CITY COUNCIL – REGULAR MEETING COUNCIL CHAMBERS 400 MAIN STREET SE JUNE 16, 2014 1. CALL TO ORDER – 5:30 P.M
2. COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE (Due to the confidential nature of the items to be discussed, public attendance is not permitted.) 2.1. Appointment of Citizen Representative to Council’s Boards (K. Kitiuk) 2.2. Calgary Regional Partnership Update (P. Schulz) 2.3. Legal Update (K. Kitiuk)
3. INFORMAL/STRATEGY SESSION (6:30 P.M.) (Items in this section are of an educational or informational nature. Public attendance is welcome.) 3.1. Economic Development Update (K. Rupert)
4. PUBLIC AGENDA - 7:00 P.M.
5. MINUTES 5.1. Regular Meeting of Council of June 2, 2014 5.2. Acknowledgement of Other Minutes Airdrie Library Board of April 29, 2014
6. CONSENT AGENDA 6.1. Sagewood Pond Causeway Replacement (G. Archer) Council is being presented with information on the replacement of the Sagewood Pond Causeway.
6.2. Cash and Investment Report for April 30, 2014 (L. Wiwcharuk)
6.3. Airdrie Housing Limited 2013 Financial Statements (P. Biswas) Council is being presented with the Airdrie Housing Limited financial results for 2013.
6.4. City of Airdrie Library Board 2013 Financial Statements (P. Biswas) Council is being presented with the Airdrie Public Library financial results for 2013.
7. APPOINTMENTS/PRESENTATIONS 7.1. Waste Pirates Awards (P. Lyons) Council is being presented with the winners of the Organics Waste Pirates Competition for Airdrie schools.
7.2. 2015 Airdrie Regional Air Show Request for Support (K. Harris) Council is being asked to support the 2015 Airdrie Regional Air Show.
7.3. Rocky View Schools Trustees Sylvia Eggerer and Todd Brand will appear before Council to discuss four provincial advocacy positions.
8. PUBLIC QUESTION PERIOD
9. BUSINESS ARISING 9.1. Storm Water Service Levels (G. Archer) As requested, Council is being presented with information on Storm Ponds Service Levels.
9.2. Extension of Service from CrossIron Mills to Northeast Calgary (C. MacIsaac) As requested, Council is being presented with information on the expansion of Route 4 service to include extension into northeast Calgary.
10. AGENDA REPORTS 10.1. 2015 Airdrie Transit User Fees (C. MacIsaac) Council is being presented with market comparisons and recommendations for user fees for Airdrie Transit services in 2015.
10.2. Bert Church Theatre Fees and Charges (D. Tinkler) Council is being presented with new fees and charges to be implemented at the Bert Church Theatre for the 2014-2015 season.
10.3. Genesis Place and Arenas Fees and Charges (Greg Lockert) Council is being presented with options for setting facility user fees and charges at Genesis Place and Arenas for 2015.
10.4. Aquatics Area Lifecycle Capital Renewal (Lynn Mackenzie) Council is being presented with information on the replacement of Genesis Place aquatic surfaces.
10.5. Aquatics Area Lifecycle / Pass Options Around Closure (Greg Lockert) Council is being presented with a communications plan and options for annual pass holders during the Genesis Place aquatics closure.
10.6. Municipal Government Act Review Submission (K. Kitiuk) Council is being asked to review the proposed submission from Airdrie to Alberta Municipal Affairs in response to their stakeholder review of the Municipal Government Act.
11. CORRESPONDENCE 11.1. Airdrie Highlanders Youth Athletic Association (K. Kitiuk) Council is being asked to provide a letter to the Airdrie Highlanders Youth Athletic Association in support of their grant application to the Community Initiatives Program to acquire a scrum machine.
12. BOARD/MEMBER REPORTS
13. REVIEW OF COUNCIL FOLLOW-UP TO JUNE 2, 2014 (P. Schulz)
14. ADJOURNMENT
AGENDA REPORT
Meeting Date (M/D/Y): 6/16/2014
Subject: Sagewood Pond Causeway Replacement
Boards Routed Through: Date: City Council 6/2/2014
Description:
Council is being provided with information with respect to replacing the causeway and widening the drainage canal at 1st Avenue. This will be included in the 2015 Capital Budget for consideration.
Background:
1. General
At the November 19, 2012 Report to Council, attached as reference both for background and terminology, staff reported that resident feedback suggested there were aesthetic and operational concerns with the stormwater system in the Sagewood Community. One such concern is the drainage swale along 1st Avenue.
It is routine in design for parks pathways to be partially submerged during spring run-off and in extreme weather events. The drainage swale has a pathway crossing (a "causeway") which has water flowing over it in these circumstances.
2. Operational Concerns
The dry canal was constructed as a V-ditch with side slopes ranging from 1V:5H to 1V:7H, a bottom slope of 1.15% and a minimum depth of 0.9 m. With this cross-section, the water depth corresponding to a design flow of 7.5 m3/s ranges from 0.8 m to 0.7 m (depending on the side slope). There is not a lot of spare flow capacity within the dry canal to account for the possibility of debris or ice build-up due to periodic flows during mild winter weather.
Another flow restriction along the dry canal exists due to the construction of the causeway across the dry canal near 1st Avenue connecting residents in the western portion of
Sagewood to the parks path system. This causeway consists of three relatively small diameter PVC culverts. The flow capacity of these three culverts is only a fraction of the design flows of the dry canal. This causeway may actually act as a small dam within the dry canal. The causeway will overtop or flood on a frequent basis.
Prior to entering the community of Sagewood, the flow from the upstream drainage area crosses 24th Street via two 1800 x 1200 mm concrete box culverts with slopes of 1.24%. These two box culverts are capable of handling nearly 19 m3/s at full pipe capacity, which is more than double the design capacity of dry canal.
3. Follow Up
Due to the extreme amount of snowfall this year, the water flow over the causeway has caused damage to the causeway and it has begun to sink and crumble. Staff are recommending the structure be replaced and the flow capacity be upgraded. The estimated cost will be $245 000. This will be included for consideration in the 2015 budget.
Alternatives/Implications:
N/A
Capital Considerations
In a letter dated May 5, 2014 (attached for reference) Hopewell Residential Communities is prepared to contribute $20,000 to this contemplated project, if completed in 2015.
Corporate Communications:
Staff will work with Corporate Communications on a communication plan for residents
Recommendation: That Council accepts for information the report on the Sagewood Pond causeway replacement.
Glenn Archer Lead Water Services
Presenter: Glenn Archer Attachments: Letter from Hopew ell Agenda Report dated November 19, 2012
AGENDA REPORT
Meeting Date (M/D/Y): November 19,2012
Subject: Sagewood Stormwater Pond and City of Airdrie Waterways Plan
Boards Routed Through: Date: Corporate Planning Team 1/10/2013 City Council 11/19/2012
Description:
Council requested that Staff bring forward a report with information on the Sagewood Pond circulation issue, the lack of a fountain, and the pond’s function within the City’s waterways plan.
Background:
1. Waterway Planning
Stormwater management guidelines for the City of Airdrie are found in the City’s General Design Standards & Construction Specifications. Inclusive of this is the Nose Creek Watershed Water Management Plan, the The City of Calgary Stormwater Management and Design Manual, and the Alberta Environmental Protection Storm Water Management Guidelines.
The primary function of these guidelines is to work towards environmental protection. However, the aesthetics of stormwater facilities is increasingly becoming important to residents. For example, the fountains the City installs every year do not significantly affect water treatment or quality, but they are highly desired by residents. In the same context, residents have an expectation that Storm Water Management Facilities will be clean, odor free, and that the land water interface (shoreline) will be attractive. Residents perceive the storm ponds as an amenity feature, but it is also a treatment facility that is affected by Airdrie’s geography, climate and the amount of pollutant loading. There are different
service levels and associated costs for maintenance that the City will have to establish. Current service levels and costs support operating storm water facilities as a utility not as amenities.
Staff has investigated Stormwater Management Facility (SWMF) water quality and edge treatment, with the goal of presenting Council with options and costs for improving SWMF aesthetics within the City. The City has also been pursuing improvements to facilities which are presenting operational difficulties due to poor hydraulics. Staff has commenced a maintenance routine to improve storm system functionality; which has not been a priority in the past. This will require extensive repairs initially, and a commitment to regular maintenance in the future. The following is what staff has been working on in 2012:
i. Overland Drainage – Setting grades, repairing swales, removing built up sediment. ii. Cleaning out and repairing outfalls iii. Dredging sediment from waterways (Nose Creek) iv. Dredging SWMF’s as sediment control and or to improve operation or aesthetics. v. Reinstating advantageous organics after maintenance; seeding with water accommodating plantings (willows, reeds, sedge grasses). Installing seed bags at water edge in Eastlake and Sagewood. vi. Extensive flushing of the stormwater system is necessary, but staff has not been able to get a start on this. This will continue to provide a significant liability to the City until it is addressed. vii. Commissioned a Technical memo from an Engineering Consultant, to evaluate aesthetic issues in the City’s most challenging ponds. viii. Commissioned a technical memo from an Engineering Consultant to evaluate hydraulics on the City’s most troubling ponds. This is ongoing. ix. Research included vendor presentations, and the trial of two different water treatment products which purport to improve clarity and remove algae. The information gained from these trials is assisting us in crafting an RFP for a more extensive treatment rollout in 2013. x. Trialed changing levels of Eastlake stormwater pond to address operational issues (rapid water level changes in rain events); this will also require more rigorous engineering assessment in 2013. xi. Water Services and Engineering Services have been working on a City Specification for Stormwater amenities – waterfalls and fountains for example. xii. Water Services and Parks are also providing input as stakeholders in the Master Drainage Plan for annexed lands as being presently worked on by Associated Engineering. xiii. Parks is managing an RFP currently in circulation to design and build an irrigation pump house for the sports fields East of Genesis place, utilizing water from the East Lake Stormwater pond.
xiv. Engineering Services has commissioned a consultant to prepare a Master Drainage Plan for the area annexed in early 2012. This is scheduled to be presented to Council early in 2013.
2. Municipal Stormwater Guidelines
The current Provincial and City of Calgary guidelines (which Airdrie has adopted) for an urban system requires that minor storm system (catch basins and underground piping) be sized to handle the 1:5 design storm event that includes road drainage and approximately 70 liter/second/hectare discharge rate from adjacent lands. Development utilizes surface storage at trapped lows and internal storm facilities (ponds) to handle 1:100 storm events. The major storm system which includes stormwater ponds, roads, and emergency overland discharge route is constructed for flows exceeding 1:100 events.
Most stormwater systems in Albertan urban municipalities have been designed to the 1:5 criteria at least as far back as the 1970’s; Alberta Environment adopted that standard in 1988.
Volume control rates (allowable runoff of stormwater discharge from an urban area), is governed in Airdrie by the Nose Creek Watershed Water Management Plan (2008). The release rate to Nose Creek is currently 1.257 liter/second/hectare.
Some examples of municipal stormwater efforts which Airdrie has initiated to improve water quality include:
bylaws that encourage more natural drainage in new developments street sweeping and storm drain cleaning creek and watercourse maintenance as well as stream enhancement to improve habitat for aquatic life stormwater quality and quantity monitoring programs education programs (e.g. yellow fish storm drain marking to remind residents that materials dumped into storm drains can kill fish and damage habitat) Chemical or organic additives to treat stormwater facilities must be approved by both Alberta Environment Sustainable Resource Development (AESRD), and Health Canada, and may also require Fisheries and Oceans approval. Maintenance work on stormwater infrastructure in the vicinity of a water body (ie Nose Creek) requires AESRD approval as well.
3. Stormwater Management Facilities (SWMF’s – “ponds”) also known as Detention (Wet) Ponds and/or Retention (Dry) Ponds
Urban stormwater, whether from rain or melting snow, flushes debris and contaminants from roads, parking lots, sidewalks, rooftops, lawns, and other surfaces. Stormwater detention ponds are designed and constructed to store water to reduce downstream flooding and erosion by controlling the peak flow, frequency of peak flow and velocity of stormwater. These ponds are also designed to trap and settle much of the solid material
carried by the stormwater as sediment, which improves water quality and helps reduce contaminant loads into rivers or lakes. Structural devices, such as oil and grit separators, may be incorporated upstream of the pond system to capture oil and larger particles. Aquatic vegetation can be added to enhance water quality and serve as a biological filter to retain fine sediment and the contaminants bound to this sediment. (1)
Wetlands can develop in stormwater ponds as a result of natural seeding and succession. "Constructed wetlands" are wetlands that have been built to improve downstream water quality. Combined pond and constructed wetland systems generally provide increased water storage time, allowing a greater number of the lighter particles, such as clays, to settle out of stormwater. Plants growing in the wetland further improve downstream water quality by assimilating phosphorus and nitrogen from the stormwater.
Stormwater ponds are designed to store the volume of runoff from a 25mm storm over the contributing area with a detention time of 24 hours and handle a “once in a 100 year” rainfall intensity within an active depth of 2 meters above the permanent or normal water level. This system allows sediment to settle and reduce downstream flooding and erosion.
During extended periods of no rainfall, there is definitely a potential that these ponds could drop below NWL (Normal Water Level) due to evaporation. There is little that can be done in this situation as it would depend on the upstream source (primarily rainfall) to feed the pond.
Detention ponds, in particular wet ponds and wetlands, are the most common methods to enhance the water quality of stormwater runoff. The buffering and attenuation of stormwater flows contributes to the level of pollution control provided. However, it should be noted that the mechanisms that control pollutant removal, and in effect water quality, can be complex and numerous. In general, treatment ponds are effective in removing solids, but less effective for removing BOD (Biochemical Oxygen Demand), TP (Total Phosphorus), and TN (Total Nitrogen). Source controls can also be an effective means of limiting these contaminants. Other Best Management Practices (BMPs) can be utilized to enhance water quality. However, the use of treatment BMPs for urban stormwater is relatively young technology, and the long-term effectiveness and impacts remain largely unknown. (2)
A concern that has been frequently raised by residents has been with general water quality. The City has received professional advice regarding stormwater quality issues, which indicated that this could be an ongoing concern due to the upstream land uses from agricultural lands (high phosphorus, cattle grazing, fertilizers and similar contaminants). Similarly, City residents can impact stormwater quality through use of fertilizers and pesticides, as well as other resident activities such as lawn mowing, dog walking (animal waste), and car washing. We have seen extensive blue-green algae growth in Nose Creek likely due to the “nutrients” related to agricultural activity. There is significant occurrence of this in stormwater systems as well.
4. Water Quality
In the past, there has been a tendency to regard stormwater conveyance as a relatively minor source of pollution. However, numerous studies have indicated that there can be significant pollution in stormwater runoff. The annual loadings from urban runoff can be similar to those found in wastewater effluent and industrial discharges. Urban runoff is typically high in suspended solids and, and can contribute significant concentrations of metals, salts, nutrients, oils and grease, bacteria, and other contaminants to receiving waters. As a result, these pollutants impact stormwater pond water quality, aquatic habitat, recreational use, and aesthetics.
Although the natural environment has some ability to mitigate and adapt to the impacts of pollution, urban runoff management is required. Generally, urban stormwater can be managed with the implementation of Best Management Practices (BMPs). It is important that BMPs include both source control and treatment approaches. Source control BMPs is the first practical step to be taken to enhance urban runoff quality. End of pipe treatment BMPs such as wet ponds and wetlands will be required when the runoff quality does not meet design specifications. On a smaller scale, vegetated swales, filter strips, and buffer strips can be considered.
In general, the quality of stormwater discharge will deteriorate when the percent imperviousness and runoff volume increases. (2)
5. Fountains
Circulation and aeration water in stormwater ponds provides several benefits which may or may not be fully understood by residents in the community. These benefits are 1) oxygenation of the water and 2) mixing of water to prevent stratification. Stratification occurs when surface waters are heated by the sun while deeper waters remain cool. The warm and cool layers do not mix, and the bottom layers become depleted of oxygen because of organic decomposition, while the surface waters receive oxygen from the atmosphere and photosynthesis of phytoplankton. Under the right conditions this low oxygen water can mix rapidly with the surface waters and dilute the oxygen, an event commonly referred to as a "turnover." Severe turnovers cause waterfowl to avoid the water due to lack of oxygen. A properly designed circulation system can prevent stratification and turnover events. Circulation systems also can help manage nutrients in the pond by balancing the trophic state and reducing nutrients available to algae and aquatic weeds.
Diffuser systems are the most efficient method to circulate water. Diffuser systems are similar to airstones in an aquarium. Diffusers are fed from an air compressor that pumps air into the bottom of the pond. The diffuser breaks the air into tiny bubbles which expand as they rise. The rising of the bubbles pushes water and forms a current that lifts bottom water up to the surface. The resulting current mixes the entire water column and prevents stratification in the pond.
Water pumps such as centrifugal irrigation pumps and sump pumps can be used to push water, but they must be designed correctly to work. The trick is to make sure that the pump
is creating a current that mixes bottom water with surface water to prevent stratification. Irrigation pumps can be mounted on land as long as they draw water through pipes from near the bottom and spray it across the surface to create a current. Unlike diffuser systems which are self-cleaning, water pumps are prone to being clogged with vegetation and debris and require frequent maintenance especially when submerged plant growth is not controlled.
Products such as solar powered recirculation pumps have shown success in preventing water stagnation and associated blue-green algae blooms. They are placed directly in the pond and pull large volumes of water from near the bottom and circulate it in a laminar fashion across the surface. The City received a quote to purchase such a pump sized appropriately for the East Lake facility. This would require an outlay of $65,000 and $5000 per year for a maintenance contract.
Surface fountains are the least efficient ways to aerate ponds, and they do very little to prevent stratification. They do move water, but typically fountains are floating devices that draw surface water into a shallow pump and spray it above the surface. Functionally speaking, they are circulating surface water that is already oxygenated and are not disrupting stratification. As a result, fountains are deployed more for aesthetic reasons than functional circulation and aeration. (3)
A typical fountain like the one City crews place in Waterstone will use in the order of $1,500 dollars a year in power and require $1000 in maintenance. It would cost approximately $15,000 to purchase including power cable. There would be an initial capital outlay to service and install a power panel.
5. Stormwater Trends
Stormwater utility is a "stand-alone" service unit within a municipal government, which generates revenues through fees for service. A stormwater utility is to stormwater what a sewer utility is to sewage and a water utility is to drinking water. A stormwater utility is responsible for funding the operation, construction and maintenance of stormwater management facilities, for stormwater system planning, and management. A stormwater utility generates its revenue through user fees, and the revenues from the stormwater charges will go into a separate fund that may only be used for stormwater services. (4)
The City of Airdrie currently has a stormwater cost center within the sewer utility. It is an emerging trend within municipalities to wholly separate these costs into a separate utility (Kitchener, Edmonton, and Victoria, for example). Other municipalities show a separate charge within the billing information (Calgary, Strathmore, Cochrane, and Chestermere).
6. Sagewood Pond
Resident feedback and engineering assessment suggest that this facility has proven to be the most problematic within the City. Multiple aesthetic and operational concerns have been evident since responsibility for the facility was transferred to the City. The challenge
for this facility is that it has the dual role of draining the subdivision and draining the undeveloped and agricultural lands to the west. Inflows are substantial and contain high levels of sediment, organics, and nutrients.
Starting in this operational season (2012), staff has pursued a course of repairs, upgrades, and scheduled maintenance. Improvements and modifications will be staged in a multi- year program; however, significant improvements have already been achieved, many of which are referenced below:
i. The narrow channel between the two integral ponds has been dredged out and approximately 90 tandem truckloads of material removed. ii. The Parks Department addressed the edges of the channel between the ponds. They were ox bowed and decorative rocks installed. This process improves aesthetics and helps prevent erosion. Plantings were placed at the edges, and the banks were re-seeded to repair the damage caused by construction equipment. iii. Both ponds were treated this year (from June to September) with an organic compound intended to improve clarity, reduce biomass, and reduce algal bloom. Some water testing and visual assessment was done. Actual results will require several years of assessment as treatment is severely affected by seasonal weather. iv. Associated Engineering is currently working on a technical memo to provide a recommendation to improve the hydraulics for this pond.
References:
(1) Environment Canada – “What is the purpose of Stormwater Detention Ponds” (2) The City of Calgary – Stormwater Management and Design Manual (3) Clemson University Cooperative Extension - Fountains and Aeration (4) Bay County Florida website – Stormwater utility (5) Stormwater Collection Systems Design Handbook by Larry Mays, 2001
Boards Routed Through:
Corporate Planning Team, November 6, 2012
Alternatives/Implications:
Alternative 1 Accept the report for information.
Alternative 2 Accept the report and concept with recommended changes.
Corporate Communications:
N/A
Recommendation: That Council accepts the report for information.
Glenn Archer Water Services Team Leader
Presenter: Attachments:
AGENDA REPORT
Meeting Date (M/D/Y): 6/2/2014
Subject: Cash and Investment Report for April 30, 2014
Boards Routed Through: Date: City Council 6/2/2014 Finance Advisory Committee 6/9/2014
Description:
Staff is presenting the Cash and Investment Summary for April 30, 2014.
Background:
At the end of April, the City’s cash and investment balance was $89,828,789, which was a decrease from the balance at the end of March of $91,146,742. This is the typical trend seen annually as large payments are due at the end of the first quarter.
The balance consists of:
General bank $6,581,971 Genesis Place Account $8,722 BMO Nesbitt Burns Cash Account $353,338 TD Waterhouse Cash Account $532,763 Total Cash $7,476,794 TD Waterhouse Cash Account Investments $82,351,995 Total Cash and Investments $89,828,789
The following provides details of the primary sources and uses of cash during the month.
Primary sources of cash:
$6,047,658 Tax, Utility and City Hall daily payments $1,810,084 RCMP tenant improvements $ 543,000 Genesis Place transfer $ 487,078 Franchise fees $ 257,640 Building Inspections revenue $ 250,000 Canadian Cultural Spaces Fund grant $ 200,525 Developer levies $ 172,151 FCSS grant $ 170,500 Town of Cochrane assessment contract $ 86,822 Fine revenue
Primary uses of cash:
$3,976,286 Capital projects $3,574,737 Payroll and benefits $ 954,222 Other expenditures less than $100,000 $ 709,260 Insurance expense $ 677,133 City of Calgary water and sewer $ 576,851 School requisition $ 334,922 Power and gas expense $ 333,699 BMO Pcard purchases $ 159,755 RMW Consulting waste collection $ 108,207 North Rocky View Community FCSS funds $ 100,000 Alberta Summer Games contribution
Interest Earned
The following is a summary of the estimated interest earned compared to budget estimates:
Budget Projected Operating $1,611,540 $1,611,540 Capital $687,393 $687,393 Total $2,298,933 $2,298,933
Rates of Return
The following table demonstrates that the annualized rates of return from the previous month have remained unchanged.
Annualized Rate of March 2014 April 2014 Return Bonds - TD 3.08% 3.08% Bonds - BMO 2.93% 2.93% Managed Funds – TD 4.03% 4.03% Managed Funds – BMO 3.34% 3.34%
Boards Routed Through:
The Cash and Investment Summary for April 30, 2014, will be presented to the Finance Advisory Committee on June 9, 2014, for information.
Alternatives/Implications:
1. Council can accept the report for information.
2. Council can table the report and request additional information.
Corporate Communications:
N/A
Recommendation: That City Council accepts the Cash and Investment Summary for April 30, 2014, for information.
Lucy Wiwcharuk, BMgmt, CMA Director of Corporate Services
Presenter: Lucy Wiw charuk Attachments: 2014-04 Investment Portfolio 2014-04 Cash Position Graph
City of Airdrie Investment Portfolio Summary April 30, 2014
Asset Mix
Annualized Rate Maximum % of Investment Type Book Value Interest YTD of Return % of Portfolio Portfolio
Operating Portfolio (Maturity less than 1 year) Cash 886,101.03 711.72 1.06% 100.00% Bonds - TD - - 0.00% 15.00% Bonds - BMO 2,596,502.45 - 3.12% 15.00% Managed Funds - TD 1,235,799.53 14,144.24 1.48% 15.00% Managed Funds - BMO - 11,890.00 0.00% 15.00% $4,718,403.01 $26,745.96
Extendible Bonds 43,000,000.00 461,016.68 3.25% 51.66% 80.00%
Non-Operating Portfolio (Maturity greater than 1 year) Bonds - TD 10,545,103.17 - 2.39% 12.67% 80.00% Bonds - BMO 13,980,320.02 40,000.00 2.96% 16.80% 80.00% Managed Funds - TD 3,437,327.16 31,812.81 3.72% 4.13% 20.00% Managed Funds - BMO 7,556,942.55 20,660.81 3.34% 9.08% 20.00% $35,519,692.90 $92,473.62
Total $83,238,095.91 $580,236.26 100.00%
Investment Mix - All funds Maximum % of Investment Vehicle Book Value % of Portfolio portfolio
Cash & Cash Equivalents 886,101.03 1.06% Federal / Provincial Government 18,882,871.51 22.69% 100.00% Canadian Chartered Banks 48,975,875.81 58.84% 50.00% Corporate Bonds 2,263,178.32 2.72% 25.00% Managed Funds 12,230,069.24 14.69% 15.00% Total $83,238,095.91 100.00%
Cash & Investment Activity
28-Feb-14 Investments Beginning Balance $82,351,994.88
Sold Bond - Purchased Bond - -
31-Mar-14 Investments Closing Balance $82,351,994.88
28-Feb-14 Cash Beginning Balance 719,178.77
Interest TD investments 140,290.50 Fee TD investments (2,532.69) Interest BMO investments 40,125.70 Fee BMO investments (10,961.25) 166,922.26
31-Mar-14 Cash Closing Balance 886,101.03
31-Mar-14 Total Investments & Cash $83,238,095.91 City of Airdrie Comparative Cash Position As at April 30, 2014
120,000,000
107,687,877 110,000,000 108,150,843
100,229,627 98,386,335 100,052,716 99,421,640 97,720,637 100,000,000 95,081,402 94,876,895 91,146,742 89,828,789 87,127,953 90,000,000
80,000,000
70,000,000
60,000,000
50,000,000
40,000,000
30,000,000
20,000,000
10,000,000
- January February March April May June July August September October November December
Cash Position = Bank Balances + Investments 2011 2012 2013 2014
Cash and Investment Balances TD Main Account 6,581,971 Genesis Place Account 8,722 BMO Nesbitt Burns Account 353,338 TD Waterhouse Account 532,763 Investments 82,351,995 Total 89,828,789
AGENDA REPORT
Meeting Date (M/D/Y): 6/16/2014
Subject: Airdrie Housing Limited 2013 Financial Statements
Boards Routed Through: Date: Airdrie Housing Limited Board 5/7/2014 City Council 6/16/2014
Description: Council is being presented with the Airdrie Housing Limited‘s 2013 Audited Financial Statements for information purposes.
Background: Airdrie Housing Limited (AHL) is a wholly owned subsidiary of the City of Airdrie. It is a requirement of AHL to prepare audited financial statements on an annual basis. The audited results have been approved by the AHL Board of Directors and are being presented to Council for information purposes.
The City of Airdrie Financial Services Department provides accounting and financial support to AHL. On a monthly basis, accounting transactions are recorded and financial results are prepared. On an annual basis, Financial Services prepares the financial statements and facilitates the external audit function. As well, the annual results are interpreted and presented to AHL’s Board.
2013 Audited Financial Statements:
The annual audit of the financial statements for AHL was completed in April 2014 and was approved by the AHL Board in May 2014.
For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2013, PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP (PwC) conducted the audit engagement for AHL. Field work was conducted on site over the period of February 24 to March 14, 2014, with additional audit work via email and phone calls throughout the remainder of March. The audit was a success with no unadjusted items and free of material misstatement. PwC has issued an unqualified opinion on the financial statements (Attachment 1).
As part of the audit engagement, PwC prepared a report to the Board. The report included communication of various aspects of the audit including internal control recommendations. This section is especially significant to management as it provides recommendations for accounting processes and internal controls. It is the responsibility of management to maintain quality internal controls. Internal controls are essential to providing assurance of accurate financial information and security over financial and non-financial assets. The 2013 internal control recommendations
include two re-issued points from prior years. City Administration agreed with the recommendations and has implemented the changes going forward.
The 2013 Audited Financial Statements include the Statement of Financial Position, the Statement of Operations and Fund Balances, the Statement of Cash Flows and the accompanying notes. Highlights related to the results follow.
Statement of Financial Position
Assets Current assets have decreased by $158,066 (5.66 percent) from 2012 to a final balance of $2,635,948. This is reflective of the decrease in cash largely due to the payment of debt. Accounts receivable increased by $3,898 (66.48 percent) to $9,761 which consists of a GST receivable and a few miscellaneous items as all grants had been received at year end. The Statement of Cash Flow details the use of funds.
Acquisitions of capital assets amounted to $4,625 in 2013. This consisted of the hall rental, architect services and rezoning application related to the future building. As a result, the net book value of capital assets held by AHL decreased by amortization of $175,205 less the new acquisitions of $4,625 for an ending net book value of $6,665,831.
