1422880 Ontario Inc.)

Home , Oxford South

AGENDA

COUNTY OF OXFORD

COUNCIL MEETING

WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 28, 2015 7:00 P.M.

COUNCIL CHAMBER, OXFORD COUNTY ADMINISTRATION BUILDING, WOODSTOCK

MEETING #8

1. CALL TO ORDER Time ______

2. APPROVAL OF AGENDA

3. DISCLOSURES OF PECUNIARY INTEREST AND THE GENERAL NATURE THEREOF

4. ADOPTION OF COUNCIL MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETING

January 14 2015 Regular

January 14 2015 Budget

5. PUBLIC MEETINGS

Resolution to go into a public meeting pursuant to the Disposal of Land Policy Time ______

1. Declaration of Surplus Lands - located at 2 Station Street, Drumbo, in the Township of Blandford-Blenheim, designated as Part Lot 1 W of Wilmot Street Block B Plan 199, in the Township of Blandford-Blenheim *See By-law No. 5663-2015

Public Notice Declaration of Surplus Lands

2. Declaration of Surplus Lands - located at 12 Vine Street, Beachville, in the Township of South-West Oxford, designated as Lot 4, 6-7 Plan 725 South-West Oxford, in the Township of South-West Oxford *See By-law No. 5664-2015

Resolution to adjourn the public meeting Time ______

6. DELEGATIONS AND PRESENTATIONS

7. CONSIDERATION OF DELEGATIONS AND PRESENTATIONS

8. CONSIDERATION OF CORRESPONDENCE

County of Oxford ~ eAgenda Application Version 0.3.0 Agenda Version 1, ► Addition to Agenda PAGE 2 COUNCIL AGENDA JANUARY 28, 2015

9. REPORTS FROM DEPARTMENTS

COMMUNITY AND STRATEGIC PLANNING

CASPO 2015-15 Re: Application for Draft Plan of Condominium and Exemption from Draft Plan Approval CD 14-03-6: Warren D. Sinclair Construction Ltd.

Recommendations

1. That the County Council approve the application for draft approval of a proposed phased standard condominium submitted by Warren D. Sinclair Construction Ltd. (File No. CD14-03-6); prepared by Stantec Consulting Ltd. and dated November 18, 2014, for lands described as Block 60, Plan 41M-217, in the Town of Ingersoll.

2. And further, that the County Council approve the request for exemption from the draft plan of condominium approval process submitted by Warren D. Sinclair Construction Ltd. (File No. CD 14-03-6); prepared by Stantec Consulting Ltd. and dated November 18, 2014, for lands described as Block 60, Plan 41M-217, in the Town of Ingersoll, as all matters relating to the multi-family residential development have been addressed through prior approvals of the related Woodhatch subdivision (41M-217) and the related Site Plan (SPA-03/13).

CASPO 2015-27 Re: Application for Draft Plan of Subdivision SB 14-03-7 (1422880 Ontario Inc.)

Recommendation

1. That Oxford County Council grant draft plan approval to a proposed subdivision submitted by, Performance Communities Realty Inc. (File SB 14-03-7) as prepared by Cyril J. Demeyere Limited (dated December 1, 2014) and Kim Husted Surveying, as shown on Plate 5 of Schedule “A” to Report No. 2015-27, comprised of land described as Part 1, Reference Plan 41R-6637 and Part 4, Reference Plan 41R-6678, being Part Lot 8, Concession 11, (Dereham), in the Town of Tillsonburg, subject to the conditions attached as Schedule “A” to this Report being met prior to final approval.

CORPORATE SERVICES

CS 2015-04 Re: Oxford County Library 2015 Business Plan and Budget

Recommendation

1. That the recommendation of the Oxford County Library Board dated January 19, 2015, that County Council approve the 2015 Oxford County Library Business Plan and Budget to provide a levy of $3,392,810, subject to possible minor adjustments to interdepartmental charges and budget amendments identified in Report No. 2015-03, be approved.

County of Oxford ~ eAgenda Application Version 0.3.0 Agenda Version 1, ► Addition to Agenda PAGE 3 COUNCIL AGENDA JANUARY 28, 2015

CS 2015-05 Re: Water and Sewer Services Financing Policy Review

Recommendation

1. That County Council hereby approves amendments to Water and Sewer Services Financing Policy No. 6.05 as set out in Attachment No. 1, forming part of Report No. CS 2015-05, and authorizes the Chief Administrative Officer to execute and implement accordingly.

PUBLIC WORKS

PW 2015-02 Re: Boundary Road Maintenance Agreement with the County of Brant

Recommendation

1. That a by-law be raised to authorize the Chief Administrative Officer to sign an agreement with the County of Brant for the maintenance of the Muir Road, Highway #2, Governors Road and Brant-Oxford Road.

PW 2015-03 Re: Amendment to the New Municipal Hazardous or Special Wastes (MHSW) Services Agreement

Recommendations

1. That Council approve an Amending Agreement to the July 1, 2011 New Municipal Hazardous or Special Wastes (MHSW) Services Agreement with Stewardship Ontario for continued funding of Phase 1 approved program materials;

2. And further, that the Chief Administrative Officer be authorized to execute all documents related thereto.

PW 2015-05 Re: Maple Leaf Foods Inc. Over-Strength Wastewater Surcharge Agreement

Recommendation

1. That a By-law be raised to authorize the Chief Administrative Officer to sign a new Over-Strength Wastewater Surcharge Agreement with Maple Leaf Foods Inc. for their Thamesford facility.

HUMAN SERVICES

HS 2015-01 Re: 2014 / 2015 Investment in Affordable Housing Program Extension

Recommendations

1. That Council approve the award of the 2014/2015 Investment in Affordable Housing RFP to Filtrec Screens Inc. in the amount of $983,900, for the development of 20 affordable housing units to be located at 34 Riddell Street, Woodstock;

2. And further, that the Chief Administrative Officer and the Director of Human Services be authorized to execute all necessary documentation and agreements related thereto.

County of Oxford ~ eAgenda Application Version 0.3.0 Agenda Version 1, ► Addition to Agenda PAGE 4 COUNCIL AGENDA JANUARY 28, 2015

CAO/CLERK

CAO 2015-03 Re: Services That Work - Wave 1 Findings Report Staff Presentation

Recommendations

1. That staff pursue detailed analysis of the 25 identified Service Improvement Opportunities as outlined in Report No. CAO 2015-03 and detailed in Munro Strategic Perspective’s the “County of Oxford Services That Work Wave 1 Findings Report”, dated January 6, 2015;

2. And further, that staff, under the direction of the Chief Administrative Officer, consult key stakeholders of the Wave 1 services regarding the Service Improvement Opportunities to further inform the detailed analysis.

10. UNFINISHED BUSINESS

Pending Items

11. MOTIONS

12. NOTICE OF MOTIONS

13. NEW BUSINESS/ENQUIRIES/COMMENTS

14. CLOSED SESSION (Room 129)

15. CONSIDERATION OF MATTERS ARISING FROM THE CLOSED SESSION

16. BY-LAWS

BY-LAW NO. 5662-2015 Being a By-law to adopt the estimated expenditure for the year 2015.

BY-LAW NO. 5663-2015 Being a By-law to declare real property located at 2 Station Street, Drumbo, in the Township of Blandford-Blenheim, designated as Part Lot 1 W of Wilmot Street Block B Plan 199, in the Township of Blandford-Blenheim, as surplus to the needs of the County.

BY-LAW NO. 5664-2015 Being a By-law to declare real property located at 12 Vine Street, Beachville, in the Township of South-West Oxford, designated as Lot 4, 6-7 Plan 725 South-West Oxford, in the Township of South- West Oxford, as surplus to the needs of the County.

BY-LAW NO. 5665-2015 Being a By-law to repeal By-law No. 5245-2011 and enact a new By -law to appoint members to the Land Division Committee.

BY-LAW NO. 5666-2015 Being a By-law to repeal By-law No. 5246-2011 a By-law to appoint citizen members to the Accessibility Advisory Committee.

County of Oxford ~ eAgenda Application Version 0.3.0 Agenda Version 1, ► Addition to Agenda PAGE 5 COUNCIL AGENDA JANUARY 28, 2015

BY-LAW NO. 5667-2015 Being a By-law to confirm all actions and proceedings of the Council of the County of Oxford at the meeting at which this By-law is passed.

17. ADJOURNMENT Time ______

NOTE: A Waste Management Information Workshop will be held in the Council Chamber from 4:00 p.m. to 6:00 p.m. prior to the Council meeting.

County of Oxford ~ eAgenda Application Version 0.3.0 Agenda Version 1, ► Addition to Agenda MINUTES

OF THE

COUNCIL OF THE

COUNTY OF OXFORD

County Council Chamber Woodstock January 14, 2015

MEETING #6

Oxford County Council meets in regular session this fourteenth day of January 2015, in the Council Chamber, County Administration Building, Woodstock.

1. CALL TO ORDER:

9:30 a.m., with Warden Mayberry in the chair.

All members of Council present except Deputy Warden Comiskey and Councillor McKay.

Deputy Warden Comiskey arrives at 9:35 a.m. Councillor McKay arrives at 9:46 a.m.

Staff Present: P. M. Crockett, Chief Administrative Officer D. Assam, Manager of Construction / Acting Director of Public Works L. Beath, Director of Public Health and Emergency Services P. D. Beaton, Director of Human Services L. S. Buchner, Director of Corporate Services C. Fransen, Director of Woodingford Lodge G. K. Hough, Director of Community and Strategic Planning A. Smith, Director of Human Resources B. J. Tabor, Clerk

2. APPROVAL OF AGENDA:

RESOLUTION NO. 1:

Moved by: Stephen Molnar Seconded by: Larry Martin

That the Agenda be approved.

DISPOSITION: Motion Carried

3. DISCLOSURES OF PECUNIARY INTEREST AND THE GENERAL NATURE THEREOF:

NIL

4. ADOPTION OF COUNCIL MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETING:

Council Minutes of December 9, 2014 – Inaugural Meeting

Council Minutes of December 10, 2014 – Regular Meeting

Page 2 January 14, 2015

RESOLUTION NO. 2:

Moved by: Stephen Molnar Seconded by: Larry Martin

That the Council Minutes of the December 9, 2014 Inaugural meeting and the December 10, 2014 regular meeting be adopted.

DISPOSITION: Motion Carried

5. PUBLIC MEETINGS:

RESOLUTION NO. 3:

Moved by: Stephen Molnar Seconded by: Larry Martin

That Council rise and go into a public meeting pursuant to Section 17(15) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, as amended, to consider an application for Official Plan Amendment for Application No. OP 14- 06-7, and pursuant to Section 51(20) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, as amended, to consider an application for draft approval of a plan of subdivision, and that the Warden chair the public meeting.

DISPOSITION: Motion Carried (9:34 a.m.)

1. Application for Official Plan Amendment Performance Communities Realty Inc. - OP 14-06-7 to redesignate subject lands from High Density Residential to Low Density Residential Application for Draft Plan of Subdivision Performance Communities Realty Inc. - SB 14-03-7 - subject lands are two properties described as Part Lot 8 and N. Part Lot 8, Concession 11 (Dereham), Town of Tillsonburg - located on the west side of Quarter Town Line Road, south of the Tillsonburg Soccer Club Access Road

The Chair asks G. Hough, Director of Community and Strategic Planning, to come forward to present the applications. G. Hough summarizes Official Plan Amendment Application OP 14-06-7 and the application for Draft Approval of a Plan of Subdivision as are contained in Report No. CASPO 2015-01. He advises that the Town of Tillsonburg did recommend support of the applications and have approved in principle the zoning for the site. G. Hough also advises that the Town has satisfied themselves that they can work with both the Tillsonburg Minor Soccer Club and the applicant to deal with concerns regarding the close proximity of the residential lands to those of the Soccer Club. In addition to his presentation, G. Hough, prior to the meeting, distributed to Council members correspondence from Tony Iezzi, expressing his concerns, shared by his neighbours, regarding the applications.

The Chair opens the meeting to questions from members of Council.

The Chair asks if anyone on behalf of the applicant wishes to speak.

Will Hayhoe of Hayhoe Homes, the home builder, representing Performance Communities Reality Inc., the applicant, comes forward and speaks to the amount of work that has taken place over the last four years in preparing this application to get it to its current form. He expresses his appreciation to the Town of Tillsonburg as they have dialogued over a number of issues including the proximity of the Soccer Club and states the fact that they want to be good neighbours and are thankful that a resolution has been reached. He appreciates County Council’s consideration of the application and looks forward to their support.

The Chair opens the meeting to questions from members of Council.

In response to a question from Councillor Birtch, W. Hayhoe states that all are in agreement that there is a solution that can be worked out with regard to the concerns of the Soccer Club.

Page 3 January 14, 2015

The Chair asks if there are any members of the public wishing to speak. No one indicates such intent.

RESOLUTION NO. 4:

Moved by: Margaret Lupton Seconded by: Sandra Talbot

That Council adjourn the public meeting and reconvene as Oxford County Council with the Warden in the chair.

DISPOSITION: Motion Carried (9:43 a.m.)

CASPO 2015-01 Re: Application for Official Plan Amendment and Approval of Draft Plan of Subdivision OP 14-06-7, SB 14-03-7: Performance Communities Realty Inc.

RESOLUTION NO. 5:

Moved by: Margaret Lupton Seconded by: Sandra Talbot

That the recommendation contained in Report No. CASPO 2015-01, titled “Application for Official Plan Amendment and Approval of Draft Plan of Subdivision - OP 14-06-7, SB 14-03-7: Performance Communities Realty Inc.”, be adopted.

DISPOSITION: Motion Carried

Recommendation Contained in Report No. CASPO 2015-01:

1. That Oxford County Council approve the application submitted by Performance Communities Realty Inc. for lands described as Part 1, Reference Plan 41R-6637 and Part 4, Reference Plan 41R-6678, being Part Lot 8, Concession 11, (Dereham), Town of Tillsonburg to redesignate the subject lands from High Density Residential to Low Density Residential to facilitate the development of a residential draft plan of subdivision and place of worship, and that Council approve the attached Amendment No. 186 to the County Official Plan and raise the necessary implementing by-law.

