THE DISTRICT MUNICIPALITY OF MUSKOKA
ADMINISTRATION AND FINANCE COMMITTEE
AGENDA
Meeting No. AF-3-98 Friday, February 27,1998 Immediately Following Emergency Services Committee Board Room, District Administration Building
Pages
1.. MINUTES
Recommendation
THAT the minutes of the Administration and Finance Committee meeting of February 6, 1998 be confirmed ..
2 DELEGATION
- John P Gallagher, John P. Gallagher & Associates- request for exemption from Development Charge By-law 91-,98
3. EXEMPTION TO DEVELOPMENT CHARGE BY-LAW 91-98
Recommendation
THAT an exemption to By-law 91-98 be granted to Mr. & Mrs .. Blanchette for four lots on Townline Road West allowing for payment of development charges to be paid at the non-urban rate subject to entering into a registered agreement with the District of Muskoka, at their expense, that the owners of these lots will not object to any future water and sewer local improvement
4 INFORMATION ITEMS
a) Alert Release of Draft New Municipal Act News Release - Draft Municipal Act Released for Consultation b) News Release - Ontario's Economic & Fiscal Outlook Continues to Improve c) WOW Backgrounder - Business Occupancy Tax Chaos Gains Attention from Ministry of Finance d) MMAH -' Local Housing Authority (LHA) Boards e) Small Urban Municipalities (OSUM) Conference -, Town of Huntsville
- ',;;;:
5 NEW BUSINESS
6. ADJOURNMENT
THAT we do now adjourn until Friday, March 20,1998 immediately following the Emergency Services Committee or the call of the Chair.
DISTRICT MUNICIPALITY OF MUSKOKA
70 PINE STREET, BRACEBRIDGE, ONTARIO P1L 1N3 TELEPHONE (705) 645-2231 FAX (705) 645-5319 -*----1-800-461-421 0 (705 AR EA 0 NLY) REPORT
TO: Chair and Members Administration and Finance Committee
FROM: John McRae Commissioner of Finance & Administration
RE: Exemption from Development Charges By-law 91-98, as amended
DATE: February 23, 1998
RECOMMENDA TION
THAT an exemption to By-law 91-98 be granted to Mr. & Mrs. Blanchette for four lots on Townline Road West allowing for payment of development charges to be paid at the non-urban rate subject to entering into a registered agreement with the District of Muskoka, at their expense, that the owners of these lots will not object to any future water and sewer local improvement
Letter from John P Gallagher &Associates on behalf of Mr. & Mrs. Blanchette for an exemption from By-law 91-98
BACKGROUND
Attached is a copy of a letter from John P Gallagher & Associates outlining the rationale for the request for an exemption to By-law 91-98 as amended. Also attached is some commentary and a recommendation from the Town of Huntsville.
By-law 91-98 does require that all lands within a Primary Urban Area or within the Urban Service Area pay development charges at the urban rate. In this case, the lands are within the Primary Urban Area and not in the District Urban Service Area but have been granted an exemption by the Town of Huntsville for the requirement to have water and sewer services
After reviewing the material, District staff recommends that the request be approved
Respectfully submitted,
r/?c< John McRae
~J... :at/I - recycled paper JOHN P. GALLAGHER & ASSOCIATES • AJ.~TS PLANNING & DESIGN CONSULT
October 31, 1997
Mr Gordon Adams District Chairman District ofMuskoka 70 Pine Street Bracebridge, Ontario PIL IN3
Dear Sir
RE. Development Charges on Part ofLots 11 & 12, Concession XIV, geographic Township ofBrunel, Town ofHuntsville
With this letter, I request to be scheduled as a delegation at the next District Council meeting to seek an exemption to the District Development Charges By-law 91-98, as amended ..
In May of 1997, my clients, the Blanchettes received approval for the creation offour new residential lots to be serviced by well water and septic system The lots met the policies of the Huntsville Official Plan that dealt with residential infill within the Primary Urban Area.. This policy allowed the limited development to proceed on individual services .. Further the property was already zoned Residential (R2) which allowed lots to be created at a minimum of 60 m frontage and a minimum lot area of°4 ha
Upon investigation, it was determined that development charges would be payable to the Town of Huntsville and the District ofMuskoka The rate payable to the Town is approximately S1,990 This fee applies to both rural and urban lots and my clients have no objection paying this amount.
The District is requesting that the Blanchettes pay $5,126 00 per lot to be created This represents the urban rate that is approximately $3,3 J°higher than the rural rate The District has also stated that no connection to the municipal services would be provided until such time that the Blanchettes extend the main line from Heritage Hills subdivision. Given the fact that private services would have to be installed this puts the total amount of money in the lot at about S13,000 exclusive ofbuilding permit and entrance fees This also makes it very difficult to sell the lot with these strict financial obligations
RR#1, SOUTH WASEOSA ROAD, HUNTSVILLE, ONTARIO P1H 2J2, TELEPHONE/FACSIMILE (705) 789-5900 E-MAIL: jpgplan@vianeton ca ;2o.:z In the future, ifone ofthe Owners decided to sever their parcel into four urban lots the District would obtain development charges for three ofthose, probably at a higher rate than what exists today.
We have approached the Town ofHuntsville with our concerns and attach a report which was endorsed by the Huntsville Council.
Given the above information, we hereby request the Blanchettes pay the rural (non urban) rate for the recently approved severances
Yours truly, ~~ John P Gallagher, CPT Planning Consultant THE CORPORATION OF THE TOWN OF HUNTSVILLE
Huntsville Town Council
No. _
Date October 14. 1997
WHEREAS: The application of a District development charge rests under the jurisdiction of the District of Muskoka. However, payment of the full urban development charge may have limited merit on the basis of contribution towards major off-site trunk lines and treatment facilities. In addition, given that the subject lands and others south of Townline Road are not planned to be serviced in the near future, the subject areas may require amendment to the Urban Service Area By-laws of the District: BE IT RESOL VED THA T: Based on the information provided, it is recommended that Council of the Town of Huntsville support the request of Mr. and Mrs. Blanchette to the District of Muskoka to pay the non-urban (rural) development charge for each lot.
