several issues and questions to assist in the discussion. The following points were discussed at the meeting:
(i)It was noted that the Arts community and the Heritage community are not equally funded by the Municipality. Heritage
gets little or no funding.
(ii)The questions of who will administer the program in the long-term is uncertain at this time because of the unknown
heritage governance structure. However, in the meantime, Heritage Toronto should continue to manage and administer the
program for the City of Toronto and expand it to the former municipalities.
(iii)The existing fund money could be used as leverage with to increase the fund.
(iv)Heritage Toronto, as a non-profit agency, has the ability to pursue private fund raising.
(v)It was suggested that one way to raise funds would be to charge heritage property owners who demolish their
buildings a penalty fee.
(vi)While the discussion was mainly about how the program could be expanded to the former municipalities, it was
suggested that the program should include grants for more than just restoration projects.
(vii)It was noted that the City has an obligation to maintain its own heritage properties as well as supporting the private
property owner.
Directions:
Determining the direction of the Toronto Heritage Fund grants program is problematic at a time when the heritage
governance structure is uncertain. However, some immediate steps can be taken now to set the ground work for the future.
City Council has directed the program be expanded to the entire City of Toronto. Since Heritage Toronto is the only
organization that has administered the program and has the most experience in the entire City, it makes economic and
administrative sense for Heritage Toronto to continue in this capacity. Heritage Toronto has already expanded its Awards
Programme to nominations from all of the former Metropolitan Toronto municipalities. Representatives from each were
invited to sit on the review panel. A similar approach should be followed here. It is recommended that a review committee
made up of representatives from each of the former municipalities be established. In this scenario, the approval process
would operate as follows:
(i)Heritage Toronto staff, with help from appropriate municipal staff, receives and reviews the applications to ensure
eligibility and completeness;
(ii)a cross-jurisdictional committee reviews the eligible applications and makes recommendations as to which properties
will receive grants;
(iii)the committee's report is forwarded to the Heritage Toronto Board; and
(iv)the Heritage Toronto Board report is sent on to the Economic Development Committee and then forwarded to City
Council.
To bring greater public awareness and focus to the program, it is recommended that applications be reviewed on an annual
or semi-annual competition basis. Presently, applications are handled on a first come first served basis.
To successfully operate the expanded program, Heritage Toronto requires additional monies to augment the fund. Based on
the number of additional designated property owners that will now be eligible for restoration grants, which is a 15 percent
increase, Council will be immediately asked for an additional $100,000.00 to support the fund. Heritage Toronto, or its
successor, should report back to Council in one year with a review of the program and an appropriate long-term strategy for
managing the Fund. That report should include an investigation of the potential for attracting private sector contributions.
Conclusions:
While the administration and management of the Toronto Heritage Fund grant program remains substantially the same, it is
premature to make further changes until the future of the heritage governance structure is determined. A fuller review of
the program will occur when the structure is known.
Contact Name:
Marisa Williams, Preservation Officer, Architecture, Heritage Toronto, Tel: 392-6827 extension 240.
--------
The Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee also had before it the following communications which were forwarded to
all Members of Council with the agenda of the Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee for its meeting on December 15,
1998, and copies thereof are on file in the office of the City Clerk:
-(September 25, 1998) from the City Clerk advising of the recommendation of the York Local Architectural Conservancy
Advisory Committee
-Tables 1 and 2 dated November 4, 1998
-(November 18, 1998) addressed to the Municipal Grants Review Committee from Ms. Allison Koturbash
-(November 19, 1998) addressed to the Municipal Grants Review Committee from Ms. Eve Guinan, Eve Guinan Design
- Restoration
10
Toronto Zoo - 1998 Operating Budget Variance Report
and Contingency Request
(City Council on December 16 and 17, 1998, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)
The Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee recommends the adoption of the recommendations of the Budget
Committee contained in the following communication (November 19, 1998) from the City Clerk:
Recommendation:
The Budget Committee on November 18, 1998, recommended to the Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee and
Council that:
(1)the communication (October 27, 1998) from the General Manager and Chief Executive Officer of the Toronto Zoo be
received as information;
(2)consideration of the request that the additional net program expenditure amount of $750,000.00 above the approved
budget amount of $6,975,000.00 be funded from the City Contingency Account, be deferred to the end of 1998; and
(3)the Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer provide a cash flow to allow the Toronto Zoo to meet its operating
expenditure requirements.
The Budget Committee also reports having requested the Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer to provide a report to the
Budget Committee on a policy for the use of the Corporate Contingency Account.
Background:
The Budget Committee on November 18, 1998, had before it a report (October 27, 1998) from the General Manager and
CEO, Toronto Zoo regarding the 1998 operating budget variance report and contingency request.
Mr. Cal White, General Manager and Chief Executive Officer, Toronto Zoo, appeared before the Budget Committee in
connection with this matter.
--------
(Report dated October 27, 1998, addressed to
the Chair of theBudget Committee,
from Mr. Calvin J. White, General Manager
and CEO, Toronto Zoo)
At its meeting on Thursday, October 22, 1998, the Board of Management of the Toronto Zoo approved the following
recommendation from the General Manager and CEO and asked that the request be forwarded to the Budget Committee for
consideration and approval.
Recommendation:
It is recommended as a result of the revenue shortfall, that the additional Net Program Expenditure amount of $750.0
thousand above the approved budget amount of $6,975.0 thousand be funded from the City Contingency Account.
Background:
Earlier this year, City Council approved the Board recommended attendance level of 1.3 million visitors, a 3.3 percent
increase in attendance levels over the 1997 budget and a 9.6 percent increase over the 1997 experience. As indicated in the
attached Schedule of Attendance (Schedule A) and as further detailed in the September Operating Variance Report
(attached), Zoo attendance in July and August fell far short of expectations. Our experience is similar to other attractions
monitored by Tourism Toronto in the GTA.
The variance report for June initially indicated that the net program expenditure projected for the year would be on target,
after staff initiated a $250.0 thousand expenditure reduction plan to offset the $250.0 projected revenue shortfalls. Staff
assumed that the request for wage settlements would be added to the 1998 approved budget. In August, in revising the June
variance report and outlook to the end of the year, it was indicated that the summer revenues had not met our expectations
and a shortfall of $1,500.0 thousand from budget would be expected.
September Variance Report and Year End Outlook:
The September variance report, now complete, indicates that the Zoo will experience a revenue shortfall of $1, 598.0
thousand at year end (Schedule B). After providing for expenditure reductions, other cost saving initiatives and a reduction
of recoverable expenditures, this net shortfall is approximately $750.0 thousand. Attendance and revenue for the month of
September is on budget and is expected to remain on target to year end.
Expenditure Controls:
As in previous years, during the budget preparation, staff prepared a list of holdbacks in the amount of $950.0 thousand to
offset potential revenue shortfalls. These holdbacks have been kept in place through the year. Additional spending has been
deferred to 1999. The expenditure reduction list includes discretionary budget items including equipment, materials,
supplies and services. Seasonal staffing levels were reduced somewhat during the summer due to the reduced attendance,
however services to the public were maintained.
Contingency Request:
To fund the shortfall, a draw of $750.0 thousand is requested from the Corporate Contingency Account. Funds are required
to meet ongoing cash flow requirements. It is clear that this amount cannot be made up by further expenditure reductions.
Most of our expenditures over the remaining three months of the year will be for payroll and essential items such as animal
food and animal care supplies and maintenance and repair supplies. Non-permanent staff levels have been reduced.
The request for a contingency draw could be reduced by the approval of an increase in the 1998 budget in the amount of
$280.0 thousand as previously requested from the Budget Committee for wage settlements earlier this year and anticipated
settlements with our other bargaining unit. As well, the Zoo has estimated savings in OMERS payments, as a result of a
"contribution holiday", in the amount of $300.0 thousand and if these savings were kept within the Zoo's accounts this
would help to offset the contingency request. The result is summarized as follows:
Funding for the revenue shortfall is as follows:(000's)
Projected 1998 Revenue shortfall$1,598.0
Net Expenditure Reductions (holdbacks)(848.0)
Net Revenue Shortfall to be funded from Contingency$750.0
Alternative Sources of Funds
Wage settlements request(280.0)
OMERS savings(300.0)
Contingency Request After Items Above$170.0
The use of alternative sources of funds would result in a draw of $170.0 thousand from Contingency.
City of Toronto
1998 Operating Budget Variance Submission
for the Period Ending September 30, 1998
Overview
Board:Toronto Zoo
Year To DateEstimateActualOver/(Under) Estimate
(000's)($000's)(000's)%
Gross Expenditure18,005.217,056.5(948.7)(5.3)
Net Expenditure3,403.43,838.9435.512.8
Board Overview:
Attendance to the end of September is 1,086,658 or 90.1 percent of budget due to average levels of attendance rather than
the expected boost from the opening of the new African Savanna in June. As a result admissions and parking revenues are
below budgeted amounts. Expenditure holdbacks were implemented earlier this year by staff to compensate for the revenue
shortfall.
Overall Net Expenditure is above budget by $435.5 thousand or 12.8 percent.
Projected Total YearEstimateActualOver/(Under) Estimate
($000's)($000's)($000's)%
Gross Expenditure22,910.022,062.0(848.0)(3.7)
Net Expenditure6,975.07,725.0750.010.8
Department/Agency Overview:
The Net Expenditure is projected to be $750.0 thousand, or 10.8 percent over budget.
Attendance for the year is expected to be 120,000 or 9.2 percent below budget. As a result visitor admissions and parking
revenues are below budget by $1,703.0 thousand offset by the net of other revenue increases of $15.0 thousand. Funding
for the Revenue and Visitor Experience and Enhancement Study, as approved in 1998, has been provided by the Zoo
Stabilization Reserve in the amount of $90.0 thousand.
Expenditure reductions and hold-backs will offset the shortfall by approximately $939.0 thousand, leaving an excess in the
total Net Expenditure of $750.0 thousand. As a result of the overexpenditure the Board will request funding from the
OMERS savings, for the contractual wage settlements approved earlier this year and from a draw from contingency.
Expenditure holdbacks, implemented earlier in the year, will result in a deferral of certain expenditures to 1999.
Overall, the Net Expenditure will be over budget at year end by $750.0 thousand or 10.8 percent.
Other Issues:
11
Replacement of Police Vehicles
(City Council on December 16 and 17, 1998, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)
The Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee recommends:
(1)the adoption of the recommendations of the Budget Committee contained in the communication (November 19,
1998) from the City Clerk; and
(2)that the Chief Administrative Officer be requested to report to Council, during its consideration of the 1999
Operating Budget, on the issue of these types of reserve funds and how they should be used in the future, including
contributions from the City's Departments, and its Agencies, Boards, and Commissions.
The Committee reports, for the information of Council, having requested the Commissioner of Corporate Services to
forward to Council for its December 16, 1998 meeting, a copy of the report which was previously before the Budget
Committee relating to the Police Services Board's vehicle replacement policy.
The Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee submits the following communication (November 19, 1998) from
the City Clerk:
Recommendation:
The Budget Committee on November 18, 1998 recommended to the Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee and
Council the adoption of the report (October 30, 1998) from the Commissioner of Corporate Services regarding the
replacement of 146 Police vehicles.
The Budget Committee also reports having requested:
(1)the Commissioner of Corporate Services to report back to the Budget Committee on:
(a)whether the Toronto Police Service is using "no-name products" to repair its vehicles;
(b)if usable spare parts are removed from vehicles prior to their demolition;
(c)the make and number of new leased vehicles that have been acquired; and
(d)whether a decision has been made not to lease any further vehicles other than for intelligence or surveillance use; and
(2)the Chair of the Toronto Police Services Board to provide a report to the next meeting of the Budget Committee
scheduled for December 8, 1998 on the flat cost per kilometre for Police vehicles.
Councillor Gardner, Chair, Toronto Police Services Board, appeared before the Budget Committee in connection with this
matter.
Background:
The Budget Committee on November 18, 1998, had before it a report (October 30, 1998) from the Commissioner of
Corporate Services regarding the replacement of police vehicles, reviewing a request from the Toronto Police Service for
replacement of 146 vehicles.
--------
(Report dated October 30, 1998 addressed to the
Budget Committee from the
Commissioner, Corporate Services)
Purpose:
To respond to the request that Fleet Management Services Division review a request from the Toronto Police Service for
replacement of 146 vehicles.
Funding sources, Financial Implications and Impact Statement:
Replacement of 146 vehicles would cost approximately $3.815 million with funds coming from the City's Vehicle and
Equipment Replacement Reserve. Toronto Police Services do not contribute to the City's reserve, however, during the
1998 Operating Budget a contribution of $2.6 million was approved to partially offset purchases in the amount of $3.8
million from the reserve. The reserve receives contributions from Departments to ensure that funds are available to replace
vehicles and equipment that have reached the end of their useful life. The reserve is currently underfunded given the
current size of the City's fleet of vehicles and equipment.
Recommendations:
It is recommended that:
(1)The purchase of 146 cars for the Toronto Police Service be approved;
(2)Funds in the amount of $3,815,000.00 be approved from the Vehicle and Equipment Replacement Reserve, for this
purpose;
(3)Proceeds from the disposal of the surplus units be deposited to the Vehicle and Equipment Replacement Reserve.
Council Reference/Background/History:
During consideration of the 1998 Operating Budget of the Toronto Police Service, approval was granted for the purchase
of 118 vehicles totalling approximately $3.8 million. The balance of the request was referred to Fleet Management
Services for review.
In the past, funds were provided and police vehicles were purchased through the Police Services Operating Budget.
Comments and/or Discussion and/or Justification:
The Director of Fleet Management Services met three times with Toronto Police Services staff to discuss vehicle
replacement. On September 18, 1998, Chief Boothby forwarded information to support the request for 146 new cars (copy
attached).
After reviewing the information provided, further clarification was requested regarding administrative vehicles scheduled
for replacement. That clarification was received on October 20, 1998 (copy attached).
The vehicles identified for replacement are beyond economical repair, given the number of kilometres driven, age,
anticipated repairs required and salvage value of the units. I support the purchase of 33 marked cars and 113 plain cars, all
for front line operations. I have been assured that the 146 new cars, will replace front line cars which will then be rotated
through the Toronto Police Service fleet, to enable the actual units identified for replacement to be disposed of.
Funds for the purchase of these units should be taken from the Vehicle and Equipment Replacement Reserve. Any
proceeds from the disposal of the surplus units should be allocated to the reserve to offset a portion of the cost. The Chief
Financial Officer and Treasurer agrees with the source of funds.
Conclusions:
After reviewing the information provided by the Toronto Police Service, the Director of Fleet Management Services and I
support the replacement of the 146 units requested.
Contact Name:
Stan Burrows, Director Fleet Management Services, Telephone No.: 392-7791, Fax: 392-7301.
--------
(A copy of the communication dated September 18, 1998, mentioned in the foregoing report from Chief Boothby,
forwarding information to support the request for 146 new cars, was circulated to all Members of Council with the agenda
of the Budget Committee at its meeting on November 18, 1998, and is on file in the office of the City Clerk).
(City Council on December 16 and 17, 1998, had before it, during consideration of the foregoing Clause, the following
report (December 16, 1998) from the Commissioner of Corporate Services:
Purpose:
To respond to a December 15, 1998 request from the Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee.
Funding Sources, Financial Implications and Impact Statement:
N/A
Recommendation:
That this report be received for information.
Council Reference/Background/History:
At its meeting on December 15, 1998, the Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee requested the Commissioner of
Corporate Services to forward to Council for its December 16, 1998 meeting, a copy of the report which was previously
before the Budget Committee relating to the Police Services Board's vehicle replacement policy for consideration with
Clause No. 11 of Report No. 26 of The Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee.
Comments and/or Discussion and/or Justification:
As per the December 15, 1998 request of the Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee, attached is a copy of the
Commissioner of Corporate Services' October 30, 1998 report to the Budget Committee related to the replacement of
Police Vehicles to be considered in conjunction with Clause No. 11 of Report No. 26 of The Strategic Policies and
Priorities Committee.
Contact Name:
Stan Burrows
Tel: 392-7791, Fax 392-7301.)
12
Eatonville Library (Markland-Centennial - Ward 4)
(City Council on December 16 and 17, 1998, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)
The Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee recommends the adoption of the recommendations of the Budget
Committee contained in the following communication (November 19, 1998) from the City Clerk:
Recommendation:
The Budget Committee on November 18, 1998, recommended to the Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee and
Council that the Toronto Public Library be authorized to proceed with the engineering design work for the Eatonville
Library, funds for which have been provided in the 1999 Library Capital Budget.
Background:
The Budget Committee on November 18, 1998, had before it a transmittal letter (October 28, 1998) from the City Librarian
forwarding for the consideration of the Budget Committee a report on the Eatonville Library which was adopted by the
Toronto Public Library Board at its meeting held on September 28, 1998.
--------
(Transmittal letter dated October 28, 1998, addressed to the
Budget Committee from the City Librarian)
Attached for consideration of the Budget Committee at its November 10, 1998 meeting, is the Eatonville Library Report
adopted by the Toronto Public Library Board at its September 28, 1998 meeting.
We look forward to hearing information from you concerning the specific date and time for discussion of the Toronto
Public Library Board budget with the Budget Committee.
--------
(Report dated September 28, 1998, addressed to the
Toronto Public Library Board from the
City Librarian)
Purpose:
To obtain approval for inclusion of the Eatonville Library project.
Recommendation:
It is recommended that the Library Board endorse the Eatonville Project for inclusion in the 1999 Capital Budget and,
support the request to the Budget Committee to have $150,000.00 approved in 1998 to fund the design cost of the project.
Background/History:
The Design costs for the Eatonville Library were originally shown in the 1998 Capital Budget and subsequently removed
during Budget Committee deliberations.
At their special meeting held on April 29 and April 30, 1998, City Council in adopting the 1998 Operating and Capital
Budgets, directed that the Eatonville Library project be considered in the five year capital plan. Council further directed
that the Budget Committee be requested to advise Council on any design funding requirements by September 1998. At this
time it is the Board's prerogative to advise Council if the project should proceed.
The Eatonville Library Project has been included in the 1999 budget year of the Capital Program. The design costs
estimated at $150,000.00 should be made available in 1998 in order for the project to proceed in 1999.
Comments and/or Discussion and/or Justification:
The original proposal for this library location provided for renovations to the existing facility and an addition that would
result in a total of 16,000 square feet. The estimated cost of the project, after design , was $2,936,000.00.
With the amalgamation of the former library systems and considering the needs of the community within the context of
uniform service levels it has been determined that a 12,000 square foot facility is required at this site. In preparation for the
1999 Capital Budget the existing building was subjected to a critical review. It was determined that the existing building is
not worth renovating. Deficiencies are numerous including structural and health and safety issues (see Business Case
attached).
Moffat Kinoshita Architects (M.K.A.) were commissioned in 1996 to address various redevelopment scenarios for the
Eatonville Library site. At that time M.K.A. recommended the following based on specific direction by the Etobicoke
Library:
(I)Renovations and an addition to provide an improved branch library with all library and public space (e.g. community
meeting room) located at the g round floor level, and only building service space (e.g. mechanical and electrical rooms) in
the existing basement (Gross Floor Area of approximately 16,000 square feet).
Considering the project in the context of uniform service delivery levels and the building deficiencies the firm of M.K.A.
was recently asked to prepare a response based on the following scenario:
(I)Demolition of the existing facility, including environmental decommissioning as required, and construction of a new
public library facility without a "Drive-Through" service component, and a Gross Floor Area of approximately 12,000
square feet on one floor at grade.
Their findings, as stated in the attached letter, is as follows, "It is our recommendation that a redevelopment option such as
described above would be the most cost effective plan compared to the other redevelopment options investigated in the
1996 Study."
Accordingly, our recommendation follows the direction of City Council to report on design cost needs. Secondly, the
project is included in the proposed 1999 Capital Budget at $2.9 million. This estimate approximates the former amount
provided for renovation and expansion. However, it is now deemed sufficient to cover demolition costs, construction of a
new facility and the purchase of new equipment.
Contact Name:
Sid Mowder, 395-5517.
City of Toronto Business Case - Eatonville Library Reconstruction
1.Department:Community & Neighbourhood Services |
2.Program:Toronto Public Library Board |
3.Project Name:Eatonville Library Reconstruction |
4.Expected Start Date:1/May/1999 |
5. Expected Completion Date:31/Dec/1999 |
6.Project Description:
A reconstruction of the Eatonville Library to provide a new branch approximately 12,000 square feet in size on the
present site. This is a one storey brick building of approximately 9,250 square feet, with a partial basement. The
reconstruction would address most economically the health and safety and service deficiencies associated with the
current facility. |
7.Project Justification:
The branch circulates approximately half a million items annually and serves a population of 34,000 people. The
population in the area is far larger than originally envisaged when the Library opened in 1964, and the continued
escalating use over the years has strained the facility, resulting in overcrowding and levels of activity far beyond the
branch's capacity. Except for routine maintenance, no major upgrade or refurbishment has been undertaken. The
facility has been subject to review for a number of reasons including:
- Inadequate smoke and fire protection measures (e.g. fire separation between floor, lack of sprinklers, etc.)
- Poor building envelope (e.g. single pane glazing, no insulation), the main floor structure not designed to
current building code loading requirements. At this time there is little flexibility in moving or adding
additional shelving.
- Presence of asbestos (and associated limitations for providing adequate cabling and other technological
enhancements)
- Inadequate power and communication infrastructure
- Lack of barrier-free access (e.g. especially to washroom facilities, and to basement meeting room)
- Inadequate space and layout for collections and study areas
- Inadequate public washroom facilities
- Inadequate access and egress from basement floor level
- Awkward layout for supervision (e.g. poor sight lines, two entrances, basement washrooms, etc.)
- No shipping and receiving area
Following an architectural study prepared by the firm Moffat Kinoshita Architects, Inc. in 1996, the Board of the former
Etobicoke Public Library and, now the current Toronto Public Library Board have reviewed various options and propose
a reconstruction of the branch to provide an improved neighbourhood branch library, to eradicate the health and safety
concerns inherent in the present structure, and to provide enhanced public service from a one-floor operation. |
8.Other Alternatives:
- Removal of the asbestos only at a cost of $234,600: this option was proposed only as a first step on the
understanding that there be a commitment to proceed with a major improvement that would address the
other health and safety and service concerns.
- Removal of asbestos along with other improvements necessary to meet life safety requirements at a cost of
approximately $619,600: this option would not address the service and facility deficiencies of the current
building.
- Renovation and addition to the current structure at a cost of $2,193,000: review of this option indicated a
reconstruction would meet the same objectives and provide a new facility at a similar cost.
|
City of Toronto Business Case - Eatonville Library Reconstruction9.Project Cost:
- Indicate and specify the major cost components of the project on the summary below for projects proposed.
- If there are different phases of the project linked to this phase, indicate the estimated costs in those future years.
- Figures provided should be in constant dollars.
Cost Component |
1999 |
2000 |
2001 |
2002 |
2003 |
Total |
|
$000's |
$000's |
$000's |
$000's |
$000's |
$000's |
Equipment |
|
|
|
|
|
0 |
Computer Hardware |
|
|
|
|
|
0 |
Computer Software |
|
|
|
|
|
0 |
External Consulting |
|
|
|
|
|
0 |
Professional Services |
250 |
|
|
|
|
250 |
Construction |
2500 |
|
|
|
|
2500 |
Labour |
|
|
|
|
|
0 |
Other (specify) |
|
|
|
|
|
0 |
Other (specify) |
|
|
|
|
|
0 |
Contingency |
|
|
|
|
|
0 |
Taxes |
150 |
|
|
|
|
150 |
Total |
2900 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
2900 |
10.Savings/Enhanced Revenues
- Specify any savings or enhanced revenues that will be realized as a direct result of proceeding with the project
- Indicate the amounts that would be realized
- Indicate the full year impact once the benefits of the project are realized for an entire twelve month period
- Identify any staff reductions (in full time equivalents - FTEs) that could be made if we proceed with the project
- Summarize information into the major expenditure categories summarized below
Savings/Enhanced Revenues |
1999 |
2000 |
2001 |
2002 |
2003 |
Total |
|
$000's |
$000's |
$000's |
$000's |
$000's |
$000's |
Salaries and Benefits |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Materials & Supplies |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Equipment |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Services and Rents |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Enhanced Revenues (Specify) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Savings/ Enhanced
Revenues |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FTE Reduction |
|
|
|
|
|
|
City of Toronto Business Case - Eatonville Library Reconstruction
11. Possible Funding Sources
- Specify any potential funding sources you are aware of that could be used to finance the project. The Budget Division will utilize this information along with other information to determine an
appropriate funding source.
Revenue Source |
1999 |
2000 |
2001 |
2002 |
2003 |
Total |
|
$000's |
$000's |
$000's |
$000's |
$000's |
$000's |
Gross Cost |
290 |
|
|
|
|
290 |
Less: Operating Budget Financing |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Less: Sale of Assets |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Less: Reserve Funds (Specify) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Less: Grants |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Less: Other Financing Sources
(Specify) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net Borrowing Requirement |
290 |
|
|
|
|
290 |
12.Other Factors
- Discuss any other factors supporting the project
- Attach any other pertinent information
|
Project:
Eatonville Reconstruction:
Project Description:
A reconstruction of the Eatonville Library to provide a new branch approximately 12,000 square feet in size on the present
site. The reconstruction would address most economically the health and safety and service deficiencies associated with the
current 9,250 square foot facility.
Project Justification:
The branch circulates approximately half-a-million items annually and serves a population of 34,000 people. The
population in the area is far larger than originally envisaged when the Library opened and the continued escalating use over
the years has strained the facility, resulting in overcrowding and levels of activity far beyond the branch's capacity. The
Library was built in 1964 and except for routine maintenance over the years, no major upgrade or refurbishment has been
undertaken. The facility has been subject to review for a number of reasons including:
(a)inadequate smoke and fire protection measures (e.g. fire separation between floor, lack of sprinklers, etc.);
(b)poor building envelope (e.g. single pane glazing, no insulation), the main floor structure not designed to current
building code loading requirements;
(c)presence of asbestos (and associated limitations for providing adequate cabling and other technological
enhancements);
(d)inadequate power and communication infrastructure;
(e)lack of barrier-free access (e.g. especially to washroom facilities, and to basement meeting room);
(f)inadequate space and layout for collections and study areas;
(g)Inadequate public washroom facilities;
(h)inadequate access and egress from basement floor level;
(i)awkward layout for supervision (e.g. poor sight lines, two entrances, basement washrooms, etc.); and
(j)no shipping and receiving area.
Following an architectural study prepared by the firm Moffat Kinoshita Architects, Inc. in 1996, the Board of the former
Etobicoke Public Library and, now the current Toronto Public Library Board have reviewed various options and propose a
reconstruction of the branch to provide an improved neighbourhood branch library, to eradicate the health and safety
concerns inherent in the present structure, and to provide enhanced public service from a one-floor operation.
Consequences of Not Approving the Project:
The Health and Safety issues would have to be addressed by one of other costly options without fully addressing the needs
of the facility, e.g., high energy costs, lack of access for people with disabilities. The library needs of the community would
continue to be under served by a library with lacks adequate space and is chronically congested.
Consequences of a One Year Deferral:
Health and Safety issues will not be addressed, creating contentious, potentially hazardous situations.
--------
(Communication dated September 4, 1998, addressed to the
Manager of Facilities, Toronto Public Library from
Ms. Moffat Kinoshita Architects Inc.)
In the summer of 1996, Moffat Kinoshita Architects (MKA) were commissioned to undertake a feasibility study to
address three redevelopment scenarios for the Eatonville Library site:
(a)Scenario "A": Renovations and a small addition to provide an improved branch library (Gross Floor Area of
approximately 14,000 square feet);
(b)Scenario "B": Renovations and an addition to provide an improved branch library, plus facilities for the Etobicoke
Public Library administrative and support functions (Gross Floor Area of approximately 36,200 square feet); and
(c)Scenario "C": Demolition of the existing building and construction of a new building to serve the same functions
noted under Scenario "B" above (Gross Floor Area of approximately 35,000 square feet). Note that in Scenarios "B" and
"C", the public library component was assumed to be 14,000 - 15,000 gross square feet. See Study dated September 12,
1996.
MKA was subsequently directed to address a variation of "Scenario A" above, identified as:
(i)"Scenario A2": Renovations and an addition to provide an improved branch library with all library and public space
(e.g. community meeting room) located at the ground floor level, and only building service space (e.g. mechanical and
electrical rooms) in the existing basement (Gross Floor Area of approximately 16,600 square feet). See Addendum dated
October 24, 1996.
We have recently been asked to consider what might be described as:
(i)"Scenario C2": Demolition of the existing facility, including environmental decommissioning as required, and
construction of a new public library facility without a "Drive-Through" service component, and a Gross Floor Area of
approximately 12,000 square feet on one floor at grade.
It is our recommendation that a redevelopment option such as "Scenario C2" as described above would be the most cost
effective plan compared to the other redevelopment options investigated in the 1996 Study. Trusting that you will find this
note in order.
--------
(Report dated November 18, 1998, addressed to the
Budget Committee from the
City Librarian)
Purpose:
To provide $150,000.00 funding for the design study for the reconstruction of the Eatonville branch.
Funding Sources, Financial Implications and Impact Statement:
Approval will add $150,000.00 to the 1999 Capital Budget.
Recommendation:
It is recommended that additional funding of $150,000.00 be provided to enable the Library Board to proceed with the
design study of the Eatonville reconstruction project.
Background:
The design costs for the Eatonville Library were originally shown in the 1998 Capital Budget and subsequently removed
during the Budget Committee deliberations.
At their special meeting held on April 29 and April 30, 1998, City Council in adopting the 1998 Operating and Capital
Budgets, directed that the Eatonville Library project be considered in the five year capital plan. Council further directed
that the Budget Committee be requested to advise Council on any design funding requirements by September 1998.
On September 28, 1998, the Library Board endorsed the Eatonville project for inclusion in the 1999 Capital Budget, and in
addition, directed staff to request $150,000.00 in design funding so that the design could commence.
This request (attached) was discussed at Budget Committee on November 10th and Budget Committee requested that a
report be prepared for the November 18th Budget Committee "requesting approval of $150,000.00 for a design study
relating to the Eatonville Library with no change in recommended cash flow."
Discussion:
The Eatonville Library Project has been included in the 1999 budget year of the Capital Program and at this point in the
process, the Chief Administrative Officer's recommendation is that the "project be deferred at this time but be included in
the Development Charge Capital Budget that will be before Council in February or March 1999.
Conclusion:
The design costs estimated at $150,000.00 should be made available in 1998 in order for the project to proceed in 1999.
Contact Name:
Ann Eddie, Director of Administration, Toronto Public Library, Telephone: 393-7091; Fax 393-7083; E-mail:
aeddie@gwmail.mtrl.toronto.on.ca.
13
City Hall Renovations
(City Council on December 16 and 17, 1998, amended this Clause by adding thereto the following:
"It is further recommended that:
(1)the Chief Administrative Officer and the Commissioners be located at City Hall in the immediate proximity of the
Members of Council; and
(2)the Commissioner of Corporate Services be requested to submit a report to the next regular meeting of City Council
to be held on February 2, 3 and 4, 1999, through the Sub-Committee on the Relocation of All Members of Council to City
Hall, and the Corporate Services Committee, on the actual location of the Chief Administrative Officer and the
Commissioners within the first few floors of City Hall.")
The Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee recommends the adoption of the report (December 14, 1998) from
the Commissioner of Corporate Services subject to the reports requested therein being submitted to the
appropriate Committees for subsequent submission to Council.
The Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee submits the following report (December 14, 1998) from the
Commissioner of Corporate Services:
Purpose:
The purpose of this report is to begin addressing the Committee's concerns about corporate office space and civic centre
planning and related issues, and to present a timetable for future deliverables that will respond fully to such concerns.
Source of Funds:
N/A
Recommendations:
It is recommended that:
(1)Recommendations (1), (4) and (6) to the Strategic Planning & Policies Committee from the Budget Committee be
referred to the Commissioner of Corporate Services, to be addressed in a report to the Strategic Policies & Priorities
Committee in January 1999;
(2)Recommendation (2) to the Strategic Planning & Policies Committee from the Budget Committee be amended by
adding to it the words "in those instances where the Executive Director of Facilities & Real Estate determines that it is
most cost effective to do so";
(3)A detailed report on a long-term office space accommodation plan, including comprehensive cost estimates,
implementation time-lines and recommendations for the disposal of surplus properties, be submitted no later than April
1999 to the Corporate Services Committee;
(4)In light of the direction of the Budget Committee recommendations and the Mayor's memorandum, that arrangements
be made at no cost or minimal cost to provide temporary accommodation for the Chief Financial Officer and
Commissioners at City Hall until such time as a concept plan for the City's main office buildings and civic centres is
approved by Council; and
(5)Those components of the long term accommodation plan that deal with the City Hall towers be overseen by the
Corporate Services Committee through its City Hall Relocation Sub-Committee once the plan is approved by Council.
Background:
At its meeting of November 18, 1998, the Budget Committee considered a report from the Commissioner of Corporate
Services which provided additional details on the City Hall capital budget. It also considered a memorandum from the
Mayor, referred on by the Strategic Policies & Priorities Committee from its November 17 meeting, expressing concerns
about the potential cost of renovating City Hall and requesting various reports. The Budget Committee's recommendations,
which appear on this agenda, request four major reports and a floor-by-floor facilities review, and propose a series of
policy changes in the meanwhile, aimed primarily at limiting spending in the short to medium term.
Comments:
(1)Council Members' Concerns:
The proposals included in the Budget Committee's report and the Mayor's memorandum reflect concerns about space
planning for the new City. Council wants to know that the space planning process is proceeding in a timely and effective
way. Councillors recognize that staff relocations are an integral part of the amalgamation process, and they want to know
that:
(a)the moves needed for operational savings and customer service are happening;
(b)urgently needed moves, such as the relocation of senior staff to City Hall, are being expedited;
(c)all moves are occurring in the context of an overall plan;
(d)unnecessary moves are not happening;
(e)everything is being done cost-effectively, with clear regard for the City's budget constraints;
(f)new office furniture is not being purchased when downsizing should be creating a surplus of furniture for re-use in the
City;
(g)the full costs of using Toronto City Hall as the seat of government are understood;
(h)potential sources for major space-related cost savings, such as terminating office leases and selling surplus
City-owned buildings, are being vigorously pursued; and
(i)the City's space plan and all related implementation activities will be in the City's long-term best interests, as well as
meeting short term needs.
This "Interim Report" begins the process of addressing these concerns. It sets out the process that is underway and the steps
being taken to respond to concerns and issues raised by City Council through its committees.
(2)the Space Planning Process So Far:
Phase 1 - Principles & Process:
In the wake of Council's decision that Toronto City Hall would become the new City's seat of government, a July 1, 1998
report to the Corporate Services Committee set out objectives, scope and a series of detailed principles for an "office and
civic space consolidation project".
The project would deal with the future of City Hall, the five civic centres, Metro Hall and seven other City-owned office
buildings. It was to be carried out in parallel with a series of related activities:
(a)the City Hall renovations required to accommodate members of council;
(b)a review of leased space including recommendations for termination;
(c)a review of fire and ambulance stations;
(d)reviews of works and parks service yards;
(e)a review of recreation facilities;
(f)a review of the use of City buildings by non-profit organizations, and
(g)immediate moves required as a result of appointments and reorganizations.
It was anticipated that the project would be able to deliver a high level conceptual plan by September, and that a detailed
office and civic space consolidation plan ("including block and stack plans for service delivery and Departmental space
allocations") could be presented in November.
Phase 2 - Data Gathering & Analysis:
In retrospect, it is clear that the timelines for the project were too ambitious. A major part of the work was to be undertaken
by a consultant, but the necessary approval process resulted in NORR Partnership (the successful respondent to the RFP
process) being unable to start work until the end of August. Furthermore, the organization as a whole was not ready to
provide the kind of information needed for a comprehensive space plan, since many departments had only just finished
their stage 2 organizational designs.
The architectural adage that "form should follow function" applies equally to organizational space planning. For some parts
of the organization this was comparatively easy. Units such as the Human Resources Division and the Finance Department
had completed their organizational design early, and others such as Social Services and Ambulance were amalgamated
long ago under the former Metro government. By September, when they were being asked detailed questions about their
emerging office space needs, these units were able to provide the information needed. For other parts of the organization,
however, it was far more difficult. In Works and EDCT, where there was major re-engineering underway, information on
the future size, locational requirements and adjacency needs of the office staff were still unavailable. Without knowing
how these parts of the organization were going to function, the project could not deliver a realistic plan for the form of their
office accommodation.
Phase 2 will conclude later this week, when NORR submits its report to the Commissioner of Corporate Services. With the
NORR report in hand, the City will have a full picture of its office inventory, which staff occupy which space, the
condition of all buildings, the appraised market value of its non-civic centre offices buildings, a draft space needs analysis
and recommendations on steps that could be taken to increase occupancy levels.
Preliminary results show that the City has almost 2.3 million square feet of (net rentable) floor space in its major office
buildings. As of October, there were 7,060 work spaces in these buildings, housing 6,565 office workers. The main
surprises from the survey were that:
(a)the average floor space per worker was somewhat higher than expected, at 323 square feet;
(b)the number of vacant work spaces was only 8.4 percent of the total; this is within the 5 - 9 percent range of normal
vacancy within a large organization, as a result of ongoing staff changes and the need for a small amount of "swing space"
to accommodate staff during renovations and moves; significantly higher vacancies had been expected; and
(c)much of the existing furniture has limited potential for re-use if the City decides to look for operating costs savings
through more compact office design.
The City Hall Relocation Sub-Committee has contributed directly to Stage 2 by developing a set of principles to guide
change at City Hall. These principles are appended to this report.
(3)Next Steps:
Phase 3 - Producing a Concept Plan:
A new series of interviews with senior staff throughout the organization is underway and will be completed before
Christmas. These interviews will review and validate the data gathered earlier through the NORR study, look at other
developments that might impact on office space needs, obtain reasonably detailed data on adjacency needs and firmer
projections on the size of 1999 year-end office population. Staff are confident that the resulting information will provide
the basis for a high level concept plan which will determine the basic long-term allocation of space in City Hall and at the
civic centres.
The concept plan will establish the basic locations of civic departments, and must have enough flexibility and resilience to
respond to changing circumstances. A report setting out the plan for Council's approval will be on the agenda for January's
Strategic Policies & Priorities Committee.
The January report will also address the remaining concerns reflected in the Mayor's letter and in the Budget Committee's
recommendations. It is anticipated to include plans and estimates for immediately renovating five or six office floors in
City Hall to accommodate the CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER's office and other staff whose relocation is most critical to
the smooth and effective functioning of Council business in City Hall. This work can serve as a pilot project for changes to
the rest of the building, and will enable the refinement of initial cost estimates.
Temporary accommodation for the Chief Administrative Officer and other senior managers at City Hall is being provided
as of January 4, 1999.
The Facility and Real Estate Division's 1999 capital budget includes funds which will allow other urgent moves to take
place in advance of the detailed plan, where such moves would be consistent with the concept plan, are into space that does
not need short-term renovations, and are supported by a reasonable business case.
Phase 4 - A Detailed Office Space Plan for the City:
The detailed plan will be a comprehensive document assigning staff to office space on a floor-by-floor basis with full
consideration for efficient customer service and service delivery, and for each staff group's short and long term space needs
with due regard for contingencies, adjacency needs, costs and the timing of moves. Stakeholder agreement will be secured
prior to finalization of the plan, which will include a detailed schedule for spreading moves and costs over a number of
years, provision of swing space to minimize multiple moves, comprehensive due diligence reports on the conditions and
future maintenance costs of all existing buildings, and plans for the future disposition of Metro Hall and of any buildings
deemed surplus to corporate needs. The detailed plan will be submitted in April 1999.
Phase 5 - Implementation Plans:
Detailed floor lay-outs, moving and staging plans and other aspects of implementation will be worked out on a unit by unit
basis following Council approval of the full office space plan. Detailed funding requests will be part of the regular capital
budget process.
It is proposed that those aspects of the plan which involve the City Hall office towers be overseen by the Corporate
Services Committee through its City Hall Relocation Sub-Committee.
(4)Complexities of Space Planning in an Amalgamating Organization:
It is appropriate to end this report with some brief comments about the complexities of space planning in the new City of
Toronto.
The scale of this amalgamation is unprecedented. Seven established municipalities (to say nothing of their agencies, boards
and commissions), each with its own culture and buildings, are being combined and restructured into a single new
organization with an office staff of more than six thousand. There is immense pressure to downsize, re-engineer, and find
amalgamation-related savings. Almost 2.3 million square feet of office space are involved.
Given this scale and complexity, and because of the need for form to follow function, an overall space plan will inevitably
lag behind organizational redesign.
Budget pressures are another key factor in the space planning equation. The City's commitment to its existing civic
buildings and to holding down costs limits its flexibility ways not always experienced by other merging organizations that
may be able to "spend money in order to save money".
The comparatively low vacancy rate in the City's buildings is a key challenge. Average levels of office floor space per
worker can certainly be reduced, but there are logistical challenges in doing so without significant areas of "swing space"
into which staff can be moved while office areas are being readied for re-occupancy. And if consolidation occurs without
upgrades, there may be long-term cost penalties because of inefficient space usage, inadequate wiring for electronic
equipment, staff time wasted in trips off a floor which has limited equipment, and the later need to move people twice
while deferred improvements are carried out. This low vacancy rate also makes it difficult to avoid construction adjacent to
work areas, with its resultant stress and impact on productivity. Yet confining construction activities to non-working hours
imposes both cost and time penalties that the City can ill afford.
In a large organization like the City, an ongoing vacancy rate of five or six per cent is a normal requirement to
accommodate change.
Conclusions:
The imminent creation of senior management offices in City Hall plus the January and April reports described above will
address most of the concerns embodied in Budget Committee's recommendations.
Budget Committee's Recommendation (2), to suspend the staff practice of not moving furniture between offices and
buildings, is a concern. The existing policy was established because it is a proven money-saver for the City. Large scale
moves of staff between buildings are far more costly when furniture is moved at the same time. Not only are there higher
moving charges, there is added wear and tear which significantly shortens the furniture's life span. A blanket suspension of
this policy could therefore prove costly for the City. The proposed amendment would keep it in place, but provide the
Executive Director with discretion to waive the policy where it is more cost-effective to do so. Such discretion would be
used in conjunction with the established policy of maximizing the use of existing furniture.
The process of producing an office space master plan for the new City has gone more slowly than anticipated, mainly
because the staff restructuring which drives space rationalization is only now being completed. Additional resources have
now been committed to the project and a new schedule established. This calls for a high level concept plan to be presented
in January, followed by a detailed space plan in April and a series of implementation plans thereafter.
The scale of change underway is large, the issues are complex, and many cannot be quickly or easily resolved. But the City
is driving hard towards a new, cost-effective solution to accommodate its office work force - one that will be robust enough
to stand the test of time.
Contact Name:
Simon Chamberlain, 392-9697, Fax: 2-4828, Facilities and Real Estate.
The Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee also submits the following communication (November 19, 1998)
from the City Clerk:
Recommendations:
The Budget Committee on November 18, 1998 recommended to the Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee and
Council that:
(1)no part of the organization be allowed to purchase furniture for at least one year until a complete review of the
furniture situation has been conducted, unless such furniture is required to accommodate the a needs of physically
challenged person;
(2)the staff practice of not moving furniture between buildings and offices be suspended;
(3)staff conduct a facilities review of each floor in Toronto City Hall and only where it is absolutely necessary carry out
any carpeting, repair work or painting;
(4)consideration be given to relocating the Senior Staff, i.e. the Chief Administrative Officer and the six Commissioners,
to the lower floors of City Hall, as close as possible to the link, and that the cost of painting, carpeting and other
renovations required to facilitate this move be reported to the Sub-Committee - Relocation of Members of Council to City
Hall;
(5)the vacating of leased space be given a high priority; and
(6)there be no further expenditures on Toronto City Hall beyond those necessary to complete the originally authorized
renovations until all the following requested reports from the Chief Administrative Officer and the Commissioner of
Corporate Services are delivered.
The Budget Committee reports having requested:
(1)the Chief Administrative Officer to:
(a)provide a report to the Sub-Committee - Relocation of Members of Council to City Hall (the mandate of which be
expanded to permit it to carry out a complete cost analysis of the City Hall Renovations) for a report back to the Budget
Committee outlining:
(i)a complete plan detailing the full scope of improvements, upgrades and renovations required at the Toronto City Hall
site; and
(ii)full cost estimates for all such improvements, upgrades, renovations and additions being contemplated, including the
real costs of restoring the east and west towers, repairing Nathan Phillips Square and ensuring all conditions for occupancy
are met;
(b)provide a report to the Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee outlining:
(i)timelines and detailed plans for all expected moves into Toronto City Hall and for the sale or lease of Metro Hall;
(ii)cost estimates for staff relocation associated with the Metro Hall/City Hall move and square footage space available in
both Metro and City Hall facilities; and
(iii)solid cost estimates on the longevity of any renovations or retrofits; and
(c)provide a report to the Corporate Services Committee, with a copy to all Members of the Budget Committee, on:
(i)the game plan for the 14 main buildings before the end of 1998; and
(ii)how many persons have been relocated to date, the estimated relocation cost per person, and how this cost was
established; and
(2)the Commissioner of Corporate Services to submit a plan before the end of March 1999 for consideration by both the
Budget Committee and the Corporate Services Committee that brings about as one of the options to be considered the
movement of departments before the end of 1999.
Background:
The Budget Committee on November 18, 1998 had before it the following:
(a)report (November 18, 1998) from the Commissioner of Corporate Services responding to a request from the Budget
Committee on November 11, 1998 for additional details of the City Hall Capital Budget; and
(b)transmittal letter (November 18, 1998) from the City Clerk forwarding from the Strategic Policies and Priorities
Committee a report (November 16, 1998) from Mayor Lastman respecting the renovation costs to Toronto City Hall.
--------
(Report dated November 18, 1998, addressed to the
Budget Committee from the
Commissioner of Corporate Services)
Purpose:
At the November 11, 1998, meeting of the Budget Committee a request was made for additional details of the City Hall
Capital Budget submission and that a presentation on the overall space consolidation program progress be made. It should
be noted that the Facilities and Real Estate Division has not received a specific list of questions to address, but the Division
has prepared a general presentation outlining the basic approach to City Hall and overall space consolidation.
Funding Sources, Financial Implications and Impact Statement:
The 1999 Capital Program submission for Facilities and Real Estate includes a $40 million expense to upgrade and
renovate Toronto City Hall. This expense is spread over three years with $15 million in 1999 and 2000 and a further $10
million in 1999. As noted in Budget Committee these amounts represent a realistic "placeholder" to inform Budget
Committee of the requirements to renovate City Hall. Detailed estimates of the costs of upgrading and consolidating City
Hall and other office space are currently being prepared and will be available within three months.
Recommendations:
That the attached presentation be received for information and consideration in the context of the 1999 Capital Budget
submission.
Council Reference/Background History:
The seat of government has been established at City Hall and the relocation of Council will be complete be December 31,
1998 as directed by Council at it's meeting of February 4 and 5, 1998. Additional items to the scope of work were added by
Council in June bringing the total approved expenditure to $6.9 million.
Discussion:
The attached briefing and presentation to the Budget Committee will provide necessary context for the consideration of the
1999 Capital program related to City Hall and other key office buildings.
Conclusions:
The presentation and briefing note has been prepared to assist the Budget Committee in considering the 1999 City Hall
capital request. The overall program of consolidation and detailed cost estimates are currently being completed and
additional detailed information will be available within three to six months (as outlined in the Strategic Policies and
Priorities Committee meeting of November 17, 1998).