Current Liabilities Current liabilities have decreased by $3,922 (0.96 percent) to $403,784. Accounts payable and accrued liabilities have decreased by $12,829 (47.47 percent) and the amounts owed to the City of Airdrie have increased by $20,910 (149.99 percent). The current portion of deferred revenue is related to the RentPlus program. This line item has decreased by $12,997 (4.99 percent) and is reflective of the 2014 planned budget for this program.
Long-Term Liabilities Long-term debt is held to facilitate the purchase of affordable housing and amounts to $8,591,224. Overall, long-term liabilities have decreased by $425,063 (4.51 percent) to $8,995,008. The forgivable loan received through Canada Mortgage and Housing’s Residential Rehabilitation Assistance Program was used to purchase siding and windows for the Mountain View building and has been amortized over 40 years. The loan revenue will be earned over a period of thirteen years at a monthly rate of $2,200 (Note 8).
Fund Balances Fund balances have increased by $96,418 (45.84 percent) to $306,771 from the 2012 ending balance of $210,353. Note 12 provides additional details on the makeup of the fund balances. The capital fund is reflective of the equity held in the capital assets and the internally restricted reserves for future improvements to Mountain View. The unrestricted operating fund balance has increased by $152,557 (308.91 percent) to $201,942 from the 2012 ending balance of $49,385.
Statement of Operations and Fund Balances
Revenue Total revenue has increased by $30,739 (3.06 percent) from 2012. $2,826 of the increase is attributed to rental income. The RentPlus grant has increased by $23,392 to $258,312 and is reflective of the amount budgeted for in 2013. Amortization of capital grant revenue has decreased by $5,184 (4.26 percent) compared to 2012, and $26,410 of the forgivable loan has
been recognized as revenue in 2013. Overall, revenue came in over budget by $61,269 (6.28 percent) compared to the over budget amount of $51,930 (5.44 percent) in 2012.
Expenses Expenses have increased by $61,672 to $940,133, a 7.02 percent increase over 2012 and $17,941 (1.95 percent) over budget (compared to $59,012 or 6.29 percent under budget in 2012). The over budget amount is largely due to the new boiler that was installed in 2013. Although this is not reflective in the budget, it was anticipated and was noted in the Board meeting minutes in early 2013.
Excess of Revenue over Expenses and Fund Balances Revenues exceeded expenses in 2013 by $96,418 which is a $30,933 decrease over 2012. The operating fund generated a surplus for 2013 of $203,388. The capital fund deficit of $106,970 was funded by an interfund transfer from the operating to capital fund of $132,271; however, the capital fund has decreased by $49,314 (32.11 percent) over 2012. The interfund transfer consists of $(34,692) for Mountain View future capital repairs, $23,928 for the purchase of a replacement boiler from the Mountain View reserves, $4,625 for the purchase of capital assets, principal payments on the term loan of $17,107, principal payments on the mortgage of $41,503, interest of $74,616, and an adjustment to the deferred contributions of $5,184.
Boards Routed Through: The 2013 Audited Financial Statements were presented to the AHL Board on May 7, 2014 and were approved.
Alternatives/Implications: N/A
Recommendation: That Council accepts the Airdrie Housing Limited 2013 Audited Financial Statements for information.
Palki Biswas, MBA Team Leader, Financial Services
Presenter: Palki Bisw as, Team Leader Financial Services Review er: Lucy Wiw charuk, Director Corporate Services Attachments: 2013 Audited Financial Statements w ith Auditor’s Opinion AHL 2013 Year Review
AIRDRIE HOUSING LIMITED
Financial Statements
For the Year Ended December 31, 2013
May 7, 2014
Independent Auditor’s Report
To the Board of Directors of the Airdrie Housing Limited
We have audited the accompanying financial statements of Airdrie Housing Limited, which comprise the statement of financial position as at December 31, 2013 and the statement of operations and fund balances and the cash flows for the year ended December 31, 2013 and the related notes, which comprise a summary of significant accounting policies and other explanatory information.
Management’s responsibility for the financial statements Management is responsible for the preparation and fair presentation of these financial statements in accordance with Canadian public sector accounting standards, and for such internal control as management determines is necessary to enable the preparation of financial statements that are free from material misstatement, whether due to fraud or error.
Auditor’s responsibility Our responsibility is to express an opinion on these financial statements based on our audit. We conducted our audit in accordance with Canadian generally accepted auditing standards. Those standards require that we comply with ethical requirements and plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free from material misstatement. An audit involves performing procedures to obtain audit evidence about the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements. The procedures selected depend on the auditor’s judgment, including the assessment of the risks of material misstatement of the financial statements, whether due to fraud or error. In making those risk assessments, the auditor considers internal control relevant to the entity’s preparation and fair presentation of the financial statements in order to design audit procedures that are appropriate in the circumstances, but not for the purpose of expressing an opinion on the effectiveness of the entity’s internal control. An audit also includes evaluating the appropriateness of accounting policies used and the reasonableness of accounting estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall presentation of the financial statements. We believe that the audit evidence we have obtained in our audits is sufficient and appropriate to provide a basis for our audit opinion.
PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP 111 5 Avenue SW, Suite 3100, Calgary, Alberta, Canada T2P 5L3 T: +1 403 509 7500, F: +1 403 781 1825, www.pwc.com/ca
“PwC” refers to PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP, an Ontario limited liability partnership.
Opinion
In our opinion, the financial statements present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of Airdrie Housing Limited as at as at December 31, 2013 and the results of its operations and its cash flows for the year then ended in accordance with Canadian public sector accounting standards for not-for-profit organisations.
Other Matters
Without modifying our opinion, we draw attention to the budget information displayed in the financial statements and the related disclosures. We were not engaged to report on the budget information, and as such, it is marked as unaudited.
Chartered Accountants
Airdrie Housing Limited Statement of Financial Position As at December 31, 2013
Operating Capital Fund Fund 2013 2012
ASSETS
Current Cash in bank $ 414,508 $ 2,173,818 $ 2,588,326 $ 2,749,422 Cash in tenant security deposits (Note 4) 37,861 - 37,861 38,729 Accounts receivable 9,761 - 9,761 5,863 462,130 2,173,818 2,635,948 2,794,014
Capital (Note 5) - 6,665,831 6,665,831 6,836,410
$ 462,130 $ 8,839,649 $ 9,301,779 $ 9,630,424
LIABILITIES AND FUND BALANCES
Current Liabilities Accounts payable and accrued liabilities $ 14,196 $ - $ 14,196 $ 27,025 Security deposits (Note 4) 37,861 - 37,861 38,530 Due to City of Airdrie (Note 6) 34,851 - 34,851 13,941 Current portion of deferred revenue (Note 7) 247,310 - 247,310 260,307 Current portion of forgivable loan payable (Note 8) - 26,403 26,403 26,400 Current portion of mortgage payable (Note 9) - 43,163 43,163 41,503 334,218 69,566 403,784 407,706
Deferred revenue (Note 7) - - - 239,586 Forgivable loan payable (Note 8) - 237,629 237,629 264,041 Mortgage payable (Note 9) - 1,344,304 1,344,304 1,387,467 Term loan (Note 10) - 501,726 501,726 523,813 Deferred contributions (Note 11) - 6,507,565 6,507,565 6,597,458 334,218 8,660,790 8,995,008 9,420,071
Fund balances (Note 12) Internally restricted 586 26,342 26,928 44,517 Invested in capital assets - 152,517 152,517 116,451 Unrestricted 127,326 - 127,326 49,385 127,912 178,859 306,771 210,353
$ 462,130 $ 8,839,649 $ 9,301,779 $ 9,630,424
2 Airdrie Housing Limited Statement of Operations and Fund Balances For the Year Ended December 31, 2013
Operating Budget Operating Capital (unaudited) Fund Fund 2013 2012
Revenue Rental $ 421,948 $ 472,677 $ - $ 472,677 $ 469,851 RentPlus grant (Note 7) 257,730 258,312 - 258,312 234,920 City of Airdrie grant (Note 6) 150,000 150,000 - 150,000 150,000 Capital grant (Note 11) 118,204 - 116,441 116,441 121,625 Forgivable loan 26,400 - 26,410 26,410 26,400 CMHC grant - 8,554 - 8,554 - Interest 1,000 4,157 - 4,157 3,016 975,282 893,700 142,851 1,036,551 1,005,812
Expenses RentPlus distributions (Note 7) 257,730 258,312 - 258,312 234,920 Amortization 164,086 - 175,205 175,205 175,205 Salaries and employee benefits 100,595 100,273 - 100,273 96,633 Interest 89,592 - 74,616 74,616 76,952 Purchased services 62,929 70,289 - 70,289 65,736 Repairs and maintenance 41,896 70,073 - 70,073 42,601 Property taxes and condo fees 70,848 67,052 - 67,052 69,202 Utilities 46,176 50,748 - 50,748 39,165 Office expense and advertising 30,225 21,487 - 21,487 19,799 Exterior maintenance 17,893 14,505 - 14,505 14,144 Management fees 14,400 13,714 - 13,714 21,610 Insurance 11,972 12,242 - 12,242 11,396 Audit fees 10,350 10,897 - 10,897 10,370 Bad debt 3,500 720 - 720 728 922,192 690,312 249,821 940,133 878,461
Excess (deficiency) of revenue over expenses 53,090 203,388 (106,970) 96,418 127,351
Fund balances - beginning of the year 56,796 56,795 153,558 210,353 83,002
Interfund transfer - (132,271) 132,271 - -
Fund balances - end of the year $ 109,886 $ 127,912 $ 178,859 $ 306,771 $ 210,353
3 Airdrie Housing Limited Statement of Cash Flows For the Year Ended December 31, 2013
2013 2012
OPERATING ACTIVITIES Excess of revenue over expenses $ 96,418 $ 127,351
Non-cash transactions Amortization 175,205 175,205 Amortization of deferred contributions (116,441) (121,625) Amortization of forgivable loan (26,410) (26,400)
Changes in non-cash working capital Accounts receivable (3,898) 23,518 Accounts payable and accrued liabilities (12,829) 8,322 Security deposits (669) (1,080) Due to City of Airdrie 20,910 8,263 Deferred revenue (252,583) (231,884) (120,297) (38,330)
INVESTING ACTIVITIES Purchase of capital assets (4,625) - Interest earned on deferred contributions 26,548 30,162 21,923 30,162
FINANCING ACTIVITIES Payments on term loan (22,087) (14,486) Payments on mortgage (41,503) (39,907) (63,590) (54,393)
Decrease in cash (161,964) ( 62,561)
Cash, beginning of the year 2,788,151 2,850,712
Cash, end of the year $ 2,626,187 $ 2,788,151
Cash consists of: Cash in bank $ 2,588,326 $ 2,749,422 Cash in tenant security deposits 37,861 38,729
$ 2,626,187 $ 2,788,151
4 Airdrie Housing Limited Notes to the Financial Statements For the Year Ended December 31, 2013
1. NATURE OF THE ORGANIZATION
Airdrie Housing Limited (the “Company”) was established through a bylaw of the City of Airdrie and was incorporated on August 1, 2008 under the provisions of the Companies Act of the Province of Alberta as a not-for- profit organization. The Company’s purpose is to facilitate and manage affordable housing to meet the diverse needs of the community. The Company is not subject to federal and provincial income taxes as it is municipally owned.
2. SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES
These financial statements have been prepared in accordance with Canadian Public Sector Accounting Standards (PSAS), including accounting standards that apply to government not-for-profit organizations, and in management's opinion, have been properly prepared within reasonable limits of materiality and within the framework of the significant accounting policies summarized below:
Fund balances The Operating Fund reports the Company's activities related to rent subsidy programs and administrative costs. The Capital Fund reports the assets, liabilities, revenue and expenses related to the funding of capital acquisitions.
Interfund transfers Interfund transfers of $132,271 (2012: $144,703) represent transfers from the Operating Fund to the Capital Fund to support current and future capital expenditures.
Revenue recognition The Company follows the deferral method using fund accounting. Restricted contributions are recognized as revenue of the appropriate fund in the year in which the related expenses are incurred. Unrestricted contributions are recognized as revenue of the appropriate fund when the amount received or receivable can be reasonably estimated and collection is reasonably assured.
Contributions for capital items, including grant revenue, are deferred and amortized over the life of the capital item. Rental income is recognized in the period in which it is earned. RentPlus grant revenue is deferred and recognized in the period in which the subsidies are distributed.
Restricted interest is recognized as revenue of the appropriate fund in the year in which the related expenses are incurred. Unrestricted interest is recognized as revenue of the appropriate fund when it is earned. (Continued on next page…/)
5 Airdrie Housing Limited Notes to the Financial Statements For the Year Ended December 31, 2013
2. SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES (…/Continued)
Use of estimates The preparation of financial statements in accordance with PSAS requires management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities and disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities at the reporting date and the reported amounts of revenues and expenses for the reporting period. Actual results could differ from these estimates.
Estimates are used primarily in the determination of the collectability of accounts receivable. The provisions against those balances are primarily assessed on historical collectability of the accounts with specific provisions for large outstanding balances deemed potentially uncollectible.
Donated materials and services Donated materials and services are not given accounting recognition in these financial statements when fair market value is not easily determined.
Cash and cash equivalents Cash and cash equivalents represent cash on hand.
Capital assets Capital assets are stated at cost less accumulated amortization, which includes all amounts that are directly attributable to the acquisition, construction, development and betterment of the asset. Amortization is provided for on a straight-line basis at the following rates: Buildings 40 years Betterment 40 years Fifty percent amortization is charged in the year of acquisition as well as the year of disposal. The Company reviews long-lived assets for impairment whenever events or changes in circumstance indicate that the asset no longer has long-term service potential to the Company. When the carrying amount exceeds the fair value of the capital asset, an impairment loss is recognized in an amount equal to the excess. Such impairments are not reversed.
Employee benefit plan Employees of the Company are eligible for the Local Authorities Pension Plan ("the Plan"), which is covered by the Public Sector Pensions Plan Act. The Plan serves about 206,000 people and 421 employers. It is financed by employer and employee contributions and investment earnings of the Plan fund.
Contributions for current service are recorded as expenditures in the year in which they become due. The Company is required to make current service contributions to the Plan of 10.43% of pensionable earnings up to the Canada Pension Plan Year’s Maximum Pensionable Earnings and 14.47% on pensionable salary above this amount. (Continued on next page…/)
6 Airdrie Housing Limited Notes to the Financial Statements For the Year Ended December 31, 2013
2. SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES (…/Continued)
Financial instruments The Company’s financial instruments consist of cash in bank, cash in tenant security deposits, accounts receivable, accounts payable and accrued liabilities, due to City of Airdrie, mortgage payable and term loan payable.
The fair value of all financial instruments excluding mortgage payable approximates their carrying values due to their short-term maturity. Please see note 9 regarding the mortgage payable. The Company is not exposed to significant credit, liquidity, currency or interest rate risks.
3. CHANGES IN ACCOUNTING POLICIES
Financial statement presentation On January 1, 2013, the Company adopted the PSA Handbook Section PS 1201 "Financial Statement Presentation", which replaced the existing Section PS 1200 standard. The new standard includes a statement of re-measurement gains and losses which will report amounts reclassified to the statement of operations upon de- recognition or settlement and other comprehensive income reported when an entity includes the result of its government business enterprises and government business partnerships in the summary of financial statements. This accounting change had no impact on the Company's financial statements. As a result the statement of re- measurement gains and losses has not been included.
Financial instruments On January 1, 2013, the Company adopted the PSA Handbook Section PS 3450 "Financial Instruments". The new standard provides guidance on the recognition, measurement and presentation and disclosure of financial instruments. Financial assets and liabilities are to be recognized when the entity becomes a party to a financial instrument contract. The change in fair value of the items is recognized in the statement of re-measurement gains and losses until settlement. This accounting change had no impact on the Company's financial statements. As a result the statement of re-measurement gains and losses has not been included.
4. SECURITY DEPOSITS
Tenant deposits are held in a separate bank account by the Company. These deposits are held for the length of the rental agreement and are payable to the tenants upon vacation of the premises, less any amounts required to repair damage to the premises caused by the tenants.
7 Airdrie Housing Limited Notes to the Financial Statements For the Year Ended December 31, 2013
5. CAPITAL ASSETS
Capital assets consist of the following: 2013 Accumulated Net Book Cost Amortization Value Buildings $ 6,682,085 $ 676,306 $ 6,005,779 Betterment 330,722 20,670 310,052 Land 350,000 - 350,000 $ 7,362,807 $ 696,976 $ 6,665,831
2012 Accumulated Net Book Cost Amortization Value Buildings $ 6,677,460 $ 509,370 $ 6,168,090 Betterment 330,722 12,402 318,320 Land 350,000 - 350,000 $ 7,358,182 $ 521,772 $ 6,836,410
6. RELATED PARTY TRANSACTIONS AND BALANCES
Grants During 2013, the City of Airdrie provided $150,000 (2012: $150,000) in funding to partially cover operating costs of the Company.
Due to the City of Airdrie The balance due to the City of Airdrie of $34,851 (2012: $13,941) is non-interest bearing, repayable on demand and unsecured.
7. DEFERRED REVENUE
Deferred revenue consists of $247,310 (2012: $499,893) for the RentPlus grant program. 2013 2012 Opening balance $ 499,893 $ 731,777 Interest 5,729 3,036 RentPlus grant (258,312) (234,920) 247,310 499,893 Less: current portion (247,310) (260,307) Long-term portion $ - $ 239,586 The RentPlus grant is distributed as a rent supplement to qualified individuals.
8 Airdrie Housing Limited Notes to the Financial Statements For the Year Ended December 31, 2013
8. FORGIVABLE LOAN
On December 3, 2010 the Company was approved for a Residential Rehabilitation Assistance Program (RRAP) loan in the amount of $343,241 with an interest rate of 6.8750%, interest adjustment date of January 1, 2011 and a maturity date of January 1, 2024. The forgivable loan will be earned over 13 years at a monthly rate of $2,200.26. The current portion of this forgivable loan is $26,403, leaving a long term portion of $237,629.
9. MORTGAGE PAYABLE 2013 2012 Mortgage payable with an interest rate of 3.96%, payments of $8,074 per month and an amortization period of 25 years $ 1,387,467 $ 1,428,970 Less: amounts due within one year 43,163 41,503 $ 1,344,304 $ 1,387,467 Interest and principal repayments are as follows: Interest Principal 2014 $ 53,722 $ 43,163 2015 52,393 44,492 2016 50,637 46,248 2017 48,772 48,114 2018 46,832 50,054 Thereafter 410,817 1,155,396 $ 663,173 $ 1,387,467 The net present value of the mortgage payable is $844,471 (2012: $948,752).
10. TERM LOAN
The Company was funded a variable rate term loan in the amount of $501,726 (2012: $523,813). Interest is paid on a monthly basis at prime plus 1.5%. The purpose of the term loan is to facilitate the purchase of affordable housing units.
11. DEFERRED CONTRIBUTIONS
Deferred contributions consist of $6,507,565 (2012: $6,597,458) for the purchase of affordable housing units within the community. Amortization of contributions is based on the straight-line basis over the life of the related asset. 2013 2012 Opening balance $ 6,597,458 $ 6,688,921 Interest 26,548 30,162 Recognized as revenue (116,441) (121,625) Closing balance $ 6,507,565 $ 6,597,458
9 Airdrie Housing Limited Notes to the Financial Statements For the Year Ended December 31, 2013
12. FUND BALANCES
The Company’s fund balances consist of the following: 2013 2012 Capital assets $ 6,665,831 $ 6,836,410 Deferred contributions related to capital assets (4,372,608) (4,494,233) Long-term debt related to capital assets (2,140,706) (2,225,726) Equity in capital assets 152,517 116,451 Operating fund - internally restricted 586 7,411 Operating fund - unrestricted 127,326 49,385 Capital fund - internally restricted for building upgrades 26,342 37,106 Total fund balance $ 306,771 $ 210,353
13. COMPARATIVE FIGURES
Certain comparative figures have been restated to conform to the current year's presentation.
10 Mission: Report 2013 To facilitate and Community connections... manage affordable housing to meet the Airdrie, AB—Airdrie Housing Limited began Additionally in 2013, Airdrie Housing’s rent diverse needs of our 2013 with a refocused and reenergized supplement programs and housing units continued community. approach to the future development of to operate at capacity with 85 families per affordable housing with a commitment to a month receiving supplements and all 44 units of Capital Assets: mixed use building concept able to provide more housing filled. Waitlists continued to grow housing units as well as commercial and retail creating even more pressure for new units and Forty-four units purchased since space to assist with sustainability. vacancy rates continued to slide driving up rental 2009. Through an open Expression of Interest process, costs in the market. One two-bedroom accessible condo- the organization submitted a proposal to the City With vacancy rates in Airdrie now hovering at minium located at The Edge. for the former RCMP lands located on Edmonton the 1% mark, the average rent for a two Successful submission of EOI for Trail. On April 2nd, 2013, Council supported bedroom apartment has hit $1224 (CMHC Fall vacant RCMP lands. Airdrie Housing’s proposal and subject to Rental Market Report) and the gross monthly successful rezoning, would transfer title to the income for an affordable housing tenant is Rezoning application for a mixed organization. $2034. That’s a rent to income ratio of close to use building on former RCMP lands This support began a year long process for a 60% before taxes. The standard acceptable land use amendment that included a lengthy rent to income ratio is 30%. community engagement process as well as a Despite the numbers however, there are successes complete site revision as Airdrie Housing as a family that has been with Airdrie Housing responded to community concerns and ideas. for three years has moved through the entire housing spectrum. They started with Airdrie “The input from area neighbors was crucial in beginning to develop a trusting relationship with Housing in an affordable unit and were receiving a rent supplement. Through better employment the existing community”, commented Managing Director Shelley Sweet. opportunities they no longer qualified for a rent supplement and were able to pay market rent “We really wanted them to feel good about the for their unit. Now they are waiting to move into Client Snapshot: building and the vitality it will bring to their their new home as they become first time home neighborhood, but we also wanted them to feel owners. They are grateful for the assistance they good about us, we want to be good neighbors”, received from Airdrie Housing. “Airdrie Housi g a d the i porta t added Sweet. staf, ha e ade y house a On the asset management side of operations, in ho e. For the irst i e i years I The recent success of the rezoning application 2013 we were able to use reserve funds to ha e take o fort i y ute 1- means that the organization is moving into the edroo apart e t. I a grateful replace an aging boiler, paint common areas e eryday to ha e a d e a part of next phase and will be looking for a design/ and upgrade the landscaping at the Airdrie Housi g. It has ade y build firm to oversee the completion of the Mountainview Apartments. A summer hailstorm life happier a d o forta le. A ig project. tha k you to all ho ork so hard also severely damaged the roof which has just to ake Airdrie Housi g hat it is “We are excited and pleased to have the undergone replacement. today.” support and confidence of Airdrie City Council Providing affordable rental housing is the main Dea a B., and the Province as we continue the journey of focus of Airdrie Housing Limited and in 2013 we Airdrie Housi g te a t creating facilities in our community that not only steadily continued to make strides to fulfill our adds much needed affordable housing units, but mandate of facilitating and managing will continue to add to the social fabric of our affordable housing to meet the diverse needs of community”, stated Airdrie Housing Board Chair our community. We are excited about the future Jim Hassett. and the opportunities and challenges for 2014. Page 2 Airdrie Housing Report 2013
Client Statistics….
Annual Income for RentPlus clients Airdrie Housi g Li ited: Nu er of u its: Aforda le % Market % 10,000-19,999 20,000-24,999 Re t Supple e ts: 25,000-39,999 fa ilies/ o th 40,000-49,999 50,000-69,999 Curre t ait list u ers: 70,000-71,000 Re t Supple e t – Housi g – Annual Income of Affordable Unit Clients Clie ts o ed of of the re t supple e t aitlist i : less than $15,000 Clie ts o ed of the aitlist for housi g i : fa ilies $15,001-$19,999 Clie t proiles: Curre t for De e er $20,000-$29,999 Age – adults o er ; Childre - : ; $30,000-$39,999 - : ; - : $40,000-$49,999 Ge der - For adults : % fe ales a d % Males $50,000-$51,000 Total people is . Pro i ial Core Needs Qualifyi g I o e Le els for Airdrie : edroo : $ , Annual Income for Bridge Fund Clients edroo : $ , edroo : $ ,
I o e le els $15,000 or less a erage a ual i o e for a BridgeFu d lie t is $ , . $15,001-$19,999 $20,000-$29,999 a erage a ual i o e for a Re tPlus lie t is $ , . $30,000-$40,999 a erage a ual i o e for a housi g lie t is $ , . $41,000-$42,000 Re t to I o e Raios: Before re t supple e t: . % Ater re t supple e t: % Fa ily akeup: Re tPlus supple e t: arried/ o o la %; separated/di or ed %; si gle %; ido ed % BridgeFu d supple e t: arried/ o o la %; separated/di or ed %; si gle % Housi g u its: arried/ o o la %; separated/di or ed %; si gle %; ido ed % Type of I o e: Re tPlus supple e t o e or ore of these sour es : e plo e t %; so ial assista e/AISH %; CPP or disa ilit %; EI %; Other pri ate pe sio et . %; Child Ta a d Child/Spousal support % BridgeFu d supple e t o e or ore of these sour es : e plo e t %; AISH/So ial Assista e %; CPP or disa ilit %; Child Ta a d Child/Spousal support % Housi g U its o e or ore of these sour es : e plo e t %; So ial Assista e/AISH %; CPP or disa ilit %; EI %; Other pri ate pe sio et . %; Child Ta a d Child/Spousal support % Mo thly re t: The o thl re t for BridgeFu d lie ts a erage $ . The o thl re t for Re tPlus lie ts a erage $ , . Airdrie Housi g U its: re ts set at a i i u of % elo arket Mou tai ie Apart e ts: edroo - $ ; edroo - $ ; edroo - $
AGENDA REPORT
Meeting Date (M/D/Y): 6/16/2014
Subject: City of Airdrie Library Board 2013 Financial Statements
Boards Routed Through: Date: City of Airdrie Library Board 4/29/2014 City Council 6/16/2014
Description: Council is being presented with the City of Airdrie Library Board‘s 2013 Audited Financial Statements for information purposes.
Background: The City of Airdrie Library Board (APL) is a subsidiary of the City of Airdrie. It is a requirement of APL to prepare audited financial statements on an annual basis. The audited results have been approved by the APL Board of Directors and are being presented to Council for information purposes.
The City of Airdrie Financial Services Department provides accounting and financial support to APL. On a monthly basis, accounting transactions are recorded and financial results are prepared. On an annual basis, Financial Services prepares the financial statements and facilitates the external audit function. As well, the annual results are interpreted and presented to APL’s Board.
2013 Audited Financial Statements:
The annual audit of the financial statements for APL was completed and approved by the APL Board in April 2014.
For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2013, PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP (PwC) conducted the audit engagement for APL. Field work was conducted on site over the period of February 24 to March 14, 2014, with additional audit work via email and phone calls through the remainder of March. The audit was a success with no unadjusted items and free of material misstatement. PwC has issued an unqualified opinion on the financial statements.
As part of the audit engagement, PwC prepared a report to the Board. The report included communication of various aspects of the audit including internal control recommendations. This section is especially significant to management as it provides recommendations for accounting processes and internal controls. It is the responsibility of management to maintain quality internal controls. Internal controls are essential to providing assurance of accurate financial information and security over financial and non-financial assets. The 2013 internal control recommendations
include one re-issued point from prior years. City administration agreed with the recommendation and has implemented the change going forward.
The 2013 Audited Financial Statements include the Statement of Financial Position, the Statement of Operations and Fund Balances, the Statement of Cash Flows, and the accompanying notes. Highlights related to the results follow.
Statement of Financial Position
Assets Current assets have increased by $119,835 (49.7 percent) from 2012 to a final balance of $601,724. This is reflective of the increase in cash largely due to items unpaid to the City of Airdrie ($222,816). Amounts due to the City will be paid on a quarterly basis going forward, so it is not expected that there will be such a large amount owing to the City in future years. Please see the Statement of Cash Flows for a detailed look at the use of funds.
The net book value of capital assets held by APL decreased by $72,457 (11.4 percent) from 2012. Capital additions for 2013 were $16,188 less a refund of $12,100 from 3M, resulting in net capital expenditures of $4,088. Capital asset amortization for 2013 was $76,546.
Liabilities Current liabilities have increased by $160,141 or 83.3 percent to $352,438. This increase is largely due to the increase in amounts due to the City of Airdrie.
Fund Balances The chart below details the year-over-year change in fund balances.
2013 2012 Change Operating funds Unrestricted $ 34,731 $ 13,360 $ 21,371 Carry forwards 9,839 15,000 (5,161) General operating 109,107 97,366 11,741 153,677 125,726 27,951 General capital funds 95,609 83,866 11,743 Subtotal Capital and Operating Funds 249,286 209,592 39,694 Investment in capital assets 562,539 634,996 (72,457) Total Fund Balances 811,825 $844,588 (32,763)
Operating and capital funds have decreased $32,763 to a total of $811,825. This decrease is largely due to the amortization expense of the capital fund. The City of Airdrie Library Board is making progress towards building funds for future operations and future capital needs.