RESOLUTION NO. 6:

Moved by: Margaret Lupton Seconded by: Sandra Talbot

That Council rise and go into a public meeting pursuant to the Section 283(7) of the Municipal Act, 2001, as amended, and that the Warden chair the public meeting.

DISPOSITION : Motion Carried (9:46 a.m.)

2. Council Remuneration By-law

The Chair asks L. Buchner, Director of Corporate Services, to speak regarding the Council Remuneration By-law. L. Buchner summarizes regarding the By-law as is contained in Report No. CS 2015-02.

The Chair asks if there are any members of the public wishing to speak. No one indicates such intent.

Page 4 January 14, 2015

RESOLUTION NO. 7:

Moved by: Trevor Birtch Seconded by: Deborah Tait

That Council adjourn the public meeting and reconvene as Oxford County Council with the Warden in the chair.

DISPOSITION: Motion Carried (9:48 a.m.)

CS 2015-02 Re: Council Remuneration By-law

RESOLUTION NO. 8:

Moved by: Trevor Birtch Seconded by: Deborah Tait

That the recommendation contained in Report No. CS 2015-02, titled “Council Remuneration By-law”, be adopted.

DISPOSITION: Motion Carried

Recommendation Contained in Report No. CS 2015-02:

1. That By-law No. 5652-2015, being a by-law to deem one-third of the remuneration paid to the elected members of the council and its local boards as expenses incident to the discharge of their duties as members of the council or local board for the term of Council from 2014 to 2018, be presented to Council for enactment.

6. DELEGATIONS AND PRESENTATIONS:

1. Geoff Hogan, Director of Information Technology Grey County Re: SouthWestern Integrated Fibre Technology (SWIFT)

Geoff Hogan, Director of Information Technology, Grey County, comes forward to present an update on the SouthWestern Integrated Fibre Technology (SWIFT) project. He proceeds through a PowerPoint presentation which was provided as an attachment to Council’s electronic Agenda. He speaks regarding what Oxford’s proposed capital contribution to the project would be under the current model and the formula behind the request.

The Warden opens the meeting to questions from Council.

G. Hogan responds to questions and comments from Councillors McKay, Molnar and Warden Mayberry.

7. CONSIDERATION OF DELEGATIONS AND PRESENTATIONS:

RESOLUTION NO. 9:

Moved by: Marion Wearn Seconded by: Stephen Molnar

That the presentation made on behalf of SouthWestern Integrated Fibre Technology (SWIFT) be referred to the Chief Administrative Officer for the preparation of a Report.

DISPOSITION: Motion Carried

Page 5 January 14, 2015

At 10:21 a.m., Council recesses for a break.

At 10:33 a.m., Council resumes with Warden Mayberry in the chair.

All members of Council present except Councillor Lupton.

Councillor Lupton arrives at 10:34 a.m.

8. CONSIDERATION OF CORRESPONDENCE:

1. City of Woodstock December 12, 2014 Re: Recommendation for Appointment to the Upper Thames River Conservation Authority

RESOLUTION NO. 10:

Moved by: Marion Wearn Seconded by: Stephen Molnar

That Mayor Trevor Birtch, City of Woodstock, be appointed to the Upper Thames River Conservation Authority.

DISPOSITION: Motion Carried

2. Woodstock District Chamber of Commerce January 9, 2015 Re: Invitation – Sustainable Energy Expo January 21, 2015 and Roundtable Forum January 22nd

RESOLUTION NO. 11:

Moved by: Marion Wearn Seconded by: Stephen Molnar

That the invitation from the Woodstock District Chamber of Commerce regarding the Sustainable Energy Expo and Roundtable Forum to be held on January 21st and 22nd, 2015, be received.

DISPOSITION: Motion Carried

9. REPORTS FROM DEPARTMENTS:

COMMUNITY AND STRATEGIC PLANNING

CASPO 2015-01 Re: Application for Official Plan Amendment and Approval of Draft Plan of Subdivision OP 14-06-7, SB 14-03-7: Performance Communities Reality Inc.

Report dealt with under Public Meetings.

CASPO 2015-02 Re: Application for Draft Plan of Condominium and Condominium Conversion – CD 14-02-8: 1000432 Ontario Inc.

Page 6 January 14, 2015

RESOLUTION NO. 12:

Moved by: Ted Comiskey Seconded by: Sandra Talbot

That the recommendations contained in Report No. CASPO 2015-02, titled “Application for Draft Plan of Condominium and Condominium Conversion CD 14-02-8: 1000432 Ontario Inc.” be adopted.

DISPOSITION: Motion Carried

Recommendations Contained in Report No. CASPO 2015-02:

1. That Oxford County Council grant draft approval to a proposed plan of condominium submitted by 1000432 Ontario Inc. (File No. CD 14-02-8); prepared by Brooks & Muir Surveying; dated October 16, 2014, for lands described as Part Lot 6 & Lot 7, Plan 10, City of Woodstock, subject to the conditions attached as Schedule “A” to Report No. CASPO 2015-2 being met prior to final approval.

2. And further, that Oxford County Council approve the conversion of the 3-storey apartment dwelling house to condominium ownership for lands described as Part Lot 6 & Lot 7, Plan 10 in the City of Woodstock proposed by application by CD 14-02-8:1000432 Ontario Inc.

CORPORATE SERVICES

CS 2015-02 Re: Council Remuneration By-law

Report dealt with under Public Meetings.

CS 2015-01 Re: 2015 Interim Tax Levy By-law

RESOLUTION NO. 13:

Moved by: Ted Comiskey Seconded by: Sandra Talbot

That the recommendation contained in Report No. CS 2015-01, titled “2015 Interim Tax Levy By-law”, be adopted.

DISPOSITION: Motion Carried

Recommendation Contained in Report No. CS 2015-01:

1. That By-law No. 5651-2015, being a by-law to provide for an interim tax levy for purposes of the County of Oxford for the 2015 fiscal year, be presented to Council for enactment.

PUBLIC WORKS

PW 2015-01 Re: Proposed 2015 – 2016 Road Reconstruction Tender

RESOLUTION NO.14: Moved by: Ted Comiskey Seconded by: Sandra Talbot

That the recommendation contained in Report No. PW 2015-01, titled “Proposed 2015 – 2016 Road Reconstruction Tender”, be adopted.

DISPOSITION: Motion Carried Page 7 January 14, 2015

Recommendation Contained in Report No. PW 2015-01:

1. That County Council authorize staff to release a tender call for the 2015 and 2016 Road Resurfacing Program including culvert replacements in advance of the 2015 and 2016 budget approvals.

PW 2015-06 Re: County Courthouse Upgrades – Amendment to 2015 Budget

RESOLUTION NO.15:

Moved by: Deborah Tait Seconded by: Trevor Birtch

That the recommendation contained in Report No. PW 2015-06, titled “County Courthouse Upgrades – Amendment to 2015 Budget”, be adopted.

DISPOSITION: Motion Carried

Recommendation Contained in Report No. PW 2015-06:

1. That County Council approve additional budget in the amount of $265,000 in the 2015 County Budget to cover the costs of extra work required for this contract, to be funded from the Facilities Reserve.

10. UNFINISHED BUSINESS:

Pending Items

No discussion takes place regarding the Pending Items list.

11. MOTIONS:

RESOLUTION NO. 16: Moved by: Deborah Tait Seconded by: Trevor Birtch

That the Council meeting of November 11, 2015, being Remembrance Day, be rescheduled to Thursday, November 12, 2015, at 9:30 a.m.

DISPOSITION: Motion Carried

12. NOTICE OF MOTIONS: NIL

13. NEW BUSINESS/ENQUIRIES/COMMENTS: NIL

14. CLOSED SESSION:

RESOLUTION NO.17: Moved by: Sandra Talbot Seconded by: Margaret Lupton

That Council rise and go into a Closed session for the purpose of considering Reports No. WDN (CS) 2015-01, No. CAO (CS) 2015-01 and No. CAO (CS) 2015-02 regarding matters that have not been made public concerning personal matters about identifiable individuals, a proposed or pending acquisition of land and labour relations or employee negotiations.

DISPOSITION: Motion Carried (10:43 a.m.) Page 8 January 14, 2015

Council members and staff move to Room 129.

Oxford County Council meets in Closed session, as part of a regular meeting, this fourteenth day of January, 2015 in Room 129, County Administration Building, Woodstock.

A. CLOSED SESSION COMMENCEMENT TIME:

10:46 a.m., with Warden Mayberry in the chair.

All members of Council present.

Staff Present: P. M. Crockett, Chief Administrative Officer D. Assam, Manager of Construction / Acting Director of Public Works L. Beath, Director of Public Health and Emergency Services L. S. Buchner, Director of Corporate Services C. Fransen, Director of Woodingford Lodge G. K. Hough, Director of Community and Strategic Planning A. Smith, Director of Human Resources B. J. Tabor, Clerk

B. DISCLOSURES OF PECUNIARY INTEREST AND THE GENERAL NATURE THEREOF:

NIL

C. DELEGATIONS AND PRESENTATIONS:

NIL

D. CONSIDERATION OF CORRESPONDENCE:

NIL

E. REPORTS FROM DEPARTMENTS:

WARDEN

WDN (CS) 2015-01

CAO/CLERK

CAO (CS) 2015-01

CAO (CS) 2015-02

F. UNFINISHED BUSINESS:

NIL

G. NEW BUSINESS/ENQUIRIES/COMMENTS:

NIL

H. TIME OF COMPLETION OF CLOSED SESSION:

11:32 a.m.

Page 9 January 14, 2015

RESOLUTION NO. 18:

Moved by: Sandra Talbot Seconded by: Margaret Lupton

That Council rise and reconvene in Open session.

DISPOSITION: Motion Carried (11:32 a.m.)

Council members and staff return to the Council Chamber.

11:35 a.m. with Warden Mayberry in the chair.

All members of Council present except Councillor Tait.

15. CONSIDERATION OF MATTERS ARISING FROM THE CLOSED SESSION:

WARDEN

WDN (CS) 2015-01 Re: Recommendations of Striking Committee Lay Member Appointments County Boards and Committees

RESOLUTION NO.19:

Moved by: Sandra Talbot Seconded by: Margaret Lupton

That the recommendations contained in Report No. WDN (CS) 2015-01 be adopted.

DISPOSITION: Motion Carried

Recommendations Contained in Report No. WDN (CS) 2015-01:

1. That Ken Dean, Kevin Gray, Sandra Howe, Michael Szala, Jim Verhoef and David Young be appointed as lay members to the Accessibility Advisory Committee;

2. And further, that Scott MacDonald and George VanDorp be appointed as lay members to the Agricultural Advisory Committee;

3. And further, that Chris Ferrell, Michael Jaffray, Scott McReynolds and Kerry Redden be appointed as lay members to the Cycling Advisory Committee.

4. And further, that Gordon Brumby, Harvey Elliott, Brian George, Mark Hacon, Russell Jull, Tom Rock, and Arend Tenhove be appointed as lay members to the Land Division Committee;

Page 10 January 14, 2015

5. And further, that Cathy Hamel, Susan Hampson, Lanette Robertson and Jim Verhoef be appointed as lay members to the Library Board;

6. And further, that all necessary By-laws be raised in support of the above actions as appropriate.

7. And further, that Report No. WDN (CS) 2015-01 be publicly released.

CAO/CLERK

CAO (CS) 2015-01

RESOLUTION NO. 20:

Moved by: Larry Martin Seconded by: Stephen Molnar

That the recommendations contained in Report No. CAO (CS) 2015-01 be adopted and the Report be publicly released upon the CAO notifying the appropriate parties.

DISPOSITION: Motion Carried

CAO (CS) 2015-02

RESOLUTION NO. 21: Moved by: Larry Martin Seconded by: Stephen Molnar

That the recommendations contained in Report No. CAO (CS) 2015-02 be adopted.

DISPOSITION: Motion Carried

16. BY-LAWS:

BY-LAW NO. 5651-2015 Being a By-law to establish an Interim Levy for the year 2015.

BY-LAW NO. 5652-2015 Being a By-law to deem one-third of the remuneration paid to the elected members of the council and its local boards as expenses incident to the discharge of their duties as members of the council or local board for the term of Council from 2014 to 2018.

BY-LAW NO. 5653-2015 Being a By-law to remove certain lands from Part Lot Control.

BY-LAW NO. 5654-2015 Being a By-law to adopt Amendment Number 186 to the County of Oxford Official Plan.

BY-LAW NO. 5655-2015 Being a By-law to repeal By-law No. 3858-99, as amended, a By-law establishing an Agricultural Advisory Committee and its Terms of Reference, and appointing members thereto.

BY-LAW NO. 5656-2015 Being a By-law to amend By-law No. 5561-2014, a By-law adopting an Emergency Management Program that includes an Emergency Plan along with other legislated requirements, for protecting property and the health, safety and welfare of the inhabitants of an emergency area. Page 11 January 14, 2015

BY-LAW NO. 5657-2015 Being a By-law to authorize the Chief Administrative Officer to execute an Agreement between the County of Oxford and Host-Kilmer Service Centres, Inc. (HKSC) and HK Travel Centres, LP (HKTC) respecting the provision of operations for the Host-Kilmer owned portions of the water and wastewater system at the Highway 401 (Eastbound) Woodstock Service Centre.

BY-LAW NO. 5658-2015 Being a By-law to confirm the appointment of Councillor David M. Mayberry as the head of council, designated as Warden, of the Council of the County of Oxford.

BY-LAW NO. 5659-2015 Being a By-law to confirm the appointment of Councillor Edward J. Comiskey as the acting head of council, designated as Deputy Warden, of the Council of the County of Oxford.