ME.WBERS OF COUNCiL Yea ~ Councillor Aitchison Councillor Clarke Councillor Coleman Councillor Oben Councillor Oldham I Councillor Snell Councillor Schumacher Councillor So ear i Mavor House I TOTAL Ir 1:';-:-.,;,..." ..'. ",:"',.""" ~~:~ .~ CORPORATION OF THE TOWN OF HUNTSVILLE '"..,
" MEMORANDUM
To: Robert W. Small, Town Manager
From: Terry Sararas, Manager of Planning
Date: October 2, 1997
Subject: Blanchette Development Charges Part of Lots 11 & 12, Concession N, geographic Township of Brunel, Town of Huntsville
I have now reviewed the letter dated September 3rd from Mr. John Gallagher respecting
the above matter. Mr. Gallagher's argument is that the District of Muskoka in applying the
criteria for collection of the District development charges on the four severed lots in question
should not be requesting the fullllrl2an rate ($5,126. per lot) but rather the non-urban (rural)
rate ($1,826. per lot) based on the following facts:
a) This portion of Townline Road West is not anticipated to be serviced by
municipal water and sewer services in the foreseeable future;
b) The new lot owners will be required to service the lots by private well
and septic system at their costs;
c) The four new lots meet the policies of the District and Huntsville
Official Plans and are zoned for residential development on private water and
sewer services.
The District of Muskoka have indicated that the subject lands are within the Primary
Urban Area boundaries for Huntsville .. While municipal water and sewer services may not
be available to the lots immediately, all development is anticipated to pay the urban
development charge as contribution towards the cost of trunk lines and sewage plant
capacity In addition, provision of local water and sewer lines on Townline Road West to o to Robert W. Small tober 2, 1997 age 2
the subject lots would be either development driven or provided through local improvement
charges similar to past projects on Yonge Street or Lakewood Park.
The application of a District development charge rests under the jurisdiction of the
District of Muskoka. However, payment of the full urban development charge may have
limited merit on the basis of contribution towards major off-site trunk lines and treatment
facilities. In addition, given that the subject lands and others south of Townline Road are
not planned to be serviced in the near future, the subject areas may require amendment to
the Urban Service Area By-laws of the District.
Based on the information provided, it is recommended that Coundl of the town of
Huntsville support the request of Mr. and Mrs. Blanchette to the District of Muskoka to pay
the non-urban (rural) development charge for each lot.
',',.;
IDS/de Page 882 FEB-11-98 WED 06:29 PM AMO c~x ~1 9716191 p, O~/03 Chalr£l1.4il CA.a.. f3 0 Clerk 13 0 Association of Treasurer B 0 ... C~'>I; ) Munlclpalfties Compuier o 0 .~ rm;c'"C',:j of Ontario P~soonel LelJ3! ~ 8 S93 Univertity oIIv•• Suitll 170<. TQl?;>t\t.,. eN MliG 1ES ALER. Hurr.dfl Serv~96 ~ Putiic VJorks B 1111: (0418)n,.QllS6. fIX: ("16) ;71··8101 PI1t;iniOg (j 0 .mlll: .moCimc.munl~Qmcom Land Divisioo G}' 0 CommUee o 0 For immediate action Courn:u o 0 February 10, 1998 Cor:espond-:nce 0 L o Alert - 98/005 I Comments Release of unlcrpal Act
The Issue: Today. the Ministry of Municipal Affairs Etnd Housing released the new MunicipalAcf draft legislation for a gO-day consultation ending on May 8,1998 ..
The Facts:
, This draft legislation fellows from broad consultations on the Government's discussion paper released in early Winter of '1997.
• The draft legislation document entitled, A Proposed New Mun;cipa! Act: Dret: Legislation, Including £xplanatcJiy Notes. is more than 280 pages and includes 19 parts addressing such substantive issues as municipal powers, business licensing, municipal restructuring, Council governance, practices and procedures, financial administration, municipal taxation and tax
collection I debt and investment, municipal liability, enforcement, regulations and translrion provisions.
• According to the Province, the key change from the current Act is enhanced municipal flexibility. The document states, "Although rnuntcipalittes would continue to have to rely on provincial legislation for authority to operate, the legislation, except for financial matters, would be less prescriptive and detailed", This proposed enhanced flexibility wouro be provided through three instruments:
- Natural Person - municipalities would have the power of a natural person to conduct their day-to-day business without the need for specific legislative authority;
- Governmental Powers· municipalities need certain govemmenta! powers that are not available to a natural person tor levying taxes, for regulating and prohibiting and enforcino matters, and establishing licenses etc.:
'. Spheres of Jurisdiction - municipalities would be given general powers that would authorize them to exercise their govemmental and natura! person powers in 13 broad subject areas or spheres of jurisdiction, among them the health, safety, protection and well-being of people, and the protection of property. public uWit!es, waste rnanaqemsnt, transportation, economic development, drainage and flood control and the natural environment.
FEB 12 1998 •• .1'f)"- ?BS GiS 5319 CLER~-Mus~okd D
FEB-11-98 WED 05:30 PM AMO FAX NO. 4169716191 p, C2/03
Member Communication: Alert Release of Draft New Municipal Act
Notwithstanding the above instruments, eight general limits to municipal powers are outlined. For example, municipalities would not be able to regulate or prohibit pnvateiy-owned systems under public utilities, waste management and transportation systems other than highways spheres of jurisdiction.
The Impact on Related Pieces of Legislation
In addition to replacing the current Municipal Act, more than 30 other statutes would be incorporated into the new proposed Acr. These Include the Regionai Municipalities Act, the 12 regional Acts and the Acts for certain counties. Other major statutes to be repealed include the Municipal Sales Tax Act and the Municipal Boundary Negotiations Act, The Public Transportation and Highway ImprovementAct, administered by the Ministry of Transportation, would be repealed and replaced by the highway provisions of the new Municipal Act. The Government wi!! introduce a Bill for first reading some time in tile Spring 1998 session of the Legislative Assembly.
Action Required:
AMO's Municipal Act Task Force will start to review the draft legislation. In commenting on the Ministry's initial 1997 consultation paper, the Association called upon the Government to provide real, substantive legislative and regulatory reform as set out in AMO's gUiding principles and recommendations in its formal response. (Copies of this report were distributed widely to Ontario municipalities last May).