Statement of Operations and Fund Balances
Revenue Overall, total revenue has increased by $113,622 (6.6 percent) year-over-year. Grant revenue received from the City of Airdrie increased by $91,968 or 7.8 percent. The Marigold service grant increased by $1,582 (1.5 percent) while other grants increased by $7,441 (35.2 percent).
Expenditures Total expenditures have increased by $148,131 year-over-year or 8.6 percent. These increases in expenditures were anticipated and budgeted for in 2013. The increase is primarily due to $114,996 (10.8 percent) increase in personnel costs; however, these costs were still $40,171 below budget due to staff vacancies. The Marigold service fee has increased $11,502 in relation to the increased population for the City of Airdrie. Information technology and systems support costs have increased by $14,697 from 2012 and are over budget by $3,592. The Facility Expansion Committee purchased services increased $29,592 and is in line with the anticipated facility study that took place in 2013. This amount is $309 under budget.
Excess (Deficiency) of Revenue over Expenses and Fund Balances In 2013, a deficit of $32,763 has been recorded, which is a $34,509 change over the 2012 surplus of $1,746. The inter-fund transfer of $15,831 consists of an $11,743 transfer to the general capital reserve and a $4,088 transfer to fund 2013 capital additions.
Boards Routed Through: The 2013 Audited Financial Statements were presented to the APL Board on April 29, 2014, and were approved.
Alternatives/Implications: N/A
Recommendation That Council accepts the City of Airdrie Library Board 2013 Audited Financial Statements for information.
Palki Biswas, MBA Team Leader, Financial Services
Presenter: Palki Bisw as, Team Leader Financial Services Review er: Lucy Wiw charuk, Director Corporate Services Attachments: 2013 Audited Financial Statements w ith Auditor’s Opinion APL 2013 Year Review
THE CITY OF AIRDRIE LIBRARY BOARD
Financial Statements
December 31, 2013
April 29, 2014
Independent Auditor’s Report
To the Directors of The City of Airdrie Library Board
We have audited the accompanying financial statements of The City of Airdrie Library Board, which comprise the statement of financial position as at December 31, 2013 and the statement of operations and fund balances and the cash flows for the year ended December 31, 2013 and the related notes, which comprise a summary of significant accounting policies and other explanatory information.
Management’s responsibility for the financial statements Management is responsible for the preparation and fair presentation of these financial statements in accordance with Canadian public sector accounting standards, and for such internal control as management determines is necessary to enable the preparation of financial statements that are free from material misstatement, whether due to fraud or error.
Auditor’s responsibility Our responsibility is to express an opinion on these financial statements based on our audit. We conducted our audit in accordance with Canadian generally accepted auditing standards. Those standards require that we comply with ethical requirements and plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free from material misstatement. An audit involves performing procedures to obtain audit evidence about the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements. The procedures selected depend on the auditor’s judgment, including the assessment of the risks of material misstatement of the financial statements, whether due to fraud or error. In making those risk assessments, the auditor considers internal control relevant to the entity’s preparation and fair presentation of the financial statements in order to design audit procedures that are appropriate in the circumstances, but not for the purpose of expressing an opinion on the effectiveness of the entity’s internal control. An audit also includes evaluating the appropriateness of accounting policies used and the reasonableness of accounting estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall presentation of the financial statements. We believe that the audit evidence we have obtained in our audits is sufficient and appropriate to provide a basis for our audit opinion.
PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP 111 5 Avenue SW, Suite 3100, Calgary, Alberta, Canada T2P 5L3 T: +1 403 509 7500, F: +1 403 781 1825, www.pwc.com/ca
“PwC” refers to PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP, an Ontario limited liability partnership.
Opinion In our opinion, the financial statements present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of The City of Airdrie Library Board as at as at December 31, 2013 and the results of its operations and its cash flows for the year then ended in accordance with Canadian public sector accounting standards for not-for- profit organisations.
Other Matters Without modifying our opinion, we draw attention to the budget information displayed in the financial statements and the related disclosures. We were not engaged to report on the budget information, and as such, it is marked as unaudited.
Chartered Accountants
The City of Airdrie Library Board Statement of Financial Position As at December 31, 2013
Operating Capital Fund Fund 2013 2012
ASSETS
Current Cash $ 494,056 $ 95,609 $ 589,665 $ 391,545 Accounts receivable 12,059 - 12,059 10,344 506,115 95,609 601,724 401,889
Capital (Note 4) - 562,539 562,539 634,996
$ 506,115 $ 658,148 $ 1,164,263 $ 1,036,885
LIABILITIES AND FUND BALANCES
Current Liabilities Accounts payable and accrued liabilities $ 96,308 - $ 96,308 $ 61,346 Due to the City of Airdrie (Note 5) 222,816 - 222,816 85,731 Deferred revenue 33,314 - 33,314 45,220 352,438 - 352,438 192,297
Fund balances Internally restricted 118,946 95,609 214,555 196,232 Invested in capital assets - 562,539 562,539 634,996 Unrestricted 34,731 - 34,731 13,360 153,677 658,148 811,825 844,588
$ 506,115 $ 658,148 $ 1,164,263 $ 1,036,885
Commitments (Note 5)
2 The City of Airdrie Library Board Statement of Operations and Fund Balances For the Year Ended December 31, 2013
Operating Budget Operating Capital (unaudited) Fund Fund 2013 2012
Revenue Grants City of Airdrie: operating (Note 5) $ 1,269,828 $ 1,269,828 -$ $ 1,269,828 $ 1,177,860 Alberta Library 217,030 217,030 - 217,030 217,030 Marigold Service 109,699 109,669 - 109,669 108,087 City of Airdrie: in-kind (Note 5) 35,000 35,000 - 35,000 35,000 Other 33,400 33,022 - 33,022 22,045 County 20,492 20,768 - 20,768 24,304 1,685,449 1,685,317 - 1,685,317 1,584,326
Memberships 73,400 69,287 - 69,287 66,883 Fines 24,300 26,903 - 26,903 23,133 Interest and miscellaneous 19,250 20,615 - 20,615 15,944 Other revenue 16,850 14,890 - 14,890 18,124 Donations 14,400 14,722 - 14,722 13,028 Photocopy 7,300 8,109 - 8,109 6,695 Book sales 6,000 6,773 - 6,773 4,861 1,846,949 1,846,616 - 1,846,616 1,732,994
Expenses Salaries and employee benefits 1,219,592 1,179,421 - 1,179,421 1,064,425 Building maintenance and rent (Note 5) 220,922 224,343 - 224,343 219,429 Marigold service fees 205,700 205,700 - 205,700 194,198 Amortization - - 76,546 76,546 91,667 Management fees 35,000 35,000 - 35,000 35,000 Materials 40,500 30,661 - 30,661 46,838 Facility Expansion Committee 30,600 30,291 - 30,291 699 Office 21,300 22,441 - 22,441 20,611 IT and system support 14,040 17,632 - 17,632 2,935 Utilities 18,770 15,288 - 15,288 15,026 Training and travel 13,210 12,222 - 12,222 10,352 Advertising and promotion 11,205 10,699 - 10,699 10,635 Professional fees 8,000 7,700 - 7,700 7,600 Program 8,615 6,769 - 6,769 7,736 Bank charges 3,500 2,525 - 2,525 2,218 Insurance 1,945 2,141 - 2,141 1,879 1,852,899 1,802,833 76,546 1,879,379 1,731,248
Excess (deficiency) of revenue over expenses (5,950) 43,783 (76,546) (32,763) 1,746
Fund balances - beginning of year 125,725 125,725 718,863 844,588 842,842
Interfund transfer 5,950 (15,831) 15,831 - -
Fund balances - end of year $ 125,725 $ 153,677 $ 658,148 $ 811,825 $ 844,588
3 The City of Airdrie Library Board Statement of Cash Flows For the Year Ended December 31, 2013
2013 2012
OPERATING ACTIVITIES Excess (deficiency) of revenue over expenses $ (32,763) $ 1,746
Non-cash transactions Amortization 76,546 91,667
Changes in non-cash working capital Accounts receivable (1,715) (1,724) Accounts payable and accrued liabilities 34,962 (17,560) Due to the City of Airdrie 137,085 53,823 Deferred revenue (11,906) 14,261 202,209 142,213
INVESTING ACTIVITIES Purchase of capital assets (4,089) (23,799)
FINANCING ACTIVITIES Payments on long-term debt - (2,000)
Increase in cash 198,120 116,414
Cash, beginning of the year 391,545 275,131
Cash, end of the year $ 589,665 $ 391,545
4 The City of Airdrie Library Board Notes to the Financial Statements For the Year Ended December 31, 2013
1. NATURE OF THE ORGANIZATION
The City of Airdrie Library Board (the "Library") was established through a bylaw of the City of Airdrie and is constituted under The Libraries Act (2000) of The Province of Alberta (the "Province"). The Library, as a registered charity, is exempt from income tax and may issue receipts to donors for tax-deductible donations.
2. SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES
These financial statements have been prepared in accordance with Canadian Public Sector Accounting Standards (PSAS), including accounting standards that apply to government not-for-profit organizations, and in management's opinion, have been properly prepared within reasonable limits of materiality and within the framework of the significant accounting policies summarized below:
Fund balances The Operating Fund reports the Library's operating and membership activities. The Capital Fund reports the assets, liabilities, revenue and expenses related to the funding of capital acquisitions and the development of the new library building.
Interfund transfers Interfund transfers of $15,831 (2012: $50,969) represent transfers from the Operating Fund to the Capital Fund to support current and future capital expenditures.
Revenue recognition The Library follows the restricted fund method of accounting for contributions. Restricted contributions related to capital are reported as revenue of the Capital Fund when received. Other restricted contributions related to general operations are reported as revenue of the Operating Fund in the year in which the related expenses are incurred.
Unrestricted contributions are recognized as revenue in the Operating Fund when the amount received or receivable can be reasonably estimated and collection is reasonably assured. Membership revenue is recorded over the period of the membership. Fines, interest and miscellaneous, other revenue, donations, photocopy and book sales revenue is recognized as revenue when received.
Use of estimates The preparation of financial statements in accordance with PSAS requires management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities and disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities at the reporting date and the reported amounts of revenues and expenses for the reporting period. Actual results could differ from these estimates.
Estimates are used primarily in the determination of the collectability of accounts receivable. The provisions against those balances are primarily assessed on historical collectability of the accounts with specific provisions for large outstanding balances deemed potentially uncollectible. (Continued on next page…/)
5 The City of Airdrie Library Board Notes to the Financial Statements For the Year Ended December 31, 2013
2. SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES (…/Continued)
Donated materials and services Donated materials and services are not given accounting recognition in these financial statements when fair market value is not easily determined.
Cash and cash equivalents Cash and cash equivalents represent cash on hand.
Capital assets Capital assets are stated at cost less accumulated amortization, which includes all amounts that are directly attributable to the acquisition, construction, development and betterment of the asset. Amortization is provided for on a straight-line basis at the following rates: Leasehold improvements 20 years Furniture and fixtures 10 years Computer equipment 3 years Amortization is charged monthly in the year of acquisition as well as the year of disposal. The Library reviews long-lived assets for impairment whenever events or changes in circumstance indicate that the asset no longer has long-term service potential to the Library. When the carrying amount exceeds the fair value of the capital asset, an impairment loss is recognized in an amount equal to the excess. Such impairments are not reversed.
Employee benefit plan Employees of the Library are eligible for the Local Authorities Pension Plan ("the Plan"), which is covered by the Public Sector Pensions Plan Act. The Plan serves about 206,000 people and 421 employers. It is financed by employer and employee contributions and investment earnings of the Plan fund.
Contributions for current service are recorded as expenditures in the year in which they become due. The Library is required to make current service contributions to the Plan of 10.43% of pensionable earnings up to the Canada Pension Plan Year’s Maximum Pensionable Earnings and 14.47% on pensionable salary above this amount.
Financial instruments The Library’s financial instruments consist of cash and cash equivalents, accounts receivable, accounts payable and accrued liabilities and due to the City of Airdrie. The fair value of all financial instruments approximates their carrying values due to their short-term maturity. The Library is not exposed to significant credit, liquidity, currency or interest rate risks.
6 The City of Airdrie Library Board Notes to the Financial Statements For the Year Ended December 31, 2013
3. CHANGES IN ACCOUNTING POLICIES
Financial statement presentation On January 1, 2013, the Library adopted the PSA Handbook Section PS 1201 "Financial Statement Presentation", which replaced the existing Section PS 1200 standard. The new standard includes a statement of re- measurement gains and losses which will report amounts reclassified to the statement of operations upon de- recognition or settlement and other comprehensive income reported when an entity includes the result of its government business enterprises and government business partnerships in the summary of financial statements. This accounting change had no impact on the Library's financial statements. As a result the statement of re- measurement gains and losses has not been included.
Financial instruments On January 1, 2013, the Library adopted the PSA Handbook Section PS 3450 "Financial Instruments". The new standard provides guidance on the recognition, measurement and presentation and disclosure of financial instruments. Financial assets and liabilities are to be recognized when the entity becomes a party to a financial instrument contract. The change in fair value of the items is recognized in the statement of re-measurement gains and losses until settlement. This accounting change had no impact on the Library's financial statements. As a result the statement of re-measurement gains and losses has not been included.
4. CAPITAL ASSETS
Capital assets consist of the following: 2013 Accumulated Net Book Cost Amortization Value Leasehold improvements $ 804,726 $ 338,804 $ 465,922 Furniture and fixtures 150,969 65,755 85,214 Computer equipment 186,250 174,847 11,403 $ 1,141,945 $ 579,406 $ 562,539
2012 Accumulated Net Book Cost Amortization Value Leasehold improvements $ 804,726 $ 298,568 $ 506,158 Furniture and fixtures 149,577 51,080 98,497 Computer equipment 183,554 153,213 30,341 $ 1,137,857 $ 502,861 $ 634,996
7 The City of Airdrie Library Board Notes to the Financial Statements For the Year Ended December 31, 2013
5. RELATED PARTY TRANSACTIONS AND BALANCES
Grants During 2013, the City of Airdrie provided $1,269,828 (2012: $1,177,860) in funding to partially cover operating costs of the Library. In addition, grants in-kind of $35,000 (2012: $35,000) were also provided. Seventy-one percent of the Library's operating revenue is received from the City of Airdrie (2012: seventy percent).
Due to the City of Airdrie The balance due to the City of Airdrie of $222,816 (2012: $85,731) is non-interest bearing, repayable on demand and unsecured.
Airdrie Mainstreet Square Real Estate Inc. Both the Library and Airdrie Mainstreet Square Real Estate Inc. ("Mainstreet Square") are controlled by the City of Airdrie and are therefore related parties. Transactions between the Library and Mainstreet Square are at fair market value and accordingly have been measured and recorded at the exchange amount. The following summarizes the Library's related party transactions with Mainstreet Square: 2013 2012 Payment to Mainstreet Square for the Library's share of common costs $ 52,348 $ 52,625 Rent paid to Mainstreet Square 135,624 135,624 Accounts receivable from Mainstreet Square 3,947 3,271
Commitments The Library signed a ten year lease in 2006 with Mainstreet Square with a five year option to renew. Rent is payable on a rate per square foot plus a proportionate share of common costs of the complex. Known rent commitments for the next five years are as follows:
2014 $ 135,624 2015 135,624 2016 135,624 2017 135,624 2018 135,624
6. COMPARATIVE FIGURES
Certain comparative figures have been restated to conform to the current year's presentation.
8 We need a new building because … A library is a community hub where family programs, digital learning, research and reading takes place. We need to contin- ue to promote literacy in the 21st century and surge forward – building-wise – to appropriately accommodate the growing population (and) use of the library. Michelle Bechthold, APL member Survey Comment, April 16, 2013
Your 2014 City of Airdrie Library Board Darrell Belyk Kayla Jessen-White Tara Daigle Jean McClean Judy Dufort Daniel Nelles Dustin Fedun Andrew Speirs Kelly Hegg Shelley Sweet Year in Review
111, 304 Main St. SE 2013 Airdrie, AB T4B 3C3 Phone: 403-948-0600 E-mail: [email protected] Website: airdriepubliclibrary.ca Facebook: facebook.com/AirdriePublicLibrary Twitter: twitter.com/AirdrieLibrary
Photos: Airdrie Public Library Messages from APL What the numbers mean On behalf of my fellow board members, I would like to thank the community Annual Visits for its input into our Facility Needs Assessment (FNA). The overall objective of the study was to provide a foundation document for facility planning and construction of a building that will serve the rapidly growing community of Airdrie, both in the short and long term. Approximately 1,775 individual citizens provided input and feedback through Board Chairperson surveys, focus groups and open houses in a comprehensive community en- Judy Dufort gagement process. Additionally, interviews and workshops with key stakehold- ers and community leaders, as well as interviews with North American libraries, added to the data. We learned so much! The study confirmed that APL is a highly used and highly valued facility. The community was very clear about the preferred location of the new library: a main library facility located cen- Community members use APL in many ways: to study, to attend trally, close to public transit and a pathway system. programs, to participate in clubs, to view art, to find resources for learning In addition, we have information on service priorities which Airdronians would like the library and/or leisure – a community gathering place for all. to focus on going forward. These priorities translate into different space needs in the new facil- ity and are identified in the report. We invite the community to view the complete report online Program Attendance at: newairdrielibrary.ca The board is confident that our FNA study will provide city council with valuable information as it moves forward with planning for a new facility and we look forward to working with coun- cil in developing a landmark community destination of choice. Board Chairperson Judy Dufort
Libraries contribute to the well-being and • Airdrie Lioness Club health of communities by providing informa- • Rotary Club of Airdrie tion, supporting literacy and bringing people • Airdrie Crossfield and Dis- together. trict Youth Justice Committee APL staff members are proud to serve Aird- • Airdrie Eyecare Centre APL offers a wide variety of programs for all ages, from BabyTime to • Those who participated rie and area and appreciate the support of the Teens After Hours to Facebook for Seniors. community, the City of Airdrie and Rocky in our Free a Book, Free a View County. Reader and Adopt-a-Book Library Director Items Checked Out campaigns Janine Jevne We owe thanks to so many: • Marigold Library System Thanks also go to the federal and provincial • Our valued literacy partners, Community governments for grants from: Canada Sum- Links and Rocky View Schools Community mer Jobs and Young Canada Works, which Learning support our TD Summer Reading Club; • Public Library Services Branch Community Facility Enhancement Program, which helped us fund our FNA study; Com- We would like to recognize: munity Spirit Program, which helped us build • Pat Cashion, Vitreous Glass our children’s collection; Canada Council for • The Butcher Shoppe the Arts, for supporting our author visits; and • Mattamy Homes Community Access Program, which provided • Advocates for APL support for summer technology projects. APL customers borrow CDs, DVDs, e-readers, magazines; they download • Airdrie Lions Club Library Director Janine Jevne e-books, audiobooks and music, but BOOKS are still important to them. 2 7 Revenues 2013 What Airdrie Wants Over the past decade, Airdrie has grown significantly in population, and demand for library services has steadily increased. Between 2005 and 2012, the number of library cardholders increased 198 per cent, circulation rose 320 per cent, visitation grew 260 per cent and program attendance soared 691 per cent. The increasing pressures on APL have been recognized in the community. APL commissioned a FNA Study in 2013, to address community needs and expectations for resources, programs, services and spaces in a new library. Key results from the engagement and research processes include: Expenditures 2013 • Airdrie’s population is growing and much of that growth is families with young children, which is a segment that is currently a high user of the library. • Use of APL is increasing. Almost half of Airdrie households used the library in the past year and their use tends to be, on average, at least once a month. • Airdronians appreciate and value the services provided by the library and consider the library to be important to their households, as well as the community at large. • Airdronians recognize various service priorities for the library, which translate into different space needs for: collections and materials; reading, studying and relaxing; programs, events and activities; technology; and social interaction and meeting. Visit Airdrie Public Library’s website for a copy of our 2013 audited financial statement. • Current needs of the community require a larger library facility. When comparing the size of the APL to other public libraries based on population size, the existing facility is less than a third of what might be expected. Fast Facts for 2013 – from APL Facility Needs Assessment Study March 2014 17,716 19,965 APL cardholders Overdrive e-books and 5,692 audiobooks downloaded APL memberships renewed 352 2,407 Exam hours proctored Volunteer hours donated 19,112 2,628 Reference questions answered Child visits to the 79,234 Summer Reading Program Interlibrary loans 97,298 20,264 Visits to the APL website Computer sessions
6 3 Your Library is a Community-Builder
APL is accessible, inclusive and a low-cost option for recreation and lifelong learning. It is a gathering place, a venue to meet friends or for newcomers to learn about the community. Residents look to the library to help support their well-being and meet their social needs.
APL adds to the economic well-being of the community. Researchers esti- mate that over the lifetime of participants in an early literacy intervention program, returns to the public are $7.16 for every dollar invested (ABC Life Literacy Canada). The value of an APL card to a family of four (preschool and school-aged children) using the library’s collections, services and programs on APL is a cultural hub of the community. The library offers not only literary and a weekly basis could be up to $15,000 per year. cultural opportunities, but also art programs, exhibits and special events, both at the library and out in the community – all APL is green and local, and shares materials, of which contributes to Airdrie’s sense of programs and spaces with the public. As part identity and quality of life. of Marigold Library System, Airdrie residents have access to three million library items. These items are transferred between libraries on a regular basis to meet the needs of our many members, and items arrive in Airdrie from all over the province via Marigold van, provincial courier and mail. Along with resource-sharing, book recycling and careful management, APL joins other libraries in reducing our environmental foot- print.
Airdrie Public Library is an accessible centre of information that • A landmark community destination of choice; enhances quality of life and provides opportunities through its • Progressive, responsive, leading edge programs, services and Our Mission inclusive services, programs, collections and spaces that support Our Vision resources; literacy, lifelong learning, leisure and cultural connections within • Organizational excellence; and the community. • A community that is committed to literacy and lifelong learning. 4 5
AGENDA REPORT
Meeting Date (M/D/Y): 6/16/2014
Subject: Waste Pirates Award Presentation
Boards Routed Through: Date: Environmental Advisory Board 6/04/2014 City Council 6/16/2014
Description:
Council is being presented with the winners of the Organics Waste Pirates Competition for five City of Airdrie K-5 schools.
Background:
The Organics Waste Pirates Competition was developed to promote awareness for the new organics collection program. The objective was to have children explain how to recycle organics to as many friends/family members as possible, obtaining signatures along the way from those that they teach.
Five City of Airdrie schools (AE Bowers, Ecole Edwards, Herons Crossing, Nose Creek and RJ Hawkey) were contacted and invited to be a part of this competition.
City staff visited the schools, provided information on organics, gave examples of acceptable and unacceptable materials, explained how the program works, and demonstrated how to use the kitchen catcher and the green cart.
The students were then invited to become a member of our Waste Pirate team. They could do this by approaching parents, grandparents, family and friends living in Airdrie, and teach them about the organics program. Each child was provided with a how-to guide, a signature sheet and a letter to their parents (outlining how the competition works).
Each child who obtained at least three signatures was awarded a Waste Pirate Certificate signed by the Mayor. Prizes are being awarded to the two individual students in each school who collected the most signatures and to the school who achieved the highest percentage participation in the program.
103 students participated and they obtained collectively 1264 signatures.
The winners will be announced at the June 16, 2014, Council meeting.
Boards Routed Through: N/A
Recommendation: That City Council accepts this Waste Pirates Awards report for information.
Paul Lyons
Presenter: Attachments:
Remember the 4ARRRR’s!
This is to certify that
is a member of the Waste & Recycling Waste Pirates
Mayor Peter Brown Date Dear Parents, Today your son/daughter attended a presentation Additional signature sheets can be obtained from on our Waste Pirate program, given by City of Airdrie your child’s teacher. Waste & Recycling staff. Prizes As you may have heard, the City of Airdrie is The student from each school who receives the introducing a curbside organics collection program most signatures will be awarded with a Proscan for all residential homes that currently receive waste 7” Tablet with case and keyboard and the school collection by the City. This program is scheduled to that has the most participating students (students start in April 2014. The Waste Pirates program is obtaining 3 or more signatures) will also receive a a fun way to get children involved in this important $500 contribution towards an environmental event initiative and allows them an opportunity to teach or initiative at their school. others about recycling organic material. Prizes will be awarded at the Environmental Waste Pirates Education Centre (21 East Lake Hill NE) to Your child has been invited to become a member congratulate the students for their dedication and of our Waste Pirate team. They can do this by hard work. This will be on June 4 , 2014 at 6 p.m. approaching parents, grandparents, family and at the regular Environmental Advisory Board (EAB) friends living in Airdrie, and teaching them about meeting. the organics program. Your child was given a how-to guide today that will assist them in passing along the Deadline information. Return signature sheets to the school by April 28, 2014. The objective is to have your son/daughter explain how to recycle organics to as many friends/family More information members as possible, obtaining signatures along For more information contact Paul Lyons the way from those that they teach. Each child at 403.948.8800 ext 6291 or email who obtains at least three signatures will be given [email protected] a Waste Pirate certificate signed by the Mayor of Airdrie. We ask that you assist your child by making the how-to guide available for their teaching sessions.
Learn more about the Curbside Organics Recycling program
Presentations Presentations will provide residents with details on why and how to recycle organics. It will include a power point presentation with information as well as a question and answer period.
Dates Location Time February 27, 2014 Bert Church Theatre 7-9 p.m. March 13, 2014 City Hall 7-9 p.m. April 9, 2014 Bert Church Theatre 7-9 p.m.
Drop-in Times Drop-in times allow residents to ask Waste & Recycling staff questions in an informal setting.
Dates Locations Times March 1, 2014 Genesis Place 10 a.m. - 2 p.m. March 8, 2014 Genesis Place 10 a.m. - 2 p.m. March 12, 2014 City Hall 3 - 4:30 p.m. March 15, 2014 Genesis Place 10 a.m. - 2 p.m. March 19, 2014 Genesis Place 1 - 2:30 p.m. & 6 - 8 p.m. March 22, 2014 Genesis Place 10 a.m. - 2 p.m. March 29, 2014 Genesis Place 10 a.m. - 2 p.m.
Online Airdrie.ca/organics
Phone 403.948.0246
Email [email protected]
Home & Lifestyle Show Visit our Curbside Organics Recycling booth at the Home & Lifestyle Show April 26-27. Dear Teachers, We would like to thank you for the role you are about to play in the school program of our curbside organics recycling initiative.
Our goal is to engage students by providing education on organics collection and have them in turn, become ambassadors for the City of Airdrie curbside organics program starting in April.
Students are being asked to educate friends and family with the information they learn and collect signatures from those that they educate. Participating students will be eligible for individual prizes. Also up for grabs is a prize for the school that has the most students participating in the initiative. Each student that collects 3 or more signatures will receive a participation certificate.
Staff would like to enlist your support for the program by handing out additional signature sheets (if required), information brochures and collecting the completed signature sheets by April 28, 2014, which in turn will be handed back to City Staff.
You can also act as a resource to your students providing information on organics collection.
If you need further information please contact me by email at [email protected] or telephone 403.948.8800 ext. 6291 Remember the 4ARRRR’s! Waste Pirates Signature Sheet
Information session with ______of ______(name of student) (name of school) My signature below confirms that I have completed the City of Airdrie 2014 Organics training. *If you would like to receive Waste & Recycling updates via email, please add your email address in the column below. You can unsubscribe at any time with a request to [email protected]. Name Signature Date Community Email
Return this signature sheet to your teacher by April 28, 2014. You can also get additional signature sheets from your teacher. *This information is collected under the authority of Section 33(c) of the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act and is used solely for the administration of the Organics Program. Questions about the collection of this information can be directed to the Waste and Recycling Department at 15 East Lake Hill, Airdrie, Alberta, T4A 2K3, 403.948.0246. Remember the 4ARRRR’s! Waste Pirates Signature Sheet
Information session with ______of ______(name of student) (name of school) My signature below confirms that I have completed the City of Airdrie 2014 Organics training. *If you would like to receive Waste & Recycling updates via email, please add your email address in the column below. You can unsubscribe at any time with a request to [email protected]. Name Signature Date Community Email
Return this signature sheet to your teacher by April 28, 2014. You can also get additional signature sheets from your teacher. *This information is collected under the authority of Section 33(c) of the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act and is used solely for the administration of the Organics Program. Questions about the collection of this information can be directed to the Waste and Recycling Department at 15 East Lake Hill, Airdrie, Alberta, T4A 2K3, 403.948.0246.
AGENDA REPORT
Meeting Date (M/D/Y): 6/16/2014
Subject: 2015 Airdrie Regional Air Show Request for Support
Boards Routed Through: City Council Date: 6/16/2014
Description:
Council is being asked to support the 2015 Airdrie Regional Air Show.
Background:
In 2009, 2011 and 2013 the Airdrie Regional Air Show Committee requested gift-in-kind support from the City of Airdrie. The Airdrie Regional Air Show Committee is making a similar request for the 2015 Air Show.
Supporting this type of request aligns well with Council's 2014 strategic priority of "Arts & Culture in Motion": Continue to support community-grown and led arts and cultural events to enhance our citizens' quality of life."
