CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CHATHAM-KENT
CHATHAM-KENT COUNCIL MEETING
COUNCIL CHAMBERS, CHATHAM CIVIC CENTRE
MARCH 27, 2006 6:10 P.M. ______
1. CALL TO ORDER
The Mayor called the meeting to Order.
Present were: Mayor Diane Gagner, Councillors Brown, Clarke, Crew, Eberle, Faas, Fluker, Gilbert, Gordon, Herman, King, McGregor, McGuigan, Robbins, Scott, Sulman, Vercouteren and Weaver.
2. APPROVAL OF SUPPLEMENTARY AGENDA
There was no supplementary agenda.
3. DISCLOSURES OF PECUNIARY INTEREST (DIRECT OR INDIRECT) AND THE GENERAL NATURE THEREOF
There were no disclosures of pecuniary interest.
4. PRESENTATION
(a) Welcoming of Bev Shipley, M.P., Lambton-Kent-Middlesex and Dave Van Kesteren, M.P., Chatham-Kent, Essex
The Mayor introduced Bev Shipley, M.P., Lambton-Kent-Middlesex and Dave Van Kesteren, M.P., Chatham-Kent, Essex and presented them with a framed map of Chatham-Kent. Mr. Van Kesteren and Mr. Shipley thanked Council and highlighted the partnership between the Municipality of Chatham-Kent and themselves, as representatives of the community.
(b) Jacques Gauthier, Senior Vice-President & COO, Jean Roy, Technical Director, & Michael Cookson, Manager, Wind Power Sector, Kruger Energy Group - Wind Energy
Gerry Murphy, Senior Planner introduced Jacques Gauthier, Senior Vice-President & COO, Jean Roy, Technical Director, & Michael Cookson, Manager, Wind Power Sector, Kruger Energy Group who were present to provide a PowerPoint presentation in relation to wind energy. Wind Energy is not new in Ontario, but not too common. There are several projects in Ontario and others underway. Wind energy accounts for approximately 2% of the power generated in the Province. A target has been set to increase this amount to 10% by 2010. The provincial RFP process is a process whereby companies interested in Chatham-Kent Council Minutes from its meeting held on March 27, 2006 Page 1 of 49 producing wind energy and supplying it to the Ontario power grid file bid proposals. Contracts are awarded based on these proposals. The Senior Planner explained that there is only one contract awarded in Chatham-Kent and it has been awarded to the Kruger Energy Group. The group is present this evening to explain the company and its projects. The Senior Planner reminded Council that some time ago, it adopted land use policies that support the use of wind energy in Chatham-Kent. This evening’s presentation will provide more detailed information about wind energy and related projects.
Mr. Gauthier, Mr. Roy and Mr. Cookson addressed Council and provided a PowerPoint presentation in relation to Port Alma – KEPA and wind energy. KEPA (Kruger Energy Port Alma Limited Partnership) was selected by the Ontario Ministry of Energy RFP II to complete a 101.2 MW wind farm project near Port Alma, Ontario. Mr. Gauthier, Mr. Roy and Mr. Cookson provided specifics of the Port Alma project together with turbine technical information. The status of the Port Alma project was provided together with the project schedule. The benefits of the project include significant economic benefits, operation phase provides annual economic benefits, and in turn, property tax revenues will increase. Furthermore, secondary incomes are created, there is no material present that would affect the property values, there is an increased investment into renewable energy and there are no emissions of green house gases. The group reported that there are numerous benefits of generating electricity from wind energy which are well documented. In comparison to other forms of electricity generation, wind energy is renewable, highly reliable, efficient, few environmental effects, assists in the reduction of global climate change and is part of an overall solution to Ontario’s forecasted electricity needs. Mr. Gauthier, Mr. Roy and Mr. Cookson reviewed the stages of a wind farm including prospecting, development, engineering studies, construction and operation. An open house will be held in April to provide further information. Mr. Gauthier, Mr. Roy and Mr. Cookson thanked the Municipality for their assistance received during this process.
The Mayor asked that the group reiterate that an open house would be held in April. Mr. Gauthier confirmed that open houses would be held however, dates have not yet been set.
Councillor King thanked the group for their presentation. He asked if they would be using the existing sub stations or, would they design their own. Mr. Roy advised that they would need to step up the transformer voltage and would be building their own sub stations.
Councillor Eberle sought clarification of the surface area diagrams included in the presentation.
Councillor Fluker sought clarification of the stage that the Port Alma project is currently at. Mr. Gauthier explained that the assessment was done two months ago. Progress would continue to the end of the year. It takes a full year assessment to receive permits. They have also begun the preliminary engineering studies which are expected to take four or five months. The construction will most likely start at the end of 2007.
Councillor Fluker noted that residents have expressed concern of where these wind farms would be located. Mr. Gauthier explained that wind farms are exclusively on agricultural lands. There are minimal distance requirements. The government has established many laws and rules to protect the residential areas. Councillor Fluker suggested that during the public consultation, citizens be told where the farms would be. This would put an end to a number of rumours circulating in the community.
Councillor Vercouteren sought clarification of the role that the Municipality would play in this Chatham-Kent Council Minutes from its meeting held on March 27, 2006 Page 2 of 49 project. Mr. Gauthier explained that they are simply seeking support by the Municipality. The Mayor clarified that the Municipality of Chatham-Kent has established that there are no funds available to assist but could offer expertise, introductions, and contacts. Administration has assisted the group with cutting through red tape to move the project along. As everyone can see, the benefits are substantial to the community and farmers. She reiterated that no funds are being provided. The Chief Administrative Officer reiterated that the official plan permits such development.
Councillor Vercouteren asked if putting up such a structure on agriculture land would change the zoning in any way. The Senior Planner advised that there would be a zone change required. These requests would require Council approval. The properties affected will require a change to zoning that permits wind turbine. Rezoning would only be applied to the area on the property required to accommodate the turbine. No severance is required and the area required for the turbine is very small. Mr. Gauthier noted that any increase in taxes due to the wind tower would be paid for by them.
Councillor McGuigan asked if the turbines are fully powered by wind. Mr. Roy advised that when in operation, the turbines take no load from the grid. Only during periods when the wind conditions do not allow operations that turbines draw a small charge. This is a very small draw –less than 1% of the production of the actual machine.
Councillor McGuigan sought clarification of any impact of the turbines on birds. Mr. Gauthier advised that any impact to the birds forms part of the environmental assessment which is presently being conducted. Four season migration studies are done. This is a one year study in which the bird migration is monitored. Furthermore, the wind towers turn very slowly. It has been found that the birds tend to go around the turbines versus into them. The studies do not indicate any need for implementing noise in the turbines to scare birds away. The wind turbines will be the most scientific on the market. The blades turn 16 times per minute.
Councillor Clarke asked who would decommission the systems should the company no longer be around when the contract ends. Mr. Gauthier noted that a trust fund has not been created for this. It is not an obligation. Discussions have taken place to extend the contracts. The intent is to increase this project. This is the company’s first objective.
Councillor Clarke sought clarification of the lifecycle of each turbine.
Councillor Clarke asked if there have been problems with other wind farms with respect to vibration and footing. Mr. Gauthier confirmed that this has never been a problem. There have been some problems with gear boxes on the machines but with the new technology, problems are very minimal. No problems have been identified with vibration and turbulence.
Councillor Herman asked if all the machines would operate at the same time. Mr. Roy noted that the machines are variable resource machines which depend on the fuel (wind). If the wind is not sufficient to generate the inertia necessary to spin the rotor, it simply won’t spin. Technology has developed remarkably over the years and it does not take much wind to have them move.
Councillor Herman referred to the agreement with the landowners. Should a landowner lose their land, and it becomes a ward of the Municipality of Chatham-Kent, is there a clause in the agreement that these wind farms would not become a responsibility of the taxpayers. Mr. Gauthier responded in the affirmative. He further advised that if there is default on the land, they have the right to remove the equipment.
Chatham-Kent Council Minutes from its meeting held on March 27, 2006 Page 3 of 49
The Chief Administrative Officer advised that the sum of $300,000 is for all the land and all the sites, not each one.
Councillor Eberle asked if they are considering expansion. Mr. Gauthier noted that it is dependant on the Province and the programs.
Councillor Fluker moved, Councillor King seconded:
“That the presentation be received for information.”
The Mayor put the Motion. Motion Carried
5. COMMITTEE REPORTS
(a) Recommendations of the Drainage Board from its meeting held February 8, 2006 - with respect to Court of Revision matters (to be approved)
Councillor King moved, Councillor Gordon seconded:
“That the recommendations of the Drainage Board from its meeting held February 8, 2006 - with respect to Court of Revision matters be approved.”
The Mayor put the Motion. Motion Carried
Councillor Vercouteren moved, Councillor Herman seconded:
“That the Notice of Motion be brought forward and discussed prior to Item 7b.”
The Mayor put the Motion. Motion Carried
6. COMMUNITY AND DEVELOPMENT SERVICES
Report from administration re
(a) Chatham-Kent Skateboard Park Project - Location of Chatham Skateboard Park
MUNICIPALITY OF CHATHAM-KENT
COMMUNITY AND DEVELOPMENT SERVICES
COMMUNITY SERVICES – RECREATION PROGRAMS
TO: Mayor and Members of Council
FROM: Shelly Arnold Mayor’s Youth Council Coordinator
DATE: March 22, 2006
SUBJECT: Chatham-Kent Skateboard Park Project - Location of Chatham Skateboard Park Chatham-Kent Council Minutes from its meeting held on March 27, 2006 Page 4 of 49
RECOMMENDATIONS
It is recommended that:
1. Council bring forth a motion to reconsider the motion passed at the May 18, 2002 Council Planning meeting which reads, “That an assessment of the community parkland needs be a prerequisite to any redevelopment proposal for the Community Centre on Tweedsmuir Avenue, Community of Chatham.”
2. Council rescind the motion that “an assessment of the community parkland needs be a prerequisite to any redevelopment proposal for the Community Centre on Tweedsmuir Avenue, Community of Chatham”.
3. The site at 50 Tweedsmuir Avenue West (commonly known as Kiwanis Stadium) be approved as the location for the Chatham Skateboard Park.
4. Up to $40,000 be funded through the Strategic Development Reserve for the development of an alternate site for a soccer field for the Chatham Youth Soccer Association.
BACKGROUND
The following outlines the most recent steps taken in the planning and construction of a skateboard park in the community of Chatham.
· October 17, 2005: Council approved the award of the tender for construction of the Chatham Skateboard Park to Agri-Urban Buildings Inc. Council also approved a recommendation to hold a public meeting to gather public input regarding the potential location of the skateboard park at 425 Grand Avenue West in Chatham.
· October 26, 2005: Public meeting for the Grand Avenue West site was held.
· February 27, 2006: Council received information on the outcome of public meeting for the Grand Avenue West site. Council approved the recommendation to hold a public meeting to gather public input regarding the potential location on two sites on Tweedsmuir Avenue West in Chatham (Kiwanis Stadium and Memorial Pool). Also at this meeting, Council rescinded the September, 2003 approval of Lion’s Park as the location for the Chatham Skateboard Park.
COMMENTS
The public meeting for the two Tweedsmuir Avenue West sites was held on March 9, 2006 with approximately 63 individuals and the media in attendance. Municipal staff in attendance included the Mayor’s Youth Council Coordinator; the Manager, Parks, Cemeteries, and Horticulture; the Manager, Recreation Programs; the Supervisor,
Chatham Parks; the Manager, Municipal Properties; and the Acting General Manager, Community and Development Services.
Discussion at the meeting, plus numerous emails, telephone calls, and letters received after the meeting expressed some positive feedback but mostly opposition to the proposed site locations on Tweedsmuir Avenue West. Refer to Attachment A for the minutes of the public meeting and feedback received concerning these sites.
Memorial Pool Site Chatham-Kent Council Minutes from its meeting held on March 27, 2006 Page 5 of 49
Several individuals expressed concern regarding the removal of Memorial Pool. Residents stated that it is the only pool on the south side. (However, it should be noted
that Jaycee Pool and Orville Wright pool are also located on the south side of the river). Additional comments pertaining to the pool site included: o Municipal pools are already in short supply; o Summer recreation programs would be impacted by removing the pool; o Availability of neighbourhood swimming lessons would be adversely affected; o Only one respondent was positive with regard to this location.
Kiwanis Stadium Soccer Field Site
The majority of individuals at the public meeting expressed concern regarding the Kiwanis Stadium location. Comments pertaining to this site included:
o An existing recreation facility (soccer) should not be converted; o Area is a large, open green space, which should be retained; o Displacement of soccer which already has a deficit of playing fields; o The youth particularly like this site as it is large, the arena is nearby and there is a lot of activity in the area already.
General Comments Regarding the Tweedsmuir Avenue West Sites
General comments included: o Skateboard park should not be located in a residential area; o The area is already too busy; o Not central location; o Not high profile enough; o Noise and garbage concerns.
It should be noted that the Kiwanis Club of Chatham was contacted and they are not adverse to the location of a skateboard park at Kiwanis Stadium. They do, however, require that any reference to the Kiwanis Club be removed, e.g. the rock marker located at the soccer field. A letter from the Kiwanis Club can be found in Attachment B.