AMO w!l1 evaluate the draft legislation to determine how it meets its established oriteria of flexibility and municipal empowennent versus the existing policy framework where prescriptive pieces of legislation direct municipalities to carry out specified administrative and financial tasks. AMO will analyze the proposed legislative limitations on municipal authority ensuring they are minimal and of a clear and overriding Provincial interest.
From AMO's standpoint. it is imperative that the draft legislation successfully meet the above criteria, 50 that after nearly 150 years since the introduction of the 'Baldwin Act', municipalities finally achieve true decision-making authority and autonomy. Without this type of authority, municipalities wil! be further disadvantaged in trying to meet the challenges presented by the WOW reforms. As one of the final pieces in the Province's municipal reform agenda, this represents a critical legislative tool that may facilitate the management of local affairs and enable municipalities to respond progressively to the emerging challenges.
AMO will keep the membership informed on issues that may arise from the review of the draft legislation and the recommendations thai tne Association will take to the Minister.
This information is also available through 4MO's Municom network at w",lwmuni'comcom
For more Information contact: Pat Van~r.i. Director of Policy and Government Rala!ions (Acting) at (416) 971-9856 ext, 316 or email: [email protected]
Transmission problems: Lilian Cheung at (416) 971-9856 ext 308 or email' Icheung@amo,municom.com MMAH - News Releases / Communique Page 1 of 1
News Release ® Ontario Communique Ministry 01 MunicIpal Aflalrs anE! Housing Mlnlstere des Affalres munlclpales et du logement
Release: February 11, 1998 Draft Municipal Act released for consultation
Municipal Affairs and Housing Parliamentary Assistant Ernie Hardeman today asked for input on a proposed new Municipal Act that would cut red tape, allowing municipalities to better serve Ontario taxpayers.
Hardeman released a draft of the proposed new Act on behalf of Minister AI Leach, asking for comments by May 8, 1998.
"This is something municipalities have been asking for for years," Hardeman said. "This proposed legislation would give municipalities more flexibility to run their affairs as effectively as possible and give the taxpayers the government they want."
The draft Act also responds to the 1996 recommendation of the Who Does What panel that the current Act be replaced with "a streamlined legislative framework that would give municipalities significantly more flexibility and autonomy .. "
The release of the draft Act follows an earlier consultation with municipalities and other interested groups and people. A discussion paper released in the spring of 1997 outlined broad proposed directions for a new Act. The draft legislation released today refines those directions and addresses issues raised during the consultation period.
Hardeman said the proposed new Act, which the government plans to introduce for first reading in the spring, would allow municipalities to respond more quickly to emerging issues, and give them more flexibility in their day-to-day operations.
The draft legislation can be seen at municipal offices, public libraries, or the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing website - http://www.mmah.gov.onca
Comments can be addressed to Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing, Local Government Policy Branch, 13th Floor, 777 Bay Street, Toronto, ON MSG 2ES. They can also be sent by fax to (416) .585-7638, or by e-mail to [email protected]
A New Municipal Act for Ontario
For more information call: David Shtern Local Government ?olicy Branch (416) 585-7263
Home II About The Ministrv II Core Business II In The News II - II Francais http.z/www.mmah.gov.on .. ca/inthnews/releases/980211e.htm -2/11/98 ~ .~- . ,t209 A New Municipal Act for Ontario Page 1 of 5
Background Information:
A New Municipal Act for Ontario Chronology
1849 The Baldwin Act establishes municipal government in Ontario. Rules governing municipalities are prescriptive. If the Act does not specifically permit them to do something, they cannot do it. Every time they need to do something new, because of the changing times, for example, or local needs, or technological advances, the Act has to be amended.
1995 Municipalities are governed by a Municipal Act that is now 385 pages long and includes some 450 sections, and many other acts, including the Municipal Elections Act, the Municipal Boundary Negotiations Act, the Municipal Tax Sales Act, the Regional Municipalities Act, Acts for individual regions, counties and cities, and significant portions of the Public Utilities Act and the Public Transportation and Highway Improvement Act. These acts all tell municipalities exactly what they are allowed to do or required to do .. For many years municipalities have asked that the government try a new, simpler approach.
August, 1995 Municipal Affairs and Housing Minister AI Leach tells municipalities all that will change .. He promises a simpler Municipal Act that would give municipalities more flexibility to meet local needs.
Fall, 1995 Advisory group established. Chaired by Municipal Affairs and Housing Parliamentary Assistant Ernie Hardeman, the group also included: Grant Hopcroft, deputy mayor of the City of London; Jay Aspin, a councillor from the City of North Bay; Ken Seiling, Chair of the Region of Waterloo; Ann Mulvale, Mayor of the City of Oakville; Bill Mickle, Reeve of the Town of Exeter; Denis Pommainville, Reeve of the Township of Cambridge; and Howard Greig, Reeve of the Township of Sullivan
January, 1996 The Savings and Restructuring Act gives municipalities new restructuring and financial powers
Spring, 1996 "Who Does What" panel appointed .. Sub-panel established to look at
http://www.mmah.gov.on .. ca/inthnewslbackgrnd/980211e.htm )/11/98 :2/0 A New Municipal Act for Ontario Page 2 of 5
municipal administration issues, including the Municipal Act. Chaired by the late Peter Meyboom, who was then acting Chief Administrative Officer of the City of Ottawa. Other elected members included Gordon Chong, now a Toronto councillor; Marian Millman, Reeve of Yarmouth Township; and Who Does What chair David Crombie.
Fall, 1996 Better Local Government Act includes measures to help municipalities: reduce the number of local politicians; simplify municipal election procedures; get the most benefit for taxpayers when they bOJIOW and invest; and better manage liability risks.
December, 1996 "Who Does What" panel calls the Municipal Act "a complex, limiting and unwieldy piece of legislation." The panel recommends giving municipalities broad powers and areas of authority within which to exercise those powers.
March, 1997 Province releases discussion paper on a proposed new Municipal Act, including some draft legislation. Response is generally positive, but municipalities and others say they want to see an entire draft Act before it is introduced in the Legislature.