The request for support further aligns with AirdrieONE goals under Arts, Culture and Recreation: "There are many year-round opportunities for community members of all ages to participate in arts, culture and heritage activities."
Strategies for enhancing arts, culture and recreation include facilitating sustainable events. AirdrieONE states that "the City will work with community groups and event organizers to integrate sustainability into the design and delivery of events and facilities". Sustainability measures the Committee has established in regards to this event include the following:
• Retaining core volunteers, not only on the Airdrie Regional Air Show Committee's board of directors, but experienced volunteers for the day of the event. In addition to these core volunteers, the Committee also plans to obtain new volunteers for both the Organizing Committee and event day to ensure a strong volunteer contingency is in place.
• Providing training opportunities to key Air Show volunteers by sending them to the International Convention of Air Shows and the North West Council of Air Shows Convention.
• Building a strong relationship with the City of Airdrie.
• Giving back to community partners: the Airdrie Regional Air Show gives back to other not- for-profit organizations that volunteer at the event.
• The Air Show strives to lessen the impact on the environment by separating recyclable materials from the garbage as well as asking vendors to use sustainable packaging and products. The Committee has received many comments on how clean the grounds are during and after an event.
• The Committee ensures that sustainable transportation options are available in conjunction with their event. Bus transportation is provided to and from the Air Show at regular intervals to lessen the number of single vehicles driving to the event, better manage onsite parking, and reduce impacts to the environment from vehicle emissions.
• Work with Economic Development to provide them with the tools to determine the economic impact of the Air Show event to better measure the impact of the Air Show as an economic generator.
The following chart outlines the 2015 request for support from the City of Airdrie.
Increase Gift Detailed City of Airdrie Support to Budget in Kind Airdrie Public Works - Dust Control of Gravel Roads Around Airpark $ 2,500
Airdrie Municipal Enforcement (2 officers x 2 days) $ 3,000 Airdrie RCMP (2 officers x 1 day and 9 officers x 2 days) $11,981 Airdrie Fire Department Equipment Costs: Engines/Bush Buggies/ Tender/ Communication Vehicle/Command Vehicle $107,520
Manpower (18 staff x 2 days, 9 staff x 1 day) $24,844
Sub-Total $42,325 $107,520
TOTAL $149,845
In the event that the Air Show generates a financial surplus, the Air Show will use the money to:
• Provide honorariums for community not-for-profit organizations assisting with the Air Show.
• Training for Air Show volunteers
• Seed money for the next Air Show
The total projected support the Committee is requesting from the City of Airdrie for the 2015 Air Show is $149,845. City Council is being asked to endorse the recommendation of staff and support the request outlined above. The Air Show Committee will report back to Council within 90 days of the Air Show.
Boards Routed Through: N/A
Alternatives/Implications:
1. That Council endorses the request by the Airdrie Regional Air Show Committee in the amount of $149,845 (subject to 2015 budget approvals), to include: dust control of gravel roads around the Airpark, $2,500; Airdrie Fire Department staff support, $24,844; Airdrie Fire Department equipment support, $107,520; Municipal Enforcement, $3,000; and RCMP support, $11,981.
2. That Council does not endorse the Airdrie Regional Air Show Committee's request for support of the above outlined items. Should the request for support not receive Council’s endorsement, it would not be possible to stage the Air Show.
3. That Council endorses a portion of the items for the Airdrie Regional Air Show listed above.
Corporate Communications:
• Economic Development will work with the Air Show Committee and provide them with the tools to complete an economic impact study of the event.
• The City of Airdrie will be recognized as a sponsor in all Air Show publications and marketing materials.
• Corporate Communications will assist to the same level as in years past.
Recommendation:
That City Council endorses the request for support of the Airdrie Regional Air Show Committee in the amount of $149,845 (subject to 2015 budget approvals), to include: dust control of gravel roads around the Airpark, $2,500; Airdrie Fire Department staff support, $24,844; Airdrie Fire Department equipment support, $107,520; Municipal Enforcement, $3,000; and RCMP support, $11,981.
Kim Harris Presenter : Kim Harris Community Developer Department : Community Development Review ed by : Lorri Laface, Michelle Lock Attachment : N/A Appointment : Airdrie Regional Air Show Committee Members Doug Francouer, Chairman and Chris Gourlie, Vice Chairman
AGENDA REPORT
Meeting Date (M/D/Y): June 16, 2014
Subject: Stormwater Facilities and Infrastructure Service Levels
Boards Routed Through: Date: Corporate Planning Team 5/15/2014 City Council 6/16/2014
Description: In November of 2013, Council directed staff to bring back a report on Storm Pond Service Levels.
Background: Urban stormwater, whether from rain or melting snow, flushes debris and contaminants from roads, parking lots, sidewalks, rooftops, lawns, and other surfaces. Stormwater retention ponds are designed and constructed to reduce downstream flooding and erosion by controlling the peak flow, frequency of peak flow and velocity of stormwater. These ponds are also designed to trap and settle much of the solid material carried by the stormwater as sediment, which improves water quality and helps reduce contaminant loads into rivers or lakes. Structural devices, such as oil and grit separators, may be incorporated upstream of the pond system to capture oil and larger particles. Aquatic vegetation can serve as a biological filter to retain fine sediment and the contaminants bound to this sediment.
Historically, the management of stormwater quality and system maintenance of the system has been reactive, not just in the City of Airdrie, but throughout the industry. In response to the need to be more proactive in the management of stormwater, staff is presenting three service levels in this report that support this initiative:
current service levels; proposed service level to be supported; and additional premium service levels that Council may consider as value added services.
Current service levels and costs allow for the operation of stormwater facilities as utilities and not as amenities. Therefore, the current stormwater service levels were acceptable because performance was not a priority. These service levels are now being reviewed in order to provide enhancements to stormwater ponds as a way of improving water quality.
Service Levels Since 2012, considerable advancement has occurred in stormwater management. The focus has shifted from entirely reactive to incorporating preventative maintenance where resources allow. When necessary, engineering consultants have been utilized to assist with technical recommendations. These recommendations and the shift of the entire industry with respect to how stormwater systems are thought of has increased the stormwater service levels at the City of Airdrie to where they are today. The goal is to meet best maintenance practices in accordance with AirdrieOne and the regulatory requirements of Alberta Environment and Resource Development, and Environment Canada. The Water Services Department continues to advance its practices through the acquisition of additional equipment and personnel each budget cycle to continue to increase the level of service in response to improved maintenance practices and resident feedback.
In the following chart, varying service levels are presented. Activity is the maintenance routine that is performed and the Purpose explains why it is required. Improvement contains the specific improvement that can be expected by the respective activity. The improvements are as follows:
Water Quality - decreases odour and algae and improves water clarity; Aesthetics – improves the visual appeal of the pond or surrounding area; Erosion Control – reduces deterioration of banks and maintains structural soundness of pond’s perimeter; System Effectiveness – impacts the overall function of the system in a positive way; and Flow Control – ability to manually raise or lower the level of the water in a storm pond.
Under Level of Service there are three levels that are being presented. Current level is the service that is currently being provided. Proposed level is the service that is over and above current services that Water Services is recommending the City move towards. This level of service will require some increase in resources and investment and includes pilot projects to determine if Premium service level is necessary. Premium level is the service that is over and above Proposed services and would require a considerable increase in resources and investment. Since encouraging the highest quality of storm water service levels is a multi-department effort, the Action Year column outlines which year Water Services would increase the level of service from Current to Proposed.
WATER SERVICES
Level of Service Action Activity Purpose Improvement Year Current Proposed Premium Storm ponds are designed with the intent that solids in the water will Water quality; Dredging of Annual inspection indicates settle out and sink to the bottom. System N/A N/A 4 Storm Ponds silt level of 300mm Over time these solids build up effectiveness and require physical removal. All stormwater eventually Water quality; Dredging of Nose discharges into Nose Creek. Over When excessive silt Annual inspection indicates System N/A 3 Creek time sediment builds up and levels are reported silt level of 300mm effectiveness requires physical removal. As water flows overland, it carries Dredging Water quality; dirt and other solids. Over time When excessive silt Annual inspection indicates overland System N/A 3 these solids buildup and require levels are reported silt level of 300mm drainage swales effectiveness physical removal. Trouble spots cleaned in the Fall by one truck, Catch basin To improve drainage and minimize System one crew (two people) Inspect and clean 1/3 N/A 4 cleaning localized flooding. effectiveness for two weeks and as annually reported throughout the year Removes material from pipes to Storm mainlines System Reactive cleaning Clean 1/3 of system annually prevent it from flowing to the creek scheduled effectiveness; performed when failure to meet BMPs and problem N/A 4 and increasing sediment. Also cleaning Water quality occurs areas as needed prevents back-ups. Storm mainlines Contract CCTV Camera inspection of underground closed circuit Water quality, performed when failure CCTV 1/3 of system annually storm infrastructure in order to television System occurs and as part of to meet BMPs and problem N/A 5 visually see the condition of the (CCTV) video effectiveness the Engineering capital areas as needed pipe. inspected roadworks Inspected every two Outfalls discharge stormwater into Outfalls to Nose System years and deficiencies Inspected annually and Nose Creek. Filter large debris N/A 2 Creek effectiveness repaired over two-year repaired annually particles from entering the creek. period
WATER SERVICES CONTINUED
Level of Service Action Activity Purpose Improvement Current Proposed Premium Year Formalized Regular inspections enable System Inspected when failures Inspect every two years to Inspect all system inspections of response to minor maintenance 2 effectiveness are reported prevent failures components annually surface features issues before complete failure. Formalized Regular inspections enable Inspect annually to prevent inspections for System Inspected when failures response to minor maintenance failures and measure N/A 2 FAC’d storm effectiveness are reported issues before complete failure. water quality ponds To reduce the growth of blue- Pond treatment green algae. The program is Treat 6 ponds with Treat all City ponds that with Live Liquid Treat all FAC’d and non- designed to comply with the City’s Water quality greatest algae surface have 5% or greater algae 3 Micro Organisms FAC’d ponds proposed 5% tolerance (by area surface area. (LLMOs) surface area) for blue green algae Made from recycled products to Water quality; create a constructed wetland System ecosystem that introduces aquatic Installation as a trial to Installation of floating Floating effectiveness; plantings into deeper water of determine effectiveness; islands in additional constructed Aesthetics; N/A 2 storm ponds or water bodies; can use in combination with ponds if trial proved wetland island Flow control; also be involved in stabilization of LLMOs effective Erosion the banks and shoreline control protection. Installation of circulation Shallow circulation of water by Installation as a trial Circulation machines in additional injecting oxygen into the surface Water quality N/A following ineffectiveness of 4 machines ponds if trial proved layer and inhibiting algae growth LLMOs and floating island effective Infuses oxygen into water to Use in combination with promote aerobic environment by Installation as a trial floating islands for Aeration mixing the entire pond with the Water quality N/A following ineffectiveness of maximum benefit. Use if 5 machines use of compressors. circulation machine other technologies are not effective. Intended to mechanically Recirculation recirculate the water by moving Maintain if previously Water quality Unchanged N/A N/A systems water from the lowest point back installed to the highest point
WATER SERVICES CONTINUED
Level of Service Action Activity Purpose Improvement Current Proposed Premium Year Installed on a neighborhood case-by- Water fountains Added to storm pond to increase Maintained if previously case basis if installation Aesthetics Unchanged N/A and/or waterfalls visual appeal of the water body installed and operating costs are provided by area residents Control Allow for the manual adjustment of structures for the water level. The adjustment of drainage, the water allows for ponds to be Water quality, Retrofit all ponds to have Retrofit ponds identified to containment and drained in order to conduct System Maintain if currently the capability of be most beneficial to have 2 maintenance maintenance such as dredging or effectiveness, installed manually controlling installed (weirs, sluice for odour to be controlled. Also Flow control water level gates, bypass allow for water to be contained in gates) the event of a spill Uses captured runoff to water Irrigation greenspaces instead of potable systems for Maintain if previously water; a way to comply with pre- Flow control N/A N/A 2 reuse of installed development release rates into stormwater Nose Creek.
Bank Placement of rocks and/or stabilization by Erosion Repair when excessive Repairs based on annual geotextile on the shores of N/A 4 armouring with control erosion is reported inspection retention ponds. boulders
Adopted in 2014. States what is System Water quality testing for Routine water quality Drainage Bylaw and what isn’t allowed to be put Maintain current level 3/5 effectiveness reported violations testing into the storm system
OTHER DEPARMENTS
Level of Service Activity Purpose Improvement Department Current Proposed Premium Maintain current Support new No mowing and restricted chemical Erosion maintenance standards: maintenance Transitional zone usage so reduce additional control; Water cutting grasses one Parks standards proposed N/A maintenance nutrients being introduced to the quality; mower width from Operations by Parks pond. Aesthetics pathways, spot weed Operations. control as required Planting in Plants hearty enough to withstand Parks transitional zone periods being submerged in water Erosion Increase planting on all Development between Normal Increase planting for to be planted around the perimeter control; Water Maintain current ponds. Can be done in for new; Water Level and ponds with localized of retention ponds to reduce the quality; transitional zone planting combination with Parks High Water Level erosion issues impact of moving water and Aesthetics boulder armouring. Operations to stabilize banks deterioration of the banks. for existing and resist erosion Roadway Construct salt Reduction of salt released into Implement all measures maintenance as Salt Management Plan storage building in watershed encourages habitat of Best Management preventative and Best Management 2015 and sustainability and improves water Water quality Practices as identified Roads measure for Practices for Snow and permanent quality in storm ponds and Nose in City’s Salt stormwater Ice Control equipment. engineered snow Creek Management Plan quality dump in 2016 Street sweeping to pick up winter Roadway maintenance material that remains maintenance as Spring sweeping on the road and prevents it from preventative System program and ongoing entering the storm system. Less Unchanged N/A Roads measure for Effectiveness sweeping throughout cost for mainline cleaning and debris year as weather permits. reduction of silt buildup in water management bodies. Funding Both current and proposed service levels would incur operating or capital costs. Currently, all stormwater maintenance is addressed through the Utilities operating budget. As a result of storm sewer systems being historically underfunded, many cities in Canada have implemented a specific stormwater utility to offset the costs of a system that has not been specifically funded by other means. The stormwater utility funding models across the cities vary from flat fee charges to complex tiered systems based on the impervious surface area to the ratio of property size and/or property type. The earliest that these utilities have introduced user fees was as early as 2003 in Edmonton to most recently Victoria in 2014.
In Airdrie the stormwater budget is part of the Sewer Utility. The Sewer Utility funds system upgrades and improvements to the system if it fails. Richmond Hill, ON, identified that the funding from a user fee would allow for dedicated dollars to be spent on long-term planning and system upkeep without increasing the sewer utility rate. Planning for repair and replacement would help avoid costly and inconvenient situations like washed out roads, stream erosion and flooding. Halifax Water implemented a user fee because it was identified that there was a cost to the organization to operate, maintain and repair the infrastructure, and therefore there were costs to the ratepayers for those services.
The option of introducing a dedicated stormwater utility charge will be brought forward at a later date following the conclusion of the rate review conducted by the Utilities Department in the Fall of this year. At that time, there would be further details on how the City of Airdrie might implement a Stormwater Utility which would support the cost of repairs and maintenance of these specific facilities and infrastructure.
Enhancements of an aesthetic nature (e.g. fountains) that would fall under the premium service level would require funding as a local area improvement cost specifically charged to residents of the benefitting area.
Budget Estimates The increase of service level will require an increase in the necessary resources to support it, including people, equipment and funds.
The following chart identifies each service level increase from the previous chart’s identified activities. Costs and required resources are high level estimates for the purposes of this report. Environmental factors such as inflation and policy changes have not been incorporated as they are beyond the City’s control; however, the costs do include an increase for the average annual storm system infrastructure 5% growth. Furthermore, as stated above, the stormwater cost center is currently being funded from the Sewer Utility; the chart includes the transfer of funds from the Sewer cost center to the Storm cost center to more accurately reflect maintenance activities and reduce the subsidization from one Utility to another.
All funding options that would increase the service level would be brought forward for approval through the annual budget process where the cost and resources numbers will be finalized. YEAR FACILITIES & PERSONNEL ACTIVITIES BUDGET Salaries + benefits $55 560 Willowbrook Lift Station Retention pond $20 000 Canals Waterfall improvements consulting Recirculation system Bayside Recirc $10,000 Bayside water features maintenance Nose Creek recirc system Storm pond Repairs Dredging overland and Nose 5 fountains 198 km mainline Creek 47 outfalls Waterfall and water feature 2210 catchbasins maintenance $90 000 2289 manholes Fountain maintenance Reactive repairs - 34 storm ponds 0.6 FTE stormwater collection system YEAR ONE Dredging for system back
2014 ups Storm pond Treatment $30,000 Nose Creek Water Quality initiative (Bow River Basin $15 000 Council) Power (estimated) $25 000 Catch basin cleaning $25 200 Contract CCTV $10 000 Mainline cleaning $15 000 Total $295 760 Subsidized from Sanitary Utility (does not include $50 200 wages) Storm Utility Total $245 560 Baseline $253 000 Willowbrook Lift Station (Year 1 + 3%) Increase baseline to Canals Waterfall $50 200 Bayside Recirc eliminate Sanitary subsidy Bayside water features Salaries + benefits Nose Creek recirc system Condition Assessment 6 fountains Tech 0.3 FTE (start 2 irrigation pump stations inspection program) Condition Assessment Move 0.3 FTE in Program certified operators and $103 000 YEAR TWO 208 km mainline 1 FTE in general labour 2015 47 outfalls (Equipment Operator / 2210 catchbasins Laborer) from Sewer budget. No direct 2321 manholes costs. 36 storm ponds One additional fountain: 2.2 FTE $2 500 maintenance and power
Floating Island Trial $25 000 Two irrigation systems: maintenance, repair and $7 500 power Storm Utility Total $441 200 YEAR FACILITIES & PERSONNEL ACTIVITIES BUDGET WillowBrook Lift Station Baseline $454 436 Canals Waterfall (Year 2 + 3%) Bayside recirc Salaries + benefits Bayside water features 1 FTE to start pipe Nose Creek recirc system cleaning as routine 7 fountains maintenance $95 000 3 irrigation pump stations 0.3 FTE for Pipe 219 km mainline cleaning program set- 47 outfalls up 2321 catchbasins Circulation System Trial $45 000 One additional fountain: 2438 manholes $3 000 maintenance and power YEAR THREE 38 storm ponds One additional irrigation 2016 3.5 FTE system: maintenance, repair $3 500 and power Expansion of storm pond $30 000 treatment Dredging based on $55 000 inspection Floating Island Trial Expansion + maintenance $30 000 for existing island 1/3 of capital equipment cost $90 000 for flusher truck Storm Utility Total $805 936 WillowBrook Lift Station Baseline – (Year 3 + 3% less equipment Canals Waterfall $670 936 Bayside Recirc purchase and assume no Bayside water features more circulation system) Nose Creek recirc system Salaries + benefits 1 FTE to clean 1/3 of 8 fountains $75 000 4 irrigation pump stations system and 1/3 230 km mainline catchbasins YEAR FOUR Parts for equipment clean 47 outfalls $10 000 1/3 2017 2438 catchbasins Bucket machines for system 2560 manholes $140 000 cleaning 40 storm ponds One additional fountain: 4.5 FTE $3 000 maintenance and power One additional irrigation system: maintenance, repair $3 500 and power Storm Utility Total $902 436 YEAR FACILITIES & PERSONNEL ACTIVITIES BUDGET WillowBrook Lift Station Baseline Canals Waterfall (Year 4 + 3% less capital $785 310 Bayside Recirc equipment purchases) Bayside water features Salaries + benefits Nose Creek recirc system 0.5 FTE for CCTV 10 fountains program $85 000 6 irrigation pump stations 0.5 FTE certified 242 km mainline operator 47 outfalls Circulation system with built 2560 catchbasins in fountain combo unit $60 000 (rental) YEAR FIVE 2688 manholes 2018 CCTV 1/3 of system (in- 42 storm ponds $50 000 house program) 5.5 FTE Expansion of storm pond $35 000 treatment Two additional fountains: $6 000 maintenance and power Two additional irrigation system: maintenance, repair $8 000 and power Routine Water quality testing $5 000 Storm Utility Total $1 034 310
Conclusion Although Stormwater service levels have improved over that last 15 years, there is a need to continue to improve in order to meet legislation, best practices for water quality, and release rates. The proposed level of service builds on the current service levels to attempt to meet best practices on a number of components.
The effective management of stormwater is a collaborative effort between Water Services, Parks, Engineering and Roads. There are specific routines that could be implemented including, but not limited to, inspections, scheduled lifecycles, and the new thresholds that would help staff perform in a proactive manner to reduce issues. Water Services is committed to reviewing practices and determining the appropriate actions required to increase the overall service levels for the storm system.
The increases in funding over the five-year period may be offset with the introduction of the Stormwater Utility charge. Users of the system would then be funding the maintenance and upgrades that are required rather than increasing the overall tax rate to all residents. Therefore the funding model would be sustainable and the system would be kept in good repair.
Water Services will continue to investigate alternative methods for the improvement of stormwater quality. Resident expectations, community affordability, amenity value and maintenance of the system components are all to be considered when developing a new service level.
Boards Routed Through: N/A
Alternatives/Implications: Alternative #1: City Council can choose to endorse the Current Service Level and direct staff to maintain this level.
Alternative #2: City Council can choose to endorse the Current Service Level and direct staff to move toward the Proposed Service Level over a five-year period. Additional resources that are necessary to support this enhanced service level will be subject to Council approval through the annual budgeting process.
Alternative #3: City Council can choose to endorse the Premium Service Level and direct staff to bring forward the necessary resourcing to accomplish this through the annual budgeting process.
Corporate Communications: N/A
Recommendation: 1. That City Council endorses Alternative #2 of supporting the Current Service Level and directing staff to move toward the Proposed Service Level over a five-year period. Additional resources that are necessary to support this enhanced service level will be subject to Council approval through the annual budgeting process.
Glenn Archer Water Services Team Leader
Presenter: Glenn Archer Attachments: No
AGENDA REPORT
Meeting Date (M/D/Y): 6/16/2014
Subject: Transit Extension of Service to Northeast Calgary
Boards Routed Through: Date: Community Services Advisory Board 3/10/2014 City Council 3/17/2014 Community Services Advisory Board 6/9/2014 City Council 6/16/2014
Description:
Council is being presented with information about expanding the scope of the Route 4 service to include extension into northeast Calgary.
Background:
In November 2013, Airdrie Transit launched an eight-month trial service between Airdrie and CrossIron Mills Mall on weekends and statutory holidays. This service is a partnership between the City of Airdrie and CrossIron Mills Mall to provide a public transit system to augment the need for employee mobility for mall employees. This service operates on weekend and statutory holidays, when regular fixed route service within Airdrie is not provided.
As part of the service’s launch, Council requested Transit administration consider the extension of service from CrossIron Mills Mall into northeast Calgary. This report will provide an overview of the existing Route 4 service and alternatives as they relate to Council’s motion.
Eight-Month Trial Service
Airdrie Transit launched Route 4 service to CrossIron Mills on a trial basis in November 2013. The trial introduced a new feature for mall employees with the inclusion of a one-way loop through Airdrie. This loop operates in West Airdrie along main transit corridors including Main Street, 1st Avenue and 8th Street with a final stop at the existing transit stop at southbound Sierra Springs Drive at Yankee Valley Boulevard (near the Calgary Co-op).
The trial service provided valuable data and feedback from customers, the contracted service provider, CrossIron Mills management, and the general public. Comments received included no service provision from East Airdrie, concern regarding the fare structure, ability for the service to continue into Calgary, and expansion of service provision to weekdays. No feedback has been received from the Airdrie business community during the trial service.
Ridership levels on the service have been consistent; however, they did not achieve the growth levels anticipated by Transit staff. From November 2013 to April 2014, ridership achieved on the service was approximately 1,900 trips or an average of approximately 35 trips per operating day. The ridership figure includes employees traveling to and from CrossIron Mills which comprises the majority of trips provided.
The revenue model for this service is a 50/50 revenue sharing model with CrossIron Mills Mall. The Route 4 service has generated approximately $1,700 in user fees for Airdrie Transit service since launching in November 2013. This figure is based on cash and ticket users only as no revenue from monthly pass holders are calculated into this formula.
The trial service has strengthened the partnership between Airdrie Transit and CrossIron Mills. Issues have been discussed and collaboratively resolved during the trial and objectives for both organizations have been achieved. Transit staff believes this has been an effective and efficient partnership to deliver public transit services to residents. The trial service has operated without subsidy by local ratepayers and is an example of a well- managed public-private partnership.
Extension of Trial Service
As part of the original motion to approve the implementation of the Route 4 service, Council requested that Transit administration consider the extension of the service into northeast Calgary. Transit administration has worked with a number of stakeholders including ICE customers, Airdrie businesses, Calgary Transit, and CrossIron Mills management to define viable service extensions. The following two service options have been agreed upon by stakeholders for Council’s consideration.
1. Service extension on weekends and statutory holidays (based on existing service) 2. Service extension for seven-day-a-week service (new service level)
Service Extension on Weekends
Airdrie Transit currently provides Route 4 service to CrossIron Mills on weekends. Should Council approve service extension into northeast Calgary, this extension would be integrated with the existing Route 4 service. This reduces the need to operate additional fleet or provide any additional supports beyond that which is currently deployed. This model would also maintain CrossIron Mills as a valued service partner.
A number of routes were considered for service extension into northeast Calgary. This included routing to a northeast Calgary LRT terminal and a route to the BRT terminal at Northpointe. Based on discussions with representatives from Calgary Transit, a regional service providing connectivity to the City of Calgary’s LRT network is the most preferred destination. This location provides higher order transit, terminal capacity for the Airdrie Transit fleet, an existing market of customers (CrossIron Mills employees) and has potential as a market for ridership from northeast Calgary to both CrossIron Mills and Airdrie.
There would be implications to the existing schedule to accommodate the service extension into northeast Calgary. Service frequency would be reduced from the existing schedule of every 60 minutes to every 75 minutes to accommodate the additional travel time to northeast Calgary. Other service revisions to the existing route/schedule may be required to facilitate service extension. The table below outlines the potential benefits and challenges associated with service extension of weekends to northeast Calgary.
Benefits Challenges Increased connectivity with Calgary Loss of frequency on existing service Untapped public market in Calgary Loss of route loop within Airdrie Continued partnership with CrossIron Mills
The two primary benefits to extending the existing service into northeast Calgary would be the increased connectivity for Airdrie residents to access services within Calgary and the new service offering for Calgarians to use Airdrie Transit services to either CrossIron Mills or Airdrie. This would be a new service level as Airdrie Transit’s ICE service does not operate on weekends or statutory holidays. This new service offering may attract further customers to the ICE service as a result of a more convenient service.
There is also the potential to attract Calgary customers to the service. Currently, there is no public transit service between the City of Calgary and CrossIron Mills Mall. Shopping districts are typically considered a demand generator, and implementing a public transit route between Calgary and CrossIron Mills Mall may open new revenue opportunities for the service. In addition, the extension of service into northeast Calgary may provide new labour market opportunities for local businesses. Combined with the existing ICE service, there would be a seven-day-a-week service offering between the two municipalities. This service option will continue to build a regional transit culture which supports objectives within local, regional and provincial strategic plans.
The challenges with service extension relate to the implications to existing service and the current customers. The current service operates on a 60-minute frequency and provides a one-way loop within Airdrie to improve service coverage. Extending service into northeast Calgary will add additional travel time and result in less frequency and the elimination of a loop within Airdrie. Service would be reduced to a 75-minute frequency as opposed to the current 60-minute frequency. This may deter usage as the frequency may not meet the needs of the customer. In addition to reduced frequency, the current loop within Airdrie would need to be eliminated. Service would operate from a single stop in Airdrie
(southbound Sierra Springs Drive at the Co-op) to maintain service and schedule reliability. This change would remove the current loop within Airdrie on Main Street, 8 th Street and Yankee Valley Boulevard.
New Regional Service Level
Transit, like the other public and private entities within the region, continues to experience the pressures of growth management. Development in the Airdrie-Rocky View County- Calgary corridor is identifying the need for additional investment to more efficiently move people and goods. Road networks are reaching capacity and limited transportation alternatives exist.
Airdrie Transit is experiencing these pressures. Interest in regional transit transcends our current ICE customers to include the general public, businesses in Airdrie and Rocky View County, and Calgarians. Many of the requests are for services that operate outside of the current hours of operation to new destinations throughout the region.
While there is latent demand for additional regional services, there are limited resources currently available to meet the demand. Airdrie Transit’s fleet has been procured to meet Council’s current service levels of ICE, local and ACCESS Airdrie services. Implementation of any new service levels will have a requirement for existing or new investment. The table below outlines the benefits and challenges of implementing a new regional service level to northeast Calgary.
Benefits Challenges Improved regional mobility Financial Investment Partnership opportunities with private sector Potential contraction of existing service Potential revenue opportunities
Implementation of a new regional public transit service operating beyond the current scope of the regional ICE service will improve regional mobility for employment, education, medical and social engagements. Residents will have another transportation alternative to the private vehicle to complete a range of trips. In addition, the service would operate with a fully accessible fleet for customers with mobility restrictions.