Contact Name:
Susanne Borup, Executive Director, Facilities & Real Estate, Tel: 397-4156 Fax: 397-0825
Mark Davies, Director Customer Services, Facilities & Real Estate, Tel: 397-0805 Fax: 397-0825
--------
(Transmittal letter dated November 18, 1998 addressed to the
Budget Committee from the
City Clerk)
On November 17, 1998, the Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee had before it a report (November 16, 1998) from
Mayor Lastman respecting the renovation costs to Toronto City Hall and recommending:
(1)a complete plan detailing the full scope of improvements, upgrades and renovations required at the Toronto City Hall
site;
(2)full cost estimates for all such improvements, upgrades, renovations and additions being contemplated, including the
real costs of restoring the east and west towers; repairing Nathan Phillips Square, and ensuring all conditions for occupancy
are met;
(3)timelines and detailed plans for all expected moves into Toronto City Hall; and for the sale or lease of Metro Hall;
(4)cost estimates for staff relocation associated with the Metro Hall/City Hall move and square footage space available in
both Metro and City Hall facilities;
(5)solid cost estimates on the longevity of any renovations or retrofits;
(6)that the Chief Administrative Officer be required to prepare said reports and report back to the Strategic Policies and
Priorities Committee; and
(7)suspension of any further expenditure on Toronto City Hall beyond those necessary to complete the originally
authorized renovations until such reports are delivered.
The Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee referred this mater to the Budget Committee for consideration.
--------
(Report dated November 16, 1998, from
Mayor Mel Lastman)
I am writing to you to express the many concerns that have been raised regarding our imminent move to Toronto City Hall,
its renovation and the future of Metro Hall. Taxpayers and all members of Council deserve a complete picture of all
projected costs to renovate Toronto City Hall beyond those already approved.
In addition, we need to know details of timing, service impact, the value of Metro Hall and the current state of Toronto
City Hall.
Cost projections of $40-$60 million just to upgrade Toronto City Hall to a class C office building/meeting centre are of
great concern.
Of even more concern are estimates floating around that it could eventually cost three to four times that amount to maintain
and bring the landmark building up to standard.
Recognizing that Toronto City Hall is the symbol of our great City and recognizing that Council has already approved
funds to renovate the Council Chamber and the first, second and third floors of the building, I would therefore ask the
Committee request the following reports:
(a)a complete plan detailing the full scope of improvements, upgrades and renovations required at the Toronto City Hall
site;
(b)full cost estimates for all such improvements, upgrades, renovations and additions being contemplated, including the
real costs of restoring the east and west towers; repairing Nathan Phillips Square, and ensuring all conditions for occupancy
are met;
(c)timelines and detailed plans for all expected moves into Toronto City Hall; and for the sale or lease of Metro Hall;
(d)cost estimates for staff relocation associated with Metro Hall/City Hall move and square footage space available in
both Metro and City Hall facilities;
(e)solid cost estimates on the longevity of any renovations or retrofits;
(f)that the Chief Administrative Officer be required to prepare said reports and report back to Strategic Policy and
Priorities Committee; and
(g)suspension of any further expenditure on Toronto City Hall beyond those necessary to complete the originally
authorized renovations until such reports are delivered.
The Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee also submits the following communication (December 11, 1998)
from Councillor Moeser:
With respect to Agenda Item Number 23, forwarding action of the Budget Committee from its meeting of November 18,
1998, I would, hereby, request Committee to consider approving items (2), (3) and (5).
With regard to items (1), (4) and (6), I would request that these be referred to the Sub-Committee - Relocation of Members
of Council to City Hall for consideration.
--------
Councillor Moeser appeared before the Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee in connection with the foregoing
matter.
(A copy of the presentation referred to in the report dated November 18, 1998, from the Commissioner of Corporate
Services was forwarded to all Members of Council with the agenda of the Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee for
its meeting on December 15, 1998, and a copy thereof is on file in the office of the City Clerk.)
14
Funding for Bendale Neighbourhood Library
Renovation Project (Scarborough City Centre - Ward 15)
(City Council on December 16 and 17, 1998, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)
The Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee recommends the adoption of the recommendations of the Budget
Committee contained in the following communication (November 19, 1998) from the City Clerk:
Recommendation:
The Budget Committee on November 18, 1998 recommended to the Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee and
Council the adoption of the report (November 18, 1998) from the City Librarian.
Background:
The Budget Committee on November 18, 1998, had before it a report (November 18, 1998) from the City Librarian
recommending that additional funding of $150,000.00 be provided to enable the Library Board to proceed with the Bendale
Neighbourhood Branch renovation project.
--------
(Report dated November 18, 1998, addressed to the
Budget Committee from the City Librarian)
Purpose:
To provide additional funding required for the Library Board's Bendale branch renovation project.
Funding Sources, Financial Implications and Impact Statement:
Approval will add $150,000.00 to the 1999 Capital Budget.
Recommendations:
It is recommended that additional funding of $150,000.00 be provided to enable the Library Board to proceed with the
Bendale Neighbourhood Branch renovation project.
Background:
A $550,000.00 renovation package for the Bendale Neighbourhood Library including upgrades to barrier free access,
mechanical and electrical systems and the building envelope was approved by Council during the 1998-2002 Capital
Budget review. Following approval a further analysis by the Library Board found that the budget was insufficient to
accommodate the barrier free renovation.
The Bendale project was further discussed by the Budget Committee on November 10, 1998 and the Budget Committee
recommended that a report be prepared "for Council approval relating to the Bendale Neighbourhood Branch which
recommends that prior approval be given to an additional $150,000.00 over previously approved $550,000 in 1998 Capital
Budget to allow the library to pursue tenders relating to the renovation to be undertaken with no change in recommended
cost flow."
Conclusions:
Approval of this additional funding will permit the Library Board to proceed with the tender process and provide the
necessary renovations to Bendale Neighbourhood Branch Library as approved by Council in the 1998 Capital Budget.
Contact Name:
Ann Eddie, Director of Administration, Toronto Public Library,
Telephone: 393-7091; Fax 393-7083; e-mail aeddie@gwmail.mtrl.toronto.on.ca.
15
Sustainable Energy, Greenspace/Nature and Water Actions
(City Council on December 16 and 17, 1998, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)
The Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee recommends that Council adopt, as a city-wide target for the new
City of Toronto, a carbon dioxide emissions reduction goal of 20 percent relative to 1990 levels by the year 2005.
The Committee reports, for the information of Council, having:
(1)referred the revised report (December 10, 1998) from the Chair, Environmental Task Force to the Toronto
Inter-departmental Environmental (TIE) Team and requested the Chief Administrative Officer to report thereon to its
February 1999 meeting on the feasibility, timing and costs/benefits of the recommendations on standards recommended in
this report;
(2)requested TIE to invite representatives from the Environmental Task Force to its meeting when considering this
matter.
The Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee submits the following report (December 10, 1998) from the
Environmental Task Force:
Purpose:
The purpose of this report is to propose actions that can be taken to implement important ideas that were identified by
participants of three workshops held by the Environmental Task Force in early September, 1998.
Source of Funds:
There are no immediate funding implications arising from the recommendations in this report.
Recommendations:
(1)That the Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services, in consultation with the appropriate Commissioners, be
requested to report to the Works and Utilities Committee on the most effective way to implement sustainable energy
actions (a) to (f) and water actions (l) to (q) identified in this report;
(2)that the Commissioner of Economic Development Culture and Tourism, in consultation with the affected
Commissioners, be requested to report to the Economic Development Committee on the most effective way to implement
greenspace/nature actions (g) and (h) identified in this report;
(3)that the Commissioner of Urban Planning and Development Services, in consultation with the affected
Commissioners, be requested to report to the Urban Environment and Development Committee on the most effective way
to implement sustainable energy action (e), greenspace/nature action (i) and water action (m) identified in this report;
(4)that the Commissioner of Economic Development, Culture and Tourism, in consultation with the affected
Commissioners and the Toronto Region and Conservation Authority, be requested to report to the Economic Development
Committee on the most effective way to implement greenspace/ nature action (j) identified in this report;
(5)that the General Manager of the Toronto Region and Conservation Authority, be requested to report to the
Environmental Task Force on the most effective way to host a stewardship forum and establish an interactive stewardship
website as described in greenspace/nature action (k) identified in this report;
(6)that the Chief Administrative Officer and the Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services, as co-chairs of the
Toronto Inter-departmental Environmental (TIE) Team, be requested to coordinate the preparation of the reports to the
Standing Committees which respond to the actions identified in this report and to provide a monthly status report to the
Environmental Task Force commencing in January 1999; and
(7)that City Council be advised that the Environmental Task Force supports the community initiative to create a roof top
garden on the third floor roof deck of Toronto City Hall.
Council Reference/Background/History:
The Environmental Task Force was established by City Council at its meeting on March 4, 5 and 6. One of the primary
roles of the Task Force is to bring stakeholders together to develop an Environmental Plan for the City. This work is
underway and the Task Force will be reporting to the Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee in the fall of 1999. The
terms of reference also indicate that the Task Force will identify urgent environmental initiatives/short term actions for
consideration by City Council. This report identifies a series of actions that can be taken in the areas of sustainable energy,
greenspace/nature and water. A report on proposed actions in the areas of air/climate change, land and toxics/pollution
prevention will follow at a later date.
The actions identified in this report are part of a group of actions that were identified through the stakeholder consultation
process described below and are being considered by the Environmental Task Force at its meetings between October 1998
and January 1999. The Environmental Task Force recognizes that many of the actions are directed at City staff and
acknowledges that it may be difficult for City staff to undertake all of these proposed actions simultaneously or in the short
term, particularly given the organizational changes arising from amalgamation. However, the actions will benefit the
environment, and most can be done relatively easily and build upon actions that were underway in former parts of the new
City. In consulting with program staff about the proposed actions, it was determined that, in many cases, the proposed
actions were consistent with directions already being taken, were planned to be undertaken at some time in the future or
were recognized as actions that should be given priority.
Comments and/or Discussion and/or Justification:
The Environmental Task Force used the following consultation process to identify the actions described in this report. In
early September 1998, the Task Force held a series of focussed workshops in the areas of air/climate change, land, water,
nature/greenspace, toxics/pollution prevention and sustainable energy strategies. Participants included Task Force
members, city staff, representatives from environmental groups and agencies, community groups, business, education and
labour. The workshops were chaired by City Councillors who are members of the Task Force. The participants of the
workshops were asked to identify important issues and actions for their topic areas. In addition, they were asked to identify
"quick start" ideas that would result in improvements to the environment, achieve cost savings, create local employment
and require limited new resources to implement. Almost 200 "quick start" ideas were identified. Through ranking by
workshop participants and review by smaller groups of participants and Environmental Task Force staff a total of 28
possible actions were identified for further consideration by the Task Force. For the actions which the Environmental Task
Force was interested in proposing, program staff were consulted to determine feasibility, cost implications, etc..
Sustainable Energy Actions:
(a)re-adopt a carbon dioxide emissions reduction goal of 20 percent relative to 1990 levels by the year 2005 as a
city-wide target for the new City of Toronto;
(b)facilitate the expeditious development of the Toronto Renewable Energy Co-operative (TREC) wind turbine and
similar renewable energy projects as part of the City's overall sustainable energy strategy, including any feasible agreement
to purchase renewable sources of electricity for use in City-owned facilities;
(c)assess the carbon trading potential of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions reduction achievable by the City and determine
the feasibility of realizing additional environmental and financial benefits from the selling/trading of carbon credits
attributed to the City;
(d)investigate the feasibility of a carbon emission cap system that would compliment a carbon trading program and
recommend appropriate action by City Council on this matter;
(e)incorporate higher energy efficiency and conservation objectives into the construction of new buildings in the City
than are currently required by the Ontario Building Code; and
(f)a comprehensive long term strategy to minimize operating and capital energy expenditures and achieve the highest
feasible levels of CO2 emission reduction in facilities owned by the City.
Sustainable Energy Comments:
(a)Carbon Dioxide Reduction Goal
In 1990, the former Toronto City Council made an official commitment to reduce the City's net carbon dioxide (CO2)
emissions by 20 percent relative to 1988 levels by the year 2005. This 20 percent target is also known as the "Toronto
target" because of the 1988 conference "Our Changing Atmosphere" which was held in this city. Toronto subsequently
went on to become the first City to adopt this target and was followed by many other cities both in Canada and around the
world. The former Metro Toronto adopted a similar 20 percent target, but only for its corporate operations as outlined in its
"State of the Environment Report: Metropolitan Toronto" (1995)). The 20 percent target has become an important symbol
in the international environmental community. Atmospheric scientists suggest that a 60 - 80 percent reduction in global
greenhouse gases would be required to protect the atmosphere (Canadian Solutions - Meeting our Kyoto Commitment:
Climate Action Basics for Canada, 1997). Environment Canada (1997) reports that by 2000, this country's emissions will
be 13 percent higher than 1990 levels and by 2010, they will be 20 percent higher. Doubling of atmospheric CO2 by 2050
and a mean global warming of 2.5 degrees are being predicted by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (1995) if
current trends continue. The former City of Toronto Department of Public Health summarized the public health impacts of
global warming on the citizens of Toronto in a 1997 report titled "Global Climate Change".
At its meeting on November 23, 1998, the Environmental Task Force endorsed the target of 20 percent reduction of CO2
emissions relative to 1990 by the year 2005 after much discussion and in consideration of the national commitment of 6
percent and a base year of 1990 as outlined in the Kyoto Protocol. The Task Force requests that the City "re-adopt" this as
the city-wide target.
(b)Renewable Energy Options:
Bill 35, the provincial legislation to deregulate the electricity industry will create generation opportunities for small, local
producers starting in 2000. Renewable energy is produced from renewable energy resources such as wind, solar, small
hydro, wood waste, geothermal, deep lake water cooling, landfill and digester gas, etc. Some forms of renewable energy
provide cost-effective and all provide emissions-free electricity. There is a unique opportunity for the City and the local
economy to support renewable energy options because it helps to moves us toward sustainability and energy
self-sufficiency. Encouraging renewable energy will benefit the City and the local economy by:
(1)reducing the human health and environmental impacts from traditional electric power generation and transportation
including the emissions of greenhouse gases, smog precursors, radionuclides (from nuclear power) and others that affect air
quality to the atmosphere;
(2)maintaining Toronto's leadership role with respect to energy and environmental management;
(3)job creation and new training opportunities in an emerging high tech sector;
(4)keeping the dollars saved from reduced energy costs in the local economy;
(5)diversifying supply to stabilize cost and increase reliability; and
(6)defer distribution upgrades through local generation.
The Toronto Renewable Energy Cooperative (TREC) has positioned itself as a leader in wind-generated electricity by
proposing to build a $1.2 million, 660 kW wind turbine on Toronto's waterfront. TREC has had negotiations with Toronto
Hydro to work out the details of a net-billing plan for the electricity it puts into the grid and an endorsement from the City
would expedite this plan. Based on such a plan and using current energy prices, TREC calculates a 12 year pay-back for its
membership and estimates the project will result in a CO2 offset of 1,400,000 kilograms per year. TREC further reports that
discussions have begun with representatives of the City and the Toronto Harbour Commission for the use of City-owned
properties as possible sites. The City can play an important role in supporting TREC by taking steps to facilitate the siting
and approval of the TREC turbine and other similar renewable energy projects. A goal should be to have the turbine
operating by the third quarter of 1999. The Task Force is asking the City to play an important role in supporting TREC by
facilitating the siting and approval of the TREC turbine and other similar renewable energy projects, by urging Toronto
Hydro to approve a net billing agreement by February 1999 and by signing on as an anchor member in the TREC initiative.
(c) and (d) Carbon Emissions Trading:
Carbon emission trading is a relatively new concept that would allow parties to barter CO2 like any other commodity on the
open market. The basic idea is to assign budgets derived from voluntary targets and/or the requirements that will be set
under the Kyoto Protocol to emit CO2 and CO2 - equivalent (eCO2 ) in tonnes. Countries or cities that are able to reduce
their emissions below budget could sell their surplus to others and generate revenue. By introducing a dollar value/tonne of
eCO2 an incentive is created to develop cleaner energy technologies and utilize them sooner. In October 1998, the David
Suzuki Foundation along with the Pembina Institute released a plan for how Canada can meet its Kyoto objectives and
emissions trading was one of the recommended strategies.
An emissions trading cap is the point above which, trading can begin for emissions credits. It can be voluntary or regulated
and by requiring all potential trading partners to have emissions caps there is a symbolic commitment to reduce emissions
overall. The Task Force believes that emissions trading should happen only if this condition is met. The role for caps and
other instruments will be considered in more detail when City staff in consultation with other stakeholders review a
Consultant's report on Carbon emissions trading in Toronto.
A SO2 trading system in the United States has been operating since the early 1990s and to date has achieved greater than
expected emissions reductions and accelerated investment in new technology and is in fact the basis for a Carbon
emissions market.
In August 1998, the Toronto Atmospheric Fund sponsored a community consultation on a city carbon emission trade. City
staff in consultation with other stakeholders are reviewing a Consultant's report on Carbon emissions trading in Toronto
and the Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services will be preparing a final report in this matter.
(e)Higher Energy Efficiency and Conservation Standards for new Buildings:
In 1991, the former City of Toronto adopted the policy that developers submit an energy efficiency and conservation plan
(EECP) for new developments. The EECP guidelines significantly exceeded the requirement of the 1991 Ontario Building
Code (OBC). As a result of advocacy for these higher standards, the provincial government amended the OBC in 1993 to
include ASHRAE Standard 90.1 which has been the basis for EECPs since 1991. It is estimated that the EECPs have been
responsible for CO2 emission reductions of approximately 100,000 tonnes since 1992. The Task Force would like the new
City to continue to provide leadership in this area by adopting a way of incorporating higher energy efficiency and
conservation objectives into the construction of new and retrofitted buildings in the City than are currently required by the
Ontario Building Code. The Federal Government has developed a C-2000 building standard that reduces energy
consumption by 50 percent in new commercial buildings. The City can investigate the feasibility of adopting the C-2000
standard of the yet to be adopted National Energy Code for new buildings in its jurisdiction. Also, it can investigate the
feasibility of adopting higher building standards for residential buildings.
(f)City-owned Building Renewal:
The BBP is an innovative program initiated by the former City of Toronto which helps building owners improve and
modernize buildings through energy/water efficiency and building renewal retrofits. The program which was launched in
June 1996, has resulted in the renewal of more than 150 buildings. Business leaders who have joined the BBP have spent
in excess of $60 million, created 1,800 to 3,000 person years of employment and reduced CO2 emissions by over 60,000
tonnes per year. The CO2 emission reductions to date represent 3.7 percent of the overall 20 percent goal of 1,770,000
tonnes reduction by the year 2005. The expertise gained from this program will be invaluable when the City reviews the
potential for building renewal in the amalgamated City.
The newly amalgamated City of Toronto presents tremendous potential for building renewal since over 800 buildings are
owned and operated directly by the City. These buildings include municipal offices, works garages, fire stations, arenas,
community centres, and other service buildings, excluding water and waste treatment plants, Homes for the Aged, Metro
Zoo, and Exhibition Place. The total floor area is approximately 1.5 million m2 and the total energy consumption is almost
$27 million per year. To date, the retrofits that have been implemented in former City of Toronto facilities have reduced
CO2 emissions by 20,000 tonnes per year. The experience of the BBP is based on a simple pay-back calculation of
approximately 9 years at which point the energy savings are realized by the building owner. The Task Force is requesting
that the City of Toronto develop a comprehensive long term plan for facilities owned by the City to achieve the highest
reduction in CO2 emissions while minimizing operating and capital energy expenditures. Building renewal presents an
"win" "win" opportunity for the City because it reduces emissions and provides cost savings.
Greenspace/Nature Actions:
(g)guidelines for mowing practices on all city-owned or managed properties in order to achieve the objectives of:
encouraging regeneration; reducing maintenance costs; and reducing requirements for pesticide use;
(h)reinstatement of and options to expand the former Metro Council's green space naturalization program for road
corridors;
(i)completion of design guidelines and an implementation plan to naturalize the Port Industrial District;
(j)a consolidated strategy to protect and enhance the greenspace system during property acquisition and divestment by the
City; and
(k)a stewardship forum and an interactive stewardship web site. The web site would:
(1)provide information on stewardship, habitats, naturalization projects and techniques, funding, wildlife, invasive
species and public events;
(2)exchange information on watershed projects through a "chat line"; and
(3)link to the Environmental Task Force web site and other related City of Toronto web sites.
Greenspace/Nature Comments:
Increase diversity through naturalization and improve natural habitat systems were identified as priorities by participants of
the Greenspace/Nature workshop sponsored by the Environmental Task Force. Actions (g) to (k) identified above would
contribute to these goals, and improve wildlife habitat and the integrity of the greenspace system. They would also increase
public education and awareness of greenspace environmental issues and increase opportunities for public recreational
enjoyment of natural areas.
There is an active community group promoting the concept of greening the Toronto City Hall 3rd Floor terrace, and they
are currently working with Facilities Management staff to explore the feasibility in more detail. Roof gardens have been
shown to have a number of environmental benefits such as moderating temperatures, filtering airborne pollutants,
increasing oxygen, creating habitat and retaining and reducing storm water runoff. Tourists and dignitaries from all over
the world visit Toronto City Hall, and a garden in this location and would demonstrate the City's leadership role in social
and environmental health. The Environmental Task Force supports this initiative.
(g) (h) (i) Naturalization:
Naturalization improves natural habitat and increases diversity. It can also reduce requirements for pesticide use,
maintenance costs and the amount of storm water runoff (through increased vegetative uptake) and contributes to better air
quality (through the presence of more trees and vegetation). A review of corporate mowing practices on city-owned and
managed property to determine where it would be possible to reduce the number of cuts per year or eliminate cutting all
together and allow regeneration to occur would be a positive step towards naturalization in the city. The Environmental
Task Force requests that this review be undertaken and that guidelines to reduce mowing practices be developed.
The City, in partnership with the community, has initiated a number of projects aimed at naturalizing corporately owned
properties, largely on parklands. In October 1997 the former Metro Parks and Culture Department produced a study
entitled "Selection of Naturalization Sites for Metro Toronto Road Corridors" (based on the award winning "Naturalization
Compendium") which identified priority sites for plantings with trees, shrubs, wildflowers. Approximately $500,000.00
was spent in 1997 and 1998 implementing the program, however, it was not funded in the 1999 capital budget. The
Environmental Task Force is requesting that this item be reinstated and expanded to address other City-owned properties.
City and TEDCO staff have been working together on a three part implementation strategy to green the Port Industrial
District in response to the October 1997 report "Greening the Toronto Port Lands" (prepared by consultants in
collaboration with the Waterfront Regeneration Trust). The strategy includes naturalization of both sides of the Keating
Channel, securing green infrastructure through development approval, and the preparation of design guidelines to
naturalize existing road allowances. Discussions are on-going regarding naturalization of the properties at 480 and 554
Lake Shore Boulevard East located at the mouth of the Don River abutting the Port Industrial District. The properties are
owned by the City and designated as "open space" in the former City of Toronto's Official Plan. The Environmental Task
Force is requesting that work to complete the design guidelines and prepare an implementation plan be accelerated.
(j)Consolidated Strategy For Greenspace Acquisition:
The former municipal parks departments and the Conservation Authority had strategies or programs in place for land
acquisition and retention of property for parklands and open space based on recreation, natural heritage, and natural hazard
criteria. The former Scarborough Works also had a program and budget for acquisition of flood vulnerable areas
(Watercourse Land Acquisition Program). The Environmental Task Force is requesting that these strategies, together with
the City's existing property portfolio, be reviewed in order to establish: (i) a consolidated strategy which will help to
protect and enhance the greenspace system during property acquisition and divestment; and (ii) city-wide priorities for
acquisition and/or retention of environmentally sensitive sites and/or key greenspace linkages which would contribute
significantly to the health of the entire watershed.
(k) Stewardship Web Site and Forum:
The need for information sharing about stewardship was identified as a priority by participants at the Greenspace/Nature
Workshop. This could be done through a web site and other venues such as a forum. Conservation Ontario has recently
launched a land stewardship web site. A similar type of web site which focuses on watershed stewardship and provides
information on local habitats, naturalization projects and an opportunity to exchange watershed information would be a
logical next step. The Environmental Task Force is requesting that the Conservation Authority establish an interactive
stewardship web site with links to other City and agency sites, and host a stewardship forum. Both activities would provide
valuable opportunities for groups and individuals working on stewardship to learn and interact with experts and
stakeholders from different areas.
Water Actions:
(l)appropriate funding strategies for combined sewer overflow and stormwater management initiatives;
(m)a harmonized Stormwater Management Policy which includes guiding principles and interim stormwater
management criteria for new development;
(n)a Downspout Disconnection Program for publicly owned buildings;
(o)a Water Conservation and Efficiency Plan which should, as a priority, investigate:
(1)retrofitting public buildings with water conserving fixtures;
(2) low-flow toilet replacement program;
(3) a strategy to retrofit City owned properties with water conserving irrigation systems; and
(4)an irrigation by-law to regulate lawn watering to off peak hours.
(p)a restructured water bill that would identify the cost split for treating and supplying drinking water, collecting and
treating wastewater and providing stormwater management works; and
(q)public education material to increase public awareness about the connection between wastewater, stormwater and
drinking water.
Water Comments:
The Water Workshop was one of the most well attended of the six workshops sponsored by the Environmental Task Force.
Many possible water actions were identified. Subsequent review of possible actions identified stormwater management,
water conservation and public education as important issues that could be addressed relatively quickly and easily in the
new City. Actions which could be taken to address these issues are listed as actions (l) to (p) above and discussed below.
(l)Funding Strategy for Wet Weather Flow Management:
The City of Toronto does not have a funding mechanism or revenue stream dedicated solely to wet weather flow
management. The former municipalities raised funds for wet weather flow management works through a mix of property
tax revenues, water rates, sewer surcharges and development charges. Implementing an aggressive wet weather flow
management strategy will require a dedicated source of funding. Stormwater management funding mechanisms used across
Canada and the United States were reviewed and documented as part of the Wet Weather Flow Master Plan. In order to
ensure the availability of adequate funding for stormwater management, the Task Force is requesting that funding options
be reviewed, their applicability to the City of Toronto be assessed and a preferred option(s) be identified.
(m)Stormwater Management Policy:
A stormwater management policy is considered the first step in directing wet weather flow management within the City.
Stormwater management policies had been developed by several former municipalities. These policies generally identified
goals, objectives, guiding principles and criteria for the management of wet weather flow. In some cases, they also included
stormwater management requirements for new developments or redevelopments within the City. The Task Force is
requesting that a harmonized Stormwater Management Policy be developed which includes guiding principles for all
stormwater drainage activities and a set of interim stormwater management/ criteria to be implemented for new
development within the City.
(n)Downspout Disconnection Program for Public Buildings:
The stormwater flow reduction benefits associated with roof downspout disconnection are well recognized. Downspout
disconnection programs were supported by several of the former municipalities and a harmonized downspout
disconnection program is being proposed for residential properties across the City. Publicly owned buildings present a
significant downspout disconnection opportunity. Downspout disconnection of City-owned buildings has not been pursued
aggressively to date. Similarly, buildings belonging to Agencies, Boards and Commissions need to be assessed for
downspout disconnection opportunities. The Task Force is requesting that the City lead by example by developing a
downspout disconnection program for publicly owned buildings across the City.
(o)Water Conservation:
At the present rate of water consumption, it is projected that the City will have to expand water supply infrastructure to
meet it's projected water demand for the year 2017. For the City, savings can be derived in capital and operating
expenditures through deferral of expansions in water distribution systems, drinking water treatment facilities, wastewater
collection systems and wastewater treatment facilities. An aggressive water efficiency program could result in additional
savings through reductions in sizing or indefinite postponement of these works. Water conservation and efficiency
measures also present financial savings to the consumer.
A water conservation and efficiency program across the City also will assist in reducing water pollution control plant
discharges and thereby help to repair degraded environmental conditions, specifically near plant outfalls. Other
environmental and financial benefits from water conservation include reductions in chemical usage for the treatment of
drinking water and wastewater; and reductions in energy requirements for the treatment and distribution of drinking water
and the collection and treatment of wastewater. Water consumption reductions also provide financial benefits to the City.
In 1996, the former Metropolitan Toronto Council approved commencement of a new Water Efficiency Plan. The Plan is
nearing completion and will identify water efficiency measures that can be implemented cost-effectively. The Task Force is
requesting that the Plan include as priorities: a strategy to retrofit public buildings with water conserving fixtures; a
low-flow toilet replacement program; a strategy to retrofit City owned properties with water conserving irrigation systems;
and an irrigation by-law to regulate city and public lawn watering to off peak hours.
(p) and (q) Water Billing and Public Education:
The City uses water revenues to fund activities associated with maintaining, operating, replacing, upgrading and expanding
water supply and wastewater systems. However, consumers are generally unaware of the costs associated with supplying
drinking water, treating wastewater and providing stormwater management. From a consumer's perspective, there is a
disassociation between water purchased and the need to provide a collection and treatment system for water used. The
connection between water rates and the provision of works for the collection and conveyance of stormwater drainage and
repairing erosion damage to area streams is even further removed. One method of increasing public awareness is to
separate the charges on consumer's water billings. Water billing also can be used as a way of increasing public awareness
toward water conservation. By presenting the recent water consumption history on each billing, actions or measure taken
by the consumer to reduce water consumption would be visible through each billing record and would serve as positive
reinforcement.
In some cases, consumers are also unaware of the linkage between Lake Ontario as a source of drinking water and receiver
of both water pollution control plant discharges and wet weather flows from sewer outfalls. They need to be better
educated about the connection between their drinking water and practices such as use of lawn and garden pesticides and
fertilizers, dumping of chemicals down road side drains, vehicle fluid leaks, etc.. Public education in this area has been
carried out by the former cities. The Task Force is requesting that the existing public education programs of the former
cities and elsewhere be examined to identify the most effective ways of educating the public, on a city-wide basis, about
the connection between drinking water and wastewater/ stormwater quality.
Conclusions:
The actions described in this report were identified through three stakeholder workshops sponsored by the Environmental
Task Force in September 1988. The Task Force is requesting that these actions be taken. The actions will benefit the
environment, most can be done relatively easily and build upon actions that were underway in former parts of the new City.
In consulting with program staff about the proposed actions, it was determined that, in many cases, the proposed actions
were consistent with directions already being taken, were planned to be undertaken at some time in the future or were
recognized as actions that should be taken.
Contact Name and Telephone Number:
Jane Weninger, Project Manager, Environmental Task Force,
Phone (416) 392-6788, Fax (416) 392-7418.
--------
Councillor Layton appeared before the Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee in connection with the foregoing matter.
16
Decision of the Ontario Labour Relations Board ("the Board")
- Bargaining Unit Structure, Description and the Determination
of Bargaining Agents Under the Public Sector Labour
Relations Transition Act, 1997 ("the Act")
(City Council on December 16 and 17, 1998, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)
The Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee recommends that the following report (December 1, 1998) from the
Executive Director of Human Resources be received for information:
Purpose:
The purpose of this report is to provide an overview of the decisions of the Board determining the bargaining unit structure,
the description of the bargaining units for the new City of Toronto and the process for determining which bargaining agents
will represent the employees to be included within the bargaining units.
Funding Sources, Financial Implications and Impact Statement:
N/A
Recommendations:
That this report be received and forwarded to Council for information.
Council Reference/Background/History:
As a result of the amalgamation on January 1, 1998 of the seven former municipalities into the new City of Toronto, it
became necessary to rationalize the labour relations structure for the new City. The Act provides the framework for this
process.
On June 30, 1998 CUPE Local 79 filed an application under the Act whereby it requested the Board to determine the
number and descriptions of the bargaining units that would be appropriate for the new City's operations and to determine
which trade union will represent the employees in those bargaining units.
The application pertained to approximately 30,000 employees, the majority of which are presently covered by over 50
separate collective agreements.
Also, the application required a determination of which employees, who are presently not represented by a bargaining agent
would, as a result of determining the description of the bargaining units, be included in one of the bargaining units.
Several other issues were raised by the Unions in regards to the number and description of the bargaining units. These
included a proposal by TCEU Local 416 that the Board create a separate bargaining unit for employees of the Public Health
Division of the Community and Neighbourhood Services Department and merge the employees of the Toronto Parking
Authority (the "TPA") into the broader City bargaining units. In addition, the Ontario Nurses Association ("ONA")
requested the Board to create a separate bargaining unit to be comprised of Public Health Nurses only.
The largest areas of dispute with respect to the determination of the number and description of the bargaining units
involved both CUPE Local 79 and the Toronto Civic Employees' Union, Local 416 who represent the overwhelming
majority of the employees of the new City.
Comments and/or Discussion and/or Justification:
Until such time as the bargaining units and bargaining agents were determined by the Board, neither the City nor the
Unions could begin the collective bargaining process with a view towards negotiating new collective agreements that
would provide consistent terms and conditions of employment for the employees of the City and facilitate the City's ability
to restructure in a timely fashion.
In the event the parties were unable to settle the matters in dispute, the City would have faced many months of delay in
getting to the bargaining table and in the interim period would have to continue to administer over 50 separate collective
agreements.
Given the scope of this undertaking and in an attempt to avoid both protracted and costly litigation, the Board directed that
the parties meet with a Board representative for the purpose of attempting to narrow and where possible settle the matters
in dispute. The parties then engaged in intensive discussions and negotiations in this regard.
The City's objectives throughout this process were to put in place a bargaining unit structure that would be appropriate and
workable for the City's operations, and would accommodate the needs of the Unions and the employees of the new City.
In this regard, an agreement was reached among the parties which, in my opinion, achieves these objectives. The agreement
is sound from a labour relations perspective and balances the interests of all of the parties concerned. By decision dated
November 19, 1998, the Board endorsed the terms of the settlement.
Under the Act representation votes are required to determine which bargaining agent will represent employees within the
various bargaining units. By decision dated November 20, 1998, the Board ordered that the representation votes be held
between the hours of 8 a.m. and 8 p.m. at the Etobicoke Civic Centre, Metro Hall, the North York Civic Centre and the
Scarborough Civic Centre on December 10, 11, 14, and 15 respectively. A representation vote will not be required with
respect to all of the bargaining units. The bargaining unit structure for the City agreed to by the parties and ordered by the
Board is as follows:
New City of Toronto Bargaining Unit Structure
Inside Employees Unit (Full-Time)
A representation vote will be directed by the Board. The vote will be between Local 79 and Local 416.
Outside Employees Unit (Full-Time)
No representation vote will be directed by the Board. Local 416 will be appointed as the bargaining agent.
Building Trades Units
No representation votes will be directed by the Board. Employees within these bargaining units will continue to be
represented by the construction/craft unions that currently represent them.
Part-time Unit - Homes for the Aged
No representation vote will be directed by the Board. Local 79 will be appointed as the bargaining agent.
Part-time Unit - Outside the Homes for the Aged
No representation vote will be directed by the Board. Local 79 will be appointed as the bargaining agent.
Recreation Casual Unit
A representation vote will be directed by the Board. The vote will be between Local 79 and Local 416. In addition, the vote
will include a non-union option on the ballot.
The reason why a non-union option is to be included on the ballot is that under the Act, if more than 40 percent of the
employees within the proposed bargaining unit are presently non-union, such an option must be included.
In this particular instance, the non-union component of the proposed Recreational Casual unit is well in excess of 40
percent.
With respect to the proposals of TCEU Local 416 for a public health unit and the merger of the TPA employees into the
broader City units and the proposal of the Ontario Nurses Association for a public health nurses only unit, the City opposed
these proposals. The City opposed the proposed health and public health nurses units because they would result in undue
fragmentation of the bargaining structure and would disconnect the public health employees from other municipal
employees with whom they share a community of interest. Also, the creation of these units would be inconsistent with the
operational needs of the City and the proposed units would not assist the City in meeting the numerous transitional
challenges brought about by restructuring. With respect to the merger of the TPA employees into the broader City units, it
was the City's position that the TPA was a separate employer created by the City of Toronto Act No. 2 and that the Act was
not applicable in the circumstances in this case.
By decision dated October 20, 1998, the Board accepted the position of the City and did not order separate bargaining units
for employees in the Public Health Division, or a separate bargaining unit for public health nurses or the merger of the TPA
employees into the broader City units.
With respect to the construction/craft units, the City will have an ongoing collective bargaining relationship with these
units that essentially flow through from the previous collective bargaining relationships that were in place with the
predecessor municipalities.
The determination of the construction/craft units was solely for purposes of this application under the Act and is without
prejudice to any rights the City may have, either now or in the future under any other existing or future provincial
legislation including, but not limited to the Economic Development and Workplace Democracy Act, 1998.
As set out above, one of the issues to be dealt with within the context of determining the description of the various
bargaining units was which employees currently excluded from any of the bargaining units would now be included in one
of the units.
The City presently has over 3200 employees who are excluded from the various bargaining units. These employees include
directors, managers, and supervisors.
As a result of the discussions between the parties, 139 position classifications that were excluded will now be included in
either the full-time inside or recreation casual bargaining units. There are approximately 200 employees within these
position classifications.
Failing this settlement, the Board would have been called upon to adjudicate the matter of the inclusion in or the exclusion
from the various bargaining units with respect to those position classifications that are presently excluded. The test that the
Board would have applied under the Act in determining the inclusion/exclusion issue is essentially twofold. Do the
employees perform managerial functions or are they employed in a confidential capacity with respect to labour relations
matters?
Upon review, it was concluded that the aforementioned position/classifications would not meet this test and should
therefore be included within the appropriate bargaining unit.
The aforementioned group of approximately 200 employees will as part of this settlement be afforded a one time option to
elect to remain excluded from a bargaining unit or if they so choose, become a member of the applicable bargaining unit.
Lastly, the matter of the description of the bargaining unit for Fire Fighters is yet to be resolved. Hearings before the Board
for the purposes of concluding this matter have been scheduled for January 22, 26 and 27, 1999. No vote for the purpose of
determining the bargaining agent will be required as the City has recognized the Toronto Professional Fire Fighters
Association as the bargaining agent.
Conclusions:
The resolution of these matters represents a positive step forward for the City in the restructuring process.
The parties now have the opportunity to begin the collective bargaining process with a view towards harmonizing and
rationalizing the various terms and conditions of employment that presently exist which will further facilitate the City's
need to eliminate many of the administrative complexities and inefficiencies that have hampered the City's restructuring
efforts to date.
Contact Name:
Harold Ball, Director, Employee & Labour Relations, 392-8727.
17
Exemption from Phase-in By-law -
188 Eglinton Avenue East ( North Toronto - Ward 22)
(City Council on December 16 and 17, 1998, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)
The Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee recommends the adoption of the following report (December 4,
1998) from the Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer:
Purpose:
This report provides additional information regarding the communication received by the Assessment and Tax Policy Task
Force at their meeting on November 20, 1998 from Goodman and Carr, solicitors for 188 Eglinton Inc., requesting that the
property at 188 Eglinton Avenue East be excluded from the provisions of the City's 1998 residential phase-in policy.
Financial Implications:
Exclusion of 188 Eglinton Avenue East from the residential phase-in will result in an estimated $287,467.00 in taxes
foregone in 1998.
Recommendations:
(1)That City Council approve a policy that, pursuant to subsection 372(6) of the Municipal Act (the "Act") , that where
there has been a change in the classification of a property between the 1997 and 1998 tax years, and the property has been
converted to residential uses for all of 1998, such property should be excluded from the phase-in of assessment-related tax
increases and decreases under By-law No. 472-98; and
(2)That authority be granted for the introduction of a bill in Council substantially in the form of the draft by-law attached
hereto as Appendix A.
Comments:
At its meeting on November 20, 1998, the Assessment and Tax Policy Task Force had before it a communication from
Goodman and Carr, solicitors for 188 Eglinton Inc., the owners of the property at 188 Eglinton Avenue East. In their
communication, the property owners are requesting that Council pass a by-law under subsection 372(6) of the Act, which
will exclude this property from the phase-in program adopted by City Council for the residential/farm property class in
July, 1998. A copy of their communication is attached for information.
The property was previously used and assessed as an office building. However, late in 1997, the conversion of the portion
of the property above street level into 20 residential condominium units was completed and individual unit owners are
scheduled to take occupancy later this year. The street level portion of the property continues to be used for commercial
purposes. The total taxes for the property in 1997, when it was assessed as an office building, were $676,137.00. The
property was returned on the 1998 assessment roll as an office building, with a current value of $4,727,000.00. The 1998
taxes originally levied on the property were $645,300.00.
The Regional Assessment Office has agreed to change the classification for the condominium portion of the property for all
of 1998 from commercial to residential, with no change to the total current value assessment for the property. As a result of
this change in classification, the revised current value taxes for the property would be $242,250.00, a decrease of
$457,289.00. Of the total decrease for the property, $359,334.00 relates to the condominium portion. Under the provisions
of the phase-in by-law adopted by City Council in accordance with the provisions of the Act, this property would be
subject to the phasing-in of this tax decrease. If the phase-in is applied to this property, the average taxes for each
condominium unit in 1998 will be approximately $16,400.00. By the end of the phase-in period, these taxes would be
reduced to approximately $2,000.00 which would also be the amount of taxes payable if the property were excluded from
the phase-in by-law.
Subsection 372(6) of the Act permits a municipality, by by-law, to exclude a property from the application of the phase-in,
where there has been a change in the use or character of the land, or in its classification such that, in the opinion of the
council of the municipality, it makes the phase-in inappropriate for such land. In this case, the change of use occurred in
1997, was not reflected for 1998 with the resulting in tax inequity for purchasers of units in the building. This section of
the Act permits a municipality to correct this anomaly.
Discussions with the Regional Assessment Office staff have indicated that, while there may be other properties for which
this exclusion could apply, the numbers do not appear to be significant. Exact numbers of properties are not available. In
addition, the exclusion provision would only apply to those properties whose classification changes in 1998. Any
properties that face similar circumstances of class change for 1999 or 2000 would not be affected by the provisions of the
phase-in by-law since their phase-in would not have started in 1998.
The City Solicitor has prepared the attached draft by-law for approval should Council support the recommendations
contained in this report. The attached draft by-law, if enacted, would exclude all properties which were re-classified as
residential/farm for the 1998 taxation year. This approach would preclude the need for additional by-laws to further
preclude any property which fits the above-mentioned criteria.
Conclusions:
This property's use changed from an office building to a condominium late in 1997 but was not reflected on the returned
1998 assessment roll and as a result the condominium portion was taxed at the commercial rate for 1998. The Regional
Assessment Office has agreed to change its use for 1998 to residential but due to the phase-in provisions adopted by
Council, and its CVA, taxes for 1998 would be approximately $16,400.00 per unit compared to approximately $2,000.00
without the phase-in. Since the issue is an unforeseen change in use erroneously reflected on the 1998 assessment roll
creating a huge tax discrepancy, it would be appropriate to exclude this property from the phase-in by-law.
It is not expected that there are many similar situations. Any property that would be subject to a classification change from
commercial to residential/farm for 1999 or 2000 would not be subject to the phase-in by-law, as the phase-in would not
have commenced in 1998.
Contact Names:
Paul Wealleans, 397-4208
Lynne Ashton, 397-4203
--------
(Communication dated November 19, 1998, addressed to
Councillor Adams from Ms. Yvonne J. Hamlin, Goodman and Carr,
Barristers and Solicitors.)
Re:Assessment and Tax Policy Task Force
Meeting:November 20, 1998 @ 9:30 a.m.
Subject:188 Eglinton Avenue East, Toronto
We act on behalf of 188 Eglinton Inc., the owners of the property municipally known as 188 Eglinton Avenue East.
We write this letter to request that we be added as an agenda item to the meeting of your Committee scheduled to
commence at 9:30 a.m. tomorrow, November 20, 1998.
The building on the subject property was converted from office to residential condominium use during late 1997. The final
improvements to the building were made during 1998 and individual unit owners are scheduled to take occupancy later this
month.
It has recently come to our attention that the assessment on this building for the 1998 taxation year was returned as an
office building. Accordingly, purchasers' solicitors are discovering that the apportionment of the 1998 taxes among the unit
owners would be based on an office-taxation rate. In particular, each of the purchasers' proportionate shares of realty taxes
is some three times higher than had been estimated on the basis of occupancy for residential uses. It has become apparent,
over the last few weeks, that purchasers are reluctant or unable to proceed with transactions so long as the property is
assessed as an office building, insofar as they can no longer afford the property taxes and, in many cases, they would no
longer qualify for their CMHC mortgages, which were based on expected realty tax burdens appropriate to residential uses.
We have had numerous conversations with the Toronto Assessment Office, and they have agreed to enter into Minutes of
Settlement with us that would leave the value untouched on the assessment roll but would change the classification of the
property from commercial-office to residential.
The problem with which we are concerned is that the City of Toronto has enacted a phasing by-law for residential property
tax decreases. We are concerned that the decrease occasioned to the taxes for this property would, as a result of that
by-law, need to be phased in over a five-year period.
It is clearly not the intention of the legislation that has been adopted by the Province, nor, we are sure, the intention of the
City of Toronto, that first-time residential purchasers would carry an office-tax burden for property tax purposes because
they bought in a building that had been converted from office uses.
Bill 106, which was given Royal Assent by the Provincial Government on May 27, 1997, contains the provisions relating
to phase-in of tax increases and decreases. In particular, that Bill introduces section 372(6) which permits, where there has
been a change in the classification of a property under the Assessment Act that in the opinion of the Council of the
municipality makes a phase-in in respect of such land inappropriate, Council to, by by-law, exclude such land from the
application of the phase-in.
Accordingly, we are seeking from your Committee a direction that staff prepare an appropriate report and draft by-law for
the consideration of Council at its next meeting which, we understand, is scheduled for November 25, 1998.
We apologize for the urgency of this matter, but time is of the essence with respect to the occupancy of these purchasers.
Thank you for your kind attention to this matter.
--------
Authority:
Intended for first presentation to Council:
Adopted by Council:
CITY OF TORONTO
Bill No.
BY-LAW No. [By-law number]
To exclude Certain Properties from the Application of By-Law 472-1998, being a By-law "To Phase-in 1998
Assessment-Related Tax Increases and Decreases for the Residential Property Class"
WHEREAS subsection 372(1) of the Municipal Act, as amended (the "Act") provides that the council of a municipality,
other than a lower-tier municipality, may pass a by-law to phase-in a 1998 Assessment-Related Tax Increase or Decrease to
be determined in accordance with section 372.1 of the Act; and
WHEREAS at its special meeting of July 21 and 23, 1998, City Council enacted By-law No. 472-1998, being a by-law "To
Phase-in 1998 Assessment-Related Tax Increases and Decreases for the Residential Property Class"; and
WHEREAS subsection 372(6) of the Act provides that if there has been a change in the use or character of any land or in
its classification under the Assessment Act that, in the opinion of the council of the municipality, makes a phase-in or the
continuation of a phase-in in respect of such land inappropriate, the council may in the by-law passed under subsection
372(1) of the Act or in another by-law exclude such land from the application of the phase-in; and
WHEREAS paragraph 7 of By-law No. 472-1998 provides that if there has been a change in use or character of any real
property in the residential property class or in its classification under the Assessment Act that makes a phase-in or the
continuation of a phase-in in respect of such property inappropriate, Council may by by-law exclude such property from the
application of the phase-in.
WHEREAS subsection 39.1(1) of the Assessment Act, as amended, provides that a person who has received a notice of
assessment under that Act may request the assessment commissioner to reconsider the person's assessment including the
classification of the person's land; and
WHEREAS subsection 40(1) of the Assessment Act, as amended, provides that any person may complain in writing to the
Assessment Review Board that, inter alia, the classification of the person's land or another person's land is incorrect;
The Council of the City of Toronto HEREBY ENACTS as follows:
1.A property shall be excluded from the application of By-law 472-1998, being a by-law "To phase-in 1998
Assessment-Related Tax Increases and Decreases for the Residential Property Class", upon notice thereof being provided
to the City of Toronto by the Assessment Review Board, if:
(a)the property was incorrectly classified for the 1998 taxation year, as belonging to a property class other than the
residential/farm property class, and
(b)as a result of a request for reconsideration pursuant to section 39.1 of the Assessment Act, or as a result of a complaint
to the Assessment Review Board pursuant to subsection 40(1) of the Assessment Act, the property was re-classified as
belonging to the residential/farm property class for the 1998 taxation year.