February, 1998 Province releases draft Municipal Act for three-month consultation period prior to introduction in the Legislature. Comments are requested by May 8, 1998. Highlights of the draft Municipal Act
As recommended by the Who Does What Panel, the Act would give municipalities certain general powers and describe areas of responsibility --' referred to in the draft legislation as "Spheres of Jurisdiction" -- within which to exercise those powers ..
Municipalities would operate within a system of checks and balances, including requirements that they hold elections every three years, that they conduct their business in the open, that they maintain a list of all their user and licensing fees and that they have procedures in place with respect to meetings, the sale ofland, notice and consultation. Ultimately, municipalities are subject to provincial regulation if necessary.
How would this new approach benefit taxpayers?
Municipalities and the province would save time and money. Here's one illustration of the how the current Act gets in the way of efficiency.
http://www.mmah.gov.oll.ca/inthnews!backgrnd/980211e .. htm -.2/11/98 '..;;:, ,9.// A New Municipal Act for Ontario Page 3 of 5
Several years ago when attacks by pit bulls became a municipal issue, municipalities did not have clear authority to deal ~it.h problems caused by vicious dogs. An amendment to the MUnICIpal Act was therefore needed. Putting that amendment in place took more than two years, involved many hours of work by municipal staff and ~taf~ of at least three provincial ministries, and also took up valuable time In the Legislature. The draft Act would have allowed municipalities to deal with the issue throuzh their own procedures for gathering local public input without the ne~d for an amendment to the Municipal Act.
Natural Person Powers The underlying principle of the current Municipal Act is that municipalities may only undertake activities that have been expressly authorized in the legislation. They have therefore required legislative approval for virtually every action. The proposed legislation would grant municipalities a general authority called "natural person powers." These powers would be similar to those given to corporations under the Business Corporation Act. This would allow municipalities to enter into agreements, for example, own property, hire and pay employees, and provide and charge for goods and services. Municipalities would be able to use their natural person powers only within certain areas in which they have clear authority, such as the 13 spheres of jurisdiction. While municipalities can already do these things, each individual action has to be specifically authorized by the legislation. With natural person powers a large mass of very prescriptive and detailed legislation could be eliminated. When a municipality wants to do something new, no legislative amendment would be needed" The restrictions to the natural person powers would include a prohibition against setting up a profit-making corporation, for example, or buying shares in a company. Governmental Powers In addition to natural person powers, municipalities would be given governmental powers, including the power to regulate, to prohibit certain activities, and to establish a system of licenses or permits. The draft Act would also give them the power to collect taxes and to enforce bylaws, Spheres ofJurisdiction The draft Act sets out 13 spheres of jurisdiction within which these powers could be exercised. They include
• health, safety, protection and well-being of people and the protection of property; • public utilities; • waste management; • highways, including parking and traffic on highways; • transportation systems such as transit, ferries and airports; • the natural environment; • culture, parks, recreation and heritage; • economic development;
http.z/www..mmah .. gov.on.ca/inthnews!backgrnd/980211e .htrn ;l;'~ A New Municipal Act for Ontario Page 4 of 5
• nuisance, noise, odour, vibration, illumination and dust; • drainage and flood control; • structures including fences and signs; • parking, other than on highways; • and animals.
Again, these spheres reflect current municipal activities, but they are expressed in a more general way. This would allow councils to deal with local circumstances, avoiding the need for amendments every time a new local issue arose. General Limitations
To balance this broad new authority, the draft Act also includes eight general limitations.
• Municipal bylaws would not be able to conflict with federal or provincial laws. • Municipalities would not be able to regulate in a more restrictive way than a provincial regulation. • Municipalities would not be able to regulate in certain defined areas of exclusive provincial jurisdiction, such as workplace health and safety. • Municipal bylaws would be subject to any procedural requirements and limits contained in specific provisions of the new Municipal Act or any other Act. • Municipalities would not be able to regulate or prohibit privately owned systems under the "public utilities", "waste management" and "transportation systems other than highways" spheres of jurisdiction. • Municipalities would not be able to do some things other natural persons can do, such as set up a corporation or purchase shares in a company. • Municipalities would not be able to grant any person a monopoly on carrying on any business, trade or occupation, unless specifically authorized to do so. • Municipalities would only be able to exercise their authority within their geographic boundaries, with some exceptions. Financial Provisions
The proposed legislation would continue to be prescriptive in the area of financial powers and requirements. For example, many of the provisions relating to debt issuance and investment in the current Act are continued in the draft Act The province has a vital interest in the financial integrity of municipalities. In part, that's because the financial integrity of municipalities has a direct impact on the financial integrity of the province. Furthermore, detailed prescriptive taxation provisions protect municipal taxpayers and they also protect municipalities from frivolous court challenges by setting the rules out in a detailed manner. Comments on the draft Municipal Act should be sent to:
Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing Local Government Policy Branch 13th Floor, 777 Bay Street
- http://www.mmah.gov.on.ca/inthnewslbackgmd/980211e.htm ~2/11/98 - :.;;;-.. ~J3 A New Municipal Act for Ontario Page 5 of 5
Toronto, ON M5G 2E5
They can also be sent by fax to (416) 585-7638, or bye-mail to [email protected]
http://wwwmmah .. gov.on .. ca/inthnewslbackgrnd/980211e.htm -.;;:.2/11/98. j?J~ Fiscal Outlook Page 1 of 2 News Release Communique ®Ont
Ministry of Finance Minilt6re des Finance. FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: February 10, 1998 ONTARIO'S ECONOMIC AND FISCAL OUTLOOK CONTINUES TO IMPROVE
Toronto A Ontario's econom-y is expanding and the government is on track to meet all fiscal targets, Finance Minister Ernie Eves told the Standing Committee on Financial and Economic Affairs of the Ontario Legislature today.
In an economic and fiscal report leading off the committee's pre-Budget consultations, Eves said that Ontario's real economic output rose by 4.4 per cent in 1997 - up from the 3.2 per cent projected in the 1997 Budget.. Ontario's economy is growing faster than the rest of Canada and faster than any of the G-7 nations, Eves said ..