This new service may attract new partnerships in providing regional public transit services. Major local and regional employers have indicated the desire to see improved employment mobility between the three municipalities (Airdrie, Rocky View County and the City of Calgary) and such a service could deliver on this outcome. These new partnerships could assist in establishing a new model for planning, implementation and operation of regional transit service within the Calgary region with the private sector playing a pivotal role in terms of the finances and transit service planning.
Expanding regional transit services is an ambitious project and will require significant resources for successful implementation and a sustainable future. The critical piece to this service would be the initial and long-term investment in fleet and operations. As a new service, this would go beyond Airdrie Transit’s existing means to provide safe, reliable, accessible and affordable services in addition to a new regional service. Council would have to consider this resource requirement to meet service levels.
Alternatives/Implications:
Alternative #1 – Maintain Existing Service Levels
The trial service operating between Airdrie and CrossIron Mills Mall is nearing completion. Transit administration has monitored the performance of the service in collaboration with management from CrossIron Mills Mall; and while the anticipated ridership levels were not achieved during the trial, it did reach other outcomes including building a successful public- private model.
Council may elect to continue the current Route 4 program as regular service operating on the current route and schedules. Maintaining the existing service level would have a positive implication on the 2014 budget. Revenues were not originally budgeted to the year and thus a positive variance on revenues from user fees would be experienced. The service hours are covered under a servicing agreement with CrossIron Mills Mall, and thus there would be no impact to expenditures.
Alternative #2 – Extension of Route 4 Service to a northeast Calgary LRT Station
Continue to provide Route 4 service between Airdrie and CrossIron Mills Mall with a service extension into a northeast Calgary LRT Station. This service would operate within the parameters of the existing Route 4 service on weekends and statutory holidays from approximately 7:30 A.M. until approximately 11:00 P.M.
Extension of service will provide new transportation alternatives for Airdrie residents to access programs and services in Calgary. This would provide seven-day-a-week service coverage to the City of Calgary when combined with the existing Intercity Express service. Airdrie would become the first municipality in the Calgary Region to have seven-day-a- week public transit service to Calgary.
In addition to this improved regional connectivity, the service would enter a new market for Calgarians seeking transportation alternatives to CrossIron Mills or Airdrie. This untapped market has significant ridership and revenue potential to improve the overall performance of transit services. This would also assist local businesses attract labour from northeast Calgary to help sustain or grow their existing business.
There are implications to extending the existing Route 4 service into northeast Calgary. Revisions to the existing route and schedule would be required resulting in reduced
frequency, elimination of the loop within Airdrie, and an impact to existing and future customers.
Should Council decide to revise the existing service for extension into northeast Calgary, Transit administration would recommend implementation effective July 5, 2014, to promote the use of this service to connect with the LRT network to attend the Calgary Stampede.
Alternative #3 - Extension of Route 4 Service to a northeast Calgary LRT Station with additional service frequency
Implement the extension of Route 4 service to northeast Calgary as per Alternative #2, while making further investment in service levels to provide a 40-minute frequency.
A 40-minute service frequency would be an improvement from the proposed 75-minute frequency as outlined in Alternative #2. The improved frequency levels may attract additional usage and encourage residents to use the service as an alternative to private vehicle trips.
Expanding service frequency may have a net positive impact on other transit services. Ridership levels on other Airdrie Transit services including the regional ICE service and local transit may experience an increase as residents become more aware of other services available. These changes in travel behaviour can take 6-12 months to develop accounting for other changes that are often made in tandem.
The largest implication of expanding service frequency from 75-minutes to 40-minutes will be to operating costs. A service operating on a 40-minute frequency will require an additional bus and additional service hours. Based on the proposed routing and schedules the annual cost is estimated at $100,000. User fees from customers would cover a portion of this service; however, it is anticipated that the initial service will be primarily subsidized by ratepayers. Initial estimates suggest this subsidy in the range of 65-75% for the first year of operations.
Alternative #4 – New Investment in Regional Transit Service
Direct Transit administration to begin planning a new regional transit service operating between Airdrie, Rockyview County and Calgary on a seven-day-a-week basis.
Implementation of a new regional transit service would require additional investment in capital and operations as existing resources are deployed on Council’s approved transit service levels. Transit administration would provide Council with a complete business case including potential partnerships, funding models, initial and ongoing expenditures, capital requirements and alignment with local and regional plans in a future report. Such a report would require significant administrative time with a targeted date to report back to Council by December 2014.
As the business case would not return to Council until December 2014, any decision regarding service levels would be delayed until the 2015 budget deliberation process. If approved, service implementation of a new regional transit service would be proposed for 2016.
Alternative #5 – Elimination of Route 4 Service
Council may elect to eliminate the Route 4 service and provide notice to our service partner, CrossIron Mills Mall, of the decision to end service.
The removal of the Route 4 service will reduce transportation alternatives for Airdrie residents to access employment and services outside of the municipality. Regional mobility has been identified as a critical factor in local, regional and provincial strategic plans and a decision to end service would reduce Transit’s ability to deliver these outcomes.
Ending the Route 4 service may have long-term implications on regional transit service planning. Transit administration has viewed CrossIron Mills Mall as a strategic hub in providing safe, accessible, reliable regional public transit service. CrossIron Mills Mall has been a valued service partner providing financial compensation for the operating costs of the service. Ending the service may impact this service delivery model and result in the City self-financing future regional transit initiatives.
Should Council decide to end the service, Transit administration would request that service continue until July 27, 2014 to provide CrossIron Mills Mall sufficient time to make alternate arrangements with another service provider.
Boards Routed Through:
At the June 9, 2014, meeting of the Community Services Advisory Board, the Board carried Alternative #2 in a vote of five to two. Members of the Board acknowledged their support for Alternative #4 appreciating such a service level may not be achievable in the short-term. Members of the Board also provided feedback regarding the proposal of eliminating the internal loop in Airdrie, depreciation of the buses and the lack of service coverage for residents in East Airdrie.
Recommendation: That Council endorse the recommendation of the Community Services Advisory Board of Alternative #2, extension of Route 4 service to a northeast Calgary LRT Station effective July 5, 2014.
Chris MacIsaac Transit Coordinator
Presenter: Chris MacIsaac:
AGENDA REPORT
Meeting Date (M/D/Y): 6/16/2014
Subject: 2015 Airdrie Transit User Fees
Boards Routed Through: Date: Community Services Advisory Board 6/9/2014 City Council 6/16/2014
Description:
Staff is presenting market comparisons and recommendations for user fees on Airdrie Transit services in 2015.
Background:
Transit user fees have been determined based on three factors. These three factors are:
1. Comparable user fees of similar sized municipalities
As a member of the Canadian Urban Transit Association (CUTA), the City of Airdrie has access to various national reports on transit operating data. These include reports on conventional transit, specialized transit, fleet, crime on public transit and ridership.
Each year CUTA compiles data from all member transit properties and produces an annual Canadian Transit Fact Book. Transit administration utilizes the data from this Fact Book for benchmarking, budgeting and performing comparisons such as user fees. CUTA performs further analysis of municipal transit properties by categorizing them into population sub-groups.
2. Council resolution – Intercity Express (ICE) recovery rates
In 2012, Council made a resolution that the regional Intercity Express service should operate on a cost recovery model of operating costs. The current user fee structure reflects this resolution with Transit administration reviewing the service bi-annually to ensure alignment with Council’s resolution. Since 2012, the cost of a monthly ICE adult pass has increased by 33% to a cost-recovery outcome.
3. The ability to pay at the local level
Airdrie Transit’s Local and ACCESS Airdrie services operate without a Council adopted recovery rate. Should the community and Council desire to increase user fees or establish a set recovery rate similar to the ICE service, user fees will undoubtedly have to increase substantially. Increasing user fees to cover a higher portion of operating expenditures may have a negative impact on ridership as the new user fee structure may exceed the public’s ability or desire to pay for the current service levels.
Transit Fare Structure
Airdrie Transit has adopted a practice of rewarding multi-time users with a better price point per trip. This structure is designed to encourage regular usage and discourage single trips. For example, a user traveling two times a day on the local transit service for a month would pay $84 in an average month using the current cash fare. That same user could purchase a $60 local transit monthly pass and travel an unlimited number of times in that same month.
Two separate fare categories have been created reflecting Council’s resolution for recovery of operating costs of the ICE service. These categories are local transit services and ICE.
Local Transit Services
Local services include conventional fixed-route service, demand-responsive Dial-A-Bus, and ACCESS Airdrie paratransit services. These services share one fare structure for ease of application for both the customer and transit operations. User fees on local transit services have remained at the current levels since 2007 when the fares were reduced.
Transit administration is recommending the user fee for local transit and ACCESS paratransit to remain parallel. This will reduce confusion to the customer as consistent fares will be charged to both service levels while reducing the number of fare media products managed and distributed by administration.
The tables below outline the current fare structures for Council’s endorsed benchmark communities in Alberta and CUTA’s list of comparable communities with population less than 50,000 residents.
Table 1 - Local Transit (Council endorsed benchmarks) Transit Property Cash Regular Adult Pass Youth Senior Fare Ticket Pass Pass Airdrie $2.00 $1.75 $60.00 $45.00 $45.00 Grande Prairie $2.00 $1.70 $54.00 $43.00 $27.00
Lethbridge $3.00 $2.25 $77.00 $62.00 $28.00 Medicine Hat $2.75 $2.20 $64.75 $35.50 $40.25 Red Deer $2.40 $2.15 $65.00 $57.00 $57.00 St Albert $3.00 $2.33 $69.00 $69.00 $69.00 Average $2.53 $2.06 $64.96 $51.92 $44.38
Table #1 identifies that Airdrie and Grande Prairie share the lowest local cash and ticket fares in Alberta. It is also important to note that both Airdrie and Grande Prairie provide the least amount of service per capita when compared to the other communities as per the 2013 Transit Investment Strategy.
Table 2 - Local Transit (CUTA comparable communities) Transit Property Cash Regular Adult Pass Youth Senior Fare Ticket Pass Pass Airdrie, AB $2.00 $1.75 $60.00 $45.00 $45.00 Bow Valley, AB $2.00 $1.75 $30.00 $15.00 $15.00 Miramichi, NB $3.00 $2.70 $72.00 $60.00 $60.00 Corner Brook, NL $2.50 $2.20 $70.00 $55.00 $55.00 Belleville, On $2.40 $2.23 $72.00 $57.00 $50.00 Cobourg, On $2.00 $1.60 $60.00 $50.00 $30.00 Cornwall, On $2.75 $2.20 $62.00 $52.00 $40.00 Loyalist Township, On $2.50 $2.15 $68.25 $50.50 $46.25 Stratford, On $2.75 $2.50 $57.00 $47.00 $47.00 Timmins, On $2.50 $2.50 $70.00 $55.00 $55.00 Welland, On $2.75 $2.20 $69.00 $59.00 $52.00 Charlottetown, PEI $2.25 $2.00 $65.00 $45.00 $45.00 Moose Jaw, Sk $2.25 $2.03 $58.00 $46.00 $29.00 Prince Albert, Sk $2.25 $2.03 $67.50 $52.50 $52.50 Whitehorse, Yk $2.50 $2.30 $62.00 $40.00 $26.00 Yellowknife, NWT $2.50 $2.27 $62.00 $62.00 $40.00 Average $2.43 $2.15 $62.80 $49.44 $42.98
Table #2 provides a broad spectrum of transit properties operating across the country. The findings are similar to those in Table #1 identifying Airdrie’s fare structure to be less than the average in many fare categories.
Local Transit Services – Administration’s Fare Structure Recommendations
Transit administration is recommending fares on local transit services increase effective January 1, 2015. This increase reflects user fees in comparable municipalities and improves cost recovery from users fees.
Local Transit service users fees have remained at their current levels since 2007. Transit administration is recommending user fees increase for all local transit services including
conventional fixed route, demand-responsive Dial-A-Bus, and ACCESS Airdrie services. Local Transit service user fees will be reviewed on an annual basis with the intent for these fees to incrementally increase to align with other comparable municipalities.
Table 3 – Transit Administration’s Recommended 2015 Local Transit Service Fare Structure Current Transit Proposed Transit % Fare Fare Increase Cash Fare $2.00 $2.25 13% Ticket Booklet (10 tickets) $17.50 $20.00 14% Adult Monthly Pass $60.00 $65.00 8% Student/Senior Monthly Pass $45.00 $47.50 6%
Transit administration is recommending an increase to all fares including cash, tickets and monthly passes. Cash and ticket booklets account for the largest increase in terms of percentage as these forms of payment incur higher administrative costs to collect and process. This is an incremental increase to move Transit user fees to better align with comparable municipalities. Future changes will align Airdrie Transit fees with comparable communities.
Based on current projections, the recommended fare structure is anticipated to generate between $10,000 to $15,000 in additional local transit user fee revenue in 2015.
Local Transit Services – Transit Riders Support Program (TRSP) Recommended 2015 Fare Structure
The City of Airdrie is committed to keeping transit accessible to everyone. Individuals who meet low-income qualifications (by household income) may be eligible to ride for a reduced rate. Transit administration is recommending the continuation of this program with fares set approximately 20% less than full fare for all Airdrie Transit services.
Table 4 – Transit Administration’s Recommended 2015 TRSP Local Transit Fare Structure Current Transit Proposed Transit % Fare Fare Discount Cash Fare $1.50 $1.75 22% Ticket Booklet (10 tickets) $17.50 $20.00 0% Adult Monthly Pass $45.00 $47.50 27% Student/Senior Monthly Pass $33.75 $40.00 16%
Airdrie Transit currently provides no discounted ticket booklets under the TRSP program. Discounts are provided for cash and monthly passes only.
Intercity Express (ICE) Service
The regional ICE service currently operates two routes into downtown Calgary during peak morning and afternoon hours. The service has expanded from three daily trips in 2010 to five daily trips in 2014.
The regional ICE service operates on a Council approved principle of cost-recovery on operating costs. This was adopted in 2012 and Transit administration has made adjustments to the ICE fare structure to achieve this outcome.
Table 5 – Regional Transit Services Transit Property Cash Regular Adult Youth Senior Fare Ticket Pass Pass Pass Airdrie, AB $8.00 $6.50 $195.00 $150.00 $150.00 Bow Valley, AB $6.00 $5.00 $80.00 $40.00 $40.00 Leduc, AB $5.00 $4.50 $75.00 $75.00 $75.00 Spruce Grove, AB $6.00 n/a $130.00 $130.00 $130.00 St. Albert, AB $5.75 $4.08 $111.00 $97.50 $58.25 Strathcona, AB $6.00 $4.20 $103.00 $93.00 $28.00 Translink, BC (Zone 3) $5.50 $4.20 $170.00 $52.00 $52.00 Saint John, NB (Comex) $3.50 $3.30 $109.00 n/a n/a Halifax, NS (MetroX) $3.50 $3.00 $111.00 n/a n/a Niagara Region, On $6.00 $4.50 $160.00 $130.00 $130.00 Ottawa, On $4.80 $4.50 $122.00 $92.50 $40.00 York Region, On (2 Zone) $5.00 $4.30 $177.00 $144.00 $85.00 Charlottetown, PEI $7.00 $6.30 $200.00 n/a n/a RTL, PQ (Tram Zone 5) n/a n/a $156.00 $93.50 $93.50 Average $5.54 $4.53 $135.64 $99.77 $80.16
Table 5 identifies the City’s fares are significantly higher than the average of other regional transit service providers from across Canada.
Table 6 – Regional Private Providers Private Property Cash Regular Adult Pass Youth Senior Fare Ticket Pass Pass First Canada $17.00 $7.50 $265.00 $265.00 $265.00 Southland $15.00 n/a $254.00 $254.00 $254.00 Average $16.00 $7.50 $259.50 $259.50 $259.50
Table 6 identifies the City’s fares are between 13-50% less than those charged by private motor coach operators in the Calgary Region.
ICE Services – Administration’s Fare Structure Recommendations
Transit administration is recommending fares on the ICE service increase effective January 1, 2015. This increase reflects Council’s direction for the regional ICE service to recover the operating costs for service provision.
Table 8 – Transit Administration’s Recommended 2015 ICE Service Fare Structure Current Transit Proposed Transit % Fare Fare Increase Cash Fare $8.00 $9.00 13% Ticket Booklet (10 tickets) $65.00 $75.00 15% Adult Monthly Pass $195.00 $200.00 3% Student/Senior Monthly Pass $150.00 $155.00 3%
The recommended fare structure is anticipated to generate between $40,000 to $45,000 in additional ICE revenue from user fees in 2015.
ICE Services - Transit Riders Support Program (TRSP) Recommended 2015 Fare Structure
The City of Airdrie is committed to keeping transit accessible to everyone. Individuals who meet low-income qualifications (by household income) may be eligible to ride for a reduced rate. Transit administration is recommending the continuation of this program with fares set approximately 20% less than full fare for all Airdrie Transit services.
Table 9 – Transit Administration’s Recommended 2015 TRSP ICE Fare Structure Current Transit Proposed Transit % Fare Fare Discount (Regular) Cash Fare $8.00 $9.00 0% Ticket Booklet (10 tickets) $65.00 $75.00 0% Adult Monthly Pass $150.00 $155.00 23% Student/Senior Monthly Pass $125.00 $125.00 19%
There are currently no TRSP discounted fares for cash or ticket booklets.
Alternatives/Implications:
Alternative #1
Endorse Transit administration’s recommended user fee increases to regional ICE, local and paratransit service. This increase would be across all fare payment types including cash, tickets and monthly passes.
Transit administration believes the level of increase (between 3-14%) is reasonable given the market comparable communities and factoring in Council’s existing direction. There is an inherit risk with increasing user fees and its implications on ridership levels. Administration believes this risk is in balance with the perceived value of the services provided.
The increase to user fees is anticipated to improve the overall cost recovery performance of Airdrie Transit services. An increase in user fees is projected to result in additional annual revenues between of $50,000-$60,000. Approximately 75% of this projected revenue is anticipated from the regional ICE service and the remaining 25% from local services including local fixed route and ACCESS Airdrie paratransit.
Alternative #2
Maintain Transit user fees at the current rates.
This alternative will have implications on the cost recovery achieved by each service level and may include the regional ICE service not achieving Council’s direction of a cost neutral service level.
A second implication of maintaining user fees at the current rates is how to implement future user fee increases. If user fees are maintained at a set level for an extended period, user fees will need to increase exponentially higher in the future to address the revenue-to- cost gap. When implemented, this user fee increase to address the fare structure will have a direct impact on ridership, revenues and future transit usage behaviour. Transit administration believes an annual review of user fees addresses these concerns and allows for incremental increases in user fees to meet Council’s desired outcomes.
Alternative #3
Adopt alternative user fees based on criteria not currently utilized in the fare structure modeling. This may include a flat percentage increase to a service, for example, a 5% increase to all regional ICE fare types.
This implication would not take into consideration the additional expenditures associated with cash handling. Transit administration are recommending that cash fares and tickets increase by the largest percentage to account for the additional costs to transit operations including staff time, equipment, and cash handling processes and procedures. The fare structure as presented in Alternative #1 account for these costs.
Boards Routed Through:
At the June 9, 2014, meeting of the Community Services Advisory Board, the Board unanimously carried Alternative #1. The Board confirmed the ICE service’s ability to achieve Council’s cost-recovery resolution.
Recommendation: That Council endorse the recommendation of the Community Services Advisory Board of Alternative #1 which includes an increase in Airdrie Transit user fees for regional ICE, local and paratransit services effective January 1, 2015.
Chris MacIsaac Transit Coordinator
Presenter: Chris MacIsaac Attachments: City of Airdrie Transit Fees & Charges 2015
CITY OF AIRDRIE FEE/CHARGE NO. F-006/2007
FEES AND CHARGES Page 1 of 3
CITY OF AIRDRIE – FEES AND CHARGES TRANSIT
Effective Date: ___June 4, 2007____Revision Date: June 9, 2014
PHILOSOPHY:
Intercity Express
The Intercity Express service is designed to operate on a 100% cost-recovery model supported by fare box recovery (user fees). This includes recovering all operating expenditures (not including capital or depreciation of the assets). The cost-recovery resolution was adopted by City Council in February 2012 and applies to the Intercity Express service only.
Local Transit
Local Transit fares are reviewed annually using the annual Canadian Urban Transit Association’s (CUTA) “Fare Structure Details of Canadian Transit Systems” publication. Airdrie Transit evaluates fare structure against two market rates: fares by province and fare by population group. Evaluating fare by province ensures transit fees are comparable with provincial transit properties. Evaluating fare by population group ensures transit fees are set at a consistent level with communities from across Canada grouped with a population less than 50,000.
ACCESS Airdrie
ACCESS Airdrie fares are reviewed annually using the annual CUTA “Specialized Transit Services Fact Book” publication. ACCESS Airdrie fare structure is evaluated based on province, by population group (less than 50,000) and the fare structure of the Local transit system.
Transit Rider Support Program
Transit Rider Support Program is reviewed annually. Rates are set approximately 20% less than full fare for all Airdrie Transit services.
CITY OF AIRDRIE FEE/CHARGE NO. F-006/2007
FEES AND CHARGES Page 2 of 3
FEE/CHARGE:
FEE/CHARGE FEE/CHARGE SERVICE/PRODUCT 03/01/2013 01/01/2015 GST Local Transit Cash $ 2.00 $ 2.25 No Children (Under 6) (Limit of 4) N/C N/C No Ticket Booklet (10 per booklet) $ 17.50 $ 20.00 No Adult Monthly Pass $ 60.00 $ 65.00 No Youth/Senior Monthly Pass $ 45.00 $ 47.50 No
Transit Rider Subsidy Program Cash $ 1.50 $ 1.75 No Children (Under 6) (Limit of 4) N/C N/C No Ticket Booklet (10 per booklet) $ 17.50 $ 20.00 No Adult Monthly Pass $ 45.00 $ 47.50 No Youth/Senior Monthly Pass $ 33.75 $ 40.00 No
ACCESS Airdrie Cash $ 2.00 $ 2.25 No Children (Under 6) (Limit of 4) N/C N/C No Ticket Book (10 per booklet) $ 17.50 $ 20.00 No Adult Monthly Pass $ 60.00 $ 65.00 No Youth/Senior Monthly Pass $ 45.00 $ 47.50 No
Intercity Express (ICE) Cash $ 8.00 $ 9.00 No Cash - Youth/Senior/Student $ 8.00 $ 9.00 No Children (Under 6) (Limit of 4) N/C N/C No Ticket Booklet (10 per booklet) $ 65.00 $ 75.00 No Adult Monthly Pass $ 195.00 $ 200.00 No Youth/Senior/Student Monthly Pass $ 150.00 $ 155.00 No ACCESS Airdrie Eligible $ 150.00 $ 155.00 No Adult Transit Rider Subsidy Program $ 150.00 $ 155.00 No Youth/Senior Transit Rider Subsidy Program $ 125.00 $ 125.00 No
CITY OF AIRDRIE FEE/CHARGE NO. F-006/2007
FEES AND CHARGES Page 3 of 3
______Date Director/Manager
______Date City Clerk
AGENDA REPORT
Meeting Date (M/D/Y): 6/16/2014
Subject: Proposed Bert Church Theatre Fees & Charges
Boards Routed Through: Date: Community Services Advisory Board 6/9/2014 City Council 6/16/2014
Description:
Staff is presenting proposed fees and charges to be implemented at the Bert Church Theatre for the 2014-2015 season.
Background:
Rates and fees at the Bert Church Theatre (BCT) have traditionally been calculated using an industry standard “per seat” basis. The per seat principle essentially determines the level of production and size of events that a venue is capable of accommodating, which in turn provides an accurate assessment of what the market value for the facility is regardless of the nature of the event being staged in the venue. This value also takes into consideration other elements such as cost recovery regarding staff and other venue resources. This is the best method to determine fair and competitive user rates for the theatre facility and will likely remain so until a new standard emerges.
New Rental Event Classifications
The BCT expansion project was completed in October 2013. As a result of the construction, the general layout of the venue was adapted to allow for new configurations of rental events not previously possible in the former space. The customary rental booking, previously founded on a public attendance basis only, has now evolved into two distinct booking events; Closed events and Public events. A closed event utilizes the auditorium and dressing rooms only. There is no audience in attendance and therefore no client access to the new public spaces is required. A public event has ticketed audience members in attendance and utilizes the new lobby space and public washrooms. These event classifications are used widely throughout the industry, and when the per seat value assessment method is applied to them, the result is an accurate measure of facility market value as compared to other similar facilities.
Comparison Rates of Similar Regional Facilities
Table 1 and Table 2 below use the per seat assessment method to compare the current BCT rates to two other similar venues in the Alberta region; Horizon Stage in Spruce Grove and The Arden Theatre in St. Albert. These two facilities are chosen to compare to on an annual basis, given that all three venues provide similar programming and services to their respective communities. These two regional theatres are also selected for comparison as they provide appropriate benchmarking aspects with one facility being slightly smaller than BCT (Horizon Stage) and one being slightly larger (The Arden).
Upon review of the “Cost per Seat” comparison columns with regards to the current rates for BCT versus the current rates of Horizon Stage and The Arden Theatre, both tables show that BCT generally ranks in between the two comparison venues in terms of fees, which aligns with the production capabilities and level of services offered by each venue.
Table 1 specifically compares facility rates for private or “Closed” events, and Table 2 compares facility rates for “Public” events.
Note: There is only one standard BCT rate schedule to currently use for both comparisons.
Table 1 - Current User Fees and Cost per Seat Comparisons / Regional Theatres
Closed Events – No Audience
Horizon Stage - Spruce Grove 5 hr. Rental Cost per Seat 8 hr. Rental Cost per Seat
318 Seats
Local non-profit groups $250.00 $0.79 $400.00 $1.26
Local Commercial / Outside NFP $360.00 $1.13 $600.00 $1.89
Non-Local business / commercial $580.00 $1.82 $880.00 $2.77
Bert Church Theatre 5 hr. Rental Cost per Seat 8 hr. Rental Cost per Seat
377 Seats
Local non-profit groups $325.00 $0.86 $500.00 $1.33
Local Commercial / Outside NFP $610.00 $1.62 $850.00 $2.25
Non-Local business / commercial $785.00 $2.08 $1,100.00 $2.92
The Arden - St. Albert 5 hr. Rental Cost per Seat 8 hr. Rental Cost per Seat
509 Seats
Local non-profit groups $475.00 $0.93 $650.00 $1.28
Local Commercial / Outside NFP $760.00 $1.49 $815.00 $1.60
Non-Local business / commercial $890.00 $1.75 $1,155.00 $2.27
The current BCT cost per seat figures associated with the five and eight hour rental periods for the Local Commercial user group puts the venue notably out of market when compared to the larger regional centre in St. Albert. The new proposed rates for this particular schedule are as below.
Bert Church Theatre 5 hr. Rental Cost per Seat 8 hr. Rental Cost per Seat
Local Commercial / Outside NFP $500.00 $1.33 $750.00 $1.99
The new proposed rates present as an actual reduction in user fees, but it should be remembered that these rates are for a closed event, where only the non-public areas of the facility are being used. This adjustment is required to bring these specific BCT rates back into line with other venues offering the same closed events.
Table 2 - Current User Fees and Cost per Seat Comparisons / Regional Theatres
Public Events – Audience in Attendance
Horizon Stage - Spruce Grove 5 hr. Rental Cost per Seat 8 hr. Rental Cost per Seat
318 Seats
Local Non-Profit groups * $310.00 $0.97 $460.00 $1.45
Local Commercial / Outside NFP $460.00 $1.45 $700.00 $2.20
Non-Local Commercial $660.00 $2.08 $960.00 $3.02
Bert Church Theatre 5 hr. Rental Cost per Seat 8 hr. Rental Cost per Seat
377 Seats
Local Non-Profit groups * $325.00 $0.86 $500.00 $1.33
Local Commercial / Outside NFP $610.00 $1.62 $850.00 $2.25
Non-Local Commercial $785.00 $2.08 $1,100.00 $2.92
The Arden - St. Albert 5 hr. Rental Cost per Seat 8 hr. Rental Cost per Seat
509 Seats
Local Non-Profit groups n/a n/a $760.00 $1.49 Local Commercial / Outside NFP n/a n/a $1,280.00 $2.51
Non-Local Commercial n/a n/a $1,650.00 $3.24
The figures in Table 2 above reveal a slight inconsistency in the per seat values of the facility rental periods where the BCT local non-profit groups are concerned. The difference is negligible however in staff’s opinion and is better left as is to ensure as much affordable access to the facility as possible for these groups. The figures above also reveal another variation in rates however, specifically where the BCT non-local commercial renters are concerned. The numbers indicate that an increase in fees for this user group for both rental periods is warranted.
