TOWNSHIP OF CENTRE WELLINGTON. ASSET MANAGEMENT & DEDICATED 2% CAPITAL LEVY FOR BRIDGES AMO/LAS & MFOA WORKSHOP April 7 th 2016

Transcription

1 TOWNSHIP OF CENTRE WELLINGTON ASSET MANAGEMENT & DEDICATED 2% CAPITAL LEVY FOR BRIDGES AMO/LAS & MFOA WORKSHOP April 7 th 2016

2 PRESENTERS Andy Goldie, Chief Administrative Officer Municipal administrator with over 27 years experience City of Guelph - Community Services 18 years Township of Centre Wellington - Director of Parks & Recreation 6 years Township of Centre Wellington - CAO since July 2012

3 PRESENTERS Don Fisher, Councillor Ward 1 Retired municipal lawyer who lives in beautiful Elora Professional career of over 30 years as in-house counsel City of Kitchener, Regional Municipality of Waterloo, & City of Hamilton Crossed over to the "dark side" by being elected to the Council of Centre Wellington Township in October, 2014

4 PRESENTATION OUTLINE Welcome to Centre Wellington Our Challenge Our Lightbulb Moment Turning our challenges into our success Lessons Learned

5

6 WELCOME TO CENTRE WELLINGTON Mix of urban & rural communities Elora & Fergus urban centres Hamlets of Inverhaugh & Belwood Strong agricultural base University of Guelph Research Centre Current population is 28,100 By 2041 forecasted to be 52,350

7 WELCOME TO CENTRE WELLINGTON

8 WELCOME TO CENTRE WELLINGTON Two Tier Government Model County of Wellington (7 municipalities) Taxes allocation 1% tax increase amounts to $111,221 (2016)

9 OUR CHALLENGE 2013 & 14 Approved Asset Management Plan Shortfall over $9 m/yr. to address aging infrastructure Represents 5.05% annual tax increase until 2032 Small population vs large infrastructure (950 lane km) 108 Bridges in CW (all structures over 3 m span) Past 10 years a # of bridges were closed, more at risk closed and 14 at risk

10

11 OUR CHALLENGE No one likes or wants tax increases Impacts from closed bridges Travel distance for agricultural businesses Economic development Emergency services

12 OUR CHALLENGE Nearing a financial cliff Reduction of OMPF by over $1 m since 2009 Hoping for bail out from upper levels of government Capital plan 1/3 funding not sound financial planning Grants being declined due to wealth in community OLG revenues ($1.8m/yr) Helping to address more community focused initiatives

13 CAO & SMT OUR LIGHTBULB MOMENT Needed new financial tools (revenues)! Needed to tackle our local issues locally! Needed to take one step at a time! Investigated other financial tools with CAO network Capital levies one of the most viable tools Oakville, Halton Hills, Innisfil, Peel region, etc. Not common in smaller to medium sized municipalities

14 OUR LIGHTBULB MOMENT Province announced OCIF Formula based annual funding (2015) $ 293,000 for CW SMT agreed on taking small steps forward Highest CW priority were our bridges Begin with dedicated capital levy for bridges Concept to match OCIF annual formula funding with dedicated capital levy

15 OUR LIGHTBULB MOMENT Developed 10 yr. dedicated capital levy Refined bridge repair/replacement costing Identified financial need of about $2.5-$3.0 annually for bridges Levy - need to be compounded each year for 10 years to build fund Assumed OCIF funding of $293,000 each year Quickly realized to match OCIF funding 3% levy was too rich & would impact annual operating budgets Finalized at 2% dedicated levy

16 CAPITAL LEVY CONCEPT FOR INFRASTRUCTURE - BRIDGES % Levy 214, , , ,589 Compounded 214, ,560 2,264,618 2,569,307 OCIF Funding 293, , , ,000 Annual Total 507, ,560 2,557,718 2,862,307 Asset Management Plan outlines the need for a 5.05 % tax per year to 2032 meet our roads, bridges/culverts

17 OCIF & COMPOUNDING 2% CAPITAL LEVY Project Est. Costs Moved from Year OCIF & 2% Year 1 (2015) $507,000 8 th Line $550,000 Year 2 (2016) $729,560 Irvine St $660,000 Year 3 (2017) $961,022 4th Line $700,000 Henderson St $220,000

18 Project Est. Cost Moved from Year OCIF & 2% Year 4 (2018) $1,201,743 First Line $563,400 Year 5 (2019) $1,452,093 Sideroad 20 $1,830,000

19 SUMMARY OF 2% CAPITAL LEVY CHARGES FOR THE AVERAGE RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY ($318,330) Annual Increase in Levy Total Annual Levy Charge Cumulative levy paid since inception ,140.60