The province's third quarter economic accounts and third quarter finances "provide proof positive that the government's plan for Ontario is working," the Minister said.
"Improving job prospects, continued deregulation and progress toward a balanced budget have boosted consumer confidence," Eves said. "In fact, Ontario's consumer confidence has risen for eight consecutive quarters to its highest level in nine years."
Auto sales, alone, were up 17 per cent over the first 11 months of 1997, on their way to the strongest gain in 12 years .. Over the same period, retail sales increased 6.8 per cent from a year earlier, on pace to register the strongest performance in nearly a decade ..
The deficit forecast for 1997-98 is now $5.2 billion, down $1.4 billion from the budget plan and $430 million from the second-quarter outlook .. For the third straight year, Ontario is on track to better its deficit target, and the province will balance its budget in 2000-01 .. "Ten years ago a deficit of $5 billion would have been unthinkable and it should be unthinkable today," Eves said.
While significant progress has been made, there is an ongoing need to manage expenditures. With an aging population, the health budget continues to come under pressure - with increasing demands for physician services, as well as new drugs and new and improved technologies .. The education budget is also under pressure - from increased enrolment and ongoing improvements to curriculum. "As I have already mentioned, investment in these priority programs and services is being dearly affected by growing public debt interest costs," said Eves
Revenue continued to grow faster than projected in response to renewed business and consumer confidence - $2.4 billion over the budget plan and up $525 million from the second-quarter level primarily as a result of strong growth in personal income tax and Corporations Tax revenue .. The $650 million reserve, which is designed to protect the fiscal plan against unforeseen economic risks, will not be needed this fiscal year and was applied directly to deficit reduction in the second quarter.
Eves cautioned that "though we should all take pride in these achievements, there is a mountain of debt that we have not yet addressed." The Province is currently paying over $9 billion annually to
http://www.gov.on.calFl+··.Jknglish/q3-97eng.htm 2/12/98 .. . ~/? Fiscal Outlook Page 2 of 2
service this debt. "These debt costs must be brought down, and the best way to do this is by continuing to strengthen the economy, improving the environment for jobs and growth and - controlling spending," said Eves.
Eves also took the opportunity to remind retail vendors that the province is waiving late- filing penalties to help eastern Ontario businesses, especially small business and particularly those in rural areas, who missed filing deadlines for their December 1997 and January 1998 provincial Retail Sales Tax (RST) returns due to the ice storm.
"We are waiving late-filing penalties to help businesses, This is just one part of a concerted effort by the government and Ontarians working together to deal with the challenges caused by the storm," said Eves.
-30-
For more information: Don Black Communications Branch (416) 325-0324
You can access all Ministry of Finance news releases and backgrounders on the Ministry of Finance web site at http://www.gov.on.ca/finlhmpage.html
For more information, please see News Releases. For more information, please see Ontario Economy
http://www.gov.on.caIFINlenglish/q3-97enghtm _2/12/98 ~b Februarv 9, 1998 Vol. 1 - Issue 4
BUSINESS OCCUPANCY TAX CHAOS GAINS ATTENTION FROM MINISTRY OF FINANCE
The elimination of the Business Occupancy Tax (SOT}, a component of the Ontario Government's massive property tax reform, caused confusion for commercial property owners and tenants, Municipalities have n01 been able to advise the commercial/industrial pr opertv owners or tenants, how ultimately the Business Occupancy Tax would be replaced, as the Province has not announced impcrtant tax ratios and "fairness ranges". On february 5, 1998 the Province finally announced ITS' inteotion to introduce legislation to address some of the concerns and gaps created by eliminating the BOT
: As we understand i~
Under the Ontario Fair Assessment System, the Business Occupancy Tax, which was created in 1904, was eliminated. Business Occupancy Tax was the tax levy paid by business operators (usually tenants) in a retail or commercial enterprise There were different rates of business tax depending on the type of business operated. For example, a retail convenience store would oav a different Business Occupancy Tax than a financial institution,
The elimination of the BUSiness Occupancy Tax does not mean that 'the tax burden disappears, it simplv means that the tenant will no longer be directly responsible for paying this tax. In 1998, an amount equivalent to the BOT will be incorporated into the property taxes paid by commercial property owners
Depending on 1heir lease aqr eernent, commercia! property owners and tenants could now face significant chances in their tax levies Gross lease situations do not generally allow for property owner recovery of increased ooerating costs, such as taxes, from the 'tenants. Those w;th net leases will generally be able to collect the amount of displaced SOT from the tenant.
The government has fil'1aiiy stated its Intention to introduce legislation that would ensure fair treatment ct commercial property owners and tenants with gross leases by requiring m n by-laws specifying a portion of tax, up to a legislated maximum, that ~r1Iay be p;as*~'d on to . Cc:JJ, ActrA C.~.",~he me~jmeDnt irn 1998 tax bills are being sent inCludir1g an amount for the BOT to '~,4.GDmmerci,' ropcWy 'ners. Providing the property assessment has not recently changed, 'the ~~19.~8 intef4l, ta~s present roughly 65 - 70% of the total 1997 commercial/industrial _:9Z~lPerty till<. ItDrth r details are available on the Min:stiy of Finance's Web site .. at .ii,tit'.tfll://WW'.G] v. ,- ,"':0 FIN/on lish/Drooeng.htm :_ !,~cIl '-.J U .; .:::·~ii ~r;~a.s LJ [J ,j'_~i;'; ',.JJrks 0 0 ~~,,;;'.;()O 0 n Elizabeth Daly i ..:;, \..1 l.'ivisioo 0 0 Transition Information Coordinator '~i,,:Naet I 0 0 Municipaiity of Niagara I ,.:.c',t;l)CU 0 0 The Regional \ ':..:J'~IlS00nd~nce 0 0 ..)~I(::1\_ NL 1 .. r-'l GJrnmell\.¥ -IL- ----J :J)1 Ministry of Ministere des Municipal Affairs Affaires municipales Ct§Y Acton I and Housing et du Logement o r Bureau au ministre ~ Office of the Minister r.q L 777' Bay Street 777 rue Bay il o ~ Toronto ON M5G 2E5 Toronto ON M5G 2E5 ~ t-, o I . ..,I ': ;}I LJ i (416) 585··7000 (416) 585-7000 n ", "...~..,. iEjIO· ,Wr-o o oL-:; o u February 16, 1998 u o ,"., . o o 'f" "'.,;, o o '."; .')~"" ,l~:lCf! 0 o Dear Heads of Council c j-';~Z:;~~r.~~---_"':::::"'-J
I am writing to inform you that in recognition ofthe fact that on Janub~Y"-jlr,-,-tl~9~9g~,~ _ municipalities assumed the provincial share offunding for social housing, they will DOW be given increased opportunities to participate in the decision-making oflocal housing authority (LHA) boards.