This increase will bring the BCT rates into better alignment with the comparison venues, ensure that non-local renters pay a fair portion of fees, and also serve to help offset the facility fees for the local groups, particularly the non-profits. Staff is recommending the increase below for Public events:
Bert Church Theatre 5 hr. Rental Cost per Seat 8 hr. Rental Cost per Seat
Non-Local Commercial $850.00 $2.25 $1,250.00 $3.32
Comparison Rates of Major Centre Facilities
The per seat assessment method is also used to compare current BCT facility rates to the rates of other venues in the nearest major centre (Calgary) which offer similar services to the public. The facilities listed below were also selected for comparison based on their audience capacity relative to BCT. While the venues below provide comparable services, it should be noted that their overall production capabilities and general resources do exceed those of BCT. This is reflected in the per seat comparisons below in Table 3.
Note: As the major centre facilities do not offer distinct rates to different user groups, the comparisons are made using the Bert Church Theatre’s Non-Local Commercial rate only for a more accurate evaluation.
Table 3 - Current User Fees and Cost per Seat Comparisons / Calgary Theatres
Bert Church Theatre 5 hrs. (min.) Cost per Seat 8 hrs. (public) Cost per Seat 377 Seats
Non-Local Commercial $785.00 $2.08 $1,100.00 $2.92
U of C / Eckhardt-Gramatte Hall 1 Perf/1 Day Cost per Seat 2 Perf's/1 Day Cost per Seat 384 Seats (total) All user groups $1,100.00 $2.86 $1,650.00 $4.30
Epcor Centre / Martha Cohen Theatre Mon-Thurs Cost per Seat Fri-Sun Cost per Seat 386 Seats (8 hours) (8 hours) All user groups $1,750.00 $4.53 $2,000.00 $5.18
Mt. Royal / Leacock Theatre 5 hrs. (min.) Cost per Seat Day Cost per Seat 314 Seats (10 hrs. max) All user groups $1,105.00 $3.52 $1,875.00 $5.97
The comparison rates for the BCT in Table 3 above reveal an opportunity to close the market gap slightly against other somewhat more complex and technologically advanced centres, which still serve a similar customer base. A suitable increase in this case could also still maintain an appropriate comparison to the aforementioned regional theatres. Staff is recommending only the same increase as presented in the previous regional theatre comparison.
Bert Church Theatre 5 hr. Rental Cost Per Seat 8 hr. Rental Cost Per Seat
Non-Local Commercial $850.00 $2.25 $1,250.00 $3.32
Year Over Year Increase
The proposed facility rates in this report represent no increase for local users of the facility. Local non-profit rates remain static for closed and public events as the market bears it out, and it will keep public events accessible for this user group. Non-local users of the facility will see the only increase, as they account for the majority use of the theatre facility each season in terms of rental based events and utilize the venue’s resources more than any other user group. In terms of BCT facility rates, the proposed new fees would present as below in Table 4.
Table 4 – Current and Proposed Theatre Facility Rates
Current Rates – Closed Events Bert Church Theatre 5 hr. Rental 8 hr. Rental Seat 377 s
Local non-profit groups $325.00 $500.00
Local Commercial / Outside NFP $610.00 $850.00
Non-Local business / commercial $785.00 $1,100.00
Proposed Rates – Closed Events Bert Church Theatre 5 hr. Rental % Increase 8 hr. Rental % Increase Seat 377 s
Local non-profit groups $325.00 0% $500.00 0%
Local Commercial / Outside NFP $500.00 0% $750.00 0%
Non-Local business / commercial $785.00 0% $1,100.00 0%
Current Rates – Public Events Bert Church Theatre 5 hr. Rental 8 hr. Rental Seat 377 s
Local non-profit groups $325.00 $500.00
Local Commercial / Outside NFP $610.00 $850.00
Non-Local business / commercial $785.00 $1,100.00
Proposed Rates – Public Events Bert Church Theatre 5 hr. Rental % Increase 8 hr. Rental % Increase
377 Seats
Local Non-Profit groups * $325.00 0% $500.00 0%
Local Commercial / Outside NFP $610.00 0% $850.00 0% Non-Local Commercial $850.00 $1,250.00 8.3% 13.6%
High Season Rental Periods
In addition to the proposed facility rates in the previous tables, Administration has also implemented a cap to the number of hours available per day for weekend facility rentals from March 1 to June 30. These hours align with industry standards, best practices, and current Theatre staff resources. . New Community Spaces
As a result of the expansion project construction, additional community spaces were created in the facility where they did not exist before. These new auxiliary spaces at BCT require their own standalone user rates as they are able to be effectively used for various public and private events without utilizing the auditorium space. These proposed rates take into consideration cost recovery elements regarding staff resources and furnishing / equipment costs similar to the auditorium rates without the “per seat” consideration, as it is obviously not relative. These proposed new rates are as below in Table 5.
Table 5
Proposed Rates – New Auxiliary Spaces
Green Lobby Multi-Purpose Room Room Local non-profit groups $80.00 $45.00 $40.00 Local Commercial / Outside NFP $130.00 $75.00 $50.00 Non-Local business / commercial $180.00 $105.00 $75.00
Annual Implementation Date of New Fees
While the BCT annual operating budget is based on the City of Airdrie’s fiscal year, the annual services that the Theatre provides to the community are program based. This means that one “year” or “season” of service to the community begins in early autumn and runs into late summer, which of course extends from one municipal budget year into another. When these program rates are adjusted on a fiscal year basis, what the facility user groups experience is an increase in fees halfway through the season. Theatre management is proposing that in addition to all the proposed facility rates being submitted for approval, that Council approves an annual implementation date of July 1st in any year where user group rates are adjusted or newly added. This will be much more beneficial for operations from a budgetary standpoint and still allow for
effective third and fourth quarter variance forecasting for the staff on an annual basis.
Alignment with Airdrie One:
The proposed rates, in addition to the existing Priority Booking Policy, will ensure that this critical cultural facility continues to contribute to Airdrie’s sense of identity, place and community. It will also ensure that the local community has the means to express itself in a variety of ways and in a variety of formal and informal venues.
Boards Routed Through:
On June 9, 2014, the Community Services Advisory Board endorsed the proposed BCT facility user fees as presented in Table 4 and Table 5, and endorsed the newly proposed annual fee implementation date of July 1, beginning in 2014.
Alternatives/Implications:
1. Approve the proposed BCT facility user fees as presented in Table 4 and Table 5, and approve the newly proposed annual fee implementation date of July 1, beginning in 2014. This will ensure affordable access to all the new community spaces and keep the entire facility competitively priced with both regional and major centre venues. 2. Approve the new BCT facility user fees in Table 4 and Table 5 only, and keep the annual implementation date the same as it is now. This will still ensure affordable access to all the new community spaces within the facility, but it will continue to result in rate increases halfway through each season and a more difficult seasonal budgeting process. 3. Keep all BCT facility fees and implementation dates as they currently are. This will result in an inaccurate representation of the available community spaces within the facility and also result in facility fees that are not appropriate to the spaces being utilized.
Corporate Communications: The fees for the 2014-2015 season will be advertised on the Bert Church Theatre website.
Recommendation: That Council endorses the recommendation of the Community Services Advisory Board to approve the proposed Bert Church Theatre facility user fees as presented in Table 4 and Table 5, and also endorse the proposed annual fee implementation date of July 1, beginning in 2014.
Dennis Tinkler Theatre Manager Presenter: Dennis Tinkler Attachments: Proposed Facility Rate Package
AGENDA REPORT
Meeting Date (M/D/Y): 6/16/2014
Subject: Fees & Charges report for Genesis Place & Arenas
Boards Routed Through: Date: Community Services Advisory Board 6/9/2014
Description:
Administration is presenting options for setting facility user fees and charges at Genesis Place and Arenas for 2015.
Background: Currently Genesis Place has set a stretch target goal of 100% cost recovery. Cost recovery is based on all operating expenses covered through user fees. This cost recovery does not take into account any capital funds, expansions to building or life cycling of equipment.
Recovery costs for the past five years have remained fairly steady at Genesis Place: - 2010 - 80%, - 2011 – 85% - 2012 – 87% - 2013 – 88% - 2014 – Budgeted 91%
Recovery costs for the past five years for Arena Operations: - 2010 – 87% - 2011 – 83% - 2012 – 87% - 2012 – 88% - 2014 – Budgeted 88%
Facility fees and charges are based on three factors. These factors are used to determine fees and charges for Genesis Place passes, drop-in rates, programs, room rentals, field rentals and ice rentals. These three factors are:
1. Comparable facility rates of similar market facilities: Surveys are completed and user fee information is compiled for a variety of multi-use recreation facilities. Although it is difficult to make exact facility comparisons, administration has collected data from comparable facilities to illustrate the different user fees that are charged in other facilities and how Airdrie compares relative to the market average. Council has determined five comparative municipal communities for benchmarking purposes, and administration obtained user fee information from other multi-use recreation facilities that are in close proximity or serve similar sized communities.
2. Annual facility recovery rates: Annual facility recovery rates are based on the percentage of operating cost recovered through fees charged for rentals, programs, admission fees, annual passes and lease holders. Using the information with current fees and charges, an estimated recovery rate is determined. This rate will fluctuate dependent on consistent users and rates charged.
3. The ability to pay at the local level: Using the benchmark information from both groups, fees and charges are then examined to see if the local market would pay these rates. Cost recoveries are based on everything staying the same: annual pass holders, program users and drop-in users. If these increase or decrease, cost recoveries will change.
An analysis will be completed each year to assess market conditions and to ensure that net recovery rates are a balance between the three factors listed above.
Genesis Place program fees are based on a minimum of 100% cost recovery of direct operating costs associated with the program. Program cost recovery is based on defined minimum registrations for each program depending on program capacity and instructor/student ratios. Programs not meeting minimum registration will be analyzed for potential growth and community needs. Program viability will be determined by staff prior to registration deadline.
Other Factors:
Reciprocal Use Agreement: Presently Genesis Place is a partner in the Rocky View School Reciprocal Use Agreement. This agreement allows citizens of Airdrie and not-for- profit groups to book gymnasiums through Rocky View Schools at a reduced rate, and Rocky View Schools can use up to 2,500 hours of time at Genesis Place or arenas per year.
Currently, Rocky View Schools uses over 1,200 hours of time per year in the field house and gymnasium. 250 hours of time is allocated to arena usage, and 200 hours of time is allotted to usage within the Aquatics area. This is all done at no charge to Rocky View Schools, but there is a cost to Genesis Place such as additional janitorial costs, consumable goods cost and administration costs to schedule.
Wavier of Fees Policy: The Council Policy ‘Waiver of Rental Fees’ effects cost recoveries as well. Genesis Place is the hub of the community and is used for many community events, such things as Remembrance Day Ceremonies. Genesis Place anticipates hosting 35 community events in 2014, and 40 community events in 2015. These events are done at no charge to the event organizer as they are deemed to have a major impact on the community. As mentioned above, there is a cost to Genesis Place in terms of janitorial costs, consumable goods cost, and administration costs to schedule.
Not-for-profit Rate: Not-for-profit organizations receive a 50% discount on all meeting room rentals with Genesis Place. Over the past three years trends have indicated an increase in these demands as well. In 2014 Genesis Place is anticipating hosting 100 events in this category.
Current practice for pricing on Not-for-Profit rate started approximately two years ago as administration received feedback from these user groups that the cost of room rentals was too expensive. Currently Not-for-profits make up 5% of all bookings for meeting rooms within Genesis Place.
Drop in admissions and Annual Pass Structure Strategy:
Administration has structured pass options to encourage longer term regular use, lifestyle changes, and health benefits by demonstrating the value of an annual pass purchase and payment on a monthly basis as a significant saving over purchasing drop in admissions. This structure presents a sustainable future for Genesis Place and a healthy community.
Following is a revenue profile for rental and user fees as per 2014 budget
Annual Passes: 1,796,000.00 36.49%
Admissions: Single 589,000.00 Ten Time 191,000.00 Monthly 217,000.00 997,000.00 20.26%
Programs: Aquatics 573,000.00 Leisure 366,000.00 Fitness 78,000.00 1,017,000.00 20.66%
Rentals: Aquatics 49,000.00 Leisure 59,000.00 Space 137,000.00 Fieldhouse 298,000.00 outdoor 2,000.00 545,000.00 11.07%
Tenant Leases: 255,000.00 5.18%
Other revenues: 212,000.00 4.31%
Staff passes: 100,000.00 2.03%
Total revenues 4,922,000.00 100.00% Transfers from reserves 325,000.00 RockyView County Grant 58,000.00 GP Twin Arena Ice Rentals 647,000.00 5,952,000.00
Bench Mark Comparisons Municipal Operations Service Delivery 2014
Chart 1
Medicine Red St. Albert Airdrie Grande City of Hat Deer Servus Genesis Prairie Lethbridg Family Collicut Credit Average Type of Pass Place East Link e Leisure Center Union (2014 values) Center Place Admissions: Adult drop-in $10.75 $11.25 $7.75 $8.25 $8.50 $10.25 $9.46 Family drop-in $22.85 $22.50 $16.50 $20.25 $19.00 $25.00 $21.00 Adult annual $520.80 $702.00 $518.70 $478.80 $510.00 $405.00 $522.55 Family annual $989.10 $1404.00 $1274.25 $1160.35 $1140.00 $1275.00 $1207.28 See schedule A Aquatic: Parented $6.75 7 – ½ Hour$8.71 Classes $5.55 $5.17 $7.50 $6.56 $6.60/h Preschool $7.35 7 – ½ Hour$8.71 Classes $5.56 $5.17 $7.00 $6.56 $6.60/h Swim Kids 1-4 $7.35 $8.71 $5.56 $5.17 $7.50 $7.50 $6.85/h See schedule B Ice: Adult Prime Rate $216.70 $190.05 $137.00 $163.10 $150.50 $212.00 $178.23 (Per Hour) Youth Prime Rate $170.50 $136.50 $95.25 $91.90 $90.30 $125.00 $118.24 (Per Hour) See schedule C1- C2 Programs: Full Day Camp $5.50 n/a $3.88 $2.93 $5.00 $5.57 $4.58 Reg Fit Program $10.50 n/a $8.57 n/a $7.00 $11.75 $9.46 See schedule D Rentals: Fieldhouse $105.00 $110.25 $90y/$117a n/a n/a $105.00 $109.31 Meeting Room $52.50 $70.41 n/a $44.63 $42.20 $45.00 $128.22 Lane Pool 1-lane $12.60 $12.75 $11.50 $9.50 $12.75 n/a $11.82 Not-for-Profit rate 50% See schedule E reduction ** Lethbridge- Fees include access to 3 Pools and University of Lethbridge Fitness Center ***Medicine Hat – Aquatic center only **** Not-for-Profit rate is applied to meeting rooms ONLY
Bench Mark Comparisons Community and Not for Profit Service Delivery 2014
Chart 2
Spruce Grove Calgary Transalt Average Airdrie Cardel Westside a Genesis Place Recreation Tri- Place Leisure Admissions: Adult drop-in $10.75 $14.00 $14.00 $9.50 $12.06 Family drop-in $22.85 $27.00 $29.00 $22.00 $25.21 Adult annual $520.80 $708.00 $735.00 $559.88 $630.92 Family annual $989.10 $1332.00 $1540.25 $1390.00 $1312.76 See schedule A Aquatic:
Parented 7 – ½ Hour Classes Preschool 7 $–6.75 ½ H our Classes$6.86 $6.88 $7.00 $6.89 Swim Kids 1-4 7 $–7.35 ½ Hour Classes$7.57 $7.86 $7.00 $7.01 $7.35 See schedule B $7.57 $7.25 $7.00 $7.01
Ice: Adult Prime Rate $216.70 $242.00 $199.00 $224.42 (Per Hour) $240.00
Youth Prime Rate $170.50 $207.00 $130.00 $186.88 (Per Hour) $240.00 See Schedule C1-C2 Programs: Full Day Camp $5.50 $5.86 $6.30 $5.65 $5.83 Reg Fit Program $10.50 $13.80 $16.80 $10.00 $12.78 See schedule D Rentals: $105.00 Fieldhouse $52.50 n/a n/a n/a n/a Meeting Room $12.60 $47.00 n/a $62.00 $53.83 Lane Pool 50% n/a 15.00 $15.50 $14.37 Not-for-Profit rate reduction See schedule E **** Not-for-Profit rate is applied to meeting rooms ONLY
It is assumed that of the facilities listed all will be increasing their user fees in 2015 at a minimum of 3% - 5%. For this report the 5% increase was used to calculate the 2015 average fees and charges for each facility.
Market Averages and 2015 Increases
Combined Airdrie Possible averages Plus 5% Genesis 2015 Municipal/ Like for 2015 % increase Place Fees & Facility prices 2014 Charges Chart 1&2 Admissions: Adult drop-in $10.76 $11.29 $10.75 $11.08 3% Family drop-in $23.10 $24.26 $22.85 $23.53 3% Adult annual $576.74 $634.41 $520.80 $572.88 10% Family annual $1260.02 $1323.02 $989.10 $1088.01 10%
Aquatic: Parented $76.74 – ½ Hour Classes$7.07 $6.75 $6.95 3% Preschool $76.80 – ½ Hour Classes$7.14 $7.35 $7.57 3% Swim Kids 1-3 $6.93 $7.27 $7.35 $7.57 3%
Ice: Adult Prime Rate $201.33 $207.36 $197.00 $202.91 3% (per hour) Youth Prime $152.56 $160.18 $155.00 $159.65 3% Rate (per hour)
Programs: Full Day Camp $5.04/h $5.29/h $5.50/h $5.67 3% Reg Fit Program $9.80/h $10.29/h $10.50/h $10.82 3%
Rentals: Fieldhouse $104.36/h $109.58/h $105.00/h $108.15 3% Meeting Room $52.38/h $55.00/h $50.00/h $51.50 3% Not-for-Profit rate 50% reduction **** Not-for-Profit rate is applied to meeting rooms ONLY
Pass Category Definitions:
Preschool (3-5) Child 9 (6-12) Youth (13 -17) Student (18 – 25) (must be full-time student, provide current transcript and student ID card) Adult (18 plus) Senior (65+) / Veteran (veteran status identification must be provided)
Family (two adults with children under 18 years, living in the same household)
Annual Pass Breakdown SERVICE 2014 Average Rate * AIRDRIE 2014 Rates *
SINGLE ADMISSION 3% - Infant Free $0.00 - Preschool (3-5) $4.27 $3.95 $4.07 - Child (6-12) $4.52 $5.50 - Youth (13-17) $6.90 $6.80 $7.00 - Student $8.10 $6.80 $7.00 - Adult $10.58 $10.75 $11.07 - Senior 65+ $7.37 $6.80 $7.00 - Family $21.08 $22.85 $23.54
10-TIME PASS - Infant FREE $0.00 - Preschool (3-5) $32.25 $33.60 $34.61 - Child (6-12) $42.50 $44.10 $45.42 - Youth (13-17) $60.08 $60.90 $62.73 - Student $72.73 $60.90 $62.73 - Adult $92.12 $92.40 $95.17 - Senior $64.23 $60.90 $62.73 - Family $194.05 $211.05 $217.38
MONTHLY PASSES - Infant FREE $0.00 - Preschool (3-5) $22.00 $26.25 $27.04 - Child (6-12) $22.00 $35.70 $36.77 - Youth (13-17) $44.39 $49.35 $50.83 - Student $38.88 $49.35 $50.83 - Adult $62.50 $73.50 $75.71 - Senior $47.41 $51.45 $52.99 - Family $151.48 $169.05 $174.12
ANNUAL PASSES 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% - Infant FREE $0.00 - Preschool (3-5) $207.00 $161.65 $169.73 186.62$ 195.19$ 203.54$ 212.16$ - Child (6-12) $277.50 $240.45 $252.47 264.49$ 288.54$ - Youth (13-17) $402.07 $360.15 $378.16 396.17$ 414.18$ - Student $538.00 $360.15 $378.16 415.98$ 434.88$ 453.79$ 472.70$ - Adult $593.77 $520.80 $546.84 572.88$ 598.92$ 624.96$ - Senior $450.31 $386.40 $405.72 425.04$ 444.36$ 463.68$ - Family $1,270.57 $989.10 $1,038.56 1,088.01$ 1,137.47$ 1,186.92$ 1,236.38$
Market comparisons in both municipally operated and community or not-for-profit operated facilities show that Genesis Place is 15% - 25% lower in all categories in regard to annual passes. As presented earlier in the revenue profile, annual passes make up the largest percentage at 36.49% of revenues within the facility. To ensure movement towards
Council’s target of 100% user pay for facility operations, it is important that Genesis Place remains in line with market values.
Administration is suggesting a 10% increase in annual pass fees at a minimum until this fee has been brought back in line with market comparisons. A 10% increase each year for the next three years would close this gap considerably. An increase of 10% would increase monthly payments on a family membership less than $10.00 a month. In establishing fees and charges for facility access, it is important to have reasonable incremental increases on an annual basis to offset increased costs of operations (utilities, staffing) rather than larger increments on a less regular basis.
If Annual passes continue on the current pricing path, Genesis Place programs and other revenues could be seen as subsidizing these Annual pass holders as increased revenues are needed to cover increased costs.
Administration is suggesting a 3% increase on all admission fees, programs, rentals, and ice.
Alternatives/Implications:
Alternative #1- That Council endorse for Genesis Place 2015 fees and charges in the following categories: Admissions 3% increase, Annual Passes 10% increase, Programs 3% increase, Rentals 3% increase, and Ice 3% increase.
Alternative #2 – That Council endorses a flat rate increase of 3% increase to all programs, rentals, annual passes and admission fees within Genesis Place for 2015 fees and charges.
Alternative #3 – That Council directs to remain status quo with no increases to any fees and charges within Genesis Place for 2015.
Boards Routed Through:
At the meeting of June 9, 2014, the Community Service Advisory Board voted six to one in favor of Alternative #1. Concerns discussed included: - 10% too high of an increase? - In a user pay model is 10% enough of an increase?
Recommendation: That the Council endorses the recommendation of the Community Services Advisory Board and approves Alternative #1 to increase Genesis Place 2015 fees and charges in the follow categories: Admissions 3% increase, Annual Passes 10% increase, Programs 3% increase, Rentals 3% increase and Ice 3% increase.
______Greg Lockert Manager Genesis Place / Arena Operations
Author : Greg Lockert Department: Genesis Place Review ed by: Michelle Lock Attachments: 1. Genesis Place Fees & Charges 2. Pass Comparison 3. Aquatic Fees Comparison 4. Arena Rate Review s 5. Ice Rental Rates 6. Rental Fees & Charges 7. Fitness Market Comparison
CITY OF AIRDRIE FEE/CHARGE NO. F-012/2013
FEES AND CHARGES Page 1 of 5
CITY OF AIRDRIE – FEES AND CHARGES GENESIS PLACE / ED EGGERER ATHLETIC PARK / ARENA OPERATIONS
Effective Date: January 1, 2015 Revision Date: May 27,2014
PHILOSOPHY:
Program fees are based on a 100% cost recovery of direct operating costs associated with the program. Program cost recovery is based on defined minimum registrations for each program depending on program capacity and instructor/student ratios. Programs not meeting minimum registration will be analyzed for potential growth and community needs. Program viability will be determined by staff prior to registration deadline.
Facility admissions and passes are based on three factors: comparable facility rates of similar market facilities, annual facility recovery rates and the ability to pay at the local level. An analysis will be completed each year to assess market conditions and to ensure that net recovery rates are a balance between user fees and tax base support.
Room rentals are based on market rates comparable with similar facilities and an analysis will be completed each year to determine these rates.
Ed Eggerer Athletic Park rental rate fees are based on 100% cost recovery for direct operating costs associated with operation of the City of Airdrie Ed Eggerer Athletic Park facility.
Ice rental rate fees are based on a 100% cost recovery for direct operating costs associated with operation of the City of Airdrie arena facilities.
FEE/CHARGE: 2014 Fees and Charges- Genesis Place
GENESIS PLACE – Fees for Aquatic Area
FEE/HOUR OR SERVICE/PRODUCT CHARGE GST 2014 / 2015 Swimming Lessons (Preschool – Youth) Parented 7 – ½ Hour Classes $6.75/$6.95 No Preschool 7 – ½ Hour Classes $7.35/$7.57 No Swim Kids 1-3 7 – ½ Hour Classes $7.35/$7.57 No Swim Kids 4-6 7 – ½ Hour Classes $7.35/$7.57 No Swim Kids 7 -10 7 – ½ Hour Classes $9.15/$9.43 No Private Lessons ½ Hour Lesson – All Ages $26.25/$27.05 No Swimming Lessons (Adults) Red Cross Swim Basics 7 – 1 Hour Classes $9.15/$9.42 Incl. Red Cross Swim Strokes 7 – 1 Hour Classes $9.15/$9.42 Incl.
Administration Swim Assessment Fee $10.00/$10.30 Incl. Badges (Preschool/Swim Kids) $2.60 Incl.
CITY OF AIRDRIE FEE/CHARGE NO. F-012/2013
FEES AND CHARGES Page 2 of 5
Advanced Life Saving Bronze Star $81.00/$83.43 Incl. Bronze Medallion/Sr. Resuscitation $135.00/$139.05 Incl. Bronze Cross $115.00/$118.45 Incl. Bronze Medallion/Sr. Resuscitation/ Bronze Cross Combination $256.20/$263.87 Incl. National Lifeguard $312.90/$322.29 Incl. Assistant Water Safety Instructor $246.75/$254.15 Incl. Water Safety Instructor $262.50/$270.38 Incl. Standard first aid and CPR level C $131.25/$135.19 Incl. Standard first aid and CPR level C (Recertification) $68.25/$70.30 Incl. Youth Programs Red Cross Babysitting Course $75.00/$77.25 Incl.
Pool Rentals Rental Lane 1 lane/Hour $12.60/$12.97 Incl. Dive Tank /Hour $70.10/$72.20 Incl. Nose Creek Swim Associations 6 Lanes/Hour $75.60/$77.25 Incl.
GENESIS PLACE – Fees for Dry Land and Leisure Area
FEE/HOUR OR SERVICE/PRODUCT CHARGE GST Dry Land General/Sport/Craft & Home Schooling (6 – 17 Years) Child (6-12yrs) Sport $10.75/$11.07 No Zumba/Yoga $11.00/$11.33 No
Youth (13-17yrs) Special Fitness (Yoga) $11.50/$11.84 No
Adult Fitness/Wellness Classes Specialty Fitness (Yoga, Pilates, Pre Natal Spec) $11.50/$11.84 Incl. Fitness (Zumba, Spin, Boot Camp, Aqua) $10.50/$10.82 Incl. Adult Pre/Post Natal (includes mom & baby, strollercize) $10.50/$10.82 Incl. Prenatal Specialty Fitness (yoga) $11.50/$11.84 Incl.
Preschool General $10.75/$11.07 No Specialty Classes with Craft (Bunny Bonanza, Halloween Howler) $8.50/$8.75 No Kids Connection-Sept 2014 (In 2014 all classes charged same hourly fee) $9.75/$10.04 No
CITY OF AIRDRIE FEE/CHARGE NO. F-012/2013
FEES AND CHARGES Page 3 of 5
GENESIS PLACE – Fees for Dry Land and Leisure Area
FEE/HOUR OR SERVICE/PRODUCT CHARGE GST Parent and Tot Programs General $10.50/$10.82 No
Child Care Per Child Per Hour $4.75/$4.89 Incl. Per 10 Hour Pass $44.60/$45.94 Incl. Per 20 Hour Pass $84.00/$86.52 Incl. Per 50 Hour Pass $196.90/$202.81 Incl. Day Camps General Hourly Fee $5.50/$5.67 No Day Camps General – With a Field Trip (Bus and Admission Included) Hourly Fee $6.00/$6.18 No Half Day Camps – Preschool Hourly Fee – General $6.00/$6.18 No Early Drop Off and Late Pick-Up Service Hourly Fee $4.50/$4.64 No Lunch Care $4.50/$4.64 No Party Packages Wet and Wild Party Package $173.25/$178.45 Incl. Sports Supreme $168.00/$173.04 Incl. Games Galore $168.00/$173.04 Incl. Let’s Dance $168.00/$173.04 Incl. Royal Princess or Pirate Party $199.50/$205.49 Incl. Survivor Challenge $173.25/$178.45 Incl. Personal Training 1 Hour Session $63.00/$64.89 Incl. 5 One Hour Sessions $288.75/$297.41 Incl. 10 One Hour Sessions $525.00/$540.75 Incl. 20 One Hour Sessions $945.00/$973.35 Incl. 2 People - One Hour Session $80.00/$82.40 Incl. 2 People - 5 One Hour Sessions $370.00/$381.10 Incl. Body Composition Test $31.50/$32.45 Incl. Kick Start Fitness Package (Per Bundle) $120.00/$123.60 Incl.
Total Fitness Package (Per Bundle) $400.00/$412.00 Incl. Nutrition – Initial Consult (1 hour) $80.00/$82.40 Incl. Nutrition – 5 hours $370.00/$381.10 Incl. Fitness Profile/Weight Room Orientation (Free with Admission) $0.00/ Incl. Dry land Team Training 10 Hour Session $945.00/$973.35 Incl. Group Personal Training(4-6 people) Per session/per person (1 session is 8 classes) $157.50/$162.23 Incl. Youth Strength Course (1hr) $52.50/$54.08 Incl. Youth Get Fit Package (2.0hr) $120.00/$123.60 Incl.