Other Locations Investigated
Other locations investigated and other feedback received can be found in Attachment Analysis of Final Three Sites
Memorial Pool Site
Memorial Pool is 48 years old and for the past several years has had several structural upgrades. Recently, substantial problems with the current filtration system have been identified as well as structural problems which will be extremely costly to repair.
Although an opportunity exists to replace an aging recreational facility (Memorial Pool) with a new one (skateboard park), this location is a very tight fit for the size of the skateboard park. Also, this area is frequently used by tour buses, ice resurfacers, circus trucks, trailers etc. In addition, the location of the skateboard park on the Memorial Pool site would necessitate the removal of playground equipment currently in place next to the pool. Relocation of this equipment on site is not recommended due to space requirement regulations for playground equipment. Therefore, the Memorial Pool option is not recommended to be pursued.
Chatham-Kent Council Minutes from its meeting held on March 27, 2006 Page 6 of 49
Grand Avenue West and Kiwanis Stadium Sites
A detailed criteria comparison chart of the Kiwanis Stadium site and the Grand Avenue West site can be found in Attachment D. From this comparison chart, it is evident that Kiwanis Stadium received the higher score.
In addition to the criteria chart, the following information should be noted:
Grand Avenue West Site
a) The Cemeteries Act states that construction cannot take place within 15 feet of a cemetery. The distance between the proposed location of the skateboard park and the cemetery is approximately 134 feet. As a further safeguard, an archaeologist would be on-site while an archaeological assessment takes place. This process involves removing the top layer of earth on the construction site to inspect for signs of burials. The cost is approximately $2000.
Analysis of photos from 1977 shows that a farm implement building was previously located on the proposed site of the skateboard park. This indicates that the cemetery likely did not extend into the area proposed for construction. (Photo taken in 1977 can be found in Attachment E.)
b) Of the four individuals in attendance at the Grand Avenue public meeting, one was in favour of the site, one was indifferent, and two were opposed. A total of 11 letters/emails were received with regard to this site: 8 were opposed, 2 were indifferent, and one was in support of this location. (Letters can be found in Attachment F.)
Kiwanis Stadium Site
a) Staff have been working closely with the Chatham Youth Soccer Association (CYSA) to find an alternate site for a soccer field. CYSA is supportive of the skateboard park as long as (1) a comparable temporary site can be found for use this coming season and (2) the Municipality contribute up to $40,000 to develop an alternate site with any costs above this amount covered by the CYSA. (An email from the CYSA can be found in Attachment G.)
Staff and CYSA have investigated 10 sites as potential alternate locations for a soccer pitch. Kingston Park is large enough, however CYSA approached the neighbourhood in previous years and met with resistance. Nine of the sites were too small with the exception of a site at the Chatham Christian School. However, this site requires (1) Board approval, (2) irrigation and seeding due to the Board’s concern with overuse, (3) a joint use agreement between the CYSA, the School Board and the Municipality. None of these could be completed in time for this report. However, the Chatham Christian School Board will be meeting on Monday, March 27 to discuss a potential partnership with the CYSA and the Municipality to develop a comparable soccer pitch on the Chatham Christian School property for the 2006 season. A conversation with a local lawn care company has indicated that an irrigation system could be installed with minimal disruption to the school and to the CYSA 2006 season. It is being recommended that Council approve up to $40,000 to be funded through the Strategic Development Reserve for the development of this alternate site.
b) Strong neighbourhood opposition to this site – of the approximately 63 attendees at the public meeting, as well as feedback received afterward: o 8 respondents were in favour of the Kiwanis Stadium location specifically or the Tweedsmuir Avenue site generally; Chatham-Kent Council Minutes from its meeting held on March 27, 2006 Page 7 of 49
o 19 respondents were opposed to the Kiwanis Stadium location specifically or the Tweedsmuir Avenue site generally.
c) Attachment H contains minutes from a Council meeting held in May, 2002. In order to approve Kiwanis Stadium as the location for the skateboard park, a Motion to Reconsider would require a 2/3 majority vote.
d) Skateboarders have indicated a preference for this site due to the openness and existing activity level.
e) Should the skateboard park be located at the Kiwanis Stadium, any special events (i.e. demonstrations, etc.) would be subject to the municipal Special Events process. This approval process would restrict the frequency of events and ensure that over-scheduling of the area does not become an issue.
Conclusion
The Detailed Criteria Comparison Chart (Attachment D) clearly shows Kiwanis Stadium as the better location. Staff will continue to work diligently with the Chatham Youth Soccer Association to find an acceptable, comparable alternate location.
Construction would commence after a meeting with municipal staff and the contractor has taken place, ideally within the next month. Construction would take approximately three months and a grand opening ceremony will be planned.
COMMUNITY STRATEGIC PLAN
The recommendations in this report support the following objectives and strategic directions: A: Health – we are a healthy community A3: Promote healthy lifestyles A4: Foster a safe and caring community
B: Economy – we are a prosperous community B1: Promote and market Chatham-Kent B2: Make Chatham-Kent a business-friendly community and a desirable leisure destination
Desired Outcomes
· Promote wellness, improve lifestyle choices and expand upon healthy behaviours to build a sustainable health system · Nurture and support volunteer activity · Improve health and safety statistics · Develop leisure/cultural venues that support a progressive community and business attraction activities · Develop Chatham-Kent as the business and leisure destination of choice in Ontario
The recommendations will not adversely impact on the remainder of the Community Strategic Plan.
CONSULTATION
The Manager, Parks, Cemeteries & Horticulture was consulted and is in agreement with the skateboard park project in general, however has concerns with how to assist soccer in finding an alternate location. Chatham-Kent Council Minutes from its meeting held on March 27, 2006 Page 8 of 49
The Supervisor, Recreation Facilities (Chatham) was consulted and supplied information pertaining to the condition of Memorial Pool.
The Supervisor, Recreation Programs was consulted and agrees with this recommendation.
Dave Land, President, Chatham Youth Soccer Association was consulted with regards to alternative locations for a soccer pitch and is not in favour of the Tweedsmuir Avenue West site unless a comparable alternate location can be found.
Chris Spafford, Proprietor, High Five Skateboard Shop was consulted and is in agreement with the location as recommended.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS
Capital and design cost of $220,000 was donated by various organizations, the majority of which came from Mr. Rob Myers.
Up to $40,000 is being requested from the Strategic Development Reserve for the development of an alternate site for a soccer field for the Chatham Youth Soccer Association. Presently, there is $890,000 in the Strategic Development Reserve.
Prepared by:
______Shelly Arnold, B.A. Mayor’s Youth Council Coordinator Recreation Programs
Reviewed by: Reviewed by:
______Evelyn Bish, B.A. Joe Pavelka, P.Eng. Acting General Manager Chief Administrative Officer Community and Development Services
Attachment(s): A – Tweedsmuir Avenue public meeting minutes and feedback B – Kiwanis Club letter C – Other locations considered and feedback received D – Detailed Comparison Chart E – Grand Avenue West photo F – Letters received re: Grand Avenue site G – Chatham Youth Soccer Association email H – Minutes of May 18, 2002 Council meeting (R:\RTC\Community Services\2006\RecProg\CK Skateboard Park – Chatham location\Mar06)
The Mayor outlined the procedure to be followed.
Councillor Clarke suggested that there was a request to appear as a deputation at the last Council meeting. He noted his interest in having them speak at this time. The Mayor reiterated the process that was followed. Over the last month, those who were proponents or opponents to the Grand Avenue and Tweedsmuir location were told that this evening would be a decision night with no deputations. Any comments or concerns could be put in Chatham-Kent Council Minutes from its meeting held on March 27, 2006 Page 9 of 49 writing and sent in. These would be comments over and above what was presented at the public meetings. If Council is going to open the door for deputations, the item must be deferred this evening and notice given to the public to allow all those interested to speak before Council. The Public meetings were provided to ensure that public input was received and to follow the procedure by-law. This ensures fairness among all. If any deputations are allowed, then all have to be allowed to speak. This would be going outside the procedure by-law. Councillor Clarke suggested that Council move forward and make the decision. The Chief Administrative Officer advised that the last Council meeting did not address the location, but the process. It was to permit administration to proceed with the public meeting for input. This was the opportunity for anyone to come forward. If you hear from one, you have to hear from them all. The Mayor noted that there is an obligation to do the presentation
for the benefit of updating the public. Council has a responsibility to be fair and consistent. Councillor Brown asked if individuals are notified that they’ve been turned down to appear as a deputation, that Council can override the decision of administration. The Mayor noted that no one is saying that Council does not have the authority to do this. The Solicitor noted that section 2(b) of the by-law does provide for adding or removing any deputations. He counseled them not to proceed this way at this time.
Councillor Robbins noted that all facts have been received and it is time to make a decision on the matter.
The Mayor’s Youth Council Coordinator addressed Council and advised that this presentation was given at the public meetings however, as some Council members did not attend those meetings, she wished to show the presentation. The Mayor’s Youth Council Coordinator provided a video clip of skateboarding which included some skateboard facilities within Chatham-Kent. She further explained that she was present not as a staff member, but as a voice of the youth in Chatham-Kent. Ms. Arnold noted that over the past four months, there have been several public meetings and as a result, two sites have been chosen – Grand Avenue and Tweedsmuir Avenue. She reviewed the assessment tool used to rate the sites which include visability, proximity to homes, number of homes, neighbourhood demographics, other recreational facilities, drop off and pick up, parking, washrooms, amenities, spectators, telephone, and transit.
In response to a question from Councillor Brown, Ms. Arnold confirmed that some meetings in the past have been somewhat contentious, and sometimes not so friendly. The information before Council is true and has not been influenced by any threats. Ms. Arnold advised that there have been some unfortunate incidents in the past. The youth have been better behaved at the public meetings than the adults. She further noted that at the recent meetings, she has been stressing respectful communications.
Councillor McGuigan questioned the washroom facilities at the recommended site and access to the facilities.
Councillor Sulman sought clarification of the dimensions of other parks within the Municipality of Chatham-Kent and the dimensions of this proposed project. Councillor Sulman sought clarification of the amenities located at the other parks located within the Municipality.
Councillor Sulman asked if a site plan would be available for Council to review. The Mayor’s Youth Council Coordinator noted that a design has been completed, however; a site plan has not yet been prepared. Councillor Sulman indicated his wish to see the landscaping and berming that would be provided. He asked that a plan return. The Chief Administrative Officer noted that should Council want to see this, a motion should be passed. This is simply for information purposes. Councillor Sulman confirmed that he is Chatham-Kent Council Minutes from its meeting held on March 27, 2006 Page 10 of 49 not suggesting that Council approve the plan prior to the park being constructed. It is simply a method of keeping Council informed. The Chief Administrative Officer confirmed that the intent is not to hold up construction but to simply keep Council abreast of the details of the construction as it progresses. The Mayor’s Youth Council Coordinator responded in the affirmative.
Councillor Clarke sought clarification of previous locations chosen. Lions Park was rescinded as the location was too small, etc. Councillor Gilbert provided further clarification as to why the park location was rescinded.
Councillor Vercouteren sought clarification as to why the Mayor’s Youth Council was recommending Tweedsmuir versus the Grand Avenue location.
Councillor Vercouteren asked if the Park Avenue site was considered for the park. The Mayor’s Youth Council Coordinator noted that there are concerns with the contamination at the site. The cost to remediate the site would be higher than any other option which has been reviewed. In addition, there are some safety concerns with that area as it is in close proximity to a four lane road.
In response to a question from Councillor Vercouteren, the Mayor’s Youth Council Coordinator confirmed that they are in possession of drawings. There is no site to apply the drawings to. The contractor is comfortable with assisting at whatever site is decided upon. It does not affect the tender.
Councillor Herman noted that the community is not satisfied that this is taking so long to decide on. Councillor Herman stressed that Council is not trying to stall the process. Council is simply trying to ensure that the best location is chosen. The process is to find the best location.
Councillor Herman asked if the design and size is what the youth want. The Mayor’s Youth Coordinator responded in the affirmative. She noted there must be coordination of this project. The Mayor’s Youth Coordinator agreed. Councillor Herman asked if a marketing plan has been considered. The Mayor’s Youth Coordinator said that this has not been considered. The focus has been to listen to the youth and concentrate on a location. The Chief Administrative Officer advised that if we build it, the local youth will come. The Special Events group would also work with the Mayor’s Youth to put on the events. The Mayor’s Youth Coordinator confirmed that the local youth know what is available within the Municipality. She further noted that there is a skatepark guide publication that lists all skateparks in Canada. The already established parks in Chatham-Kent are listed in this publication.
Councillor Gilbert sought confirmation that the contractor would work to reconfigure the design to any location chosen. The Mayor’s Youth Coordinator responded in the affirmative. The consultant has agreed to slight modifications to make it fit better on a site. Councillor Gilbert asked if the other cities took into account neighbourhood resistance. The Mayor’s Youth Council Coordinator advised that it is difficult to quantify public resistance. If you did, it would raise other questions. For example, although there is resident resistance, there is also the youth saying that they want it in a specific location. How does one weigh these factors? There is also the silent majority. You cannot capture this and quantify it.