As you know, LHA's are responsible for the management ofpublic housing projects across the province. They are managed by boards of directors made up ofvolunteer members from local communities. The boards are agents ofthe Ontario Housing Corporation (OHC), reporting to and receiving funding and direction through the OHC board.
In current practice, municipalities appoint one-fifth ofthe members on an LHA board, with the remaining appointments divided federally and provincially. But as we move towards transferring full administrative responsibility of social housing, and as vacancies occur on LHA boards, nominations which would have previously been made by the province will be made by municipalities. This will allow municipalities an increasingly important role in the day-to-day management ofthe public housing stock.
Ifthere is a vacancy on an LHA board in your municipality, ministry staffwill contact your municipality directly to request that you nominate candidates as soon as possible. Candidates for membership are recommended by me to Cabinet and appointed by Order in-Council.
Since all billing for social housing is through upper-tier and separated municipalities, these municipalities will be given the nominations to LHA boards.. Ifone LHA manages public housing units for both an upper-tier municipality and a separated municipality, the distribution ofmunicipal positions on the LHA's board will be based on the portion ofthe total social housing bill paid by each municipality. Any current municipal nominations on an LHA board will continue to be given to the municipality that had them originally.
/2
FEB 2 3 1998
.,.~... - 2 -
Heads ofCouncil
In northern areas ofthe province, where an upper-tier government does not exist and where an area services board is yet to be established, provincial nominations will be distributed, one per municipality, beginning with the municipality that is being billed the highest amount. Once an upper-tier organization is established, the previous municipal nominations will be given to the new upper-tier organization.
This transfer ofprovincia1 nominations is an. interim measure until social housing programs have been reformed and municipalities are able to assume full administrative responsibility. The provinceand its agencies remain fully committed to municipal involvement throughout the transition period, and municipalities are strongly represented on the new Social Housing Committee and working groups on social housing reform.
Three municipal members will also be appointed shortly to the OHC board of directors so that municipalities can participate in the decision-making at a corporate level. The ministry is working with the Association ofMunicipalities ofOntario to choose these appointees and will announce the appointments publicly when they are made.
Ifyou or your staffhave any questions regarding the nomination ofmembers for local housing authority boards, please call Alfredo Bartucci, Agency and Branch Services, OHC Support Branch, at (416) 585-6171.
Sincerely,
AI Leach Minister
-" .::-:" TOWN OF HUNTSVILLE 37 Main Street East. Huntsville, Ontario-PIH [AFlli i TeL (705) 789-1751 or 1-888.. 696-4255 Fax (70S) 7t1';I-OOb';l c[& Action Web site: http://www_cown.,huntsville,,on.ca Ch~ 0 C>- v. O Q' 0 C~~ G" Treasurer g- ~ , C21:l!Jutar U 0 P,j;S~lMel February 16, 1998 0 0 L~':,)aJ 0 0 iil;I-,dil Serv!cll6 0 0 MI' Jim Green P',,",1;C Works 0 Commissioner of Planning [~'~il:'tino ~ 0 & Economic Development Land Division 0 0 The District Municipality of Muskoka Ccmmi:tB8 0 0 70 Pine SL C.I;lJ(U:JJ 0 0- Bracebridge, DN c..."'freSOO~nce 0 0 PIL IN3 COmrrrBQl$ \ Dear Mr. Green:
In late April 1998, hundreds of municipal government representatives will be at Deerhurst in Huntsville for the 45 th Annual Organization of Small Urban Municipalities (OSUM) Conference, , In past years, the lower tier municipality hosting the event has sought financial assistance from its upper tier municipal government.. Similarly, we are respectfully requesting $5,000 in financial assistance from the District of Muskoka,
In return for your investment, we offer the following benefits:
.:. Free Trade Show Booth .:. Your logo on side ofconference kit bags .:. Recognized as a Platinum Sponsor .:. Full Page Ad in the OfficialProgram .:. Official Host of a Specific Meal '.' Promotional literature in all regis! kits .:. Posters/Banners inside Deerhurst .:. Recognition from Podium .:. Limited number of free meal passes
This conference is a wonderful opporninity to promote the District of Muskoka to the rest of Ontario in an inexpensive manner. Traditionally, there are about 200 delegates and about 100 spouses who attend the conference .. The past two years, the City of Stratford hosted the conference and received a $2,500 donation from the County of Perth in 1996 and again in 1997 A nearby municipality, St. Thomas, also donated S2,SqO in 1996 and 1997 We hope that you will also see the advantages ofgetting the District involved in this exciting marketing oppcrtuniry
Ifyou have any questions in regard to this request, please feel free to contact me at any time
Yours sincerely, ~. DaVIQ selbY conference1do-ordinator
cc Bill Calvert, C AO V
FEB 2-3,1998 -;;-.';;;-" .' FlJij Association of Copy Actioo Municipalities ChJlrmao f!J 0 of Ontario cc:r·kOO FFI Ccf1JF iifJE PRESIDENT TraaSlJrif Q/ 0 cornputSf 0 0 February 18, 1998 PmoMai 0 0 LaqaJ 0 0 Hurr..lln ScJ\'lcas G 0 Public Works 0 P~~lnino ~ 0 To the Head and Members of Council: Lana (>"'k" 0 I Committee §!0 0 Council 0 RE: CLEARING THE AIR ABOUT THE VILLA~TLB ANl[JfH ~ DISTRICT OF MUSKOKA RESOLUTIONS CuI"M',si1lS
The Association has been receiving numerous enquiries about resolutions that have recently been circulated by the Village of Blyth and the District of Muskoka, expressing concerns about the Association and its operations .. To clear the air, here is the background and current status on both of those issues.