2.This by-law shall be deemed to have come into force on the 1st day of January, 1998.
ENACTED AND PASSED this day of, A.D..
Mayor City Clerk
The Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee also submits the following communication (December 2, 1998) from
the City Clerk:
The Assessment and Tax Policy Task Force on November 20, 1998, had before it a communication (November 19, 1998)
from Ms. Yvonne J. Hamlin, Goodman and Carr, Barristers and Solicitors respecting 188 Eglinton Avenue East and
requesting that the classification of the property be changed from commercial-office to residential.
The Task Force took the following action:
(1)requested the Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer, in consultation with the City Solicitor, and, if necessary, Ms.
Yvonne Hamlin, to report on the request contained in the communication (November 19, 1998) from Ms. Yvonne J.
Hamlin, Goodman and Carr, Barristers and Solicitors, and to take the necessary action to ensure implementation of the
change without phasing in of the tax decrease; such report to also include any outstanding matters that the City has with the
developer; and
(2)requested the Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer to submit the report to the December 15, 1998, meeting of
Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee for consideration by City Council on December 16, 1998, or earlier if possible.
Ms. Yvonne Hamlin addressed the Assessment and Tax Policy Task Force.
The Task Force's recommendations are noted above.
18
1999 Interim Levy By-law
(City Council on December 16 and 17, 1998, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)
The Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee recommends the adoption of the report (December 3, 1998) from
the Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer.
The Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee reports, for the information of Council, having adopted the report
(December 8, 1998) from the City Solicitor which recommends that it be received for information.
The Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee submits the following report (December 3, 1998) from the Chief
Financial Officer and Treasurer:
Purpose:
To provide for the levy and collection of 1999 interim realty taxes.
Financial Implications:
The approval of the by-law will provide for the cash requirements of the City until the final 1999 operating budget is
approved by Council in April 1999.
Recommendation:
Authority be granted for the introduction of a bill in Council substantially in the form of the draft by-law attached as
Appendix hereto, providing for an interim tax levy in the amount permitted by statute, prior to the adoption of the estimates
for 1999.
Discussion:
Section 370 of the Municipal Act, as amended (the "Act"), provides that a municipal council may pass a by-law, prior to
the adoption of the estimates, to levy interim taxes for 1999. Similarly, section 447.30 of the Act provides that a municipal
council may pass a by-law levying interim taxes for 1999, prior to the adoption of the estimates, on any property classes for
which the municipal council adopted the 2.5 percent cap on tax increases for 1998, 1999, and 2000.
The 1999 interim rates as reported in the attached by-law will generate no more than 50 percent or less of the total 1998
revenue by property class, and are in the same proportion to one another as the tax ratios established by City Council in
July, 1998. The 1999 interim taxes for the capped commercial, industrial and multi-residential property classes are levied
by applying 50 percent of the adjusted 1997 mill rates to the assessment in the frozen assessment listing. Adjustments are
made to account for the phase-in program (residential) and the 2.5 percent cap (commercial, industrial and
multi-residential) adopted by City Council in July, 1998. Additional funds will be raised by provincial transfer payments,
user fees, internal revenues sources and, if necessary, temporary borrowing.
The draft by-law attached hereto as Appendix "A" has been prepared in accordance with the foregoing and in accordance
with the Act, as amended by Bill 79.
Bill 79 (the Fairness for Property Taxpayers Act, 1998), if enacted, will provide the authority to adjust the 1999 interim
levy to account for the phase-in and capping programs adopted by Council in July, 1998.
The following two additional issues also affect the enactment of the interim levy by-law:
3:While Bill 79 specifically excludes the City of Toronto from the 10-5-5 capping provisions, as it currently reads, it also
prohibits the council of any municipality (including the City of Toronto) from passing an interim levy by-law prior to
January of 1999.
4:Section 447.21 of the Act appears to require the council of a municipality to levy the full 1999 levy on the
multi-residential property class in the interim levy by-law, where the multi-residential property class is subject to the 2.5
percent cap.
Staff have been informed by Ministry sources that both issues are to be resolved by way of amendment to Bill 79 before
third reading in early December 1998.
Bill 79 is scheduled to receive Royal Assent during the week of December 7, 1998. Provided the above-mentioned issues
are resolved by amendment, and Bill 79 is enacted on schedule, City Council can enact a 1999 interim levy by-law, in
substantially the form attached, at its meeting of December 16, 1998.
Conclusion:
The interim levy by-law will provide for the cash requirements of the City until the 1999 operating budget is approved by
Council by March 1999. Council's authority to enact the by-law at its next meeting, in substantially the form attached, is
dependant upon Bill 79 being amended and enacted prior to City Council's meeting of December 16, 1998.
Contact:
Giuliana Carbone, Director of Revenue Services, (416) 392-8065.
--------
APPENDIX "A"
Authority:
Intended for first presentation to Council:
Adopted by Council:
CITY OF TORONTO
Bill No.
BY-LAW No. [By-law number]
To provide for the levy and collection of 1999 interim realty taxes and penalties for non-payment thereof
WHEREAS subsection 370(1) of the Municipal Act, as amended (the "Act"), provides that for 1999, the council of a local
municipality, before the adoption of the estimates for the year, may pass a by-law levying a separate tax rate, as specified in
the by-law (the "interim levy by-law"), on the assessment in each property class in the municipality rateable for local
municipality purposes (the "interim taxes"); and
WHEREAS subsection 2(2) of the City of Toronto Act, 1997, provides that the City of Toronto is a local municipality for
all purposes; and
WHEREAS section 370 of the Act, provides in subsection 3 thereof that the interim taxes are subject to the following
restrictions:
1The rate on a property class must be set so that the total amount raised, when the tax rate is levied on the applicable
assessment rateable for local municipality purposes, does not exceed 50 per cent of the total amount raised for all purposes
for the previous year by the levying of tax rates on all properties that, in the current year, are in the property class,
2.The rates must be set so that the amount raised does not exceed any limit in a regulation under section 371 of the Act,
3.The rates on the different classes of property must be in the same proportion to each other as the tax ratios established
under section 363 of the Act for the property classes are to each other,
4.For the purposes of calculating the total amount raised for all purposes for the previous year, if any tax rates were
levied for only part of the previous year because assessment was added to the collector's roll during the year, an amount
shall be added equal to the additional taxes that would have been levied if the tax rates had been levied for the entire year;
5.The total amount raised for all purposes for the previous year shall be adjusted in accordance with the following:
(i)the amount shall be decreased by the costs, for the previous year, of deferrals, cancellations or other relief to
low-income seniors and low-income disabled persons under a by-law passed pursuant to subsection 373(1) of the Act,
(ii)the amount shall be increased by any taxes deferred by low-income seniors or low-income disabled persons under a
by-law passed pursuant to subsection 373(1) that were due in the previous year; and
WHEREAS the total amount raised, when the tax rate for each property class set out in Column II of section 2 of this
by-law is levied on the applicable assessment rateable for local municipality purposes, does not exceed 50 per cent of the
total amount raised for all purposes in the 1998 by the levying of tax rates on all the properties that, in 1999, are in the
property class; and
WHEREAS no percentages have been prescribed for the purposes of the section 371; and
WHEREAS section 370 of the Act, provides in subsection 4.1 thereof that if an interim levy by-law is passed before the tax
ratios for the current year are established, the tax ratios for the year for the purposes of levying the interim taxes, shall be
deemed to be the tax ratios for the previous year; and
WHEREAS section 370 of the Act provides in subsection 4 thereof, that if an interim levy by-law is passed before the
assessment roll for taxation in the current year is returned the interim taxes shall be levied on the assessment according to
the assessment roll for taxation in the previous year as most recently revised before the by-law is passed or a preliminary
assessment roll provided by the assessment commissioner for the purpose; and
WHEREAS section 370 of the Act, provides in subsection 4.2 thereof, that an interim levy by-law may provide for the
levying of tax rates on assessment added, after the by-law is passed, to the collector's roll for the current year that was not
on the assessment roll upon which the tax rates are levied; and
WHEREAS section 370 of the Act, provides in subsection 7.1 thereof, that if the council of the municipality is of the
opinion that the interim taxes levied on a property are too high or too low in relation to its estimate of the total taxes that
will be levied on the property, the council may, by by-law, adjust the interim taxes on the property to the extent it considers
appropriate; and
WHEREAS section 370 of the Act, provides in subsection 14 thereof, that the Minister may make regulations varying the
application of section 370 with respect to 1999; and
WHEREAS no regulations have been made under subsection 370(14) of the Act;
WHEREAS subsection 447.30(1) of the Act, provides that the following rules apply, rather than section 370 of the Act, for
the 1999 and 2000 taxation years, with respect to properties to which Part XXII.1 of the Act applies:
1.The council of a local municipality, before the adoption of the estimates for the year, may pass an interim levy by-law
levying interim taxes on the assessment in the frozen assessment listing, as most recently revised, for property in the
municipality rateable for local municipality purposes, which by-law may provide for the levying of taxes on assessment
added to the frozen assessment listing after the by-law is passed and to which by-law subsections 370(2), (5), (6), (7) and
(7.1) of the Act apply, with necessary modifications,
2.The interim taxes shall be determined by applying,
(a)a mill rate to the commercial assessment and business assessment as set out in the frozen assessment listing, which
mill rate shall not exceed the prescribed percentage, or 50 per cent if no percentage is prescribed, of the adjusted
commercial mill rate, determined under section 447.16 of the Act, that was applicable to the property for the previous year
or that would have applied to the property for the previous year if Part XXII.1 of the Act had applied,
(b)and a mill rate to the vacant commercial assessment and non-business assessment, as set out in the frozen assessment
listing, which mill rate shall not exceed the prescribed percentage, or 50 per cent if no percentage is prescribed, of the
adjusted residential mill rate, determined under section 447.16 of the Act, that was applicable to the property for the
previous year or that would have applied to the property for the previous year if Part XXII.1 of the Act had applied; and
WHEREAS no percentage has been prescribed under section 447.30; and
WHEREAS section 447.21 of the Act, provides in paragraph 5 thereof that, if Part XXII.1 of the Act applies to the
multi-residential property class, the interim taxes levied on the multi-residential property class shall be determined by
applying 50 per cent of the adjusted residential mill rate to the total assessment in the frozen assessment listing, rather than
as provided under paragraph 2 of subsection 447.30(1); and
WHEREAS the mill rates set out in section 4 hereof do not exceed 50 per cent of the adjusted mill rates as determined in
accordance with section 447.16 of the Act;
The Council of The City of Toronto (the "Council") HEREBY ENACTS as follows:
1.In this by-law:
"1998 Assessment-Related Tax Increase" means a "1998 Assessment-Related Tax Increase" as defined in By-law No.
472-98;
"1998 Assessment-Related Tax Decrease" means a "1998 Assessment-Related Tax Decrease" as defined in By-law No.
472-98;
"area" means the part of the City of Toronto which was the geographical area of an "area municipality" as defined by the
Municipality of Metropolitan Toronto Act, as it read on December 31, 1997 and each such area is referred to by the name
of the former municipality;
"Tax Collector" means any person who was a collector or tax collector appointed, pursuant to the provisions of the Act, by
by-law of a former area municipality in force on December 31, 1997, or any person subsequently appointed by Council to
hold that office, and
"Treasurer" means the Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer of the City of Toronto; and
2.Before the adoption of the estimates for 1999, there shall be levied as taxes on the assessment of all property in the City
of Toronto rateable for local municipality purposes according to the assessment roll as most recently revised before this
by-law is enacted, in amounts calculated for each property class set out in Column I, by applying the interim tax rate set out
in Column II to the assessment set out in the assessment roll as most recently revised and on any assessment added to the
collector's roll for 1999 after this by-law is passed that was not on the assessment roll as most recently revised:
Column IColumn II
(Property Class/Subclass)(Interim Tax Rate)
Residential/Farm0.629851%
Multi-Residential2.323420%
Commercial3.821376%
- Vacant Units and Excess Land2.674951%
- Vacant Land2.674951%
Industrial5.3320015%
- Vacant Units and Excess Land3.465791%
- Vacant Land3.465791%
- Farmland Awaiting Development0.220448%
Farmlands0.157463%
Pipelines1.7836535%
3.(a)The interim taxes levied by section 2 hereof on all real property in the residential/farm property class for which
there is a 1998 Assessment-Related Tax Increase are deemed by City Council to be too high and shall be adjusted by
subtracting therefrom 50 per cent of the amount of the 1998 Assessment-Related Tax Increase remaining, if any, to be
phased-in in the 2000, 2001, and 2002 taxation years pursuant to subsection 3(2) of By-law No. 472-98; and
(b)The interim taxes levied by section 2 hereof on all real property in the residential/farm property class for which there
is a 1998 Assessment-Related Tax Decrease are deemed by City Council to be too low and shall be adjusted by adding
thereto 50 per cent of the amount of the 1998 Assessment-Related Tax Decrease remaining, if any, to be phased-in in the
2000, 2001 and 2002 taxation years pursuant to subsection 3(2) of By-law No. 472-98.
4.(a)Before the adoption of the estimates for 1999, notwithstanding section 2 hereof and in accordance with Part
XXII.1 of the Act and By-law No. 473-1998, there shall be levied as taxes on the assessment of all property in the City of
Toronto in the commercial and the industrial property classes (including the vacant units and excess land, vacant land, and
farmland awaiting development subclasses) rateable for local municipality purposes according to the frozen assessment
listing as most recently revised, in amounts calculated within each of the areas set out in Column I by the application of,
(i)the appropriate commercial mill rate set out in Column II, opposite the area in which the property is located, to the
commercial assessment and the business assessment set out in the frozen assessment listing as most recently revised (based
on 1997 assessments adjusted in accordance with the Act) and to any commercial assessment and business assessment
added to the frozen assessment listing after this by-law is passed; and
(ii)the appropriate residential mill rate set out in Column III, opposite the area in which the property is located, to the
vacant commercial assessment and the non-business assessment set out in the frozen assessment listing as most recently
revised (based on 1997 assessments adjusted in accordance with the Act) and to any vacant commercial assessment and
non-business assessment added to the frozen assessment listing after this by-law is passed:
Column IColumn IIColumn III
(Area)(Commercial Mill Rate)(Residential Mill Rate)
PublicSeparatePublicSeparate
SupportSupportSupportSupport
East York283.075282.700240.620240.295
Etobicoke262.690263.250223.285223.760
North York264.755264.830225.035225.100
Scarborough272.560272.225231.675231.390
Toronto278.455276.762236.685235.246
York295.690296.240251.335251.805
(b)Before the adoption of the estimates for 1999, notwithstanding section 2 hereof and in accordance with Part XXII.1 of
the Act and By-law No. 473-1998, there shall be levied as taxes on the assessment of all property in the City of Toronto in
the multi-residential property class rateable for local municipality purposes according to the frozen assessment listings as
most recently revised, in amounts calculated within each of the areas set out in Column I by the application of the
appropriate residential mill rate set out in Column II, opposite the area in which the property is located, to the total
assessment in the frozen assessment listing, as most recently revised (based on 1997 assessments adjusted in accordance
with the Act) and to any assessment added to the frozen assessment listing after this by-law is passed:
Column IColumn II
(Area)(Residential Mill Rate)
PublicSeparate
SupportSupport
East York240.620240.295
Etobicoke223.285223.760
North York225.035225.100
Scarborough231.675231.390
Toronto236.685235.246
York251.335251.805
5.(a)The interim taxes levied by section 4 hereof on all real property in the commercial, industrial and multi-residential
property classes for which there is a "1998 tax increase phase-in" as determined in accordance with section 447.19 of the
Act, are deemed by City Council to be too low, and shall be adjusted by adding the following thereto:
(0.5 x percent tax increase in 1998) x 1997 level taxes as determined in accordance with section 447.17 of the Act
(b)The interim taxes levied by section 4 hereof on all real property in the commercial, industrial and multi-residential
property classes for which there is a "1998 tax decrease phase-in" as determined in accordance with section 447.19 of the
Act, are deemed by City Council to be too high, and shall be adjusted by subtracting the following therefrom:
(0.5 x percentage tax decrease in 1998) x 1997 level taxes as determined in accordance with section 447.17 of the Act
(c)Notwithstanding clauses (a) and (b), the interim taxes levied by section 4 hereof shall not be adjusted so as to exceed
50 per cent of the taxes levied on the property in the 1998 taxation year.
6.The taxes levied by sections 2 and 4, as adjusted by sections 3 and 5 hereof, shall be paid in three installments which
shall be equal or as nearly equal as practicable, and shall be due and payable on or before the respective dates set out
below:
Installment 1 - February 15, 1999
Installment 2 - March 8, 1999
Installment 3 - April 6, 1999
7.The payment of taxes, or any instalment thereof, may be made, in respect of property situated within each area listed in
Column I below, at the location for payment set out opposite such area under Column II below:
Column IColumn II
(Area)(Location for Payment)
East York850 Coxwell Avenue
Etobicoke399 The West Mall
North York5100 Yonge Street
Scarborough150 Borough Drive
Toronto100 Queen Street West
York2700 Eglinton Avenue West
8.Taxes shall be payable to the Treasurer, City of Toronto.
9.When not in default, the payment of taxes, or any instalment thereof, may also be made at any financial institution
permitted by the Act, and the Treasurer is hereby authorized to determine, in accordance with the provisions of the Act, the
financial institutions where payment may be made.
10.The Treasurer or Tax Collectors may mail, or caused to be mailed, all notices of taxes required in accordance with the
provisions of the Act, to the address of the residence or place of business of the person taxed pursuant to this by-law.
Notices will not be mailed to tenants. It is the responsibility of the person taxed to notify and collect taxes from tenants or
other persons.
11.The Treasurer or the Tax Collectors shall be and they are hereby authorized to accept part payment from time to time
on account of any taxes due, and to give a receipt for such part payment provided that acceptance of any such part payment
does not affect the collection of any percentage charge imposed or collectable under section 12 in respect to non-payment
of any taxes or any class of taxes or of any instalment thereof.
12.A penalty for non-payment of taxes shall be added at the rate of 1.25 percent on the 1st day of default, and on the 1st
day of each calendar month thereafter in which default continues, but not after December 31, 1999.
13.The Treasurer or the Tax Collectors shall add interest at the rate of 1.25 percent per month on the 1st day of each
calendar month from the 31st day of December, 1999 until the taxes are paid.
14.Except in the case of taxes payable under sections 33 and 34 of the Assessment Act, as amended, the percentage
charge imposed by section 12 as a penalty for non-payment of taxes and monies payable as taxes shall be added to every
tax or assessment, rent or rate or any instalment or part thereof remaining unpaid on the first day of default and on the first
day of each calendar month thereafter in which such default continues but not after December 31, 1999; and it shall be the
duty of a Tax Collector, immediately after the several dates named in section 6 to collect at once, by distress or otherwise
under the provisions of the applicable statutes all such taxes, assessments, rents, rates or instalments or parts thereof as
shall not have been paid on or before the several dates named as aforesaid, together with the said percentage charges as
they are incurred.
15.In respect of taxes payable under sections 33 and 34 of the Assessment Act, as amended, the percentage charge
imposed by section 12 as a penalty for non-payment of taxes and moneys payable as taxes shall be added to every amount
of taxes so payable remaining unpaid on the first day after twenty-one days from the date of mailing by the Treasurer or a
Tax Collector of a demand for payment thereof and on the first day of each calendar month thereafter in which default
continues but not after December 31, 1999; and it shall be the duty of a Tax Collector immediately after the expiration of
the said twenty-one days to collect at once by distress or otherwise under the provisions of the applicable statutes, all such
taxes as shall not have been paid on or before the expiration of the said twenty-one-day period, together with the said
percentage charges as they are incurred.
16.Nothing herein contained shall prevent the Tax Collectors from proceeding at any time with the collection of any rate,
tax or assessment, or any part thereof, in accordance with the provisions of the statutes and by-laws governing the
collection of taxes.
17.Where the sum of the total annual taxes for which any person is chargeable in the year 1999 for municipal, school,
local improvement and other purposes, upon any real property assessed in one parcel to the same owner would according to
the assessment thereon be less than $10.00, the sum of such taxes shall be deemed to be $10.00 and shall be so entered on
the collector's roll and the difference between the sum that would have been entered but for this section and the sum of
$10.00 shall form part of the general funds of the City of Toronto and such levy shall be deferred to the issuance of the
final tax bill.
18.Where tenants of land owned by the Crown or in which the Crown has an interest are liable for the payment of taxes
and where any such tenant has been employed either within or outside the municipality by the same employer for not less
than thirty days, such employer shall pay over to the Treasurer or Tax Collectors on demand out of any wages, salary or
other remuneration due to such employee, the amount then payable for taxes under this by-law and such payment shall
relieve the employer from any liability to the employee for the amount so paid.
19.This By-law shall come into force on the 1st day of January, 1999.
ENACTED AND PASSED this day of, A.D..
Mayor City Clerk
The Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee also submits the following report (December 8, 1998) from the City
Solicitor:
Purpose:
To provide an update on the status of Bill 79, and the amendments required thereto prior to the enactment of the 1999
interim levy by-law, as referred to in the report from the Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer dated December 3, 1998.
Recommendations:
It is recommended that this report be received for information.
Comments and/or Discussion and/or Justification:
In her report dated December 3, 1998, the Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer (the "Treasurer's Report") outlined the
following two problems with the statutory authority for the 1999 interim levy by-law:
(i)Bill 79, as it read on first reading, precluded the council of any municipality (including the City of Toronto) from
passing a 1999 interim levy by-law prior to January, 1999; and
(ii)Where the multi-residential property class is subject to the 2.5 percent cap (such a cap is in place for the
multi-residential property class in the City of Toronto), the Municipal Act required the raising of the full 1999 levy for that
property class in the interim levy by-law.
Amendments to Bill 79, which corrected both of the above-mentioned problems, were introduced and approved by the
Standing Committee on Finance and Economic Affairs on December 7, 1998.
Bill 79, as amended, is expected to receive Third Reading and Royal Assent prior to December 18, 1998.
As there is now no bill before the legislature which, if enacted, would prevent City Council from passing its 1999 interim
levy by-law in December, City Council has the authority, pursuant to section 370 of the Municipal Act to enact the 1999
interim levy by-law at its December meeting.
However, Bill 79, as amended, provides the authority to set and collect the 1999 interim levy for the multi-residential
property class in the same manner as is required for the other capped property classes, and provides the authority to adjust
the interim levy to account for the phase-in and capping programs adopted by City Council in July. Consequently, the
enactment of Bill 79 is still required to provide City Council with the necessary statutory authority to pass the 1999 interim
levy by-law in the form attached to the Treasurer's report.
City Council can pass the 1999 interim levy by-law at its meeting of December 16 and 17, 1998, provided the sections of
the by-law which set the interim levy for the multi-residential property class, and which adjust the interim levy to account
for the phase-in and capping programs, do not come into force until Bill 79 receives Royal Assent. This change will be
made to the 1999 interim by-law prior to its introduction at City Council's meeting on December 16, 1998.
Conclusions:
Bill 79 has been amended to address the two issues identified in the Treasurer's report.
As there is now no bill before the Legislature which, if enacted, would prevent City Council from passing its 1999 interim
levy by-law in December, City Council has the necessary statutory authority to enact the 1999 interim levy by-law at its
meeting of December 16 and 17, 1998.
However, as the authority for the multi-residential levy and the phase-in and capping adjustments are dependent upon the
enactment of Bill 79, and as Bill 79 may not be enacted prior to December 17, the sections of the draft 1999 interim levy
by-law, as attached to the Treasurer's report, which set the multi-residential levy and which adjust the levy for phase-ins
and capping cannot come into force until Bill 79 has received Royal Assent. The necessary change to the 1999 interim levy
by-law will be made prior to its introduction at the meeting of December 16 and 17, 1998.
Contact Name:
Christina Hueniken, 392-8429.
19
By-law to Amend Phase-In By-law
(City Council on December 16 and 17, 1998, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)
The Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee recommends the adoption of the following report (December 3,
1998) from the Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer:
Purpose:
To obtain Council's authority for the establishment of a by-law to amend By-law No. 472-98, being a by-law "To Phase-in
1998 Assessment-Related Tax Increases and Decreases for the Residential Property Class".
Recommendation:
It is recommended that authority be granted for the introduction of a bill in Council substantially in the form of the draft
by-law attached as Appendix "A" hereto, providing for technical amendments to By-law No. 472-98.
Background:
At its meeting on July 21 and 23, 1998, City Council adopted By-law No. 472-98 (attached as Appendix "B") which allows
for the phase-in of 1998 assessment-related tax increases and decreases for the residential property class over a five year
period (1998 to 2002 inclusive). The authority to enact and amend a phase-in by-law is limited by legislation to 1998.
In order to allow for the calculation of taxes payable to be made in the years 1999 to 2002 inclusive, clauses 3(1) (a) and
4(1) (a) of By-law-No. 472-98 require amendment. Further amendments are required to clarify that the by-law only applies
to properties classified as residential/farm in 1998 and to correctly identify the name of the property class, as defined by
Ontario Regulation No. 390/98, to which the by-law applies.
The City Solicitor concurs with the above mentioned recommendations.
Contact Names:
Giuliana Carbone, 392-6085;
Paul Wealleans, 397-4208
--------
Appendix A
Authority:
Intended for first presentation to Council:
Adopted by Council:
City of Toronto
Bill No.
By-Law No. [By-law number]
To amend By-Law No. 472-1998, being a by-law "To Phase-in 1998 Assessment-Related Tax Increases and Decreases
for the Residential Property Class"
Whereas subsection 372(1) of the Municipal Act, as amended (the "Act"), provides that the council of a municipality, other
than a lower-tier municipality, may pass a by-law to phase-in a 1998 Assessment-Related Tax Increase or Decrease to be
determined in accordance with subsection 372.1 of the Act; and
Whereas at its special meeting of July 21 and 23, 1998, City Council passed By-law No. 472-1998 being a by-law "To
Phase-in 1998 Assessment-Related Tax Increases and Decreases for the Residential Property Class", pursuant to subsection
372(1) of the Act; and
Whereas paragraph 1 of section 2 of Ontario Regulation No. 282/98, as amended, prescribes the "residential/farm" property
class for the purposes of the Assessment Act; and
Whereas paragraph 1 of subsection 371(5) of the Act provides that the first year in which a 1998 assessment-related tax
increase or decrease is phased-in must be the 1998 taxation year; and
Whereas paragraph 2 of subsection 372(5) of the Act provides that if a phase-in by-law is phasing in a 1998
assessment-related tax increase, the following adjustments are to be made to the taxes for a property for a taxation year: the
1998 assessment-related tax increase shall be subtracted from the taxes, the amounts phased-in in each of the previous
years shall be added to the taxes, and the amount to be phased-in in the current taxation year shall be added to the taxes;
and
Whereas paragraph 3 of subsection 372(5) of the Act provides that if a phase-in by-law is phasing in a 1998
assessment-related tax decrease, the following adjustments are to be made to the taxes for a property for a taxation year: the
1998 assessment-related tax decrease shall be added to the taxes, the amounts phased-in in each of the previous years shall
be subtracted from the taxes, and the amount to be phased-in in the current taxation year shall be subtracted from the taxes;
and
The Council of the City of Toronto Hereby Enacts as follows:
1.By-law 472-1998, being a by-law "To Phase-in 1998 Assessment-Related Tax Increases and Decreases for the
Residential Property Class", is amended by deleting "residential" wherever it appears, and substituting "residential/farm".
2.Section 2 of By-law 472-1998 is amended by adding "for the 1998 taxation year" after "property class" and before
"shall be phased-in".
3.Clause 3(1)(a) of By-law 472-1998 is amended by deleting "1998" and substituting "in that year".
4.Clause 4(1)(a) of By-law 472-1998 is amended by deleting "1998" and substituting "in that year".
5.This by-law shall be deemed to have come into force on the 1st day of January, 1998.
Enacted And Passed this day of, A.D..
Mayor City Clerk
--------
Appendix B
Authority:Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee
Report No. 13(1), July 21 and 23, 1998
Intended for first presentation to Council: July 23, 1998
Adopted by Council: July 23, 1998
City of Toronto
BY-LAW No. 472-1998
To Phase-in 1998 Assessment-Related Tax Increases and Decreases for the Residential Property Class.
Whereas subsection 372(1) of the Municipal Act, as amended (the "Act"), provides that the council of a municipality, other
than a lower-tier municipality, may pass a by-law to phase-in a 1998 Assessment-Related Tax Increase or Decrease to be
determined in accordance with section 372.1 of the Act; and
Whereas paragraph 1 of subsection 372(5) of the Act provides that the first year in which a 1998 Assessment-Related Tax
Increase or Decrease is phased-in must be the 1998 taxation year, and the last year must be the 2005 taxation year or an
earlier taxation year; and
Whereas subsection 372(11) of the Act provides that section 372 applies with respect to payments in lieu of taxes, other
than an amount referred to in subparagraph ii of paragraph 24 of subsection 3(1) of the Assessment Act, as amended, or an
amount received under section 157 or subsection 158(4) of the Act, as though they were taxes; and
The Council of the City of Toronto Hereby Enacts as follows:
1.In this by-law:
"1998 Assessment-Related Tax Increase" means the Assessment-Related Change for each property, where the
Assessment-Related Change is positive, as shown on the Collector's Roll; and
"1998 Assessment-Related Tax Decrease" means the Assessment-Related Change for each property as an absolute number,
where the Assessment-Related Change is negative, as shown on the Collector's Roll.
"Assessment-Related Change" means an amount calculated pursuant to section 6 hereof.
2.A 1998 Assessment-Related Tax Increase or a 1998 Assessment-Related Tax Decrease for all real property in the City
of Toronto which is in the residential property class shall be phased-in in accordance with section 3 or section 4 hereof,
commencing in the taxation year 1998 and ending in the taxation year 2002 or in such earlier year as is required to fully
phase in the 1998 Assessment-Related Tax Increase or the 1998 Assessment-Related Tax Decrease under section 3 or 4
hereof.
3. (1)The taxes payable in each year on any real property in the residential property class for which there is a 1998
Assessment-Related Tax Increase, shall be calculated as follows:
(a)by subtracting the 1998 Assessment-Related Tax Increase from the taxes levied on the property in 1998;
(b)in the 1998 taxation year by adding thereto the amount calculated under subsection (2); and
(c)in each taxation year subsequent to the 1998 taxation year by adding thereto the amount calculated under subsection
(2) for that year plus all amounts calculated under subsection (2) for any previous year or years.
(2)The amount to be phased-in in each year shall be calculated as follows:
(a)if the 1998 Assessment-Related Tax Increase is $300.00 or less, the amount for the 1998 taxation year shall be the
1998 Assessment-Related Tax Increase, and the amount for all future years shall be $0.00;
(b)if the 1998 Assessment-Related Tax Increase is more than $300.00 but less than or equal to $1500.00, the amount for
the 1998 taxation year and each subsequent year shall be $300.00, except in a subsequent taxation year where the
difference between the 1998 Assessment-Related Tax Increase and all amounts phased-in in previous years is less than
$300.00, the amount shall be that difference; and
(c)if the 1998 Assessment-Related Tax Increase is greater than $1500.00, the amount in each year shall be one-fifth of
the 1998 Assessment-Related Tax Increase.
4.(1)The taxes payable in each year on any real property in the residential property class for which there is a 1998
Assessment-Related Tax Decrease, shall be calculated as follows:
(a)by adding the 1998 Assessment-Related Tax Decrease to the taxes levied on the property in 1998;
(b)in the 1998 taxation year by subtracting therefrom the amount calculated under subsection (2); and
(c)in each taxation year subsequent to the 1998 taxation year, by subtracting therefrom the amount calculated under
subsection (2) for that year plus all amounts calculated under subsection (2) for any previous year or years.
(2)The amount to be phased in each year shall be calculated as follows:
(a)if the 1998 Assessment-Related Tax Decrease is $200.00 or less, the amount for the 1998 taxation year shall be the
1998 Assessment-Related Tax Decrease, and the amount for all future years shall be $0.00;
(b)if the 1998 Assessment-Related Tax Decrease is more than $200.00 but less than or equal to $1000.00, the amount for
the 1998 taxation year and each subsequent year shall be $200.00, except in a subsequent taxation year where the
difference between the 1998 Assessment-Related Tax Decrease and all amounts phased-in in previous years is less than
$200.00, the amount shall be that difference; and
(c)if the 1998 Assessment-Related Tax Decrease is greater than $1000.00, the amount in each year shall be one-fifth of
the Decrease Amount.
5.Each of the amounts in Column I shall be calculated, in accordance with the Schedule in Column II for all properties in
the residential property class to which the conditions in Column III apply. If the conditions in Column III do not apply to
the property, then the amount in Column I shall not be calculated.
Column IColumn IIColumn III
(Amount)(Schedules)(Conditions)
General Upper-tier AmountSchedule "A"if, in 1997, taxes were levied on the property to raise a general upper-tier
levy
General Local AmountSchedule "B"if, in 1997, taxes were levied on the property to raise a general local levy
School AmountSchedule "C"if, in 1997, taxes were levied on the property for school purposes
Special Municipal AmountSchedule "D"if, in 1997, taxes were levied on the property to raise a special levy
6.An Assessment-Related Change shall be calculated for all real property in the City of Toronto which is in the
residential property class and such amount shall be the sum of each of the general upper-tier amount, the general local
amount, the school amount and the special municipal amount for that property, if such amount applies to the property.
7.Despite sections 3 or 4, if there has been a change in use or character of any real property in the residential property
class or in its classification under the Assessment Act that makes a phase-in or the continuation of a phase-in in respect of
such property inappropriate Council may by by-law exclude such property from the application of the phase-in.
8.(1)If a new improvement to any real property in the residential property class is reflected in the assessment used to
determine the 1998 taxes but was not reflected in the assessment used to determine the 1997 taxes, the definition of "1998
assessment (property)" in Schedules A through D shall be adjusted to what it would be if the improvement was not
reflected in the assessment for 1998.
(2)If an improvement to any real property in the residential property class was reflected in the assessment used to
determine the 1997 taxes and because of a change related to the improvements, the improvement is not reflected in the
assessment used to determine the 1998 taxes, the definition of "1998 assessment (property)" in Schedules A through D
shall be adjusted to what it would be if the improvement was reflected in the assessment for 1998.
9.The provisions of this by-law apply with respect to payments in lieu of taxes other than an amount referred to in
subparagraph ii of paragraph 24 of subsection 3(1) of the Assessment Act, as amended, or an amount received under section
157 or subsection 158(4) of the Act as though they were taxes, in accordance with O. Reg. 406/98.
Enacted And Passed this 23rd day of July, A.D.1998.
MEL LASTMAN,NOVINA WONG,
MayorCity Clerk
(Corporate Seal)
Schedule "A"
General Upper-Tier Amount
1.The general upper-tier amount for each property which in 1997 had taxes levied on it to raise a general upper-tier levy
shall be determined in accordance with the following:
1997 upper-tier taxes (class)
1998 upper-tier assessmentX1998 assessment_1997 upper-tier
(class)(property)taxes (property)
Where,
"1997 upper-tier taxes (class)" means an amount determined as follows:
1.Identify all the properties in the municipality that, for 1998, are classified in the same property class as the property for
which the general upper-tier amount is being determined;
2.The 1997 upper-tier taxes (class) is the total of the taxes on the properties identified in paragraph 1, including business
taxes imposed on persons carrying on business on such properties, levied for the purposes of the general upper-tier levy for
1997;
"1998 upper-tier assessment (class)" means the total assessment for 1998 of the properties identified in paragraph 1 of the
definition of "1997 upper-tier taxes (class)" that are properties upon which the general upper-tier levy was levied in 1997;
"1998 assessment (property)" means the assessment of the property for 1998;
"1997 upper-tier taxes (property)" means the taxes on the property, including business taxes imposed on persons carrying
on a business on the property, levied in 1997 for the purposes of the general upper-tier levy.
Schedule "B"
General Local Amount
1.The general local amount for each property which in 1997 had taxes levied on it to raise a general local municipality
levy shall be determined in accordance with the following:
1997 local taxes (class)
1998 local assessmentX1998 assessment_1997 local
(class)(property)taxes (property)
Where,
"1997 local taxes (class)" means an amount determined as follows:
1.Identify all the properties in the same local municipality as the property for which the general local amount is being
determined that, for 1998, are classified in the same property class as the property for which the general local amount is
being determined.
2.The 1997 local taxes (class) is the total of the taxes on the properties identified in paragraph 1, including business taxes
imposed on persons carrying on businesses on such properties, levied for the purposes of the general local municipality
levy for 1997;
"1998 local assessment (class)" means the total assessment for 1998 of the properties identified in paragraph 1 of the
definition of "1997 local taxes (class)" that are properties upon which the general local municipality levy was levied in
1997;
"1998 assessment (property)" means the assessment of the property for 1998;
"1997 local taxes (property)" means the taxes on the property, including business taxes imposed on persons carrying on a
business on a business on the property, levied in 1997 for the purposes of the general local municipality levy.
Schedule "C"
School Amount
1.The school amount for each property which in 1997 had taxes levied on the property for school purposes shall be
determined in accordance with the following:
1997 school taxes (class)
1998 school assessmentX1998 assessment_1997 school
(class)(property)taxes (property)
Where,
"1997 school taxes (class)" means an amount determined as follows:
1.Identify all the properties in the municipality that, for 1998, are classified in the same property class as the property for
which the school amount is being determined.
2.The 1997 school taxes (class) is the total of the taxes on the properties identified in paragraph 1, including business
taxes imposed on persons carrying on businesses on such properties, levied in 1997 for school purposes;
"1998 school assessment (class)" means the total assessment for 1998 of the properties identified in paragraph 1 of the
definition of "1997 school taxes (class)";
"1998 assessment (property)" means the assessment of the property for 1998;
"1997 school taxes (property)" means the taxes on the property, including business taxes imposed on persons carrying on a
business on the property, levied in 1997 for school purposes.
Schedule "D"
Special Municipal Amount
1.The special municipal amount for each property which in 1997 had taxes levied on the property to raise a special levy
shall be determined in accordance with the following:
1997 special taxes (class)
1998 special assessmentX1998 assessment_1997 special
(class)(property)taxes (property)
Where,
"1997 special taxes (class)" means an amount determined as follows:
1.Identify all the properties that, for 1998, are classified in the same property class as the property for which the special
municipal amount is being determined and that are in the local municipality that the property for which the special
municipal amount is being determined is in.
2.Identify the properties identified in paragraph 1 upon which the special levy was levied in 1997.
3.The 1997 special taxes (class) is the total of the taxes on the properties identified in paragraph 2, including business
taxes imposed on persons carrying on businesses on such properties, levied for the purposes of the special levy for 1997;
"1998 special assessment (class)" means the total assessment for 1998 of the properties identified in paragraph 2 of the
definition of "1997 special taxes (class)";
"1998 assessment (property)" means the assessment of the property for 1998;
"1997 special taxes (property)" means the taxes on the property, including business taxes imposed on persons carrying on a
business on the property, levied in 1997 for the purposes of the special levy.
20
Write-Off of Uncollectible Business Taxes and Water
Charges from the Collectors Roll
(City Council on December 16 and 17, 1998, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)
The Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee recommends the adoption of the following report (December 1,
1998) from the Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer:
Purpose:
This report addresses the uncollectible business taxes still on the Tax Collector's Roll. These business taxes can be struck
from the Tax Collector's Roll under the provisions of the Section 441 of the Municipal Act, R.S.O. 1990. The Section 441
process differs from other tax related adjustments because only Council can approve the write-offs being removed from the
Roll and does not include cancellation of taxes due to assessment appeals (i.e. the Section 40 process).
Financial Implications:
The amount of business taxes that require removal from the Tax Collector's role is $7,375,419.29 plus $19,390.93
attributable to business improvement areas (BIA). Approximately $3,097,000.00 of this amount is the City's share.
Provision for the City's share has been made in the 1998 budget. The balance of approximately $4,278,500.00 is the School
Board's share and will be recovered. This adjustment brings the total write-off for 1998 to $19,212,684.20.
The BIA total amount of $19,390.93 includes $19,330.59 and $60.34 for BIA's for the former City of Toronto and
Scarborough, respectively. This is offset by an allowance amount set aside for this purpose as part of the BIA levy and does
not have an impact to the city. A breakdown of the recommended strike-off is in Schedule 'A' is attached. In addition, the
amount of $190,714.13 in water charges requires write-off. A breakdown of the relevant District's area distribution is
outlined in Schedule 'B' attached.
The comparable 1997 tax write-off was $19,395,009.80. The comparable 1997 water write-off was $249,140.78
Recommendations:
It is recommended that:
(1)Council resolve to cancel the uncollectible business taxes of $ 7,375,419.29 and strike them from the Tax Collector's
Roll under the provisions of Section 441 of the Municipal Act,
(2)the amount attributable to uncollectible taxes from Business Improvement Areas (BIA) in the amount of $19,330.59
and $60.34 be written off as a receivable under Section 441; and
(3)the amount attributable to uncollectible water charges in the amount of $190,714.13 be written off as a receivable
under Section 441.
Background:
All accounts have gone through our collection process. This process includes some or all Overdue Statements, Final
Demand Letters, Bailiff Warrants and investigations, Collection Agency action and Legal action. In certain cases, payment
arrangements were entered into between the taxpayers and the City. Unfortunately, due to Bankruptcies and business
closures, we were unable to collect all of the total outstanding amounts. These business taxes are uncollectible in
accordance with Section 441 of the Municipal Act.
Conclusion:
The list of uncollectible business taxes has been reviewed and edited by the Tax Collector for each area district. All
appropriate collection action has been performed and the Treasurer has ascertained the taxes to be uncollectible. It is
recommended that Council cancel the uncollectible business taxes and strike them off from the Tax Collector's Roll.
Contact Names:
Margo L. Brunning, Manager, Collections/Receivables, Payments and Regional Customer Service,
Phone: 395-6789, Fax: 395-6703, e-mail: mbrunnin@city.toronto.on.ca;
G. Carbone, Director, Revenue Services Division, Phone: 392-8065, Fax: 397-5236, e-mail: gcarbone@city.toronto.on.ca
(Councillor Shiner, at the meeting of City Council on December 16 and 17, 1998, declared his interest in the foregoing
Clause, in that his family has an interest in a business that may owe taxes.)
21
Payment in Lieu of Taxes for Provincial and
Federal Buildings
(City Council on December 16 and 17, 1998, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)
The Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee recommends the adoption of the recommendations of the
Assessment and Tax Policy Task Force contained in the following communication (December 2, 1998) from the City
Clerk:
Recommendation:
The Assessment and Tax Policy Task Force recommends that the report (November 13, 1998) from the Chief Financial
Officer and Treasurer be amended by deleting the word "legislation" and inserting the word "regulation" in
Recommendation No. (1), and that the report, as amended, be adopted.
Background:
The Assessment and Tax Policy Task Force on November 20, 1998, had before it a report (November 13, 1998) from the
Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer respecting Utilisation Of Assessment Times Rate As An Alternative To The Method
Prescribed In Section 157 of the Municipal Act For Calculation Of Payments In Lieu Of Taxes, and recommending that:
"(1)Council request the Provincial Government to approve legislation to increase the "head and bed" rate allowed in
Section 157 of the Municipal Act from $75.00 to $208.50;
(2)the Association of Municipalities of Ontario (AMO) be requested to pursue recommendation 1 with the Province of
Ontario; and
(3)all GTA municipalities be requested to endorse recommendation 1."
The Assessment and Tax Policy Task Force on November 20, 1998, also had before it the following
communications/reports:
(a)(September 30, 1998) from Councillor Saundercook requesting the Task Force to review the matter of payment in lieu
of taxes for provincial and federal buildings; and
(b)(October 9, 1998) from the City Clerk forwarding Council's action of October 1 and 2, 1998.
The Task Force requested the Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer to compile a comprehensive list of the Federal and
Provincial properties that would be affected in the City of Toronto and report back to the Task Force.
The Task Force's recommendation is noted above.
--------
(Report dated November 13, 1998, addressed
to the Assessment and Tax Policy Task Force from
the Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer)
Purpose:
To provide information regarding the 1997 levy for public hospitals, universities and college and correctional institutions
in the City of Toronto.
Financial Implications:
If a standard assessment times residential tax rate were calculated, City PIL's would increase by $17.6 million. If the
existing head & bed rate was increased to $208.50, the City's PIL's would increase by $17.6 million.
Recommendations:
It is recommended that:
(1)Council request the Provincial government to approve legislation to increase the "head and bed" rate allowed in
Section 157 of the Municipal Act from $75.00 to $208.50;
(2)That the Association of Municipalities of Ontario (AMO) be requested to pursue recommendation 1 with the Province
of Ontario; and
(3)That all GTA municipalities be requested to endorse Recommendation No. (1).
Discussion:
Under the Assessment Act, universities, colleges of applied arts and technology, correctional institution, public hospitals,
mental health facilities, and Provincial education institutions are exempt from paying property tax. However, Section 157
of the Municipal Act, allows municipalities to annually levy up to a maximum of $75.00 to each provincially rated hospital
bed (public hospitals); $75.00 for each full time student (universities & colleges); and $75.00 for each resident place
(correctional institutions). The capacity figures for these institutions which are used by the municipalities for this levy, are
determined by the Province and forwarded to municipalities by the Ministry of Municipal Affairs. The grants are paid by
the Provincial Government. The rates are specified in the Municipal Act, and were most recently changed from $50.00 to
$75.00 in 1987.
Each year, the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing provides to the City updated capacity data for institutions
designated under Section 157 of the Municipal Act. In 1998, the amount of tax and PIL generated for the City by this
calculation is $9.8 million. The City normally receives payment for all of the amounts levied under Section 157.
If the City were able to use a standard assessment times tax rate calculation, the amount of tax generated would be
substantially different. If the exempt assessment were considered residential, and were multiplied by the City's portion of
the tax rate, the amount generated for 1998 would have been $27.4 million. Appendix 1 compares the amount received as a
payment in-lieu of taxes to what the actual taxes on the property could be using the current value assessment times the
city's portion of the residential tax rate. In order to generate an equivalent amount of tax and PIL under the "heads & beds"
formula, the current rate of $75.00 would have to be increased to $208.50.
Changing the "head and bed" formula to an assessment-based calculation would require legislation amendments to both the
Assessment Act and Municipal Act. A change to the "head bed" rate allowed under Section 157 of the Municipal Act
requires an amendment to the Municipal Act.
Conclusion:
The amount of tax and PIL generated for the City under the current provisions of Section 157 of the Municipal Act is only
36 percent of the amount the City would levy if a standard "assessment" times "tax rate" calculation were used. If the
exempt assessment were considered residential, and were multiplied by the City's portion of the tax rate, the amount
generated for 1998 would have been $27.4 million (compared to the $9.8 million generated using the $75.00 "head and
bed" rate). In order to generate an equivalent amount of tax and PIL under the "heads & beds" formula, it is recommended
the Provincial government be requested to increase the current "head and bed" rate of $75.00 to $208.50.
Contact Name:
Bob Ripley, Manager, Accounting, Financial Billings & Meter Services, (416) 395-6730; Fax (416) 395-6703, Internet
Email Address:bripley@city.toronto.on.ca.
The Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee also had before it the following communications/reports which were
forwarded to all Members of Council with the agenda of the Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee for its meeting on
December 15, 1998, and copies thereof are on file in the office of the City Clerk:
-(September 30, 1998) from Councillor Saundercook requesting the Task Force to review the matter of payment in lieu
of taxes for provincial and federal buildings; and
-(October 9, 1998) from the City Clerk forwarding Council's action of October 1 and 2, 1998.