Councillor Crew expressed concern of the procedure by-law which he felt, does not allow individuals to speak on an issue. Councillor Crew noted that residents will always say “not in my backyard”. Wherever the park is put, the youth have to take care of it. The youth want the skate park so they must keep it clean and without debris and graffiti. Councillor Crew reiterated his wish the administration review that section of the procedure by-law. The Chatham-Kent Council Minutes from its meeting held on March 27, 2006 Page 11 of 49
Mayor noted that the issue this evening is about fairness and to provide a site, the procedure by-law itself. Administration is aware that there are flaws within the procedure by-law not only with this section, but others that were not even discussed this evening. She confirmed that a report would come back to Council.
Councillor Robbins thanked the youth in the community, the Youth Council, and the Mayor’s Youth Coordinator for their work. A lot of information has been provided to assist Council in its decision. Regardless of the site chosen, the information provided by the youth assisted Council in its decision. Councillor Robbins thanked Rob Myers for his support.
Councillor Robbins moved, Councillor Crew seconded:
“That:
1. The site at 425 Grand Avenue West be approved as the location for the Chatham Skateboard Park;
2. Staff be directed to confer with and seek the input of the provincial courthouse tenants with respect to landscaping, berming;
3. Regulate and keep Council informed of the landscaping and construction process.
4. Funds be made available through the Strategic Development Reserve to pay for the cost of having an archeologist present during the excavation period.”
Councillor Robbins noted that the reason he did not select the Tweedsmuir Avenue location was because 95% of the public who attended the public meeting did not feel that it was a suitable location. Council must listen to the public. Another comment from the public was that one recreation facility should not be removed for another. Councillor Robbins explained that the reason he chose the Grand Avenue location as the site for the park is that this land is already owned by the Municipality of Chatham-Kent, there is no building on that location currently, high visibility, number of amenities within a few blocks, bus line, and the skate park would not impede or take away from the other buildings. Councillor Robbins felt that the visibility issue should have been rated higher on Grand Avenue versus the Tweedsmuir location. He felt that there is more youth on the north side versus the south side of the community. This is evidenced by the population at the schools. Councillor Robbins felt that it is not necessary to locate it by other facilities such as an arena. These are some of the reasons for his choice of locations. The Mayor’s Youth Council Coordinator noted that the demographics show that there are more youth in the south side of the community.
The Mayor noted that there are issues at this location that would need to be resolved and would not be part of the $250,000 to build the park. This is around the cemetery. To ensure that there is no further delay, she asked that there be funds to address the cemetery. Councillor Robbins noted that the report does say that some did not feel that there is an issue with the cemetery. He further stressed that although he did not support the recommendation included in the report, it does not mean that he is not listening to the youth. He is listening to the Youth Committee who has provided good information but Council must also listen to the residents.
Chatham-Kent Council Minutes from its meeting held on March 27, 2006 Page 12 of 49
The Mayor’s Youth Council Coordinator referred to page 4 of the report which indicates that according to the Cemeteries Act, construction cannot take place within 15 feet of a cemetery. The park would be constructed approximately 150 feet from the cemetery. This condition has been met. However, as a further safeguard, she would request that an archeologist be on site when excavation is done to ensure that there are no burials. The cost is approximately $2,000.
Councillor Robbins added “funds be made available through the Strategic Development Reserve to pay for the cost of having an archeologist present during the excavation period”.
Councillor Crew asked if the park would be named at some point. The Mayor noted that this is a whole different issue.
Councillor Brown expressed his wish to place a cap on the funds being used for the archeologist.
Councillor Brown moved an Amendment, Councillor Eberle seconded:
“4. Up to $5,000 be made available through the Strategic Development Reserve to pay for any incidental costs such as the cost of having an archeologist present during the excavation period.”
He noted that any further monies for the archeologist exceeding $5,000 would require the Youth Council to return to Council for its approval. The Mayor’s Youth Council Coordinator noted that to have the archaeologist on site is a cost of $2,000 and the other $800 was for a land survey. It has been determined that the survey is no longer required.
Councillor Weaver felt that any extra money required should be brought back to Council. He expressed his support of the motion. Although he agreed with the criteria used, there were no points issued for loss of potential use of the Kinsmen arena site. Although he respects the concerns of the judiciary, he felt that this location is the best location.
Councillor Vercouteren asked for a recorded vote.
Councillor Sulman reminded Council that there used to be an archeologist with the Municipality of Chatham-Kent but the grant program ended. He suggested looking for another grant program to save money. Councillor Sulman noted that he would not support the motion as he felt that this is not the location he would have chosen.
Councillor Clarke expressed his support of the motion and noted that it is an excellent site in regard to visibility and access. Councillor Clarke referred to the process and criticism received. He wished to remind the public that the size of the park has increased since the beginning and everyone has done their best to find a suitable location. It is expected that the public would voice their opinions.
Councillor McGuigan thanked the Mayor’s Youth Council Coordinator for the presentation. She also agreed that due to the size of the project, it requires due time and due consideration to ensure that the best location is chosen. However, her preference would have been the Kiwanis site. She felt that the objective analysis should be considered. It does not take away from parkland but is a nice addition to parkland. Councillor McGuigan noted that she did not wish to be interpreted as not supporting the construction of a skate park if she voted against the motion; she simply has a preference for a different location. She wants to see it complete and acknowledges the Mayor’s Youth Council Coordinator’s comments that the youth would be happy with any site at this point.
Councillor Gordon thanked the youth and Ms. Arnold for their patience and work in this Chatham-Kent Council Minutes from its meeting held on March 27, 2006 Page 13 of 49 matter.
The Mayor noted that the amendment would be voted on first and then the original motion would be taken as a recorded vote.
The Mayor put the Amendment. Amendment Carried
The Mayor put the Motion, as amended. Brown yes Clarke yes Crew yes Eberle yes Faas yes Fluker yes Gilbert yes Gordon yes Herman yes King yes McGregor yes McGuigan no Robbins yes Scott yes Sulman no Vercouteren no Weaver yes Mayor Gagner no 14 yes 4 no Motion Carried
(b) Lease Agreement with the Chatham Minor Baseball Association for Renovations to the Canteen and Dressing Rooms located in Rotary Park, Community of Chatham MUNICIPALITY OF CHATHAM-KENT
COMMUNITY AND DEVELOPMENT SERVICES
COMMUNITY SERVICES – PARKS, CEMETERIES & HORTICULTURE
TO: Mayor and Members of Council
FROM: Deborah Veccia, Supervisor, Chatham Parks
DATE: March 10, 2006
SUBJECT: Lease Agreement with the Chatham Minor Baseball Association for Renovations to the Canteen and Dressing Rooms located in Rotary Park, Community of Chatham
RECOMMENDATIONS
It is recommended that:
1. Based on the approval of Ontario Trillium Foundation funding, the Mayor and Clerk be authorized to enter into a five-year lease agreement with the Chatham Minor Baseball
Chatham-Kent Council Minutes from its meeting held on March 27, 2006 Page 14 of 49
Association for renovations to the canteen and dressing rooms located in Rotary Park, community of Chatham.
2. Administration continue to work with the Chatham Minor Baseball Association to enhance Rotary Park services and amenities.
BACKGROUND
Rotary Park is located on the corner of Queen Street and Tweedsmuir Avenue in the community of Chatham.
The Chatham Minor Baseball Association has been involved in several projects that have enhanced Rotary Park services and amenities. These include the addition of lights, electronic score board and pitching cage.
The Rotary Park building was built in 1988 in partnership with the Chatham Rotary Club. It is primarily used by park users during games and tournaments. The building contains public washrooms, a canteen area, and two large dressing rooms including showers, a central utility room and a storage area for equipment. The Municipality owns the building and the land; however, the funds for the public washrooms and canteen area were raised in partnership with the Chatham Rotary Club, the former City of Chatham and the Ministry of Tourism and Recreation. The Municipality provides building and liability insurance, maintenance and payment of utilities. The current building configuration is shown in Attachment A.
COMMENTS
Chatham Minor Baseball Association has been working with the Chatham Parks Supervisor to develop the terms of a five-year lease agreement (Attachment B) which would allow the Association to renovate the canteen and dressing rooms. The Chatham Rotary Club has expressed its support of this renovation project.
The Association would be applying for funding from the Ontario Trillium Foundation to assist in the cost of the renovation. The Ontario Trillium Foundation requires community groups to obtain a minimum five-year lease agreement to qualify for funding for capital improvements.
The proposed improvements include the following renovations to the Rotary Park building and surrounding area (Attachment C):
· Relocation of the canteen area to face the ball diamond allowing park users better access to the canteen area as well as allowing volunteers to view the ball game while working. · Replacement of shingles on the building which are approximately 17 years old and are in need of immediate replacement. · New cement patio directly in front of the new canteen area. · New lighting for security purposes. · New landscaping at the north-east side of the building (Queen Street and Tweedsmuir Avenue)
The canteen area is operated by Chatham Minor Baseball Association volunteers.
Proceeds from the operation assist to offset operational costs of the baseball program such as registration fees, equipment purchases, park improvements and program requirements. The location of the canteen has hindered the Association’s ability to raise significant profits due to parents not volunteering during events since they cannot view the game while working. By relocating, the Association is hoping to improve its revenue Chatham-Kent Council Minutes from its meeting held on March 27, 2006 Page 15 of 49 generating ability and entice more volunteers to assist in the canteen area.
For security reasons and maximum visibility, the building was constructed with the canteen facing Tweedsmuir Avenue. As a result, many park users do not use the canteen due to its location. Upon review of the proposed renovations to the building, the location would still afford visibility from the street for security purposes. In the past, the building has not been a target of vandalism.
It is anticipated that the capital costs of the project are approximately $29,000.
Therefore, it is recommended that the Mayor and Clerk be authorized to enter into a five- year lease agreement with the Chatham Minor Baseball Association for renovations to the canteen and dressing rooms located in Rotary Park, community of Chatham.
The Municipality recognizes Chatham Minor Baseball Association’s contribution and dedication to the community; therefore it is recommended that administration continue to work with the Chatham Minor Baseball Association to enhance Rotary Park services and amenities.
COMMUNITY STRATEGIC PLAN
The recommendations in this report support the following objectives and strategic directions.
A: Health - A healthy community A3: Promote Healthy Lifestyles A4: Foster a safe and caring community B: Economy - A prosperous community B3: Maintain and enhance new and existing infrastructure to support economic and smart growth opportunities
Desired Outcomes
· Nurture and support volunteer activity · Increase the number of preventative health initiatives · Promote wellness and improve lifestyle choices and expand upon healthy behaviours to build a sustainable health system · Support new infrastructure investment and modernize existing infrastructure
The recommendations will not adversely impact on the remainder of the Community Strategic Plan.
CONSULTATION
Chatham Minor Baseball Association assisted in the development of the terms in the proposed lease agreement.
Chatham Rotary Club has been consulted and is strongly supportive of the renovation project at Rotary Park and any other efforts by the Association to improve the park for community use.
Director, Legal Services was consulted and has reviewed the terms of the lease agreement.
The Manager, Traffic and Infrastructure Services has reviewed the proposed renovations and will assist the Chatham Minor Baseball Association in developing the specifications and review of bids received for the work. Chatham-Kent Council Minutes from its meeting held on March 27, 2006 Page 16 of 49
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS
The maintenance and operating costs of the Rotary Park building are covered by the Chatham Parks base budget. It is anticipated that the proposed renovations will not incur any additional costs.
All capital improvement costs of approximately $29,000 would be the responsibility of the Chatham Minor Baseball Association. The renovations would not occur unless the Ontario Trillium Foundation funding is approved.
Prepared by:
______Deborah Veccia, CMM III, Supervisor, Chatham Parks Parks, Cemeteries & Horticulture
Reviewed by: Reviewed by:
______Evelyn Bish, B.A. Joe Pavelka, P.Eng. Acting General Manager Chief Administrative Officer Community and Development Services
Attachments: A - Existing Rotary Park Building Layout B - Lease Agreement Chatham Minor Baseball Association – Rotary Park, Chatham C - Proposed Renovation – Rotary Park Building (R:\Community Services\2006 \reports\Lease Agreement with Chatham Minor Ball Association Mar06)
Councillor Sulman moved the recommendations as included in the report and added “…and the Rotary Club” to recommendation #2.
Councillor Sulman moved, Councillor Vercouteren seconded:
“That:
1. Based on the approval of Ontario Trillium Foundation funding, the Mayor and Clerk be authorized to enter into a five-year lease agreement with the Chatham Minor Baseball Association for renovations to the canteen and dressing rooms located in Rotary Park, community of Chatham.
2. Administration continue to work with the Chatham Minor Baseball Association and the Rotary Club to enhance Rotary Park services and amenities.”
The Mayor put the Motion. Motion Carried
(c) Purchase of an Emergency Response Unit Vehicle and EMS Equipment
Chatham-Kent Council Minutes from its meeting held on March 27, 2006 Page 17 of 49
MUNICIPALITY OF CHATHAM-KENT
COMMUNITY AND DEVELOPMENT SERVICES
EMERGENCY MEDICAL SERVICES
TO: Mayor and Members of Council
FROM: Alan DeVillaer, Coordinator, Emergency Medical Services
DATE: March 13, 2006
SUBJECT: Purchase of an Emergency Response Unit Vehicle and EMS Equipment
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that:
1. A replacement vehicle for the Blenheim Emergency Response Unit at a maximum cost of $63,235 be purchased with grant funds supplied by the Ministry of Health and Long- Term Care.
