Town of Caledon Correspondence Package

Transcription

1 Town of Caledon Correspondence Package December 6, 2016 General Budget Committee Memorandums 1. Heather Haire, Acting Treasurer, Finance and Infrastructure Services dated December 6, 2016 re: Feedback received from Public Budget Sessions 2. Patrick Trafford, Coordinator, Legislative Services, dated December 6, 2016 re: Update Regarding 2017 Dog Redemption Fees and Communications Strategy General Correspondence 2. Region of Peel dated November 14, 2016 re: Proposed Provincial Consultation on Expanding Medical Response Through Fire Services 3. Region of Peel, dated November 22, 2016 re: Motion Regarding the Transfer of Regional Arterial Roads to the City of Mississauga 4. Chair Frank Dale, Region of Peel to the Minister of Government Services and Consumer Services, dated November 24, 2016 re: the Retail Holiday Business Act 5. Town of Oakville dated November re: Federal Infrastructure Programs Incrementality Rules of 22

2 Memorandum Date: December 6, 2016 To: Members of Council Submitted By: Heather Haire, Acting Treasurer, Finance and Infrastructure Services Subject: Feedback received from Public Budget Sessions Over the past several weeks, the public provided comments and feedback on the Town s proposed 2017 budget through a series of Coffee with Council sessions, held at various locations across Town on November 18, 19, and 22, and a Budget Open House held at Town Hall on November 23, All of the sessions were well attended and participants asked questions about projects proposed by staff and about projects that they did not see on any of the lists for As in prior years, detailed information about the Town s proposed 2017 budget was posted on the Town s website ( New for 2017 was the introduction of a dedicated address to field budget-related questions. To-date, we fielded three (3) questions through this channel and estimate that approximately 120 people attended the in-person sessions noted above. As part of the in-person sessions (e.g. Coffee with Council and Open House), attendees were provided a coloured sticker to place on one of the proposed 2017 capital initiatives to indicate their support for the project. The colour of the sticker corresponded with the ward that the resident was from. Overall: 120 stickers were handed out with Ward 1 residents (43 of the 120 or approx. 36%) having the highest participation rate; The top 3 projects that stand out in terms of priority for the participants are as follows: 1) Broadband Internet (21 stickers) 2) Design for the Rotary Place Expansion (18 stickers); 3) Traffic Calming (7 stickers) Details of the Town s proposed 2017 capital projects and a count of the stickers, by ward, is provided on the next page. 2 of 22

3 Residents were asked to place their respective ward coloured sticky beside the project that was more important to them. Below are the results from these public sessions. Project No. Project Name Total No. of Stickers Ward 1 Ward 2 Ward 3/4 Ward 5 Green Blue Red Yellow Rotary Place Expansion - Design Inglewood Tennis Court Resurfacing Caledon Trailway Aerial Brush Clearing Large Fire Equipment Replacement Alton Village Square Water and Hydro Service Mayfield West Community Centre Caledon Community Complex (CCC) Banquet Hall and Complex Upgrades Inglewood Fire Station Mansard Roof Replacement Parking Lot Improvements at various Fire Stations Pumper/Tanker Replacement (1996) Caledon East Soccer Field Lighting Bolton Camp Challenger Baseball Diamond Caledon Centre for Recreation & Wellness (CCRW) Accessible Pool Entrance Roofing and Eavestroughs - Various Facilities Lloyd Wilson Centennial Arena (LWCA) Lighting Retrofit Fire Training Facility - Phase Playground Replacement - Hubert Corless Park Playground Rubber Surface Repairs- Adam Wallace Memorial park Ball Diamond Infield Replacements (3 Locations) Electronic Lock System Installation at Caledon East Soccer Complex and Edelweiss Park Caledon Trailway - Terra Cotta Parking Lot Project Design Palgrave Estate Residential Area Policy Review Village and Hamlet Infill Policy Review 1 1 Community Services Total IT - Broadband Internet Animal Shelter Kennel Replacement 1 1 Corporate Services Total Traffic Calming Road Safety Program Roads Rehabilitation & Reconstruction Program 1. Maple Lane - from Pine Avenue to Birch Avenue 2. Church Street - from Wallace Avenue to Highway Mount Hope Road - from Old Church Road to Cedar Meadows Lane 4. Healey Road - from Centreville Creek Road to The Gore Road 5. Heart Lake Road - from Mayfield Road to Old School Road 6. Heart Lake Road - from Old School Road to King Street 7. Shaws Creek Road - from Charleston SR to High Point SR Stormwater Management Program Energy and Environment Projects Traffic Studies & Counts Sidewalk Repair & Rehabilitation Program Drainage Studies & Designs Antrim Court Deficiency Works Works Yard Renovation and Expansion Phase Town Hall HVAC Replacement Phase 3 of Southfields OPP Community Sub Office Resurfacing Gravel Roads Two Electric Fleet Vehicles (Town Hall) Traffic Signalization - Healey Rd at Holland Dr/Simpson Rd 1 1 Finance & Infrastructure Total Library Collections and Materials Library Signage - Albion Bolton and Caledon East Mayfield West/Southfields Pop-Up Library Strategic Initiatives Total Overall Total of 22