22
1999 Schedule of Meetings
(City Council on December 16 and 17, 1998, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)
The Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee recommends that the status quo-four week meeting cycle be
approved to the end of July 1999, or until the Council-Committee governance structure has been determined by
Council, whichever is the sooner.
The Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee submits the following communication (December 8, 1998) from the
City Clerk:
City Council, at its meeting held on November 25, 26 and 27, 1998, had before it Clause No. 3 of Report No. 8 of The
Striking Committee, headed "1999 Schedule of Meetings".
Council amended the aforementioned Clause by striking out the recommendations of the Striking Committee and inserting
in lieu thereof the following:
"It is recommended that, in light of the fact that the issue of the Council-Committee governance structure has not yet been
resolved, as an interim measure it is recommended that Recommendations Nos. (1), (2) and (6) embodied in the report
dated November 12, 1998, from the City Clerk be adopted, subject to amending Recommendation No. (1) to provide that
City Council approve the status quo four-week meeting cycle for the first four months of 1999, as outlined in the attached
Appendix 'I', providing for City Council meetings on Tuesday, Wednesday and Thursday, so that such recommendations
shall now read as follows:
'It is recommended that:
(1)City Council approve the status quo four-week meeting cycle for the first four months of 1999, as outlined in the
attached Appendix "I", providing for City Council meetings on Tuesday, Wednesday and Thursday;
(2)a copy of the 1999 Schedule of Meetings for the first four months of 1999 be circulated to the City's agencies, boards,
commissions, Council-appointed task forces, special committees and sub-committees with a request that wherever
possible, they avoid scheduling meetings which conflict with City Council meetings and the Standing Committees to which
they report; and
(6)the appropriate City Officials be authorized and directed to take the necessary action to give effect thereto.' "
In addition, Council referred the balance of the 1999 Schedule of Meetings to the next meeting of the Strategic Policies and
Priorities Committee to be held on December 15, 1998, for consideration.
--------
(Clause No. 3 of Report No. 8 of the Striking Committee,
headed "1999 Schedule of Meetings", as adopted by
Council of the City of Toronto at its meeting held
on November 25, 26, and 27, 1998)
(City Council on November 25, 26 and 27, 1998, amended this Clause by:
(1)striking out the recommendations of the Striking Committee and inserting in lieu thereof the following:
"It is recommended that, in light of the fact that the issue of the Council-Committee governance structure has not yet been
resolved, as an interim measure it is recommended that Recommendations Nos. (1), (2) and (6) embodied in the report
dated November 12, 1998, from the City Clerk be adopted, subject to amending Recommendation No. (1) to provide that
City Council approve the status quo four-week meeting cycle for the first four months of 1999, as outlined in the attached
Appendix 'I', providing for City Council meetings on Tuesday, Wednesday and Thursday, so that such recommendations
shall now read as follows:
'It is recommended that:
(1)City Council approve the status quo four-week meeting cycle for the first four months of 1999, as outlined in the
attached Appendix "I", providing for City Council meetings on Tuesday, Wednesday and Thursday;
(2)a copy of the 1999 Schedule of Meetings for the first four months of 1999 be circulated to the City's agencies, boards,
commissions, Council-appointed task forces, special committees and sub-committees with a request that wherever
possible, they avoid scheduling meetings which conflict with City Council meetings and the Standing Committees to which
they report; and
(6)the appropriate City Officials be authorized and directed to take the necessary action to give effect thereto.' "; and
(2)adding thereto the following:
"It is further recommended that the balance of the 1999 Schedule of Meetings be referred to the next meeting of the
Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee to be held on December 15, 1998, for consideration.")
The Striking Committee recommends:
(I)the adoption of the report (November 12, 1998) from the City Clerk, subject to amending Appendices "F" and
"H" referred to in Recommendation No. (1) to read as shown in the attached revised Appendices "F" and "H", and
that the Committees shown as shaded shall report to the Council meeting shown shaded, and the Committees shown
as unshaded shall report to the Council meeting shown unshaded;
(ii)that any matter contained in a Report of a Committee or Community Council, which is deferred for further
consideration by City Council, shall:
(a)be deferred to the same Council meeting designated in the cycle to consider such matters, i.e. matters deferred
at a Council meeting shown as shaded, shall be considered at the next Council meeting shown as shaded, and
matters deferred at a Council meeting shown as unshaded, shall be considered at the next Council meeting shown
as unshaded; and
(b)be listed as the first item of business on the appropriate Council agenda;
(iii)that leave be granted to introduce the necessary bill in Council to amend the Council Procedural By-law to
give effect thereto; and
(iv)that the City Clerk be requested to submit a report to the Striking Committee in March 1999 on the status of
how the two cycles are operating, and how the workload is balanced between these two cycles.
The Striking Committee submits the following report (November 12, 1998) from the City Clerk:
Purpose:
To recommend a schedule of meetings for Council, its Standing Committees and Community Councils, in 1999.
Funding Sources, Financial Implications and Impact Statement:
There are no funding implications.
Recommendations:
It is recommended that:
(1)option 4(a) (Appendix "F"), based on a two and three-week meeting cycle for City Council, be approved, and that the
1999 schedule of meetings submitted as Appendix "H" to this report be adopted;
(2)a copy of the 1999 Schedule of Meetings be circulated to the City's agencies, boards, commissions, Council-appointed
task forces, special committees and sub-committees with a request that wherever possible, they avoid scheduling meetings
which conflict with City Council meetings and the Standing Committees to which they report;
(3)subject to City Council adopting staff recommendation (1), the City Clerk and Solicitor be requested to report on
possible amendments to the Procedural By-law to implement the recommended 1999 meeting schedule, and in particular,
address deferrals of Council business from one meeting to another and ways to control the potential for "fast tracking"
Committee business as a major exception to the legislative process;
(4)in order to give Members and the public sufficient time to review agenda items in advance of meetings, the current
practice of issuing supplemental agendas or "walk-in" items be discontinued, and that any late item be accepted only if it
pertains to an item that is already listed on the main agenda or if it is a matter of emergency health or safety, or legal
deadline, or if it is a matter referred from one committee to another committee within the meeting cycle, and in the event of
a late item, it must be received by the City Clerk in sufficient time for distribution to Members no later than the day before
a meeting;
(5)subject to City Council's decision on a revised Council-Committee governance structure, the City Clerk report back,
through the Striking Committee, on any amendments to the 1999 Council meeting schedule to accommodate the revised
Council-Committee governance structure; and
(6)the appropriate City Officials be authorized and directed to take the necessary action to give effect thereto.
Council Reference/Background/History:
City Council must approve a schedule of meetings to permit the orderly consideration of business in 1999. This report
discusses the concerns with the current meeting schedule, presents options for the 1999 meeting schedule, and recommends
a 1999 schedule.
On September 24, 1998, the Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee referred the following motion by Councillor
Nunziata to the City Clerk:
"Unless otherwise decided by Council, regular meetings of the Council shall begin at 9:30 a.m. on every fourth Tuesday,
unless such a day shall be a public or civic holiday, in which case the Council shall meet at 9:30 a.m. on the Wednesday of
the same week".
The City Clerk considered this motion in preparing the 1999 meeting schedule.
Comments and/or Discussion and/or Justification:
The Current Meeting Schedule:
The current schedule was established early in 1998 based on City Council's adopted governance structure. In following the
schedule during the past 10 months, a number of issues have arisen which should be considered in developing the 1999
meeting schedule.
(a)First, the monthly meetings of City Council are seen to be too long. The three-day and two-evening City Council
meeting is tiring for the Members, staff and the public following particular issues;
(b)Second, the decision-making process is too long. It sometimes takes months for an issue to be identified, addressed in
a staff report, considered by a standing committee, and decided upon by City Council;
(c)Third, the layered committee structure which has evolved, with matters being referred through the Budget Committee
and Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee to Council, has produced a bottleneck in the decision-making process.
Also, the tendency for matters to be referred from one committee to another means there is too much lateral movement of
issues between committees before matters get to City Council for a decision. The time required to accommodate this
layered structure has undermined the effectiveness of the entire schedule. The purpose of each committee, and its reporting
responsibilities, must be clearly defined; and
(d)Fourth, the current schedule makes it extremely difficult for Secretariat staff to follow the Procedural By-law
requirements to prepare and distribute agenda materials for committees within a practical time frame in advance of a
meeting. The current meeting schedule does not allow for such agenda coordination (e.g., the close timing between
standing committee and Budget Committee and Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee meetings). It seems as though
there are not enough business days in a month to efficiently accommodate the current City Council-Committee structure
and facilitate effective decision-making. The pressure placed on the Secretariat Unit to accommodate the current schedule
is unsustainable.
Assumptions and Principles:
In designing a schedule of meetings, a number of key assumptions and considerations are necessary.
Committee Assumptions:
(a)the Council meeting schedule is established for City Council, Community Councils, and those Standing Committees
which are established through the Procedural By-law and need to meet on a regular basis;
(b)the Budget Committee is included in the 1999 schedule as it has already initiated the 1999 budget process and it will
need to meet on a regular basis during the first several months of the year to coordinate the operating and capital budgets;
(c)the Audit, Striking and Nominating Committees meet on a less regular basis and thus, are not included in this
schedule;
(d)the Board of Health is a special purpose body and not a Standing Committee of Council and is not included in this
schedule, although it reports directly to City Council; and
(e)special purpose bodies of the City and discretionary committees of City Council, including special committees,
sub-committees and task forces, are not included in the City Council meeting schedule and are expected to make their own
meeting arrangements in consideration of the adopted Council meeting schedule.
Meeting Considerations:
(a)the need for frequent enough City Council meetings to permit decision-making that is not over duly delayed;
(b)the need for Members to be able to attend other Standing Committee meetings which, therefore, generally should not
be scheduled concurrently, or if they are, should ensure adequate time for other Councillors to attend a portion of the
meeting;
(c)the Community Councils can meet concurrently;
(d)the need to ensure adequate time to permit report preparation by City staff, committee agenda and report management
by the Secretariat staff, and review by Members, staff and the public;
(e)the provision of time for Members to tend to constituency matters and attend other meetings;
(f)the need to accommodate a summer break;
(g)the recognition of days and times of religious significance; and
(h)the general principle of not scheduling meetings on a Friday to allow for the scheduling of agency, board and
commission meetings, unless necessary as a result of statutory holidays and religious days.
Principles are required to guide the development of options and assist the selection of a preferred schedule. The following
principles are to be used for the 1999 meeting schedule.
(a)The schedule should facilitate a timely procedural process for effective decision-making by City Council;
(b)The schedule should be easy to understand and follow by Members, the public and staff;
(c)The schedule should provide enough flexibility and free time to allow Members to address their other responsibilities
(e.g., task forces, special purpose bodies, constituency work); and
(d)The schedule must be achievable by Clerk's Secretariat staff given current and projected resources.
It is recognized that the Chief Administrative Officer is currently reviewing the Council-Committee structure and will be
making recommendations for changes to the structure, to be implemented before or at the halfway point of the current
Council term (June 1999), which may impact the meeting schedule. The City Clerk is aware that any governance structure
changes may necessitate amendments to the Council schedule. It is recommended that, subject to Council adopting a
revised governance structure, the City Clerk bring forward a further report outlining any necessary amendments to the 1999
meeting schedule.
Meeting Schedule Options:
Various meeting cycle options were reviewed, including a four-week, three-week, two-week, and a two- and three-week
Council meeting cycle. Appendices "A" through "G" show typical two month schedules for these options.
(a)Four-Week Council Meeting Cycle:
This option generally replicates the 1998 Council schedule. Community Councils, Standing Committees and City Council
would all continue to meet on monthly basis. This is shown as option 1(a) in Appendix "A". It allows for the continuation
of the current hierarchical practice of certain financial matters being routed from a Standing Committee to the Budget
Committee and through the Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee to Council, although the tight time lines would
continue to result in delays in agenda and report production and distribution. This option would require the Budget
Committee to accept walk-in items from Standing Committees since there is not enough time in the schedule to allow for
proper agenda management. The Budget Committee is scheduled one week prior to the Strategic Policies and Priorities
Committee meeting to allow more time for reports to be transmitted to it. It is assumed that the Community Councils will
not deal with financial matters, and therefore, do not need to report through the Budget Committee. City Council would
continue to meet for up to three days per session starting on a Tuesday. The only meetings on Fridays would be the
Economic Development Committee. This option would lead to 11 City Council meetings scheduled for 1999. Standing
Committee meeting days would also total 11 days in the year.
A variation on this option would schedule concurrent Standing Committee meetings to ensure Friday meetings are not
scheduled and provide another free day for other meetings and business. This is shown as option 1(b) in Appendix "B".
The Standing Committee-Budget Committee- Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee bottleneck would still exist but
there would be a few more free days between committee meetings.
This option is consistent with the current schedule, which is now familiar to Members, staff and the public. The necessary
conditions for this schedule to be successful would include a flatter committee structure (i.e., a reduced hierarchy of
committees) and a more controlled agenda management process with no more supplemental committee agendas and
"walk-in" reports to committee permitted only as an exception. It is recommended that the current practice of issuing
supplemental agendas or "walk-in" items be discontinued. Late items should only be accepted only if it pertains to an item
that is already listed on the main agenda or if it is a matter of emergency health or safety, or legal deadline, or it is a matter
referred from one committee to another committee within a meeting cycle. Any late items should be received by the City
Clerk in sufficient time for distribution to Members no later than the day before a meeting;
(b)Three-Week Council Meeting Cycle:
In this option City Council, Standing Committees and Community Councils would meet every three weeks. This is shown
as option 2 in Appendix "C". This option would mean constant "walk-in" reports from Standing Committees to Budget
Committee and Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee. This option would also put extraordinary pressure on the
Secretariat Unit to accommodate agenda preparation, production, printing and distribution time lines. The re-organized
Secretariat Unit could not meet the agenda time lines suggested by this option. This option was not considered in any detail
by staff in selecting a recommended meeting schedule.
Staff investigated a variation of this option where half the committees would report to one Council meeting within three
weeks and the other half of committees would report to the next Council meeting in another three weeks (a six-week
cycle), but it was concluded that the time between committee meetings (six weeks) would undermine the ability of the City
to do business effectively. Staff also investigated a three-week Council meeting cycle with monthly Standing Committees
and Community Councils meetings, but the schedule would not be synchronized and would eventually lead to unacceptable
delays between a Committee meeting and a Council meeting.
(c)Two-Week Council Meeting Cycle:
In this option City Council would meet every two weeks to better distribute its total workload, whereas the Standing
Committees and Community Councils would continue to meet once per month. This is shown as option 3(a) in Appendix
"D". City Council would meet generally every second and fourth week of the month. One group of Committees (shown
shaded in Appendix "D") would report to one Council meeting (also shown shaded in Appendix "D"). Similarly, the other
group of Committee meetings would report to the second Council meeting. It is assumed that with a division of workload
between the Council meetings every two weeks, fewer Council days per session would be required. Assuming the need for
two Council days per session, there would be a total of four Council days per month. No Committee or Council meetings
would be scheduled for Fridays.
This option would result in 20 City Council meetings per year (the equivalent of 10 meetings when compared to the
4-week schedule option), and more total hours of Council in session (25 percent more in-Council time than the monthly
schedule). Standing Committee meeting days would be reduced to 10 days per year compared to 11 days for the monthly
schedule.
A variation on this option would schedule concurrent Standing Committee meetings to provide more free days for other
meetings and business. This is shown as option 3(b) in Appendix "E".
The implications from this option, including fewer free days, a more complex schedule, the inability to address the
procedural concerns around the hierarchical committee structure, and greater pressures on Secretariat staff, all suggest this
may not be a viable option. While, the distribution of Committee work across two Council meetings could clear up the size
of Council's agenda for any one meeting, the extra Council meeting days would further reduce the number of days left over
to accommodate special purpose body, task force or constituency meetings. The complexity around which Committees
would report to specified Council meetings could lead to confusion and could open up the legislative process to abuse by
matters being "fast-tracked" to Council by a Committee before its proper turn. The current practice of having matters
referred from a Standing Committee to Budget Committee to Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee (with each
Committee meeting every four weeks) could mean that some financial matters may take three to five weeks from the time a
Standing Committee deals with it to Council's final decision.
For a two-week Council meeting cycle to be successful, a number of conditions are necessary. First, a flatter committee
structure is needed where all committees report directly to Council on a normal basis and referrals to other committees are
on an exceptional basis. Second, no fast tracking of a Committee recommendation to Council before its regular turn would
be needed, and only permitted in extraordinary cases. Third, a more controlled agenda management process is required
with the no more supplemental committee agendas and "walk-in" reports to committee permitted only for emergency health
or safety reasons or legal deadlines.
(e)Two and Three-Week Council Meeting Cycle:
This option is based on the two-week Council meeting schedule discussed above, but also has a three-week cycle built-in
to accommodate the procedural relationship which has evolved between Standing Committees, the Budget Committee, and
the Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee. It allows reasonable time lines to accommodate the work flow between
these different committees. A typical schedule is shown as option 4(a) in Appendix "F". In this option, the Standing
Committees (except for the Corporate Services Committee) meet every five weeks but report to Council about two weeks
after their meetings. The Community Councils, Corporate Service Committee, Budget Committee and Strategic Policies
and Priorities Committee form a second group of committees that meet every five weeks and report to Council about three
weeks after their meetings. These groupings allow for city-wide operational and policy matters to be addressed at one
Council meeting and local, corporate, and major financial matters to be addressed at the other Council meeting in the cycle.
Grouping the committees any other way such that half the Community Councils meet with one group and half meet with
the other would require more committee days and further confuse the meeting schedule. No committee or Council meetings
are scheduled for Fridays.
This option would result in 18 City Council meetings per year (the equivalent of 9 meetings when compared to the monthly
schedule option), and more total hours of Council in session (13 percent more in-Council time than the monthly schedule).
Standing Committee meeting days would be reduced to 9 days per year compared to 11 for the monthly schedule.
This option is designed to accommodate the procedural practice of having financial matters processed through Standing
Committee, Budget Committee and the Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee. Like the two-week option, however,
this option still means the possibility of a five week time line between when a Standing Committee deals with a matter
requiring Budget Committee approval and when City Council makes a decision on the matter. This option does provide
more free days for other meetings and business than the two-week schedule option. It also is more flexible to accommodate
statutory holidays and religious days. This option still places pressure on Secretariat staff to manage the legislative process
and produce reports, agendas and minutes. Like all the other options, a more controlled agenda management process is
necessary with this option with no more supplemental committee agendas, and "walk-in" reports permitted on an
exceptional basis only.
A variation of this option, with concurrent Standing Committee meetings, is shown as option 4(b) in Appendix "G".
Having concurrent meetings would free more time for other business and special purpose body and task force meetings.
A Recommended 1999 Meeting Schedule:
In considering the principles outlined earlier in this report, option 4(a), based on the two-week and three-week schedule
and shown in Appendix "F", best satisfies all the principles. This option accommodates the current procedural process
which has evolved to allow for a unique process to be followed for financial matters. The different groupings of public
service-oriented Standing Committees reporting to one Council meeting and Corporate, financial and community issues
reporting to another Council meeting is understandable. This schedule allows more free days for other City business.
Consideration of concurrent committee meetings should be delayed until a revised committee system is in place so the full
benefit of concurrent meetings can be properly assessed.
This option also provides enough flexibility to accommodate the revised Council-Committee governance structure to be
adopted by City Council. This schedule can be adapted to accommodate a modified two-week schedule or a four-week
schedule to accommodate the new Committee structure.
Appendix "H" to this report sets out the full 1999 Council meeting schedule based on the two- and three-week Council
meeting cycle. This schedule accommodates a Council spring break in March and a summer recess. It also accounts for the
annual meetings of the Federation of Canadian Municipalities and the Association of Municipalities of Ontario where
representatives from the City have traditionally played a major role. It is recommended that the 1999 Council meeting
schedule as shown in Appendix "H" be adopted by City Council. If Council prefers to keep the status quo meeting schedule
until the governance structure is changed, then it is recommended that option 1(a), the modified status quo monthly
schedule (Appendix "A"), should be adopted by City Council until a decision is made on a revised governance structure.
Appendix "I" shows the full 1999 schedule for this option. Subject to Council adopting a revised governance structure, the
City Clerk will report back on any amendments to the 1999 schedule to accommodate the new Council-Committee
structure.
Implementing the recommended 1999 schedule will necessitate amendments to the Procedural By-law to address a means
for dealing with matters deferred from one Council meeting to another (i.e., are deferred items placed on the agenda of the
next scheduled Council meeting for that group of matters or can they be dealt with at the next successive Council meeting
in two or three weeks?). Also, controls will need to be put in place to prevent Committee matters from being "fast tracked"
to the next immediate Council meeting instead of the proper Council meeting for which it is scheduled. Exceptions to "fast
tracking" will need to be identified for emergency health and safety matters and legal deadlines. It is recommended that the
City Clerk and Solicitor prepare a report recommending amendments to the Procedural By-law to ensure the 1999 meeting
schedule can be implemented in a practical manner.
Clerk's staff are continuing the legislative process review and anticipate presenting an interim report to Council before the
end of the year which will suggest other process measures to improve the legislative process and help achieve the
recommended 1999 meeting schedule.
The 1999 Council meeting schedule, as adopted by City Council, will be posted to the City Internet site. The City Clerk's
Division will develop a comprehensive reference guide on the Internet for the meetings of Council, Standing Committees,
Community Councils, Special Committees, sub-committees, agencies, boards and commissions, and task forces.
Conclusions:
Given the current number of committees reporting to City Council and the hierarchical committee structure, there is very
little flexibility to shorten the decision-making process, to reduce the agenda workload, or to free up more days to
accommodate other meetings. In a typical four-week cycle with 20 business days, 13 days are already allocated for
meetings of Standing Committee, Budget Committee, Community Council, and City Council meetings. Only seven days
are left for all other meetings.
This report recommends a five-week cycle with two Council meetings in a cycle. The more frequent Council meetings will
help to speed up the decision-making process, better distribute Council's agenda workload, and allow more time for
constituency and other meetings. The schedule does not address or resolve the issues pertaining to the governance structure
which is being undertaken by the Chief Administrative Officer. If City Council decides to change the Council-Committee
structure, then the City Clerk will report back with possible scheduling changes to accommodate the new governance
structure.
Contact Name:
Jeffrey A. Abrams, Director, Secretariat, Printing and Distribution, Clerk's Division
Telephone: (416) 392-8670 E-mail: jabrams@city.toronto.on.ca
Peter Fay, Senior Policy and Planning Analyst, City Clerk's Division
Telephone: (416) 392-8668E-mail: pfay@mta1.metrodesk.metrotor.on.ca
(A copy of each of the following attachments:
Appendix "H"-1999 Recommended Schedule of Meetings, City of Toronto Council and Committees
Appendix "I"-1999 Schedule of Meetings (Based on Option 1(a): Status Quo 4-Week Council Meeting Cycle),
referred to in the foregoing report dated November 12, 1998, from the City Clerk, was forwarded to all Members of
Council with the agenda of the Striking Committee for its meeting held on November 16, 1998, and a copy thereof is also
on file in the office of the City Clerk.)
23
Extending the Termite Control Program Across the City of Toronto
(City Council on December 16 and 17, 1998, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)
The Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee recommends that the Termite Control Program be extended across
the new City of Toronto.
The Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee submits the following communication (December 9, 1998) from the
City Clerk:
City Council, at its meeting held on November 25, 26 and 27, 1998, had before it Clause No. 10 of Report No. 24 of the
Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee, headed "Other Items Considered by the Committee".
Council directed that:
(a)the following Item (c), embodied in the aforementioned Clause, be struck out and referred back to the Strategic
Policies and Priorities Committee for further consideration:
"(c)Extending the Termite Control Program Across the City of Toronto
The Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee reports having received the report (November 6, 1998) from the
Commissioner of Community and Neighbourhood Services for information.
(November 6, 1998) from the Commissioner of Community and Neighbourhood Services responding to Council's request
of July 29, 30 and 31, 1998 to report to the Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee on extending former City of
Toronto Termite Grants to all of the former municipalities in 1998, and recommending that the foregoing report be
received for information."; and
(b)the following Item (d), embodied in the aforementioned Clause, together with the additional documentation submitted
by Councillor Berardinetti, be struck out and referred back to the Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee for further
consideration and report thereon to Council for its next regular meeting to be held on December 16, 1998:
"(d)Court Ordered Recount in Scarborough Malvern - Ward 18
The Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee reports having received the report (November 12, 1998) from the City
Solicitor and requested that the previously requested report from the City Clerk and the City Solicitor be expedited, and
that this report also include suggested amendments to the Municipal Elections Act, which would provide, in appropriate
circumstances, for reimbursement of costs to candidates involved in election recounts.
(November 12, 1998) from the City Solicitor forwarding a report responding to City Council's direction that the City
Solicitor report on the fee requested by Mr. Ayres to prepare a report requested by City Council respecting the above-noted
election recount and recommendations to amend the Municipal Elections Act, 1996, and recommending that the foregoing
report be received for information."
--------
Councillor King appeared before the Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee in connection with the foregoing matter.
24
Court Ordered Recount in Scarborough Malvern - Ward 18
(City Council on December 16 and 17, 1998, amended this Clause by striking out Recommendations Nos. (1) and (3) of the
Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee and inserting in lieu thereof the following:
"(1)given the error in the City Clerk's Department during the 1997 election, Council recognize that it is in the public
interest to direct appropriate City staff to pay the legal costs for both candidates involved in the court ordered recount in
Ward 18, and staff be authorized to pay the appropriate solicitors in this regard; and
(3)the City Solicitor be authorized to make the necessary application for special legislation to amend the Municipal
Elections Act.")
The Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee recommends that:
(1)given the error in the City Clerk's department during the 1997 election, Council recognize that it is in the
public interest to direct appropriate City staff to pay the legal costs for both candidates involved in the court
ordered recount in Ward 18;
(2)given that the court costs were already drawn from the corporate contingency account, funds for the remaining
legal costs also be drawn from contingency; and
(3)the City Solicitor be authorized to make the necessary application for special legislation to enable the City to
pay these recount costs despite the provisions of the Municipal Elections Act.
The Committee reports, for the information of Council, of having requested the City Clerk to record into the minutes of the
December 15, 1998 meeting of the Strategic Polices and Priorities Committee, paragraphs 13 and 14 of the judgement of
the Court of Appeal respecting Montgomery v. Balkissoon et al.
The Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee submits the following report (December 9, 1998) from the City
Clerk:
City Council, at its meeting held on November 25, 26 and 27, 1998, had before it Clause No. 10 of Report No. 24 of the
Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee, headed "Other Items Considered by the Committee".
Council directed that:
(a)the following Item (c), embodied in the aforementioned Clause, be struck out and referred back to the Strategic
Policies and Priorities Committee for further consideration:
"(c)Extending the Termite Control Program Across the City of Toronto
The Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee reports having received the report (November 6, 1998) from the
Commissioner of Community and Neighbourhood Services for information.
(November 6, 1998) from the Commissioner of Community and Neighbourhood Services responding to Council's request
of July 29, 30 and 31, 1998 to report to the Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee on extending former City of
Toronto Termite Grants to all of the former municipalities in 1998, and recommending that the foregoing report be
received for information."; and
(b)the following Item (d), embodied in the aforementioned Clause, together with the additional documentation submitted
by Councillor Berardinetti, be struck out and referred back to the Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee for further
consideration and report thereon to Council for its next regular meeting to be held on December 16, 1998:
"(d)Court Ordered Recount in Scarborough Malvern - Ward 18
The Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee reports having received the report (November 12, 1998) from the City
Solicitor and requested that the previously requested report from the City Clerk and the City Solicitor be expedited, and
that this report also include suggested amendments to the Municipal Elections Act, which would provide, in appropriate
circumstances, for reimbursement of costs to candidates involved in election recounts.
(November 12, 1998) from the City Solicitor forwarding a report responding to City Council's direction that the City
Solicitor report on the fee requested by Mr. Ayres to prepare a report requested by City Council respecting the above-noted
election recount and recommendations to amend the Municipal Elections Act, 1996, and recommending that the foregoing
report be received for information."
--------
(A copy of the communication dated November 23, 1998, from Councillor Berardinetti which was forwarded to all
Members of Council with the agenda of the Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee for its meeting on December 15,
1998, and a copy thereof is on file in the office of the City Clerk.)
(Councillor Balkissoon, at the meeting of City Council on December 16 and 17, 1998, declared his interest in the
foregoing Clause, in that he is a City Councillor for Scarborough Malvern, Ward 18.)
(Councillor Cho, at the meeting of City Council on December 16 and 17, 1998, declared his interest in the foregoing
Clause, in that he is a City Councillor for Scarborough Malvern, Ward 18.)
25
Wheel-Trans Vehicle Replacement
(City Council on December 16 and 17, 1998, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)
The Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee recommends the adoption of the recommendations of the Budget
Committee contained in the following communication (December 10, 1998) from the City Clerk:
Recommendation:
The Budget Committee on December 8, 1998 recommended to the Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee and Council
the adoption of the report (November 17, 1998) from the Commissioner of Finance and Treasurer.
The Budget Committee reports having requested the Toronto Transit Commission to report directly to the meeting of the
Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee on the stability of the ELF vehicles with regard to their usage in other Canadian
cities such as Winnipeg, Hamilton and Edmonton; such report to also include the length of service, any maintenance
problems, etc.
Background:
The Budget Committee on December 8, 1998 had before it the following:
-report (December 7, 1998) from the Chief General Manager, Toronto Transit Commission, regarding the purchase of
127 replacement Wheel-Trans vehicles;
-report (November 17, 1998) from the Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer recommending approval of the gross request
for Project 415-127 Wheel-Trans vehicle replacements; and
-transmittal letter (October 6, 1998) from the City Clerk forwarding the recommendations of the Urban Environment and
Development Committee to approve the Wheel-Trans Vehicle Replacements.
Councillor Johnston appeared before the Budget Committee in connection with the foregoing matter.
The following persons also appeared before the Budget Committee in connection with the foregoing matter:
-Mr. Rick Miles, Transportation Action Now;
-Ms. Janet Youdell, Ontario March of Dimes, who filed a copy of her brief with the City Clerk;
-Mr. Bill Brown, Advisory Committee for Accessible Transportation;
-Mr. Keith Sheardown, Orion Bus Industries Ltd.; and
-Mr. Doug McKay, Orion Bus Industries Ltd.
--------
(Joint report dated December 7, 1998, addressed to the
Budget Committee from the
Chief Financial Officer, City of Toronto and the
Chief General Manager, Toronto Transit Commission)
Purpose:
The purpose of this report is to provide the Budget Committee and Council with a summary of the information presented to
date which supports the following recommendations.
Both the Commission and City staff have recommended that the purchase of the Wheel-Trans replacement vehicles
proceed now, thereby avoiding significant additional expenditures on maintenance and alternate service.
Financial Implications:
Approval of the recommendations will increase the net capital requirement to be financed through the issuance of
debentures by $2.7 million in 1999, $2.9 million in 2000, $3.0 million in 2001, and $1.8 million in 2002, in relation to the
TTC 1999-2003 capital request for the project. In addition, the recommended funding will result in a 1998 increased
contribution from the TTC Capital Subsidy Reserve Fund of $0.7 million.
Recommendations:
It is recommended that:
(1)the gross request for Project 152-127 Wheel-Trans Vehicle Replacements (Orion II) be approved as originally
submitted with the TTC 1999-2003 capital request, based on the staggered delivery option, at a total gross cost of $27.5
million;
(2)the contributions from the Wheel-Trans operating budget to this project be limited to the anticipated operating savings
resulting from the project, plus the $1.4 million contribution for vehicle replacements included in the approved 1998
operating budget for the TTC;
(3)funding for this project, excluding the reserve contribution, be financed through the issuance of debentures for a term
not exceeding twenty years, noting that the amount is within the City's updated debt and financing obligations limit, and
direct the City Solicitor to apply to the OMB for approval as required under the City of Toronto Act;
(4)a Wheel-Trans vehicle replacement reserve fund be established and funded from the anticipated operating savings
resulting from the purchase of new vehicles, plus the $1.4 million contribution for vehicle replacement included in the
1998 operating budget for the TTC, as per the schedule of contributions set in the body of this report;
(5)the $0.7 million increase in the 1998 net capital program requirement for the project be financed from the TTC Capital
Subsidy Reserve Fund; and
(6)the City Solicitor be authorized to prepare and introduce the necessary By-Law to give effect thereto.
Reference:
Included in the Commission and City Council approved 1998-2002 Capital Program were funds for the purchase of
vehicles intended to replace the existing Wheel-Trans fleet. On June 30, 1998 a Request for Proposals (RFP) was issued
and publicly advertised. Based on the proposals received, the Commission, at its meeting of September 23, 1998 approved
the purchase of 127 low floor (ELF) vehicles from Overland Custom Coach Inc. subject to City Council approval. The
Urban Environment and Development Committee adopted the recommendations of the Commission and forwarded the
report to the Budget Committee for their consideration. The Budget Committee, in considering the item requested
additional information on the operating budget savings associated with the purchase, the methods available to finance the
purchase and the impact of the various scenarios on the City's operating budget. The Committee also requested the TTC
and the City Treasurer to investigate the use of Off-Balance Sheet leases which would allow the payments to match the
projected operating budget savings.
Background:
The following is a brief summary of the justification for the replacement of the Wheel-Trans vehicles. More detailed
information is contained in both the original Commission report and the TTC's 1997 and 1998 Capital Program Blue
Books.
Prior to any estimates being included in TTC's Capital Program three basic questions are asked:
(1)Is there a need?
(2)Is the estimate reasonable?
(3)Is there a lower cost alternative?
(1)Determining Need:
The need for the Wheel-Trans fleet is driven by ridership on the system. The current and projected ridership is the basis for
the fleet requirements.
The current Orion bus fleet will exceed their twelve-year design life during the next five years. A combination of
increasing maintenance costs and decreasing bus reliability has negatively impacted the ability of the Wheel-Trans system
to accommodate the increasing demand for service. Currently the Orion vehicles are experiencing high annual maintenance
costs of $52,500 per bus excluding the fuel and overhead allowances.
The decreased reliability associated with these aging buses not only impacts the ability of the system to meet demand, but
also impacts the quality of service. A summary of the 1998 customer service impacts associated with these ageing buses is
as follows:
(i)60 in service failures per week resulting in a minimum of 100 customer trips being disrupted;
(ii)disrupted trips experiencing increased travel time up to 1 hour; and
(iii)5 Fewer Accessible Buses available on average to meet demand.
Therefore, the combination of the vehicles being at the end of their useful life, the increase in operational costs and the
decrease in customer satisfaction supports the need to replace these vehicles.
(2)Is the Estimate Reasonable:
The 1998 - 2002 Capital Program included $17.4 million dollars for the replacement of these Orion buses. A competitive
process identified an additional cost to replace these Orion buses of approximately $10 million dollars. Although a
fluctuating exchange rate is partially responsible for this price increase, the majority of the increase is as a result of a
change in vehicle market conditions. The revised estimate of $27.5 million dollars is included in the 1999-2003 Capital
Program Request as approved by the Commission on October 7, 1998.
(3)Are there Alternatives:
Vehicle Considerations:
A detailed discussion of alternatives is included in the Commission's budget submission. In summary the vehicles are at the
end of their design life. In order to continue using these vehicles, either a heavy rebuild program will be required or a major
investment in the short term will be required to allow replacement purchases to be deferred for one or two years (This
report discusses the option of the short term deferrals in greater detail). Both options have been considered by the TTC in
developing the budget and the recommendations to the Commission. Neither option was recommended based on cost.
Use of Lift equipped vehicles rather low floor vehicles was also considered. Based on a strong customer preference for low
floor vehicles, staff and the Commission recommended the purchase of low floor vehicles rather than lift equipped (see
discussion in original commission report).
Mixture of Vehicles:
Currently, Wheel-Trans service is provided by TTC owned and operated Orion buses, as well as contracted sedan and
accessible taxis. As part of the 1997 Five-year Wheel-Trans Accessible Service Plan developed as part of the Task Force
on Accessible Transit which was adopted by the Commission and Metro Council, larger capacity accessible buses would
service the peak demand period whereas low capacity vehicles would be used predominately in the off peak periods. This
combination of large and small capacity accessible vehicles is considered the most effective method of providing a cost
effective quality service.
During the preparation of the Wheel-Trans Operating and Capital Budgets, consideration is given to the level of service
provided by large capacity buses as well as the small capacity vehicles. Accessible buses are predominately used during
peak demand periods (7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m.) when the opportunity exists to utilize the additional capacity in order to
accommodate as many rides as possible. In contrast, the accessible taxis have a much smaller capacity and therefore are
utilized in the off peak demand periods where opportunities for ride sharing are reduced and the length of trips increased.
Similarly, sedan taxis provide service in the off peak periods for Wheel-Trans customers who do not use a wheelchair or
scooter. These sedan taxis are utilized as a last resort since additional accessible small capacity vehicles are not available
for Wheel-Trans service at this time. The Five-year Wheel-Trans Accessible Service Plan provides for the gradual
elimination of sedan taxi service whereas based upon current demand projections, the accessible taxis contracted to provide
Wheel-Trans service will need to increase from 25 in 1998 to 73 in 2002. Table 1 provides a summary of the proposed mix
of vehicles for Wheel-Trans over the next five years. If the current high demand (10 per cent growth per year) continues,
then the additional accessible vehicles will be required.
Table 1
Wheel-Trans Vehicle Mix - 1999-2003
Vehicle Type |
1999 |
2000 |
2001 |
2002 |
2003 |
High Occupancy Buses |
140 |
117 |
117 |
127 |
127 |
Accessible Cab |
25 |
44 |
62 |
73 |
73 |
Sedan Cabs |
36 |
28 |
13 |
0 |
0 |
Although the 25 accessible taxis under contract for Wheel-Trans service are fully utilized, taxi contractors do not appear
interested in significantly expanding their accessible taxi fleet. Essentially there is no incentive for owners of taxi plates to
purchase accessible cabs rather than the traditional sedan style cabs. Unlike the early 1990's, provincial and federal grant
programs are not currently available to offset the significant additional cost associated with purchasing accessible vehicles.
Based upon the current licensing fees and lack of accessible vehicle grant programs, it is extremely unlikely that the
accessible taxis available for Wheel-Trans service will increase from 25 to 73 over the next five years. The Taxi Task
Force report approved by the City of Toronto Council provides for an increase in accessible taxis by providing for issuance
of 25 additional licenses to be issued annually until 10 per cent. of all taxis are accessible. It remains to be seen whether the
industry will respond favourably to this aspect of the report.
Discussion:
Purchase Options:
The low floor (ELF) buses were recommended in the amount of $27.5 million dollars based upon a five-year staggered
schedule. The cost of purchasing these 127 low floor (ELF) buses is reduced to $25.8 million dollars if a continuous
delivery schedule is approved. Based upon City of Toronto cash flow considerations, both the City finance and
Commission staff agree that the staggered delivery schedule is acceptable.
The Budget Committee requested that the TTC report on the impact of deferring the purchase of these buses for one year.
Table 2 provides the total cash flow associated with the continuous and staggered delivery schedule as well as two alternate
schedules.
Table 2
Summary of Cash Flows Associated with the Options for Purchase of Wheel-Trans Vehicles
(Recommended Scenario has been Bolded)
($ millions) |
1998 |
1999 |
2000 |
2001 |
2002 |
2003 |
Total |
Staggered delivery
Capital
Vehicles delivered |
2.8
14 |
6.2
30 |
6.4
30 |
6.7
28 |
5.4
25 |
0.0
|
27.5
|
Continuous delivery
Capital |
2.8 |
11.8 |
11.2 |
0.0 |
0.0 |
0.0 |
25.8 |
One Year deferral - All
Years
Capital
Vehicles Delivered |
0.0
|
0.0
|
9.0
44 |
6.4
30 |
6.7
28 |
5.4
25 |
27.5
|
One year Deferral -
1999 Only
Capital
Vehicles Delivered |
0.0
|
0.0
|
15.4
74 |
6.7
28 |
5.4
25 |
0.0
|
27.5
|
Note:Any contracts awarded beyond March 1, 1999, the price validity date may be impacted by additional costs not
reflected. (Specifically Inflation)
In order to defer the purchase of replacement vehicles one year, it is necessary to undertake additional maintenance on the
vehicles. If the purchase of the vehicles is deferred one year for all five years, an additional $8.0 million in labour and
materials is required (as highlighted in TTC's presentation given to committee at its last meeting). This work, required to
keep the ageing Orions running, includes major repairs to the engines and frames of the vehicles as well as the axle
assemblies. While a deferral of one year only will reduce the cost of the increased maintenance to $2.4 million, these
additional expenditures are still required. The remainder of the costs associated with both scenarios relate to additional taxi
service and foregone maintenance savings associated with newer vehicles which will be under warranty.
The TTC does not recommend any of these alternate delivery schedules all of which result in significant additional costs to
maintain the ageing Orion bus fleet as well as additional unaccommodated trips. In addition, Wheel-Trans customers
would continue to experience interrupted trips resulting in travel times that exceed Wheel-Trans customer service targets.
Operating Budget Impact and Financing Options:
Operating Budget Impacts:
Each option has a unique impact on the operating budget. Table 3 presents a summary of the key cost indicators and Table
4 provides a summary of the five year impact.
Table 3
Summary of Cost Calculations for Wheel-Trans Replacement Vehicles Purchase Options
Option
($ thousands) |
Staggered
Delivery |
Continuous
Delivery |
One year
deferral for
All Five
years |
One year
deferral -
1999 Only |
Net Present value of
Operating Budget Costs*
1998 to 2013 |
7,288.3 |
6,607.2 |
15,280.5 |
9,003.1 |
Operating Budget Costs*
1998 to 2013 |
9,295.9 |
6,555.8 |
20,195.9 |
11,895.9 |
Impact on 1999 Operating
Budget* |
193.8 |
452.0 |
3,611.2 |
911.2 |
Increase in
Unaccommodated Trips |
|
|
22,400 |
13,300 |
Additional Operating
Costs |
N.A. |
N.A. |
10,900.0 |
2,600.0 |
*Note:Includes debt servicing costs for the purchase assuming standard 10 year debentures, 6 per cent bond rate, 5 per
cent sinking fund rate and 6 per cent discount rate for the purposes of calculating net present value.
Calculations do not include the future replacement cost of the vehicles to be purchased.
Table 4
Summary of Impact on the 1999-2003 Budget
($ thousands) |
1999 |
2000 |
2001 |
2002 |
2003 |
Staggered Delivery
Operating Costs
Increase/(Decrease)
Interest
Sinking fund
Total Operating Budget Impact |
(388.8)
356.0
226.6
193.8 |
(1,115.5)
732.5
717.0
333.9 |
(1,601.6)
1,125.0
1,224.1
747.5 |
(2,163.5)
1,488.1
1,757.3
1,081.9 |
(2,163.5)
1,650.0
2,186.4
1,672.9 |
Continuous Delivery
Operating Costs
Increase/(Decrease)
Interest
Sinking fund
Total Operating Budget Impact |
(295.5)
523.3
224.1
452.0 |
(1,374.0)
1,213.4
1,162.8
1,002.2 |
(1,834.7)
1,549.3
2,052.9
1,767.5 |
(2,163.5)
1,549.3
2,052.9
1,438.7 |
(2,163.5)
1,549.3
2,052.9
1,438.7 |
One-Year Deferral for All Years
Operating Costs
Increase/(Decrease)
Interest
Sinking fund
Total Operating Budget Impact |
3,611.2
0.0
0.0
3,611.2 |
2,184.5
270.0
0.0
2,454.5 |
(301.6)
732.0
715.5
1,145.9 |
(863.5)
1,125.0
1,224.4
1,485.9 |
(1,163.5)
1,488.0
1,757.1
2,081.6 |
One year Deferral 1999 Only
Operating Costs
Increase/(Decrease)
Interest
Sinking fund
Total Operating Budget Impact |
911.2
0.0
0.0
911.2 |
184.5
462.0
0.0
646.5 |
(1,601.6)
1,125.0
1,224.4
747.8 |
(2,163.5)
1,488.0
1,757.1
1,081.6 |
(2,163.5)
1,650.0
2,186.4
1,672.9 |
The lowest cost option in terms of overall cost, debt servicing costs, and additional maintenance costs is the continuous
delivery option. However, given the cash flow pressures in 1999, this option was not recommended.
The next lowest cost option and the one with the lowest cost impact in 1999 and 2000 is the staggered delivery option. This
option also has a significantly lower overall total cost as compared to the deferral options. Therefore, the staggered delivery
option, as approved by the Commission and previously recommended by City staff is still recommended.
The deferral options all require a significant operating budget expenditure in 1999 in order to keep the fleet running. These
expenditures are essentially throw away dollars in that they only enable fleet deferrals of one or two years at the most and
add limited life to the vehicles.
Impact on 1998 Approved Budget:
The funding structure of the staggered option, as originally requested by the TTC, was based on major contributions from
the Wheel-Trans Operating Budget. In particular, the entire 1998 gross expenditure of $2.8 million is anticipated to be
financed through an equivalent contribution from the operating budget.
The approved 1998 Operating budget for the Wheel-Trans (at a total flat-lined 1997 level of $37.543 million) includes an
amount of only $1.4 million for the funding of the Orion II fleet replacement. In addition the approved 1998 Capital
Program for the TTC includes a net funding of $0.7 million in 1998 for Project 415 - 127 Wheel-Trans Vehicle
Replacements (Orion II), to be financed through the issuance of debentures. Therefore, the total 1998 funding anticipated
for the project in the approved operating and capital budgets is $2.1 million ($1.4 million operating and $0.7 million
capital). It is recommended that the funding for the 1998 expenditure of $2.8 million be provided as follows: $1.4 million
from the 1998 operating budget; $0.7 million for the issuance of debentures, as included in the approved 1998 Capital
Program; and the remainder $0.7 million for the TTC Capital Subsidy Reserve.
1999-2003 Expenditures:
The funding structure submitted by the TTC for 1999 onwards includes operating budget contributions significantly higher
that the projected savings. Even if the $1.4 million operating contributions to capital for vehicle purchases (included in the
1998 Operating Budget) is added, the total funding available from the future operating budgets would increase through the
four year period to a maximum of $3.6 million in 2002 ($1.4 million plus the $2.2 million estimated savings). This level of
operating budget contributions to the capital program would allow for continuation of the operating budget on a flat line
1997 level until year 2000 (excluding other pressures, i.e. increased demand). Any additional contributions from the
operating budget should be made either through cuts in other expenditures or through higher subsidy from the tax levy.
The 1999 operating budget discussion will take place in early 1999. Therefore, to avoid committing budget increasing in
advance, it is recommended that the contributions from the operating budget to this project be limited to the anticipated
operating savings resulting from the project, plus the $1.4 million contribution for vehicle replacements included in the
approved 1998 operating budget for the TTC, through future contributions from the reserve to be established for this
purpose (See Reserve section below). The balance of the required funds are recommended to be financed through the
issuance of debentures.