2. Replacement patient care equipment for Emergency Medical Services at a maximum cost of $126,344 be purchased with grant funds supplied by the Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care.
BACKGROUND
On October 27, 2003 Council authorized the implementation of an Emergency Response Unit (ERU) 24 hours a day, 7 days a week stationed in Blenheim. The ERU is fully equipped identical to an ambulance with the exception of patient transport equipment e.g. stretcher. At the time of the authorization, the ambulance service provider, Sun Parlour EMS, agreed to devote one administration vehicle out of the two administration vehicles provided by the Municipality to be used as an ERU. This vehicle was a 1990 Chevrolet Venture passenger van.
On February 6, 2006 the Government of Ontario, Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care announced that the Municipality of Chatham-Kent was eligible to receive a $202,608 special grant for replacement of medical diagnostic and treatment equipment. The grant is intended to improve patient care by upgrading equipment used in the land ambulance service. A condition of the grant is that the equipment being replaced applies only to existing ambulances, emergency response units, patient diagnostic and treatment equipment and not equipment to establish any new services, purchases must be completed by March 31, 2006 with the proof of purchases delivered to the Ministry by May 15, 2006.
Through the service contract established with Sun Parlour EMS, the Municipality of
Chatham-Kent retains ownership of all buildings, vehicles and patient care equipment and is responsible for the replacement of such items. Sun Parlour EMS is responsible for the maintenance and upkeep of all vehicles and equipment.
COMMENTS
Sun Parlour EMS, the contractor providing ambulance service to Chatham-Kent, was Chatham-Kent Council Minutes from its meeting held on March 27, 2006 Page 18 of 49 contacted and together with the author developed a list of urgently needed equipment.
All equipment meets the Ministry patient care and age requirement to be eligible for this funding grant. Type of Equipment Quantity Replacement Cost Sub Total Emergency Response Unit 1 $ 63,235.50 $ 63,235.50 Scoop Stretchers 15 $ 711.00 $ 10,665.00 Stryker 35A Stretchers 7 $ 4,195.00 $ 29,365.00 KED Boards 30 $ 159.00 $ 4,770.00 Sagar Splints 30 $ 390.00 $ 11,700.00 D tank Oxygen Regulators 35 $ 129.95 $4,548.25 M tank Oxygen Regulators 15 $ 159.95 $ 2,399.25 Ferno #9 Stretchers 7 $ 659.00 $ 4,613.00 Replacement Canvas 20 $ 25.00 $ 500.00 Canvas Pole Stretchers 7 $ 175.00 $ 1,225.00 Stair Chairs 7 $ 1,995.00 $13,965.00 Quick Connect Straps 147 $ 17.00 $ 2,499.00 Lifepak 12 Defibrillators 2 $ 15,827.00 $ 31,654.00 Lifepak 500 Defibrillators 2 $ 4,220.10 $ 8,440.20
Sub-total $189,579.20
PST $13,270.54
Total $202,849.74
The condition of the Chevrolet van has deteriorated over time due to the constant severe duty use that emergency vehicles are subjected to. The van was never designed to be used in the EMS service and the Blenheim ERU is regularly dispatched to calls for service on Highway 401, further subjecting it to immediate high speed incidents. The required emergency lighting upgrades are approximately $5,000.
The Ministry of Health recommends a full framed enclosed truck-like vehicle for ERU use. They have found that many ambulance services are successfully using an emergency rated police package vehicle as an ERU. This type of vehicle is specifically designed and equipped for severe emergency service use. A full engineering study has been completed by the Ministry of Health on this type of vehicle therefore Chatham-Kent would not need to pay to have a study done on another type of vehicle.
The listed patient care equipment was obtained during the Provincial ambulance download and has been in service continuously. The date when the equipment was purchased cannot be determined with any accuracy but is believed to be between 1996 and 1998. The maintenance of the equipment has been to Ministry standards but the useful lifespan has been reached. The equipment will be distributed to the fleet of ambulances throughout the Municipality. The ambulances are continuously rotated among the EMS bases for maintenance purposes and to keep mileage accumulating evenly throughout the fleet.
COMMUNITY STRATEGIC PLAN
The recommendations in this report support the following objectives and strategic directions: A4: Foster a safe and caring community
Desired Outcomes:
· Improve health and safety statistics.
Chatham-Kent Council Minutes from its meeting held on March 27, 2006 Page 19 of 49
The recommendations will not adversely impact on the remainder of the Community Strategic Plan.
CONSULTATION
Manager, Fleet Services advised on the approved speed rated emergency vehicles currently available through the Police Cooperative Purchasing arrangement. It is recommended that a heavy duty speed rated emergency vehicle be used as an emergency response unit and purchased through this cooperative.
Director, Budget and Performance Services advised on the impact of the purchases on existing budgets, the use of lifecycle funding and the funding projections for the EMS system.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS
The purchase of the replacement vehicle for the Blenheim Emergency Response Unit at a maximum cost of $63,235 would be funded through a one-time grant from the Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care. The current lifecycle budget amount for the administration vehicle will be applied to the lifecycle budget for the eventual replacement of the heavy duty ERU.
The replacement of patient care equipment at a cost of $126,344 would be funded through a one-time grant from the Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care. This funding
commitment has been confirmed by the Ministry. The establishment of a lifecycle reserve for the EMS equipment will be presented through the 2007 supplementary budget.
Prepared by:
______Alan DeVillaer, M.B.A. Coordinator, Emergency Medical Services
Reviewed by: Reviewed by:
______Evelyn Bish, B.A. Joe G. Pavelka, P. Eng. Acting General Manager Chief Administrative Officer Community and Development Services
(R:\EMS-Emergency Planning/ Purchase of EMS Equipment & ERU, Mar.06.doc)
Councillor Herman moved, Councillor Scott seconded:
“That:
1. A replacement vehicle for the Blenheim Emergency Response Unit at a maximum cost of $63,235 be purchased with grant funds supplied by the Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care.
Chatham-Kent Council Minutes from its meeting held on March 27, 2006 Page 20 of 49
2. Replacement patient care equipment for Emergency Medical Services at a maximum cost of $126,344 be purchased with grant funds supplied by the Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care.”
Councillor Sulman sought clarification of the grant funds. The Coordinator, Emergency Medical Services reported that he has confirmed with the Ministry that the full amount of $126,344 is available through a one-time, one hundred percent dollar grant.
Councillor Gilbert asked if this van is similar to the one being replaced. The Coordinator, Emergency Medical Services provided clarification of the new vehicle and its options.
Councillor Eberle questioned the funding. The report notes that there would be an establishment of a lifecycle reserve for the EMS equipment presented during the 2007 supplementary budget. The Coordinator, Emergency Medical Services confirmed that emergency equipment would be reviewed as used and a lifecycle value of it or how long it could be used for, determine a replacement cost, etc. This provides a lifecycle similar to other equipment in the Municipality. This has not been done in the past. He would not presume that one time funding would be made available very often.
The Mayor put the Motion. Motion Carried
7. CORPORATE SERVICES
Report from administration re
(a) Line Fences Act – Fence Viewers
MUNICIPALITY OF CHATHAM-KENT
CORPORATE SERVICES
LEGAL SERVICES
TO: Mayor and Members of Council
FROM: Steve Matheson, B.A., LL.B. Director, Legal Services
DATE: March 27, 2006
SUBJECT: Line Fences Act – Fence Viewers
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended that:
1. By-law 13-1998 of the Municipality of Chatham-Kent be hereby repealed. Chatham-Kent Council Minutes from its meeting held on March 27, 2006 Page 21 of 49
2. Council enact a by-law exempting The Municipality of Chatham-Kent from the Line Fences Act, R.S.O. 1990
BACKGROUND:
At the time of amalgamation, the Line Fences Act was reviewed by the Solicitor-Clerk Task Force. It was determined that it was not practical or necessary for the Municipality of Chatham-Kent to become involved in these matters, which often pit neighbour versus neighbour. Accordingly, in January of 1998, by-law 13-1998 was passed to preclude the application of the Line Fences Act in the Municipality of Chatham-Kent.
COMMENTS:
As a result of the passage of the new Municipal Act, 2001, the sections referred to in by- law 13-1998 are no longer valid and legal is not comfortable that the existing by-law is adequately clear. As such, a new by-law has been prepared and is listed for Council consideration to correct the issues described above.
COMMUNITY STRATEGIC PLAN:
The recommendations in this report do not support, negatively or positively, a specific objective of the Community Strategic Plan. It is a neutral issue.
CONSULTATION:
The Building, Enforcement and Licencing Services Division was consulted with respect to this by-law.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:
There are no financial implications associated with this report.
Prepared by:
______Steve Matheson, B.A., LL.B. Director, Legal Services
Reviewed by: Reviewed by:
______Gerry Wolting, B. Math, CA Joe G. Pavelka, P. Eng. General Manager Chief Administrative Officer Corporate Services
Attachment(s): By-law determining that the Line Fences Act does not apply to lands within the Municipality of Chatham-Kent G:\LEGAL\REPORT\2006 reports\Line Fences Act.doc
Councillor Gilbert moved, Councillor Eberle seconded:
1. By-law 13-1998 of the Municipality of Chatham-Kent be hereby repealed. Chatham-Kent Council Minutes from its meeting held on March 27, 2006 Page 22 of 49
2. Council enact a by-law exempting The Municipality of Chatham-Kent from the Line Fences Act, R.S.O. 1990.”
Councillor Gilbert sought clarification of the Act and the recommendations before Council.
Councillor Brown noted that he would not support the motion as he required further time to review the Act and the existing fencing by-law. Councillor Brown asked that in the future, staff provide a web link for Council to view the actual Act.
The Mayor felt that the Municipality of Chatham-Kent should not become involved with civil disputes.
Councillor Weaver did not support the recommendation. This is not used very often and it is primarily a rural tool. Not many municipalities do exercise their option of removing themselves from using this Act. It is a way to resolve line fencing issues. It is an expedient way of resolving an issue which has worked in the past.
Councillor King provided further clarification of the purpose of the Act. He noted that there has not been a need for a fence viewer in years. He expressed his support in doing away with it. It is antiquated and the purpose is not useful in today’s cash crop farming. The Solicitor advised that there have been no calls since amalgamation in this regard.
Councillor Fluker sought clarification of the definition of a boundary line and a line fence. He expressed concern of someone using this as a Local Improvement charge. The Solicitor noted that this is simply a clean up of an existing by-law which exempts the Municipality of Chatham-Kent from using the Act. The Solicitor provided further information as to the resolution process available to residents.
The Mayor put the Motion. Motion Carried
The Chief Administrative Officer reminded Council of an earlier motion moving the Notice of Motion to be discussed under Item 7.
(a) Councillor Vercouteren –Credit Card Audit (as introduced at the March 6th meeting of Council)
NOTICE OF MOTION
I, Councillor Vercouteren hereby provide Notice of Motion to Chatham-Kent Council.
That Chatham-Kent Council establish an Audit Committee of Council, of four persons (councillors) to address issues and concerns of credit cared and charge cards of staff, guidelines for the committee and will be brought back to next Council meeting.
------
Councillor Vercouteren noted that he wished to amend his Notice of Motion and make a new motion. The new motion being “That Chatham-Kent Council authorize an audit on credit cards and charge cards for 2003, 2004, & 2005 by a chartered accountant approved by Council within a report to Council and report back to Council within 90 days.” Councillor Vercouteren noted that the use of credit cards has become a major public concern, and that he, as an elected Councillor, must ensure that there is accountability. He felt that this would be dollars well spent. All of Council has a responsibility to provide accounts to the
Chatham-Kent Council Minutes from its meeting held on March 27, 2006 Page 23 of 49 public as it is the public’s money. It would be unfair to appoint councillors to sit on such an ad hoc committee as he felt that Council did not have this expertise. He has received numerous calls stressing the need for an audit. He wished to accommodate the taxpayers. This must be done before this term ends.
The Mayor sought clarification as to whether there is an audit committee or an outside auditor. She noted that this issue is currently in the press as Council members brought it up. Councillor Vercouteren noted that he wished it to be an outside source who provides the audit.
Councillor Gilbert felt that this Notice of Motion is completely different than the original Notice provided at the last meeting. She suggested that he withdraw the original Notice of Motion and provide a new Notice which would be considered at the next meeting.
Councillor McGuigan noted that there are different types of audits available and this has led to confusion.
The Mayor noted that auditors are hired annually to review the books. The Mayor further noted that the motion is a new motion and would require that last week’s motion be withdrawn and a new Notice of Motion be provided and it would be considered at the next meeting of Council.