The Village of Blyth Resolution
In 1997, the Village of Blyth sought support for a resolution asking that the cost of education be removed form the commercial and industrial property tax base. This resolution was endorsed by hundreds of municipalities and the delegates at the 1997 A.MO Conference. Because the Association was still trying to get the Province to live up to its promise of revenue neutrality regarding Who Does What, a decision was taken by A.t\10 last fall not to pursue the issue raised in the Blyth resolution until the Association had had an opportunity to address the outstanding WDW issues
While we are still working on those issues, the Association's Board of Directors reaffirmed its strong support for the Blyth resolution at its February 5th meeting, and will be pushing for the removal of education from the property tax base as part of its pre-budget presentation to the Province later this week .. The Association has expressed its appreciation to Blyth for their efforts regarding this issue, and will continue to push for the complete removal of education costs from the property tax base without a corresponding increase in the percentage of social service costs borne at the municipal level
The District of Muskoka Resolution
The District of Muskoka Resolution, which has recently been circulated to all municipalities in the Province, questions AMO's ability to negotiate with the Province on behalf of the sector The District of Muskoka, because it benefitted so greatly from the removal of education costs from the residential property tax base, was one of only three areas of the Province that was a net winner financially as a result of the Province's Megaweek announcements in January, 1997 The alternative proposals put forward by the municipal members of the Who Does VVhat Transition Teams, with A:,\l10's support, would also have left Muskoka District taxpayers in a 'win' situation. Unfortunately, the reforms announced by the Province on May 1, 1997, which included a number of significant changes from the proposals put forward by the municipal sector, left Muskoka District municipalities to deal with Provincial downloading similar' to that being experienced by other municipalities across the province ·------~FE826 19~~ 393 University Ave, Suite 1701 Toronto, ON M5G 1E6 tel (416) 971-9856 • lax (416) 971-6191 • email amo@amomunicomcom ~tl/ Head and members Date of Council Page 2/2
While AMO regrets that the final WDW outcome means that Muskoka municipalities are bearing a heavier financial burden than they were after Megaweek, the following points need to be made:
The basic premise of AMO's discussions with the Province regarding WDW, was that municipalities would rather have some portion of education costs stay on the property tax base rather than take on much higher social service costs, This premise was supported by resolutions received from hundreds of municipalities following Megaweek
• The proposals put forward by the Transition Teams would still have left the Muskoka municipalities as net financial winners. It was the Province's decision to reject fundamental aspects of the Transition Team's final proposal that resulted in the Muskoka municipalities being less well-off' than they were previously.
While the preamble to Muskoka's resolution refers to A1\10's WDW negotiations with the Province, there never were any such negotiations, because AMO was never empowered to negotiate on behalf of the sector. If AMO had been empowered to truly negotiate with the Province, the result would likely have been much more favourable for municipalities.
Over the past year, a number of municipalities have been critical of the Association for not taking a th stronger stance regarding Provincial initiatives. On February 6 , the AMO membership approved some significant changes to the Association's structure and operations - changes which should enable AMO to respond more quickly and decisively to Provincial actions One of the key changes approved by the membership was to give the Association the clear authority to negotiate with the Province on municipalities' behalf. Let me assure you that this will only be done after consulting extensively with A.1\10's membership, and that the Association is working hard to find ways to improve communication with its members to enable this type of consultation to take place"
Like any good organization, AMO is constantly looking for ways to improve its performance, and I have no doubt that the changes approved on February 6th will produce positive results, On behalf of the Association, I would therefore ask that you support our efforts to deal more effectively with the Province, and not endorse the District of Muskoka' s resolution.
Should you have any questions about the above, please contact Doug Raven, A1\10's Executive Director, at (416) 971-9856, ext. 306,
Yours truly,
Michael Power Association of - Municipalities Filsi of Ontario Actioo C1lalrmall ~ 0 CAO G 0 Clerk 0 February 18, 1998 Treasurer ~ 0 Computer 0 0 PrNsonnel 0 0 L~ 0 0 Hurr~n services lB' 0 Pu~ic Wooo g 0 Mr. John Young g Mayor Pltnninc 0 Land Divisioo 0 0 Township of Muskoka Lakes Committee 0 Box 129 Cooneil M 0 Port Carling, ON POB lJO Correspondence 0 0 Comw.e'lU
Dear Mayor Young:
th I was very disappointed to receive your letter of January 30 , 1998, which indicated that the Township was reluctant to continue as a member of AMO .. It is obvious that Council's reluctance stems from the impact of the Who Does What process, and AMO's perceived role in that process. I would therefore like to take this opportunity to clarify exactly what AMO's role was with regard to that process.
When the Province announced the establishment of the Crombie Panel in May, 1996, Ai\10 insisted that Association representatives be present to act as advisors at all Panel and Sub-panel meetings .. The Province agreed, and those representatives played an important role in ensuring that the Crombie Panel's recommendations reflected municipalities' views .. Unfortunately, the Province chose to ignore much of the Crombie Panel's advice .. Had they chosen to respect that advice, municipalities would have been far better off than they are today
Following the Megaweek announcements, AMO called an emergency Board of Directors meeting, at which time the Association passed a resolution denouncing the Province's reforms, which would have cost municipalities $1..2 billion per year, and called for a meeting with the Premier and key Cabinet Ministers to put forward municipalities' views. The Board's resolution, which supported the final Crombie recommendation of keeping some of the cost ofeducation on the property tax. base to avoid taking on substantial new social service costs, was subsequently endorsed by hundreds of municipalities across the Province
In mid-February, AMO representatives met with Minister of Finance Ernie Eves, Minister of Municipal Affairs Al Leach, and other key Cabinet Ministers to tell them that the reforms announced during Megaweek were simply unacceptable to the municipal sector, and demand that the Province establish a consultation process to review the proposed changes. After considerable pressure by AMO, the Province agreed To date, we have been the only public sector association (0 get the
Page 1 of 4
fEB 2 6 1q98 393 University c..ve SUite 1701 Iorontc ON 1v15G 1E6 tel (416) 971-9856 • ;ax (416\ 971-319"1 • er'2' amo@amomunicomcom Mayor John Young, 98/02/17
Province to pause and reconsider its decisions in this manner.