Therefore, the recommended funding of the project is as follows:
Recommended Funding Structure
($ Millions)
19981999200020012002Total
Debenture Financing1.4*4.43.93.71.815.2
Funding from the Reserve Fund**1.41.82.53.03.612.3
Total2.86.26.46.75.427.5
*The 1998 requirement is recommended to be funded $0.7 million from the issuance of debentures, as included in the
approved 1998 Capital Program, and $0.7 million from the TTC Capital Reserve Fund
**See next page for details
The impact of the currently recommended funding structure on the debenture financing levels included in the requested
TTC 1999-2003 Capital Program is as follows:
Increase in debenture financing levels
($ Millions)
1999200020012002
1999-2003 Capital Program Request1.71.00.70.0
As Per recommendations in this Report4.43.93.71.8
Increase2.72.93.01.8
Use of a Vehicle Replacement Reserve Fund:
Funding vehicle purchases from a reserves is a normal business practice for many municipalities. Vehicle purchases tend to
be 'big ticket' items which are purchased on an irregular schedule. The advantage of using a reserve mechanism to fund
purchases of this type are:
(a)Annual contributions to a reserve provide stabilization by moderating large fluctuations in the replacement
expenditure;
(b)Reserves provide an alternate funding source from the operating budget; and
(c)Reserves provide for better financial and vehicle management by contributing to the replacement of vehicles in a
timely fashion and economically advantageous fashion.
In either of the suggested replacement options of the Wheel-Trans vehicles, the outflow of funds for the purchase of the
vehicles will fluctuate from zero to several million dollars. To include these sums in the operating budget as needed would
cause dramatic swings in the operating budget from year to year. A reserve fund mechanism would mitigate this
fluctuation. In addition the reserve fund would allow for the capture of the projected operating savings resulting from the
regular purchase of the new vehicles as well as the provision for vehicle replacement already included in the approved
1998 Operating budget of the TTC. It is therefore recommended that a Wheel-Trans Vehicle Replacement Reserve Fund be
established and funded as follows:
($Millions)
19981999200020012002
1998 Provision1.41.41.41.41.4
Operating Savings 0.00.41.11.62.2
Total Contribution to the reserve fund1.41.82.53.03.6
Use of Off-Balance Sheet Financing Methods:
Off Balance Sheet Financing methods, or lease back alternatives are currently being investigated jointly by TTC and City
staff in relationship to the purchase of the Subway Car fleet. In simplistic terms, a lease back alternative would involve the
TTC leasing the vehicles from a company based in a foreign jurisdiction, who would purchase the vehicles and would
claim the depreciation expense (Capital Cost Allowance) associated with the vehicles each year in order to reduce the
company's taxable income and thereby reduce their annual income tax payments. Theoretically, the City would benefit
from the company's savings through reduced lease payments although significant concerns regarding maintenance of the
vehicles, operational constraints and ownership do exist and would need to be addressed.
As indicated in the report from the Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer on the preliminary Capital Financing Plan, dated
November 11, 1998, one of the conditions to make the sale-leaseback a feasible financial instrument is the long life-span of
the assets. A longer life-span reduces the risk of the investment by ensuring a higher residual value in case of an advanced
recovery of the asset, and allows a claim for depreciation tax deductions during a longer period of time, therefore making
the operation financially attractive. The expected life of the Wheel-Trans vehicles is 7 to 10 years. It is therefore the
opinion of City Finance that the sale-leaseback of the vehicles is not a viable option in this case.
Conclusion:
Based on age of the vehicles (the design life will be exceeded prior to completion of the purchase order), the cost of
maintaining the current Wheel-Trans fleet and the various reliability issues, there is a need to replace the Wheel-Trans
buses. Deferring the purchase of the vehicles by one or two years requires additional operating expenditures in 1999 that
are essentially throw away expenses.
The lowest overall cost option to replace these vehicles is the continuous delivery option. The next lowest overall cost
option, which has the least impact on the 1999 and 2000 budget, is the staggered delivery option, which was approved by
the Commission. Therefore, it is recommended that approval be granted for this purchase and that, consistent with the
Chief Financial Officer's earlier recommendations, that a vehicle replacement reserve be established.
--------
(Report dated November 17, 1998, addressed to the
Budget Committee from the
Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer)
Purpose:
The report recommends funding options for Project 415 - 127 Wheel Trans Vehicle Replacements (Orion II).
Financial Implications:
Approval of the recommendations will increase the net capital requirements to be financed from debentures by $2.7 million
in 1999, $2.9 million in 2000, $3.0 million in 2001, and $1.8 million in 2003, in relation to the TTC 1999-2003 capital
request for the project. In addition, the recommended funding will result in a 1998 increased contribution from the TTC
Capital Subsidy Reserve Fund of $0.7 million to finance the increased net capital requirement for the project ($1.4 million
recommended less the 1998 approved net expenditure of $0.7 million).
Recommendations:
It is recommended that:
(1)the gross request for Project 415-127 Wheel Trans Vehicle Replacements (Orion II) be approved as originally
submitted with the TTC 1999-2003 capital request, based on the staggered delivery option, at a total gross cost of $27.5
million;
(2)the contributions from the Wheel Trans operating budget to this project be limited to the provision for vehicle
replacement of $1.4 million as included in the approved 1998 operating budget for the TTC, with the addition of the
projected operating savings resulting from the project, through future reserve contributions as set in the body of this report;
(3)a Wheel-Trans Vehicle Replacement reserve be established and funded from the provision for vehicle replacement
included in the approved 1998 operating budget for the TTC and the future operating savings from the purchase of the new
vehicles as per the schedule of contributions set in the body of this report; and
(4)the $0.7 million increase in the 1998 net capital requirement for the project be financed from the TTC Capital Subsidy
Reserve Fund.
Background:
The Urban Environment and Development Committee on October 5, 1998, recommended:
(a)the adoption of:
(1)additional project approval and financing of $10.1 million for City Project No. 415, "127 Wheel-Trans Vehicle
Replacements (Orion II)"; noting that such additional project approval and financing is required no later than October 30,
1998, at which time the bids expire; and
(2)an increase of $800,000.00 in the 1998 Wheel-Trans Operating Budget, subject to successful negotiations between the
Toronto Transit Commission and Overland Custom Coach Inc. regarding the delivery of 14 ELF low floor buses in 1998;
and
(b)that the communication (October 5, 1998) from the Chief General Manager, Toronto Transit Commission, be
forwarded to the Budget Committee for consideration.
The Budget Committee on October 13, 1998, had before it the item together with a communication (September 24, 1998)
addressed to the Clerk, City of Toronto from the General Secretary, Toronto Transit Commission indicating that a
continuous delivery schedule rather than a staggered schedule had been further considered and that an overall price
reduction of $1.7 million could be realized under this option, i.e. $27.5 million to $25.8 million.
The Budget Committee deferred this item until the next meeting, with a request that the Chief Administrative Officer, the
Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer and the Chief General Manager, Toronto Transit Commission, provide a joint report
providing other financial options to fund the Wheel-Trans Vehicle Replacement project; and further that, due to time
restraints, if a special Budget Committee meeting is required to finalize this matter, the said meeting, be at the call of the
Chair.
Discussion:
Gross Expenditures:
On June 30, 1998 a Request for Proposals to supply 127 specialized accessible low floor and lift-equipped vehicles over a
five year period was issued by the TTC. Based on the results of the request for proposals, the TTC is recommending the
replacement of the Orion bus fleet with 127 low floor (ELF) buses to be delivered from 1998 through 2002. The total cost
of the project, under this staggered delivery option, is $27.5 million. Once the vehicles are fully delivered, it is estimated
that annual operating costs will be reduced by $2.2 million as a result of lower fuel and maintenance costs.
TTC also submitted an option based on the continuous delivery of vehicles combined with the accelerated retirement of the
Orion II vehicles by the year 2000. The total project cost under this option is $25.8 million, $1.7 million less than the
staggered option, however through an accelerated cash flow. The comparison of capital costs, operating savings and net
present value under both alternatives is as follows:($ Millions)
19981999200020012002Total
Staggered Delivery
Gross Project Cost2.86.26.46.75.427.5
Operating Savings0.0(0.4)(1.1)(1.6)(2.2)(2.2)
Net Present Value (@7%)2.85.44.54.02.419.1
Continuous Delivery
Gross Project Cost2.811.811.20.00.025.8
Operating Savings0.0(0.3)(1.4)(1.8)(2.2)(2.2)
Net Present Value (@7%)2.810.68.4(1.4)(1.6)18.8
The Continuous delivery option would result in a net present value saving of only $0.3 million or 1.6 percent. However,
this option would increase the already existing pressure on the 1999 and 2000 debenturing requirements. It is therefore
recommended that the gross request for the project be approved as originally submitted with the TTC 1999-2003 capital
request, based on the Staggered Delivery option.
Each ELF bus can carry a maximum of five wheel-chairs, while an Orion II bus has a capacity of six wheel-chair positions
(the new Orion vehicles are designed to carry a maximum of five wheel-chairs, as in the ELF buses). However, TTC staff
indicate that the capacity reduction will have no significant impact in the operating expenditures or revenues. They indicate
that currently the Orion II buses only carry simultaneously six wheel-chairs per vehicle in approximately one percent of the
trips.
Funding:
The TTC request for the funding of the staggered option is mainly based on contributions from the Wheel Trans Operating
Budget. The funding sources included in the current TTC request, also reflected in the 1999-2003 capital program request
of the TTC, are as follows:
TTC Requested Funding Structure (1999-2003 Capital Program Request)
($ Millions)
19981999200020012002Total
Funding - Capital Budget0.01.71.00.70.03.4
Funding Operating * 2.84.55.46.05.424.1
Total2.86.26.46.75.427.5
*These amounts include the use of the noted savings plus new operating contributions.
The approved 1998 Operating Budget for Wheel Trans (at a total flat-lined 1997 level of $37.543 million) included an
amount of $1.4 million for the funding of the Orion II fleet replacement. In addition, the approved 1998 Capital Budget for
Project 415 - 127 Wheel Trans Vehicle Replacements (Orion II) included a net expenditure of $0.7 million from debenture
financing. Therefore, the total 1998 funding anticipated for the project in the approved operating and capital budgets is
$2.1 million ($1.4 million operating and $0.7 million capital). However, the funding authorization for Project #415 was
granted for the total project cost of $17.4 million (as estimated at that time) on the basis that the purchase would be made
on a single contract. It is therefore recommended that the funding of the 1998 expenditure of $2.8 million be provided as
follows: $1.4 million from the 1998 operating budget; $0.7 million from debenturing , as included in the approved 1998
Capital Program; and the remainder $0.7 million from the TTC Capital Subsidy Reserve Fund.
The funding structure submitted by the TTC for 1999 onwards is based on operating budget contributions significantly
higher than the projected savings, even if the $1.4 million provision anticipated in the 1998 budget is added.
If the provision for the project included in the 1998 Operating budget is added, the total funding available from the
operating budget would increase through the four-year period to a maximum of $3.6 million in 2002 ($1.4 million plus the
$2.2 million estimated savings). This level of operating budget contributions would allow for the maintenance of the
operating budget on a flat-line 1997 level (excluding other pressures, i.e. increased demand). Any additional contribution
from the operating budget should be made either through cuts in other expenditures or through a higher subsidy from the
tax levy.
The 1999 operating budget discussion will occur from December 1998 onward. Therefore, to avoid committing budget
increases in advance, it is recommended that the contributions from the operating budget to this project be limited to the
provision for vehicle replacement of $1.4 million as included in the approved 1998 operating budget for the TTC, with the
addition of the projected operating savings resulting from the project, through contributions from a reserve to be
established as recommended below. The balance of the required funds would be financed through debenturing.
Therefore, the recommended funding of the project is as follows:
Recommended Funding Structure
($ Millions)
19981999200020012002Total
Funding - Capital Budget1.44.43.93.71.815.2
Funding from Reserve**1.4*1.82.53.03.612.3
Total2.86.26.46.75.427.5
*Direct contribution from the 1998 operating budget.
**See next page for details
The impact of the recommended funding on the debenturing levels included in the TTC 1999-2003 capital program request
is as follows:
($Millions)
1999200020012002
Requested Funding from Debentures1.71.00.70.0
Recommended Funding from Debentures4.43.93.71.8
Increase2.72.93.01.8
It should be emphasized, however, that the alternative option to the increased debenturing requirements would be the
funding of the project from the operating budget, with a direct impact on the tax levy. A possible alternative to this higher
capital cost would the purchasing of lift-equipped, instead of low floor, vehicles (the proposed total cost for lift-equipped
vehicles at the Request for Proposal was $16.6 million vis-a-vis $27.5 million for the low floor buses). The Toronto Transit
Commission does not recommend this alternative on the basis that the service provided is not comparable.
Reserve:
Funding vehicle purchases from a reserve is a normal business practice for many municipalities. Vehicle purchases tend to
be 'big ticket' items which are purchased on an irregular schedule. The advantage of using a reserve mechanism to fund
purchases of this type are:
(a)Annual contributions to a reserve provide budget stabilization by moderating large fluctuations in the replacement
expenditure;
(b)Reserves provide an alternate funding source from the operating budget; and
(c)Reserves provide for better financial and vehicle management by contributing to the replacement of vehicles in a
timely and economically advantageous fashion.
In either of the suggested replacement options of the Wheel Trans vehicles, the outflow of funds for the purchase of
vehicles will fluctuate from zero to several million dollars. To include these sums in the operating budget as needed would
cause dramatic swings in the operating budget from year to year. A reserve fund mechanism would mitigate this
fluctuation. In addition the reserve fund would allow for the capture of the projected operating savings resulting from the
purchase of the new vehicles, as well as the provision for vehicle replacement already included in the approved 1998
Operating Budget of the TTC. It is therefore recommended that a Wheel-Trans Vehicle Replacement Reserve Fund be
established and funded as follows:
($ Millions)
19981999200020012002Total
1998 Budget Provision1.41.41.41.41.41.4
Operating Savings0.00.41.11.62.22.2
Total Contribution to
Reserve Fund1.41.82.53.03.63.6
Conclusion:
The funding structure submitted by the TTC for 1999 onwards is based on operating budget contributions from the
operating budget significantly higher than the projected savings, even if the $1.4 million provision anticipated in the 1998
budget is added. To avoid committing operating budget increases in advance, it is recommended that the contributions
from the Wheel Trans operating budget to this project be limited to the provision for vehicle replacement of $1.4 million as
included in the approved 1998 operating budget for the TTC, with the addition of the projected operating savings resulting
from the project, through contributions from a reserve to be established as per the recommendations in this report.
The Chief General Manager of the TTC concurs with the recommendations of this report.
Contact Names:
Andres Hachard (416) 392-5377
--------
(Transmittal letter dated October 6, 1998, addressed to the
Budget Committee from the
City Clerk)
Recommendations:
The Urban Environment and Development Committee on October 5, 1998, recommended:
(A)the adoption of:
(1)additional project approval and financing of $10.1 million for City Project No. 415, "127 Wheel-Trans Vehicle
Replacements (Orion II)"; noting that such additional project approval and financing is required no later than October 30,
1998, at which time the bids expire; and
(2)an increase of $800,000.00 in the 1998 Wheel-Trans Operating Budget, subject to successful negotiations between the
Toronto Transit Commission and Overland Custom Coach Inc. regarding the delivery of 14 ELF low floor buses in 1998;
and
(B)that the communication (October 5, 1998) from the Chief General Manager, Toronto Transit Commission, be
forwarded to the Budget Committee for consideration.
Background:
The Urban Environment and Development Committee had before it the following communications:
-(September 24, 1998) from the General Secretary, Toronto Transit Commission, advising that the Toronto Transit
Commission on September 23, 1998, approved the Recommendations contained in Report No. (6), entitled "Wheel-Trans
Vehicle Replacement"; and
-(October 5, 1998) from the Chief General Manager, Toronto Transit Commission (TTC), regarding the purchase of
Wheel-Trans buses; advising that an evaluation of the continuous delivery option of ELF buses, combined with an
accelerated retirement of the Orion II vehicles, would result in net overall savings of approximately $2.0 million; that,
however, the continuous delivery option would require an increase to the 1999 and 2000 Operating Budgets which is
significantly higher than the staggered delivery option; and stating that while City Council needs to consider the overall
impact to the City of bringing forward the purchase, either approach is acceptable to the TTC.
--------
(Communication dated September 24, 1998, addressed to the
City Clerk from the
General Secretary, Toronto Transit Commission)
At its meeting on Wednesday, September 23, 1998, the Commission considered the attached report entitled, "Wheel-Trans
Vehicle Replacement."
The Commission approved the Recommendation contained in the above report, as listed below:
"It is recommended that the Commission approve:
(1)a $10.1M increase in the current project approval amount of $17.4 million for the Wheel-Trans Vehicle Replacement
project, bringing the total to $27.5 million; and
(2)an increase in the 1998 Operating Budget allocation for purchasing these buses from $2,000,000.00 to $2,800,000.00
due to bus price increases, noting that should it not be possible to award this contract and make initial payments in 1998,
arrangements should be made to place these funds into contingency for use in 1999; and
(3)the award of a contract to Overland Custom Coach Inc. for the supply of 127 accessible low floor (ELF) buses in the
amount of $27,030,966.00 (including taxes), subject to City Council approval; and
(4)the provision of associated spare parts, test equipment, vehicle maintenance training, vehicle inspection services and
in-house support in the amount of $469,034.00 (net of GST rebate); and
(5)forwarding this report to the City of Toronto Council for approval of:
(a)additional project approval and financing of $10.1 million by no later than October 30, 1998 at which time the bids
expire;
(b)and an increase of $800,000.00 in the 1998 Wheel-Trans Operating Budget subject to successful negotiations with
Overland Custom Coach Inc. regarding the delivery of 14 ELF low floor buses in 1998.
(6)forwarding this report to the TTC's Advisory Committee on Accessible Transportation for information."
The foregoing is forwarded to City of Toronto Council for the necessary action, as detailed in Recommendation No. 5 of
the report, as well as, the TTC's Advisory Committee on Accessible Transportation for information.
--------
(Toronto Transit Commission Report No. 6)
Recommendations:
It is recommended that the Commission approve:
(1)a $10.1 million increase in the current project approval amount of $17.4 million for the Wheel-Trans Vehicle
Replacement project, bringing the total to $27.5 million;
(2)an increase in the 1998 Operating Budget allocation for purchasing these buses from $2,000,000.00 to $2,800,000.00
due to bus price increases, noting that should it not be possible to award this contract and make initial payments in 1998,
arrangements should be made to place these funds into contingency for use in 1999;
(3)the award of a contract to Overland Custom Coach Inc. for the supply of 127 accessible low floor (ELF) buses in the
amount of $27,030,966.00 (including taxes), subject to City Council approval;
(4)the provision of associated spare parts, test equipment, vehicle maintenance training, vehicle inspection services and
in-house support in the amount of $469,034.00 (net of GST rebate);
(5)forwarding this report to the City of Toronto Council for approval of:
(a)additional project approval and financing of $10.1 million by no later than October 30, 1998 at which time the bids
expire; and
(b)an increase of $800,000.00 in the 1998 Wheel-Trans Operating Budget subject to successful negotiation with
Overland Custom Coach Inc. regarding the delivery of 14 ELF low floor buses in 1998;
(6)forwarding this report to the TTC's Advisory Committee on Accessible Transportation for information.
Funding:
The 1998-2002 Wheel-Trans Service Plan assumed flatlined funding of $38.2 million per year in order to meet projected
trip demand and to partially fund the procurement of new accessible buses to replace the Orion II fleet.
It was estimated that a total of $17.4 million would be required over the five year period to replace the fleet with $14.0
million to be provided from the Wheel-Trans Operating Budget and the balance of $3.4 million to be provided from the
Commission's 1998-2002 Capital Program. The funding details of the 1998-2002 plan are shown in Table 1.
Table 1
1998-2002 Wheel-Trans Service Plan
($ Millions)
|
1998 |
1999 |
2000 |
2001 |
2002 |
Total |
Operating Budget |
38.2 |
38.2 |
38.2 |
38.2 |
38.2 |
191.0 |
Service Requirements |
36.2 |
35.8 |
35.1 |
35.1 |
34.8 |
177.0 |
Operating Funds available
for Vehicle Replacement |
2.0 |
2.4 |
3.1 |
3.1 |
3.4 |
14.0 |
Capital Funds available for
Vehicle Replacement |
-- |
1.7 |
1.0 |
0.7 |
-- |
3.4 |
Total Funds available for
Vehicle Replacement |
2.0 |
4.1 |
4.1 |
3.8 |
3.4 |
17.4 |
Based on a tender call, we now know that the cost to replace the Orion II Fleet with low floor buses has significantly
increased from $17.4 million to $27.5 million resulting in a requirement for an additional $10.1 million in operating funds.
Table 2
Vehicle Replacement Costs
($ Millions)
|
1998 |
1999 |
2000 |
2001 |
2002 |
Total |
Current Estimate |
2.8 |
6.2 |
6.4 |
6.7 |
5.4 |
27.5 |
Original Estimate* |
2.0 |
4.1 |
4.1 |
3.8 |
3.4 |
17.4 |
Additional Operating
Funds Required |
0.8 |
2.1 |
2.3 |
2.9 |
2.0 |
10.1 |
*Includes Capital Funds of $3.4 million ($1.7 million in 1999, $1.0 million in 2000 and $0.7 million in 2001)
Background:
In 1997, the Task Force on Accessible Transit presented a Five Year Service Plan that was adopted by Metro Toronto and
the Commission. That Plan identified the need to replace the aging fleet of Orion buses as they were approaching the end
of their design life, are expensive to maintain, and increasingly unreliable. The Task Force concluded it would not be cost
effective to refurbish the old Orion buses.
As per the Task Force's recommendation, a test of new low floor and lift-equipped buses was completed earlier this year.
One low floor and two lift-equipped specialized buses were tested in service to consider factors such as vehicle reliability,
maintenance and fuel costs, ride comfort, passenger safety, and scheduling constraints as well as the accommodation of
various mobility devices. Wheel-Trans customers assisted Commission staff in the evaluation of the test buses. These
vehicles were also viewed at a Wheel-Trans Open Forum and examined by the Advisory Committee on Accessible
Transportation (ACAT). Members of ACAT assisted in the evaluation of each vehicle type.
From an Operator, scheduling, and maintenance perspective, both vehicle types were considered acceptable. However,
Wheel-Trans customers and members of ACAT preferred the low floor design because of the superior ride quality, safety,
security, and ease of entry and exit. Some customers were so concerned about their safety and comfort on lift-equipped
buses that they requested trips only on low floor buses. This latter issue could be alleviated through increased customer
familiarity with lift-equipped vehicles and additional Operator assistance in the shorter term.
Other concerns raised about the lift-equipped buses included scheduling constraints due to relocating wheelchairs and
scooters when the bus was filled to capacity, as well as longer loading and unloading times. In addition, some customers
were concerned about lift devices being able to accommodate large motorized scooters. While these concerns did not
manifest themselves as significant delays to service, the test would suggest that lift-equipped buses are less adaptable and
flexible with regard to quickly and efficiently handling large mobility devices and serving peak demand during core service
hours.
Discussion:
As a result of this test, both types of vehicles are considered acceptable for Wheel-Trans service. In addition, the test
identified areas to be addressed in the current accessible vehicle specifications such as safety systems for ramps and lifts,
improved ride quality, better interior layout and access to doors, improved seating, better lighting and visibility, an
alternate emergency exit on lift-equipped buses and upgraded major mechanical components to improve vehicle reliability
and achieve cost efficiencies.
On June 30, 1998, a Request for Proposals to supply 127 specialized accessible lift-equipped and low floor vehicles over a
five year period was publicly advertised in the Globe and Mail and 14 companies were issued notifications. Optional prices
were requested for the delivery of 50 additional buses, a best continuous vehicle delivery, and a $2.0 million prepayment in
late 1998.
A total of eight companies picked up the Request for Proposals and four proposals were received for the supply of
lift-equipped buses and two proposals offered for the supply of low floor buses. Appendix 'A' summarizes the proposals for
the supply of 127 buses of each type and the optional prices for the delivery of an additional 50 buses.
Based on a preliminary analysis to establish the cost benefit of proceeding with the aforementioned pricing options, staff
concluded that insufficient benefit existed to pursue the prepayment option as proposed. Discussions are continuing with
the manufacturer to secure a more advantageous discount in return for an advance payment. Staff are continuing to evaluate
the continuous delivery option both from a cost benefit and operational perspective. If this option is determined to be more
beneficial then staff will report to the Commission at the next meeting.
Lift-Equipped Buses
Overland Custom Coach Inc. (Overland) submitted the lowest priced proposal for a lift-equipped bus (El Dorado National
Aertech Model 240). However, they stated several exceptions such as a reduced vehicle design life, limited warranty,
limited access to wheelchair positions, and overall vehicle height. Therefore Overland's proposal is considered both
commercially and technically non-compliant.
The second lowest price proposal was offered by Capital Bus Sales (Capital) for their Corbeil bus. However, Capital stated
several exceptions including a limited warranty, limited random wheelchair access, and an inability to meet all the
Provincial/Federal regulatory requirements at this time. Therefore Capital's proposal is considered both commercially and
technically non-compliant.
Leeds Bus Sales Limited (Leeds) offered the only commercially and technically acceptable proposal for the supply of
lift-equipped buses. The Girardin MB IV bus was offered. Their submission was qualified in that the Girardin MB IV has a
five year service life. However, they met the specified seven year structural warranty (including chassis) and as a result this
qualification is considered technically and commercially acceptable.
Low Floor Buses:
Overland Custom Coach (Overland) submitted the lowest price proposal for their ELF low floor bus. The only notable
exception was a service life of five years or 200K miles. However, Overland did comply with the specified seven year
structural warranty and offered an extended warranty exceeding the specified requirements of the overall bus, engine and
transmission. Therefore Overland's proposal is considered both commercially and technically acceptable.
Orion Bus Industries (Orion) submitted an alternative proposal to lease 127 Orion II low floor buses over a seven year term
at $3,703.00 per month or a nine year term of $3,139.00 per month. Based on a net present value analysis, the cost to lease
these buses from Orion is higher than the purchase cost for the ELF buses. Also, Orion did not comply with various
warranty provisions and therefore their proposal is considered commercially non-compliant.
Wheel-Trans has gained considerable experience with an earlier model low floor ELF bus which has been in revenue
service since 1993. This test of the new low floor (ELF) bus in 1998 confirmed earlier assessments that this vehicle has the
overall design and capacity necessary to meet the growing demand for Wheel-Trans service. In fact, the Task Force on
Accessible Transit had used the previous model low floor ELF bus as a benchmark vehicle in their analysis as it was
recognized as having the advantage of lower maintenance cost than the Orions and the capacity to meet Wheel-Trans
demand.
Over the Five Year Vehicle Replacement period, the 127 low floor ELF buses plus associated spare parts, test equipment,
vehicle maintenance training, vehicle inspection services and in-house support will cost approximately $27.5 million.
These low floor buses are more expensive than the lift-equipped buses ($16.6 million) and rebuilt Orion buses ($26.0
million). With regard to the rebuilt Orions, the significant ongoing operating cost advantage of the low floor (ELF) buses
negates the additional capital costs as compared to rebuilt Orion buses.
Based upon testing both lift-equipped and low floor buses, staff consider both vehicles appropriate for Wheel-Trans
service. However, customers have indicated a distinct preference for low floor technology, in particular they appreciate the
ease of entry and exit from the bus as well as the ride quality. This preference for low floor technology, combined with the
increased flexibility of low floor buses in meeting the additional demand during peak service periods, prompted staff to not
pursue the purchase of lift-equipped vehicles even though the procurement of these vehicles would have allowed us to
remain within the original vehicle replacement budget ($17.4 million). Appendix 'B' outlines the total project funding
required for each of the Orion vehicle replacement options considered; namely rebuilt Orions, the Girardin MB IV
lift-equipped bus, and the low floor (ELF) bus as compared to the Operating and Capital funding provided for in the Five
Year Plan.
Due to the increased cost of low floor (ELF) over what was projected last year, the $2.0 million provided for in the 1998
Operating Budget for purchasing 14 replacement buses must be increased to $2.8 million. Neither the Overland or Leeds
proposals provided for delivery of buses in 1998. If Overland is unable to deliver buses this year, staff recommends
approval to carry over these operating budget funds for the purchase of the 14 buses in 1999.
Justification:
Approval to purchase 127 ELF low floor buses from Overland will allow for the scheduled replacement of Orion buses
over the five year period 1998-2002 resulting in decreased maintenance costs and increased vehicle reliability. The
replacement program will allow the Commission to provide a quantity and quality of service required and expected by our
customers. Continuing without the vehicle replacement program will result in further maintenance cost increases as well as
continuing deterioration of vehicle performance and customer dissatisfaction.
(Communication dated October 5, 1998, addressed to the
Urban Environment and Development Committee from the
Chief General Manager, Toronto Transit Commission)
Re: Purchase of Wheel-Trans Buses
At its meeting of September 23, 1998, the Commission approved awarding a contract with Overland Custom Coach Inc.
for the supply of 127 accessible low floor (ELF) buses in the amount of $27,030,966.00 and a total project cost of $27.5
million subject to City Council approval.
As indicated in the report, a continuous delivery schedule rather than a staggered schedule has been further considered. An
evaluation of the continuous delivery option has now been completed and indicates that an overall price reduction of $1.7
million could be realized, i.e. $27.5 million to $25.8 million. If the additional operating savings which would be realized
through an accelerated retirement of the Orion II vehicles are considered, then the net overall savings increase to
approximately $2.0 million. The net present value of these savings is approximately $680 thousand. (A continuous delivery
schedule would require an accelerated cash flow which has an associated cost of money).
The difference in the cash flow projections is shown below:
($ millions) |
1998 |
1999 |
2000 |
2001 |
2002 |
Total |
Continuous delivery |
2.8 |
11.8 |
11.2 |
0 |
0 |
25.8 |
Staggered delivery* |
2.8 |
6.2 |
6.4 |
6.7 |
5.4 |
27.5 |
Difference |
0.0 |
4.4 |
4.8 |
(6.7) |
(5.4) |
(1.7) |
*Approved by the Commission at its meeting of September 23, 1998.(Note: Capital Funds of $3.4 million are included ($1.7 million in 1999, $1.0 million in 2000 and $0.7 million in 2001)
While the continuous delivery option results in a reduction in the overall price, it requires an increase to the 1999 and 2000
operating budgets which is significantly higher than the staggered delivery option. While Council needs to consider the
overall impact to the City of bringing forward the purchase, either approach is acceptable to the TTC. In short, regardless
of the option chosen by Council, low floor service to the Wheel-Trans customers can be maintained assuming approval of
one of the options.
A copy of this letter is also being forwarded to the Commission for their information. I would ask that your Committee
consider this option and forward it along with any other actions deemed appropriate to the Budget Committee and Council
for their consideration in conjunction with our request to approve the purchase.
The Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee also submits the following communication (December 14, 1998)
from the Chief General Manager, Toronto Transit Commission (TTC):
At the Budget Committee Meeting on Tuesday, December 8, 1998, TTC's Capital Project 152 - Purchase of 127
Replacement Wheel-Trans Vehicles, was approved. The Committee also requested that staff report to the Strategic Policies
and Priorities Committee on the experience of other transit operators.
Staff had previously contacted numerous properties in order to consider the ELF bus operating performance experienced by
other transit properties prior to and during the development of vehicle specifications which formed the basis of a Request
for Proposals for the Supply of Accessible Buses. Additional follow-up information has also been obtained from the
following transit properties:
DARTS Hamilton (51 ELF Buses):
DARTS Hamilton has operated ELF low-floor buses since 1991. Their customers appear to be satisfied with the ELF's
interior design and ride quality. These buses have achieved a satisfactory level of reliability and overall maintenance costs
have been relatively low for the type of service provided.
Peel TransHelp (2 ELF Buses):
Peel TransHelp have confirmed that their ELF buses are both cost efficient and suitable for the specialized transit service
provided. Customer feedback regarding the low-floor design of these buses have been favourable.
Cleveland Transit (60 ELF Buses):
Cleveland Transit has operated ELF buses since 1993 and recently expanded their fleet by 27. Customer comments
regarding these buses have been favourable. However, Cleveland has expressed some concern regarding the ELF braking
system. The TTC accessible bus specification has addressed these braking system concerns as part of the original tender.
Edmonton Transit (20 ELF Buses):
Edmonton Transit has been operating ELF buses since 1993 and in 1998 expanded their fleet by 12. Their experience with
the ELF has been favourable but they also had some concerns regarding the braking system. However, these problems have
been resolved with the new models and the TTC tender specifications addressed these issues. Edmonton Transit have
confirmed that their ELF buses are very reliable and cost efficient. Customer Comments regarding these buses have been
favourable.
The ELF bus proposed for Wheel-Trans operations adequately addresses the relatively few concerns raised during the
accessible bus test earlier this year as well as any operating issues experienced by other transit properties.
26
Interim Spending Approvals for the 1999 Water
and Wastewater Capital Works Program
(City Council on December 16 and 17, 1998, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)
The Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee recommends that the recommendations of the Budget Committee
contained in the following communication (December 15, 1998) from the City Clerk be received:
Recommendation:
The Budget Committee on December 8, 1998, recommended to the Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee and
Council the adoption of the recommendation of the Works and Utilities Committee with respect to the subject matter.
Background:
The Budget Committee had before it a transmittal letter (December 2, 1998) from the City Clerk forwarding the
recommendation of the Works and Utilities Committee from its meeting held on December 2, 1998 to adopt the report
(November 27, 1998) from the Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services respecting interim spending approvals for
the 1999 Water and Wastewater Capital Works Program.
--------
(Transmittal letter dated December 2, 1998 addressed to the
Budget Committee from the
City Clerk)
Recommendation:
The Works and Utilities Committee on December 2, 1998, recommended to the Budget Committee, the adoption of the
report dated November 27, 1998, from the Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services respecting interim spending
approvals for the 1999 Water and Wastewater Capital Works Program.
--------
(Report dated November 27, 1998, addressed to the
Works and Utilities Committee from the
Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services)
Purpose:
The report addresses the need for interim spending approval in the first few weeks of 1999 for those projects that are
ongoing and will continue beyond December 31, 1998, as the Capital Works Program is anticipated to be approved by
Council in late January 1999.
Funding Sources, Financial Implications and Impact Statement:
Interim approval of capital expenditures on the projects identified in the recommendations will pre-approve
$12,618,000.00 (after Goods and Services Tax rebate) of the Water and Wastewater 1999 Capital Budget. The divisional
request for spending approval in 1999 amounts to $235,071,000.00. The interim approval represents 5 percent of the 1999
Capital Budget request.
The approval of the recommendations will not add to the 1999 request but merely give approval to continue projects in
early January.
Staff of the Finance Department have been consulted with regard to the requests contained in this report.
Recommendations:
It is recommended that:
(1)the Budget Committee be requested to recommend the approval of interim spending authority, in the amount of
$12,618,000.00 for the projects identified in Appendix "A", prior to the approval of the Water and Wastewater Division's
1999-2003 Capital Works Program;
(2)subject to approval of Recommendation No. (1) above, authority be granted to extend and amend the existing
consulting and engineering services contract with EMA Canada Inc., by an amount not to exceed $979,203.00 including
Goods and Services Tax;
(3)subject to approval of Recommendation No. (1) above, authority be granted to engage the firms listed in Table 2 of
this report, to maximum amounts indicated therein; and
(4)the appropriate City officials be directed to take the necessary action to give effect thereto.
Council Reference/Background/History:
The Water and Wastewater Services Division's 1999-2003 Capital Works Program was prepared and submitted on the
assumption that approvals for 1999 expenditures would be obtained before the end of 1998 as originally scheduled. With
the approval of the capital budget now deferred to late January 1999, interim spending authority is required to continue
projects in early January.
Comments and/or Discussion and/or Justification:
There are projects underway within the division where funding approval only exists to the end of 1998, yet the actual work
and the project timetable is dependent upon continuing into January of 1999 with the work program.
As identified in Appendix "A", the applicable projects are as follows:
Biosolids (included in Project No. 160 - Main Treatment Plant - Sludge Utilization):
Council has approved fast tracking the 100 percent beneficial use of biosolids process to ensure that we cease incineration
at the Main Treatment Plant by January 2001. The division has issued a Request for Proposals (RFP) for the Biosolids
Beneficial Use Program, with submissions to be received on or before December 16, 1998. Respondents' proposals will be
evaluated and it is anticipated that recommendations will be brought to Council in February 1999.
The firm of R.V. Anderson has been retained to assist the City in its move to 100 percent beneficial use.
In view of the accelerated timing and to ensure adequate funds are available, an expenditure of $1.5 million is required to
cover the cost of consulting services, project initiation and to support the activities of the Council appointed Biosolids
Multi-Stakeholder Committee and the Independent Review Committee.
It should be noted, however, that an amount of $0.3 million has been transferred from the Biosolids Odour Control Facility
and hence, the incremental interim funding request is lowered to a net amount of $1.2 million.
Taste and Odour Control Facilities (included in Project No. 373 - Plant Process Additions):
The submitted 1999 Capital Works Program identifies a request in the order of $7 million for plant process additions to
address taste and odour control at the four filtration plants. This funding will provide for a short-term solution for taste and
odour control solutions in the drinking water.
The completion of the project is targeted for the beginning of July, which is one month in advance of the time when taste
and odour problems are expected to develop. In order to meet this time frame, it is necessary for us to prepare and issue
tenders for the work at the four filtration plants, commencing as early as possible in 1999.
We are requesting, therefore, interim funding approval in the amount of $0.40 million in order to commence work in early
January 1999.
District Operation and Maintenance Contracts:
There are several sewer and water projects at the District Level where an early tender and award in January will ensure
competitive rates as well as an early start on the projects. Some of the work can be carried out in the winter months, and
therefore the contractors bid low to ensure their resources are utilized as much as possible in the winter. The projects are
identified in Appendix "A".
Works Best Practices Program:
The original Phase 1 of the Works Best Practices Program (WBPP) was planned to end in October 1998. However, due to
amalgamation of the new City and protracted discussions with the Union, Local 416, the program's implementation
schedule was significantly impacted. As a result, the implementation plan was revised several times over the past few
months. Work is now proceeding to finalize a formal Terms of Reference for Phase 2 consulting and implementation
requirements, with the intent of issuing an RFP in December of 1998. It is anticipated that the resulting contract award
would be finalized by mid-March 1999.
The workplan for the remaining program implementation requirements has now been finalized. As originally planned,
there is a clear need for consultants' support to continue the implementation process. The scope of the consulting activities
covers project management, organizational design, practices redesign, technology infrastructure and process control
systems implementation, and work management and performance management systems implementation.
The Phase 1 consulting, design and preliminary implementation services contract with EMA Canada Inc., operating in
consortium with ten local firms, is nearing completion of its agreed scope of work and budget at the end of 1998. We are,
therefore, seeking approval for interim funding to continue Best Practices Program implementation during the first several
weeks in 1999, through a short-term extension of the current contract for services with the EMA-led consortium.
We are proposing that the EMA consortium provide key personnel at the original rates of the Phase 1 contract that expires
by the year end. Using the same key personnel that are needed during the transition period until mid-March 1999, the
estimated maximum costs are $979,203.00, including Goods and Services Tax. Table 1 below highlights the costs and
related activities. This is based on the anticipated timing for the contract award for Phase 2 requirements. In light of the
fact that the schedules for Committee and Council meetings in 1999 have yet to be established, any delay which may result
in a need for further approvals will be brought forward to the Committees and Council at that time.
Table 1
Works Best Practices Program Contract Extension with EMA - Costs and Related Activities
Work Category |
Work Description |
1999
Requirement
(Full GST) |
Program Management |
Provide ongoing support of project
communications, standards, procedures and
guidelines, planning and scheduling, project
administration and project integration |
$177,374 |
Technology
Integration |
Provide ongoing support for technology architecture
and standards development and integration. Ensure
continued integrated implementation of technologies |
$159,846 |
PCS Implementation
Management |
Provide support for the acquisition of consulting
and contracting resources for the Water Pollution
Control Process Control System Detailed Design and
Water Supply Process Control System Preliminary
Design |
$63,780 |
Organizational
Services |
Provide ongoing support for human resource
management, staff training and development,
management training and development and
organization design |
$176,977 |
Work Area Practices
Implementation |
Provide continued support of the plant-wide
integrated work area implementation at Highland
Creek Treatment plant and the initial
implementation in Water Supply Transmission |
$184,344 |
Work Management
System
Implementation |
Provide continued support of the configuration of
WMS for Water Supply and continued support of
WMS implementation at Highland Creek Treatment
plant |
$100,212 |
POMS
Implementation |
Provide ongoing performance implementation
support for the initial work areas in Water Pollution
Control and Water Supply Transmission |
$88,212 |
Quality Assurance |
Provide ongoing monitoring of the progress and the
production of deliverables on the WBPP |
$28,458 |
Total (including full
GST) |
|
$979,203 |
Similarly, there are several existing professional service agreements for specific technical and implementation support to
the program, which will also expire at the end of 1998. It will be necessary to renew certain of these agreements for 1999.
All the work is on a time and materials basis as per their current agreements and Table 2 below summarizes the
requirements. The value of the specified work to be delivered in 1999 is shown in the right hand column. Approval for
agreement renewals is sought now in order to continue necessary work in January 1999.
Table 2
Recommended Firms for Specified Works Best Practices Program Related Services
Firm |
Key Roles and Activities |
1999
Requirement
(Full GST) |
Ball Hsu & Associates
Ltd. |
WMS Technical and Implementation Coordination;
Knowledge Base Implementation and
Administration |
$184,000 |
cdmoore
Communications |
Change Management Communications
Management and Support |
$72,000 |
Chartwell I.R.M. Inc. |
Knowledge Base Development and Support |
$136,000 |
EDS Canada Inc. |
Project Technologies Support; Work area
Implementation Support; Oracle Database
Administration; POMS Implementation |
$330,000 |
QCA (Division of
775174 Ontario Ltd.) |
Program Management and Coordination; Integration
Quality Control and Testing |
$410,000 |
Prior & Prior
Associates Ltd. |
POMS Support, GMC Support, Test Coordination |
$64,890 |
Thorburn Penny Ltd. |
Technology Configuration Management; Database
Integration and Management Services; Interim
Process Control Systems Support |
$420,000 |
Vector Technical
Services Inc. |
Technology Infrastructure Support - Water Supply |
$93,000 |
Total ( including full
G.S.T. ) |
|
$1,709,890 |
Once Council approves the 1999 Capital Budget, a number of other contracts will be initiated for process control systems
and related components required under the Best Practices Program. They will be reported to Committees as appropriate.
The amount required to extend the EMA and Table 2 agreements, to their upset limits in 1999, is $2,689,093.00 including
Goods and Services Tax. All the expenditures identified herein are consistent with the overall Works Best Practices
Program budget as identified in the report which was adopted by Council in October 1998. Adherence to the overall
workplan, including the timely procurement and utilization of necessary professional and consulting resources, is
fundamental to sustaining this progress toward successful completion of the program.
Conclusion:
In order to address the expected delay in approval by Council of the 1999 Capital Budget, as well as the winding down of
Phase 1 to the implementation of Phase 2 of the Best Practices Program, we have identified a need for interim capital
funding approval in certain areas of the Water and Wastewater Services Division. These areas are critical in that work is
either required to continue on from 1998 or needed to be started as soon as possible in 1999, in order to achieve the
timetable associated with these various projects, and take advantage of better construction prices for contracts issued
during the winter months.
Contact Name and Telephone Number:
Michael A. Price, P. Eng., FICE, General Manager, Water and Wastewater Services Division,
Phone: (416) 392-8200; Fax: (416) 392-4540, E-mail: mprice@city.toronto.on.ca.
27
Official Plan: 1999 Funding Allocation
(City Council on December 16 and 17, 1998, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)
The Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee recommends the adoption of the recommendations of the Budget
Committee contained in the following communication (December 10, 1998) from the City Clerk:
Recommendation:
The Budget Committee on December 8, 1998 recommended to the Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee and Council
the adoption of the report (November 27, 1998) from the Commissioner of Urban Planning and Development Services.
Background:
The Budget Committee on December 8, 1998 had before it a report (November 27, 1998) from the Commissioner of Urban
Planning and Development Services recommending that Council approve funding in the amount of $700,000.00 from
Transition funding for the preparation of a new Official Plan for 1999.
--------
(Report dated November 27, 1998, addressed to the
Budget Committee from the
Commissioner of Urban Planning and Development Services)
Purpose:
This report responds to Council's direction with respect to funding for the development of a new Official Plan for the City.
Funding Sources, Financial Implications and Impact:
Funds in the amount of $700,000.00 are being requested as part of the 1999 Capital Transition Costs.
Recommendations:
(1)That Council approve funding in the amount of $700,000.00 from Transition funding for the preparation of a new
Official Plan (PUD-1 Urban Planning) for 1999; and
(2)that the appropriate City Officials be authorized and directed to take the necessary action to give effect thereto.
Council Reference/Background:
In April, City Council decided to develop a new Official Plan for the City of Toronto. Council also directed that,
"should the estimated funding of $250,000.00 not be provided as part of the 1998 Transition Costs, the Commissioner of
Planning and Urban Development Services be requested to submit a report to the Urban Environment and Development
Committee demonstrating how these funds will be accommodated within the budget process."
Council also directed that an extensive public consultation process and a broad mandate for policy development be part of
the plan's development. (Clause No. 17 of Report No. 4 of The Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee).
At its meeting of July 29, 30 and 31, 1998, Council approved the New Official Plan as a Transition Project, but directed the
Commissioner of Urban Planning and Development Services to report back to the Budget Committee in October, if
funding for this project could not be absorbed within the departmental operating budget. (Clause No. 1 of Report No. 15 of
The Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee). The total transition funding requested for the new Plan was $500,000.00
- $250,000.00 in 1998, and $250,000.00 in 1999. These were external costs to cover consultation and communications,
research and council workshops.
The re-organization of the Department and appointment of the Manager of the Official Plan and Zoning By-law has taken
longer than originally anticipated. Consequently, the Official Plan work program and associated budgetary requirements
were determined during October and November, and are reflected in the current budget request.
Comments:
The new plan is not intended to be a simple amalgamation of the existing plans. It will be a completely different approach,
reflecting the shared values and expectations of the new City. The Plan will be characterized by strategic policies that focus
on quality of life as the key to a vibrant economically successful City. It will be a road map for public and private
reinvestment opportunities in the City - an innovative plan that will unleash new investment and growth. The plan will help
grow the City's economy. The budget for the new Official Plan is an investment in the City's future.
We are requesting $700,000.00 in transition funding, or about 34 cents per resident. This figure reflects revisions to the
work program which take into account a thorough analysis of issues and an expanded consultation process, outreach
program and communication process with various stakeholders, as directed by Council. Transition funding is being sought
for the external costs of the new Plan as follows:
Research and data$ 50,000.00
Consultants Studies$200,000.00
Public consultation and communication$400,000.00
Council round tables$ 50,000.00
(workshops, visioning exercises)
In addition to the consultants, we are establishing a City Planning Division staff team to produce the Official Plan.
The funding requested will be good value for the money spent, especially compared with the costs of developing plans in
other cities. Some recent examples are:
(i)Toronto's CityPlan '91 required $1.7 million over three years;
(ii)London, Ontario's Vision '96 project required $6 million of which $3.56 million was for studies;
(iii)The Region of York's Official Plan cost $1 million over one and a half years;
(iv)The Calgary Transportation Plan's public consultation cost $4 million over four years;
(v)Atlanta's recent Vision Project cost $1.1 million (US) for consultant studies, computer equipment, etc, plus
$800,000.00 in in-kind donations;
(vi)Edmonton's new Official Plan cost $1.1 million; and
(vii)Vancouver's CityPlan's public consultation cost about $1.7 million.
Toronto's population is about 2.4 million. None of the cities listed above has more than a million.
Funding for the $700,000.00 in external costs cannot be absorbed in the Department's operating budget, for the following
reasons:
(i)During 1998, the City Planning Division lost 25 per cent of its staff resources due to restructuring. As a result of
reduced staff resources, outside expertise and consultant assistance will be required to undertake key planning studies to
meet Council's April 2,000 completion target. In addition, the $700,000.00 being sought would represent a 33 per cent
increase to the City Planning Division's non-salary operating budget, and absorbing it would undermine the Division's
operating capability.