BY-LAW NO. 5660-2015 Being a By-law to confirm all actions and proceedings of the Council of the County of Oxford at the meeting at which this By-law is passed.

RESOLUTION NO. 22:

Moved by: Don McKay Seconded by: Marion Wearn

That the following By-laws be now read a first and second time: No. 5651-2015, No. 5652-2015, No. 5653-2015, No. 5654-2015, No. 5655-2015, No. 5656-2014, No. 5657-2015, No. 5658-2015, No. 5659-2015 and No. 5660-2015.

DISPOSITION: Motion Carried

RESOLUTION NO. 23:

Moved by: Don McKay Seconded by: Marion Wearn

That the following By-laws be now given third and final reading: No. 5651-2015, No. 5652-2015, No. 5653-2015, No. 5654-2015, No. 5655-2015, No. 5656-2014, No. 5657-2015, No. 5658-2015, No. 5659-2015 and No. 5660-2015.

DISPOSITION: Motion Carried

17. ADJOURNMENT:

Council adjourns its proceedings until the next meeting scheduled for Wednesday, January 14, 2015 at 1:00 p.m.

11:38 a.m.

Minutes adopted on by Resolution No.

WARDEN

CLERK MINUTES

OF THE

COUNCIL OF THE

COUNTY OF OXFORD

County Council Chamber Woodstock January 14, 2015

MEETING #7

Oxford County Council meets in special session this fourteenth day of January 2015, in the Council Chamber, County Administration Building, Woodstock.

1. CALL TO ORDER:

1:00 p.m., with Warden Mayberry in the chair.

All members of Council present except Councillor Tait.

Councillor Tait arrives at 1:01 p.m.

Staff Present: P. M. Crockett, Chief Administrative Officer D. Assam, Manager of Construction / Acting Director of Public Works L. Beath, Director of Public Health and Emergency Services P. D. Beaton, Director of Human Services L. S. Buchner, Director of Corporate Services C. Fransen, Director of Woodingford Lodge G. K. Hough, Director of Community and Strategic Planning D. McRoberts, Manager of Finance A. Smith, Director of Human Resources B. J. Tabor, Clerk

2. APPROVAL OF AGENDA:

RESOLUTION NO. 1:

Moved by: Margaret Lupton Seconded by: Ted Comiskey

That the Agenda be approved.

DISPOSITION: Motion Carried

3. DISCLOSURES OF PECUNIARY INTEREST AND THE GENERAL NATURE THEREOF:

NIL

4. ADOPTION OF COUNCIL MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETING:

Council Minutes of January 7, 2015 – Budget Meeting

Page 2 January 14, 2015

RESOLUTION NO. 2:

Moved by: Stephen Molnar Seconded by: Larry Martin

That the Council Minutes of the January 7, 2015 Budget meeting be adopted.

DISPOSITION: Motion Carried

5. PUBLIC MEETINGS:

NIL

6. DELEGATIONS AND PRESENTATIONS:

NIL

7. CONSIDERATION OF DELEGATIONS AND PRESENTATIONS:

Not Required.

8. CONSIDERATION OF CORRESPONDENCE:

NIL

9. REPORTS FROM DEPARTMENTS:

PUBLIC WORKS

Briefing Note PW 2015-02 Re: Upgrade Plans for the Oxford County Courthouse

RESOLUTION NO. 3:

Moved by: Don McKay Seconded by: Marion Wearn

That Briefing Note PW 2015-02, titled “Upgrade Plans for the Oxford County Courthouse”, be received.

DISPOSITION: Motion Carried

CORPORATE SERVICES

CS 2015-03 Re: 2015 Business Plans and Budget

Peter Crockett, Chief Administrative Officer, addresses Council on the Report by use of a PowerPoint presentation which was provided as an attachment to the Council Agenda. Throughout the presentation he gives a recap of the Budget process to date, points to new information since the December 10th meeting, and speaks to the next steps.

RESOLUTION NO. 4: Moved by: Trevor Birtch Seconded by: Deborah Tait

That the recommendations contained in Report No. CS 2015-03, titled “2015 Business Plans and Budget”, be adopted.

DISPOSITION: See Action of Council following Resolution No. 6 Page 3 January 14, 2015

Recommendations Contained in Report No. CS 2015-03:

1. That the 2015 Oxford County Business Plans be adopted as amended;

2. And that Oxford County Council approves the 2015 Budget with a general purpose levy of $52,368,106;

3. And that Oxford County Council approves a 2015 special levy for Library subject to a recommendation from the Board and approval thereof by County Council on January 28, 2015;

4. And that the following grants be included in the 2015 general purpose levy:

Agricultural Award of Excellence $2,000 Economic Development - Oxford Connections 25,000 Physician Recruitment 10,000 Tillsonburg Airport 5,000 Hospital - Stratford 40,000 South Central Ontario Region Action Plan (SCOR) 35,000 Oxford Creative Connections 50,000 Social Planning Council Oxford 51,317 Oxford Workforce Planning Partnership 24,500 Oxford Invitational Youth Robotic Challenge 5,000

5. And that a by-law to adopt the estimated expenditure for the year 2015 be presented to Council for enactment at their regular meeting scheduled for January 28, 2015;

6. And that staff be authorized to proceed with implementing the incremental full-time equivalent positions as presented in the Full-time Equivalent Plan attached to Report No. CS 2015-03, upon the passing of the aforementioned by-law;

7. And that staff be directed to proceed with the appropriate actions identified in the Action Items List as presented in Report No. CS 2015-03.

RESOLUTION NO. 5:

Moved by: Ted Comiskey Seconded by: Margaret Lupton

That Report No. CS 2015-03 be amended to support the following regarding Grants:

That County Council request Alexandra Hospital to confirm they have considered appropriate renewable energy/system opportunities only to conclude that replacement of the boiler is the most appropriate course of action to re-instate the integrity of the hospital’s HVAC system at this time;

And further, that upon receipt of said confirmation, in accordance with the “Community Healthcare Capital Funding Policy” Council hereby authorizes a grant in the amount of $500,000 to Alexandra Hospital for capital improvements to the hospital HVAC system, to be funded from a Community Healthcare Facilities Capital Reserve upon receipt of expended funds from the hospital;

And further, that the provisions of the Community Healthcare Capital Funding Policy within paragraphs 3.0, 5.0 and 7.0 be hereby waived;

And further, that County Council authorizes the reallocation of funds from the Landfill Reserve Fund to the Community Healthcare Facilities Capital Reserve in the amount of $500,000 in 2015, for the purpose of funding the Alexandra Hospital grant in 2015;

And further, that annual debt payments of blended principal and interest at the rate of 3.38% per annum, calculated in accordance with Debt Management Policy No. 6.19, be levied as part of the annual budget for each of ten years beginning in 2015 to fully recover the expended funds from the Page 4 January 14, 2015

Landfill Reserve Fund, resulting in an annual levy of $59,830.30 for ten years with the final provision in 2024.

DISPOSITION: Motion Withdrawn

RESOLUTION NO. 6:

Moved by: Don McKay Seconded by: Stephen Molnar

That Report No. CS 2015-03 be amended to take the SWIFT project funding from reserves rather than taxation.

DISPOSITION: Motion Carried.

DISPOSITION ON RESOLUTION NO. 4 AS AMENDED: Motion Carried

During the course of the meeting a summary list is created on items needing follow-up.

TO DO LIST

 Public Works - staff bring forward a report before moving forward with building conditions assessment

10. UNFINISHED BUSINESS:

NIL

11. MOTIONS:

NIL

12. NOTICE OF MOTIONS:

NIL

13. NEW BUSINESS/ENQUIRIES/COMMENTS:

Further to his withdrawn motion, Deputy Warden Comiskey questions Council regarding the Alexandra Hospital’s grant request and if the County is interested in helping the hospital as to what the next steps should be.

After discussion, direction is given to the Warden, Deputy Warden and CAO to request a meeting with representatives from Alexandra Hospital including staff, the Board and the Hospital Foundation to discuss options and report back to Council. Councillor Birtch also notes the absence of a County representative on the Alexandra Hospital Board and suggests the meeting should include a discussion regarding the change in Board structure.

14. CLOSED SESSION:

NIL

15. CONSIDERATION OF MATTERS ARISING FROM THE CLOSED SESSION:

Not Required.

Page 5 January 14, 2015

16. BY-LAWS:

BY-LAW NO. 5661-2015 Being a By-law to confirm all actions and proceedings of the Council of the County of Oxford at the meeting at which this By-law is passed.

RESOLUTION NO. 7:

Moved by: Deborah Tait Seconded by: Trevor Birtch

That the following By-law be now read a first and second time: No. 5661-2015.

DISPOSITION: Motion Carried

RESOLUTION NO. 8:

Moved by: Sandra Talbot Seconded by: Ted Comiskey

That the following By-law be now given third and final reading: No. 5661-2015.

DISPOSITION: Motion Carried

17. ADJOURNMENT:

Council adjourns its proceedings until the next meeting scheduled for Wednesday, January 28, 2015 at 7:00 p.m.

2:34 p.m.

Minutes adopted on by Resolution No.

WARDEN

CLERK Declaration of Surplus Lands Public Notice Blandford-Blenheim & South-West Oxford Township December 5, 2014

Notice is hereby given to all persons, in accordance with County of Oxford Policy on the Disposal of Land, and amendments thereto, that the Council of the County of Oxford proposes to deem the following lands to be surplus to the needs of the County.

A By-law will be considered for adoption at the Council Meeting outlined below.

Written comments and/or verbal comments will be considered at the Council meeting noted below.

Additional information concerning this proposal is available by calling 519-539-9800. For further information and/or to submit written comments please contact the Office of the Clerk as Part Lot 1 W of Wilmot St Block B Plan 199, in the Township of outlined. Blandford-Blenheim, municipally known as 2 Station Street, Drumbo.

Office of the Clerk: P.O. Box 1614 21 Reeve Street Woodstock ON N4S 3G1 Brenda J. Tabor, Clerk 519-539-9800 Ext. 3002

Council Meeting: January 28, 2015, 7:00 pm Council Chambers Oxford County Administration Building 21 Reeve Street Woodstock ON N4S 3G1

oxfordcounty.ca

Lot 4, 6-7 Plan 725 South-West Oxford, in the Township of South- West Oxford, municipally known as 12 Vine Street, Beachville.

1 / 1 Report No: CASPO 2015-15 COMMUNITY AND STRATEGIC PLANNING Council Date: January 28, 2015

To: Warden and Members of County Council

From: Director, Community and Strategic Planning

Application for Draft Plan of Condominium and Exemption from Draft Plan Approval CD 14-03-6: Warren D. Sinclair Construction Ltd.

RECOMMENDATION

REPORT HIGHLIGHTS

. Application requests approval of a draft plan of condominium and exemption from the draft approval process to facilitate the creation of a phased standard condominium corporation for a 41-unit residential development on the subject lands.

. The proposal is consistent with the relevant policies in the 2014 Provincial Policy Statement, the development policies of the Official Plan and the provisions of the Town’s Zoning By-law. The subject property is designated as a “Medium Density Residential” area and is zoned Special Residential Type 3 Zone (R3-1).

. The Town approved the related Site Plan in late 2013. The Development Agreement for the site plan has been registered on title and construction of the townhouse units for the first phase has proceeded.

Page 1 of 5 Report No: CASPO 2015-15 COMMUNITY AND STRATEGIC PLANNING Council Date: January 28, 2015

Implementation Points

This application will be implemented in accordance with the relevant policies contained in the Official Plan.

Financial Impact

The approval of this application will have no financial impact beyond what has been approved in the current year’s budget. The Treasurer agrees with this financial impact statement.

Risks/Implications

There are no risks or other implications anticipated as a result of this application beyond those that can reasonably be expected for any such proposal.

Strategic Plan

County Council adopted the County of Oxford Strategic Plan in March 2013. The proposed application and staff recommendation as outlined in this report is fully supportive of the values and strategic directions as set out in the Plan and specifically supports:

3. ii. A County that Thinks Ahead and Wisely Shapes the Future – Implement development policies and community planning guidelines that: - Strategically grow our economy and our community - Actively promote the responsible use of land and natural resources

DISCUSSION

Background

Owner/Applicant:

Warren D. Sinclair Construction Ltd. 262 Lawrence Avenue, Kitchener, ON N4M 1Y4

Agent:

Douglas W. Stewart, RPP, MCIP - Stantec Consulting Ltd. 49 Frederick St, Kitchener, ON N2H 6M7

Location:

The subject land is described as Block 60, Plan 41M-217, in the Town of Ingersoll. The site is located on the west side of Ingersoll Street North, between Victoria Street and Bell Street, and is municipally known as 175 Ingersoll Street North.

Page 2 of 5 Report No: CASPO 2015-15 COMMUNITY AND STRATEGIC PLANNING Council Date: January 28, 2015

County of Oxford Official Plan:

Schedule “I-1” Town of Ingersoll Land Use Plan Residential

Schedule “I-3” Town of Ingersoll Residential Density Plan Medium Density Residential

Town of Ingersoll Zoning By-law No. 04-4160:

Existing Zoning: Special Residential Type 3 Zone (R3-1)

Application Review

(a) Proposal and Background

An application has been received for approval of a Plan of Condominium and exemption from the draft approval process to permit the creation of a phased condominium corporation on the subject site. The owner has indicated their intention is to develop the 41 units in phases which will be dependent upon market forces for absorption of the new housing units.

The subject site is approximately 1.2 ha (3.1 ac.) in area. In late 2013, the Town approved a Site Plan proposal that involved a 41-unit townhouse-style housing development, with 2 road accesses to Ingersoll Street North. Presently, the development contains 8 horizontally-attached multiple dwelling units (townhouses) and an internal laneway, with some of the units presently under construction. The developer wants to convey the completed units to the purchasers in a timely manner.

Plate 1 – Location and Existing Zoning indicates the location of the subject property and the existing zoning in the immediate vicinity.

