City of Toronto  
HomeContact UsHow Do I...?Advanced search
Living in TorontoDoing businessVisiting TorontoAccessing City Hall
 
Accessing City Hall
Mayor
Councillors
Meeting Schedules
   
   
  City of Toronto Council and Committees
  All Council and Committee documents are available from the City of Toronto Clerk's office. Please e-mail clerk@city.toronto.on.ca.
   

 

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


  • Housing Initiatives Fund
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.)

 

 

   
Please note that council and committee documents are provided electronically for information only and do not retain the exact structure of the original versions. For example, charts, images and tables may be difficult to read. As such, readers should verify information before acting on it. All council documents are available from the City Clerk's office. Please e-mail clerk@city.toronto.on.ca.

 

City maps | Get involved | Toronto links
City of Toronto 1998-2001