(ii)Consultation with the general public and stakeholder groups across the amalgamated City is costly but essential to
achieving public confidence in a new Plan.
(iii)The budgets for the previous municipal planning departments did not provide for a project of this nature, so it was
not provided for in the amalgamated City Planning Division's budget.
The new Official Plan qualifies as a transition project because the need for a new Plan arises as a result of amalgamation.
There are clear benefits to having an Official Plan that addresses the new city as a single municipality. The existing Official
Plans, containing over 2,000 pages of differing policies, do not offer a clear direction or a workable planning framework
for the new amalgamated City.
The benefits of a new Official Plan include:
(i)enabling Council to articulate its vision for the growth of the City and the protection of established neighbourhoods
and communities;
(ii)positioning the City to capture economic growth and sustain a high quality of life;
(iii)providing a guide to make the best and most effective use of public and private investment in the City in these times
of financial constraint;
(iv)allowing more effective use of our limited staff resources: a new Plan providing for a consistent policy direction will
enable staff to move easily from one location to another; and
(v)providing better customer service: by eliminating confusing and in some instances contradictory policies from one
location to another, a new Plan for the new City will enable Council and staff to provide better service for all stakeholders
in the City, and will enhance the investment opportunities for the City.
If the Plan is not funded as a transition project:
(i)we will not be able to carry out the broad consultation directed by Council;
(ii)we will have to forgo external consultation and expertise that will be required in order to ensure that we take
advantage of lessons learned elsewhere and are able to conduct specific studies within a short time frame;
(iii)we will not be able to complete the OP in the time frame envisaged; and
(iv)we may lose the momentum that is starting to build around this project - particularly the interest being shown by a
wide range of stakeholders, through their input to Task Forces and other committees.
We will be reporting in January on the framework for developing the new Plan and the time frame and milestones that lie
ahead in order to have it adopted by Council during this term.
Conclusion:
Council has recognized the benefits of developing a new Official Plan and has approved its funding as a transition project.
In order to provide an extensive public consultation and broad analysis of issues, as directed by Council, $700,000.00 in
transition funds are required.
Contact Name:
Kerri Voumvakis, Toronto Metro Hall, Telephone: (416) 392-8126, Fax: (416) 392-3821 .
28
September 30, 1998 Operating Budget
Variance Report and Surplus Analysis
(City Council on December 16 and 17, 1998, deferred consideration of this Clause to the next regular meeting of City
Council to be held on February 2, 3 and 4, 1999.)
The Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee recommends the adoption of the recommendations of the Budget
Committee contained in the following communication (December 10, 1998) from the City Clerk:
Recommendation:
The Budget Committee on December 8, 1998 recommended to the Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee and Council
the adoption of the report (November 24, 1998) from the Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer with respect to the
September 30, 1998 Operating Budget Variance Report.
The Budget Committee reports having received as information the report (December 4, 1998) from the Chief Financial
Officer and Treasurer providing a comparison of surplus sources for the years 1996 - 1998 and an analysis of surplus by
former municipalities from 1996 and 1997.
The Budget Committee reports having requested the Board of Management for the CNE and CNEA to provide a report to
the Budget Committee meeting scheduled for January 19, 1999 on:
(a)the comments of the Auditor, the concerns expressed over the last five years and how they have been addressed;
(b)what actions have been taken, other than the review of the admittance fees to stop the continuing loss; and
(c)what actions have been taken to make the casino a break-even operation.
Background:
The Budget Committee on December 8, 1998 had before it the following:
-report (December 4, 1998) from the Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer regarding the September 30, 1998 Operating
Budget Variance Report; and
-report (November 24, 1998) from the Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer regarding Surplus Analysis.
--------
(Report dated December 4, 1998, addressed to the
Budget Committee from the
Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer)
Purpose:
This report and the attached Schedules A - comparing the surplus sources for the years 1996 - 1998 and B - analysis of
surplus by former municipalities from 1996 and 1997 are submitted in response to a request of the Budget Committee.
Recommendation:
It is recommended that this report be received as information.
Background History:
Budget Committee, at its meeting of September 15, 1998, requested a report showing the sources of surplus for the years
1996 and 1997, highlighting surplus sources that are of a one time nature and therefore are not expected to reoccur.
This report and the attached Schedules A - comparing the surplus sources for the years 1996 - 1998 and B - analysis of
surplus by former municipalities from 1996 and 1997 are submitted in response to the request of the Budget Committee.
Comments:
Departmental surplus over the period 1996 - 1998 is relatively stable at $28 million. This surplus is not expected to
continue as each future budget cycle will produce tighter budgets, therefore leaving less available as a recurring nature for
2,000 and 2,001 budgets.
Tax related surplus items consisting of tax deficiency payments in lieu of taxes, supplementary taxes and tax penalties
contributed significantly as well to the 1996 and 1997 surpluses ($16.1 million and $7.2 million respectively), but will
have the reverse effect in 1998 - a loss of $12 million - arising from the delay in the assessment roll in 1998. Investments
earnings loss of $13.7 million also arises from the delay in the roll causing a total of $25 million in surplus loss going into
1999 as related to the delay in the assessment roll. This loss in investment earnings is not expected to recur in 1999, nor is
the tax penalty revenue loss.
Greater than expected tax deficiencies in 1997 in the former Metro was the single largest contributor to the reduced surplus
from 1996 to 1997. The deficiencies are expected to be on budget for 1998, thus not creating any surplus contribution to
1999.
The extraordinary 1996 surplus of $81.3 million is comprised of departmental surplus of $28.0 million. Contingency use
was low during the year, particularly in the former Metro, resulting in a $24.4 million surplus. A surplus from contingency
is of a nature that it can not be expected to reoccur annually. Investment earnings, payment in lieu of taxes and
supplementary taxes contributed a further $24.7 million.
The 1997 surplus of $53.8 million is comprised of $27.3 million in departmental surplus and $5.1 million from payments
in lieu of taxes. The $8.1 million in prior years' surplus was primarily the result of the recording of $6.1 million as a result
of the settlement of the Union Station rent dispute. This is an event that will not occur again. Surplus in other revenue of
$13.3 million included $3.1 million in licences and permits, $3.0 million in concessions' rents and $4.4 million as a result
of recoveries of expenditures in excess of budgets in the former City of Toronto.
The former Toronto is the only former municipality that did not generate a departmental surplus over 1996 and 1997. Most
significantly, a $14.9 million departmental overspending occurred in 1997.
Former Scarborough, North York and East York surplus' remained fairly constant in 1996 and 1997, while Etobicoke,
Toronto and York swung in the range of $1 million to $4.5 million.
Variations in surplus from year to year cause an impact on the next year's budget. For example, since our 1997 surplus into
1998 was $53.8 million, and the current projection for 1998 surplus after reserve transfers is $25.9 million, a revenue loss
of $27.9 million could be felt in the 1999 operating budget. As such, it is desirable to reduce surplus down to as close as
zero as possible to remove this effect. Any surpluses from departmental or non-program operations of a onetime nature
should be transferred to reserves. This has been the case in the 1998 projected surplus. The actual projected surplus is
$53.5 million but $27.6 million is being transferred to reserves - $18 million to the Social Services Reserve Fund (our rainy
day fund and for 200 daycare spaces), $1.7 million to Child Care Capital Reserve and $7.9 for Homes for the Ages Capital
Reserve Fund. Variance reports over the year will highlight when such items arise.
Surplus is also reduced by creating better estimates for budget items so that only one time, non recurring items flow - but
then into specific reserves.
Conclusion:
Surplus varies from year to year. Non recurring items should flow to reserves and not impact on surplus variability. As
departmental and non-program estimates become more precise, surplus will shrink to a level as close to zero as possible. It
will then be incumbent on programs to manage overall within their budget on a strict basis.
(Report dated November 24, 1998, addressed to the
Budget Committee from the
Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer)
Purpose:
To provide the overall gross and net expenditure position of the City of Toronto for the nine months ended September 30,
1998 and to identify the funding issues to-date. This is the second scheduled corporate variance report for 1998, with a
further update scheduled for December 31 (as a part of the operating budget process). Areas of significant variation, as
reported by programs as of September 30, 1998, impacting the corporate position are highlighted within this report.
Financial Implications:
The nine month variance report indicates that City departments and operations are overall on track with respect to the 1998
Operating Budget as approved by Council on April 28 and 29, 1998. The projected net under-expenditure to year-end is
$25.9 million, after transfers of surplus to various Community and Neighbourhood Services' reserves of $27.6 million.
This is an improvement of $3.1 million from the June variance position. Under-expenditures from the operational
programs comprise $28.5 million of the total (with $27.2 million originating from the Social Services program) and
corporate accounts are projecting a shortfall of $2.6 million (June reported of $11.9 million). The Parks and Recreation,
and Facilities and Real Estate programs are projecting over-expenditures of $2.7 and $3.5 million, respectively (June
reported of $1.6 and $0.0 million). The Exhibition Place, Toronto Zoo, TTC and Police Services are projecting
over-expenditures totalling $5.5 million (June reported of $4.5 million).
It should be noted that subsequent to the 1998 budget approval, Council decisions have been made to addback items
impacting the financial position of the corporation, through either draws to contingency (totalling $5.7 million) or
absorption into existing budgets (totalling approximately $2.7 million).
Recommendation:
It is recommended that:
(1)as a direct result of Provincial downloading adjustments, the Housing under-expenditures, to the extent of $10.5
million, be used to reduce the Transfer from the Transition Reserve Fund;
(2)one-time transition funding of approximately $7.9 million in Homes for the Aged, be transferred to a new reserve fund
to be created for Homes for the Aged Capital; and
(3)to more accurately align budgets with the new reporting structures, the 1998 budget estimates be adjusted as reflected
within the text of this report.
Comments:
Year to Date and Projected Year-End Variances:
The Corporation's total gross expenditure for the period ended September 30, 1998 of $3,621.5 million is $240.0 million
or 6.2 percent under budget. On a net basis, the year-to-date expenditure of $1,627.6 million is $ 111.1 million or 6.4
percent under budget, based on the 1998 budget prorated to September 30, 1998.
The Corporation's projected year-end gross expenditure on the levy is $5,319.0 million, reflecting $220.8 million
under-expenditure or 4.0 percent under budget. On a net basis, the projected under-expenditure on the levy is $25.9
million, primarily attributable to $28.5 million in program under-expenditures and an $2.6 million shortfall in the corporate
accounts.
Approved draws to September 30, 1998 from contingency total $5,718.0 thousand.
Based on the adjusted actual figures, the following table highlights the contributors to the projected year-end gross and net
expenditure variances.
Projected Year-End Variances ($ Millions)
Gross Expenditures Net Expenditures
Over / (Under) Estimate Over / Under Estimate
(1)Community and Neighbourhood Services(203.5)(28.3)
(2)Works and Emergency Services 9.5 (4.2)
(3)Economic Development, Culture and Tourism 2.6 3.0
(4)Urban Planning and Development Services 0.0 (7.0)
(5)Corporate Services 1.8 3.1
(6) Exhibition Place 2.5 2.1
(7)TTC (3.3) 2.1
(8)Police 5.9 0.6
(9)Toronto Zoo (0.8) 0.8
(10)Corporate Accounts (28.3) 2.6
(11)Other (7.2) (0.7)
Projected Year-End Variance(220.8)(25.9)
The net position changes from the June variance, as well as a summary explaining the departments with significant or
negative change are outlined below:
Projected Year-End Variances ($ Millions)
June VarianceSeptember Variance
Over / (Under)Over / (Under)
ProjectedProjected
Net EstimateNet Estimate
Community and Neighbourhood Services(30.9)(28.3)
Works and Emergency Services(2.4) (4.2)
Economic Development, Culture and Tourism1.13.0
Urban Planning and Development Services(5.9)(7.0)
Corporate Services(0.1)3.1
Special Purpose Bodies4.55.5
Corporate Accounts11.92.6
Other(0.8)(0.6)
Total Net Expenditure(22.8)(25.9)
(a)Community and Neighbourhood Services - Projected net under-expenditure decrease of $2.6 million (from $30.9
million in June to $28.3 million in September) due to improved unde-expenditure positions in Children's Services, Homes
for the Aged, and Public Health, offset by higher projected expenditures in Social Services and higher reserve contributions
associated with the Child Care Capital Reserve Fund and the National Child Benefit Savings;
(b)Economic Development, Culture and Tourism - Projected net over-expenditure increase of $1.9 million (from $1.1
million in June to $3.0 million in September) due to higher shortfall positions in the Parks and Recreation primarily due to
the late approval of the organizational structure and the delay in the implementation of the downsizing plan;
(c)Corporate Services - Projected net over-expenditure increase of $3.2 million (from $0.1 million under-expenditure in
June to $3.1 million over-expenditure in September) due to delays in the reorganization and implementation of the
downsizing plan within the Facilities and Real Estate program;
(d)Special Purpose Bodies - Projected net over-expenditure increase of $1.0 million (from $4.5 million in June to $5.5
million in September) primarily attributable to Exhibition Place from the lower than budgeted CNE revenues associated
with new promotions, offset by a reduction in the Police Services' over-expenditure; and
(e)Corporate Accounts - Projected net shortfall decrease of $9.3 million (from $11.9 million shortfall in June to $2.6
million shortfall in September) due to lower interest/investment earnings, parking tag revenue, and temporary borrowing,
as well as higher supplementary taxes and payments in lieu of taxes. Temporary borrowing requirements are lower due to
using investments to fulfill short-term borrowing needs and the lower interest and investment earnings are associated with
the delay in the final tax bill issuance. Revenue shortfalls in parking tag operations relate primarily to the a lower collection
rate on parking fines. At this point in time, supplementary taxes are projected to be $15.2 million under-budget, a slight
improvement from the $18.4 million projected in the June position. Additionally, the payments in lieu of taxes are
expected to be $10.0 million over-budget.
The attached Appendices A and B support this report, reflecting the corporate gross and net variance, on a year-to-date and
projected year-end basis. In some instances the budget estimates have been adjusted to account for re-alignments related to
the definition of organizational structures. These adjustments are summarized later in the report.
Appendices C and D are attached to reflect the corporate salaries and benefits expenditures and corporate staff reductions
related to the Restructuring program.
Based on the submissions received, the programs= year-to-date expenditures for salary and benefits account for
approximately 70 percent of the annual salary budget. Actual salaries and benefits to September 30, 1998 are underspent by
$20.4 million for levy operations and are forecast to be $5.4 million underspent by year-end. This represents a $10.6
million reduction from the $16.0 million projected year-end under-expenditure reported in the June variance report. Delays
in the approval of restructuring plans and the resultant deferral of implementation, are the major contributing factors to the
change in position. This in turn, will increase the required financial reductions for the 1999 operating budget. In three
instances, Parks and Recreation, Economic Development and Facilities and Real Estate, the delays in reorganizing
negatively impact the projected year-end position to the extent of being over-expended on a net basis for the year, however,
the staff reductions by year-end are projected to be on-target. The impact of these three programs' projected
over-expenditures total $6.4 million. The Amalgamation Office in the City will continue to monitor the progress of the
actual employee exits within the corporation against the anticipated levels.
(1)Community and Neighbourhood Services:
The adjusted net budget variance of Community and Neighbourhood Services is comprised of the following:
Expenditures Over / (Under) Budget
($ millions)
GrossNetNet
Sept. 30, 1998Sept. 30, 19981998 Projected
Program AreaYear-to-DateYear-to-DateYear-End
Children's Services (26.1) (2.2)(2.4)
Housing (2.2) (0.2)(11.8)
Social Services (104.2) (20.3)(27.2)
Library (2.7) (2.7) 0.0
Homes for the Aged (3.4) (10.6) (9.3)
Public Health (3.4) (5.3) (4.9)
Other (Hostels, Housing, Social Dev.) (1.1) (1.0) (0.3)
Contribution to Reserve* 0.0 0.0 27.6
Total Department Expenditures (143.1) (42.3)(28.3)
*Consists of $1.7 million in Children's Services for the Child Care Capital Reserve Fund, $18.0 million in Social Services
for the Social Services Reserve Fund and $7.9 million in Homes for the Aged for the Homes for the Aged Capital Reserve
Fund.
Children's Services:
The Children's Services program is experiencing year-to-date gross and net under-expenditures of $26.1 and $2.2 million
primarily due to the delay in the Provincial transfer of management responsibility of Purchased Services such as Special
Needs Resourcing, Resource Centres and wage subsidies.
On a projected annual net basis, the delay in the Provincial transfer and an anticipated increase in user fee revenue resulting
from a more favourable case mix associated with the delay in the Ontario Works implementation, result in a net
under-expenditures of $2.4 million
This projected net under-expenditure will be reduced by $1.7 million in projected excess user fees, with the amount being
transferred to the Child Care Capital Reserve Fund, as approved by Council on July 30, 1998.
The program has identified that $0.8 million may be required as a contribution for the municipal 20 percent share to the
provincial adjustment of Ontario Works funding.
Housing:
The Ministry of Housing has advised Housing that payments for the amortization of the public housing stock will not occur
until December, with the City being invoiced in January 1999. The program has been accruing these items, with no
variance to be reflected. The Ministry has not yet provided a year-end forecast. A favourable year-end gross and net
variance of $19.7 and $11.8 million, respectively, are being projected due to the Province no longer requiring
municipalities to assume costs dedicated for Supportive Housing. This amount reduces the net impact of Provincial
downloading on the City, therefore, it is recommended that to the extent of $10.5 million, these under-expenditures be used
to reduce the Transfer from the Transition Reserve Fund.
Social Services:
For the September year-to-date, the Social Services program has a favourable gross variance of $104.2 million or 12.6
percent primarily attributable to:
(a)$51.4 million resulting from the change in budget assumptions relating to the number of transferred cases from
provincially downloaded programs, as well as the delay in the transfer of these cases to the City of Toronto;
(b)$20.7 million related to the Ontario Works Program, due to a revised Provincially approved Ontario Works Business
Plan and underutilization of the Employment Support budget due to maximum funding levels imposed by the Province;
and
(c)$27.7 million attributable to lower than budgeted average caseload. Actual average caseload to date is 82,948 versus
the budgeted caseload of 88,000.
As a result of this favourable gross under-expenditure and a change in the funding for Ontario Works Program delivery
from 50/50 to 80/20, the program's September year-to-date net savings are $20.2 million.
On a projected year-end basis, continuing these trends, the program identifies a favourable net under-expenditure of $27.2
million.
Projected funding of $18.0 million is to be set aside at year-end for the Social Services Reserve Fund, for the following
purposes:
(a)$16.0 million for the Social Services Reserve Fund, established by City Council during the 1998 Budget approval
process. This reserve is intended to protect the City against future caseload increases by redirecting savings incurred from
social assistance, in the event the caseload drops below 88,000 cases and to provide interim funding for the 2,000 childcare
spaces for clients leaving assistance; and
(b)$2.0 million for the National Child Benefit Savings (NCBS). This is a Federal government initiative. Effective August
1998, the Federal government increased benefits for low-income families with children. These increased benefits will be
treated as income for Social Services recipients, thus reducing their Ontario Works entitlement. The resulting net savings
are to be reinvested in programs and services to support children of low-income families, per Provincial government
directives. This item was subject of a report to the Community and Neighbourhood Services Committee on November 5,
1998 (Clause 1, Proposed Reinvestment Strategy for Municipal Savings) and was deferred back to staff for an additional
report, addressing the implications of giving the funding back to the affected families.
Library:
Current under-expenditures of $2.7 million, gross and net, result from spending delays for library material and other
services, to offset anticipated over-expenditures in staffing costs resulting from reorganization delays. At this time, the
Library is projecting to reduce staffing by 102.0 by year-end, compared with the budgeted staff reductions of 151.5. These
actions are projected to result in program spending for year-end to be within budget.
Homes for the Aged:
Homes for the Aged reports year-to-date gross under-expenditures of $3.4 million, consisting of $2.0 million for salary and
benefit expenditure patterns differing from the allocated budget, $0.7 million from the Supportive Housing program
restructuring to conform with the Ministry of Health's new direction, $0.3 million due to a temporary payment decrease to
Homemaker agencies, and $0.4 million of miscellaneous under-expenditures. On a net basis, the under-expenditure is
further increased to $10.6 million, due to one-time transition subsidy funding made available by the Ministry of Health.
On a projected year-end basis, the program reports a favourable net under-expenditure of $9.3 million attributable to an
increase in basic accommodation revenue resulting from fewer residents receiving subsidy.
The one-time transition funding is estimated to contribute $7.9 million of the projected year-end total. Subject to the
year-end results, this transition funding should be transferred to a reserve for Homes for the Aged Capital. This item has
been captured in the Contribution to reserve line for Community and Neighbourhood Services Department. In the June
variance report, this item was included in the year-end surplus projection.
Public Health:
The program reports favourable year-to-date, gross and net under-expenditures of $3.4 and $5.3 million, related to delays
in program implementation of Healthy Babies / Healthy Children, Healthy Babies Possible and Parents Helping Parents,
position gapping pending the program's reorganization, and unbudgeted funding from the Ministry of Health for the
Preschool Speech and Language Services System starting in April 1998. These same factors influence the favourable
year-end net under-expenditure of $4.9 million.
(2)Works and Emergency Services:
The adjusted net budget variance of the Works and Emergency Services is primarily comprised of the following:
Net Expenditures Over / (Under) Budget
($ Millions)
Sept. 30, 19981998 Projected
Program Area (excluding Police) Year-to-Date Year-End
Fire (6.3) 0.8
Solid Waste Management(11.5)(4.7)
Transportation(11.2) 0.0
Ambulance (0.3)(0.3)
Total Department Expenditures(29.3)(4.2)
Fire:
With a significant net under-expenditure of $6.3 million reported year-to-date due to equalization of the budget allocations,
the Fire Program projects spending patterns to self-correct by year end, leaving a year-end net over-expenditure of $0.8
million related to the delay in the implementation of the new fees revenue.
Solid Waste Management:
Year-to-date the Solid Waste Management Program reports a net under-expenditure of $11.5 million, associated with the
higher than estimated disposal revenue. The year-to-date actual revenue related to disposal tonnage is exceeding budgeted
levels by approximately 120,000 tonnes. These sizable variances are attributable to the City's competitive pricing, as well
as an improved economy.
A graph of the budgeted and actual tonnage levels for the years 1996-1997, along with the year-to-date budget, actuals and
projections for 1998 follow.
While this revenue trend is projected to continue through year-end, the impact is a net under-expenditure of $4.7 million.
Higher disposal revenue amounting to $6.2 million will be offset by higher transfer and haulage costs at the transfer
stations, as well as higher royalty payments to the Region of York for the Keele Valley landfill site.
Transportation:
The Transportation Program reports a favourable year-to-date net variance of $11.2 million, while reporting $5.7 million in
salary and benefit over-expenditures. These over-expenditures are attributable to budget misallocations within the program
and between Facilities and Real Estate, Urban Planning and Licensing. Significant efforts are underway to determine the
nature and extent of the relationships.
Projections for year-end are that the program will be on budget; correcting the misallocations resulting in a $7.6 million
over-expenditure in salaries and benefits, as well as absorbing the $1.3 million projected shortfall in winter maintenance
(as identified in the June variance report) through reduced non-salary expenditures and increases in revenue.
(3)Economic Development, Culture and Tourism:
The adjusted net budget variance of the Economic Development, Culture and Tourism is primarily comprised of the
following:
Net Expenditures Over / (Under) Budget
($ Millions)
Sept. 30, 19981998 Projected
Program Area Year-to-Date Year-End
Arts, Culture & Heritage(0.3)0.0
Economic and Tourism Development(0.6)0.2
Parks and Recreation(3.1)2.7
Other (Conservation, Special Events, Theatres
And Galleries) 0.00.1
Total Department Expenditures(4.0)3.0
Economic and Tourism Development:
Year-to-date net under-expenditures of $0.6 million are the result of delayed implementation of program initiatives. Delays
in the approval of the restructuring process are expected to impact the year-end net position with an unfavourable $0.2
million over-expenditure.
Parks and Recreation:
Year-to-date net under-expenditures of $3.1 million are primarily attributable to timing differences. By year-end it is
anticipated that the program will incur a net over-expenditure of $2.7 million, of which $2.5 million relates to salaries and
benefits, resulting from the late approval of the organizational structure and subsequent delayed implementation of the
downsizing plan. Fifty percent of the budget reduction strategy was based on staff reductions effective July 1, 1998. While
the program estimates that the staff reduction target will be reached by year-end, it also estimates a significant
over-expenditure of $2.5 million for staffing costs.
Additionally, it should be noted that the program has absorbed over $0.7 million in unanticipated budget pressures during
the 1998 budget year, consisting of the Parking Pilot Program deferral ($0.2 million), unrealized brochure and facility
advertising revenues ($0.4 million), provision of no-charge public swimming across the City per Council directive, and the
extension of the swimming season ($0.3 million).
(4)Urban Planning and Development Services:
The adjusted net budget variance of the Urban Planning and Development Services department is comprised of the
following:
Net Expenditures Over / (Under) Budget
($ millions)
Sept. 30, 19981998 Projected
Program Area (excluding TTC) Year-to-Date Year-End
Toronto Licensing(1.9)(0.9)
Urban Planning and Building(6.7)(6.1)
Total Department Expenditure(8.6)(7.0)
Toronto Licensing:
Year-to-date under-expenditures of $1.9 million are mostly attributable to salaries and benefits, due to unfilled vacancies
offset by an increase in establishment strength linked to accessing the Provincial icon system. Access has been granted for
the first week of October 1998 and staff will be hired before year-end.
A projected year-end net under-expenditure of $0.9 million is a result of the above actions, as well as lower than budgeted
costs for Police reports and mechanical inspections.
Urban Planning and Building Program:
The program reports significant net under-expenditures for September year-to-date and projected year-end of $6.7 million
and $6.1 million, respectively, related to higher development levels than anticipated and the introduction of a new fee
policy.
However, it should be noted that operational over-expenditures continue to occur due to the delay in the restructuring
program. It is expected that staffing costs will exceed the 1998 budget allocation by approximately $1.0 million or 1.7
percent of salaries and benefits.
(5)Corporate Services:
The net budget variance of the Corporate Services department is primarily comprised of the following:
Net Expenditures Over / (Under) Budget
($ millions)
Sept. 30, 19981998 Projected
Program Area Year-to-Date Year-End
Clerk's(0.5) 0.0
Facilities and Real Estate 0.5 3.5
Fleet and Equipment 1.3 0.4
Information Technology 1.4(0.5)
Legal (0.3) 0.0
Other (Audit) 0.1(0.3)
Total Department Expenditures 2.5 3.1
Clerk's:
Year-to-date net under-expenditures of $0.5 million are primarily due to timing differences and are expected to self-correct
by year-end. Revenue shortfalls of $0.3 million related to the closure of three bingo halls are anticipated to be offset by
higher than budgeted printing revenue.
Facilities and Real Estate:
For this program, significant account posting problems have been identified, including the possible misallocation of
part-time salary costs of some 200 plus employees from Transportation, Water Supply and Water Pollution within the
Facilities Program. The matter is presently being investigated for appropriate action.
Delays in the development of the organizational structure and implementation of the downsizing plan will contribute $3.9
million to the projected year-end over-expenditure of $3.5 million.
Fleet and Equipment:
Year-to-date over-expenditures of $1.3 million are primarily related timing differences. By year-end, this situation is
expected to self-correct, leaving the program in an unfavourable $0.4 million position.
Fleet Management has incurred substantial costs on the replacement of major components of vehicles and equipment,
which have extended the useful lives of these vehicles and equipment. Presently Finance is reviewing with Fleet
Management the possibility of transferring these costs to the user departments.
Currently, fleet operations are being reviewed by KPMG, with many future issues being dependent upon the resultant
restructuring and fleet size.
Information Technology:
Year-to-date, the program is net over-expended by $1.4 million attributable to non-salary over-expenditures of $0.8 million
related to the one-time conversion costs for the former City of Toronto mainframe and for current value assessment
upgrades to the tax system, and revenue shortfalls. Revenues will be collected prior to year-end; the program is projecting a
net year-end under-expenditure position of $0.5 million.
Legal:
As indicated in the June variance report, the validity of revenue assumptions continues to be closely monitored. The
approved budget included increased revenues from various initiatives, such as planning fees and reduced overall
expenditures by over a million dollars. To-date the program has experienced a significant shortfall in planning fee income
of $0.8 million, which is projected to result in a $0.5 million shortfall by year-end.
While the program continues to forecast coming in on budget as of September 30, this is due to expenditure reductions and
higher than budgeted inter-departmental recoveries.
(6)Exhibition Place:
Net Expenditures Over / (Under) Budget
($ millions)
Sept. 30, 19981998 Projected
Program Area Year-to-Date Year-End
Exhibition Place1.82.1
An unfavourable year-to-date position of $1.8 million over-expenditure primarily relates to Canadian National Exhibition
(CNE) admission revenues falling below budget by approximately $3.3 million, as a result of promotions, particularly for
Saturday, August 29, 1998 and the "pay-one-price", which may have served as disincentives to the public. This shortfall is
primarily offset by $0.7 million from Exhibition Place operations attributable to heavy use of staff time to support trade
and consumer show requirements for which costs are fully recoverable, $0.5 million in unbudgeted net revenue from the
operation of the casino during the Canadian National Exhibition and $0.4 million net revenues from the National Trade
Center.
For year-end, the National Trade Center and Exhibition Place are forecast to achieve favourable year-end variances of
approximately $0.4 million, through expenditure control and implementation of initiatives to improve service delivery
efficiency.
With the CNE event's significant revenue shortfall, efforts will be directed towards reducing the overall unfavourable
position. All discretionary spending for the remainder of the year will be curtailed and CNEA management, in conjunction
with the finance staff of Exhibition Place, will be reviewing all the 1998 operational data to ensure complete transaction
accrual. In addition, incentives and fee structures will be thoroughly evaluated to assess the impact on 1998 and future
years' income streams.
The overall year-end net projected position is to be a $2.1 million shortfall.
(7)Toronto Transit Commission (TTC):
Net Expenditures Over / (Under) Budget
($ millions)
September, 19981998 Projected
Program Area Year-to-Date Year-End
Toronto Transit Commission (0.3)2.1
The Toronto Transit Commission's (TTC) variance submission is for the period ended August 29, 1998.
While the year-to-date variance is slightly under budget, the projected year-end position reflects a net over-expenditure of
$2.1 million almost entirely attributable to Wheel-Trans operations. Areas of shortfall in Wheel-Trans include the
following:
(a)$1.4 million for Orion II fleet replacement costs;
(b)$0.3 million for additional Orion material maintenance;
(c)$0.2 million for legal fees associated with Charter of Rights and Freedom Challenge; and
(d)$0.2 million additional operating funds to maintain the unaccommodated rate at 2 to 3 percent. Year-to-date the
unaccommodated rate is running at 3.4 percent.
Budgeted annual ridership for 1998 is 392 million rides, however, through August 1998, ridership is 1.7 percent below
budget to-date but 2.0 percent higher when compared with a year ago. Per the TTC, the actual ridership growth has been
less than budgeted due to the decline in the City's jobs for the period of October 1997 through May 1998, extended
holidays to the United States and a severe flu season.
If the current trends continue, the 1998 year-end ridership could be in the range of 386-388 million rides, with revenues
projected to be $4.6 million under budget. It is projected that this revenue shortfall will be fully offset by expenditure
reductions, primarily related to non-implementation of budgeted service improvements, savings in traction power and
accident claims.
A graph of the budgeted and actual TTC ridership figures for the years 1996-1997, along with year-to-date actuals and
projections for 1998 follows.
(8)Toronto Police Service:
Net Expenditures Over / (Under) Budget
($ millions)
Sept. 30, 19981998 Projected
Program Area Year-to-Date Year-End
Toronto Police Service(0.9)0.6
The Toronto Police Service's budget was approved by City Council at $520.7 million gross and $511.2 million net. This
included an expenditure reduction of $8.6 million dollars. Due to operational difficulties and insufficient lead-time, the
Police Service was unable to implement all of Council's recommended budget reductions. As a result, the Service has
restructured its budget to achieve the same net Council approved funding level; $1.9 million of the expenditure reductions
have been deferred and the Service has increased revenue estimates by the same amount. Based on the Council approved
gross and net expenditures, the Police Service is anticipating a projected year-end gross over-expenditure of $5.9 million
and a net over-expenditure of $0.6 million. This reflects a $0.5 million improvement, over the $1.1 million projected
over-expenditure reported in June.
Police Services submitted the September variance report, on the basis of re-stated budget figures, accounting for the
reallocation of expenditures and revenues. The reported net position is mainly attributable to:
(a)$0.7 million over-expenditure for premium pay associated with the impact of the early July Yonge Street closure for
Celebrate Toronto and increased crowd activity as a result of the World Soccer games; and
(b)0.9 million in revenue shortfalls; offset by
(c)$1.2 million in salary savings related to decreased uniform strength and gapping adjustments
The negotiated 1998 contract settlements impact the Police budget by $7.7 million. Funding to offset this increase has been
approved by the Police Services Board and City Council, consisting of $3.5 million from OMERS holiday savings and $4.2
million from OMERS Type-3 Surplus.
(9)Toronto Zoo:
Net Expenditures Over / (Under) Budget
($ millions)
Sept. 30, 19981998 Projected
Program Area Year-to-Date Year-End
Toronto Zoo0.40.8
The net expenditure of the Toronto Zoo is over budget by $0.4 million as of September 30, 1998, due to revenue shortfalls
offset to some extent by expenditure reductions. The drop in attendance is mainly attributable to lower attendance of 90.1
percent of budgeted levels. The expected boost in attendance from the June opening of the new African Savanna did not
materialize. As a result, admission and parking revenues were lower than budgeted.
For year-end, the Zoo projects a net over-expenditure of $0.8 million (including the $0.3 million impact of wage
settlements); attributable to revenue shortfalls of $1.6 million offset more than half, by expenditure reductions of $0.8
million
(10)Corporate Accounts:
Capital Financing & Corporate Financing:
Although it appears as a projected net over-expenditure of $8.6 million in Capital Financing and Corporate Financing, this
is on account of a $10.5 million reduction to the draw from the Transfer for the Transition Reserve Fund, offset by $1.9
million in lower debt charges due to the delay in the timing of debt issuance and lower than forecasted interest rates. The
reduction is associated with the Province no longer requiring municipalities to assume costs dedicated to Supportive
Housing.
An updated downloading schedule is attached as Schedule E.
Non-Program Expenditures:
A projected year-end favourable variance of $26.4 million is primarily related to projected under-spending in the Corporate
Contingency account of $24.2 million and lower temporary borrowing.
Subsequent to the June 30, 1998 variance report, it was determined that funding for the Task Force on Community Access
and Equity ($20.0 thousand) was provided through the Clerk's program 1998 budget. Contingency funding as reported in
the June variance will not be required.
The current status of the Corporate Contingency Account is summarized as follows:
$ Thousands
Approved Contingency Provision 29,945.0
Draws approved to date (Council date):
Millennium Celebration Task Force, (5/14/98) 50.0
By-Election in Ward 1 East York (6/1/98) 122.0
Parking Tags System Upgrade (7/8/98) 350.0
Year 2000 Project - Office (7/31/98)1,500.0
Year 2000 Project - Systems (7/31/98)3,596.0
Accessibility Improvement Projects from
Capital Works Program (9/30/98) 100.0
Total of Contingency Draws 5,718.0
Balance after approved draws 24,227.0
At this time, temporary borrowing requirements are now projected to be under-budget by $6.1 million, an improvement
from the June variance report. Year-to-date, borrowing costs have been contained using investments to fulfill short-term
borrowing requirements. This pattern is expected to be sustained throughout the fourth quarter.
A corporate item has been included in the approved estimate for the 2 percent OMERS contribution reduction effective
January 1, 1998 and amounting to $29.0 million annualized. Negative net variances related to the 2 percent OMERS
reduction of $2.1 million year-to-date and $2.9 million projected year-end, are due to original estimates being based upon
maximum insurable earnings for the entire approved salary budgets. In some instances, calculations based on the maximum
insurable earnings may not be appropriate and significant portions of the salary budgets may be for non-permanent staff
who are not eligible under the OMERS plan.
Non-Program Revenues:
A $20.5 million shortfall is currently projected in the corporate revenues, consisting of:
(a)$13.7 million related to lower interest and investment earnings, associated with the delay in final tax bill issuance
adversely impacting funds available for investment;
(b)$15.2 million from supplementary taxes, due to the move to Current Value Assessment (CVA) and delays in the
processing of supplementary taxes by the assessment office;
(c)$6.9 million reduction in tax penalties due to the two and half month delay in the second billing and changes to the
assessment; and
(d)$2.3 million revenue shortfall in Parking Tag Operations relates primarily reduced parking fine revenue based on a
lower expected collection rate of 78 percent (budget level of 80 percent); offset by
(e)$10.0 million increase to payments in lieu of taxes related to policy changes; and
(f)$7.7 million increase in revenue associated with the 1997 year-end surplus finalization by the former municipalities.
Staff are currently in active discussions with Ministry of Finance officials to recoup the interest and investment earnings
shortfall, as well as tax penalties.
Non-Levy Operations:
Water and Water Pollution Control:
On a year-to-date basis, net expenditures for this program are $7.9 million under budget primarily related to timing issues.
For year-end, the program expects to come in on budget, with a contribution to the reserve of $6.1 million. This amount
reflects the impact of a projected volume increase of 0.7 percent, and a 12.6 percent volume increase for the Region of
York. Additionally there is a $1.0 million revenue increase associated with the reassessment of the Industrial Waste
Surcharge Agreements from estimated to actual discharge levels.
Toronto Harbour Commission and Toronto Parking Authority:
Operating variance submissions for the period ended September 30, 1998, were not received from the Toronto Harbour
Commission and the Toronto Parking Authority, therefore their year-end financial position is unknown at this time. For the
purposes of this report, it was assumed that they will be on-budget.
OMERS Holiday Savings:
The full OMERS contribution holiday effective August 1, 1998 will provide an estimated additional $20.0 million in
savings, after accounting for $3.5 million to offset the Police Services salary settlement. The $20.0 million in savings will
flow into the Employee Benefit Reserve.
Other:
1998 Approved Estimate Adjustments:
Since the June 30, 1998 operating variance report, more organizational structures have been defined and budget accounts
re-aligned. The re-alignments of the approved budget estimates result in a zero net impact to the corporation. The
following budget adjustments are recommended for approval and have been incorporated into the September 30, 1998
operating variance report.
ApprovedRevised
1998 NetAdjustment1998 Net
Program: EstimateEstimate
Arts, Culture and Heritage7,886.7( 599.7) 7,287.0
Parks & Recreation142,907.8( 1,229.1) 141,678.7
Special Events 0.0 2,134.6 2,134.6
Theatres & Galleries 0.0 950.6 950.6
Clerk's 28,664.3( 1,839.8) 26,824.5
Facilities & Real Estate 51,068.9( 750.0) 50,318.9
Legal 16,313.6( 55.9) 16,257.7
Non-Program Expenditures:
Consolidated Grants 45,768.0( 1,869.4) 43,898.6
Capital Financing / Corporate Financing175,721.2( 2,847.0)172,874.2
Liabilities - Employee Related 43,830.0 6,964.8 50,794.8
Liabilities - Current and Future 17,790.0( 5,990.0)11,800.0
Other Corporate Expenditures 86,899.8( 974.8) 85,925.0
Less Non-Program Revenue:
Other Corporate Revenue 46,200.5( 2,982.7) 43,217.8
Other Adjustments 3,123.0( 3,123.0) 0.0
Net Total Impact 0.0
Adjustments for Arts, Culture and Heritage, Parks and Recreation, Special Events and Theatres and Galleries primarily
reflect the dis-entanglement of these budgets. In the Clerk's Program, items have been adjusted for the Special Events
Program and staff expense transfer from Legal. In Facilities and Real Estate, funding changes relate to capital financing of
hydrants.
On the corporate side, Consolidated Grants was inappropriately charged with the funding of drain claim grants, which
belonged in Other Corporate Revenue. Changes to the Capital Financing primarily relate to the capital financing
requirements for Etobicoke. In both Liabilities, Employee Related and Current/Future, changes were made to reflect the
re-classification of items within non-program expenditures. Changes to Other Corporate Revenue, reflect various offsetting
adjustments, including entries for water conservation, drain claim grants, and re-alignment of Other Adjustments.
Conclusion:
At this time, a corporate year-end surplus of $25.9 million is projected, primarily resulting from operational program
under-expenditures of $28.5 million and corporate accounts shortfall of $2.6 million. The City agencies, boards and
commissions of the Toronto Zoo, Exhibition Place, TTC and Police, are reporting to be $5.5 million overspent by year-end.
Program factors noted at this time to monitor and report to committee as necessary with any significant changes from
projected levels are: required funding for the municipal share of contribution toward the provincial adjustment of Ontario
Works funding, General Welfare Assistance (GWA) caseload volumes, waste tonnage and revenues, winter maintenance
expenditures for the seasonal months, Zoo attendance and revenue levels, materialization of development fee revenue
levels, TTC ridership levels, and monitoring activity recoveries and revenue levels at the Police Services.
Contact Name and Telephone Number:
Keshwer Patel, Manager, Budget Operations and Support,
Telephone: 392-8217; Fax: 392-3649;
E-mail: kpatel@mta1.metrodesk.metrotor.on.ca.
Shekhar Prasad, Director of Budgets
Tel: 392-8095; Fax: 392-3649
The Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee also submits the following communication (December 15, 1998)
from Councillor Layton:
Recommendation:
To defer consideration of the use of the $10.5 million fund targeted for supportive housing until January 1999.
Background:
Several key housing initiatives and reports will be brought forward in January. These include:
(i)the final report of the Mayor's Homelessness Action Task Force;
(ii)Councillors' briefing on municipal housing programs, policy, portfolio and expenditures; and
(iii)establishing a Capital Revolving Fund for Affordable Housing.
These reports are in response to a growing homelessness and affordable housing crisis, the dimensions of which is only
now becoming apparent and include:
(i)a 46 percent increase in emergency shelter use by families since 1995;
(ii)rental vacancy rates standing at 0.7 percent with rent increases on vacant units in the 20 percent to 30 percent range;
and
(iii)Demolition Permit applications for 1,100 rental units in the City of Toronto since the introduction of the Rental
Housing Protection Act with no projected affordable housing replacements.
The reports will bring these issues into sharper focus, will make recommendations for immediate actions to address the
crisis and, in the case of the Mayor's report, may recommend new municipal expenditures. As such, it would be imprudent
to reallocate funds already targeted for housing purposes until the housing reports are tabled in January.
29
Heritage Toronto 1998 Cash Flow
(City Council on December 16 and 17, 1998, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)
The Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee recommends the adoption of the recommendations of the Budget
Committee contained in the following communication (December 10, 1998) from the City Clerk:
Recommendation:
The Budget Committee on December 8, 1998 recommended to the Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee and Council
the adoption of the report (December 2, 1998) from the Acting Managing Director, Heritage Toronto.
Background:
The Budget Committee on December 8, 1998 had before it a report (December 2, 1998) from the Acting Managing
Director, Heritage Toronto, recommending that $354,000.00 be advanced against a projected deficit in Heritage Toronto's
1998 operating budget.
--------
(Report dated December 2, 1998, addressed
to the Budget Committee from the
Acting Managing Director, Heritage Toronto)
Purpose:
To request a cash flow advance against a projected deficit in the Heritage Toronto operating budget.
Funding Sources, Financial Implications and Impact Statement:
$354,00.00 to be advanced against a projected deficit in Heritage Toronto's 1998 operating budget.
Recommendation:
That, as a result of delays in the implementation of a new city-wide structure for heritage, and cash-flow issues related to
an additional pay period, payable within the calendar year 1998, the Budget Committee authorize a cash advance against a
projected deficit in Heritage Toronto's 1998 Operating Budget of $354,400.00.
Council Reference / Background / History:
City Council, in anticipation of an early decision with respect to the governance and management of its heritage
programmes on a City-wide basis, approved a reduction in wages and benefits of $354,400.00 as a part of the Board's 1998
Operating Budget. Assumptions existed that a range of services would be consolidated within the City, and the reduction
was understood to be achievable for a half-year beginning July 1st. The corporate environment, and the practice within the
arts, heritage and culture sector, supported no service cuts, nor release of staff prior to Council's decision on how services
were to be managed, in order to facilitate staff's ability to apply for positions within the new structure.
Discussion:
Over the year the Board has made a conscious effort to control and minimize all expenses, particularly human resource
costs in circumstances where there remained flexibility and little public service impact; and to maximize revenue
opportunities, particularly in the areas of facilities rentals and film-shoots. Other specific steps included ongoing review
and fine-tuning of site hours, staffing approaches, and programming / marketing to maximize revenue; and a strategy to
manage revenue shortfalls at The Pier in light of the required reallocation of exhibitions / programme development funds to
correcting structural building code deficiencies. An expenditure-control system was also put in place.
A further issue which increases the year-end cash flow is the fact that, because January 1st is a Friday in 1999, an
additional pay occurs (on the Thursday), within the 1998 calendar year.
Conclusion:
It is recommended that, as a result of delays in the implementation of a new city-wide structure for heritage, and cash-flow
issues related to an additional pay period, payable in the 1998 calendar year, the Budget Committee authorize a cash
advance against a projected deficit in Heritage Toronto's 1998 Operating Budget of $354,400.00.
Contact:
George Waters, Acting Managing Director, Heritage Toronto, 392-6827 x 260, fax 392-6834.
30
National Child Benefit Supplement Reinvestment Plan
(City Council on December 16 and 17, 1998, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)
The Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee recommends the adoption of the recommendations of the Budget
Committee contained in the following communication (December 10, 1998) from the City Clerk:
Recommendation:
The Budget Committee on December 8, 1998 recommended to the Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee and Council
the adoption of the recommendation of the Community and Neighbourhood Services Committee subject to
Recommendations No. (2)(ii) relating to child care alternatives and No. (2)(iii) relating to other enhanced reinvestment
strategies being deferred until such time as the requested legal opinion has been received.
Background:
The Budget Committee had before it a transmittal letter (December 3, 1998) from the City Clerk forwarding the
recommendations of the Community and Neighbourhood Services Committee with respect to the subject matter.
--------
(Transmittal letter dated December 3, 1998, addressed to the
Budget Committee from the City Clerk)
Recommendations:
The Community and Neighbourhood Services Committee on December 3, 1998, recommended to the Budget Committee:
(a)the adoption of the attached report dated November 18, 1998, of the Commissioner of Community and
Neighbourhood Services, subject to amending Recommendation No. (2) to read as follows:
"(2)if the Province disallows the City of Toronto's strategy and the requested legal opinion prevents the City from
granting money directly back to families on social assistance, the City develop a combined strategy whereby:
(i)the reinvestment of Municipal social assistance savings resulting from the implementation of the National Child
Benefit Supplement would go directly to all families on social assistance through a shelter fund that requires the least
intrusive administrative measures;
(ii)child care alternatives and service supports for children of low income families, including those families making the
transition from Ontario Works into sustainable employment, be provided; and
(iii)any other enhanced reinvestment strategies, such as school nutrition programs, continue to be considered; and
(b)that City Council request the Association of Municipalities of Ontario to seek endorsement from its entire membership
of the Region of York's resolution; and to pressure the Provincial Government to change its policy with regard to the
National Child Benefit Supplement.
The Community and Neighbourhood Services Committee reports, for the information of the Budget Committee, having
requested the City Solicitor to provide a legal opinion on the City's proposed strategy with respect to the National Child
Benefit Supplement, in order to determine whether the City is able to develop its own child income program.