Plate 2 - Proposed Plan of Condominium shows the outline of the proposed townhouses to be held in condominium ownership on the subject property as well as the common element areas within the site and the proposed phases of the development.

Comments

(a) 2014 Provincial Policy Statement

The current version of the 2014 Provincial Policy Statement (PPS) came into effect on April 30, 2014. Policies within the PPS direct municipalities to provide for a range of housing types and densities to meet the needs of current and future residents while also promoting compact built form of development. The policies also require municipalities to permit and facilitate all forms of housing to meet the projected social, health and well-being requirements of current and future residents and to promote residential intensification where it can be accommodated taking into account existing building stock, efficient use of infrastructure and public service facilities.

(b) Official Plan

The subject property is designated as a “Medium Density Residential” area according to the Town of Ingersoll Residential Density Plan, as contained in the Official Plan. Medium Density

Page 3 of 5 Report No: CASPO 2015-15 COMMUNITY AND STRATEGIC PLANNING Council Date: January 28, 2015

Residential areas are those lands that are primarily developed or planned for a variety of housing forms including townhouses, medium density cluster development, converted dwellings and low rise apartments. In these areas it is intended that a mix of housing forms will develop to achieve an overall net residential density that ranges from 31 units per hectare (13 units per acre) to 62 units per hectare (25 units per acre).

Section 9.2.2.2 (TENURE MIX) of the Official Plan also contains policies which encourage Town Council to facilitate the creation of housing opportunities within the Town that result in a mix of tenure forms, such as ownership, rental and condominium and cooperative units.

The subject property is presently zoned ‘Special Residential Type 3 Zone (R3-1)’, which permits a range of medium density forms of housing, including multiple-attached dwellings (townhouses). The subject property meets the relevant R3-1 zone provisions.

A related application for Minor Variance (#A-03/13) was granted by the Town of Ingersoll Committee of Adjustment in early 2013 to allow a reduction in the required setback to the arterial road centreline and a reduction in the rear yard depth to the west lot line.

(d) Agency Comments

A number of agencies were circulated the proposal to create a new condominium. None of the responding agencies indicated that they had any concerns regarding this application. The Town Engineer noted all of the development issues have been or will be addressed via the Development Agreement for the related, approved Site Plan that has been registered on title.

(e) Town of Ingersoll Council

Town of Ingersoll Council recommended support of the proposed draft plan of condominium and exemption from the draft approval process at the Town’s regular meeting of January 12, 2015.

Planning Analysis

An application for standard condominium approval can be dealt with in one of two ways. The first method involves a process similar to subdivision approval where an applicant receives ‘draft’ plan approval which is contingent on the applicant satisfying a number of conditions prior to final approval and registration.

The Condominium Act also permits a second process where the approval of the standard condominium is exempt from the draft or ‘conditional’ approval stage and proceeds directly to final approval. The exemption process is intended to apply to proposals that have previously undergone a complete evaluation (i.e. site plan approval) and where no further conditions of approval are required by the municipality regarding the development.

The Condominium Act regulations (Ont. Reg 48/01) also accommodate phased development of a standard condominium plan, to enable on-going conveyance of new housing units as the marketing and construction proceeds over time, but these regulations also require the developer to complete all phases no later than 10 years after the registration of the declaration and description that created the condominium corporation, with each new phase being an amendment the original condominium declaration.

Page 4 of 5 Report No: CASPO 2015-15 COMMUNITY AND STRATEGIC PLANNING Council Date: January 28, 2015

Review of the condominium application by Town Engineering staff, the County Public Works Department and other agencies has revealed no outstanding issues with respect to the proposal and no need for any conditions to be imposed on the draft plan of condominium.

Conclusions

It is staff’s opinion that the application is consistent with the policies of the 2014 Provincial Policy Statement because the application provides an alternative form of housing to meet the long term needs of current and future residents of the Town of Ingersoll. The development represents an efficient use of municipal services on lands designated as a Medium Density Residential area within the Town of Ingersoll. Further, staff is of the opinion that the proposal conforms with the relevant Official Plan policies regarding the establishment of a condominium development on residentially designated land. The development also meets the relevant provisions of the R3-1 Zone as contained in the Town’s Zoning By-law. The Town recently approved the related Site Plan and the required development agreement has been registered on title. Therefore, the application for draft plan of condominium and the requested exemption from the draft approval process can be supported.

SIGNATURES

Report Author:

Original signed by

Stephen Couture, MCIP, RPP Development Planner

Departmental Approval:

Original signed by

Gordon K. Hough, MCIP, RPP Director

Approved for submission:

Original signed by

Peter M. Crockett, P.Eng. Chief Administrative Officer

ATTACHMENTS

Attachment No. 1: Report Mapping Plate 1 – Location and Existing Zoning Plate 2 – Proposed Plan of Condominium

Page 5 of 5 PLATE 1: Location and Existing Zoning CD14-03-6 (175 Ingersoll St North, Ingersoll - Warren D. Sinclair Construction Ltd.)

Legend Environmental Protection/Flood Overlay Flood Fringe Ingersoll St Floodway North Environmental Protection (EP1) Environmental Protection (EP2) Zoning Floodlines/Regulation Limit 100 Year Flood Line SUBJECT 30 Metre Setback Conservation Authority SITE Regulation Limit Regulatory Flood And Fill Lines Zoning (Displays 1:16000 to 1:500)

Victoria St

Notes

This map is a user generated static output from an Internet mapping site and 0 51 102 Meters is for reference only. Data layers that appear on this map may or may not be accurate, current, or otherwise reliable. This is not a plan of survey NAD_1983_UTM_Zone_17N November 21, 2014 PLATE 2: Proposed Plan of Condominium (showing potential phases)

County file: #CD14-03-6 Report No: CASPO 2015-27 COMMUNITY AND STRATEGIC PLANNING Council Date: January 28, 2015

To: Warden and Members of County Council

From: Director of Community and Strategic Planning

Application for Draft Plan of Subdivision SB 14-03-7 (1422880 Ontario Inc.)

RECOMMENDATION

REPORT HIGHLIGHTS

. The purpose of this report is to consider draft plan approval of a residential plan of subdivision within the Town of Tillsonburg.

Implementation Points

This application will be implemented in accordance with the relevant policies contained in the Official Plan.

Financial Impact

The approval of this application will have no financial impact beyond what has been approved in the current year’s budget. The Treasurer agrees with this financial impact statement.

Risks/Implications

There are no risks or other implications anticipated as a result of this application beyond those that can reasonably be expected for any such proposal with respect to potential appeals to the Ontario Municipal Board.

Strategic Plan

County Council adopted the County of Oxford Strategic Plan in March 2013. The initiative contained within this report supports the Values and Strategic Directions as set out in the Strategic Plan as it pertains to the following:

Page 1 of 2 Report No: CASPO 2015-27 COMMUNITY AND STRATEGIC PLANNING Council Date: January 28, 2015

DISCUSSION

Background

County Council held a public meeting pursuant to Section 51(20) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, as amended, at the January 14, 2015 regular meeting of Council to consider an application for draft approval of a residential plan of subdivision. No concerns were raised at the public meeting.

Comments

Town of Tillsonburg Council, at their meeting of January 12, 2015 passed a resolution recommending that draft plan approval be given by the County. County Council is now in a position to give draft plan approval to subdivision File No. SB 14-03-7.

Conclusions

2. It is staff’s opinion that draft approval of the residential plan of subdivision, SB 14-03-7, is appropriate, subject to the imposition of the draft plan conditions attached as Schedule “A”.

SIGNATURES

Original signed by

Gordon K. Hough, MCIP, RPP Director

Approved for submission:

Original signed by

Peter M. Crockett, P.Eng. Chief Administrative Officer

ATTACHMENTS

Schedule “A” – Conditions of Draft Approval (SB 14-03-7: 1422880 Ontario Inc.)

Page 2 of 2 Schedule “A” To Report No. CASPO 2015-27

CONDITIONS OF DRAFT APPROVAL – SB 14-03-7 – 1422880 ONTARIO INC.

1. This approval applies to the draft plan of subdivision, submitted by Performance Communities Realty Inc. (File SB 14-03-7) as prepared by Cyril J. Demeyere Limited (dated December 1, 2014) and Kim Husted Surveying, as shown on Plate 5 of Schedule “A” to Report No. 2015-27, comprised of land described as Part 1, Reference Plan 41R-6637 and Part 4, Reference Plan 41R-6678, being Part Lot 8, Concession 11, (Dereham), in the Town of Tillsonburg, and showing 72 lots for single detached dwellings, a block for a place of worship, two road widening blocks, a municipal service block, and three blocks for stormwater management purposes, all served by 3 (three) new local streets.

2. The owner agrees in writing to satisfy all requirements, financial and otherwise, of the Town of Tillsonburg and County of Oxford regarding the construction of roads, installation of services, including the water, sewer, electrical distribution systems, sidewalks and drainage facilities, payment for the existing watermain and sewer services, and other matters pertaining to the development of the subdivision in accordance with the standards of the Town of Tillsonburg and County of Oxford.

3. Prior to final approval by the County, such easements as may be required for utility or drainage purposes shall be granted to the appropriate authority.

4. The subdivision agreement shall be registered to the satisfaction of the Town of Tillsonburg against the title of the lands to which it applies.

5. The road allowances included in the draft plan of subdivision shall be dedicated as public highways.

6. The streets included in the draft plan shall be named to the satisfaction of the Town of Tillsonburg.

7. Prior to the final approval by the County, all lots/blocks shall conform to the zoning requirements of the Town of Tillsonburg Zoning By-Law. Certification of lot areas, lot frontages, and lot depths shall be obtained from an Ontario Land Surveyor retained by the developer.

8. Prior to final approval, the owner agrees in writing to satisfy all the recommendations in Summary Recommendations of the Environmental Impact Study (dated November 5, 2014) prepared by Jeff Thompson Environmental Planning and Design Limited., and all recommendations from the peer review of the EIS prepared by Natural Resource Solutions Inc., regarding the restoration, construction, design mitigation and monitoring of the proposed development on matters relating to the preservation of the adjacent Significant Valleyland areas to the satisfaction of the County of Oxford and the Town of Tillsonburg.

9. The subdivision agreement shall contain a provision that adequate fencing be provided between the plan of subdivision and all abutting environmental sensitive lands to east and south adjacent to Block 76 & 77.

10. Prior to the final approval by the County, the owner shall receive confirmation from the County of Oxford Department of Public Works that there is sufficient capacity in the Town of Tillsonburg water system and Town of Tillsonburg sewage system to service the plan of subdivision. Confirmation shall be given in accordance with the “Protocol for Allocation of Water and Sewage Capacity for Development”.

Page 1 of 3 Schedule “A” To Report No. CASPO 2015-27

11. The owner agrees in writing to satisfy all the requirements, financial and otherwise, including payment of applicable development charges, of the County of Oxford regarding the installation of the water distribution system and sewer system, and other matters pertaining to the development of the subdivision.

12. The subdivision agreement shall make provision for the assumption and operation, by the County of Oxford, of the water distribution system and sewage system within the draft plan, subject to the approval of the County of Oxford Department of Public Works.

13. The subdivision agreement shall make provision for phasing of the subdivision to the satisfaction of the Town of Tillsonburg and the County of Oxford.

14. Prior to the signing of the final plan by the County of Oxford, a road widening having an area of 0.12 ha adjacent to Quarter Town Line shall be dedicated to the Town of Tillsonburg, free of all costs and encumbrances.

15. The subdivision agreement shall contain provisions requiring that the 1.64 ha (4.05 ac) stormwater management block and access block on the east side of the draft plan, as shown on the draft plan of subdivision as Blocks 75, 76 & 77, shall be dedicated to the Town of Tillsonburg, free of all costs and encumbrances, to the satisfaction of the Town of Tillsonburg.

16. The subdivision agreement shall contain provisions indicating that prior to final approval by the County a final storm water management report, including a planting plan, a grading plan and an erosion and siltation control plan, and salt management plan, to be prepared and submitted by the owner for the review and approval by the Town of Tillsonburg and the Long Point Region Conservation Authority, and further, the subdivision agreement shall include provisions for the owner to carry out, or cause to be carried out, any necessary works in accordance with the approved plans and reports.

17. The subdivision agreement shall include provisions that require the owner to establish sidewalks along the south side of Glendale Drive, and the south, east, and west side of Crescent “A” to Block 74, at no cost to the Town of Tillsonburg and to the satisfaction of the Town of Tillsonburg.

18. The subdivision agreement shall include disclosure provisions relating to light trespass, noise arising from the fields of play, clubhouse and irrigation system, the possible intrusion of stray soccer balls from the adjacent Tillsonburg Minor Soccer Club, and provisions that require the owner to include in any agreement of purchase and sale shall be included in the subdivision agreement.

19. Prior to final approval, the owner agrees in writing to construct a wooden privacy fence, 1.8 m in height, along the rear lot lines of any residential lots that are adjacent to the Tillsonburg Minor Soccer Club, to the satisfaction of the Town of Tillsonburg.

20. Prior to final approval, the owner agrees in writing to satisfy all the requirements of the Tillsonburg Hydro Inc. regarding the installation of the electrical distribution system and any other matters pertaining to the development of the subdivision.

21. Prior to final approval, the owner shall provide a payment for 5% cash-in-lieu of parkland to the Town of Tillsonburg in accordance with the provisions of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, as amended, and the Town is hereby authorized to do so.

22. Prior to final approval, the owner agrees in writing to satisfy all requirements of Union Gas Limited regarding necessary easements and/or agreements for the provision of gas services and any other matters pertaining to the development of the subdivision.

Page 2 of 3 Schedule “A” To Report No. CASPO 2015-27

23. Prior to final approval, the owner agrees in writing to satisfy the requirements of Canada Post Corporation with respect to advising prospective purchasers of the method of mail delivery, the location of temporary Centralized Mail Box locations during construction and, the provision of public information regarding the proposed locations of permanent Centralized Mail Box locations.