Councillor Vercouteren withdrew the motion introduced at the March 6, 2006 meeting of Council and provided the following Notice of Motion (to be considered at the meeting held on April 3, 2006). “That Chatham-Kent Council authorize an audit on credit cards and charge cards for 2003, 2004, & 2005 by a chartered accountant approved by Council within a report to Council and report back to Council within 90 days”. The Mayor noted that this would be heard on April 3rd. There was discussion whether the administrative report is relevant now that the original Notice of Motion has been withdrawn. The General Manager, Corporate Services provided an indication of what the follow-up report include. The Mayor clarified that she was seeking legal advice as to whether or not the report could be dealt with although the notice has been withdrawn. The Solicitor advised that the report exists and to suggest it does not exist would not be fathomable. Council could choose to accept the report and deal with it but it would not be procedurally sound to pretend it does not exist.
Councillor Gilbert moved, Councillor Gordon seconded:
“That the report be deferred to the April 3rd meeting of Council when the new Notice of Motion is considered.”
The Mayor put the Motion Motion Carried
(b) Notice of Motion Regarding Audit Committee for Credit/Purchasing Cards As deferred above
8. HEALTH AND FAMILY SERVICES
Report from administration re
(a) Expenditures from the 2006 Social Housing Building Lifecycle Budget
Chatham-Kent Council Minutes from its meeting held on March 27, 2006 Page 24 of 49
MUNICIPALITY OF CHATHAM-KENT
HEALTH & FAMILY SERVICES
SOCIAL HOUSING DIVISION
TO: Mayor and Members of Council
FROM: Gregory Swance, C.E.T. Building Maintenance Supervisor
DATE: March 2, 2006
SUBJECT: Expenditures from the 2006 Social Housing Building Lifecycle Budget
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that:
1. The total expenditure of $454,300 from the 2006 Social Housing building lifecycle budget to complete the lifecycle projects as listed in schedule “A” be approved.
BACKGROUND
Council has approved the amount $402,788 in base budget and a one time supplementary budget request of $73,500 for a total of $476,288 for the 2006 Social Housing building lifecycle budget, to maintain, repair and replace major components of the Social Housing building portfolio. This report is presented to Council for approval of the 2006 expenditures from the Social Housing building lifecycle reserve.
COMMENTS
The Building Maintenance Supervisor for Social Housing has reviewed all of the Social Housing facilities and the Building Condition Assessment and Capital Reserve Fund
Study for Public Housing, then prioritized the work to be completed for 2006. The attached schedule “A” represents the building lifecycle projects to be undertaken for 2006.
COMMUNITY STRATEGIC PLAN
The recommendation in this report correlates weakly to the following objectives and strategic directions: A: Health – We are a healthy community A1: Provide sufficient capacity to sustain community health and economic growth B: Economy – We are a prosperous community B3: Maintain and enhance new and existing infrastructure to support economic and smart growth opportunities. C: Environment – We are a green community C4: Promote responsible consumption of non-renewable resources.
Social Housing provides stable affordable housing throughout the rental market cycle, in good times and bad, investment in social housing creates a lasting infrastructure that serves Chatham-Kent for generations. So although there are no Desired Outcomes and/or Proposed Activities that speak directly to this recommendation, Chatham-Kent’s health, economy and environment are positively impacted when we maintain, repair and replace Chatham-Kent Council Minutes from its meeting held on March 27, 2006 Page 25 of 49 major components of the Social Housing building portfolio.
CONSULTATION
No other departments were consulted.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS
Approved 2006 annual Social Housing building lifecycle reserve $402,788 Approved one time supplementary budget request $ 73,500 (E-funded from Social Housing Reserve Fund) 2006 expenditure (Schedule “A” to this report) $454,300 2006 life cycle reserve (remaining to be transferred to reserve) $ 22,572
Prepared by: Reviewed by:
______Gregory Swance, C.E.T. Shelley Wilkins, B.P.A. Building Maintenance Supervisor Director, Social Housing Social Housing
Reviewed by: Reviewed by:
______Lucy Brown, R.N., B.A. Joe G. Pavelka, P. Eng. General Manager Chief Administrative Officer Health and Family Services
Attachment:: Schedule “A” P:\RTC\Health & Family Services\2006\Social Housing\2006 Lifecycle Budget.doc
Councillor Robbins moved, Councillor McGuigan seconded:
“The total expenditure of $454,300 from the 2006 Social Housing building lifecycle budget to complete the lifecycle projects as listed in schedule “A” be approved.”
The Mayor put the Motion. Motion Carried
(b) Addiction Services Initiative Pilot Project
MUNICIPALITY OF CHATHAM-KENT
HEALTH AND FAMILY SERVICES
ONTARIO WORKS
TO: Mayor and Members of Council
FROM: Valerie Colasanti
Chatham-Kent Council Minutes from its meeting held on March 27, 2006 Page 26 of 49
Director, Ontario Works
DATE: March 2, 2006
SUBJECT: Addiction Services Initiative Pilot Project
RECOMMENDATIONS
It is recommended that:
1. The implementation of the mandatory Addiction Services Initiative (ASI) by the Ontario Works Division be approved, at no incremental cost to the Municipality.
2. The hiring of two contract Ontario Works Intensive Case Managers for the balance of 2006 to deliver the program be approved at 100% provincial cost.
BACKGROUND
On November 14, 2000, the Provincial Government announced its consultation on the Mandatory Addiction Treatment Initiative (MATI) for Ontario Works participants. Consolidated Municipal Service Managers (CMSMs) had the opportunity to become an “early site” for the implementation of the MATI. Chatham-Kent did not seek to become an early implementation site. The nine early sites chosen for the initiative were Algoma, Brantford, Peterborough, Stratford, Parry Sound - Muskoka, Sault Ste. Marie, Thunder Bay and Prince Edward / Lennox & Addington.
Since it was originally announced, the Province has introduced changes to the philosophy of the MATI. The initiative has been renamed the Addiction Services Initiative Program. The focus of the Addiction Services program is to provide supports to Ontario Works participants for whom an addiction is a barrier to their employment. Addictions are defined as substance abuse issues only. The initiative will involve three types of support for the Ontario Works participant: screening; assessment, and treatment.
In July, 2005, a local planning committee was developed to create Chatham-Kent’s implementation plan. The committee was comprised of addictions treatment providers and other social service providers, including the Ontario Works Division, Chatham-Kent Health Alliance, Westover Treatment Centre and Chatham-Kent Public Health Division.
The Ministry of Community and Social Services ASI proposal review committee reviewed Chatham-Kent’s plan in December 2005 and on January 11, 2006 Chatham-Kent was approved as a pilot site effective January 1, 2006.
COMMENTS
The Division does not currently maintain statistical data regarding referrals to addiction assessment and treatment services, or data on how many Ontario Works participants may be struggling with addictions as a barrier to employment. Data from the early sites indicates that 10% of the existing caseload has some type of addiction. The monthly caseload for Chatham-Kent averaged 2200 cases for 2005. Therefore, it is estimated that approximately 220 individuals on the Ontario Works caseload will be in need of addiction services on an annual basis.
The Ontario Works Division has developed strong linkages with local agencies and community services to develop an integrated approach to provide services to Ontario Works participants. We recommend hiring two contract Intensive Case Managers to work with a reduced caseload ensuring those participants are linked to the agencies that can Chatham-Kent Council Minutes from its meeting held on March 27, 2006 Page 27 of 49 assist them. The Addictions Case Managers will work with a caseload of no more than 60 Ontario Works participants. A regular caseload is made up of 120 Ontario Works participants. The Addictions Case Managers will work with local agencies to ensure effective case planning. The Case Manager will provide both the financial assistance and employment assistance functions; this approach has produced a high degree of success in other employment programs within the Division. By December 2006, the program will be fully implemented. This will enable us to reduce the number of regular Case Managers by one.
COMMUNITY STRATEGIC PLAN
The recommendations in this report support the following objectives and strategic directions: A: Health - We are a healthy community A3. Promote healthy lifestyles A4. Foster a safe and caring community
Desired Outcomes/Proposed Activities · Encourage citizens to take greater personal responsibility for their own health · Achieve substantial and sustained reduction and prevention of child poverty · Reduce use of addictive substances
The recommendations will not adversely impact on the remainder of the Community Strategic Plan.
CONSULTATION
Discussions took place with the Chatham-Kent Health Alliance, Mental Health and Addiction Services Program, Westover Treatment Centre, Chatham-Kent Public Health Unit, the Chatham-Kent Addictions Network and the General Manager of Health and Family Services.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS
As a pilot site there is no municipal cost to Chatham-Kent to participate in the pilot year. Funding will be at 100% provincial cost. The planning allocation for Chatham-Kent’s ASI is $187,553 for 2006, and Chatham-Kent will also receive $150,000.00 start-up funding to assist with staff training, technology, marketing supplies, and any other start-up costs directly associated with the planning and implementation of the Addictions Services Initiative.
On January 1, 2007, if the ASI is approved, the planning allocation will be provided at an 80-20 cost share with the province. There will be no financial implications for the Chatham- Kent budget as the 20% municipal cost share will be covered by realignment of base funding within the employment program envelope.
Prepared by: Reviewed by:
Valerie Colasanti Lucy Brown, R.N., B.A. Director, Ontario Works General Manager, Health & Family Services
Reviewed by:
______Joe G. Pavelka, P. Eng. Chatham-Kent Council Minutes from its meeting held on March 27, 2006 Page 28 of 49
Chief Administrative Officer
Councillor Eberle moved, Councillor Faas seconded:
“That:
1. The implementation of the mandatory Addiction Services Initiative (ASI) by the Ontario Works Division be approved, at no incremental cost to the Municipality.
2. The hiring of two contract Ontario Works Intensive Case Managers for the balance of 2006 to deliver the program be approved at 100% provincial cost.”
Councillor Herman questioned why a tendering process was not done on this project.
Councillor Brown sought clarification that the positions are funded by the Province. The Director, Ontario Works advised that this is a pilot project so it is 100% funded. If it continues next year, the funding formula would be 80% provincial and 20% municipal but there would be no additional cost to the Municipality as they would realign the employment envelope. It would be part of the budget.
The Mayor put the Motion. Motion Carried
9. INFRASTRUCTURE AND ENGINEERING SERVICES
Report from administration re
(a) Contract with Sidewalks Plus MUNICIPALITY OF CHATHAM-KENT
INFRASTRUCTURE AND ENGINEERING SERVICES
PUBLIC WORKS SOUTH
TO: Mayor and Members of Council
FROM: Pat Bruette, Director Public Works South
DATE: March 15, 2006
SUBJECT: Contract with Sidewalks Plus
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that:
1. A contract with Sidewalks Plus to treat trip-and-fall hazards on Chatham-Kent sidewalks for an amount of up to $60,000 be approved from the 2006 sidewalk replacement lifecycle budget.
Chatham-Kent Council Minutes from its meeting held on March 27, 2006 Page 29 of 49
BACKGROUND
At the regular Council meeting of May 24, 2005, a motion was passed indicating the following:
“Administration provide a report reviewing alternatives to ripping and replacing sidewalks.”
This report is intended to address this issue.
Since amalgamation, administration has been investigating various methods of repairing trip-and-fall hazards that are ¾ of an inch or greater. Currently, the two most cost effective methods for temporary repairs are patching the joints with a concrete compound called Top and Bond or Cold and/or Hot Mix compounds. The average cost of patching is $16.85 per trip-and-fall hazard.
These methods are temporary repairs and normally need to be re-treated after winter sidewalk snow removal has been completed. On several occasions, attempts have been made at mechanically grinding away the trip hazard. This is a very slow and costly process, with the average trip hazard taking 45 minutes to repair. Compounding the grinding issue is the rough finish that is left when the grinding has been completed. The average cost of grinding a trip-and-fall hazard is $51.55.
In most cases, trip-and-fall hazards develop due to tree roots or frost action lifting the sidewalk panels. To remove and replace the hazard with new concrete panels would be very costly and would require more than one panel to be replaced to achieve the proper grade matching to the old sidewalk. This process will normally require the removal of at least three (3) panels for each repair, at an average cost of $88.00 per panel for a total of $264.00. The average sidewalk panel is 16 square feet, but depending on the location, some panels may be larger than 16 square feet in downtown areas.
Another process Public Works has tried is called “Mud Jacking”. This is a process where a contractor will drill several holes in a slab of sidewalk and inject a concrete slurry under the panel to lift the panel up and level it with the adjoining sections. This is also a costly process, at approximately $36.00 per trip hazard.
The “Sidewalks Plus” process mechanically cuts the trip hazard off the sidewalk panel and leaves a very smooth, clean appearance with transitional slopes that effectively eliminate the trip hazard. Administration believes by cutting the hazard away, we are enhancing the safety of the sidewalk system in Chatham-Kent and extending the replacement life of the sidewalk, until the block would require complete replacement in the rating program.