Background:
The Community and Neighbourhood Services Committee had before it the following report and communications:
-(November 18, 1998) from the Commissioner of Community and Neighbourhood Services responding to the request of
the Community and Neighbourhood Services Committee to explore alternative options for the reinvestment of Municipal
social assistance savings resulting from the implementation of the National Child Benefit Supplement (N.C.B.S.) in
Toronto; and recommending that;
(1)City Council endorse the Region of York's resolution requesting that "the Minister of Community and Social Services
rescind the decision to consider the National Child Benefit Supplement as income thereby deducting the supplements from
social assistance", and communicate this position to the Minister;
(2)should Recommendation No. (1) not be approved by the Province, and within the current Federal-Provincial
framework agreement for the National Child Benefit, the City's savings from the implementation of the National Child
Benefit be reinvested to develop a combined strategy consisting of:
(i)provision of child care alternatives and service supports for children of low income families including those families
making the transition from Ontario Works into sustainable employment;
(ii)a shelter fund to address the high shelter costs of families with children;
(3)the Commissioner report back to the Community and Neighbourhood Services Committee on an implementation plan
to carry out the proposed reinvestment strategy;
(4)pending provincial confirmation of the actual City savings and review of the City's reinvestment priorities, the
N.C.B.S. savings accrued be retained and designated in a reserve for future spending in accordance with the approved
reinvestment plan;
(5)City Council strongly encourage the Province to address shelter issues facing Ontario Works clients through the
creation of a shelter supplement program; and
(6)the appropriate City officials be authorized and directed to take the necessary action to give effect thereto;
-(November 4, 1998) from the City Clerk advising that the Children and Youth Action Committee on October 26, 1998,
considered the report dated October 22, 1998, of the Commissioner of Community and Neighbourhood Services regarding
the proposed reinvestment strategy for Municipal Savings resulting from the implementation of the National Child Benefit,
and recommended to the Community and Neighbourhood Services Committee that City Council remind the Federal
Government of the commitment to end child poverty in the year 2000;
-(December 2, 1998) from the City Clerk advising that the Children and Youth Action Committee on November 23,
1998, recommended that the Community and Neighbourhood Services Committee find a way of keeping the National
Child Benefit Savings in the pockets of social assistance recipients with children and further requested that this money not
be clawed back from the families;
-(December 2, 1998) from Ms. Anne Dubas, President, Canadian Union of Public Employees, Local 79, urging the
Community and Neighbourhood Services Committee to endorse the Region of York's resolution and to work with other
municipalities in efforts to convince the Province to reverse its clawback of the National Benefit; and
-(December 2, 1998) from Ms. Maria de Wit, Chair, Child Care Advisory Committee of Toronto, outlining the position
adopted by the Advisory Committee at its meeting on December 2, 1998.
The following persons appeared before the Community and Neighbourhood Services Committee in connection with the
foregoing matter:
-Ms. Sue Cox, Daily Bread Food Bank; and submitted a paper, entitled "Hunger Hardship and Children in Toronto";
-Ms. Debbie Bridge, L.A.M.P., and Mr. Gavin MacLeod;
-Mr. Colin Hughes, Metro Campaign 2000; and submitted a brief in regard thereto;
-Ms. Sue Collis, Ontario Coalition Against Poverty;
-Mr. Mike Howard;
-Ms. Vicki McPhee, Riverdale for Kids;
-Ms. Cheryl MacDonald, Toronto Coalition for Better Child Care; and
-Ms. Michelle Adams; and submitted a brief in regard thereto.
--------
(Report dated November 18, 1998, addressed to the
Community and Neighbourhood Services Committee from the
Commissioner of Community and Neighbourhood Services)
Purpose:
This report responds to the Community and Neighbourhood's Services Committee (C.N.S.) request to explore alternative
options for the reinvestment of municipal social assistance savings resulting from the implementation of the National Child
Benefit Supplement (N.C.B.S.) in Toronto.
Financial Implications:
Fiscally, the projected net savings from the Social Assistance program as a result of the implementation of the National
Child Benefit are expected to be $1.97 million by calendar year-end. After inclusion of savings from FBA clients, the
estimated net annualized impact for the City has been previously estimated to be approximately $7.0 million. It is also
important to recognize that the level of savings available will change with fluctuations in the Social Assistance caseload.
Recommendations:
It is recommended that:
(1)City Council endorse the Region of York's resolution requesting that "the Minister of Social and Community Services
rescind the decision to consider the National Child Benefit Supplement as income thereby deducting the supplements from
social assistance", and communicate this position to the Minister;
(2)should Recommendation No. (1) not be approved by the Province, and within the current Federal-Provincial
framework agreement for the National Child Benefit, the City's savings from the implementation of the National Child
Benefit be reinvested to develop a combined strategy consisting of:
(i)provision of child care alternatives and service supports for children of low income families including those families
making the transition from Ontario Works into sustainable employment;
(ii)a shelter fund to address the high shelter costs of families with children;
(3)the Commissioner report back to Community and Neighbourhood Services Committee on an implementation plan to
carry out the proposed reinvestment strategy;
(4)pending provincial confirmation of the actual City savings and review of the City's reinvestment priorities, the
N.C.B.S. savings accrued be retained and designated in a reserve for future spending in accordance with the approved
reinvestment plan;
(5)City Council strongly encourage the Province to address shelter issues facing Ontario Works clients through the
creation of a shelter supplement program; and
(6)the appropriate City officials be authorized and directed to take the necessary action to give effect thereto.
Council Reference/Background:
At its November 5, 1998, meeting, the Community and Neighbourhood Services Committee considered the Community
and Neighbourhood's Services October 22, 1998, report proposing a reinvestment strategy for the City's savings in the
social assistance program resulting from the implementation of the N.C.B.S. At that time, Committee requested that the
Commissioner of Community and Neighbourhood Services report back in December on the following issues:
(a)the establishment of a Toronto Child Income Program and how such a program would be administered, including the
cost and the reaction from the 905 municipalities;
(b)any other options that could be considered, such as the provision of hot lunch programs; and
(c)the implications of any suggested options on the Ontario Works program.
This report examines these issues. Initially, the reinvestment plan discussed in the October 22, 1998, report to Committee
is reviewed.
Discussion:
(I)Ontario's Approach to the N.C.B.S.:
At its July 1998 meeting, Toronto City Council approved a report, entitled "National Child Benefit Supplement", which
outlined the origins and implications of the National Child Benefit program for families on social assistance. Based on the
framework established by the Province governing the use of municipal social assistance savings achieved through the
implementation of the N.C.B.S., Council directed the Department to report further on a strategy for reinvesting these
savings.
Subsequently, senior officials in the Ministry of Community and Social Services (M.C.S.S.)shared guidelines governing
how these savings must be reinvested. Based on the program's objectives, savings must be used in two ways:
(1)to help prevent and reduce child poverty; and
(2)to promote attachment to the workforce by ensuring that families will always be better off as a result of finding work.
As discussed in the Department's October 22, 1998, report to Committee, the federal, provincial and territorial
governments have agreed on a joint approach to the National Child Benefit. On July 1, 1998, the Federal Government
increased its benefits for low-income families with children. Provinces and territories were to subsequently decrease social
assistance payments for families with children while still ensuring that these families receive the same level of overall
income support from government.
Provinces and territories must then reinvest these newly-available funds in complementary programs which improve work
incentives, benefits and services for low income families with children. There is some variation in how provincial
governments have proceeded with the implementation of the N.C.B.S.
Ontario's approach is to deduct 100 percent of the income which families on social assistance with children receive from
the N.C.B.S. The intention is that a family's overall social assistance entitlement before receipt of the N.C.B.S. will remain
unchanged. To implement the program in Ontario, M.C.S.S. included a specific regulation under the Ontario Works Act
which mandates that municipalities deduct the benefit. Because of the cost-sharing partnership with municipalities, local
government shares the Province's obligation to reinvest its portion of the savings on social assistance in accordance with
the policy objectives of the National Child Benefit program. However, municipalities have not had a role in developing the
guidelines for using savings. Further, all municipal reinvestment plans will be reviewed by the Province.
In a recent communication from the M.C.S.S. Toronto Area office, dated November 12, 1998, the Ministry has identified
its priorities for municipalities. The first priority encouraged by the Ministry is "increased spending on additional child care
support for low income families to assist them in joining or participating in employment or to maintain their employment."
According to the Ministry, "Municipalities may wish to consider using N.C.B. reinvestment to offset their 20 percent
contribution" to recently announced provincial programs, such as the new Learning, Earning and Parenting Program
(L.E.A.P.), which provide more flexible child care supports to families on Ontario Works (O.W.) who are involved in
training or upgrading activities, or who are working. At the same time, the Ministry clearly stated that municipal savings
cannot be reinvested to replace current program spending or leverage Provincial cost-sharing to create licensed child care
spaces.
The Province is reinvesting its savings to create the new Ontario Child Supplement for Working Families. This new
program is designed to provide assistance to low and middle income families, with eligible families receiving up to a
maximum of $85.00 for each child under age seven. Parents who incur child care expenses to attend school or training
courses will be eligible, as will working families where one parent stays at home to care for their children.
Ontario's treatment of N.C.B.S. savings, involving deduction of the N.C.B.S. from a family's social assistance entitlement,
is shared by Manitoba, Nova Scotia and Prince Edward Island. Each of these provinces is also implementing a range of
programs aimed at reducing child poverty and increasing workforce attachment using the program savings obtained by
introducing the N.C.B.S.
British Columbia and Saskatchewan have developed programs which remove the support for children from the social
assistance system. In both cases, N.C.B.S. payments will be subtracted from all families' social assistance entitlement, but
benefits provided under the respective new child income programs will ensure that families are no worse off. However, in
both cases, families must file a tax return to receive the new basic allowances for children. Quebec is taking a very similar
approach. Alberta has effected a reduction in base benefits for all families with children. Families, in turn, must apply for
the N.C.B.S. to compensate for this loss of income. A supplementary benefit will be provided to recipients who do no
receive the full entitlement only if hardship is shown.
Only New Brunswick and Newfoundland obtained federal agreement to allow families in receipt of social assistance to
retain the new benefit in 1998-99 to compensate for social assistance rates which are the lowest in the country.
In each case, these reinvestment initiatives have been developed on the basis of Federal-Provincial agreements. There has
been no municipal involvement in the formulation of these agreements, or in the decision making processes.
(II)A Combined Reinvestment Strategy for City of Toronto Savings:
The Department is proposing a two-pronged reinvestment strategy, consisting of:
(a)provision of child care alternatives and service supports for children of low income families, including those families
making the transition from Ontario Works into sustainable employment; and
(b)creation of a shelter fund to address the high shelter costs of families with children.
As will be discussed below, the Department believes the two elements of the proposed strategy work together to provide
families with the types of critical supports they need to become independent of social assistance. They also reflect the
unique issues that parents on social assistance in Toronto face in trying to maintain stable housing, and obtain reliable child
care supports. It should be noted that the Department anticipates that the proposed strategy is consistent with the objectives
of the National Child Benefit and will therefore meet provincial requirements.
In its October 22 report to Committee, the Department discussed the advantages of reinvesting City savings from the
implementation of the N.C.B.S. to support the development and provision of flexible child care arrangements for children
of low income families, notably families seeking to obtain sustainable employment and move off Ontario Works.
This thrust is based on the recognition that families with children now comprise more than 50 percent of the total social
assistance caseload, and that the length of stay on assistance for families has been steadily increasing to its current level of
25 months. There is well documented evidence that such families often need access to a wide range of supports, as early as
possible, to prepare to re-enter the workforce, or to participate in value-added educational or community placements. Any
efforts the City can make to reduce the length of time families must remain on assistance, and increase their chances of
obtaining sustainable employment, will potentially benefit both the families involved, and the City.
The child care option presented by the Department (see Appendix 1) allow the City to prudently provide a broader range of
flexible service options for children requiring care while their parents earn or learn than would normally be possible
through the regular fee subsidy system, which requires cost shared dollars to be spent on licensed care only in accordance
with the Day Nurseries Act. An additional advantage is that the reinvestment of savings in non-licensed service options
does not negatively impact the City's continued commitment to the subsidized child care system. Spending these savings in
this way also helps to avoid the redeployment of existing fee subsidy dollars away from the licensed child care system to
which they are already committed. Since the types of services included in the proposed reinvestment strategy for the City
are not subject to pooling, there will be no incremental within the pooled social services funding envelope.
Finally, this direction is consistent with both the Province's and City Council's emphasis on providing families with a
wider range of service options to address the unmet needs of the children of Ontario Works clients, and of the many
families eligible for child care but still on the waiting list. As discussed above, the Ministry has recently elaborated its
reinvestment priorities for municipalities, stressing the provision of child care supports to families to assist them in joining
or participating in activities leading to employment.
At the same time, the Department recognizes that housing stability is a basic need for all families on social assistance. It is
also an essential foundation for families' efforts to move into the workforce, or to participate in O.W. activities.
Currently, nearly 80 percent of all social assistance recipients live in private rental accommodations. The Department's
own analysis indicates nearly two-thirds of all families with children in receipt of O.W. pay more than the maximum
shelter allowance for rent in Toronto. More than half of all single parents receiving O.W. pay more than 50 percent of their
total income toward shelter. The result is that often families have to pay substantial amounts of their basic allowances to
cover their rent. Fewer resources are available for other basic necessities, for providing for the health and welfare of
children, or for any expenses related to seeking employment.
Given the extremely low vacancy rates in the City, and the impacts of the new Provincial Tenant Protection Act, it is
particularly difficult for families with children to find affordable rental accommodation. This situation has persisted since
the Provincial rate cuts in 1995, and has been extensively documented in previous Departmental reports to the former
Metropolitan Council.
A shelter fund delivered by the Department could provide direct financial support to families with children who
demonstrate needs for assistance in a number of areas: money for first and last month's rent, one-time assistance with
utility bills or other housing related costs, or assistance to relocate to less costly or more adequate accommodation.
However, the Department recognizes that a Toronto shelter fund is only a partial answer to the much larger challenge of
promoting housing stabilization among O.W. recipients. The Department noted in a previous report to Metropolitan
Council dated August 15, 1995 ("Shelter Supplement to Address Social Assistance Benefit Reductions") that "The stresses
placed on families...by sharply reduced shelter allowances will be detrimental to their efforts to achieve economic
independence." At that time, Metropolitan Council strongly endorsed the creation of a shelter supplement for social
assistance recipients experiencing high shelter shortfalls.
Given the statistics reported above regarding the number of clients who still experience shelter shortfalls, the extreme
housing affordability issues which exist in Toronto, and the critical role housing stability plays in facilitating workforce
attachment, the Department reiterates its support for Provincial action to address the shelter issues facing O.W. clients
through the creation of a shelter supplement program.
Finally, it is incumbent that the City ensure that it takes every step possible to achieve program service targets, which it is
required to meet under Ontario Works. Failure to meet designated targets in any of the three O.W. program streams
(Employment Supports, Community Participation, Employment Placement) can result in the Provincial Government
clawing back funds from the municipality. The Department believes that by directly supporting O.W. program activities,
including Community Participation, the provision of flexible child care arrangements will assist the City to meet its service
targets. Similarly, helping O.W. families with children obtain or maintain suitable accommodation can positively affect
their participation in O.W. activities and potentially increase workforce attachment, in both cases supporting the
achievement of the City's O.W. targets.
(III)Alternative Uses For City of Toronto Savings:
There are a wide range of possible ways to use such savings. Support for the Public Health programs serving children, such
as the "Healthy Baby Healthy Children" program, or for hot lunch programs in the community are two potential options
that would meet the Provincial criteria for reinvestment of savings. However, in response to the Community and
Neighbourhood Services Committee's request, the focus of this section is on issues related to the development and
administration of a City of Toronto child income program.
City of Toronto Child Income Program:
In accordance with Provincial Ontario Works regulations, N.C.B.S. benefits must be deducted from all families on social
assistance who receive them. Therefore, it is not possible for the City to simply pass the benefit through to the client.
However, the City's net savings equal only 20 percent of the income deducted from the 26,500 clients who currently
receive N.C.B.S. funds, as the remainder flows to the Province. To reimburse families, it will be necessary to identify the
total amount of the N.C.B.S. deduction for each case, and calculate 20 percent for subsequent disbursement. It is estimated
that the average amount returned per family would equal about $12.00 per month. Appendix 2 provides a breakdown of the
average monthly benefit for different family sizes.
It should be noted that all families will not receive the N.C.B.S. Currently, there are approximately 38,000 families with
children in receipt of O.W., of which 26,500 are eligible for N.C.B.S. Returning funds to eligible families will in effect
establish a two tier benefit structure, and introduce clear inequities into the current system.
Reissuing benefits to families is potentially technically feasible, although a cumbersome technological system will be
required to make the necessary budget adjustments. The City must use the Provincial computer system (MAIN) to reinstate
benefits to clients, for which Ministry approval will be required. However, significant administrative resources will be
required. Caseworkers will have to manually enter the appropriate amount for each case with N.C.B.S. income deducted.
Given the potential for error in manual processes, supervisory staff will be required to review the process to ensure
entitlements are distributed accurately.
Key Issues and Concerns:
Whether a Toronto child income program is technically or administratively feasible, there are a number of crucial issues
and concerns that must be considered with regard to pursuing such an option. These are as follows:
(a)In a preliminary consultation with legal counsel barriers to the creation of a separate Toronto program have been
identified. Under current regulations, "income" is calculated by taking "the total amount of all payments of any nature paid
to or on behalf of or for the benefit of every member of the benefit unit". Given the broad nature of this definition, the
payment of a municipal child benefit may be considered "income" for the purpose of determining the amount of a benefit
unit's entitlement. If the City's child benefit is considered "income", it would have to be deducted from the benefit unit's
entitlement and there would be no net increase in the amount paid to the benefit unit. A legal opinion on this issue will be
required if the City decides to pursue development of its own child income program.
(b)Provincial approval will also be required to use the current computer system (MAIN) to re-issue the deducted
N.C.B.S. income to clients. However, the Province has indicated it will phase out the computer system now used by the
City in six months because it is not Year 2000 compliant. In mid-1999, the City must convert to the system (CIMS)
currently used by the Province and the majority of municipalities in Ontario. At this time, the Province is unwilling to
consider any changes to CIMS which are not required as part of Year 2000 preparations.
(c)While it may be possible to back out the program benefit costs of a Toronto child income program from pooling
calculations if the MAIN computer system is used, there will be no easy way to accurately establish administrative costs. It
is unlikely that 905 municipalities will consent to share any such costs associated with the creation of a separate Toronto
income support program which reimburses N.C.B.S. savings to clients.
Summary:
There are a number of substantial resource, administrative and legal obstacles to the creation and implementation of a
separate Toronto child income program. Given these factors, the Department believes it is not advisable to proceed with
the development of a such a program at this time.
However, as a necessary precursor to making such an approach possible, the Department supports efforts, such as the
resolution recently passed by York Region Council, which requests that "the Minister of Social and Community Services
rescind the decision to consider the National Child Benefit Supplement as income thereby deducting the supplements from
social assistance"(see Appendix 3). Therefore, the Department recommends that Toronto Council endorse the Region of
York's resolution, and communicate its position to the Minister.
The Department is also concerned that a Toronto child income program will not provide critical supports to Ontario Works
recipients who are seeking to upgrade their skills, participate in community placements or take new jobs. Nor will it assist
the Department to achieve its Ontario Works program targets, with the attendant financial risks to the City.
Conclusions:
Based on the issues considered in this report, the Department is proposing a strategy for reinvesting N.C.B.S. savings
which consists of two elements:
(a)provision of child care alternatives and service supports for children of low income families, including those families
making the transition from Ontario Works into sustainable employment; and
(b)creation of a shelter fund to address the high shelter costs of families with children.
From the perspective of obtaining Provincial approval, of assisting O.W. clients to capitalize on opportunities to obtain
employment, and of meeting the City's program targets under O.W., these options represent the most effective way to
reinvest N.C.B.S. savings in Toronto.
Therefore, the Department recommends that the proposed reinvestment strategy be approved and that a further report on
the implementation of the strategy, and the way in which the initiative will be monitored and evaluated, be provided once
the level of savings accruing to the municipality has been confirmed and the Province has clarified its reporting
requirements with respect to this program.
Contact Names:
Heather MacVicar, General Manager, Social Services Division, Tel: 392-8952.
Marna Ramsden, General Manager, Children's Services Division, Tel: 392-8128.
--------
Appendix 1: A Proposed Reinvestment Strategy for the City's Savings
It is proposed that the City's savings resulting from the implementation of the National Child Benefit program be
reinvested to support the development and provision of a broader range of care arrangements for children of low-income
families including those making the transition from Ontario Works into sustainable employment. More specifically, the
City's savings could be used creatively in a variety of ways to achieve this overall service objective. These include:
(a)supporting the start-up and development costs of strategically located non-licensed community programs that meet the
recreational needs and interests of school-aged children requiring out of school care while their low income families are
earning, learning, or engaged in community participation activities;
(b)purchasing service on behalf of school-aged children of low income families who require assistance with their care
arrangements during out of school times including after school, professional development days, seasonal and summer
breaks. Service options would focus on non-licensed but accountable community programs such as recreation services,
family resource centres, boys and girls clubs, etc.;
(c)purchasing increased service from summer day camps to provide another summer service option for low income
families who might otherwise continue to utilize a regular child care fee subsidy over the summer school break period;
(d)providing increased access to non-licensed care options for children of families graduating from Ontario Works but
not yet eligible for or desirous of a regular child care fee subsidy arrangement; and
(e)providing a top-up payment (in lieu of wage subsidies) to the base provider rate paid to providers under subsidy
contract with licensed home child care agencies. This would facilitate expansion of home capacity within the licensed
home child care sector. Expansion of this flexible child care service option for low income families has been difficult in the
absence of the additional wage subsidy dollars needed to pay at established provider rate scale.
--------
Appendix 2: National Child Benefit Supplement (N.C.B.S.) Monthly Entitlement
No. of Children |
Max. NCBS
Entitlement1 |
20 Percent
City Share |
Max Monthly
Benefit2 |
No. of Families in
Receipt of NCBS |
1 |
$ 50.41 |
$10.00 |
$ 957.00 |
11,042 |
2 |
$ 84.16 |
$16.90 |
$1086.00 |
9,000 |
3 |
$113.66 |
$22.70 |
$1234.00 |
4,186 |
4 |
$141.16 |
$28.20 |
$1446.00 |
1,526 |
5 |
$168.00 |
$33.60 |
$1505.00 |
508 |
6 |
$196.00 |
$39.20 |
$1605.00 |
282 |
(1)Maximum monthly entitlement available. In some cases, families will receive less, depending on their level of
income.
(2)Maximum monthly social assistance entitlement that a single parent paying maximum shelter would receive. Two
parent families will receive a slightly higher entitlement.
Case example:
The Canada Child Tax Benefit (C.C.T.B.), of which the N.C.B.S. is the newest component, is calculated based on last
year's income and current eligibility (children in care). The maximum amounts apply to all families with a net family
income of $20,921.00 or less.
For example, a single parent with one child would receive a maximum N.C.B.S. entitlement of $50.41 monthly which must
be deducted, per Provincial regulation, from their social assistance entitlement. Twenty percent of this amount, or
approximately $10.00 per month, accrues to the City. This is the amount that would be available to return to this family on
a monthly basis.
In cases where the family has higher employment earnings, the entitlement would be scaled back as earnings increase. In
this case, the monthly N.C.B.S. entitlement would be progressively reduced from the maximum until it is eliminated.
--------
(A copy of the Appendix 3 referred to in the foregoing report of Commissioner of Community and Neighbourhood
Services was forwarded to all Members of Council with the agenda of the Community and Neighbourhood Services
Committee for its meeting on December 3, 1998, and a copy thereof is on file in the office of the City Clerk.)
31
Purchase of Community Volunteer Vehicle known as "Box 12"
(City Council on December 16 and 17, 1998, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)
The Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee recommends the adoption of the recommendations of the Budget
Committee contained in the following communication (December 10, 1998) from the City Clerk:
Recommendation:
The Budget Committee on December 8, 1998 recommended to the Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee and Council
the adoption of the recommendation of the Emergency and Protective Services Committee not to purchase the community
service vehicle.
Background:
The Budget Committee had before it a transmittal letter (December 3, 1998) from the City Clerk forwarding the
recommendations of the Emergency and Protective Services Committee regarding the purchase of the community service
vehicle.
--------
(Transmittal letter dated December 3, 1998, addressed to the
Budget Committee from the City Clerk)
Recommendation:
The Emergency and Protective Services Committee on December 1, 1998, recommended to the Budget Committee, and
Council, that the report (October 30, 1998) from the Fire Chief requesting authorization to purchase a community service
vehicle not be adopted.
Background:
The Emergency and Protective Services Committee had before it a report (October 30, 1998) from the Fire Chief,
responding to the direction of the Budget Committee at its meeting held on October 13, 1998, which referred this item to
the Fire Chief for further consideration and a report to the Emergency and Protective Services Committee; advising that the
cost of this community service vehicle is $65,000.00 and that funds could be made available in the Fire Services (North
York District) Trucks General Account; and recommending that Council authorize the purchase of this vehicle.
Councillor Shiner, Seneca Heights, appeared before the Emergency and Protective Services Committee in connection with
the foregoing matter.
--------
(Report dated October 30, 1998, addressed to the
Emergency and Protective Services Committee
from the Fire Chief)
Purpose:
This report responds to the direction of Budget Committee at its meeting held on October 13, 1998 which referred this item
to the Fire Chief for further consideration and a report to the Emergency and Protective Services Committee.
Financial Implications:
The cost of this community service vehicle is $65,000.00 should council decide to purchase it. Funds could be made
available in the Fire Services (North York District) Trucks General Account.
Recommendations:
It is recommended that Council authorize the purchase of this vehicle.
Background and Comments:
The following is the history of support services to the Toronto Fire Services:
Box 12 has supported the former Toronto Fire Department at emergency incidents since 1948. The members of this group
(12) are volunteers from the community who provide refreshments to members of the fire service and work on an on-call
basis to provide coverage. Box 12 has just celebrated their 50th Anniversary of dedicated service.
The Toronto Fire Fighters Association, Local 113, provides the condiments and the vehicle for the members of Box 12.
The vehicle is stationed at No. 14 Station in the South Command and is insured and maintained by the Toronto Fire
Services. The vehicle is owned by Local 113.
Greater Toronto Multiple Alarm Association commenced operations as the Toronto Multiple Alarm Association in 1975.
The new name of the association was changed effective September 1, 1998. Currently, 40 members provide volunteer
community service to the Toronto Fire Services.
In 1996, the former City of Scarborough and the Scarborough Fire Department purchased a new vehicle to provide canteen
service to the Scarborough Fire Fighters at emergency incidents. The members of the Greater Toronto Multiple Alarm
Association staff the unit and respond on an on-call basis. This relationship of service has spanned the past 20 years
responding to over 500 calls and the donation of over 12,000 volunteer hours.
The vehicle is stationed at No. 7 Station in the East Command and is insured and maintained by the Toronto Fire Services.
The Scarborough Fire Fighters Association, Local 626, provides the condiments for the vehicle.
Canadian Red Cross, North York Branch has provided volunteer service since 1980 to the members of the former North
York Fire Department and now the Toronto Fire Services. The branch provides volunteers from their Emergency Response
Group.
The Red Cross members operate their own van and provide the condiments. The relationship between the former North
York Fire Department and the branch was a very positive experience. The North York Fire Department donated a
microwave oven to the branch in 1992 for use on the vehicle and has assisted the branch as required.
The North York Fire Fighters Association has supported the endeavours of the branch and has donated funds to the branch
for various projects.
The Salvation Army was presented the former Incident Command Unit of the North York Fire Department by Mayor
Lastman and Fire Chief Speed in 1995. This vehicle is used to support emergency incidents in the G.T.A. communities that
require the aid and support of the Army.
The Salvation Army has responded to numerous incidents in the former City of North York and will continue to serve the
new City of Toronto should we require their assistance. The vehicle is staffed by volunteers from the Salvation Army and
is maintained and stored in a Salvation Army facility. All condiments are provided by the Army. I believe that the
Salvation Army now has three vehicles outfitted to respond to incidents.
Toronto Fire Services:
The support and cooperation of the four volunteer agencies is greatly appreciated by all members of the Toronto Fire
Services. Each agency has indicated that they will continue to support the Service at emergency incidents. All the agencies
provide hot/cold beverages and snacks which aid the members of the Toronto Fire Services at long duration incidents. The
services provided do not require any staffing complement or funding. In the event that we did not have the volunteer
groups providing this type of service, we, as a Service, would have to provide staffing, funding, resources and additional
vehicles to respond to incidents.
The past practices of the Fire Fighters' Associations of Scarborough and Toronto have provided the refreshments from
association funds. This past practice will likely continue in the new city once the new association has been established.
The units currently located in Fire Station facilities can be prepared for departure to an emergency incident prior to the
arrival of the volunteers, providing the station is staffed by a fire crew.
The Salvation Army and the Red Cross have a delayed response time as they have to prepare the unit prior to responding to
the incident.
Conclusion:
Currently, we own one vehicle called "Support 7" which has served the previous municipality of Scarborough well by
responding to almost 500 requests for assistance utilizing over 12,000 volunteer hours of time. We now have the
opportunity to purchase another vehicle from Local 113. In the event that the vehicle is sold by Local 113, we will have to
rely on the assistance of the Red Cross, Salvation Army and Greater Toronto Multiple Alarm Association. The 50 year
relationship with Box 12 would likely come to an end unless council was prepared to purchase this vehicle. The loss of the
Box 12 unit would hamper the quick response to incidents, as the other volunteer groups would respond from a greater
distance in a non-emergency mode in accordance with the Highway Traffic Act.
Contact Name:
Alan F. Speed, Fire Chief, 397-4300.
32
Sale of Paper Fibre from the Grey Box Program
(City Council on December 16 and 17, 1998, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)
The Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee recommends the adoption of the recommendations of the Budget
Committee contained in the following communication (December 10, 1998) from the City Clerk:
Recommendation:
The Budget Committee on December 8, 1998 recommended to the Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee and Council
the adoption of the recommendation of the Works and Utilities Committee with respect to the subject matter.
Background:
The Budget Committee had before it a transmittal letter (December 2, 1998) from the City Clerk forwarding the
recommendation of the Works and Utilities Committee to adopt the report (November 19, 1998) from the General
Manager, Solid Waste Management Services, respecting the sale of paper fibre from the grey box program.
--------
(Transmittal letter dated December 2, 1998, addressed to the
Budget Committee from the City Clerk)
Recommendation:
The Works and Utilities Committee on December 2, 1998, recommended to the Budget Committee the adoption of the
report dated November 19, 1998, from the General Manager, Solid Waste Management Services, respecting the sale of
paper fibre from the grey box program.
--------
(Report dated November 19, 1998, addressed to the
Works and Utilities Committee from the
General Manager, Solid Waste Management Services)
Purpose:
To seek authority to enter into agreements with Canada Fibres Ltd. and Donohue Recycling Inc. for the purchase of mixed
paper fibre from Toronto's grey box program.
Funding Sources, Financial Implications and Impact Statement:
Although the recommended paper fibre bids are very attractive under current market conditions, the impact on revenue is
expected to be significant. We are currently receiving a price of approximately $84.00 per tonne which is expected to
continue until May 15, 1999, when our current contract with Donohue Recycling expires. The existing price is a result of
floor prices that we were able to secure when negotiating our current contract, at a time when market demand for fibre was
extremely high and market prices were in excess of $200.00 per tonne. Based on current market prices, the recommended
bids provide a blended price of approximately $39.00 per tonne. The exact impact on revenue will be contingent on market
conditions; however, it is projected that fibre revenue from Toronto's grey box program will be $1 million to $2 million
lower in 1999 compared to the 1998 budget estimate.
Recommendation:
That authority be granted to enter into agreements with Donohue Recycling Inc. and Canada Fibres Ltd. for the purchase of
mixed paper fibre from Toronto's grey box program during the period May 15, 1999 to April 30, 2003, in accordance with
the prices stated in this report and terms and conditions satisfactory to the Commissioner of Works and Emergency
Services.
Council Reference/Background/History:
Approximately 79,000 tonnes of mixed paper fibre are currently collected annually through Toronto's grey box program.
Mixed paper fibre includes waste newspaper, old corrugated containers including pizza boxes, magazines, catalogues,
telephone books, boxboard, writing and computer paper, junk mail, envelopes, gift wrap, cards, books and paper egg
cartons, rolls and bags. This fibre is currently sold to Donohue Recycling, under contract until May 15, 1999.
Approximately 20,000 tonnes of fibre collected annually from the North York Community Council area are marketed
separately to Metro Waste Paper Inc. under a contract that expires in April 2003.
Discussion and Justification:
In order to secure a market for our grey box fibre after our current contract with Donohue Recycling expires, a Request for
Quotations (RFQ) was issued through the Purchasing and Materials Management Division of the Finance Department on
October 23, 1998.
Bidders were provided with the option of bidding on the entire quantity (estimated to be in the range of 75,000 - 90,000
tonnes annually) and/or a portion of the quantity based on: (a) fibre that would be delivered directly to the bidder's facility
by collection vehicles from the communities of Toronto and East York (45 percent of total), and (b) fibre received at our
transfer stations from the communities of Scarborough, Etobicoke and York and then delivered in bulk by transfer trailers
to the bidder's facility (55 percent of total). The term identified in the tender was approximately four years, May 15, 1999
to April 30, 2003, to coincide with the North York/Metro Waste Paper fibre contract which expires on April 30, 2003.
The premise of the RFQ was that Toronto would receive market price for its fibre, which would be determined monthly
based on a pre-defined formula that is tied to the Official Board Markets (OBM) Yellow Sheet, a U.S. industry publication
that tracks market prices monthly for various grades of sorted paper and is currently used to determine market prices in our
contracts with Donohue Recycling and Metro Waste Paper. The formula also takes into account conversion to Canadian
dollars. Since this market price is for sorted paper, whereas the fibre received is unsorted, mixed paper, as collected from
the street, bidders were asked to submit a processing cost. We also asked bidders to identify a per tonne premium, if any,
that they would be willing to pay.
The RFQ closed on November 12, 1998, and we received four bids. Please see Attachment (1) for a summary of the bids.
The bids were evaluated based on the per tonne processing cost and premium submitted by the bidders. Since the monthly
market price for sorted paper is fixed monthly according to a pre-defined formula, and therefore the same for all bidders,
the only pricing variables were the processing cost and premium. Evaluation of the quotations also included Toronto's cost
of transporting the fibre to the bidder's facility.
Based on our evaluation, we recommend acceptance of the highest bids which are from Donohue Recycling for the
quantity delivered directly to the bidder's facility (processing cost of $35.00 per tonne and a premium of $25.00 per tonne),
and from Canada Fibres for the quantity delivered in bulk by transfer trailers (processing cost of $39.00 per tonne and a
premium of $33.00 per tonne). When transportation costs were taken into account these companies were still the highest
bidders.
The price Toronto will receive for its fibre will fluctuate each month according to market conditions and will be based on
the following formula:
Price=A-B+C
Where Price=the monthly per tonne price paid to Toronto. This price can never fall below zero.
A=the monthly per tonne market price for sorted paper which fluctuates monthly according to a pre-defined formula
that is tied to the OBM Yellow Sheet and takes into account conversion to Canadian dollars.
B=the per tonne processing cost submitted by the bidders, which is set for the duration of the contract.
C=the per tonne premium offered by the bidders, which is set for the duration of the contract.
Assuming October 1998 market conditions, the prices Toronto would receive for its unsorted fibre after May 15, 1999,
would be:
Donohue RecyclingCanada Fibres
Price=A-B+CPrice=A-B+C
=$47.00 - $35.00 + $25.00=$47.00 - $39.00 + $33.00
=$37.00 per tonne=$41.00 per tonne
These prices would be very attractive for unsorted, mixed paper as collected from the street at a time when market demand
and prices for waste paper are low. It should also be noted that if market prices for waste paper are, in fact, higher after
May 15, 1999, than they are now, the prices paid to Toronto will increase accordingly.
As illustrated in the table below, Toronto and the North York Community Council area have been realizing higher than
market prices for its fibre since May 1995, when the pricing and floor prices in our current contracts came into effect. This
trend will continue beyond May 15, 1999, if the aforementioned tenders are accepted.
FIBRE REVENUE
Price Per TonneNov./98After May 15/99
May -Jan. -May 15/99Estimate based on current
Dec./9519961997Oct./98Estimatemarket conditions
Toronto$210.00$89.00$95.00$90.00$84.00$39.00
North York
Community$209.00$121.00$66.00$68.00$65.00$29.00
Estimated
Market Price for
Unsorted Fibre$134.00$0$5.00$13.00$12.00$11.00
Conclusions:
Acceptance of the bids from Donohue Recycling and Canada Fibres will ensure that Toronto receives market price plus a
significant premium for its grey box fibre until April 30, 2003. It is therefore recommended that we enter into agreements
with Donohue Recycling and Canada Fibres in accordance with the prices offered.
Contact Name:
Tim Michael, Manager - Waste Diversion, Solid Waste Management Services, Metro Hall,
Phone: (416) 392-8506; Fax: (416) 392-4754, E-mail: Tim_Michael@metrodesk.metrotor.on.ca.
Insert Table/Map No. 1
Attachment 1
33
1999 Capital Budget - Toronto Police Service
and Toronto Fire Service Integrated Fire/Police
Radio Communication System
(City Council on December 16 and 17, 1998, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)
The Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee recommends the adoption of the recommendations of the Budget
Committee contained in the following communication (December 10, 1998) from the City Clerk:
Recommendations:
The Budget Committee on December 8, 1998 recommended to the Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee and Council
that:
(1)the Toronto Police Service be authorized to expend $2.6 million in 1998 for the radio system re-engineering project;
(2)pre-commitment approval for the 1999 cash flow of the $34.5 million Toronto Fire Services Capital Budget proposal
for an integrated Fire/Police radio communication system be given thereby saving $6.6 million through not implementing
two separate radio systems;
(3)the Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer assist the Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services in ensuring an
appropriate process to protect the City's financial and purchasing interests in acquiring additional communication
equipment from Motorola;
(4)subject to City Council approval of Recommendations 2. and 3., authority be given to contract with Motorola Canada
for the proposed radio system, and that the contract be executed in 1998;
(5)that the switch remain in the corporate ownership of the City of Toronto; and
(6)financing in the amount of $34,500,000.00 be debentured (if necessary for a term up to but not exceeding 20 years be
approved.
The Budget Committee reports that the Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer, in accordance with provincial regulations,
has certified that expenditures in the amount of $34,500,000.00 for this project can be financed by the issuance of
debentures and is within the updated Financial Debt and Obligation Limit.
The Budget Committee reports having requested:
(a)the City Auditor to review the presentation provided to the Budget Committee by Mr. Steve Warner, Elyps Dispatch
Solutions, together with the Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services and report thereon to Council; and
(b)the Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services to report on whether the provision of the subject services should
be carried out on a cross-departmental basis.
Background:
The Budget Committee had before it the following:
-Recommendation (1) contained in the transmittal letter (December 3, 1998) from the City Clerk forwarding the
recommendations of the Emergency and Protective Services Committee with respect to the 1999 Capital Budget - Toronto
Police Services; and
-Recommendation (C) contained in the transmittal letter (December 3, 1998) from the City Clerk forwarding the
recommendations of the Emergency and Protective Services Committee with respect to the 1999 Capital Budget - Toronto
Fire Services.
Mr. Steve Warner, Elyps Dispatch Solutions, appeared before the Budget Committee in connection with the foregoing
matter.
--------
(Transmittal letter dated December 3, 1998, addressed to the
Budget Committee from the City Clerk)
Recommendations:
The Emergency and Protective Services Committee on December 2, 1998, recommended to the Budget Committee and
Council, that:
(1)the Toronto Police Service be authorized to expend $2.6 million in 1998 for the radio system re-engineering project;
(2)the $600,000.00 capital budget expenditure for 11 and 14 Divisions be deferred until the year 2000; and
(3)the Chief Administrative Officer's recommendation with regard to the timing of 51 Division be adopted.
The Emergency and Protective Services Committee reports having:
(a)endorsed the position of the Budget Committee that the Provincial Government be requested to provide funds for the
firearms training facility as this new facility is mandated by Provincial legislation; and
(b)requested the Toronto Police Service to submit the following additional information to the Budget Committee:
(i)a further report on the firearms training facility and the reporting centre;
(ii)the long term costs of deferring any of the capital budget items;
(iii)a review of its requirements for the retention of video tapes to minimize future storage requirements;
(iv)a report outlining the minimum safety requirements for the front counter renovation;
(v)a reduced request for boat replacement with consideration given to phasing the replacements over the next three years;
(vi)the building wiring upgrades required to serve the data communications system; and
(vii)a breakdown of the Security Control Capital Budget request of $600,000.00 to determine what can be deferred to
future years.
Background:
The Emergency and Protective Services Committee had before it the 1999 Capital Budget for the Toronto Police Service.
The following persons appeared before the Emergency and Protective Services Committee on behalf of the Toronto Police
Service in connection with the foregoing matter:
-Mr. Hugh Moore, Chief Administrative Officer;
-Mr. Michael Ellis, Facilities Management; and
-Mr. Frank Chen, Director of Finance and Administration.
--------
(Transmittal letter dated December 3, 1998, addressed to the
Budget Committee from the City Clerk)
Recommendation:
The Emergency and Protective Services Committee on December 2, 1998, recommended to the Budget Committee and
Council, that:
(a)the recommendations contained in the report (November 5, 1998) from the Chief Administrative Officer with regard
to the 1999 Capital Budget for the Toronto Fire Services be adopted;
(b)the recommendations contained in reports to the Budget Committee, listed below as (a), (b) and (c), be supported and
that the projects listed therein be included in the 1999 Capital Program as transition projects, i.e.:
"(a)Self Contained Breathing Apparatus;
(b)Fire Services Headquarters and Training Academy; and
(c)Centralized Computer-Aided Call-Taking Dispatch System;" and
(c)the adoption of the recommendations embodied in the supplementary report (November 25, 1998) from the
Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services, viz.
"(1)the Emergency and Protective Services Committee request the Budget Committee to authorize pre-commitment
approval from City Council for the 1999 cash flow of the $34.5 million Capital Budget proposal for an integrated
Fire/Police radio communication system, thereby saving $6.6 million through not implementing two separate radio
systems;
(2)the Chief Financial Officer assist the Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services in ensuring an appropriate
process to protect the City's financial and purchasing interests in acquiring additional communication equipment from
Motorola; and,
(3)subject to City Council approval of recommendations (1) and (2), authority be granted to contract with Motorola
Canada for the proposed radio system, and that the contract be executed in 1998."
The Emergency and Protective Services Committee reports having requested:
(a)the Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services, the Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer and the City Solicitor
to report to the Emergency and Protective Services Committee on protective measures that can be employed through
contractual arrangements with Motorola Canada Inc. and suppliers to ensure competitive pricing for spare parts,
maintenance and future system upgrades and enhancements for the integrated Fire/Police voice radio communication
system;
(b)the City Solicitor to report to the Emergency and Protective Services Committee on existing legislation that protects
consumers from technological monopolistic behaviour;
(c)the Chief Administrative Officer, in consultation with the City Solicitor and the Commissioner of Works and
Emergency Services, to assess the dependency of the City's emergency services departments on single source suppliers in
areas like telecommunications and to report back to the Emergency and Protective Services Committee on what contractual
or legislative measures might be implemented to ensure that the City continues to receive the best price possible for needed
materials in the future and to permit for flexibility should it be advisable to change suppliers;
(d)the Fire Chief to report to the Emergency and Protective Services Committee and the Budget Committee:
(i)on the impact that this 1999 Capital Budget will have on the 1999 Operating Budget for Toronto Fire Services; and
(ii)what the capital costs would have been had amalgamation not occurred, and that this information be broken down by
former municipality; and
(e)the Fire Chief, the General Manager, Toronto Ambulance Services, and the Chief of Police to submit a joint report to
the Emergency and Protective Services Committee by the end of 1999 outlining the savings achieved through joint
initiatives among the three emergency services.
Background:
The Emergency and Protective Services Committee had before it the 1999 Capital/Transition Budget for the Toronto Fire
Services, together with the following reports:
-(November 12, 1998) from the Fire Chief addressed to the Budget Committee regarding the self-contained breathing
apparatus (SCBA) for Fire Services;
-(November 13, 1998) from the Fire Chief addressed to the Budget Committee regarding the Fire Services headquarters
and training academy;
-(November 12, 1998) from the Fire Chief addressed to the Budget Committee regarding the centralized computer-aided
call-taking/dispatch system for Fire Services;
-(November 11, 1998) from the Fire Chief addressed to the Budget Committee regarding the integrated voice radio
communication system; and
-(November 25, 1998) supplementary report from the Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services regarding the
integrated voice radio communication system, together with a copy of a working agreement between the Toronto Police
Service, the Toronto Fire Service and the Toronto Ambulance Service regarding this system.
--------
(Report dated November 25, 1998, from the
Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services addressed to
the Emergency and Protective Services Committee)
Purpose:
This report is seeking approval of the combined Fire and Police Radio Communication System and pre-authorization
approval to allow the equipment to be ordered in 1998 to avoid a $4.4 million Canadian to U.S. currency exchange increase
that will become effective January 1, 1999.
Funding Sources, Financial Implications and Impact Statement:
This report is supplementary to the November 11, 1998 report to the Budget Committee. Funding of $29.2 million and $5.3
million has been proposed in the respective Fire and Police 1999-2003 Capital Budget submissions. The Police Services
Board and Toronto City Council have approved $5.4 million for this initiative in the Police 1998 Capital Budget
submission.
Recommendations:
It is recommended that:
(1)the Emergency and Protective Services Committee request the Budget Committee to authorize pre-commitment
approval from City Council for the 1999 cash flow of the $34.5 million Capital Budget proposal for an integrated
Fire/Police radio communication system, thereby saving $6.6 million through not implementing two separate radio
systems;
(2)the Chief Financial Officer assist the Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services in ensuring an appropriate
process to protect the City's financial and purchasing interests in acquiring additional communication equipment from
Motorola; and
(3)subject to City Council approval of recommendations (1) and (2), authority be granted to contract with Motorola
Canada for the proposed radio system, and that the contract be executed in 1998.
Background:
In 1998, the Toronto City Council approved a Capital Budget proposal of $5.4 million, including taxes to redesign the
voice radio system for Toronto Police (Project No. 057). The approval was subject to the findings from an independent
technology review of a number of proposals put forward by Police, Fire and Ambulance. This independent review required
final acceptance and approval from the City's CAO. The premise of the Police business case was to enable the
re-engineering of how the Service process Police occurrences (Project No. 037), and corresponding reduction of 139
clerical staff.
An added benefit of the Police proposal was to enable voice radio communications with other Police services in the GTA.
The Police proposal for $5.4 million represented approximately one half of the total required ($10.7 million), as the Police
had also proposed an integrated Public Safety system with costs shared with other emergency services. At this point, none
of the approved $5.4 million has been spent or committed (the plan was for $2.7 million in each of 1998 and 1999). (See
appendix B for Toronto Police Service budget submission to the Police Services Board).
Also in 1998, the Toronto Fire Services requested $26 Million plus taxes in transition funding for a new radio
communications system that would meet the identified requirements of the amalgamated Fire Service. The integrated radio
communications system would allow the Fire Service to move towards the consolidation of its six existing
communications centres, thereby decreasing staff from the current complement of 72 to 60. This would reduce the yearly
communications operating budget by approximately $900,000.00. Of this amount, $375,000.00 would be re-directed to
fully offset the increased costs of the new system for Fire Services with the balance of $525,000.00 available as savings.
(See Appendix C for Toronto Fire Services budget submission to the Budget Committee).
Toronto Ambulance has no planned 1998 Capital requirements for changes to its existing radio system.
During 1998, Fire, Ambulance and Police formed a peer working group with a mandate to identify a radio system solution,
from an integrated City perspective, that took into consideration:
(i)cost optimization;
(ii)existing investment;
(iii)common and unique requirements of the individual services;
(iv)reliability / coverage / capacity;
(v)growth; and
(vi)technology life.