24. Prior to the approval of the final plan by the County of Oxford, the owner shall satisfy Condition Number 9 to the satisfaction of the County of Oxford and the Town of Tillsonburg.

25. Prior to the approval of the final plan by the County of Oxford, the owner shall provide to the County clearance from the Tillsonburg Hydro Inc. that Condition Number 20 has been met to their satisfaction. The clearance letter shall include a brief statement detailing how the condition has been satisfied.

26. Prior to the approval of the final plan by the County of Oxford, the owner shall provide to the County clearance from Union Gas Limited that Condition Number 22 has been met to their satisfaction. The clearance letter shall include a brief statement detailing how the condition has been satisfied.

27. Prior to the approval of the final plan by the County of Oxford, the owner shall provide to the County clearance from the Long Point Region Conservation Authority that Condition Number 16 have been met to their satisfaction. The clearance letter shall include a brief statement detailing how the condition has been satisfied.

28. Prior to the approval of the final plan by the County of Oxford, the owner shall provide clearance to the County from Canada Post Corporation that Condition Number 23 has been met to their satisfaction. The clearance letter shall include a brief statement detailing how the condition has been satisfied.

29. Prior to the approval of the final plan by the County of Oxford, the owner shall provide clearance to the County from the Town of Tillsonburg that Conditions 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 21 have been met to their satisfaction. The clearance letter shall include a brief statement for each condition detailing how each has been satisfied.

30. Prior to the approval of the final plan by the County of Oxford, the owner shall secure clearance from the County of Oxford Public Works Department that Conditions 2, 10, 11, 12, and 13 have been met to their satisfaction. The clearance letter shall include a brief statement for each condition detailing how each has been satisfied.

31. This plan of subdivision shall be registered by January 28, 2018, after which time this draft approval shall lapse unless an extension is authorized by the County of Oxford.

Page 3 of 3 W:\DRAFTING\WORK\2010\1036\1036_Draftplan R1.dwg, 12/1/2014 10:47:19 AM, avranckx, 1:25.4 lt :DatPa fSubdivision of Plan Draft 5: Plate atLt8 ocsin1 Drhm,Pr f4R67,Pr f4R63,Tw fTillsonburg of Town 41R-6637, of 1 Part 41R-6678, of Inc. 4 Communities Part Realty (Dereham), Performance 11 7-14-08- Concession ZN 8, & Lot SB14-03-7 Part & 14-06-7 OP Nos. File Tillsonburg, Ontario. N4G N4G Ontario. 4J1 Tillsonburg, P.O. Box 606, 261 261 Broadway 606, Box P.O. Cyril J. Demeyere Limited Fax: 519-842-3235 Fax: Tel: 519-688-1000 Tel: [email protected] 866-302- 9886

Report No: CS 2015-04 CORPORATE SERVICES Council Date: January 28, 2015

To: Warden and Members of County Council

From: Director of Corporate Services

Oxford County Library 2015 Business Plan and Budget

RECOMMENDATION

REPORT HIGHLIGHTS

. 2015 Library levy $3.4 million – 14.5% increase over 2014

. $26,077 capital plan – 16.3% decrease from 2014

. 36.7 FTEs – 1.7 FTE increase over 2014

Implementation Points

The Oxford County Library 2015 Business Plan and Budget was presented to Council as part of Corporate Services’ programs.

Upon County Council’s approval a County of Oxford by-law will be enacted to authorize the Oxford County Library Board special levy.

Financial Impact

The draft budget proposes a $430,000 increase in the levy to be collected from property owners within the Area Municipalities that participate in the County library system. This represents a 14.5% increase over the 2014 levy.

The Treasurer has prepared this report.

Risks/Implications

The risks and implications associated with the proposed 2015 goals and objectives have been identified in Oxford County Library Board Report No. 2014-022.

Page 1 of 5

Report No: CS 2015-04 CORPORATE SERVICES Council Date: January 28, 2015

Delay in approval of the 2015 business plan and budget may have an impact on the ability to complete approved goals and objectives by their expected completion date.

Strategic Plan

County Council adopted the County of Oxford Strategic Plan at its regular meeting held March 27, 2013. The initiative contained within this report supports the Values and Strategic Directions as set out in the Strategic Plan as it pertains to the following Strategic Directions:

3. iii. A County that Thinks Ahead and Wisely Shapes the Future - Apply social, financial and environmental sustainability lenses to significant decisions by assessing options in regard to: - Life cycle costs and benefit/costs, including debt, tax and reserve levels and implications 4. ii. A County that Informs and Engages - Better inform the public about County programs, services and activities through planned communication by: - Improving County-municipality information exchange

DISCUSSION

Background

Section 24(1) of the Public Libraries Act, R.S.O. 1990, states that “A public library board, county library board or county library co-operative board shall submit to the appointing council, annually on or before the date and in the form specified by the council, estimates of all sums required during the year for the purposes of the board. Subsection (2) sets out the approval as “The amount of the board’s estimates that is approved or amended and approved by the council shall be adopted by the board and shall be paid to the board out of the money appropriated for it. Subsection (3) indicates that “The board shall apply the money paid to it under subsection (2) in accordance with the estimates as approved, subject to subsection (4)” and subsection (4) states “The council may, in its approval of the board’s estimates or at any time at the board’s request, authorize the board to apply a specified amount or percentage of the money paid to it under subsection (2) otherwise than in accordance with the items of the estimates as approved.”

Comments

At the regular meeting of the Board held October 20, 2014, the Board considered the draft 2015 Library Business Plan and passed the following resolution:

“That the Oxford County Library Board approve the 2015 Library Business Plan goals and objectives as set forth in Report 2014-019.”

The content of the 2015 Library Business Plan is incorporated in the County of Oxford 2015 Preliminary Business Plan and Budget Highlights information which was presented to Council on December 10, December 17 of 2014, and further deliberated on January 7 and January 14, 2015. The information package can also be found on the County’s website at http://www.oxfordcounty.ca/general/budget/2015/default.aspx .

Page 2 of 5

Report No: CS 2015-04 CORPORATE SERVICES Council Date: January 28, 2015

At the inaugural meeting of the Board held January 19, 2015, the Board considered Report No. 2015-03 regarding the 2015 draft budget and passed the following resolution:

“That the Board recommends that County Council approve the 2015 Oxford County Library Business Plan and budget to provide a levy of $3,392,810, subject to possible minor adjustments to interdepartmental charges and budget amendments identified in Report No. 2015-03.”

Based on the Board’s direction regarding the 2015 goals and objectives, the 2015 Preliminary Library Budget proposed a levy requirement of $3,392,810 - benefitting seven of the Area Municipalities (excluding Woodstock). The 2015 proposed levy represented an increase of 14.5% over the 2014 levy.

The total budget (gross expenditures) is $3,677,271, which is a $148,626 increase over 2014 or 4.2%. Although the draft budget proposes an increase of $148,626, the library levy is increasing by $430,000. This variance is explained in Table 1 – Budget Increases/Pressures.

Table 1 – Budget Increases/Pressures Revenue/Expense Explanation Amount

Prior year surplus 2013 year surplus $147,150 – 2014 forecast surplus $129,870 $17,280

Salaries and Benefits cost of living increase and 1.7 additional FTEs1 155,024

Other Contributions from reserve – development charges 165,862

Total $450,756

Budget Increases/Pressures Since the prior year surplus and contributions from reserve are funding sources, it is only the increase in salaries and benefits that impact the gross expenditures to deliver library services.

As for the variance in the year end surpluses, 2013 was a transition year – introducing the Tillsonburg branch to the library system, which came with many variables, resulting in a fairly substantial surplus. The only down side to that is that in 2014 a more precise budget was adopted in relation to the new addition to the system, largely eliminating a surplus to carryover and subsidize the following year’s levy.

Similarly, with the introduction of the Tillsonburg branch in 2013, the Board approved to draw down on the accumulated development charge reserves in order to assist with the transition costs causing upward pressure on the levy. The plan was to ease in the increase to the levy over a couple of years by using the development charge reserve that had not been fully utilized in the past. Subsequently, when considering the 2014 budget, the Board decided to further draw down on the development charge reserve to maintain the same levy as in 2013. However, in 2014, the County concluded its Development Charge Background Study and passed new by- laws for the next five years. As required in the process, the development charge reserve fund

1 Salaries and benefits related to 1.7 additional FTE is $99,615 Page 3 of 5

Report No: CS 2015-04 CORPORATE SERVICES Council Date: January 28, 2015 balance of $101,626 was taken into consideration in calculating the development charge for the next five years and the estimated annual contribution became $78,209 for facilities. In response, the contribution from the development charge reserve has decreased from $254,062 in 2014 to $88,200 ($78,200 facilities + $10,000 collections carried over) in 2015, a difference of $165,862. As cited above this is a contributing factor to the significant increase in the 2015 levy.

Full-time Equivalent Analysis Table 2 provides a comparison of full time equivalent (FTE) staff resources from 2014 to 2015.

Table 2 – Full-time Equivalent Analysis 2014 2014 2014 2015 2015 2015 % Inc(Dec) FTE Student Budget FTE Student Budget Change

34.3 0.7 35.0 36.0 0.7 36.7 1.7 4.9

In addition to the base FTE staff resources required in 2014, the draft 2015 budget proposes an additional 1.7 FTE. The Tillsonburg branch staffing has been increased by the equivalent of 0.9 FTE, increasing the Public Service Clerk front-line service hours and program staff hours, reflecting the huge increases in branch traffic, circulation, and program attendance since the branch opened in its temporary location in January 2013. Since January 2014, materials circulation has increased by 35 percent, and attendance has increased by over 60 percent. The Branch Supervisor must be able to have time away from the front desk to go out into the community, work with the Friends Group and other community partners, and plan adult programming.

An additional 0.4 FTE is proposed for e-services and training purposes (system-wide), to provide the staffing capacity needed to lead mobile circulation projects, and develop a program to promote OCL e-resources and offer training on those resources to staff and the public.

To round out the 2015 FTE requirements, 0.4 FTE is proposed for community outreach work (system-wide), to provide the staffing capacity needed to coordinate community consultations and outreach efforts, with particular emphasis in 2015 on the Zorra Township branches.

These additional hours that make up the 1.7 FTE increase do not represent new hires, but will facilitate a more effective use of the talents and skills of existing, underutilized staff members.

Other Considerations In addition to the considerations previously cited in this report, the Board also reviewed the future years’ debt requirement projections for the years 2015 to 2024. There are no plans at present to increase debt in the ten-year planning horizon and all current debt will be fully retired by the end of 2023.

Also as part of the 2015 budget review process, the Board gave consideration to the projected Library reserve continuity schedule illustrating the proposed uses and contributions to each of the respective reserves as contained in the draft budget to ensure that funds previously collected are brought into revenue at the appropriate time. Page 4 of 5

Report No: CS 2015-04 CORPORATE SERVICES Council Date: January 28, 2015

Considering that the Preliminary Draft Budget was circulated on November 12, 2014, subsequent information has been received that requires consideration in the 2015 budget. As a result of a recent Ministry of Labour regulation in response to the death of a worker from a fall while working on an HVAC system, work that was taking place at the Thamesford Library and Resource Centre’s HVAC had to be halted until such time that the required fall arrest provisions were installed. This called for specialized railing that added to the HVAC maintenance work. According to the joint agreement between the Township and the County, this work is considered capital in nature and therefore is to be funded by the facilities reserve. The County’s portion of the cost is $7,441 and the consolidated Library Facilities Capital Reserve balance is projected to be $219,400 with no other contributions planned for 2015, therefore provides sufficient funding for these works.

Considering that the Preliminary Draft Budget was circulated on November 12, 2014, subsequent information has been received that requires consideration in the 2015 budget. More specifically, information has been received from the Ontario Ministry of Tourism, Culture and Sport, in response to an application in 2014 the Oxford County Library was more successful that what was anticipated. There was $10,000 included in the 2015 Preliminary Budget to provide for new technology equipment eligible under the Ontario Libraries Capacity Fund (OLCF) and recent correspondence from the Ministry informs that the Board will be in receipt of $23,586. Inclusion of this subsequent item in the 2015 budget has no impact on the levy as the technology project is funded by a grant from the Ministry. To ensure that this project and its funding is appropriately reflected in the budget, the recommendation of the Board contains the following wording “and budget amendments identified in Report No. 2015-03, be approved”.

Conclusions

The 2015 draft Oxford County Library Board Business Plan and Budget proposes a strong foundation from which service improvement opportunities can be further explored and considered as we continue to strive to adapt our programs, services and facilities to reflect evolving community needs2.

SIGNATURE

Departmental Approval:

Original signed by Lynn S. Buchner, CPA, CGA Director of Corporate Services

Approved for submission:

Original signed by Peter M. Crockett, P.Eng. Chief Administrative Officer

2 County of Oxford Strategic Plan – 1.ii. – Enhance the quality of life for all of our citizens, March 27, 2013 Page 5 of 5

Report No: CS 2015-05 CORPORATE SERVICES Council Date: January 28, 2015

To: Warden and Members of County Council

From: Director of Corporate Services

Water and Sewer Services Financing Policy Review

RECOMMENDATION

REPORT HIGHLIGHTS

. Policy establishes when new services are to be billed and who is to be billed

. Procedural guidelines determine the process for how new services are billed and benefiting property owners and area municipalities are informed

Implementation Points

The provisions of this amended Policy will become effective upon Council’s adoption of the recommendation contained in this Report. The associated procedures as set out in this Report will be implemented immediately

The amended Policy will be signed by the CAO and registered in the County’s General Policy Manual.

Financial Impact

There are no financial implications associated with the recommendation contained within this report.

The Treasurer has reviewed this report and agrees with the financial impact information.

Risks/Implications

Adopting the recommendation contained within this report is intended to minimize the risk of municipal partners, stakeholders and the public from not being appropriately informed of financial obligations as they relate to new water and sewer services to properties.