4 Memorandum Date: Tuesday, December 06, 2016 To: From: Subject: Members of Council Patrick Trafford, Coordinator, Legislative Services, Update Regarding 2017 Dog Redemption Fees and Communications Strategy At a Council meeting held on November 22, 2016, Council passed a motion directing staff to report back regarding fees related to a dog redemption program as part of the 2017 Budget process for self-identified dogs. Therefore, the purpose of this memo is to advise Council of Staff s plan of action in response to the direction provided Redemption Fees The chart below provides a comparison of the current 2016 fees for dog redemption as well as the new fees that are included in the proposed 2017 Fees By-law: Redemption Fees Total Fee (excluding HST) 2016 Fees Proposed 2017 Fees Redemption Fees - Dogs Redemption Fees - Dogs i) For a dog without a valid dog tag $69.00 ii) For a dog with a valid dog tag $43.00 in addition to i) and ii) above, for each day or part thereof during which the dog is impounded (excluding the first day the dog is $20.00 impounded) i) Dog without identification including owner contact information $ ii) Dog without up-to-date identification $ iii) Dog with valid identification first redemption $25.00 iv) Dog with valid identification each subsequent redemption $50.00 in addition to i), ii), iii) and iv above, for each day or part thereof during which the dog is impounded (excluding the first day the dog is $20.00 impounded) Under the new fee structure different charges will be applied depending on whether or not the dog has identification, such as a microchip or owner s tag. Proper identification allows Staff to easily identify the dog and in turn, reunite the dog with its owner. Although microchipping may offer advantages over an owner s tag, the latter 4 of 22

5 will be accepted as a valid form of identifications as some owners may not want to have a microchip embedded in their dog. Consistent with other local municipalities, the fee for a dog without identification has been increased, while the redemption fee for dogs with identification has been reduced; further incentivizing owners to ensure their dog(s) have either a microchip or a tag with contact information. A new section within the fee structure has been included to ensure that owner s keep their contact information on a microchip or tag up-to-date to maintain the effectiveness of the identification. If the identification for the dog is not up-to-date, the redemption fee for a dog without identification will be applied. Further, for dogs with valid identification, a graduated fee has been included charging a higher fee if a dog is redeemed more than once. For the purposes of the proposed 2017 budget the revenue budgeted for dog licencing will remain unchanged and any required adjustments will be monitored by Staff and proposed in the 2018 budget. It should be noted that by increasing the dog redemption fees and by utilizing the savings in staff time, savings will be realized from eliminating the dog licencing program. As a result, new programs will be developed which may assist with eliminating the revenue shortfall caused by the removal of the dog tag licence program. Communications Strategy In order to clearly inform the public of the above changes, Staff has developed a communication plan. The new program will be promoted to the public through the use of various methods including: 1. The Animal Shelter Staff will communicate the changes to the animal shelters of other nearby municipalities. 2. Staff will partner with local veterinary clinics in order to promote microchipping to residents. The Town s message will be significantly strengthened if it is supported and communicated by animal health care professionals. 3. Local pet stores will be notified and asked to communicate the changes to customers as the new program may increase their sale of personalized owner tags. 4. A social media campaign will be launched to advertise that annual licence renewals are not required and to promote microchipping. Further, this will be communicated through the Town s website and at Town facilities using the television information screens. 5. The Animal Shelter Staff will communicate the changes to any inquiring residents and, in place of renewal letters, Staff will send notice to all residents who purchased a licence in the previous year. Finally, in contacting local veterinary clinics, staff will review the feasibility of holding future events to promote microchipping. For example, the City of Thunder Bay has previously partnered with several local veterinary clinics in order to hold annual events offering microchipping at a reduced cost for residents for a day. The new fees and the communications strategy will be implemented by Staff for January of 22