In March and April, the Association worked full tilt, trying to develop alternative proposals that would be acceptable to the Province and the municipal sector, in support of the municipal members of the Transition Teams that had been appointed by the Province. The basis of each proposal was that municipalities should not be picking up increased costs in such areas as social assistance, long term care, social housing, and that the Farm Tax Rebate and Managed Forest programs must be maintained to avoid serious financial implications for rural and northern municipalities. We made it clear that municipalities with limited assessment bases must be protected, and that municipalities should not be any worse off financially after the reforms than they were before. No negotiations took place, The Province merely indicated that it would consider the proposal.
On May 1, the Premier met with AMO to announce that the Province was making a number of changes to the Megaweek announcements The good news was that tbe Province was going to assume 100%of the cost of long term care, and keep social assistance cost sharing at 80% Provincial and 20% municipal, instead of goingto 50/50" The Province also indicated that it was going to make $800 million in new funding available over two years to help municipalities cope with the reforms" The bad news was that municipalities were still being disadvantaged by over $600 million a year, social housing was still a municipal responsibility, and the Province had failed to deal with the rural and northern issues Unfortunately, the Province did its best to portray the May 1st announcement as a "deal" with At\10 This was simply untrue. No negotiations took place, no deal was ever struck, and AMO would never have agreed to many of the things announced on May 1". To counter this impression, AMO sent out the For the Record document to each councillor in the Province. Members of Council may want to refer to that document again before making a final decision about AMO membership,
Following May I", the Association continued to press the Province to deal with the many issues which had not been resolved to the municipal sector's satisfaction, Part of that effort centered around assisting municipal representatives across the province to lobby their local MPP's for changes to the reforms At the AMO Conference, we turned up the heat again, requesting the members to pass a resolution demanding that the WDW reforms be revenue neutral. This pressure resulted in the Premier making his famous "pinky swear" promise to the delegates, that the transfer of financial responsibilities would be revenue neutral Throughout the [all, AMO kept up the pressure on the Province to make important changes to the WDW reforms, and to release information on the financial impact of the reforms to municipalities as soon as possible
On December 12, 1997, the Province announced its 'final' WDW numbers for individual municipalities. While the pressure put on by the sector had convinced the Province to add another SI 1[.2 million to the transitional funding being provided to municipalities, many of the Association's key concerns still had not been addressed. As a result, AMO called a special meeting
Page 2 of 4 Mayor John Young, 98/02/17
th of the members for February 6 . to determine what strategy the sector wished to take in response to the Province's latest announcements, and to send a strong message to the Province that the sector intends to carryon the fight against the Provincial download
With regard to the impact of Who Does What on District of Muskoka municipalities, fuvl0 recognizes that Muskoka municipalities benefitted from the removal of education costs from the residential property tax base, as set out in the Megaweek announcements In fact, the District was one of only three areas of the Province that was a net winner financially as a result of those announcements The alternative proposals put forward by the municipal members of the Who Does What Transition Teams, with AMO's support, would also have left Muskoka District taxpayers in a 'win' situation Unfortunately, the reforms announced by the Province on May 1, 1997, which included a number of significant changes from the proposals put forward by the municipal sector, left Muskoka District municipalities to deal with Provincial downloading similar to that being experienced by other municipalities across the province.
While AMO regrets that the final WDW outcome means that Muskoka municipalities are bearing a heavier financial burden than they were after Megaweek, the following points need to be made
The basic premise of AMO's discussions with the Province regarding WDW, was that municipalities would rather have some portion of education costs paid for through property taxes than take on much higher social service costs This stance was taken by AMO after considerable input from member municipalities, and was supported by resolutions received from hundreds of municipalities following Megaweek. These municipalities realized that the potential risk of taking on 50% of the cost of services such as social assistance and long term care could devastate communities in bad economic times, or as the population ages.
The proposals put forward by the municipal members of the Transition Team would still have left the Muskoka municipalities as net financial winners. It was the Province's decision to reject fundamental aspects of the Transition Team's final proposal that resulted in the Muskoka municipalities being less well-off than they were previously. So if someone is to blame for the financial situation you now find yourselves in, it is the Province, not AMO
As your second resolution refers to ANIO's negotiations with the Province. let me reiterate that there never were any negotiations with regard to WDW, because AMO was never empowered to negotiate on behalf of the sector If AMO had been empowered to trul. negotiate with the Province, the result would likely have been much more favourable for municipalities
Finally, AMO appreciates your concerns about the need to defend municipal interests in discussions with the Province That is why the AMO Board recently asked the Association s membership to
Page 3 of '-1- Mayor John Young, 98/02/17 approve some significant changes to the Association's structure and operations - changes which should enable AMO to respond more quickly and decisively to Provincial actions. One of the key changes approved by the membership was to give the Association the clear authority to negotiate with the Province on municipalities' behalf. Let me assure you that this will only be done after consulting extensively with At\10's membership, and that the Association is working hard to find ways to improve communication with its members to enable this type of consultation to take place ..
In summary, the Association has been extremely active and forceful in representing municipalities' views throughout the past year-and-a-half, AMO has been successful in convincing the Province to reconsider its Megaweek announcements, make substantial changes to the original package, and to ease municipalities' financial burden by over $800 million .. But there is much more to be done, and Aivl0 will continue to lead the fight until all municipal issues are resolved ..
I apologize for the length of this letter, but hope that it has addressed the Township's issues regarding the Association's recent performance, and the need to be empowered by the membership to deal effectively with the Province. The Township's membership is very important to AlvIO, and we hope that you will continue to support the work of the Association as it continues to fight on behalf of Ontario's municipalities.
Should you require additional information about the Association in general, or the above issues in particular, please let me know.
Doug Raven Executive Director
cc G Adams, Chair, District of Muskoka S Northmore, Mayor, Town of Bracebridge RJ Betts, Mayor, Town of Gravenhurst C Len, Mayor, Town of Huntsville M Kennedy, Mayor, Township of Georgian Bay T Pinkard, Mayor, Township of Lake of Bays
Page 4 of 4