Page 1 of 5

Report No: CS 2015-05 CORPORATE SERVICES Council Date: January 28, 2015

Strategic Plan County Council adopted the County of Oxford Strategic Plan at its regular meeting held March 27, 2013. The initiative contained within this report supports the values and strategic directions as set out in the Strategic Plan as it pertains to the following Strategic Directions:

4. i. A County that Informs and Engages - Better harness the power of the community through conversation and dialogue by: - Fostering greater involvement in County and community events and/or program/project implementation

4. ii. A County that Informs and Engages - Better inform the public about County programs, services and activities through planned communication by: - Improving County-municipality information exchange

5. i. A County that Performs and Delivers Results – Enhance our customer service focus and responsiveness to our municipal partners and the public by: - Implementing clearly defined customer service standards and expectations

DISCUSSION

Background At the regular meeting of County Council held October 8, 2014, the following resolution was adopted: “That Oxford County Corporate Services bring to Council a Report outlining the procedures around water and sewer hook-up programs pertaining to new development or boundary adjusted areas.”

The resolution was first introduced as a notice of motion at the regular meeting of Council held September 24, 2014 following a delegation from the Havelock Corners Ratepayers Association and Council’s decision to defer Report No. 2014-55. The purpose of the Report was to introduce for Council’s consideration By-law No. 5622-2014 to authorize billing and a mandatory connection date for the Woodstock Sanitary Sewer and Watermain Extension services.

This Report has been prepared in consultation with Public Works staff in response to the Council resolution dated October 8, 2014. The procedures proposed within this Report have been developed in consideration of the County’s “Inform and Engage – A Guideline for Effective Communication & Public Participation at the County of Oxford” as they relate to inform.

In 2007, Corporate Services and Public Works staff presented Council with a policy for consideration regarding water and sewer financing. The policy was initiated by Council direction for more payment options to be made available to benefiting property owners to meet their financial obligations with respect to new municipal services. At that time, two payment options were being offered to each benefiting property owner: 1. Lump sum payment; or 2. Debenture the full amount over a term of 10 years.

Page 2 of 5

Report No: CS 2015-05 CORPORATE SERVICES Council Date: January 28, 2015

In addition to payment options, there was concern regarding the length of time it took to bill out financial obligations to the benefiting property owners which led to unanticipated financial burden on some property owners. As a result, Water and Sewer Services Financing Policy No. 6.05 was adopted. The Policy provides new services in developed areas to be financed by the County for a set term of not less than five years. Further, the Policy establishes that the financial obligations “should be documented at all meetings and in any information provided to the public”.

The purpose of policies is to establish rules and guidelines to ensure consistency and compliance with the County’s strategic direction. They set out the rules under which staff administer or operate the County’s programs and services and are the guidelines under which procedures are developed. Procedures define the specific instructions necessary to perform the rules and guidelines established by policy. Therefore, in order to implement Policy No. 6.05 – Water and Sewer Services Financing Policy and address Council’s concerns regarding the length of time it takes to complete a servicing project and determine its final costs, staff developed procedures based on discussions with Council in relation to new services billings that were taking place at the time. More specifically, Report No. A-1 2007-59, dated October 24, 2007, cited the following procedures to be part of the billing process for each water and/or sewer servicing project to better prepare benefiting property owners to plan for their financial obligation.

Procedures

1. Direct mailing to the property owners to take place during the project at an appropriate time to outline cost estimates, the timing of which will depend upon the stage of the particular project. In addition, the correspondence will provide an estimated billing date and financing options, with estimated annual debt repayment obligations, and will encourage seeking more flexible third party financing options.

2. All correspondence and public meeting information provided to benefiting property owners will encourage third party financing, in accordance with the Water and Sewer Services Financing Policy, to allow more flexibility for long term financing.

3. Projects involving several phases, correspondence will be sent to benefiting property owners informing them of future billings to be sent by direct mail within 60 days. Further, the correspondence will inform them of the estimated cost, estimated billing date and their financing options in accordance with the Water and Sewer Services Financing Policy. This will allow them ample opportunity to research all available options and plan for the billing date.

These procedures were evaluated for effectiveness after the final phase-two billing of the Thamesford sewer project and were deemed to be satisfactory by Council at the time. That being said, these procedures have been followed since adoption of the Water and Sewer Services Financing Policy with procedure number three being exercised for all servicing projects regardless if they consist of several phases or not.

Page 3 of 5

Report No: CS 2015-05 CORPORATE SERVICES Council Date: January 28, 2015

Comments

In response to the October 8, 2014 direction from Council, the current Water and Sewer Services Financing Policy was carefully reviewed and the following amendments are recommended and are clearly tracked on Attachment No. 1 to this Report:

1. Paragraph 1.0 – County Services to a New Development – wording added to reflect other scenarios available for financing new development.

2. Paragraph 2.2 – propose a maximum term of financing for ten years. The existing wording limits only the minimum term, being five years. Past practice has always offered ten years and in the past two years another option has been provided that allows for 50% of the debt obligation to be paid up front and finance the balance over five years.

3. Paragraph 2.3 – insert the word “rate” following interest and cite the County’s Debt Management Policy as the basis for determining the interest rate. Debt Management Policy No. 6.17 was adopted by Council subsequent to the adoption of the Water and Sewer Services Financing Policy and contains a prescribed formula for determining interest rates for the purpose of internal financing.

4. Paragraph 4.0 – Public Consultation – this section sets out the basis of a communications protocol to ensure all stakeholders, including but not limited to property owners and Area Municipalities are informed of the status of projects that require financial contributions from property owners. The procedures to fulfill the communications protocol will be determined on the basis of each project in consultation with Strategic Communications and Engagement.

In addition to the aforementioned policy amendments, procedures for future water and sewer servicing processes related to developed areas are proposed as follows:

Proposed Procedures

1. Direct mailing and website posting of information to be provided to benefiting property owners and area municipality from the onset of the project to outline cost estimates, and updates at intervals of which will be determined for each unique project. In addition, the correspondence will provide an estimated billing date and financing options, with estimated annual debt repayment obligations, and will encourage seeking more flexible third party financing options.

2. County website will provide an information page that will allow the public to monitor the billing status of ongoing servicing projects. The page will be updated with all new correspondence circulated to the benefiting property owners and area municipalities.

3. Direct mailing, media and website posting of notice of public meetings will be provided to benefiting property owners and area municipality and will include or provide access to (i.e. for other than direct mail - link to online information or by contacting Customer Service) all financing related information as set out in Procedure 1 – updated to include any new information and explaining reasons for any variances.

Page 4 of 5

Report No: CS 2015-05 CORPORATE SERVICES Council Date: January 28, 2015

Proposed Procedures

4. Direct mailing and website posting will be provided to benefiting property owners and area municipality informing them of future billings to be sent by direct mail within 60 days. The correspondence will inform them of the estimated cost, estimated billing date and their financing options in accordance with the Water and Sewer Services Financing Policy. This will allow an opportunity to research all available options and plan for the billing date.

5. Direct mailing and website posting will be provided to benefiting property owners and area municipality of the final billing. The correspondence will inform them of the final cost, financing options including terms, and a deadline within which they are to inform the County of their preferred option.

These proposed procedures are intended to better inform benefiting property owners and area municipalities regarding long-term water and sewer servicing projects and avoid unanticipated financial burden for those property owners in the future.

Conclusions

Upon Council approval, the Policy will be updated accordingly and posted in the General Policy Manual. The related procedures will be implemented for all future water and sewer servicing projects that benefit property owners in developed areas. The Policy and procedures will be reviewed as deemed necessary by the CAO or otherwise requested by Council.

SIGNATURE

Departmental Approval:

Original signed by

Lynn S. Buchner, CPA, CGA Director of Corporate Services

Approved for submission:

Original signed by Peter M. Crockett, P.Eng. Chief Administrative Officer

ATTACHMENTS

Attachment No. 1 – Water and Sewer Services Financing Policy with Amendments

Page 5 of 5

Report No. CS 2015-05 Attachment No. 1

GENERAL POLICY MANUAL

SECTION: Finance APPROVED BY: County Council

NUMBER: 6.05 SIGNATURE: Original signed by Ken Whiteford, CAO

PAGE: 1 of 4 DATE: October 24, 2007

REFERENCE POLICY: REVISED:

Water and Sewer Services Financing

POLICY

The County is responsible for municipally owned water and sewer services within its boundaries. Municipal services are constructed for two main reasons. New development is proposed providing lots that require municipal services because services do not exist, or previously developed lots require some form of municipal services.

New development happens continuously and a process to plan and manage municipal services is important. In Oxford County, development occurs in two ways either through consent approvals under the Planning Act for five or fewer lots, or by subdivision approvals for larger than five lots. Regardless of the approval process, services must be planned and the financing for the associated costs of such services must be determined.

Services can also be extended to a previously developed area. When this occurs, the financial impact on property owners will be addressed in a by-law to assess costs to properties applicable to each project.

This policy provides direction on the how the capital costs of water and sewer services are recovered from land developers and the consumers of such services.

DEFINITIONS

Developed Is an area where residential and commercial buildings already exist and were Area previously serviced with private wells and septic systems or one private service in combination with municipal services.

Personal Is property owned by an individual or corporation and not by the County of Oxford. Property

Page 1 of 4 Report No. CS 2015-05 Attachment No. 1

GENERAL POLICY MANUAL

SECTION: Finance APPROVED BY: County Council

NUMBER: 6.05 SIGNATURE: Original signed by Ken Whiteford, CAO

PAGE: 2 of 4 DATE: October 24, 2007

REFERENCE POLICY: REVISED:

PROCEDURE

The systematic planning and management of water and sewer infrastructure is an important function of local government. Residents depend on these services to improve the quality of life and expect that local government will have in place processes that can address their need for infrastructure.

The following procedures outline the financing options available, through the County of Oxford, to property owners where services are being proposed.

1.0 County Services to a New Development

The County is required to provide services to new development established by consent or subdivision approvals. In both cases, whether the new development is owned by individuals or corporate developers, the County’s servicing costs associated with the development will generally not be financed long-term by the County. The preferred method of payment would be use of a prepaid deposit, corresponding to the estimated cost of providing the services, with eventual reconciliation to actual costs upon completion. The deposit would be received prior to services being constructed. The County should shall seek to haveincorporate these conditions incorporated in all documents related to the consent or subdivision approval processes. Projects listed in the County Development Charges Background Study may also receive have funding from Development Charges collected in accordance with the County’s Development Charge By-laws.

In cases where new development properties exist within a developed area that the County is servicing, costs associated with the new development may be financed long-term until such time as the consent or subdivision approvals are in place. Payment of outstanding costs associated with the servicing will be incorporated into any suchrelated development approvals.

In the case of subdivisions, the subdivision agreement is to contain adequate security for any infrastructure to be installed by the developer.

Where the servicing provided by the County benefits a large number of new development properties, the County may choose to add the costs associated with the servicing to the water and wastewater specific Development Charges for the community, in accordance with the local services policy in the Development Charges Background Study.

2.0 County Services to a Developed Area

Page 2 of 4 Report No. CS 2015-05 Attachment No. 1

GENERAL POLICY MANUAL

SECTION: Finance APPROVED BY: County Council

NUMBER: 6.05 SIGNATURE: Original signed by Ken Whiteford, CAO

PAGE: 3 of 4 DATE: October 24, 2007

REFERENCE POLICY: REVISED:

Sometimes the County is required to provide services to a previously developed area. This may occur in the following situations:

. Property owner(s) have requested County Council to provide services; . the County is required to provide services as a consequence of a Ministry of Environment process; or . County Council directs that services be installed.

In any of these cases, the costs associated with such services can be financed through the County of Oxford on a long-term basis, at the option of the property owner. The following conditions should be documented at all meetings and in any information provided to the public:

2.1 That the long-term financing has a set term (a minimum of five years) and cancellation or prepayment of the annual debt obligation cannot occur, during the term of the financing, by neither the current nor any future property owner. 2.2 That the interest rate related to the long-term financing provided is an estimate and that annual payments will be based upon actual rates negotiated at the time of debt issue by the County. 2.3 That when the long-term financing occurs by way of internal borrowing of County funds, the interest rate will be set using prevailing market rates as a guidein accordance with County of Oxford Debt Management Policy No. 6.19. 2.4 That the property owners be encouraged to find a third party source of financing as the County is limited to the above noted financing terms and conditions.

3.0 Private Services on Personal Property

The County will not offer financing options to any property owner for the cost of private services on personal property unless directed to do such by County Council in an exceptional circumstance.

4.0 Public Consultation

Recognizing the evolving nature of servicing projects and the associated cost estimates, the County will to the best of its ability ensure that property owners are informed of the intention to service and the potential impacts on property owners. Public Works in consultation with Communications staff shall develop a public consultation procedure to guide, for each project, the timing, method and content of notices and meetings. The procedure shall be consistent with the County’s “Guideline for Effective Communication & Public Participation”. The procedure

Page 3 of 4 Report No. CS 2015-05 Attachment No. 1

GENERAL POLICY MANUAL

SECTION: Finance APPROVED BY: County Council

NUMBER: 6.05 SIGNATURE: Original signed by Ken Whiteford, CAO

PAGE: 4 of 4 DATE: October 24, 2007

REFERENCE POLICY: REVISED: shall also include strategies for interim updates on multi-year projects.

At a minimum, direct public consultation shall occur at the following stages and shall include cost estimates for property owners as set out in Section 2.0 of this report: • During the Servicing Study, prior to adoption by County Council • Following acceptance of the construction tender • Upon finalization of project costs

Page 4 of 4

Report No: PW 2015-02 PUBLIC WORKS Council Date: January 28, 2015

To: Warden and Members of County Council

From: Acting Director of Public Works

Boundary Road Maintenance Agreement with the County of Brant

RECOMMENDATION

REPORT HIGHLIGHT

. The purpose of this report is to obtain County Council approval of an agreement with County of Brant for boundary road maintenance and to seek authorization for the Chief Administrative Officer to execute the proposed agreement. . The proposed agreement sets out responsibilities of each of the neighbouring municipalities for routine maintenance and capital repair related to shared boundary roads.