6 6 of 22

7 7 of 22

8 8 of 22

9 9 of 22

10 10 of 22

11 11 of 22

12 12 of 22

13 13 of 22

14 14 of 22

15 fr Region d Peel Woltkiklf folt ~Otl November 22,2016 Resolution Number & Carey degorter Clerk Town of Caledon 6311 Old Church Road Caledon East, ON L7C 1J6 Dear Ms. degorter: Subject: Motion Regarding the Transfer of Regional Arterial Roads to the City of Mississauga I am writing to advise that Regional Council approved the following resolution at its meeting held on Thursday, November 10,2016: Resolution That resolution from the October 27,2016 minutes be amended. Regional Council Resolution That authority be given to Regional staff and the external auditor (Deloitte) to model the financial implications of a possible transfer to the local municipalities of ownership and jurisdictional responsibility of Regional Arterial Roads, with City of Mississauga, Brampton and Caledon staff and report back to Regional Council by June 30, 2017; And further, that the model include the financial implications of all possible transfer scenarios including one that only considers the transfer of Regional Arterial Roads to Mississauga; And further, that a copy of this resolution be sent to the local municipalities with a request that staff be authorized to work with Deloitte to enable Deloitte to produce the report in the timeline provided. A copy of the original correspondence is provided for your reference. Thaljlk you, -.-I Curtiss Law Legislative Specialist Cl.ms cc: Gary Kocialek, Director, Transportation, Public Works, Region of Peel Corporate Services 10 Peel Centre Dr., Brampton, ON L6T 4B9 Tel: of 22 Office of the Regional Clerk

16 16 of 22

17 Office of the Chair November 24, 2016 Honourable Marie-France Lalonde Minister of Government Services and Consumer Services 6 1 h Floor, Mowat Block 900 Bay Street Toronto, Ontario M7A 1L2 Dear Minister Lalonde: I am writing to you regarding section 1.2 of the Retail Holiday Business Act (RBHA), which has not yet been proclaimed. If in force, this provision would allow a municipality to opt out of the RBHA and replace it with its own holiday closure regime. It would also give the Region the flexibility to tailor holiday closure requirements to meet local needs and help support local retailers. Peel Regional Council has long supported the proclamation of this section. This support was reaffirmed at its November 24, 2016 meeting. On behalf of Peel Regional Council, I ask this provision be proclaimed by December 31, If not proclaimed by end of the year, the section will be repealed. Peel Regional Council continues to deal with the impractical provisions of the current legislation and requires section 1.2 proclaimed so that it can regulate retail holiday closures in a way that provides the proper balance between supporting local businesses and protecting the common pause day principle. Sincerely,, r Frank Dale Regional Chair cc. Carey degorter, Town Clerk, Town of Caledon Peter Fay, City Clerk, City of Brampton Crystal Greer, City Clerk, City of Mississauga Lynn Dollin, President, Association of Municipalities of Ontario The Regional Municipality of Peel 10 Peel Centre Dr., Suite A, Brampton, ON L6T Fax Website: 17 of 22

18 REPORT ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES COMMITTEE MEETING DATE: JANUARY 23, 2017 FROM: Mayor Burton DATE: November 18, 2016 SUBJECT: Federal Infrastructure Programs Incrementality Rules LOCATION: NA WARD: Town wide Page 1 RECOMMENDATION: That the motion attached as Appendix A to the report dated November 18, 2016 from Mayor Burton entitled Federal Infrastructure Programs/Incrementality Rules be passed. KEY FACTS: The following are key points for consideration with respect to this report: Under current federal infrastructure programs (Public Transit Infrastructure Fund, Clean Water and Wastewater Fund), funding recipients are required to demonstrate that projects are incremental i.e. new or accelerated projects rather than projects funded and/or prioritized through asset management plans. Federal rules include a requirement to attest to the following in order to meet current federal incrementality requirements: 1. Activities would not otherwise have taken place in or and/or; 2. Work would not have been undertaken without federal funding. BACKGROUND: Note the key facts COMMENT/OPTIONS: Municipalities have spent considerable time and money in the development of Asset Management Plans, meeting the mandated requirements of the Province of 18 of 22