Leagues Recreational Volleyball (Based on 6 People) per person/hour $5.80/$5.97 Incl. Pickle Ball (Based on 2 People) per person/hour $4.35/$4.48 Incl.
GENESIS PLACE – Fees for Facility Access
CITY OF AIRDRIE FEE/CHARGE NO. F-012/2013
FEES AND CHARGES Page 4 of 5
2014 Facility Rental Fees GST Included FEE/HOUR SERVICE/PRODUCT OR CHARGE GST Room Rentals Meeting Rooms (Per Hour) $22.05/$22.71 Incl. Meeting Rooms (Per Half Day) $88.20/$90.85 Incl. Meeting Rooms (Full Day) $137.55/$141.68 Incl. Premier Meeting Room (Per Hour) $30.00/$30.90 Incl. Premier Meeting Room (Per Half Day) $120.00/$123.60 Incl. Premier Meeting Room (Full Day) $180.00/$185.40 Incl. Full Gymnasium Rental (Per Hour) $68.25/$70.30 Incl. Half Gymnasium Rental (Per Hour) $42.00/$43.26 Incl. Woodmont/Blue Grass Multi-Purpose (Per Hour) $31.50/$32.45 Incl. Woodmont/Blue Grass Multi-Purpose (Per Half Day) $126.00/$129.78 Incl. Woodmont/Blue Grass Multi-Purpose (Full Day) $189.00/$194.67 Incl. McDonald’s Fun Place (Per Hour) $42.00/$43.26 Incl. McDonald’s Fun Place (Per Half Day) $110.25/$113.56 Incl. McDonald’s Fun Place (Full Day) $220.50/$227.12 Incl. Rotary Community Room (Per Hour) $52.50/$54.08 Incl. Rotary Community Room (Per Half Day) $210.00/$216.30 Incl. Rotary Community Room (Full Day) $315.00/$324.45 Incl. Dance Studio (Per Hour) $42.00/$43.26 Incl. Mind Body Room (Per Hour) $42.00/$43.26 Incl. Full Field House (Per Hour) $105.00/$108.15 Incl. 1/3 Field House (Per Hour) $42.00/$43.26 Incl. 2/3 Field House (Per Hour) $68.25/$70.30 Incl. Trend Room (Per Hour) $42.00/$43.26 Incl. Running Track (Per Hour) 1 Lane $15.75/$16.22 Incl. 2 Lanes $31.50/$32.44 Incl. 3 Lanes $47.25/$48.67 Incl. 4 Lanes $60.00/$61.80 Incl.
GENESIS PLACE – Fees for Facility Access FEE/HOUR OR SERVICE/PRODUCT CHARGE GST Drop In Single Admission Infant $0.00 Incl. Preschool (3 – 5) $3.95/$4.07 Incl. Child (6 – 12) $5.50/$5.67 Incl. Youth (13 – 17) $6.80/$7.00 Incl. Student $6.80/$7.00 Incl. Adult $10.75/$11.07 Incl. Senior $6.80/$7.00 Incl. Family $22.85/$23.54 Incl. 10 Time Pass Infant $0.00 Incl. Preschool (3 – 5) $33.60/$34.61 Incl. Child (6 – 12) $44.10/$45.42 Incl. Youth (13 – 17) $60.90/$62.73 Incl. Student $60.90/$62.73 Incl. Adult $92.40/$95.17 Incl. Senior $60.90/$62.73 Incl. Family $211.05/$217.38 Incl. Monthly Pass
CITY OF AIRDRIE FEE/CHARGE NO. F-012/2013
FEES AND CHARGES Page 5 of 5
Infant $0.00 Incl. Preschool (3 – 5) $26.25/$27.04 Incl. Child (6 – 12) $35.70/$36.77 Incl. Youth (13 – 17) $49.35/$50.83 Incl. Student $49.35/$50.83 Incl. Adult $73.80/$75.71 Incl. Senior $51.45/$52.99 Incl. Family $169.05/$174.12 Incl. Annual Pass Infant $0.00 Incl. Preschool (3 – 5) $181.65/$186.62 Incl. Child (6 – 12) $240.45/$264.49 Incl. Youth (13 – 17) $360.15/$396.17 Incl. Student $360.15/$415.98 Incl. Adult $520.80/$572.88 Incl. Senior $386.40/$425.04 Incl. Family $989.10/$1088.00 Incl. Annual Pass Plus (Executive) Adult $719.25/$791.18 Incl. Senior $584.85/$643.34 Incl. Corporate Pass Family $884.95/$973.45 Incl. Adult (18+) $416.65/$458.31 Incl. Senior $309.10/$339.57 Corporate Pass Structure Based on Criteria Endorsed by the Airdrie Regional Recreation Board – Annual Pass, Non-Transferable, Non- Refundable Participant Support Program 50% Discount of all Rates Listed Above
ED EGGERER ATHLETIC PARK – Rental Rates FEE/HOUR OR SERVICE/PRODUCT CHARGE GST Ed Eggerer Athletic Park (Per Hour) $68.25/$70.30 Incl. Ed Eggerer Athletic Park (Per Day – 8 hours) $367.50/$378.53 Incl.
ARENA OPERATIONS – Ice Rental, Dry Pad Rental Rates FEE/HOUR OR SERVICE/PRODUCT CHARGE GST Adult Prime Rate (Per Hour) $216.70/$223.20 Incl. Youth Prime Rate (Per Hour) $170.50/$175.62 Incl. Non-Prime Rate (Per Hour) $93.50/$96.30 Incl. Dry Pad Rate (Per Hour) $84.00/$86.52 Incl.
______Date Director/Manager
______Date City Clerk GENESIS PLACE - Fees and Charges 2014-2015- Pass Options Dow Centennial SHERWOOD 2014 Average Centre (Fort East Link Grande COLLICUT CTR. St.Alberta Servus PARK. LEDUC TRI LEISURE CTR. WESTSIDE REGIONAL Village Square- TALISMAN CRT. N.C.R.A. (CARDEL * AIRDRIE Rate SERVICE Medicine Hat (FLC) Lethbridge Saskatchewan) Prairie RED DEER Place (MILLENNIUM) SPRUCE GROVE REC. CTR. Calgary Lesiure CALGARY Y M C A PLACE) 2014 Rates * 3% 5% 7%
SINGLE ADMISSION - Infant Free Free Free Free Free Free Free Free Free Free Free Free n/a Free Free $0.00 - Preschool (3-5) n/a $3.00 n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a $5.00 (2-5 yrs) $4.27 $3.95 $ 4.07 $4.15 $4.23 - Child (6-12) $4.25 (3-12 yrs) $3.00 $3.95 (2-12 yrs) $5.50 (3-12 yrs) $4.25 (3-12 yrs) $5.00 (2-12 yrs) $4.75 (2-12 yrs) $3.80 (3-7 yrs) $4.50 (2-12 yrs) n/a $2.85 (2-6 yrs) $5.75 (2-12 yrs) $4.48 (0-11 yrs) $7.00 $4.52 $5.50 $ 5.67 $5.78 $5.89 - Youth (13-17) $5.75 $5.75 $6.35 $8.00 $6.00 $7.00 $7.25 $5.15 (8-17 yrs) $6.50 $9.00 (10-17 yrs) $5.70 (7-17 yrs) $8.25 $7.52 (12-17 yrs) $9.00 $6.90 $6.80 $ 7.00 $7.14 $7.28 - Student n/a $5.75 n/a n/a $6.75 $10.25 n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a $9.05 $10.00 $8.10 $6.80 $ 7.00 $7.14 $7.28 - Adult $8.25 $7.75 $7.60 $11.25 $8.50 $10.25 $8.75 $8.15 $9.50 $14.00 $11.45 $13.25 $13.33 $14.00 $10.58 $10.75$ 11.07 $11.29 $11.50 - Senior 65+ $7.25 (60+) $5.75 $6.35 $8.00 (60+) $7.50 $7.00 (60+) $7.25 $5.45 (60-79 yrs) $6.75 (60-79 yrs) $9.00 $5.70 $8.75 $7.52 $10.00 (60+) $7.37 $6.80 $ 7.00 $7.14 $7.28 - Family $20.25 $16.50 $17.75 $22.50 $19.00 $25.00 21/50 $19.00 $22.00 $29.00 $25.15 $27.00 $24.52 $27.00 $21.08 $22.85$ 23.54 $23.99 $24.45
10-TIME PASS - Infant Free n/a Free Free Free Free Free Free Free Free Free Free n/a Free FREE $0.00 - Preschool (3-5) n/a $24.00 n/a n/a n/a n/a $40.50 n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a $45.00 (2-12 yrs) $32.25 $33.60 34.61$ $35.28 $35.95 - Child (6-12) $34.00 (3-12 yrs) $24.00 $35.40 (2-12 yrs) $46.75 (3-12 yrs) $34.00 (3-12 yrs) $45.00 (2-12 yrs) $40.50 $33.40 (3-7 yrs) $40.50 (2-12 yrs) n/a $25.60 (2-6 yrs) $47.25 (2-12 yrs) n/a $63.00 $42.50 $44.10 45.42$ $46.31 $47.19 - Youth (13-17) $46.00 $46.00 $57.30 $68.00 $48.00 $63.00 $63.00 $45.40 (8-17 yrs) $58.50 $81.00 (10-17 yrs) $51.30 (7-17 yrs) $70.00 n/a $81.00 $60.08 $60.90 62.73$ $63.95 $65.16 - Student n/a $46.00 n/a n/a $54.00 $92.20 n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a $81.43 $90.00 $72.73 $60.90$ 62.73 $63.95 $65.16 - Adult $66.50 $62.00 $68.70 $95.63 $68.00 $92.20 $76.50 $71.65 $85.50 $126.00 $103.00 $122.00 $126.00 $126.00 $92.12 $92.40$ 95.17 $97.02 $98.87 - Senior 57.15 (60+) $46.00 $57.30 $68.00 (60+) $60.00 $63.00 (60+) $63.00 $47.75( 60-79 yrs) $60.70 (60-79 yrs) $81.00 $51.30 $78.00 $51.45 $90.00 $64.23 $60.90 62.73$ $63.95 $65.16 - Family $161.15 $132.00 $160.00 $191.25 $152.00 n/a $186.75 $167.15 $198.00 $261.00 $226.30 $250.00 n/a $243.00 $194.05 $211.05$ 217.38 $221.60 $225.82
MONTHLY PASSES - Infant Free n/a Free Free Free Free Free Free Free Free Free Free n/a Free FREE $0.00 - Preschool (3-5) n/a $22.00 n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a $22.00 $26.25$ 27.04 $27.56 $28.09 - Child (6-12) $34.00 (3-12 yrs) $22.00 $17.75 (2-12 yrs) $46.75 (3-12 yrs) $21.25 (3-12 yrs) $23.00 (2-12 yrs) $21.00 (2-12 yrs) $23.65 (3-7 yrs) $23.50 (2-12 yrs) n/a n/a $45.00 (2-12 yrs) n/a n/a $22.00 $35.70 36.77$ $37.49 $38.20 - Youth (13-17) $46.00 $46.00 $31.80 $68.00 $30.00 $33.50 $36.00 $32.30 (8-17 yrs) $42.25 n/a n/a $66.00 n/a n/a $44.39 $49.35 50.83$ $51.82 $52.80 - Student n/a n/a n/a n/a $33.75 $44.00 n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a $38.88 $49.35$ 50.83 $51.82 $52.80 - Adult $66.50 $55.40 $38.20 $95.63 $42.50 $50.50 $44.00 $50.75 $62.50 n/a n/a $119.00 n/a n/a $62.50 $73.50$ 75.71 $77.18 $78.65 - Senior $57.15 $46.00 $31.80 $68.00 (60+) $37.50 $37.00 (60+) $36.00 $33.80 (60-79 yrs) $45.50 (60-79 yrs) n/a n/a $76.00 n/a n/a $47.41 $51.45 52.99$ $54.02 $55.05 - Family $161.15 n/a $108.55 $191.25 $95.00 $127.50 n/a $118.40 $160.00 n/a n/a $250.00 n/a n/a $151.48 $169.05$ 174.12 $177.50 $180.88
ANNUAL PASSES - Infant Free n/a Free Free Free Free Free Free Free Free Free Free n/a Free FREE $0.00 - Preschool (3-5) n/a $207.00 n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a $207.00 $161.65$ 166.50 $169.73 $172.97 - Child (6-12) $244.80 (3-12 yrs) $207.00 $196.25 (2-12 yrs) $343.20 (3-12 yrs) n/a $230.00 (2-12 yrs) n/a $236.70 (3-7 yrs) n/a n/a n/a $177.00 (2-12 yrs) n/a $348.00 $277.50 $240.45 247.66$ $252.47 $257.28 - Youth (13-17) $331.20 $413.95 $349.15 $499.20 n/a $335.00 n/a $322.50 (8-17 yrs) n/a $393.25 (10-17 yrs) n/a $466.00 n/a $420.00 $402.07 $360.15 370.95$ $378.16 $385.36 - Student n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a $440.00 n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a $670.00 n/a $504.00 $538.00 $360.15$ 370.95 $378.16 $385.36 - Adult $478.80 $518.70 $420.25 $702.00 n/a $505.00 n/a $507.20 n/a $735.00 n/a $769.00 n/a $708.00 $593.77 $520.80$ 536.42 $546.84 $557.26 - Senior $411.25 $413.95 $349.15 $499.20 (60+) n/a $370.00 (60+) n/a $338.15 (60-79 yrs) n/a $514.50 n/a $509.00 n/a $504.00 $450.31 $386.40 397.99$ $405.72 $413.45 - Family $1,160.35 n/a n/a $1,404.00 n/a $1,275.00 n/a $1,183.50 n/a n/a n/a $1,330.00 n/a n/a $1,270.57 $989.10$ 1,018.77 $1,038.56 $1,058.34
Medicine Hat FLC – A child is considered ages 3-12 and seniors are 60+. The FLC offers a weight room only price for 16+ for $7.05. Lethbridge – Dow Centennial Centre Fort Saskatchewan – A child is considered ages 2-12. Annual family passes are sold as a “build your family pass”. Eastlink Grande Prairie – Seniors age is considered 60+. There is a 10% fee for monthly payments on an annual pass. Collicutt Red Deer – A child is considered ages 3-12. Annual family passes are sold as a “build your family Pass”. Servus Place St. Albert – A child is considered age 2-12 and seniors are 60+. Millennium Place Sherwood Park – A child is considered age 2-12. A family is considered 2 adults and 5 children. Annual family pass is sold as a “build your family pass” with payment option of 50% down and then 3 payments. Monthly and annual Millennium Card passes are valid for 5 facilities. Leduc – Child age is considered 3-7 and youth 8-17. Senior is 60-79 and senior plus is 80+ with a free membership. Daily school admission rate of $3.35 from 8:30am -4:00pm September to June Monday to Friday. Tri Leisure Centre Spruce Grove – A child is considered age 2-12. Members receive complimentary access to ‘Members only’ Fitness Classes, member pricing on Registered Programs, Specialty Fitness Classes & Professional Services, early registration privileges on all Registered Programs and eligibility for a 15% discount on additional immediate family membership purchases (spouse and dependents within the same household). They offer a 3 month pass. Westside Recreation Centre – Child age is considered 2-9, youth 10-17. Annual passes are sold at $735.00 per adult and $75.00 per child. They offer a Membership Plus pass to adult and senior passes which include 20% discount off all programs and services, program registration priority, 3 complimentary guest day passes. Village Square Leisure Centre Calgary – Pre-school age is considered 2-6, Child/youth 7-17. They offer different drop in prices for single parents with children. All annual passes are sold as a “build your family pass” and can include multiple facilities within the city. Talisman Centre Calgary – Child age considered 2-12 with the family of 2 adults and 8 children maximum. Annual memberships receive 5 Guest Passes , up to 17% off Registered Programs, 10% discount on Personal Training and Nutrition services, 24 hour advance Early Bird Program Registration and Refer a friend who signs up for an Annual Membership and they extend your membership by one month for each referral. GENESIS PLACE - Fees and Charges 2015- Aquatics WESTSIDE N.C.R.A. 2014 Average Dow Centennial St.Alberta Servus SHERWOOD TRI LEISURE CTR. REGIONAL REC. Village Square- (CARDEL * AIRDRIE Rate SERVICE Medicine Hat Lethbridge Centre Grande Prairie Credit Union PARK. (Kinsmen) SPRUCE GROVE CTR. Calgary Lesiure Okotoks Collicut Center PLACE) 2014 Rates * 3% increase 5% increase HARBOR POOL Parented Classes 5.17 5.31 6.12 $6.52 $5.05 $6.13 $7.00 $6.88 $7.21 $8.25 $7.50 $6.86 $7.07 $6.75 6.95 7.08
PresSchool Classes 5.17 $5.31 $6.12 $6.52 $5.05 $6.50 $7.00 $7.86 $7.21 $8.25 $7.00 $7.57 $7.34 $7.35 7.57 7.72
Swim Kids 1-3 5.17 $5.31 $6.12 $6.52 $5.05 $7.13 $7.00 $7.25 $7.21 $8.25 $7.50 $7.57 $6.53 $7.35 7.57 7.72
Swim Kids 4-6 $6.87 $5.68 $6.62 $6.52 $6.90 $7.13 $9.88 $7.25 $7.21 $8.49 $7.50 $8.29 $7.41 $7.35 7.57 7.72
Swim Kids 7-10 $8.60 $5.68 $6.62 $7.47 n/a $8.13 $9.88 $10.14 $8.33 $9.10 $7.50 $8.29 $8.23 $9.15 9.43 9.61
Private Lessons 25.5 25 30 $31.66 $32.00 $32.00 27.6 $40.00 n/a n/a $25.00 $30.17 $26.25 27.05 27.56
Bronze Star n/a n/a $69.00 $91.00 $ 78.00 $84.00 n/a $98.00 $98.93 $81.85 $ 90.00 $87.00 $88.68 $81.00 83.43 85.05
Bronze Medallion $140.00 $110.00 $126.00 $161.00 $ 148.00 $142.00 $196.00 $145.00 $141.54 $115.00 $ 150.00 $145.00 $146.20 $135.00 139.05 141.75
Bronze Cross $120.00 $100.00 $126.00 $121.00 $ 110.00 $142.00 $152.00 $140.00 $141.54 225w/SFA $ 150.00 $120.00 $137.22 $115.00 118.45 120.75
Standard First Aid $125.00 $125.00 $190.48 $165.00 $ 126.00 $186.00 $161.00 n/a $140.00 $ 120.00 n/a $146.30 $125.00 128.75 131.25
Babysitting n/a n/a n/a $45.00 $57.75 n/a $72.00 n/a 56.53 $93.00 $74.13 $75.00 77.25 78.75
National Lifeguard $276.00 $220.00 $228.00 $336.00 $362.25 $258.00 $399.00 $367.00 $345.56 $321.00 $285.00 $281.80 $298.00 306.94 312.90
AWSI $240.00 $205.00 $210.00 $318.00 n/a $190.00 $321.00 $275.00 $309.31 $220.00 $240.00 $246.00 $235.00 242.05 246.75
Junior Lifeguard Club $72.00 n/a $125.00 $94.00 153 (12) $84.00 $12.50/class $96.00 98.88 100.80
WSI $190.00 155 $190.48 $247.00 n/a $230.00 $321.00 $262.00 $251.53 $200.00 $190.00 $225.00 $250.00 257.50 262.50 2014 Arena Rate Review Facility Non Prime Time Prime Time After Midnight After Midnight SCHOOLS / DRY PAD Sum Hky Effective Date NM Yth NM Adt M Yth M Adt HOURS NM Yth NM Adt M Yth Mr Adt HOURS Member Non Mem DAYCARES /Fig Skate Trico Centre Sep 1 2014 $99.00 $115.00 M-F 6:00-4:00pm $199.00 $242.00 M-F 4:00-Close Sat,Sun $83.00 $130.00 South Fish Creek June 1/2013-June 1/2014 N/A N/A $81.75 $118.50 M-F 6:30 am - 4 pm N/A N/A $186.75 $236.75 M-F 4 -11 pm M-F 6:30 am - 4 pm Yth: $107.75/hr Spring review; effective Labour Day Sept - June Sat, Sun + Stat Holidays $174.25 Not for Profit Summer Sch: $118.50/hr; Adult + Hky Sch: $131/hr CITY OF CALGARY(incl GST) for May- Jun & Sept - Apr May 1 2014 $61.25 $105.55 $171.25 $229.90 Lk Bonavista Community Assn.(+GST) 01-Jul-14 $88.00 $120.00 $84.00 $115.00 6 am - 4 pm $242.00 $242.00 $230.00 $230.00 M-F 4 - 11 pm; $170.00 $179.50 $73.33 Summer Hky: $185/hr S+S: 6 am - 11 pm Fig Skate: $94.50 Fairview Arena 01-Apr-14 $110.00 $110.00 $110.00 $110.00 $190.00 $240.00 $190.00 $240.00 $180.00 $180.00 $180.00 $110 + $190 (Prime Time)
Bowness Arena Sept 1 2013-2014 $65.00 $95.00 $65.00 $95.00 M-F 6 am - 4 pm $181.50 $181.50 $225.25 $225.25 M-F 4 pm - 1 am S+S: 6 am - 1 am N/A N/A N/A N/A Acadia Rec Centre July 1/2014 $110.85 $110.85 $99.77 $99.77 7 am - 4 pm $241.40 $241.40 $225.15 $217.26 4 pm - Closing + weekends N/A $86.80 Day: $108;
Crowchild Twin Arenas (No GST Charged) 01-Sep-14 $85.00 $95.00 $85.00 $95.00 M-F 6 am - 4 pm $180.00 $210.00 $160.00 $210.00 M-F 4 - 11 pm $145.00 $145.00 $85.00 $135.00 Sat,Sun + Stat Holidays 7 am- 11pm Crowfoot Arena Sept 1/2012 $80.00 $93.00 $80.00 $93.00 M-F 6am-4pm $210.00 $210.00 $155.00 $155.00 Sat,Sun + Stat Holidays $135.00 $135.00 $80.00 $115.50/hr 4 - 11 pm Cardel Place 01-Sep $99.00 $99.00 6 am - 4 pm $207.00 $242.00 4 pm - 10.45 pm $180.00 $82.00 Summer Hky Fig Skate: $116 Minor Hky: SVHA $189 Thorncliffe Greenview Comm. Assn Sep-14 $90.00 $90.00 $75.00 $90.00 $185.00 $215.00 $150.00 $150.00 $150.00 $150.00 $90.00 $195.00 Rate review in Mar/Apr;increases in Sept Triwood Comm. Assn. Immediate $120.00 $120.00 $120.00 $120.00 $220.00 $220.00 $180.00 $220.00 $120.00 $120.00 $85.00 $110.00
Westside Sep-14 N/A $120.00 N/A $120.00 M-F 6 am - 4:15 pm N/A $240.00 N/A $240.00 N/A N/A $75.00 $75.00 Chestermere Regional CA 01-Sep-14 $85.00 $85.00 $175.00 $160.00 $231.00 $175.00 $175 $30.00 Day: 85; PT:$155.50 Effective September (yearly) East Calgary Twin Arena Sept 1/2013 $89.25 $102.90 $89.25 $102.90 M-F 7 am-4:30pm $187.35 $222.00 $187.35 $222.00 Mon-Sun:4:30-11:30 pm; N/A N/A $60.00 $60/hr All weekend Winsport Apr 12, 2014-Mar 31, 2015 $95.24 $243.81 $95.24 $121.90 M-F 6 am - 4 pm $190.48 $243.81 $190.48 $243.81 M-F 4 pm - Close; weekends N/A N/A $95.24 M-F 8 am - 5 pm: $800; M-F 7 am - 7 pm: $1050 NPT: $125; PT $190.48 Oilfields Regional Arena Sep-14 $80.00 $90.00 $70.00 $90.00 M-F 6-12 pm(Yth Mbr $60) $130.00 $170.00 $120.00 $170.00 M-F 5 - 11:30 pm N/A N/A No Chg No summer ice M-F 12-5 pm; 11:30 pm - 6 am Sat+Sun:6 am - 11:30 pm City of Airdrie 01-Jan-14 $89.05 $89.05 $89.05 $89.05 M-F 6 am - 4:30 pm $162.39 $206.39 $162.39 $206.39 M-F 4:30 - close N/A N/A N/A $80.00 N/A S+S all day 2015 increase to $100 Strathmore Family Ctr Aug 1,2014 N/A N/A $105.60 $105.60 $216.40 $216.40 $134.85 $206.20 $82.50 $82.50 $48.70 Local: $134.85; non local: $216.40
Okotoks Sept 1,2014 - Aug 31,2015 $136.23 $215.02 $96.29 $154.25 $187.01 $259.11 $136.23 $215.02 N/A $48.23 $184.27 (Local + Non Local) $96.27 more than 1 class Cochrane Arena/Totem Arena no GST Sept 1,2014 $100.00 $100.00 $100.00 $100.00 M-F 6 am - 4 pm $200.00 $235.00 $170.00 $215.00 M-F 4-10.14pm $170.00 $170.00 $100.00 $100.00 Review May-June; Effective Aug 1 S+S: to 10:14pm after10:15pm after 10:15pm Indus Recration Centre 01-Sep-14 $60.00 $60.00 $60.00 $60.00 M-Th 6 am-4pm; $180.00 $200.00 $168.00 N/A M-Th: 4 pm - 12 am N/A N/A 2Xwk:$90 $70.00 N/A F:6 am-2:30 pm F: 2:30 pm - 12 am 3Xwk:$130 The Fenlands Banff at annual review May 2014 $200.45 $232.75 $97.85 $144.40 7 am - 3 pm $200.45 $232.75 $97.85 $200.45 3 pm - 1 am N/A N/A Joint use Resident: $158.65 (resident + non resident) agreement Non Resident: $232.75 Canmore June 1/2013 $170.00 $225.00 $75.00 $100.00 $170.00 $225.00 $105.00 $187.00 N/A N/A $40.00 Non Profit: $48/hr $170/hr for May- Jun & Sept - Apr Private: $96/hr Oakridge Community Assn 01-Sep-14 N/A $160.00 $98.00 $98.00 N/A $305.00 $255.00 $290.00 N/A N/A $90.00 $174/hr
Flames Community Arena Sep 1 2014 95.35 95.35 78.5 78.5 open-4:00pm 234.82 234.82 166.38 166.38 124.31 139.82 88.63 132.61 City of Airdrie Arena Operations Comparison of Ice Rental Rates With Other Local Arenas Arena Adult Prime Youth Prime Non-Prime Adult Dry Pad Youth Dry Pad Comments City of Leduc Arenas $225.00 $151.70 $137.45 $95.30 $54.50 GST included They offer lower summer rates Airdrie $216.70 $170.50 $93.50 $84.00 $84.00 GST included City of Grande Prairie Arenas $190.05 $136.50 $114.45 $81.90 $73.50 GST included Rate increase for 2015; they offer lower summer rates City of Medicine Hat Arenas $163.10 $91.90 $112.35 $59.70 $48.20 GST included They offer lower summer rates City of Lethbridge Arenas $137.00 $95.25 103.75 (Adult) $74.75 $62.75 GST included They have higher tournament rates City of Red Deer Arenas GST included SHERWOOD TRI LEISURE Village Dow COLLICUT St.Alberta PARK. CTR. WESTSIDE Square- TALISMAN N.C.R.A. Airdrie 2014 LEDUC Centennial Grande CTR. RED Servus Credit (MILLENNIU SPRUCE REGIONAL Calgary CRT. (CARDEL Rates 3% 5% 7% SERVICE Medicine Hat Lethbridge Centre Prairie DEER Union M) GROVE REC. CTR. Lesiure CALGARY Y M C A PLACE) Increase Increase Increase Meeting Rooms (40-150 People) Full room per hour $113.40 $42.00 $104.00 $41.80 $62.00 $90.00 $67.00 $47.00 1/2 room per hour $56.70 $52.50 $ 54.08 $ 55.13 $ 56.18 Full Day $126.00 $250.00 $210.00 $26.25 $ 27.04 $ 27.56 $ 28.09 Half Day $63.00 $70.41 $42.20 $210.00$ 216.30 $ 220.50 $ 224.70 $315.00$ 324.45 $ 330.75 $ 337.05 Multipurpose/Birthday Party $26.25 $ 27.04 $ 27.56 $ 28.09 Rate per hour $33.15 $30.35 $31.65 $30.00 $27.99 $28.10 $46.00 $35.00 $15.75 $ 16.22 $ 16.54 $ 16.85 Full Day $210.00 $131.25$ 135.19 $ 137.81 $ 140.44 Half Day $84.00 $ 86.52 $ 88.20 $ 89.88 $21.00 $ 21.63 $ 22.05 $ 22.47 Gymnasium $15.75 $ 16.22 $ 16.54 $ 16.85 Full Gym per hour $51.60 $62.00 $31.20 $90.00 $64.00 $93.00 1/2 Gym per hour $25.90 $52.45 $65.00 $168.00$ 173.04 $ 176.40 $ 179.76 $252.00$ 259.56 $ 264.60 $ 269.64 Field House $42.00 $ 43.26 $ 44.10 $ 44.94 Full Field per hour $102.00 $105.00 $111.25 $126.00 1/3 Field per hour $53.53 (1/4) $37.75 $70.72 $168.00$ 173.04 $ 176.40 $ 179.76 1/2 Field per hour $56.00 $252.00$ 259.56 $ 264.60 $ 269.64 $42.00 $ 43.26 $ 44.10 $ 44.94
$126.00$ 129.78 $ 132.30 $ 134.82 $189.00$ 194.67 $ 198.45 $ 202.23 $31.50 $ 32.45 $ 33.08 $ 33.71 $15.75 $ 16.22 $ 16.54 $ 16.85
$110.25$ 113.56 $ 115.76 $ 117.97 $220.50$ 227.12 $ 231.53 $ 235.94 $42.00 $ 43.26 $ 44.10 $ 44.94
$168.00$ 173.04 $ 176.40 $ 179.76 $252.00$ 259.56 $ 264.60 $ 269.64 $42.00 $ 43.26 $ 44.10 $ 44.94 $ - $ - $ - $68.25 $ 70.30 $ 71.66 $ 73.03 $42.00 $ 43.26 $ 44.10 $ 44.94
$42.00 $ 43.26 $ 44.10 $ 44.94 $68.25 $ 70.30 $ 71.66 $ 73.03 $105.00$ 108.15 $ 110.25 $ 112.35 GENESIS PLACE - Ftiness & Leisure market research 2014 for 2015 Rates Dow Centennial 2014 Average Centre (Fort East Link Grande Collicut Ctr Red St. Albert Servus Sherwood Park Leduc Tri Leisure Ctr Village Square Rate Genesis Place SERVICE Medicine Hat Lethbridge Saskatchewan) Prairie Deer Place (Millennium) Spruce Grove Westside Ctr Lesiure Ctr Cardel Place 2014 Rates 3% 5% Core Fitness Services Fitness Services 5Hr Personal Training N/A $325.00 $288.65 N/A N/A $260.00 $294.75 $255.00 $250.00 $315.00 $346.00 $330.00 $296.04 $288.75 297.41$ $303.19 10Hr Personal Training N/A $650.00 $432.60 $580.00 N/A $500.00 $589.50 $495.00 $500.00 $605.00 $640.00 $620.00 $561.21 $525.00 540.75$ $551.25 20Hr Personal Training N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A $1,000.00 N/A $935.00 $1,000.00 $1,102.00 N/A $1,180.00 $1,043.40 $945.00 $ 973.35 $992.25 5Hr Partner/PT N/A N/A $250.00 N/A N/A $300.00 N/A $325.00 $350.00 $420.00 $388.00 $390.00 $346.14 $370.00 $ 381.10 $388.50
Core Fitness Programs Fitness Classes Adult N/A $8.57 $7.15 N/A $7.00 $11.75 $8.45 $10.93 $10.00 $16.80 $10.50 $13.80 $10.50 $10.50 $10.82 $11.03 Adult Speciality N/A $11.43 $9.00 N/A $7.00 $12.40 $11.00 $10.45 $13.00 $17.00 $12.00 $14.70 $11.80 $11.50 $11.85 $12.08 Pre/Post Natal N/A $11.43 $6.00 N/A $7.00 $10.00 $7.67 $11.64 $10.00 $17.00 $10.50 $13.00 $10.42 $10.50 $10.82 $11.03 Pre/Post Natal Speciality N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A $13.00 N/A N/A $13.00 $17.00 $12.00 $14.75 $13.95 $11.50 $11.85 $12.08 Youth N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A $15.00 N/A $12.12 $13.56 $11.50 $11.85 $12.08
Core Rec Programs Rec Classes Preschool $5.37 $3.14 N/A N/A $6.43 $8.00 N/A N/A $11.25 $10.29 $10.50 $13.00 $8.50 $10.75 $11.07 $11.29 Parent & Tot N/A N/A N/A N/A $6.33 $7.67 N/A N/A $13.33 $16.00 $10.20 N/A $10.71 $10.50 $10.82 $11.03 Children $5.56 $5.44 $6.50 N/A $13.13 N/A $7.00 N/A $10.29 $14.55 $9.50 $12.13 $9.34 $10.75 $11.07 $11.29 Daycamp(5-12yr) F day $2.93 $3.88 $3.38 $4.29 $5.00 $5.57 $5.14 $4.75 $5.66 $6.30 $5.18 $5.86 $4.83 $5.50 $5.67 $5.78 Daycamp(3-5yr) 1/2 day N/A $3.88 $5.20 N/A $6.33 $7.00 N/A N/A $7.07 $7.50 $6.00 $7.47 $6.31 $6.00 $6.18 $6.30 Kids Connection 2 day/yr N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A $1,275.00 N/A $1,195.00 $1,670.00 $1,380.00 $1,755.00 $1,807.65 $1,842.75 Kids Connection 3 day/yr N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A $1,680.00 $1,900.00 $1,790.00 $2,559.50 $2,636.29 $2,687.48
Core Birthday Parties Birthday Party Sports N/A $180.00 N/A $120.00 N/A $127.00 N/A $175.00 $98.00 $150.00 $150.00 $116.00 $139.50 $160.00 $164.80 $168.00 Wild N Wet N/A N/A N/A $180.00 N/A N/A N/A $140.00 N/A $125.00 $150.00 N/A $148.75 $165.00 $169.95 $173.25
Child Care Services Child Care Drop in per hour N/A $4.00 $4.60 $5.00 $5.00 $5.72 $6.00 $6.00 $8.00 $6.75 $5.00 $5.50 $5.60 $4.75 $4.89 $4.99 10 hr pass N/A $25.00 N/A $50.00 $45.00 $51.30 $54.00 $51.35 N/A N/A $45.00 N/A $45.95 $44.60 $45.94 $46.83 20 hr pass N/A $47.00 $36.40 N/A $85.00 N/A N/A $102.70 N/A N/A N/A N/A $67.78 $84.00 $86.52 $88.20
Kids Connection 2014 Comparisons - will not be increasing until Sept 2015-June 2016 program, will look at 2% or 3%. Kids Connection – Preschool 10 mth program (2.5hr program): 2 days: $1,755/yr, 3 days: $2,559.50/yr Airdrie Average: 2 days: $1,762.50/yr, (2.5hr and 3hr programs) 3 days: $2,437.50/yr
AGENDA REPORT
Meeting Date (M/D/Y): 6/16/2014
Subject: Aquatic's Area Lifecycle Capital Renewal
Boards Routed Through: Date: Community Service Advisory Board 5/12/2014
Description:
The surface areas within the aquatics building system needs to be replaced in order to maintain the existing asset, increasing its longevity and ensuring optimal facility functions and public safety. Replacement of surfaces in the aquatics area includes the pool deck, leisure pool, hot tub, pool basins, the aquatic changing room floors, showers, and the steam room.