Financial Impact

There are no financial implications associated with the recommendation contained within this report.

The Treasurer agrees with the financial information contained in this report.

Risks/Implications

The proposed agreement with the County of Brant is consistent with, and supported by, the approved County of Oxford Risk Management Policy. In today’s business environment it is more prudent to operate with a legal agreement in place and is considered a “best management practice”.

Page 1 of 3

Report No: PW 2015-02 PUBLIC WORKS Council Date: January 28, 2015

Strategic Plan

1. ii. A County that Works Together – Enhance the quality of life for all of our citizens by: - Maintaining and strengthening core infrastructure - Working with community partners and organizations to maintain / strengthen public safety

DISCUSSION

Background

Through the Municipal Act, municipalities can enter into agreements to establish responsibilities related to the maintenance and repair of boundary roads. There currently is no existing agreement that deals with the maintenance and repair of the boundary road between County of Oxford and Brant County. Historically, both municipalities have cooperated by carrying out certain aspects of the maintenance operations. The agreement will continue to include this level of cooperation.

The proposed agreement (Attachment 1) has been discussed in detail with County of Brant.

Schedule A of the agreement lists the section of roads to be maintained by County of Brant. Schedule B of the agreement are the sections of roads to be maintained by County of Oxford during winter control. The divide of roadway maintenance has occurred in accordance with Schedule A and B without a formal agreement. Attachment 2 is a Map illustrating the roads outlined in Schedule A and B to be maintained by the respective Counties.

Comments

Historically, many municipalities have used verbal agreements for boundary road maintenance. Often these arrangements included the parties each doing half of the road length. The County of Oxford now has a formal risk management policy in place. Through our ongoing risk management review we are ensuring the appropriate contracts and agreements are in place to minimize our exposure to loss. In today’s business environment it is more prudent to operate with a legal agreement in place and is considered a “best management practice”.

The proposed agreement clearly states the responsibilities of both parties which will be legally binding.

Page 2 of 3

Report No: PW 2015-02 PUBLIC WORKS Council Date: January 28, 2015

Similar agreements are in place with the Region of Waterloo, Township of Wilmot, County of Middlesex and Perth County. An additional agreement being negotiated with Norfolk County is expected to be presented to Council in the first quarter of 2015, while discussions regarding the remaining agreement(s) with Elgin County, and applicable Townships, are set to be completed by the fourth quarter of 2015.

Conclusions

It is the recommendation of the staff that the County of Oxford enter into an agreement with County of Brant for the maintenance and repair of the boundary roads between the adjacent municipalities.

SIGNATURE

Report Author:

Original signed by:

Melissa Abercrombie, P.Eng. Manager of Roads and Facilities

Departmental Approval:

Original signed by:

Robert Walton, P.Eng. Director of Public Works

Approved for submission:

Original signed by:

Peter Crockett, P.Eng. Chief Administrative Officer

ATTACHMENTS

Attachment 1: Proposed Agreement with the County of Brant, January 7, 2015 Attachment 2: Map illustrating the boundary roads outlined in the Proposed Agreement.

Page 3 of 3

Attachment 1 to PW 2015-02 January 28, 2015

BOUNDARY HIGHWAY

ROUTINE MAINTENANCE AND CAPITAL REPAIR AGREEMENT

BETWEEN

THE CORPORATION OF THE COUNTY OF BRANT

(Hereinafter called “Brant”)

OF THE FIRST PART

- and -

COUNTY OF OXFORD

(Hereinafter called “Oxford”)

OF THE SECOND PART

WHEREAS pursuant to subsection 29.1(2) of the Municipal Act, 2001, if municipalities having joint jurisdiction over a boundary line highway enter into an agreement under which each municipality agrees to keep any part of the highway in repair for its whole width and to indemnify the other municipality from any loss or damage arising from the lack of repair for that part, each municipality has jurisdiction over that part of the highway that it has agreed to keep in repair and is liable for any damages that arise from failure to keep the highway in repair and the other municipality is relieved from all liability in respect of the repair of that part;

AND WHEREAS, the parties wish to enter into an agreement with respect to boundary line highways;

NOW THEREFORE in consideration of the covenants herein, the parties hereto agree each with the other as follows:

1.0 DEFINITIONS

1.1 “Agreement” means this Boundary Highway Routine Maintenance and Capital Repair Agreement, including the following Schedules:

Schedule “A” – County of Brant Boundary Highways;

Schedule “B” – County of Oxford Boundary Highways;

Schedule “C” –Capital Improvement Activities;

Schedule “D” –Routine Maintenance and Repair Activities.

Page 1 of 13 1.2 “Boundary Highway” means the highways listed in Schedule “A” and Schedule “B”.

1.3 “Business Day” means any day other than a Saturday, Sunday, public holiday or other day on which banks in Ontario are authorized or required by law to be closed, or a day on which the administrative offices of Brant or Oxford are closed.

1.4 “Capital Improvement” means the activities listed in Schedule “C”.

1.5 “Contract Administrator” means an individual appointed by a municipality, or his/her designate, to oversee the administration of the Agreement.

1.6 "Developing Municipality" means the Municipality in which a Development is proposed or occurs.

1.7 "Development" means any Capital Improvement to a Highway that is required as a result of one of the following actions:

1.7.1 The passing of a zoning by-law, or an amendment to a zoning by-law under section 34 of the Planning Act;

1.7.2 The approval of a site plan under section 41 of the Planning Act;

1.7.3 The approval of a minor variance under section 45 of the Planning Act which involves a change in use, intensification of use or expansion of use;

1.7.4 A conveyance of land to which a by-law passed under subsection 50(7) of the Planning Act applies;

1.7.5 The approval of a Plan of Subdivision under section 51 of the Planning Act;

1.7.6 A consent under section 53 of the Planning Act;

1.7.7 The approval of a description under sections 8 or 9 of the Condominium Act, 1998;

1.7.8 The issuing of a permit under the Building Code Act, 1992, in relation to a building or structure

1.7.9 The issuing of any permits or permissions allowing occupancy on the Highway of any fixture such as a publicly or privately owned utility; or

1.7.10 The issuing of a permit to allow entrances onto the Highway.

1.8 “Highway” means a highway as defined in the Municipal Act, 2001, S.O. 2001, c.25, as amended.

1.9 “Joint Jurisdiction” has the meaning described in s.29 of the Municipal Act, 2001.

Page 2 of 13 1.10 “OSIM” means the “Ontario Structure Inspection Manual (OSIM)”, by the Ministry of Transportation, Policy Planning & Standards Division, Engineering Standards Branch, Bridge Office (October, 2000), as amended.

1.11 “Routine M&R” means those activities completed in the routine maintenance and repair of a Highway, as contemplated in the Municipal Act, 2001, S.O. 2001, c.25, as amended and all applicable regulations, including without limitation, the Minimum Maintenance Standards for Municipal Highways Regulation, O.Reg. 239/02, as amended and as they exist from time to time, or any successor regulation(s) or statute(s) (collectively referred to as the “Maintenance Legislation”), and which shall be conducted in accordance with the specifications contained in the Maintenance Legislation and in this Agreement. For greater certainty, Routine M&R does not include Capital Improvement. Activities considered to be Routine M&R, include but are not limited to the activities listed in Schedule “D”.

1.12 “Structure” means a bridge, culvert, tunnel, as those terms are defined in the OSIM.

2.0 MAINTENANCE RESPONSIBILITIES - BOUNDARY HIGHWAYS

2.1 Brant agrees to carry out Routine M&R in respect of all the Highways or parts thereof described in Schedule “A” of this Agreement.

2.2 Oxford agrees to carry out Routine M&R in respect of all the Highways or parts thereof described in Schedule “B” of this Agreement.

3.0 ROAD MAINTENANCE STANDARDS - BOUNDARY HIGHWAYS

3.1 Brant and Oxford shall perform all Routine M&R for their respective jurisdictions, as outlined in subsection 2.1 and subsection 2.2 of this Agreement, in accordance with the requirements of the Maintenance Legislation at a minimum.

4.0 COST OF WORK ROUTINE M&R BOUNDARY HIGHWAYS

4.1 Brant agrees to bear the entirety of the cost of Routine M&R for the Highways listed on Schedule “A”.

4.2 Oxford agrees to bear the entirety of the cost of Routine M&R for the Highways listed on Schedule “B”.

5.0 OSIM INSPECTIONS – STRUCTURES - BOUNDARY HIGHWAYS

5.1 Brant agrees to carry out all biennial structure inspections as required by the OSIM on all Structures, situated in or along the Highways or parts thereof described in Schedule “A” of this Agreement. Brant further agrees to bear the entirety of the cost of all biennial structure inspections for the Highways listed on

Page 3 of 13 Schedule “A” and to provide a copy of all Biennial OSIM Structure inspection reports to Oxford upon completion.

5.2 Oxford agrees to carry out all biennial structure inspections as required by the OSIM on all Structures, situated in or along the Highways or parts thereof described in Schedule “B” of this Agreement. Oxford further agrees to bear the entirety of the cost of all biennial structure inspections for the Highways listed on Schedule “B” and to provide a copy of all Biennial OSIM Structure inspection reports to Brant upon completion.

6.0 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS - BOUNDARY HIGHWAYS

6.1 Notwithstanding any other provisions in this Agreement, Capital Improvement on any Highway outlined in Schedules “A” and “B” of this Agreement shall not be undertaken by either party without one (1) year prior approval of the Councils of both municipalities, and the parties shall agree in writing upon a 50/50 cost- sharing for that project prior to the implementation of said project, unless the Capital Improvement is due to a Development within the Developing Municipality in which case section 7.0 of this Agreement shall apply.

7.0 DEVELOPMENT

7.1 Notwithstanding subsection 6.1 of this Agreement, if Capital Improvement on a Highway listed in Schedule “A” or Schedule “B” relates to a Development, the Developing Municipality shall notify the other municipality of the proposed development prior to approval and shall undertake or cause or permit to be undertaken such Capital Improvement on the following terms:

7.1.1 The Developing Municipality shall obtain approval via a written agreement with the other Municipality except with respect to the issuance of entrance permits where providing a copy of the entrance permit to the other municipality as soon as is reasonable subsequent to issuance is sufficient.

7.1.2 The Developing Municipality shall bear full responsibility for the costs relating directly to such Capital Improvements and the other Municipality shall bear none of the costs relating directly to such Capital Improvements.

7.1.3 Nothing in this section shall derogate from each Municipality's obligation for Routine M&R on Boundary Highways pursuant to the terms of this Agreement.

8.0 INDEMNIFICATION

8.1 Brant covenants and agrees that it shall indemnify, defend and save harmless Oxford from any liability, cost, demands, damages, expenses, claims and suits arising out of or in any way related to the obligations of Brant to carry out the work or otherwise meet the obligations provided for in this Agreement, including

Page 4 of 13 the failure to perform such work adequately or at all, except to the extent that same is caused by the negligence or wilful misconduct of Oxford. This indemnity shall survive the early termination or expiry of this Agreement.

8.2 Oxford covenants and agrees that it shall indemnify, defend and save harmless Brant from any liability, cost, demands, damages, expenses, claims and suits arising out of or in any way related to the obligations of Oxford to carry out the work or otherwise meet the obligations provided for in this Agreement, including the failure to perform such work adequately or at all, except to the extent that same is caused by the negligence or wilful misconduct of Brant. This indemnity shall survive the early termination or expiry of this Agreement.

8.3 Notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained in this Agreement, and subject to any applicable legislation and the ability of a party to protect its own rights in the face of litigation against that party, each party agrees to assist the other party in a timely manner in terms of the provision of information relevant to any claims that are made against the other party with respect to either party’s obligations assumed under this Agreement.

8.4 Brant shall register this Agreement on title to all affected lands in Brant. Oxford shall register this Agreement on title to all affected lands in Oxford.

9.0 RECIPROCAL INSURANCE

9.1 During the term of this Agreement, each party shall obtain and maintain in full force and effect, Comprehensive General Liability Insurance naming the other party as an additional insured regarding their respective obligations under the Agreement. Each party shall also maintain Automobile Liability Insurance for owned vehicles and Non-Owned Automobile Liability Insurance for non-owned vehicles as may be used under this Agreement. Each of the coverages shall have limits of not less than Twenty Million Dollars ($20,000,000) per occurrence, and shall be issued by insurance companies licensed to carry on business in the Province of Ontario.

9.2 Upon request, each party shall deposit with the Contract Administrator for the other party such evidence of its insurance as provided in or required under this Agreement. Each party shall take all reasonable steps to not do or omit to do anything that would impair or invalidate the insurance policies.

9.3 The insurance coverages shall in no manner discharge, restrict or limit the liabilities and obligations assumed by the parties under this Agreement.

Page 5 of 13 10.0 NOTICE, CONTRACT ADMINISTRATION AND AMENDMENT

10.1 Each party has appointed the following to act as Contract Administrator for that party:

Director of Roads The Corporation of the County of Brant 26 Park Avenue PO Box 160 Burford, Ontario, N0E 1A0

Director of Public Works County of Oxford 21 Reeve Street PO Box 1614 Woodstock, Ontario, N4S 7Y4

10.2 Each Contract Administrator shall ensure that detailed maintenance and communications logs and other records relevant to the Routine M&R requirements of this Agreement (“Maintenance Records”) are maintained with respect to the respective parties’ obligations under this Agreement. These Maintenance Records shall be available for review and/or copying by the other municipality upon request. Any records reviewed and/or copied pursuant to this provision shall be kept in the strictest of confidence, subject only to the requirements of applicable privacy and freedom of information laws and any other provision of this Agreement.