The average rate for Sidewalks Plus to cut trip hazards is $19.33 per hazard. The chart below explains the average cost to treat each trip hazard by the different methods:
GRINDING Labour $ 24.40 per hour x 2 men (45 minutes per hazard) $36.60 Pick up $ 6.60 per hour x 45 minutes 4.95 Sub Total 41.55 Grinder teeth replacement $700.00 per set ¸ 70 hazard cuts 10.00 Total Cost Per Hazard $51.55
TEMPORARY PATCHING Labour $ 23.69 per hour x 2 men (15 minutes per hazard) $12.20 Pick up $ 6.60 per hour x 1 hour (15 minutes per hazard) 1.65 Materials cold/hot mix or Top Bond 3.00 Total Cost Per Hazard $16.85
Chatham-Kent Council Minutes from its meeting held on March 27, 2006 Page 30 of 49
MUD JACKING Cost to repair $9.00 per panel x average 4 panels / repair $36.00 Total Cost Per Hazard $36.00
REPLACEMENT Cost to replace one (1) panel $88.00 x average 3 panels / repair $264.00 Total Cost Per Hazard $264.00
SIDEWALKS PLUS Average Rate per cut $19.33 a) 1 – 200 cuts = $23.00/cut b) 201 – 700 cuts = $19.00/cut c) 701 + cuts = $16.00/cut Total Average Cost Per Hazard $19.33
COMMENTS
This report has been forwarded to Council for consideration due to Sidewalks Plus being owned by the General Manager of Infrastructure & Engineering Services.
When reviewing the various options available, Public Works could double the number of trip and fall treatments using the Sidewalks Plus process.
Sidewalk Plus 60,000 divided by 19.33 per trip 3,100 trip hazard treatments Mud Jacking 60,000 divided by 36.00 per trip 1,527 trip hazard treatments
Chart shows number of cuts with taxes
COMMUNITY STRATEGIC PLAN
The recommendations in this report support the following objective and strategic direction: B: Economy – We are a prosperous community B3: Maintain and enhance new and existing infrastructure to support economic and smart growth opportunities
Desired Outcomes
· Advocate for essential provincial and federal investment and equitable tax policies to support financing and effective operation of sustainable transportation systems, and water, sewer and waste management services
OTHERS CONSULTED
The Engineering & Traffic Division was consulted to verify the cost of replacing hazardous sidewalks with new concrete.
The CAO was consulted due to the fact that the owner of Sidewalks Plus is the General Manager of Infrastructure & Engineering Services.
The Municipality’s insurance provider, Frank Cowan Company was consulted in 2003 and will be provided a copy of this report.
Chatham-Kent Council Minutes from its meeting held on March 27, 2006 Page 31 of 49
Consistent with report to Council re: “Contracting Services with Municipal Employees” dated June 20, 2005, the General Manager, Infrastructure and Engineering Services has not been involved/consulted in the decision making process for issues covered in this report.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS
Sidewalk Replacement 2006 Lifecycle Budget $462,650.
Administration suggests that this process should be funded from the Public Works lifecycle sidewalk replacement budget for an amount up to $60,000 in 2006.
Prepared by: Reviewed by:
Pat Bruette Joe Pavelka, P.Eng. Director Public Works South Chief Administrative Officer
C Director of Engineering and Traffic PB/jc Attachments(s) – none R:\Infrastructure and Engineering\I & ES\2006\2295 - Sidewalks Plus.doc
Councillor Faas moved, Councillor King seconded:
“That a contract with Sidewalks Plus to treat trip-and-fall hazards on Chatham- Kent sidewalks for an amount of up to $60,000 be approved from the 2006 sidewalk replacement lifecycle budget.”
Councillor Herman questioned why this project was not tendered. The Director, Public Works South noted that there is no other competition in the market.
Councillor Herman noted that a member of staff has developed something to improve service. The Director, Public Works confirmed that this is a good initiative. The savings to the Municipality of Chatham-Kent appear to be 3100 trip hazards with the money as opposed to a mud jacking process which would cover half of this work. Councillor Herman asked that a report return to Council as to the effectiveness of using this method and validate cost savings associated.
Councillor Herman moved an Amendment, Councillor Brown seconded:
“That a contract with Sidewalks Plus to treat trip-and-fall hazards on Chatham- Kent sidewalks for an amount of up to $60,000 be approved from the 2006 sidewalk replacement lifecycle budget.”
Councillor Herman sought clarification of any legality with respect to a staff member coming up with a service and it being contracted out by that person to the Municipality of Chatham-Kent.
The Mayor questioned if administration could validate the cost of this service seeing as though there is no service to compare this to. The Chief Administrative Officer noted that
Chatham-Kent Council Minutes from its meeting held on March 27, 2006 Page 32 of 49 they know this to be the most cost effective way to eliminate a trip. However, it is not known how many trips could be eliminated with the $60,000.
In response to a question from Councillor Weaver, the Director, Public Works South confirmed that the process was enveloped outside of work time and completely on this staff member’s own time. It has been in operation in other municipalities by this company which is owned by a staff member. It is completely separate from any municipal activity.
Councillor Vercouteren questioned who would monitor the work and process.
The Mayor noted that she wished a recorded vote.
The Mayor put the Amendment.
Amendment Carried
The Mayor put the Motion, as amended.
Brown – yes Clarke-yes Crew-yes Eberle –yes Faas-yes Fluker-yes Gilbert-yes Gordon-absent Herman-yes King-yes McGregor-yes McGuigan-yes Robbins –yes Scott-yes Sulman-yes Vercouteren-no Weaver-yes Mayor Gagner-yes 16 yes, 1 no Motion Carried
(b) Turin Line and Littlejohn Road Intersection Traffic Control Review – Community of Orford MUNICIPALITY OF CHATHAM-KENT
INFRASTRUCTURE AND ENGINEERING SERVICES
ENGINEERING AND TRAFFIC DIVISION
TO: Mayor and Members of Council
FROM: Mark Ceppi
Engineering Technician, Infrastructure and Traffic
DATE: March 7, 2006
Chatham-Kent Council Minutes from its meeting held on March 27, 2006 Page 33 of 49
SUBJECT: Turin Line and Littlejohn Road Intersection Traffic Control Review - Community of Orford
RECOMMENDATIONS
It is recommended that:
1. The Yield Signs facing northbound and southbound traffic on Littlejohn Road at Turin Line in the Community of Orford be replaced with Stop Signs.
2. The Chatham-Kent Traffic and Parking By-law 245-2004 be amended accordingly.
BACKGROUND
A resident of Littlejohn Road requested the implementation of All-Way Stop at the intersection of Littlejohn Road and Turin Line in the Community of Orford. The resident was informed of the warrants that the Municipality of Chatham-Kent uses to determine the need for an All-Way Stop and how unlikely it was that this intersection would meet those warrants.
The resident agreed that the intersection would not meet the traffic volume required to meet the All-Way Stop Warrant but requested that the Municipality of Chatham-Kent review the need to increase the existing intersection traffic control from a Yield Sign to a Stop Sign.
COMMENTS
Littlejohn Road and Turin Line are both local rural roadways with gravel surfaces and a speed limit of 80 km/h. The location of the Littlejohn Road and Turin Line is shown in Appendix A. The guidelines to assist in evaluating the intersection traffic control type for an intersection are described in Appendix B. These guidelines are based on standards developed by the Ontario Ministry of Transportation’s Geometric Design Standards for Ontario Highways and the Ontario Traffic Manual.
The safe approach speed criteria is the most commonly used method to determine the type of intersection traffic control required at an intersection. Under this methodology, a sight triangle is formulated based on potential sight obstructions at the intersection; the speed limit of the roadway and the corresponding safe stopping sight distance. A safe approach speed of the proposed traffic controlled roadway is then calculated.
At the intersection of Littlejohn Road and Turin Line, a safe approach speed of 5.1 km/h was calculated for Littlejohn Road. This warrants the replacement of the existing Yield Signs in the north and south directions with Stop Signs.
COMMUNITY STRATEGIC PLAN
The recommendations in this report support the following objective and strategic direction: A: Health – We are a healthy community A4: Foster a safe and caring community
Desired Outcomes/Proposed Activity · Improve health and safety statistics
CONSULTATION
No others were consulted for this report.
Chatham-Kent Council Minutes from its meeting held on March 27, 2006 Page 34 of 49
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS
The cost for Public Works to manufacture and install the new Stop Signs is estimated to be $300 and will be funded through the Public Works Base Budget Accounts. Prepared by: Reviewed by:
______Mark Ceppi Gary Northcott, P. Eng. Engineering Technician, Director, Infrastructure and Traffic Engineering and Traffic Division
Reviewed by: Reviewed by:
______Leo Denys, P. Eng. Joe G. Pavelka, P. Eng. General Manager Chief Administrative Officer Infrastructure & Engineering Services
Attachment(s): Appendix A – Littlejohn Road and Turin Line Intersection Location Appendix B – Guideline for Intersection Traffic Control Appendix C – By-Law Amendment MC/ (r:\Infrastructure & Engineering)\I & ES\2006\2727 – Littlejohn and Turin Intersection Control Review - Orford.doc
Councillor Eberle moved, Councillor Brown seconded:
“That:
1. The Yield Signs facing northbound and southbound traffic on Littlejohn Road at Turin Line in the Community of Orford be replaced with Stop Signs.
2. The Chatham-Kent Traffic and Parking By-law 245-2004 be amended accordingly.”
The Mayor put the Motion. Motion Carried
(c) Faubert Drive Local Improvement between Tweedsmuir and Indian Creek Road, Community of Chatham
MUNICIPALITY OF CHATHAM-KENT
INFRASTRUCTURE AND ENGINEERING SERVICES
ENGINEERING AND TRAFFIC DIVISION
TO: Mayor and Members of Council
FROM: Gary Northcott, P. Eng. Director, Engineering and Traffic
DATE: March 15, 2006
Chatham-Kent Council Minutes from its meeting held on March 27, 2006 Page 35 of 49
SUBJECT: Faubert Drive Local Improvement between Tweedsmuir Avenue and Indian Creek Road Community of Chatham
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that:
1. Notice be given under section 3 of the Local Improvement Regulation that the Municipality intends to apply to the Ontario Municipal Board to pass a By-law for Local Improvement Charges for the sidewalk improvement on Faubert Drive between Tweedsmuir Avenue and Indian Creek Road, in the Community of Chatham.
BACKGROUND:
Council at the Monday February 27th meeting deferred Engineering Report #2714 asking staff to investigate standards used in St. Catherines with respect to the placement of a yellow line delineating a portion of the traveled roadway. It was suggested that delineating the roadway and restricting parking at selected times might be an alternative to the sidewalk construction proposed on Faubert Drive.
Dillon Consulting the author of the original traffic study undertaken on Faubert was also asked to comment along with checking with officials of St. Catherines Transportation Services on this proposal being an acceptable alternative. The information obtained is included in the comments section of this report.
Originally Engineering and Traffic Staff received a request for the provision of a sidewalk along Faubert Drive from Tweedsmuir Avenue to Indian Creek Road. In accordance with current policy, a traffic study was conducted to confirm whether traffic and pedestrian volumes warranted the construction of such a sidewalk for safety reasons. The results of said study were then compared against the Municipality’s current warrant criteria (Appendix B).
Faubert Drive was designated as a collector road in the 1998 Transportation Plan and extends from Tweedsmuir Avenue to Indian Creek Road. Faubert Drive has two-lane cross- section complete with curbs and gutters and is posted with a 50 kilometre per hour limit. Fronting lands are low-density residential. John McGregor Secondary School and YMCA facilities are located on the west side of Faubert Drive. The First Reformed Church is south of the study area. St. Ursula’s Roman Catholic School is located just north of the study area.
In a report to Council dated November 2, 2005 Council approved administration proceed with the process for the construction of a sidewalk on the west side of Faubert Drive between Tweedsmuir Avenue and Indian Creek Road in the community of Chatham. Council gave two readings to the by-law for the sidewalk improvement; notification was published in Chatham- Kent Matters and forwarded to the abutting assessed owners in accordance with Section 3 of the Regulation. (Appendix D)
This was based on the traffic study undertaken by the Municipality’s traffic consultant Dillon Consulting which indicated that the installation of sidewalks on one side of Faubert Drive meet the current warrant policy. The west side of Faubert was favoured by those pedestrians frequenting the area. The sidewalk improvement qualifies for a 50% reduced assessment from $85.00 to $42.50 per lineal meter under the current municipal policy.
COMMENTS
The following additional comments were obtained from Dillon Consulting and Transportation Services for the City of St. Catherines. Chatham-Kent Council Minutes from its meeting held on March 27, 2006 Page 36 of 49
A) Dillon Consulting:
The suggestion to delineate a portion of the existing traveled roadway for pedestrian only usage was put to our traffic consultant who carried out the original traffic study. Dillon Consulting is retained under contract and often acts as a consultant to the Municipality on these matters. The traffic engineer has reviewed the proposal and her response letter is appended to this report (Appendix A). To summarize, Dillon can find no basis from the technical resources reviewed that provides guidance on delineating on-street space for pedestrians as a safe route to walk except for the purpose of crossing the road at crosswalks. The objective of providing curbed thoroughfares is to delineate vehicular from non-vehicular uses. They do not suggest supporting the suggested alternative.
B) City of St. Catherines:
In response to our inquiry the Manager of Transportation Services advises that the City does not have any policies related to “share the road” for pedestrians. They do have painted bicycle lanes on certain streets for the exclusive use of cyclists. Share the road signage is provided for cyclists where dedicated lanes cannot be provided. The signs do not include pedestrians.