Background:
The Aquatic area has undergone a number of lifecycle improvements over the past 10 years of operation to improve efficiencies and to maintain the facility. This report explains the scope of work required to repair and replace the worn and failing surfaces in the aquatics area, the length of time required to complete the work, the implications to facility operations, and the necessity to close the aquatics area for 12 weeks.
Replacement and/or repairing the existing surfaces in the aquatics area has become a necessity as part of the preventative maintenance plan. Surface areas are looking worn as a result of high traffic, volume of use, nature of environment, and the acid base cleaners that are used to remove calcium build up.
Numerous tiles have gone missing around grates and at the bottom of the pool. Replacement or repair on these tiles is not possible without draining the pool. Patchwork is done to file down sharp edges to help reduce the problem; however, with nearly 50,000 square feet of tile it is nearly impossible to eliminate all the areas of concern.
The changing rooms (Men’s, Ladies, and Family) consist of 5,000 square feet of tile, the pool deck consists of 20,000 square feet, and there is 25,000 square feet of tile in the leisure pool basin and hot tub. Grout has almost completely eroded in the changing rooms, on the deck, and in the leisure pool basin in an effort to be proactive and eliminate the following potential concerns: water seeps in causing the tiles to lift and pop off, it is esthetically unappealing, and safety concerns for both staff and patrons as tiles are sharp.
A process to gather information was carried out by staff in December 2013 to determine what the estimated cost would be as well as the best method and product to use and approximate timeline to perform the scope of work. This process is called “Request for Information” (RFI). A scoring matrix was developed weighing the following factors: sustainability, performance, maintenance, life of product, and the impact it will have on operations.
After all the information had been gathered through the RFI process, staff completed a detailed analysis of these proposals. Staff has been able to conclude through a proactive approach that an alternate product would be an option for the deck surfaces; however, it has been determined that tile would be the best product for the pool basins. The RFI process has also allowed staff to consult with experts to determine that staging the project is not an option because of the size and scope of the work, the nature of the environment, and how the space is used.
Implications:
Closing the aquatics area, which is an integral part of Airdrie’s community (Schedule 2), will have a significant impact to numerous different user groups. Unfortunately, in order to repair the tile and the grout and to complete the scope of work safely and efficiently the aquatic center will have to be closed completely for the duration.
Impact on Genesis Place’s operating budget based on 2014 fees and charges is approximately:
Loss of Revenue: Programming revenue………………….…$200,000 Pool rentals…………………………….….....$20,000 Admissions revenue……………………….$100,000
Projected loss of revenue…………………………………..$320,000
Expenditure Impacts based on 2014 numbers (savings) approximately: Staff cost……………………………..………$170,000 Utilities………………………………….……...$15,000 Chemicals…………………………………..….$12,000 Projected Net Savings………………………………………$197,000
The overall project impact to the operating budget is an increased cost of approximately $123,000.
Alternatives/Implications:
Scheduling of Aquatic Closure
As the aquatic center is an important amenity used differently throughout the year, every effort has been made to analyze the impact to each group when choosing the time to close. User groups do not use the pool in August and start in mid-September, school groups do not use the pool in August or September, and the use is minimal in October. User groups and schools use the pool heavily November until the end of June. Children are out of school in July and August, and there are provide more public swim hours in the months to accommodate children being out of school. In an attempt to mitigate the impacts to the community, it was determined that August 1 to October 31, 2015, would be the best to time to close as public use is lower in September and October, but user groups’ use is higher from mid-September until the end of June.
The impact to the community will be significant and a detailed communication strategy will have to be completed with Corporate Communication. City Council has supported the following user fees structure for Genesis Place: “Genesis Place as a multi-use facility having a single admission for access to the entire facility.”
Annual pass holders are able to place the pass on hold twice a year suspending any usage within the facility by the pass holder unless a drop-in fee is paid. The pass holder continues to make monthly payments on the pass during this time. Once activated, the pass is extended at the end with the additional time period added. This option will support annual pass holders who determine that the three-month aquatic area closure will impact their use or present a need to go elsewhere.
One of the main issues regarding the closure is how to proceed with annual pass sales while reducing services within the facility. In order to maintain and support the existing operating structure, Administration is researching how other facilities have handled major shutdowns and industry standards.
Corporate Communications:
Corporate Communications is aware of the proposed closure and a plan is being developed. This plan would consist of utilizing all of the social media tools available. Other communication strategies such as In the City Guide, ads in City Connection, enhanced content on airdrie.ca, a press release, and Airdrie Today will all be used to ensure that the information has been presented to as large a target audience as possible. A communications plan would start August 1, 2014, informing pass holders that this will be occurring in August 2015.
Boards Routed Through:
At the May 12, 2014 meeting, the Community Service Advisory Board voted unanimously in favor of the three-month closure if approved by Council in the 2015 capital budget.
Recommendation: That City Council accepts Community Services Advisory Board recommendation of a three-month aquatic facility closure August 1 – November 1, 2015 to accommodate the replacement of the aquatic area surfacing as outlined in this report.
Lynn Mackenzie Aquatics Services Team Leader
Presenter: Lynn Mackenzie Attachments:
AGENDA REPORT
Meeting Date (M/D/Y) 6/16/2014
Subject: Aquatic Lifecycle / Annual Pass Fee Options During Closure
Boards Routed Through: Date: Community Services Advisory Board 6/9/2014
Description:
Admininistration is presenting a communication plan and options for annual pass holders during the closure at Genesis Place.
Background:
A lifecycle project if approved within the 2015 Capital Budget will close the aquatic area for three months to have the deck surfaces and the tiles replaced within the pool basins.
The impact of a closure of this length will be significant to the community and the patrons of Genesis Place in many different ways. Over the past 10 years, administration has fielded many requests from users regarding a separate fee for individual amenities within the facility. City Council has supported the following user fee structure for Genesis Place: “Genesis Place is a multi-use facility with a single admission fee for access to the entire facility.”
Administration is presenting potential options in regard to how the closure will be handled and communicated to the patrons of Genesis Place. This closure will affect:
- Annual pass sales during closure - Admissions (drop-in, 10x-passes, monthly) during closure - Executive memberships - Clubs, rentals and schools
Administration has contacted similar facilities in order to gather information on how amenity shutdowns have occurred and been managed with the different affected users within other like facilities. The information gathered is as follows:
TransAlta Tri Leisure Centre - Closed for 8 weeks in 2013 for replacement of air handling system. - Normal 10-day closure in September for regular maintenance. - Extended memberships by 2 months if requested by patron ONLY. - No other pools in the area for access (summer access in other communities).
Grande Prairie – East Link Centre - Facility only 2 years old. - Closed one week per quarter for preventative maintenance. - Annual passes were extended and a reduced rate for annual pass holders was implemented for registered programs.
Lethbridge – Leisure Centre - Closures are rotated through 3 community pools for a 2 to 3 week period each year. - No discounts or pass extensions during closure, but extend passes for special needs cases where other pools don’t meet special needs requirements.
Strathcona County (Millennium Place) - Annual shutdowns occur for maintenance. - Patrons were educated and redirected with no compensation on fees during closure.
Westside Leisure Centre - Longest being 3 week shutdown (close annually in Sept). - Disclaimer in membership package regarding shutdown, no compensation of any type during the closure.
Cardel Place - Closures are approximately every 2 years for maintenance and repairs. - Have arranged for other facilities close by to accept their pass holders at facility drop-in rates. - No compensation or extension for annual pass holders during the closure.
Current annual pass holders at Genesis Place are able to place their pass on hold twice a year suspending any usage within the facility by the pass holder during the suspension period unless a drop-in fee is paid. This process is managed through Customer Service with monthly payments continuing to be made while the pass is on hold. The suspended period is then added to the end of the pass extending it without further payments. This option could be used to support annual pass holders who determine that the three-month Aquatic area closure will impact their use or present a need to go elsewhere.
The City of Airdrie Corporate Communications Team is working on a detailed plan to present the approved options to the public and Genesis Place annual pass holders. The intent of all departments involved is to be able to offer 12 months’ notice to everyone involved in this shutdown and allow enough time for education and decision making of the public and annual pass holders.
The aquatic team has been in discussion with all club and rental groups as well as the schools regarding the closure. These groups are aware of the potential shut down and are awaiting information regarding moving forward around the scheduled dates of the closure.
Options presented below would include annual pass holders ONLY. Admission fees of drop-in, 10x passes and monthly passes will all be educated and informed of the closure prior to purchasing this admission pass. Administration would suggest no compensation or reduction of fees applied to 2015 rates in these areas during closure.
As presented in the previous report entitled Aquatic Area Lifecycle Capital Renewal, the impact on Genesis Place’s operating budget based on 2014 fees and charges is estimated as follows:
Loss of Revenue:
Programming revenue………………….…$200,000 Pool rentals……………………………….....$20,000 Admissions revenue……………………….$100,000
Projected loss revenue……………………………………. $320,000
Expenditure impacts based on 2014 numbers (savings) approximately: Staff cost……………………………..………$170,000 Utilities………………………………….……...$15,000 Chemicals………………………………….….$12,000
Projected Net Savings……………………………………..…$197,000
The overall projected impact to the operating budget is an increased cost of approximately $123,000.
Alternative #1: Remain Status Quo
Allow annual pass holders to follow current practice and put their annual passes on hold for up to three months. Once this annual pass is put on hold, the account is frozen and there is no access to other amenities within the building. Current practices allow annual pass holders to use this option throughout the year. In 2014 it is budget that 300 units (annual passes) will use this option out of 3172 units (annual passes). This value added service is used by 9.4% of annual pass holders currently. This option will allow annual pass holders the choice whether to continue using other services offered or not.
Implications:
With not having established a consistent closure period over the past 10 years of operation for preventative maintenance and repairs in the aquatic area, both public users and annual pass holders will feel that a fee reduction of some sort is required due to a decrease in service.
This alternative does support Council’s approved fee structure of one fee for access to all available amenities within the building.
Financial implications with this option would be that annual passes that are put on hold will carry over into 2016 by three months or less which would show a decrease in revenues in 2016. All indirect costs would still occur (building heat, lighting, full-time staff).
Alternative #2: Reduction of Service Amenities Fee
Implement a reduction in service fee that is applied directly to the account for the three-month closure. A reduction in service fee of 10% is applied to all annual pass for the three months affected. Under the monthly payment plan, the average monthly payment is $93.40 for a family membership. With a 10% reduced service fee applied to the three-month shutdown, the reduction per month would be $9.34 per annual family pass for a total of $28.02. The reduction in service fees for an individual pass ($49.19 / month) would amount to $4.91 credit for the three- month period for a total of $14.73. A reduction in service fee of $14.73 (single) or $28.02 (family) would be taken off the cost of an annual pass and credited to the account. The credit could be applied to programing or admission costs at a later date.
Implications:
This alternative does not support Council’s approved fee structure of one fee for use for all amenities within the facility. This option may encourage other users to seek a discount for other amenities when unavailable (for example, indoor track).
This may set expectations of moving to a user fee based on amenities used.
This also assumes that all annual pass holders use the aquatic area regularly or at some time, which is not the case.
Financial implications associated with this option could reach as high as an additional $60,000 in decreased revenues if all annual pass holders apply for the reduction in service fee. Applying a credit on the account allows Genesis Place to retain the dollars to be spent in the facility. This net loss would be applied on top of the already presented net loss of revenues of $123,000 for a total net loss of revenues of approximately $183,000. All indirect costs would still occur (building heat, lighting, full time staff).
Alternative #3: Combination of Option #1 and Option #2
Allow annual pass holders to choose either Option #1 or Option #2 to better meet their individual needs. This option gives annual pass holders the choice of putting their annual pass on hold or having a reduced fee applied to their account. A process would be established as to how Customer Service would receive individual requests and then make the changes in each account accordingly. The process would include a written request or e-mail from annual pass holders.
Implications:
This option does present some administrative challenges, and staff will have to wait for customers to attend to communicate what they want. This alternative does not support Council’s approved fee structure of one fee for access to all available amenities within the building.
Financial implications associated with this option would be a maximum of approximately $60,000 in decreased revenues added to the projected $123,000 for a total net loss for 2015 within the aquatic area of potentially $183,000. All indirect costs would still occur (building heat, lighting, full time staff).
Boards Routed Through:
At the meeting of June 9, 2014, the Community Service Advisory Board voted in favor of Alternative #1, remaining status quo and allowing annual pass holders to put their pass on hold for the three- month closure if they wish to do so.
Recommendation: That City Council endorses the recommendation of the Community Services Advisory Board and accepts Alternative #1 of remaining status quo, allowing annual pass holders to put their pass on hold for the three-month closure if they wish to do so.
Greg Lockert Manager Genesis Place / Arena Operations
Author : Greg Lockert Department: Genesis Place Review ed by: Michelle Lock Attachments: N/A
AGENDA REPORT
Meeting Date (M/D/Y): 6/16/2014
Subject: Municipal Government Act Review Submission
Boards Routed Through: Date: City Council 6/16/2014
Description:
Council is being asked to review the proposed submission from Airdrie to Alberta Municipal Affairs in response to their stakeholder review of the Municipal Government Act.
Background:
The Province is currently undergoing a stakeholder review of the Municipal Government Act (MGA). Many Council and staff members have participated in various stakeholder sessions offered by Alberta Municipal Affairs throughout the Province. City staff believes it is worthwhile to submit a municipal response to the review. It supports advocacy efforts in ensuring Airdrie maintains a presence at the provincial level and is viewed as an important mid-sized City. All submissions are due in to the Province by mid-June. The attached document outlines the feedback received from staff regarding the current Municipal Government Act.
Boards Routed Through: N/A
Alternatives/Implications:
1. Council could choose to endorse the submission as presented. Choosing this option would suggest Council believes the submission is complete in its current form.
2. Council could choose to amend the submission prior to endorsing it. Choosing this option would suggest Council believes there are some areas that have not yet received comment that should.
3. Council could choose not to endorse forwarding a submission to the Province. Choosing this option would suggest Council believes it is not necessary to submit an Airdrie-specific response to the MGA review.
Corporate Communications: N/A
Recommendation: That City Council endorses forwarding the Municipal Government Act Review submission to the provincial government for their consideration.
Kari Kitiuk Team Leader, Legislative Services
Presenter: Kari Kitiuk Attachments: MGA Submission
MGA REVIEW SUMMARY TABLE
Division Reference General Comments Priority The MGA needs to be brought current in terms of technology and the High ability for interactions, business, etc., to be conducted by electronic means. Part 1 Section 3 Greater definition is required to provide a viable community. Aim of Purposes, Powers stewardship over public assets (money and infrastructure). and Capacity of
Municipalities Part 1 Section 4 Being able to hold controlled corporations should remain since it gives Purposes, Powers flexibility in generating income and providing a service (i.e. a utility). and Capacity of
Municipalities
Part 1 Section 5 Expand powers to raise revenue. Purposes, Powers and Capacity of allow municipalities to create new fees and taxes
Municipalities
Part 1 Section 6 It is important that municipalities maintain natural person powers. High Purposes, Powers and Capacity of Municipalities Part 2 Alberta Fire Departments have been lobbying for a number of years High Bylaws for the municipalities to have the ability to dictate and mandate through bylaws mandatory building materials in new developments (residential sprinklers, fire resistant or rated roofing and siding materials, lot sizes) to name a few. Airdrie would support this amendment.
Part 5 Division 9, Sect. 184 Currently a Council member may vote at a public hearing if absent Councils, Councillors from a portion of the public meeting. A Council member may not vote and Council if absent from the entire public hearing. Airdrie would support allowing a Council member absent from the whole hearing to vote if Committees they review the contents of the hearing through audio or video recording and swear an affidavit indicating they have done so.
Part 7 Ensure transparency. Don’t legislate public engagement in financial Public Participation matters. Address requirements of municipalities to adequately budget for short and long term obligations
Part 9 All types of property should be assessed at typical market value, High Assessment of including regulated property, machinery & equipment and linear Property property. The assessment process needs to be transparent, and if property taxes of specific property warrant a change in the tax rates
then an adjustment can be made at the tax rate level. MRAT
Part 9 Division 5 The school tax requisitions are based on the equalized assessment of High Assessment of each municipality. The current equalization process does not result in Property a fair and equitable distribution of educational funding requirements between municipalities. Equalized assessments for all properties should be based on market value principles and equalized to a common level and a common year.
Part 9 Division 1 Functions like audit, linear assessment and special property High Assessment of (machinery and equipment) valuations should remain under the Property jurisdiction of the province.
Alberta Municipal Affairs is currently responsible for establishing and setting the MGA and they also provide the audit function for assessment services. This could be perceived as a conflict of interest.
Part 9 Division 1 Sections 294 through 296 of the MGA allow for the inspection of High Assessment of Sections 294-296 and property, information collection from property owners and remedies Property 299-300 through the courts if requests are not complied with. The provisions are necessary for the assessor to carry out its basic function and
failure to provide information requested should have serious consequences.
Sections 299 and 300 allow for public access to assessment information. Currently, the municipalities are obliged to provide “all” assessment information, including content that does not assist either party in ascertaining the accuracy or fairness of their assessments.
The exact requirement should be set out and legislation should provide direction around what information must be provided.
Legislation should include a provision to allow municipalities to provide and receive information electronically, and allow assessment notices and the additional information on the assessment notice to be communicated electronically or online.
Part 9 Division 4 There is a concern about inequity among municipalities that do or do High Assessment of Sections 313-216 not choose to prepare supplementary assessments. Jurisdictions with Property supplementary assessments pay additional provincial school taxes, over and above the annual requisition. This additional school tax
revenue should be used as a credit towards the following years’ requisitions
Part 10 Division 2 Municipal independence in setting tax rates and ratios is a high High Taxation Section 354 priority as is the ability to have new revenue sources. Part 10 Division 2 Exemptions are an important issue. All exemptions from taxation (and High Taxation Sections 361-363 assessment) represent forgone revenues for municipalities and an increased share of the total tax burden for taxpayers in return
The Community Organization Property Tax Exemption Regulations need to be reviewed and updated. The current criteria are not comprehensive and interpretations are not clear enough to ensure consistency within and across jurisdictions. Part 10 Division 3 Like all other bylaws, Council should only be required to pass a High Taxation Section 379 supplementary tax bylaw once rather than on an annual basis. The bylaw would remain in effect until Council decided not to conduct supplementary assessments and repealed the bylaw.
Part 11 The Assessment Review Board Clerk should have the ability to reject High Assessment Review complaints that are incomplete (e.g., not accompanied by a fee or Boards consent letter, no discussions held with assessor with no reasons as to why). The majority of these deficiencies are coming from agents, MRAC who should be familiar with the process and able to fulfil the requirements of the Act.
Part 11 Assessment Review Airdrie strongly supports the existing ARB structure - where Boards complaints are heard once with the option to appeal to the courts on High matters of law or jurisdiction .
And Board member training is important. Assessment review boards seem to be unwilling to uphold existing provisions. It would be beneficial to High MRAC see tools or clarifications that require/assist the ARBs to enforce directions regarding complaint form completion and deadlines for filing.
The length of time between assessment notice mailing and the deadline for filing a complaint – currently 60 days - is too long. Most appeals are still received within the last 7-10 days with no discussion High with assessors. With respect to the foregoing
Notification should be received regarding requirements for preliminary and procedural matters regarding evidence exchange timelines. Discussions should occur with the assessor on this High matter.
The assessment standard for assessors is mass appraisal. Once a complaint is at a hearing, it appears board members switch to a Medium single property appraisal. Mass appraisal should be carried – High through both the assessment and complaint to ensure consistency in approach.
Procedural matters regarding corrections to assessments under complaint and to assessments that may be related to a value under complaint (i.e. comparable(s)). Assessment review board members are considering comparables that are not true comparables when making decisions. The issue of inadequate complaint form information – not allowing Medium the use of “boiler plates” and “appeal placeholder” – complaints – High need to be specific and set out what the complainant is asking for and the reasons for the complaint..
Disallowing individual tenants within a property to dispute the assessment of the entire property. High
The complaint period (whether 30 or 60 days) should be inclusive High of mailing time.
Part 17 Off-site Levies The portions of the MGA that deal with off-site levies needs to be High Planning & expanded to allow for a community to collect off-site levies (or an Development Division 6 equivalent charge) to fund community infrastructure pertaining to growth. Things such as fire halls, transit facilities, Sections 648, 650 recreation/community centres, libraries, etc., should have partial funding provided by MGA-approved cost recovery mechanisms. In the Division 7 absence of these changes, high growth communities cannot afford to Section 655 fund necessary community infrastructure to accommodate new residents. The absence of these changes place a disproportionate funding share on existing residents and not on a ‘growth-pays-for- itself’ methodology that is more appropriate.
OUTSTANDING COUNCIL FOLLOWUP (Updated to June 2, 2014)
2014 Item Director Alderman and Expected Return Date Contact Date Originated Report back re potential for a video featuring life in Airdrie P. Schulz Hegg – Jan 20/14 June 2014 (Revised – July 2014) Report back on Bylaw regarding use of motorized vehicles for M. Locking Brown – Jan 20/14 May 2014 snow clearing L. Stevens (Revised – July 2014) P. Schulz Report back with respect to the feasibility, including costs, for M. Locking Hunter – Feb 18/14 June 2014 a reader board to be located at City Hall as a way of P. Schulz communicating to the City’s residents, and to use existing reader boards at City facilities
Report back with information regarding the implementation of M. Lock Burley – Mar 17/14 March 2015 bar service at Bert Church Theatre in first quarter 2015
Report back with respect to Public Hearings and the L. Stevens Brown – May 5/14 September 2014 public notification process
Report back with respect to the concerns outlined in P. Schulz Hegg – May 5/14 September 2014 Charlene Maine’s presentation of May 5, 2014
Report back with information on what constitutes auto L. Stevens Hunter - May 20/14 July 2014 sales within the parameters of home-based businesses and what factors would require the home-based business to move to commercial space.
Report back with information on the background to the P. Schulz Burley - May 20/14 October 2014 Massage Practitioners bylaw related to mobile massage therapy services in Airdrie being restricted to Airdrie residents only.
Report back with information on a procedural bylaw P. Schulz Burley - May 20/14 October 2014
Report back on Residential Fire Hall option (costs) M. Locking Burley – June 2/14 September 2/14
Report back on review of snow and ice service levels L. Stevens Kolson – June 2/14 Fall 2014
2013 Report back on limiting the number of election signs on public L. Stevens Hegg – Nov 18/13 March 2014 property and what is being done in other communities with (Revised – July 2014) respect to election signage as part of the development of the new Land Use Bylaw