19 ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES COMMITTEE From: Mayor Burton Date: November 18, 2016 Subject: Federal Infrastructure Programs Incrementality Rules Page 2 Ontario s 2012 specifications for the development of comprehensive asset management plans. (AMP) The provincially required Asset Management plans require a supporting financial plan. Municipalities long-term capital plans are developed based on affordability and priority, with the highest priority projects scheduled in the current year of the plan. Timing of projects often depends on the work of earlier years in the plan and on significant planning studies and design. These factors preclude many projects from meeting the incremental funding criteria. Municipalities do not have the financial capacity to fund a significant share of new projects or the advancement of projects in their capital plan solely to meet the definition of incrementality. Therefore, municipalities are forced to choose between providing the highest priority elements in their financial plans and the opportunities provided through incremental funding. Accommodating the condition of incrementality requires the diversion of scarce municipal funding from scheduled projects, thus causing delay and resulting in incrementality in name only. In fact, identifying new or future year infrastructure renewal projects may be inconsistent with priorities based on Asset Management Plans and may result in lower priority projects being funded at the expense of currently funded projects. CONSIDERATIONS: (A) PUBLIC Public works and funding for them are a significant component of the Community s well-being. (B) FINANCIAL Asset Management Plans have cumulatively identified an infrastructure gap in excess of $60 billion in Ontario and $172 billion nation-wide. Municipalities do not have the financial capacity to fund a significant share of new projects or the advancement of projects in their capital plan solely to meet the definition of incrementality. (C) IMPACT ON OTHER DEPARTMENTS & USERS All municipal departments face significant challenges in meeting the funding requirements of Municipal Asset Management Plans, which in turn, require assistance from the federal and provincial governments. (D) CORPORATE AND/OR DEPARTMENT STRATEGIC GOALS This report addresses the corporate strategic goal to: 19 of 22

20 ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES COMMITTEE From: Mayor Burton Date: November 18, 2016 Subject: Federal Infrastructure Programs Incrementality Rules Page 3 enhance our natural environment enhance our economic environment have environmentally sustainable programs/services be fiscally sustainable (E) COMMUNITY SUSTAINABILITY Federal funding assistance affects all pillars of community sustainability. APPENDICES: Appendix A: Federal infrastructure programs/incrementality rules Prepared and Submitted by: Mayor Burton 20 of 22

21 ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES COMMITTEE From: Mayor Burton Date: November 18, 2016 Subject: Federal Infrastructure Programs Incrementality Rules Page 4 Appendix A SAMPLE MUNICIPAL RESOLUTION FEDERAL INFRASTRUCTURE PROGRAMS/INCREMENTALITY RULES WHEREAS, the [MUNICIPALITY NAME] is advocating for a principled approach to the design of the federal government s $81 billion funding commitment known as Canada s Long-Term Infrastructure Plan; WHEREAS, the [MUNICIPALITY NAME] is committed to working together with the Government of Canada and the Province of Ontario to use this funding to support priority infrastructure projects across Ontario which will promote economic growth and job creation today, while supporting jobs in the future; WHEREAS, the [MUNICIPALITY NAME] recognizes that in order to support sound infrastructure planning, it is essential that future programs provide greater flexibility to direct funding towards existing priorities and respecting existing fiscal plans; WHEREAS, the [MUNICIPALITY NAME] recognizes that federal incrementality rules undermine sound asset management planning by focusing only on new and accelerated projects, rather than priority projects identified in existing municipal plans; WHEREAS, a more flexible approach overall, particularly by not imposing incrementality requirements for project eligibility, is necessary to properly recognize the many years of critical capital planning and prioritization work already undertaken by the [MUNICIPALITY NAME]; 21 of 22

22 ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES COMMITTEE From: Mayor Burton Date: November 18, 2016 Subject: Federal Infrastructure Programs Incrementality Rules Page 5 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY [MUNICIPALITY NAME] THAT: The [MUNICIPALITY NAME] supports this principled approach to the design of federal infrastructure programs and calls upon the Government of Canada not to impose incrementality rules as part of its program design. 22 of 22