The City of St.Catherines web site identifies the City’s New Sidewalk Construction Program (NSCP) which they developed with a safer and more convenient environment by giving priority to the completion of the pedestrian sidewalk network where a need, demand or continuity deficiency was identified. The main objective of constructing sidewalks is to separate pedestrian traffic from vehicles and thus provide safe and continuous pedestrian linkages from residential areas to generators such as schools, parks and shopping areas.
Staff advised that the St. Catherines council annually commits funding (+/- $300,000) to its (NCSP) under the general tax rate. They do not utilize the Local Improvement Regulations. They use several factors in establishing criteria for sidewalk placement. The determining factors for sidewalk construction are arterial, collector and local roads, school linkages, conformance with the official plan, transportation master plan, petitions, and constructability are reviewed. The St. Catherines council was identified as having the ultimate responsibility for the policies it choose to adopt and the sidewalk construction program.
Faubert Drive:
On Faubert Drive the warrant criterion established by Council has been satisfied. The process being followed is consistent with Council’s direction. The local improvement regulations are being used to assess a portion of the costs to the abutting property owners.
Process:
The deadline for receiving objections to the proposed improvement was January 6, 2006 (Appendix C). The clerk received a petition (Appendix E) signed by twenty of twenty- three or 89.66% of the abutting property owners representing 83.65% of the assessed property values against the undertaking. Sufficiency of a petition against the work must be signed by a majority of owners representing one-half of the value of the lots liable to be specially charged for the work. In accordance with the Local Improvement Regulation the Municipality must now receive approval from the Ontario
Municipal Board (OMB) for the construction and assessment by-law. Notice of intent to apply to the OMB will be publicly advertised in Chatham-Kent Matters. Separate notices will be sent to all abutting property owners liable to be specially charged as required under the regulation. No work can commence on the project until this process is followed and a review or hearing is undertaken with a decision received from the OMB Chatham-Kent Council Minutes from its meeting held on March 27, 2006 Page 37 of 49
Staff initially proceeded under section 3 to determine support or non support for the project without indicating the intent to proceed to the OMB. While this seems like an unnecessary step, the non sufficiency of a petition against the project would have avoided the cost of a hearing or review and the rating and construction by-law could have been recommended for third reading.
While normally this would terminate the ability of the Municipality to proceed with the undertaking for a two year period, the safety warrants have been met for a sidewalk construction so the Municipality is obligated to proceed in this matter or place itself in a liability position should an incident occur and due diligence has not been exercised.
The criteria and policy adopted by Council, August 2000 has guided staff in this matter and reflects in the report recommendation being made at this time to proceed according to the provisions of the Local Improvement Regulation. The next step in the process will allow the objections received to be impartially judged. This would seem to be the fairest and fiscally responsible way of dealing with the matter. The OMB would review the objections and if deemed necessary convene a hearing. The works would proceed only on OMB approval. Once a decision or hearing date has been confirmed notification will be given to all property owners on the decision or if a hearing is convened, allow them to be represented before the OMB. In the notification to be provided to the abutting assessable owners, staff will attempt to mitigate and address their concerns with the hope of avoiding a possible hearing if the sufficiency of the first response is duplicated
The Municipality has received a favourable decision from the OMB on its warrant and assessment policy in the past.
It is the recommendation of administration that the next step in the process be undertaken which is consistent with Council’s current policy.
COMMUNITY STRATEGIC PLAN
The recommendation in this report supports the following objective and strategic direction: A. Health – We are a healthy community A1: Provide sufficient capacity to sustain community health and economic growth Desired Outcome · Provide safe, accessible, convenient and efficient public transportation
CONSULTATION:
The municipal solicitor and the municipal clerk have been consulted in the preparation of this report.
Dillon Consulting was consulted in the preparation of this report.
The Transportation Services Department of the City of St. Catherines was consulted in the preparation of this report.
BUDGET IMPACTS:
The notice costs are considered part of the municipal project costs which is currently part of the approved 2006 capital budget.
Prepared By:
Gary Northcott, P. Eng. Chatham-Kent Council Minutes from its meeting held on March 27, 2006 Page 38 of 49
Director, Engineering and Traffic Division
Reviewed By: Reviewed By:
Leo Denys, P. Eng. Joe Pavelka, P. Eng. General Manager, Chief Administrative Officer Infrastructure and Engineering Services
Attachments: Appendix A, Dillon Consulting Limited correspondence dated March 3, 2006 Appendix B, Dillon Consulting Limited Report, dated July 2005 Appendix C, Notice to Homeowners, dated November 29, 2005 Appendix D, Newspaper Notice to construct a Sidewalk, dated November 29, 2005 Appendix E, Objection Petition from Homeowners, December 14, 2005 (RTC:\Infrastructure & Engineering\I&ES\2006\2729 - Faubert Drive Sidewalk, Local Improvement Community of Chatham.doc)
Councillor Brown moved, Councillor Herman seconded:
“That the Municipality not apply to the Ontario Municipal Board to pass a By-law for Local Improvement Charges for the sidewalk improvement on Faubert Drive between Tweedsmuir Avenue and Indian Creek Road, in the Community of Chatham.”
The Director, Engineering and Traffic Division advised that this is contrary to Council’s policy established two years ago. Staff requires direction as the process will no longer exist. There was a safety issue, administration followed the established policy, and although some of the public has complained, the Municipality is proceeding according to its established policy. The Mayor noted that Council must move to In Closed Session to discuss issues that would result as a matter of action being taken.
Councillor Sulman moved, Councillor McGuigan seconded:
“That Council recess to address an issue in Closed Session.”
The Mayor put the Motion. Motion Carried
------Council recessed at 9:32 p.m
------Council adjourned at 9:47 p.m.
Councillor Weaver reported that Council moved to In Closed session to discuss legal ramifications regarding reception of the report and with respect to potential liability to the Municipality.
The Mayor asked for a recorded vote due to anything ramifications of action taken or not taken.
Councillor Sulman noted that it would not be doing anything but forcing the owners to go to the OMB for action. There are other options.
The Mayor put the Motion. Chatham-Kent Council Minutes from its meeting held on March 27, 2006 Page 39 of 49
Brown – yes Clarke-yes Crew-no Eberle –no Faas-no Fluker-no Gilbert-no Gordon-absent Herman-no King-no McGregor-no McGuigan-no Robbins –no Scott-no Sulman-yes Vercouteren-yes Weaver-no Mayor Gagner-no 4 yes, 13 no Motion Failed
Councillor Robbins moved, Councillor Faas seconded:
“Notice be given under section 3 of the Local Improvement Regulation that the Municipality intends to apply to the Ontario Municipal Board to pass a By-law for Local Improvement Charges for the sidewalk improvement on Faubert Drive between Tweedsmuir Avenue and Indian Creek Road, in the Community of Chatham.”
Brown – no Clarke-no Crew-yes Eberle –yes Faas-yes Fluker-yes Gordon-absent Gilbert-yes Herman-no King-yes McGregor-yes McGuigan-yes Robbins –yes Scott-yes Sulman-no Vercouteren-no Weaver-yes Mayor Gagner-yes 12 yes, 5 no Motion Carried
10. REPORTS FROM COUNCIL IN CLOSED SESSION
COUNCIL CLOSED SESSION REPORT March 27, 2006
Chatham-Kent Council Minutes from its meeting held on March 27, 2006 Page 40 of 49
No Closed Session issues were discussed on Monday, March 27, 2006.
During Closed Session on March 20, 2006, Council would report the following for the approval of Council:
1. Wheatley Life Lease
Councillor Weaver moved, Councillor King seconded:
“That Council accept the proposal of First Leaside for the conditions and repayment schedule for Wheatley Life Lease Housing Project dated March 14, 2006.”
The Mayor put the Motion. Motion Carried
· Council received a presentation from Chatham-Kent Energy. · Council received an update on a property issue, and two personnel issues.
During Closed Session on March 6, 2006, Council would report the following for the approval of Council:
1. Paxton’s Bush
Council is pleased to announce that 10.46 acres is now deeded to the Municipality of Chatham-Kent.
Councillor Weaver moved, Councillor King seconded:
“That the information be received.”
The Mayor put the Motion. Motion Carried
11. READING OF BY-LAWS
(a) FIRST READING
Councillor Crew moved, Councillor Robbins seconded:
“That the by-laws be taken as read for the first time.”
The Mayor put the Motion. Motion Carried
(b) SECOND READING
Councillor Crew moved, Councillor Robbins seconded:
“That the by-laws be taken as read for the second time.”
The Mayor put the Motion. Motion Carried
Chatham-Kent Council Minutes from its meeting held on March 27, 2006 Page 41 of 49
(c) COUNCIL TO GO INTO COMMITTEE, IF REQUIRED, TO DISCUSS BY-LAWS
(d) RESUMPTION OF COUNCIL
(e) THIRD AND FINAL READING
Councillor Vercouteren moved, Councillor Eberle seconded:
“That the by-laws be taken as read for the third time.”
The Mayor put the Motion. Motion Carried
i. By-law to provide for drainage work in the Municipality of Chatham- Kent for the Osborne Drain (Community of Orford) THIRD READING ONLY
ii. By-law to provide for drainage work in the Municipality of Chatham- Kent for the McArthur East Drain (Community of Harwich) THIRD READING ONLY
iii. By-law to provide for drainage work in the Municipality of Chatham- Kent for the Lewis Drain (Community of Harwich) THIRD READING ONLY
iv. By-law to provide for drainage work in the Municipality of Chatham- Kent for the Henderson-Hebert Drain–Griffore Culvert (Community of Dover) THIRD READING ONLY
v. By-law to provide for drainage work in the Municipality of Chatham- Kent for the Were Drain (Community of Raleigh) THIRD READING ONLY
vi. By-law to provide for drainage work in the Municipality of Chatham- Kent for the Nicholson Drain (Community of Raleigh) THIRD READING ONLY vii. By-law determining that the Line Fences Act does not apply to lands within the Municipality of Chatham-Kent viii. By-law to amend By-law Number 245-2004 of the Municipality of Chatham-Kent (Replace Yield Signs with Stop Signs at the Intersection of Littlejohn Road and Turin Line by way of the existing Through Highway Designation on Turin Line, Community of Orford)
ix. By-law to dedicate certain lands for Highway Purposes –Kent Bridge Road
x. By-law to repeal by-law 171-2005 being a by-law to dedicate certain lands for Highway Purposes (Hamlet Court)
xi. By-law to confirm proceedings of the Council of The Corporation of the Municipality of Chatham-Kent at its meeting held on the 27th day of March, 2006
Chatham-Kent Council Minutes from its meeting held on March 27, 2006 Page 42 of 49
12. NOTICES OF MOTION
(a) Councillor Vercouteren –Credit Card Audit As dealt with above.
13. APPROVAL OF COMMUNICATION ITEMS
(a) Approval of the March 27, 2006 Council Information Package ------1. Staff Reports and Information (a) Information report from Steve Matheson, Director, Legal Services dated March 27, 2006 re 2006 Census Data. (b) Letters to the following organizations from Barbara Masse, Administrative Assistant, Traffic and Transit re banners: § MS Society, Chatham-Kent Chapter Chatham-Kent Super Cities Walk for MS (April 3 – 24, 2006) § Chatham-Kent Big Sisters – Women Only Champagne & Chocolates Golf Tournament (May 23 – June 5, 2006) § Chatham-Kent Multiple Birth Association – Conference and Workshop (May 23-29, 2006) § Junior Achievement 5K Fun Run (May 15-29, 2006) (Copies available upon request from the Council Coordinators Office) (c) Letter to Marc Roberts, Program Manager, Municipal Services and First Nations from Lucy Brown, General Manager, Health & Family Services dated February 20, 2006 re Best Start Funding. (d) Action Items from the March 6, 2006 Council Meeting. 2. Mayor’s Information Package (a) Copy of a letter from Darrell Randell, President, Friends of the St. Clair dated February 2, 2006 to Peter Mansbridge, CBC National News re Sarnia and the Aamjiwnaang Health Effects (b) Letter from Len Crispino, President & CEO, Ontario Chamber of Commerce dated February 8, 2006 re Bill 206: Revising the Ontario Municipal Employees Retirement System Act. (c) Communication from Kevin Robson, a resident of Chatham-Kent dated February 14, 2006 re Proposed Municipal Signs for Myles McLellan. (d) Letter from Carolyn Downs, City Clerk, City of Kingston dated February 24, 2006 re Resolution requesting Corrections Canada to reconsider the February 8, 2006 placement of Long-Time Sex and Violence Offender at Portsmouth Community Corrections Centre (e) Letter from the David Ramsay, Minister of Natural Resources dated February 28, 2006 and an email from Ron Stead, Director of Customer Services re Ministry of Natural Resources Counter Service Transition. (f) Letter from George Smitherman, Minister of Health and Long-Term Care dated March 3, 2006 re Health Reform Plan. (g) Communication from Ken Sharratt, Chair, Water Efficiency Committee, Ontario Water Works Association received March 8, 2006 re New Regulations regarding the MOE Permit to take Water (PTTW) Program and Water Efficiency. (h) Copy of a letter to Thomas Warwick from Police Chief Carl Herder dated March 13, 2006 re Newspaper article “Police Destroy cache of Weapons, published in the London Free Press, March 1, 2006. (i) Invitation to the Mayor and Members of Council from the St. Clair Region Conservation Authority dated March 13, 2006 re 34th Annual Sydenham River Canoe V.I.P. Race, April 23, 2006.