20 OUR LIGHTBULB MOMENT New Levy Challenge Small amount of funding in early years Matched smaller bridges to funding revenue in early years

21 Political OUR LIGHTBULB MOMENT New Mayor & Council for the 2015 budget process CAO & new Mayor met several times Mayor & Councillors did not campaign on tax increases Did speak on Priority Spending Clear voice of community during campaign was they needed to see tangible results from their tax dollars with a shift in focus to addressing roads and bridges Mayor knowledgeable about Capital levies

22 OUR LIGHTBULB MOMENT Staff proposed 2% levy during 2015 budget process Reviewed Asset Management Plan & Bridge impact Provided examples of other successful capital levies Presented 10 year dedicated funding scenario, impact $ per property, and proposed bridge replacement plan Much debate

23 Political support OUR LIGHTBULB MOMENT 1 st year majority supported but not all on board But was approved on one year basis Strategic Plan Undertook community consultation early in 2015, including two community surveys Large response back with a priority on roads & bridges and a willingness to spend more on these

24 OUR LIGHTBULB MOMENT An increase of up to 5% would be acceptable Only so- so Extremely

25 OUR LIGHTBULB MOMENT Identified 5 priorities for Strategic Plan Reliable Infrastructure Township will replace or reconstruct 4 bridges by 2019

26 TURNING OUR CHALLENGES INTO OUR SUCCESS 2016 Budget Strategic Priority to do 4 bridges by 2019 Refined dedicated bridge levy priorities based on additional data Council wanted to fund priority bridges and not just bridges to match funding Council requested new bridge plan to include some debt to move priority bridges forward sooner

27 TCW Structure Replacement & Major Rehab Proposed Sequence Structure ID Estimated Replacement Cost Score Rank Estimated Remaining Life Year To Be Replaced Comments Road Year Constructed Maintenance 9- N Irvine Street 1929 $890, H 2016 Heritage Proposed Rehab work required to extend Str. Life - 20yrs 10- P Fourth Line 1935 $480, Rehab work in WG Seventh Line 1925 $555, WG Sideroad $1,300, WG Fifth Line 1923 $413, yr. Life Remaining 24- P Third Line 1930 $560, P Noah Road 1926 $520, P Noah Road 1922 $540, WG First Line 1922 $1,560, Rehab work in N Beatty Line 1942 $1,650, Structural Shear Crack 31- WG Second Line 1962 $2,000, Deck Replacement Only Rehab work in 2014 extended deck life 16- WG Fifth Line 1910 $1,160, WG Sideroad $1,640, WG First Line 1929 $ 1,310, yr. Life Remaining 7- E Third Line 1920 $605, E Fourth Line 1923 $660, WG Third Line 1970 $ 415, yr. Life Remaining 26- P First Line West 1940 $ 528, yr. Life Remaining 30- P Sideroad $416, E Sixth Line 1919 $1,080, yr. Life Remaining 5- P Weisenberg Road 1920 $630, N Washington Street 1925 $200, Current Ped.Traffic Use 2- WG Third Line 1921 $ 586, yr. Life Remaining 28- P Sideroad $560, P Sideroad $540, Variables in Calculating Score Variables in Year to be Replaced - Traffic Count - Fitting project needs into Proposed Funding Limit - Increased Response Time When Structure is Closed - Detour Distance - Local Access Limitations - Heritage

28 Total - $1,400,000 debt Project Est. Costs Debt Payment OCIF & 2% Year 3 (2017) $961,022 Sideroad 20 $1,300, th Line $455,000 $100,000 4 th Line $480,000 0 Subtotal $935,000 0

29 5 year debt payment begins in 2018 Project Est. Cost Debt Payment OCIF % 2% Year 4 (2018) $1,201,743 Loan Payment $297,107 5 th Line $413, rd Line $504,000 0 Subtotal $917,000 $297,107 $1,214,107

30 TURNING OUR CHALLENGES INTO OUR SUCCESS 2016 Dedicated Levy Still a Political issue Levy still capped at $2.8m total Flexibility for review every year (bridge conditions) However locked for 5 years to pay back debt

31 TURNING OUR CHALLENGES INTO OUR SUCCESS Provincial announcement to increase OCIF formula will help get us to our goal sooner Always a balance between our rural and urban areas Developed key communications messages regarding program

32 LESSONS LEARNED Community Buy-in Addressing our priority needs locally Clear Strategy Deliverable timing & costs Flexibility built in Annual review and progress Staying the Course Consistent communication

33 Quote from Mayor Linton For over a decade, Centre Wellington had been content to blame the upper orders of government for our growing infrastructure deficit. I am proud that our Council and staff have worked together to finally take responsibility for our own challenges by initiating a 2% dedicated capital levy that will give us real results 8 new bridges in within one term of Council.

34 Thank you! Questions?