The peer review team has identified that a single integrated radio system for Fire and Police (as opposed to two individual
systems) will save the City approximately $6.6 million in initial Capital costs, and provide an opportunity for economies of
scale in annual operating costs. The single integrated system cost is $34.5 million ($29.2 million Fire, $5.3 million Police),
while the multiple system cost is $41.1 million (30.4 million Fire, $10.7 million Police). Discussions on respective
responsibilities for Fire and Police on a shared system have progressed extremely well. In addition, the two Services are
now examining a business case which would allow each Service to act as a hot backup site to the other for 9-1-1 call taking
and dispatching (enabled by the proposed common radio system).
In October 1998 the independent technology review performed by KVA Communications Inc. (On behalf of the
Commissioner, Works and Emergency Services) confirmed that the conceptual design and technology direction proposed
by Police and Fire was the most cost effective solution for the City. The specific technology proposal also enabled radio
communications with other regional Police Services such as York, Peel and Hamilton/Wentworth (highly desirable in the
event that a suspect or criminal crosses jurisdictional boundaries while being followed). (See Appendix A for synopsis of
KVA Communications Inc. Report B, An Independent Review of Emergency Services Technology).
The consultant further recommended to proceed with acquisition of the components of the integrated system solely from
Motorola Canada Inc. This recommendation is made in the interest of protecting the City's prior investment in Motorola
technology, in the amount of $38 million. The Police Services has already invested approximately $29 million in this
technology and has relied on this equipment for the past two and a half years. The Fire Services investment in Motorola
equipment has been approximately $9 million to date. It is now proposed to complement the existing Police and Fire radio
communication system by further investing in the same technology.
A change in suppliers at this time would jeopardize the previous investment and, thereby, would result in significant cost
increases, project schedule extensions, equipment replacement and training. The Chief Financial Officer will assist in
ensuring that, through the purchasing process, the City's interests are well protected from a financial perspective.
Should a decision on the joint Police / Fire proposal be deferred beyond December 1998, an additional $4.4 million will be
required to offset the vendor's planned increase in Canadian to U.S. exchange rates (from 1.4 in Jan. 98 to 1.61 in Jan. 99).
At a budget review meeting with the City's Chief Administrative Officer (CAO), the Commissioner, Works and
Emergency Services, Police and Fire representatives, the City CAO adopted the concept of a joint venture between Police
and Fire, and instructed both Police and Fire Services to proceed on a course of action that would mitigate this currency
exchange risk. This would entail signing a contract in 1998 with the vendor, along with a down payment of $2.7 million. It
is proposed that the down payment funds would come from the Police 1998 approved capital budget for this project, and
the Police Services Board approved this down payment at its meeting held on November 19, 1998, subject to subsequent
approval by City Council of the recommended integrated voice radio communication system.
The implementation costs of the integrated voice radio communications system are as follows:
VOICE RADIO SYSTEM FOR THE CITY OF TORONTO EMERGENCY SERVICES
(All figures in $000s) |
|
1998 |
1999 |
2000 |
2001 |
2002 |
2003 |
Post |
Total |
Capital Costs |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fire System Component * |
|
19,200.0 |
10,000.0 |
|
|
|
|
29,200.0 |
Police System Component* |
2,700.0 |
2,600.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
5,300 |
Total Capital Costs |
2,700.0 |
21,800.0 |
10,000.0 |
|
|
|
|
34,500.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Impact on Operating -
Increase (decrease) From 1998 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fire System Comp. (Incl.
Works Dept.) |
|
175.0 |
175.0 |
175.0 |
*(500.0) |
*(500.0) |
*(500.0) |
|
Police System Component |
|
95.0 |
170.0 |
405.0 |
655.0 |
655.0 |
655.0 |
|
Total Annual Impact on
Operating Costs |
|
270.0 |
345.0 |
580.0 |
155.0 |
155.0 |
155.0 |
|
Note:
Additional costs if implemented in 1999 (exchange rate savings). Increase in exchange rate as of January 1/99 : 1.4 to 1.61
(vendor establishes January 1 of each year) = $4,400.00.
*In 2002, existing systems costs of $300,000.00 and additional systems costs of $200,000.00 are transferred as a Police
budget responsibility. The $175,000.00 and $200,000.00 increases are offset against $900,000.00 in staff reductions with
the balance of $525,000.00 as savings.
Conclusion:
From the point of view of efficiency, economies of scale and the use of equipment best suited to an amalgamated radio
voice communication system, Council's approval of the proposal will ensure that the emergency needs of residents and
businesses of our City will continue to be served with optimum efficiency.
Contact Names:
Dan Perlstein, Senior Radio Engineer, Computing and Telecommunications, Toronto Police,
Tel. 808-6905, Fax: 808-6902.
Vera Maute, Division Chief, Communications, Fire Services, Tel: 397-4390, Fax: 396-7665.
Tom G. Denes, P.Eng., Executive Director, Technical Services.
Working Agreement
between
Toronto Police Service
(Herein referred to as Toronto Police)
and
Toronto Fire Service
(Herein referred to as Toronto Fire)
and
Toronto Ambulance Service
(Herein referred to as Toronto Ambulance)
Regarding the joint integration, design, implementation, operation, administration, technical support and maintenance of a
common communication infrastructure for voice signaling over radio frequencies within the jurisdictions serviced by the
above named services.
1.0Definitions:
1.1"Parties" shall mean the above named Toronto Police, Toronto Fire, and Toronto Ambulance.
1.2"Voice Communication Infrastructure" shall mean those electronic, radio frequency based, fixed electronic
subsystems that have been designated and manufactured to allow for the transmission and reception of wireless voice
communication, and include but are not limited to, installed radio equipment at radio sites, base stations, radio towers,
radio antennas, cables, dispatch consoles and radio accessories, real estate leases and rentals, utilities and
telecommunications services, and all such electronic equipment required to support these activities.
1.3"Radio channels" shall mean those radio frequency allocations and licenses issued by Industry Canada for the purpose
of wireless voice communication.
2.0Introduction:
2.1The above named services are committed to provide the best and most efficient emergency public safety services
within the jurisdiction of the City of Toronto.
2.2The Parties recognize that communications via a Voice Radio Infrastructure is a fast, efficient and cost effective
manner for police officers and fire fighters to communicate with one another and with their dispatch centres, within the
confines of each service and between services.
2.3The Parties recognize the need for their personnel to be able to quickly communicate with the members of the other
service in areas and under circumstances in which land line based telephones are not available or accessible.
2.4The Parties recognize the operational and financial benefits of shared ownership, technical support and maintenance
of a Voice Radio Infrastructure.
2.5The Parties recognize that this working agreement shall not preclude any other emergency agency or, other public
service organizations within the jurisdiction of the City of Toronto to become party to this working agreement, should it
wish to do so. Toronto Ambulance will continue with their current communications system and will participate in the joint
radio infrastructure steering committee to ensure continued co-operation in future communications projects.
3.0Objective:
3.1The objective is to design, administer, support and maintain an integrated Voice Radio Infrastructure that shall
provide the required radio communication services, capabilities and features for each service, separately and in common, in
the most cost efficient manner.
4.0Terms and Procedures:
4.1The Parties agree to integrate the voice radio infrastructures presently operated by the Police Service and Fire Service
into one voice radio infrastructure in such manner as to include the Objective of this working agreement.
4.2The Parties agree that the radio frequency channels that each service operates will remain allocated and licensed to the
respective service.
4.3The Parties agree that where feasible and cost effective they shall facilitate the Objective of this working agreement
within their current voice radio infrastructures to preserve existing investment.
4.4The Parties agree to represent the integrated voice radio infrastructure as one item in the present and future capital
works programs.
4.5The Parties agree that Toronto Police and Toronto Fire shall assume joint responsibility to design and integrate the
aforementioned voice radio infrastructure and the dispatch centres, primary and backup, associated with it. In this context
both Fire and Police Deputy Chiefs responsible for communications must be signatories to any and all supply and delivery
contracts pertaining to the voice radio infrastructure.
4.6The Parties agree that Toronto Police shall be responsible for the technical support and the maintenance of the voice
radio infrastructure.
4.7The Parties agree that Toronto Fire shall be responsible for the administration of the voice radio infrastructure
including network access security, addressing schemes, user equipment access protocols and all other operational functions
required to manage the network component of the voice radio infrastructure.
4.8The Parties agree to set up a joint steering committee to oversee all the activities related to the voice radio
infrastructure.
4.9The Parties agree to support the objective of this working agreement with the management support and personnel
required.
4.10The Parties agree to assume individual budgetary and managerial responsibility for the staff responsible for
activities, related to the voice radio infrastructure, that fall within each party's jurisdiction.
4.11The Parties agree to coordinate their efforts to implement the objective of this working agreement in such a manner
as to satisfy their respective time constraints.
4.12The Parties agree that any emergency service or public service organization within the jurisdiction of the City of
Toronto that considers the objective of this agreement a cost effective manner to provide its services in the City of Toronto
may become a party to this working agreement provided the party shall bear its share of operational resources, such as
radio channels, dispatch facilities, etc. and financial responsibilities required to implement the objective.
4.13The Parties agree to grandfather the existing users on their current systems.
4.14The Parties agree that other projects that present common interest could be approached on a project by project basis
subject to the same working agreement in the future.
5.0Release:
5.1This working agreement shall not supersede or replace any other agreements currently in place involving any of the
named Parties.
Alan F. Speed David BoothbyRon Kelusky
Fire ChiefPolice ChiefAmbulance General Manager
(City Council on December 16 and 17, 1998, had before it, during consideration of the foregoing Clause, the following
report (December 15, 1998) from the City Auditor:
Recommendation:
It is recommended that this report be received for information.
Background:
At its meeting on December 8, 1998, the Budget Committee considered a report from the Emergency and Protective
Services Committee recommending the purchase of an integrated Police and Fire Radio Communications System from
Motorola Canada Limited.
Mr. Steven Warner of Elyps Dispatch Solutions appeared before the Budget Committee and presented an unsolicited
public system proposal for a radio communications system for Toronto Fire Services.
The Budget Committee requested that the City Auditor review Mr. Warner's presentation, together with the comments of
the Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services, and report thereon to Council.
Given the time constraints, my staff have conducted a high level review of this issue. The review included discussions with
the Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services, Police and Fire Services staff, as well as representatives from Elyps
Dispatch Solutions and Motorola Canada Limited. In addition, we have had discussions with KVA Communications Inc.,
the independent consultant hired to review the integrated private Police and Fire radio communications system. We have
also reviewed the consultant's report, various committee reports and related correspondence as well as the documentation
relating to the hiring of this consultant.
Comments:
Combined Police and Fire Radio System Being Recommended:
Early in 1998, a peer working group with representatives from Police, Fire and Ambulance was formed to identify a radio
communication system solution from an integrated City perspective. The peer review team developed a conceptual design
for a combined Police and Fire radio system. The system would take advantage of the City's existing investment in
Motorola equipment and would allow for economies of scale in terms of annual operating and maintenance costs. The
proposed integrated system is estimated to cost $34.5 million and funding of $29.2 million and $5.3 million has been
included in the respective Fire and Police 1999-2003 capital budget submissions. Staff have indicated that the proposed
combined system would save the City approximately $6.6 million as opposed to implementing two individuals systems. The
proposal being recommended by staff is a private system solution, wherein the City has its own private channels and
would own the infrastructure and equipment. The specific technology proposed also enables radio communication with
other regional Police Services such as York, Peel and Hamilton/Wentworth.
Elyps Dispatch Solutions Unsolicited Proposal:
The proposal put forward by Elyps Dispatch Solution would provide a radio system for Fire Services only. The proposal is
an out source solution whereby Fire Services would use public channels utilized by other commercial users and would
essentially lease the equipment from Elyps. In his presentation to the Budget Committee, Mr. Steven Warner of Elyps
indicated that based on information he obtained from City Treasury staff, the cost of the Fire System recommended by staff
would be $42.0 million over the 10 year estimated life, factoring in the cost of borrowing over this time period and that he
"would be able to commit to being at least $10 million below the amortized cost to the City over a 10 year period." He
indicated that the Elyps system would cost only $29 million over the ten year period. In a letter to the Toronto Police
Service (dated November 26, 1998) he guaranteed that the cost of his solution would be at least 10% less than the
amortized cost of the private system being proposed by staff. No detailed and firm proposal was received from Elyps so it
is difficult to determine what savings, if any, would accrue to the City under the Elyps proposal or whether any technical,
functional or operational issues exist.
Independent Consultant:
In April, 1998, the Emergency and Protective Services committee recommended that an independent consultant be
engaged to confirm the conceptual design of the combined Police and Fire system from a technological, operational and
functional perspective, as well as determining whether it was the most cost effective solution for the City.
The firm of KVA Communication Inc. (KVA) was hired through a competitive process and based on our discussions with a
representative of the firm and a review of the consultant's summary of related experience, submitted as part of the Request
for Proposals process, this firm appears to be qualified to carry out this work.
KVA started its work this past summer and held meetings with various Fire, Police and Works staff, as well as with
suppliers and proponents. KVA reviewed the conceptual design of the private system being proposed by Police and Fire
Services as well as three potential public system solutions. In doing its evaluation, KVA used the following five
requirements, which it indicated were critical for a public safety radio communications system:
- adequate and consistent coverage;
- sufficient capacity;
- required functionality;
- reliable operation; and
- cost effectiveness.
In October 1998, KVA issued its detailed report to the Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services, and concluded in
the report that the proposed integrated Police and Fire Services radio system represents the best strategy to satisfy user
requirements. The report indicated that the proposed system meets all five of the requirements of a public safety
communications system, since there are no viable alternatives and the integration would maximize the use of existing
equipment. KVA recommended that, "the City proceed without delay to a sole source procurement to Motorola for the
required, equipment, system and services."
"Essentially the City has no choice than to proceed in this manner. To contemplate an RFP process to implement a new
radio system at this time would indicate that the City of Toronto places no value on the existing systems, equipment and
knowledge base."
As previously discussed, KVA met with public system proponents including Elyps (then known as Group CS). During its
review of the Group CS plans, KVA evaluated the plans against each of the five critical requirements of the system. Based
on this evaluation Group CS would not meet the technical specifications required by the Fire Services. In addition, KVA
further indicates that "to date, no explicit costing has been received, short of their stated desire to provide "low" costs to
their commercial subscribers and the vague promise to ensure that pricing for Toronto would be very cost competitive
against a private system. The cost effectiveness of their solution would likely be poor, since adopting their plan would
require the City to dispose of all of its existing radio equipment (which still has a 10 to 15 year life expectancy) and to
surrender back to Industry Canada its valuable 800 MHZ channels."
The consultant concluded with respect to Elyps that, "the current plans of Group CS do not meet the City's requirements
with respect to coverage, capacity and reliability. The system functionality needed by Toronto Fire Services would be
achieved using extremely inefficient and complicated methods... No further consideration of the Group CS offer should be
made by the City."
The consultant also ruled out two other public systems for consideration at this time.
Conclusion:
Ideally, a competitive process, involving a request for proposals, should be used when selecting systems of this magnitude.
In the case of the radio communications system, staff hired a qualified independent consultant to review the proposed
private integrated system as well as alternatives. The consultant concluded that there are no real viable alternatives at this
time and that due the existing investment in Motorola equipment, the City should procure its additional requirements from
Motorola. A competitive process was therefore not considered necessary or appropriate. While the action taken by staff is
reasonable under the circumstances, the use of a competitive process may have helped avoid the issue we are currently
dealing with by allowing the deputant (Elyps) and other proponents a formal opportunity to put forward their respective
proposals for evaluation against the integrated system proposed by staff. It would have also established, up front, the
terms and conditions that any successful proponent would have to adhere to. While the decision in the end would most
likely have been the same, it would have at least been made as part of an open and formal process.
Contact Name:
Tony Veneziano, Senior Audit Manager, 392-8353.)
34
Yonge Dundas Redevelopment Project
- Joint Board Order (Downtown - Ward 24)
(City Council on December 16 and 17, 1998, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)
The Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee recommends the adoption of the following report (December 11,
1998) from the City Solicitor subject to amending Recommendation No. (1) to indicate that the funding be provided
from Account No. 216692:
Purpose:
To obtain Council authority to pay the costs award made by the Joint Board (Ontario Municipal Board and Board of
Inquiry) in connection with the proceedings held before the Joint Board for expropriation and planning approvals required
to implement the Yonge Dundas Redevelopment Project.
Funding Sources, Financial Implications and Impact Statement:
Funding for the costs award, in an amount not to exceed $850,000.00 including G.S.T., is included in the previously
approved overall project funding Account No. 216692.
Recommendations:
It is recommended that:
(1)authority be granted to make payment of the costs award made by the Joint Board; and
(2)the appropriate City officials be authorized and directed to take the steps necessary to give effect to the foregoing.
Council Reference/Background/History:
At its meeting held on July 8, 9, and 10, 1998, Council amended and adopted Clause No. 26 of Report No. 10 of the
Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee, and thereby endorsed its commitment to proceed with the Yonge Dundas
Redevelopment Project. Among the recommendations adopted at that time were endorsement of Project funding
provisions. At the time of that report, the Joint Board had issued its decision approving the Project, with certain conditions
which were described in the report. The Board reserved any decision as to costs. Subsequently, the conditions were
fulfilled and the Order implementing the Board's decision was issued. On October 14 and 15, 1998, the Board heard
arguments as to costs from the participants in the proceedings and on November 26, 1998, the Board issued its decision on
costs and an Order.
Comments and/or Discussion and/or Justification:
The Board awarded the participants in the hearing against the City 50 percent of their costs of the hearing. With respect to
two motions, one before the hearing and the other being the costs motion, the Board fixed the costs of the participants and
ordered that the City pay those costs. In granting these awards, the Board did not provide the participants with the total
costs they requested.
In its decision the Board stated:
"...the Board found that the public interest was well served by the public process and ultimately by the approval of the
entire Yonge/Dundas scheme as a package. The matter is so unique that it...should not be read as being punitive against the
City.
The City should consider the cost awarded as a cost of doing business. In the Board's view, good business practice entails
the spending of considerable sums in order that all approvals are in place...
The cost award to be granted is a small price to pay...and is relatively minor in relation to the overall cost of the entire
Yonge/Dundas scheme."
In total, the amounts awarded for costs to be paid under the Board Order are $850,000.00 including G.S.T. The Board
directed that the amounts be paid by the City forthwith.
Conclusions:
The City has achieved a good result in the Joint Board Order which approved the Yonge/Dundas Redevelopment Project,
and is proceeding to implement the Project. The cost award, while not insignificant, is, as the Board stated, a cost of doing
business before the Joint Board. The City must comply with the order. Therefore, authority should be granted to pay the
costs awarded from the Project funding.
Contact Name:
Barbara A. Cappell, Solicitor: 397-4055, Fax 392-3848
(City Council on December 16 and 17, 1998, had before it, during consideration of the foregoing Clause, a confidential
report (December 16, 1998) from the City Solicitor, such report to remain confidential in accordance with the provisions
of the Municipal Act.)
35
Tax Appeals - Sections 442 and 443 of the Municipal Act -
Creation of a Committee of Council for Tax Appeals
(City Council on December 16 and 17, 1998, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)
The Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee recommends the adoption of the following report (December 14,
1998) from the Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer:
Purpose:
To establish a policy for The City of Toronto for the hearing and disposition of tax appeals pursuant to sections 442 and
443 of the Municipal Act including the creation of a committee of Council to carry out the function. For Council to
authorize this function for implementation in 1999, a by-law must be adopted by Council prior to December 31, 1998.
Recommendations:
(1)That under Section 105 of the Municipal Act, a by-law be passed authorizing the Corporate Services Committee to
hear and make recommendations on all tax appeals, pursuant to sections 442 and 443 of the Municipal Act for 1998 and
subsequent tax years;
(2)That the Assessment Review Board continue to hear and dispose of all section 442 appeals that relate to 1997 and
prior tax years for all former municipalities with the exception of North York where outstanding appeals filed prior to 1998
be dealt with by the Corporate Services Committee on a priority basis;
(3)That any outstanding by-laws in place in any of the former municipalities that established committees or delegated
responsibilities to hear and dispose of applications under section 443 of the Municipal Act be repealed;
(4)That as a matter of policy, the hearing and disposition of applications submitted under section 442 (e) of the
Municipal Act, as poverty appeals, be delegated to the Assessment Review Board;
(5)That the Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer be responsible for the full administrative process as delegated by the
City Clerk for the receipt of the applications and the mailing of the required notices;
(6)That no fee be charged by the municipality to initiate appeals under section 442 of the Municipal Act; and
(7)That the City Solicitor be directed to introduce a bill in Council to have the Corporate Services Committee hear and
dispose of appeals pursuant to section 442 and 443 of the Municipal Act.
Funding Source, Implications and Impact Statement:
None.
Background:
Section 442 of the Municipal Act allows Council to cancel, reduce or refund taxes levied for the following reasons:
(a)property that has ceased to be liable to be taxed at the rate it was taxed on the returned roll;
(b)property became exempt from taxation;
(c)property razed by fire or demolished;
(d)mobile unit that has been removed from the municipality during the year;
(e)taxpayer unable to pay taxes due to sickness or extreme poverty;
(f)overcharged by gross or manifest clerical error; or
(g)property could not be used for at least three months due to repairs or renovations.
These tax appeal applications can be initiated by the property owner, the Regional Assessment Commissioner or by the
City itself. All former municipalities in Toronto, except North York, delegated the authority to hear and dispose of all
applications and appeals pursuant to section 442, of the Municipal Act to the Assessment Review Board (ARB). Only 14 of
the more than 900 municipalities in Ontario delegate this function to the ARB.
Section 443 of the Municipal Act allows Council to make decisions relating to errors of fact on supplementary and omitted
assessments. This section permits correction of these types of errors for the previous two years.
Comments:
Section 442 Appeals:
A consistent and uniform policy must be established prior to the processing of any 1998 tax appeals. Unless delegated by
City Council by-law, section 442 applications are to be dealt with by municipal council. Although most of the former
municipalities in Toronto delegated the disposition of Section 442 appeals to the ARB, there are legitimate reasons for
Council to retain responsibility to hear them.
The following table sets out the advantages and disadvantages for these appeals to be heard by either the City or the ARB.
|
COUNCIL |
ARB |
Benefits |
- expeditious processing of
adjustments
- no application filing fees
- stream-lined process
- increased volume of appeals
can be processed in-house
within a shorter duration
- City maintains complete control
over process
|
- revenue source to ARB, based on fees
charged per list of applications.
- "contracting out" to outside agency
for administrating the process
|
|
|
|
|
COUNCIL |
ARB |
Drawbacks |
- cost of mailing of Notices of
Recommendation/Hearing and
Decision estimated to be
$9,000, annually
- committee must meet regularly
to avoid delays to taxpayers
|
- Number of applications per list varied
from municipality to municipality,
ranging from 40 to 250 applications
per list, at a cost of $25 per list
- production of notices for the board
for mailing
- Potentially slower response time to
enquiries by city staff
- approval process may be slower due
to the elimination of the Ontario
Municipal Board (OMB)
- anticipated increase in assessment
appeals may compound delays and
the processing of adjustments to
taxpayers
|
It is expected that the number of applications under section 442 for tax relief will decrease substantially in 1998 and in
subsequent years due to the elimination of the Business Occupancy Tax (BOT). The BOT accounted for approximately 80
percent of all section 442 applications because this type of appeal was submitted whenever a business tenant moved or
closed a business. For example, in 1997, for all the former municipalities in Toronto, the total number of section 442
applications was approximately 24,000 and of these, approximately 19,000 or 80 percent were applications related to
business closures or movements. With the elimination of the BOT, the number of section 442 applications is expected to
decrease significantly and is further justification for the City to be responsible for their hearing and disposition.
The only type of appeal under section 442 of the Act that is recommended to be delegated to the ARB is an application
under section 442 (e). These are appeals for which the taxpayer is requesting relief from payment of tax due to sickness or
extreme poverty for which personal financial information is required to justify the request. The application would be
submitted to the City, as with all other applications under section 442, and would be reviewed by City staff. However, it is
recommended that these appeals be heard by the ARB to ensure confidentiality and impartiality.
Previously, the former City of Scarborough was the only municipality to charge a fee for filing appeals under section 442.
City Council at its meeting held in April 16, 1998, (CSC, Report No. 3, Clause 31) adopted a standard fee structure for
administration fees applicable to tax revenue, and discontinued the fee previously charged by Scarborough.
The section 442 process should to be administered entirely by the Finance Department. Although the Municipal Act
specifies that applications made under section 442 be submitted to the City Clerk, its function would be that in name only
and the actual process would be administered by the Finance Department. Finance staff would receive the applications,
provide notices of acknowledgment of receipt, forward applications to the Regional Assessment offices for review,
calculate the tax adjustment, prepare and mail the notices of decision, and schedule the hearings before the Corporate
Services Committee. If any taxpayer did not agree with the tax adjustment, the opportunity to be heard before the
Corporate Services Committee would exist.
The Treasurer would provide a report to the Committee for each meeting containing a list of all applications, account
numbers, reasons for applications along with the recommendation for tax adjustments for each application, for review and
approval by the Corporate Services Committee. The Corporate Services Committee would be required to consider Finance
staff's recommendation for each application and the applicant's objection, if any. The report would also include the total
number of applications and total dollar value of adjustments.
To ensure that all applicants are dealt with in a timely manner. The application should be dealt with at the regular meeting.
There should be no minimum number of applications to be disposed of for the Committee to consider them. Delays to
taxpayers should not be due to volume of applications to be heard.
There are some applications filed under section 442 for the 1997 tax year and prior years in the former municipalities that
remain outstanding. These applications should be dealt with in the same manner and process under which they were filed.
For all former municipalities except North York, these applications should be dealt with by the ARB. In North York, the
applications were dealt with by Management Committee through to City Council. Since that committee no longer exists
under the amalgamated new City of Toronto, outstanding applications remain to be disposed of. It is recommended that
Corporate Services Committee deal with the outstanding North York applications on a priority basis.
Section 443 Appeals:
Applications under section 443 of the Municipal Act should also be disposed of through the Corporate Services
Committee. Section 443 of the Municipal Act allows Council to make decisions relating to errors of fact on supplementary
and omitted assessments. This section permits correction of these types of errors for the current and previous two years.
The errors cannot be an error of assessor judgement.
In the former municipalities, section 443 applications were disposed of through Council except the City of Toronto where
they were delegated and disposed of through the Court of Revision. It is recommended that the City Solicitor be directed to
repeal any by-law in place that delegated the authority to dispose of section 443 applications in any former municipality in
Toronto. For the former City of Toronto, the authority for the Court of Revision to hear section 443 applications should be
repealed as well.
A by-law to delegate section 443 applications for the new City of Toronto should be put in place and that responsibility be
delegated to the Corporate Services Committee.
I have consulted with the City Solicitor in the preparation of this report.
Conclusion:
In the former municipalities of Toronto, different methods were employed to hear and dispose of applications for tax
appeals under Section 442 and 443 of the Municipal Act. In order to establish a uniform policy for the City of Toronto, it is
recommended that the Corporate Services Committee hear and dispose of all such applications for 1998 and subsequent
years. However, it is recommended that Council delegate to the Assessment Review Board the responsibility for tax
appeals made under Section 442(e) of the Municipal Act (poverty appeals). These recommendations will ensure that all tax
appeal adjustments are processed on a prompt and timely basis for taxpayers.
Applications filed for tax years prior to 1998 should be dealt with using the same process under which they were filed. For
all former municipalities, except North York, the ARB should dispose of them. For North York, which had its City Council
hear these appeals, it is recommended that any outstanding appeal be heard by the Corporate Services Committee on a
priority basis.
36
Release of Recreation Grant Funds
(City Council on December 16 and 17, 1998, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)
The Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee recommends the adoption of the following report (December 14,
1998) from the Commissioner of Economic Development, Culture and Tourism:
Purpose:
This report responds to two Recreation Grant applicants from the former City of Toronto, whose applications were not
reported on in the regular grants stream.
Funding Sources, Financial Implications and Impact Statement:
Sufficient funds for these two recommendations exist unallocated in the 1998 Recreation Grants Program Budget.
Recommendations:
It is recommended that:
(1)a grant of $2,000.00 be awarded to Central Neighbourhood Community Centre for its seniors program;
(2)a grant of $800.00 be awarded to "Circolo dell'Anziano "Le Caravelle" for its seniors program; and
(3)the appropriate City Officials be authorized to take the necessary action to give affect thereto.
Council Reference/Background/History:
The direction for grants review and allocation process in 1998, as outlined in the Administration of Municipal Grants
Programs Report (Clause No. 1, Report No. 1 of the Community and Neighbourhood Services Committee) approved by
Council on February 4, 5 and 6, 1998, was to undertake a simplified review process and provide flatline allocations to
returning organizations that were in good standing within their grants programs.
Comments and/or Discussion and/or Justification:
The joint application forms used by Community Services and Recreation Grants Programs in the 1998 process caused
some confusion. Appropriate lines identifying which programs were being accessed were not filled out properly and/or
misinterpreted by staff reviewing the applications. As a result, two applicants that received 1997 Recreation Grants in the
former City of Toronto and who applied for 1998 funds on or before the deadline, were not awarded Recreation funding. In
1997, Central Eglinton Community Centre received $2,000.00 and Circolo dell'Anziano "Le Caravelle" received $800.00
for seniors programming. Both groups were in good standing with the City and met all of the eligibility and time
requirements. If these grants are awarded, the $3301.00 that was unallocated in the Recreation Grants budget, would be
reduced to $501.00.
Conclusions:
These two organizations have complied with the Recreation Grants Program's guidelines and sufficient funding is
available to restore their 1997 level of support from the City.
Contact name:
Cathi Forbes , Phone 395-6192, Fax 395-7886, email cforbes@city.north-york.on.ca.
37
Board of Directors for New Toronto Hydro Corporation
(City Council on December 16 and 17, 1998, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)
The Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee recommends the adoption of the following report (December 14,
1998) from Mayor Lastman subject to amending Recommendation No. (2) by adding the words "and that the slate
of qualified candidates be submitted to Council no later than March 2, 1999.":
Purpose:
To provide an update on actions taken to date and recommend a new structure for the Board of Directors of Toronto Hydro
and a process for selecting directors.
Funding Sources, Financial Implications and Impact Statement:
There are no financial implications.
Recommendations:
My recommendations are that:
(1)the new Toronto Hydro Board of Directors be set at 11 members: 8 citizens which collectively represent a range of
relevant expertise; 2 Councillors; and the Mayor or his designate; and
(2)the Mayor and the 3 Councillors currently on the Toronto Hydro-Electric Commission serve as a Steering Committee
to work with the search consultant to recommend to Council a slate of qualified candidates nominated as the Board of
Directors of the new Toronto Hydro Corporation.
Comments:
On October 28, 1998 Council referred the Toronto Hydro issue to me. This will update you on what has been done to date
and recommend the next steps.
Bill 35 received Royal Assent on October 30, 1998 and requires us to incorporate the utility. The new company can begin
operating on April 1 under the legislation. It is important that this City and the Hydro Board be ready.
Therefore, I have set in motion a number of specific initiatives:
(1)I have heard your views and I believe we are generally in agreement that we need a board where the majority of
directors are citizens with a range of expertise and related experience. To start the wheels in motion, I instructed the CAO
to retain a search consultant to recruit suitable candidates for our consideration.
To ensure that Council's interests are clearly represented, I am recommending that 2 Councillors and the Mayor or his
designate and 8 citizens make up a Board totalling 11 members.
I am also recommending that a Steering Committee be established composed of the Mayor and the three Councillors
currently on the Hydro Commission. The Steering Committee will recommend to Council a slate of candidates. With the
advice of the search consultant, the citizens will be selected to represent expertise and experience in a range of disciplines
such as the utility industry, finance, retail marketing, labour relations, law, safety, and the environment.
(2)I asked the CAO to set up briefings for Council to assist us in making decisions on the terms of a shareholder
agreement. Many of you attended the first of these on November 27 and the CAO has distributed the materials from the
briefing to all Councillors. There will be further briefings and discussions in the new year where we can air views and
suggestions.
To assist the City in working through these complex issues, the CAO has retained independent legal counsel and financial
advisors. These people will help the City outline the best options available to Council to protect the public interest and may
assist in the briefings.
(3)I hope that a new Board can be brought before Council for approval by March. In the meantime, I have asked the CAO
and Chief Financial Officer to attend Commission meetings and generally maintain a watching brief on Hydro operations.
Conclusions:
This is an exciting challenge for City Council and I urge you to take part in the briefing sessions and discussions so we can
smoothly work through these changes to the benefit of the citizens of Toronto.
38
Other Items Considered by the Committee
(City Council on December 16 and 17, 1998, received this Clause, for information.)
(a)Final Report - Task Force On Community Access And Equity
The Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee reports having received the following report for information:
(December 14, 1998) from Councillor Mihevc, Chair of the Task Force on Community Access and Equity, advising that
the Task Force will be meeting on January 19, 1999, to review the final draft of its report, which will be submitted to the
next meeting of the Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee.
(b)External Legal Firms Retained For Insurance Claim Defence
The Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee reports having received the following communication:
(November 19, 1998) from the City Clerk forwarding the action of the Budget Committee from its meeting of November
18, 1998, to the Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee and advising that the Budget Committee received for
information the report (October 16, 1998) from the Chief Administrative Officer and the Chief Financial Officer and
Treasurer.
(c)Reinvestment Of Animal Licensing And Registration Fees
The Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee reports having adopted the following communication:
(November 19, 1998) from the City Clerk forwarding the action of the Budget Committee from its meeting of November
18, 1998, and recommending to the Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee and Council that the following
recommendations of the Board of Health contained in the transmittal letter (October 19, 1998) from the City Clerk, be
considered as part of the Budget Committee deliberations on the 1999 Operating Budget:
"The Board of Health recommends to the Budget Committee that:
(1)current licensing revenues continue to be utilized to defray operating expenses; and
(2)any additional licensing and registration revenues be used to fund retroactive program initiatives, subject to the review
and the resolution of these and other amalgamation-related issues."
(d)Public Health - Site Rationalization
The Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee reports having received the following communication:
(November 19, 1998) from the City Clerk forwarding the action of the Budget Committee from its meeting of November
18, 1998, to the Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee and recommending that the following action taken by the
Board of Health as contained in the transmittal letter (October 16, 1998) from the City Clerk, be received for information:
"The Board of Health recommends to the Budget Committee that the Budget Committee and the Commissioner of
Corporate Services give high priority to site rationalization because of the potential cost saving benefits inherent therein."
(e)Update on Consulting Assistance for Amalgamation
The Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee reports having received the following communication:
(November 19, 1998) from the City Clerk forwarding the following action of the Budget Committee from its meeting of
November 18, 1998, to the Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee and advising that the Budget Committee:
(1)received as information the report (September 29, 1998) from the Executive Director, Human Resources and
Amalgamation;
(2)requested Local 79 to forward a letter to the Budget Committee outlining its concerns in detail; and
(3)recommended that this matter be considered further at the meeting of the Budget Committee scheduled for December
8, 1998, and that it be listed as a deputation item.
(f)1998 Wheel-Trans Budget - Update
The Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee reports having received the following communication:
(November 19, 1998) from the City Clerk forwarding the action of the Budget Committee from its meeting of November
18, 1998, and recommending to the Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee and Council that the Toronto Transit
Commission Report No. 15 entitled, "1998 Wheel-trans Budget - Update" from the meeting of the Toronto Transit
Committee on November 4, 1998, be received and considered as part of the Budget Committee deliberations on the 1999
Operating Budget.
(g)Current Value Assessment - Tax Capping
The Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee reports having received the following communication:
(November 19, 1998) from the City Clerk forwarding the action of the Budget Committee from its meeting of November
18, 1998, to the Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee, advising that the Budget Committee received for information
the communication (September 30, 1998) from the General Secretary, Toronto Transit Commission, and the report
(November 16, 1998) from the Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer.
(h)Swipe Card Technology
The Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee reports having received the following communication:
(November 19, 1998) from the City Clerk forwarding the action of the Budget Committee from its meeting of November
18, 1998, to the Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee and Council, advising that the Budget Committee received for
information the communication (October 26, 1998) from the General Secretary, Toronto Transit Commission.
(i)Yards Rationalization Study
The Strategic Policies and Priorities reports having referred the recommendations of the Budget Committee,
contained in the following communication, to the appropriate Commissioners with a request that they report to the
Works and Utilities Committee, the Economic Development Committee and the Urban Environment and
Development Committee as appropriate in January 1999 on the impact of the closure of the yard locations, and that
these Committees report thereon to the Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee:
(November 19, 1998) from the City Clerk forwarding the action of the Budget Committee from its meeting of November
18, 1998, to the Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee and Council, and recommending that:
(1)the report (November 9, 1998) from the Commissioner of Corporate Services be received for information; and
(2)the Yards Rationalization Study be completed either in or before June, 1999.
(j)Child Care Expansion - City's Cost Sharing Request to the Ministry of Community and Social Services
The Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee reports having received the following communication:
(November 19, 1998) from the City Clerk forwarding the action of the Budget Committee from its meeting of November
18, 1998, to the Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee and advising that the communication (October 8, 1998) from
the Commissioner of Community and Neighbourhood Services was received for information.
Councillor Ashton declared his interest in this matter in that his daughter is registered in a not-for-profit daycare centre.
Councillor Pantalone declared his interest in this matter in that his two children are registered in a not-for-profit daycare
centre.
(k)Ontario Municipal Board Hearings
The Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee reports having referred the following matter to the City Solicitor,
the Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer and the Chief Planner with a request that they report thereon to the
Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee:
(November 19, 1998) from the City Clerk forwarding the action of the Budget Committee from its meeting of November
18, 1998, to the Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee and Council, and recommending the adoption of the following
recommendations embodied in the report (August 25, 1998) from the City Solicitor, subject to the following amendment to
Recommendation No. 3:
"in the event that Council directs the hiring of an outside planner, the necessary funding be taken from the department's
contingency."
(l)Keele Valley Landfill Site - Filling Options
The Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee reports having:
(1)adopted the communication (November 19, 1998) from the City Clerk; and
(2)adopted, as amended, the recommendation of the Budget Committee contained in the confidential
communication (November 19, 1998) from the City Clerk addressed to the Works and Utilities Committee and
forwarded notice of its action to the Works and Utilities Committee for its Special Meeting on December 16, 1998.
(i)(November 19, 1998) from City Clerk forwarding the action of the Budget Committee from its meeting of November
18, 1998, to the Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee and Council, and recommending that financial implications
and costs be considered during the Budget Committee deliberations on the 1999 Operating Budget
(ii)(December 10, 1998) from the City Clerk forwarding the action of the Budget Committee, under confidential cover,
from its meeting of December 8, 1998.
(m)Survey Of Single Parents
The Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee reports having adopted the recommendations of the Budget
Committee contained in the following communication:
(November 19, 1998) from the City Clerk forwarding the action of the Budget Committee from its meeting of November
18, 1998, to the Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee and Council, and recommending that the recommendation of
the Community and Neighbourhood Services Committee, to adopt the report (October 19, 1998) from the Commissioner of
Community and Neighbourhood Services be considered as part of the Budget Committee deliberations on the 1999
Operating Budget.
(n)Oversized Street Name Signs - International Year Of Older Persons (1999)
The Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee reports having:
(1)received the following communication from the City Clerk; and
(2)requested appropriate City staff to meet with Ms. Edna Beange of the Seniors Task Force to discuss the design
and installation of oversized street signs.
(November 19, 1998) from the City Clerk forwarding the action of the Budget Committee from its meeting of November
18, 1998, to the Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee, for receipt of information, the transmittal letter (November 6,
1998) from the City Clerk forwarding the recommendations of the Seniors' Task Force with respect to the installation of
oversized street signs.
(o)Toronto Police Services Board - Update On Police Pursuits
The Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee reports having received for information the following
communication:
(November 19, 1998) from the City Clerk forwarding the action of the Budget Committee from its meeting of November
18, 1998, to the Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee, and recommending receipt for information of the
communication (November 9, 1998) from the Toronto Police Services Board.
(p)Establishing A Capital Revolving Fund For Affordable Housing
The Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee reports having deferred consideration of the following joint report
and requested that it be considered as the same time that the previously requested report on the Revolving Capital
Fund is submitted by the Budget Committee:
(December 1, 1998) from the Commissioner of Community and Neighbourhood Services and Chief Financial Officer and
Treasurer forwarding the aforementioned report and recognizing that Council has agreed in principle to establish a capital
revolving fund for affordable housing to provide financial support to projects that demonstrate the City's role in facilitating
creation of affordable housing (July 1998) and recommending that:
(1)the City establish a Capital Revolving Fund for Affordable Housing and re-designate the Social Housing Reserve
Fund of the former City of Toronto for this purpose;
(2)the Capital Revolving Fund for Affordable Housing be managed as a restricted reserve fund, consistent with the
requirements of Section 37 of the Planning Act;
(3)the Commissioner of Community and Neighbourhood Services and the Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer be
responsible for making recommendations to Council about allocation of funds from the Capital Revolving Fund to
non-profit organizations including Cityhome/Metro Toronto Housing Company Limited, per the management plan outlined
in this report, and restricted to the following purposes:
(i)proposal development funding for affordable housing projects;
(ii)project development assistance including forgivable loans and re-payable loans;
(iii)project financing (e.g. second mortgage loans); and
(iv)other activities related to improving the quality and quantity of affordable housing supply in the City of Toronto.
(4)the $1,288,776.72 received from the Province of Ontario as partial settlement of the former City of Toronto and
Cityhome's claim against the Province arising out of the cancellation of non-profit housing projects be allocated as
follows:
(i)$214,186.23 to Corporate Services to cover legal costs associated with the claim;
(ii)$7,813.00 to Cityhome to cover expenses related to the claim; and
(iii)$1,066,777.49 (plus accumulated interest) to the proposed Capital Revolving Fund for Affordable Housing.
(5)the Commissioner of Community and Neighbourhood Services and the Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer report
back on options for ongoing funding of the Capital Revolving Fund for Affordable Housing, if adopted.
(6)the Commissioner of Community and Neighbourhood Services and the Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer report
back on final management guidelines for the Fund;
(7) Council write to the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing and the Federal Minister responsible for Canada
Mortgage and Housing advising that Council has established a Capital Revolving Fund to support Affordable Housing, and
to request that the Province of Ontario and Government of Canada participate in supporting development of affordable
housing in the City of Toronto by contributing to this Fund; and
(8)authorize and direct appropriate City officials to take the necessary actions to implement these recommendations.
Councillor Layton appeared before the Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee in connection with the foregoing matter.
(q)Assessment And Tax Policy Task Force - Proposed Terms Of Reference
The Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee reports having deferred consideration of the recommendations of
the Assessment and Tax Policy Task Force contained in the following communication, pending the review of the
Council-Committee governance structure by Council:
(December 2, 1998) from the City Clerk forwarding the action of the Assessment and Tax Policy Task Force from its
meeting of November 20, 1998, to the Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee and recommending that:
(1)that the following Terms of Reference be adopted for the Assessment and Tax Policy Task Force:
(a)To meet as a working reference group to provide political direction to Finance Officials in the preparation of
comprehensive tax policies in advance of the return of the 1999 Current Value assessment, (taking effect in 2001)
including:
(i)review the tax burden for each property class, including the advantages and disadvantages of different tax rates for the
residential, multi-residential, commercial and industrial property classes;
(ii)develop comprehensive tax policies for the multi-residential, commercial and industrial classes, including a
permanent solution (ie. 2001) to ensure property tax equity between property classes;
(iii)develop long term (ie. 2001) tax policies to protect charitable and similar organizations in the commercial and
industrial classes;
(iv)work towards a recommendation that a portion of a resident's property taxes be based on income;
(b)To develop a process to consult interested stakeholders on proposed tax policies for the 2001 reassessment;
(c)To review hardship cases arising from the 2.5 percent cap on charitable and similar non-profit organizations during the
1998-2000 period;
(d)To review criteria for an enhanced tax relief program for low-income seniors and disabled persons;
(e)To review a mechanism to establish a general tax deferral program for all low-income home owners;
(f)To review ways and means to protect the City's tax base;
(g)To continue efforts to persuade the Provincial Government to exempt veterans' club houses from the education
portion of the property tax; and
(h)To provide options for Council, should legislation change in the future; and
(2)The Assessment and Tax Policy Task Force report directly to City Council because deputations are made at the Task
Force level and not at the Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee level.
(r)Status Report of Year 2000 Business Continuity Plan
The Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee reports having:
(1)received the following report (November 30, 1998) from the Commissioner of Corporate Services for
information; and
(2)met in-camera, in accordance with the provisions of the Municipal Act, to consider Recommendation No. (2) of
the confidential report dated November 22, 1998 from the City Solicitor which was referred to the Committee for
further consideration by Council at its November 25, 26 and 27, 1998 meeting, and the matter remained in camera.
(i)(November 30, 1998) from the Commissioner of Corporate Services updating the Strategic Policies and Priorities
Committee on the status of the Year 2000 Business Continuity Plan for the City of Toronto and providing the following:
(1)Status report of each priority 1 Year 2000 function;
(2)Status report on all ABC's and their state of readiness;
(3)Status report on expenditures;
(4)Change requests; and
recommending that the Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee receive this report for information.
(ii)Clause No. 2 of Report No. 24 of the Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee, adopted as amended by the Council
of the City of Toronto at its meeting held on November 25, 26 and 27, 1998.
(s)1999 Funding Levels For Municipal Grants Program
The Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee reports having deferred consideration of the recommendations of
the Budget Committee contained in the following communication and requested the Commissioner of Community
and Neighbourhoods Services to report to the Municipal Grants Committee for submission to the Strategic Policies
and Priorities Committee for its meeting on January 26, 1999, on the sustainability of AIDS services in
programming at 1998 levels prior to approval of the 1999 Operating Budget:
(December 10, 1998) from the City Clerk forwarding the action of the Budget Committee from its meeting of December 8,
1998, to the Strategic Policies Committee and Council, and recommending:
(1)adoption of Recommendations (3) and (4) embodied in the transmittal letter (November 20, 1998) from the City Clerk
as follows:
"(3)available funds in the 1998 consolidated grants budget be used to address one-time financial adjustments required in
the AIDS Prevention grants program up to $526,400.00;
(4)any remaining available funds in the 1998 consolidated grants budget after Recommendation No. (3) be used to
address one-time financial adjustments required in the Arts and Culture grants program;"; and
(2)deferred the following Recommendation (2) for consideration with the 1999 Operating Budget:
"the 1999 consolidated grants appropriation be maintained at the 1998 level, redirecting available funding within the 1998
grants appropriation based on Committee priorities to initiate levelling up/service enhancement in 1999."
The following persons appeared before the Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee in connection with the foregoing
matter:
-Ms. Stacey Papernick, Volunteer Board Member, The AIDS Committee of Toronto; and
-Ms. Joan Anderson, Board Member, The AIDS Committee of Toronto.
(t)Uniform Snow Removal
The Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee reports having received the following communication:
(December 10, 1998) from the City Clerk forwarding the action of the Budget Committee from its meeting on December 8,
1998, to the Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee and advising that the Budget Committee deferred consideration of
the joint report (December 4, 1998) from the Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer and the Commissioner of Works and
Emergency Services relating to the subject matter to June 1999.
(u)Feasibility of Incorporating Parking Functions into an Authority or Department
The Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee reports having received the following report:
(December 15, 1998) from the Chief Administrative Officer, forwarding a report to respond to Council's request respecting
the incorporation of parking enforcement and other related parking functions into an authority or department and
recommending that the report be received for information.
Respectfully submitted,
CASE OOTES,
Chair Pro Tem
Toronto, December 15, 1998
(Report No. 26 of The Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee, including additions thereto, was adopted, as amended,
by City Council on December 16 and 17, 1998.)
|