Chatham-Kent Council Minutes from its meeting held on March 27, 2006 Page 43 of 49
(j) Letter from Judith Andrew, Vice President, Ontario, Canadian Federation of Independent Business dated March 14, 2006 re Local Leaders Survey. (k) Letter from Greg Farrant, Government Relations Manager, Ontario Federation of Anglers and Hunters dated March 14, 2006 re Gun Hunting on Sundays during regular hunting seasons. 3. Correspondence From (a) Letter from Henry Puderer, Chief, Geographic Concepts, Statistics Canada to Elinor Mifflin, Clerk, dated February 27, 2006 re 2006 Census of Canada.
(b) Letter from Deborah Bourque, National President, Canadian Union of Postal Workers dated March 8, 2006 re Future of Public Postal Service. (c) Letter from Rhonda Barkley, Ontario Family Fishing Weekend Steering Committee dated March 13, 2006 re 2006 Ontario Family Fishing Weekend. (d) Communication from Damian Bassett, CEO, Stewardship Ontario dated February 27, 2006 re Letter from Daniel Steen, Owens Illinois Canada (Blue Box Funding Committee). (e) Letter from Don Pearson, General Manager, Conservation Ontario dated March 6, 2006 re Communication from OPERA regarding Section 28, Regulation Conservation Authorities Act. (f) Draft copy of the 53rd Annual OSUM Conference Program (May 3-5, 2006), Leamington, Ontario. (g) Letter from Irvin Shachter, Senior Counsel, Ministry of the Attorney General dated March 3, 2006 re Notice of Appeal, Official Plan Amendment No. 18, Part of Lots 22 and 23, Concession 3 – Links of Kent, Community of Raleigh, Municipality of Chatham-Kent. (h) Letter from Claude Berthiaume, Councillor Ward 2, City of Greater Sudbury to Mayor Redekop, Mayor of the Town of Fort Erie dated March 6, 2006 re Increase in Municipal Share of Slot Revenue and a copy of a letter to the Ontario Lottery and Gaming Corporation from Elinor Mifflin, City Clerk dated March 15, 2006 re Harness Racing in Southwestern Ontario. 4. Routine Approvals Delegated to Administration (a) Corporate Services (i) Routine approval from Steve Matheson, Director of Legal Services dated March 6, 2006 re Repeal By-law 171-2005 of The Corporation of The Municipality of Chatham-Kent (ii) Routine approval from Stuart Wood, Director, Financial Services dated March 1, 2006 re Taxes and Assessment Adjusted to February 28, 2006 (b) Infrastructure and Engineering Services (i) Routine approval from Wayne Pollock, Director Public Works North dated February 21, 2006 re Dedication By-law – Kent Bridge Road 5. Resolutions (a) Resolutions from the City of Kawartha Lakes re Provincial Relief and Municipal Property Assessment Corporation (b) Resolution form the Town of Collingwood re Watertight Report and Recommendations of the Expert Water Panel (c) Resolution from the Township of King re Preservation of Agricultural Land (d) Resolution form the Municipality of Durham Region re Removal of Barriers to Family Physicians (e) Resolution from the Town of Fort Erie re Ontario Mayors for Automotive Investment (f) Resolutions from the City of Owen South and the County of Grey re Municipal Financial Crisis 6. Minutes (a) Chatham-Kent Community Strategic Plan Implementation Committee Meeting Minutes a meeting held Thursday, February 23, 2006
Chatham-Kent Council Minutes from its meeting held on March 27, 2006 Page 44 of 49
7. Invitations (a) Invitation to Council to attend the Dresden Rotary Annual Banquet and Auction to be held on Friday, April 21, 2006. (b) Invitation to the Mayor and Members of Council to attend the Parade of Chefs event on Thursday, April 13, 2006 at the Wheels Inn, Chatham. 8. News Letters/News Releases/Advisory/Announcements/Media Releases/Articles AMO Member Communication Alert/For your Information · Municipal Act Reform – Update, FYI 06/002 · OMERS Bill 206, Status of Supplemental Plans, Alert 06/013 · Update on Proposed Amendment to Municipal Council Term, Alert 06/014
· Media Release from the Thames A Canadian Heritage River, dated March 6, 2006 Article published in The Ontario Fire Service Messenger entitled “Chatham-Kent Fire hits all the right notes · Riverview Gardens, March 2006 Report 30 · Chatham-Kent Matters published March 15, 22, 29, 2006 ------
Councillor Faas moved, Councillor seconded:
“That the Council Information package be received.”
Councillor Faas referred to Item 2(k) - letter from Greg Farrant, Government Relations Manager, Ontario Federation of Anglers and Hunters dated March 14th, 2006 regarding gun hunting on Sundays during regular hunting seasons. He asked that administration notify the Ontario Federation of Anglers and Hunters that Chatham-Kent Council will revisit the issue and take action accordingly. The Mayor asked that administration provide information as to when this would return to Council.
The Mayor referred to Item 1(c) - letter to Marc Roberts, Program Manager, Municipal Services and First Nations from Lucy Brown, General Manager, Health and Family Services dated February 20th, 2006 regarding Best Start Funding. She asked that a copy of this letter be incorporated into and form part of the minutes of the Council of March 27th, 2006 (as attached).
The Mayor referred to Item 2(c) - Communication from Kevin Robson, a resident of Chatham-Kent dated February 14, 2006 re Proposed Municipal Signs for Myles McLellan. She noted that they are wishing to find out if Council wishes to proceed.
Councillor Crew moved, Councillor Eberle seconded:
“That administration review the request and prepare a report for Council.”
The Mayor put the Motion. Motion Carried
The Mayor referred to a letter from the David Ramsay, Minister of Natural Resources dated February 28, 2006 and an email from Ron Stead, Director of Customer Services regarding Ministry of Natural Resources Counter Service Transition.
The Mayor referred to Item 2(g) - Communication from Ken Sharratt, Chair, Water Efficiency Committee, Ontario Water Works Association received March 8, 2006 with respect to new regulations regarding the MOE Permit to take Water (PTTW) Program and
Chatham-Kent Council Minutes from its meeting held on March 27, 2006 Page 45 of 49
Water Efficiency. The Mayor noted that the PUC would most likely to return to Council with this information.
The Mayor referred to Item #5(a) Resolution from the City of Kawartha Lakes regarding Provincial Relief and Municipal Property Assessment Corporation. She noted that a fair amount of information was provided on these communities.
Councillor Herman referred back to the letter received from the David Ramsay, Minister of Natural Resources dated February 28, 2006 and the email from Ron Stead, Director of Customer Services regarding Ministry of Natural Resources Counter Service Transition.
Councillor Herman moved, Councillor McGuigan seconded:
“That administration prepare a letter to David Ramsay noting Chatham-Kent’s concerns of discontinuing the front counter service delivery to the public at the Municipal Service Centre and the effect this will have on Chatham-Kent residents and operations at the Municipal Service Centres.”
The Mayor put the Motion. Motion Carried The Mayor put the Motion. (the original motion to receive the information package) Motion Carried
14. NON-AGENDA BUSINESS
(a) Responses to Council Inquiries
(i) 2005 Remuneration & Expenses Paid to Each Member of Council
MUNICIPALITY OF CHATHAM-KENT
CORPORATE SERVICES
FINANCIAL SERVICES
INFORMATION REPORT
TO: Mayor and Members of Council
FROM: Stuart Wood, CMA Director, Financial Services/Treasurer
DATE: March 9, 2006
SUBJECT: 2005 Remuneration & Expenses Paid to Each Member of Council
This report is for the information of Council.
BACKGROUND
Chatham-Kent Council Minutes from its meeting held on March 27, 2006 Page 46 of 49
Section 284(1) of the Municipal Act requires the Treasurer to submit to Council, prior to March 31, an itemized statement of remuneration and expenses paid to each member of Council by the Municipality for the preceding year.
COMMENTS
Mayor and Council’s 2005 remuneration and expenses were as follows:
Honorariums Travel, Total Mayor / Councillors & Training, Remuneration Related Benefits Car Allowances and Expenses Etc. Arbour, Doug $ 17,080 $ 871 $ 17,951 Brown, Jim 23,031 1,445 24,476 Clarke, Don 4,534 127 4,661 Crew, Mel 23,031 89 23,120 Eberle, Marg 23,031 4,875 27,906 Faas, Joe 23,031 123 23,154 Fluker, Bryon 23,031 1,681 24,712 Gagner, Diane 79,806 24,490 104,296 Gilbert, Anne 23,031 4,985 28,016 Gordon, Don 23,031 6,599 29,630 Herman, Karen 23,031 5,707 28,738
Honorariums Travel, Total Mayor / Councillors & Training, Remuneration Related Benefits Car Allowance and Expenses Etc. King, Brian 23,031 4,472 27,503 McGregor, Tom 23,031 3,239 26,270 McGuigan, Janet 23,031 849 23,880 Robbins, Larry 23,031 2,635 25,666 Mansfield Scott, Bill 23,031 862 23,893 Sulman, Doug 23,031 2,995 26,026 Vercouteren, Frank 23,031 3,370 26,401 Weaver, Bill 23,031 2,218 25,249 TOTALS $ 469,916 $ 71,632 $ 541,548
A straight percentage is applied to the honorariums to calculate the related benefits. One- third of honorariums are considered to be a re-imbursement of expenses subject to a municipal GST rebate. Honorariums received were $22,381 for Councilors and $72,382 for the position of Mayor, of which $3,000 was an RSP contribution. Benefits include pooled CPP and EHT costs.
OTHERS CONSULTED
No other departments were consulted.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS
The total amount of remuneration and expenses paid is lower than the 2005 budget allocation of $563,834.
Prepared by: Reviewed by:
______Colleen Croft Stuart Wood, CMA Financial Analyst III Director, Financial Services/Treasurer
Chatham-Kent Council Minutes from its meeting held on March 27, 2006 Page 47 of 49
Reviewed by: Reviewed by:
______Gerry Wolting, B.Math, CA Joe G. Pavelka, P. Eng. General Manager Chief Administrative Officer Corporate Services
R:\F&ps\Finance\2006\RTC007 - 2005 Remuneration & Expense Paid To Each Member of Council.doc
Councillor Weaver moved, Councillor Fluker seconded:
“That we extend the meeting ten minutes.”
The Mayor put the Motion. Motion Carried
Councillor Weaver moved, Councillor King seconded:
“That the report be received for information.”
Councillor Weaver asked that Council’s actual budget be received with this report in the future.
The Mayor put the Motion. Motion Carried
(b) Councillor Weaver reported that he has received communication expressing concern of the speed limit in front of St. Michael School. He noted that the police have met with the people and recommended that speed limit be reduced. He asked that administration bring a report back to Council as soon as possible.
Councillor Weaver moved, Councillor Faas seconded:
“That administration bring a report back to Council on the matter as soon as possible.”
Councillor Gilbert moved an Amendment, Councillor Eberle seconded:
“That the motion include the speed limit in front of all schools in Chatham-Kent (traffic calming devices).”
The Mayor put the Amendment. Amendment Carried The Mayor put the Motion, as amended. Motion Carried
Councillor Brown expressed concern of the cost. The Mayor noted that the report would outline the costs and it would be Council’s decision.
(b) Councillor Herman moved, Councillor Vercouteren seconded:
“That administration bring back a report with regard to the cost of providing street Chatham-Kent Council Minutes from its meeting held on March 27, 2006 Page 48 of 49 lights at the O’Brien and Detroit Drive.”
The Mayor put the Motion. Motion Failed
(c) Councillor Fluker referred to the recent Provincial budget. He asked that administration bring a report back outlining the budget and its impact on the Municipality of Chatham-Kent. The General Manager, Corporate Services confirmed that a comprehensive report would be brought forward in the near future.
(d) Councillor Gilbert sought clarification of the requirement of a motion to provide direction to staff. The Mayor confirmed that staff will only receive direction by way of a motion. This ensures that administration is acting on direction from Council as a whole.
15. RESOLUTION COUNCIL IN CLOSED SESSION & ADJOURNMENT
Councillor Robbins moved, Councillor Faas seconded:
“That Chatham-Kent Council adjourn to its next Meeting to be held at 6:00 p.m. on Monday April 3, 2006 and that Chatham-Kent Council authorize itself to meet in closed session prior to such Meeting to discuss any matters permitted by The Municipal Act to be considered at a Closed Meeting.”
The Mayor put the Motion. Motion Carried
The meeting adjourned at 10:10 p.m.
______Mayor – Diane Gagner
______Clerk – Elinor Mifflin /bmp
Attachments- Letter to Marc Roberts, Program Manager, Municipal Services and First Nations from Lucy Brown, General Manager, Health and Family Services dated February 20th, 2006 regarding Best Start Funding and letter dated February 24, 2006 from Marc Roberts, Program Manager, Municipal & First Nations Services, South West Region.
Chatham-Kent Council Minutes from its meeting held on March 27, 2006 Page 49 of 49