10.3 Each Contract Administrator shall be responsible for providing the other party with written notice as soon as reasonably aware of the following:

10.3.1 The amalgamation of one party’s jurisdiction with another jurisdiction;

10.3.2 Any proposed change of name or organization of one party’s jurisdiction;

10.3.3 Any proposed change of name of any Highway as listed on Schedules “A” and “B”;

10.3.4 Any proposed change of speed limits of any Highway as listed on Schedules “A” and “B”;

10.3.5 Any changes, additions or removal of any signs on any Highway as listed on Schedules “A” and “B”;

10.3.6 Any change to the class of Highway listed on Schedules “A” and “B”.

10.4 In the event of any changes to Schedules “A” or “B”, the party proposing to make the change shall not make said change without obtaining the prior written consent of the other party, which consent shall not be unreasonably withheld.

Page 6 of 13 10.5 In the event of any authorized changes identified in 10.3.1, 10.3.2 or 10.3.3, this Agreement shall be amended accordingly.

10.6 For greater certainty, the changes identified in 10.3.4, 10.3.5, or 10.3.6 shall not require an amendment to this Agreement.

10.7 For greater certainty, any changes and/or amendments to this Agreement, including without limitation, any changes to Routine M&R conducted by either or both parties, shall be approved by the Council of each party respectively.

11.0 GENERAL PROVISIONS

11.1 This Agreement comes into force on the day of its execution by both parties hereto authorized by By-law and shall continue in force for a period of ten (10) years there for, unless terminated in accordance with subsection 11.2. This Agreement shall automatically renew every year for another ten (10) years up to a maximum of twenty (20) years, unless terminated in accordance with subsection 11.2.

11.2 This Agreement may be terminated by either party upon sixty (60) days prior written notice to the Contract Administrator of the other party.

11.3 This Agreement shall be construed in accordance with the laws of the Province of Ontario and the laws of Canada applicable therein.

11.4 No amendment or variation to this Agreement or of any of the terms hereof shall be binding upon the parties hereto, unless the same is in writing and properly authorized and executed by both parties to this Agreement.

11.5 This Agreement shall not be assigned by either party without the prior written consent of the other party.

11.6 It is understood and agreed by the parties hereto that they are and shall be independent contractors and that nothing herein is intended to make either party and agent, legal representative, subsidiary, joint venture, partner, fiduciary, employee, or servant of the other for any purpose.

11.7 This Agreement contains the entire understanding between the parties with respect to the subject matter contained herein. All other responsibilities, duties, liabilities or other rights and/or powers of the respective jurisdictions, statutory or otherwise, remain unaffected unless specifically addressed herein.

11.8 Where there is any conflict between any provision of this Agreement and any provision of the Municipal Act, 2001 as amended, the provision of the Municipal Act, 2001 shall prevail to the extent of the conflict.

11.9 All references to a day or days in this Agreement shall mean a Business Day or Business Days.

Page 7 of 13 12.0 DEFAULT

12.1 No consent or waiver, expressed or implied, by any party hereto of any breach or default by any other party hereto in the performance of its obligations hereunder shall be deemed to be or construed to be a consent to or waiver of any other breach or default in the performance by such other party of the same or any other obligations of such party hereunder. Failure on the part of any party to complain of any act, or failure to act of any other party, or to declare the other party in default, irrespective of how long such failure continues, shall not constitute a waiver by the first mentioned party of its rights hereunder.

13.0 DISPUTE RESOLUTION

13.1 In the event of a dispute between the parties to the Agreement arising pursuant to this Agreement, the Contract Administrators agree to engage in good faith negotiations with a view to resolving the dispute.

13.2 In the event the Contract Administrators are unable to resolve a dispute within sixty (60) days as of the date the dispute arose, the parties agree to appoint a Committee comprised of three (3) members per party (“Dispute Committee”) in order to resolve the dispute.

13.3 In the event the Dispute Committee is unable to resolve the dispute within thirty (30) days as of the date the dispute was brought before the Dispute Committee, the parties agree to submit to arbitration under the rules of the Arbitration Act, 1991, S.O. 1991, c.17, as amended and as it exists from time to time. This part of the Agreement is not intended to apply to third party tort litigation.

13.4 Nothing contained herein shall be construed as waiving any additional rights in law or in equity of either party with respect to this Agreement.

Page 8 of 13 IN WITNESS WHEREOF the Corporate Seals of each of the parties hereto have been affixed duly attested by the respective authorized signing officers:

THE CORPORATION OF THE COUNTY OF BRANT

Per: ______Mayor

Per: ______Clerk We have the authority to bind the Corporation.

COUNTY OF OXFORD

Per: ______CAO I have the authority to bind the Corporation.

Page 9 of 13 Schedule “A”

COUNTY OF BRANT BOUNDARY HIGHWAYS

SECTION SECTION ROAD NUMBER OF ROAD ROAD HIGHWAY LIMIT LIMIT SURFACE STRUCTURES CLASS MAINTENANCE (FROM) (TO) TYPE Harley Highway Muir Road Road #53 Paved/Surface 4 3 8,400 metres South (Oxford (Oxford Treated Road 21) Road 53) Middle Governors Highway#2 Townline Road Paved 1 3 6,430 metres Road West

Governors Highway Puttown Paved 0 3 780 metres Road West #2 Road

Brant- Puttown Oxford Keg Lane Paved 2 2 2,000 metres Road Road

Total Length of Highway 17.61km

Page 10 of 13 Schedule “B”

COUNTY OF OXFORD BOUNDARY HIGHWAYS

SECTION SECTION ROAD NUMBER OF ROAD ROAD HIGHWAY LIMIT LIMIT SURFACE STRUCTURES CLASS MAINTENANCE (FROM) (TO) TYPE Highway Muir Road #53 Highway Paved 0 4 4,290 metres North (Oxford #2 Road 55) Middle Muir Road Highway #2 Townline Paved 1 3 7,170 metres North Road

Brant- Brant- Keg Lane Waterloo Paved 0 3 8,120 metres Oxford Road Road

Total Length of Highway 19.58km

Page 11 of 13 Schedule “C”

CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT ACTIVITIES

Included in Capital Improvement Activities: 1. Utility relocations required for road reconstruction 2. Design, environmental assessment, tendering and construction administration 3. Traffic control during construction 4. New and replacement bridges and centerline culverts 5. Rehabilitation of bridges and centerline culverts 6. Gravel roadway resurfacing 7. Road realignment, widening, grade revisions, intersection improvements 8. Excavation 9. Placing earth fill and granular base 10. Hot mix asphalt paving or surface treatment on new grade 11. Storm sewers, catch basins, curbs and gutters 12. Sidewalks 13. Illumination 14. Traffic Signals 15. Signing replacement or enhancement required for road reconstruction 16. Guiderail systems 17. Topsoil on slopes, seeding, sodding, tree planting and other landscaping required to restore roadsides after road reconstruction

18. Environmental protection 19. Issuance of entrance permits

Page 12 of 13 Schedule “D”

ROUTINE MAINTENANCE AND REPAIR ACTIVITIES

1. Included in Maintenance Legislation: • Patrolling • Weather monitoring • Snow removal • Ice treatment/removal • Pothole repair • Shoulder grading and gravelling • Pavement crack repair • Debris removal • Luminaire maintenance • Sign maintenance • Traffic control signal system maintenance • Bridge deck spall repair • Road surface discontinuity repair • Sidewalk surface discontinuity repair

2. Other Routine Maintenance Activities: • Asphalt patching • Surface treatment overlay • Tree trimming and removal • Grass and vegetation control • Roadway drainage system maintenance • Culvert cleaning, repair and replacement • Guiderail maintenance • Bridge washing and minor repairs • Responding to public concerns • Emergency response and repairs • Gravel surface grading and placing gravel to restore roadway surface • Pavement marking maintenance • Environmental protection • Dust control

Page 13 of 13 O

X 5 F 9 98 O 9 R Attachment 2 for PW 2015-02 D R January 28, 2015 O

D 3 29 36 E 9 9

929 B

A N

T - O

X 929 922 F 9 O

R D

R 33 D AD 93 RO 9 RD FO OX 4 D 1 0 33 A O 9 4 9 O X Y R A F O D W R R H D O G I F R X H

O O A 947 D 9 7 2 1 2 2 AD WAY RO HIGH RD FO 2 OX 94 9 917 9

35 AVE 9 SHIRE 92 EVON 9 D H IG HW 92 AY 954 53 RD RLINE TOWE

15 9 HWAY 403 955 HIG O

O R

1 4 KEY PLAN

914 912 922 IES RD CURR 959 940Legend Boundary Roads Maintained by County of Oxford

BoundHary Roads Maintained by County of Brant I G

Y 5 OXFORD COUNTY 9 0 3 6 12 Kilometers

Report No: PW 2015-03 PUBLIC WORKS Council Date: January 28, 2015

To: Warden and Members of County Council

From: Director of Public Works

Amendment to the New Municipal Hazardous or Special Wastes (MHSW) Services Agreement

RECOMMENDATIONS

2. And further, that the Chief Administrative Officer be authorized to execute all documents related thereto.

REPORT HIGHLIGHTS

. To obtain County Council approval to sign an Amending Agreement (Attachment 1) to the New Municipal Hazardous or Special Wastes Services Agreement currently in place with Stewardship Ontario for the continued funding of Phase 1 approved program materials.

Implementation Points

The amending Agreement must be signed and returned to Stewardship Ontario no later than March 1, 2015.

The potential start date for this amending Agreement has been set for June 1, 2015.

Financial Impact

Estimated revenues anticipated through this Agreement in the amount of $70,000 are included in the 2015 budget.

The Treasurer has reviewed this report and agrees with the financial impact information.

Page 1 of 3

Report No: PW 2015-03 PUBLIC WORKS Council Date: January 28, 2015

Risks/Implications

Signing this amending Agreement will secure continued funding from Stewardship Ontario to cover Phase 1 program material costs associated with the operation of the MHSW Depot at the County’s Waste Management Facility and Special Waste Collection Days held throughout the County.

Strategic Plan

3. iii. A County that Thinks Ahead and Wisely Shapes the Future - Apply social, financial and environmental sustainability lenses to significant decisions by assessing options in regard to: - Responsible environmental stewardship 5. ii. A County that Performs and Delivers Results - Deliver exceptional services by: - Regularly reviewing service level standards to assess potential for improved access to services / amenities

DISCUSSION

Background

Report PW 2014-02 was adopted by County Council at their January 8, 2014 meeting. This report contained a recommendation to amend the original MHSW Program Agreement made between the County and Stewardship Ontario in 2011.

On December 16, 2014 the County received notification from Stewardship Ontario for another amendment to the New Municipal Hazardous or Special Wastes Services Agreement. This request is based on the recent approval of the Industry Stewardship Plan proposed by Product Care Association (Product Care) for Paints and Coatings approved by Waste Diversion Ontario (WDO) on December 10, 2014. Attachment 1 identifies program funding for materials and services associated with depot and collection events which will still be covered by Stewardship Ontario, with the exception of Paints and Coatings.

As of June 2015, the responsibility associated with the management of Paints and Coatings in Ontario will move from Stewardship Ontario to Product Care. Details on how this program will be coordinated have not yet been finalized. However, preliminary communication from WDO indicate that the administrative burden associated with this change should be minimal and that municipalities should receive at least the same compensation and rates for depot and event collections as before. The WDO Fact Sheet (Attachment 2) identifies the expected program changes to be experienced by municipalities.

Page 2 of 3

Report No: PW 2015-03 PUBLIC WORKS Council Date: January 28, 2015

Comments

The amending Agreement enclosed as Attachment 1 is the standard form agreement used by all municipalities. This amending Agreement must be signed in order for the County to continue to receive program funding for Paints and Coatings.

Conclusions

It is recommended that Council authorize the execution of the amending Agreement to the New Municipal Hazardous or Special Wastes Services Agreement to allow for continued program funding.

SIGNATURE

Report Author:

Original signed by:

Pamela Antonio, BES, MPA Waste Management Coordinator

Departmental Approval:

Original signed by:

Robert Walton, P.Eng. Director of Public Works

Approved for submission:

Original signed by:

Peter M. Crockett, P.Eng. Chief Administrative Officer

ATTACHMENTS

Attachment 1: Amending Agreement - New Municipal or Special Wastes Services Agreement Attachment 2: WDO Fact Sheet - Information for Municipalities on the Paint ISP - WDO

Page 3 of 3

Attachment 1 to PW 2015-03 January 28, 2015 - 1 -

AMENDING AGREEMENT NEW MUNICIPAL HAZARDOUS OR SPECIAL WASTES SERVICES AGREEMENT

WHEREAS:

1. Stewardship Ontario and County of Oxford (collectively, the “Parties”) entered into an agreement concerning municipal hazardous or special wastes dated July 1, 2011, including any previous amendment made by the parties (the “Agreement”);

2. The parties wish to make certain amendments to the Agreement as set out herein.

THE PARTIES THEREFORE AGREE AS FOLLOWS:

1 The Agreement is hereby amended effective January 1, 2015 as set out in Schedule “A” hereto.

2 Any section marked as “Intentionally Deleted” in the Agreement remains “Intentionally Deleted” and is not replaced by or amended by anything in Schedule “A”.

3 All other provisions of the Agreement remain un-amended and in full force and affect.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF the Parties have signed this AMENDING AGREEMENT as of January 1, 2015.

STEWARDSHIP ONTARIO

by:

Name: David Pearce

Title: Managing Director

COUNTY OF OXFORD

by:

Name:

Title: - 2 -

SCHEDULE “A” TO THE AMENDING AGREEMENT NEW MUNICIPAL HAZARDOUS OR SPECIAL WASTES SERVICES AGREEMENT

1.0 Definitions and Interpretation. The Parties agree that Section 1.2 of the Agreement is deleted in its entirety and replaced with the following:

1.2. In this Agreement:

(a) “Agreement” means this Agreement and includes all schedules and amendments thereto;

(b) “Business Day” means Monday through Friday, excluding statutory holidays and any other day that the Government of Ontario has elected to be closed for business;

(d) “Collection Services” means all the activities, including those conducted at Events and Depots operated by or on behalf of the Municipality, for the purpose of receiving, classifying, packing, storing and transferring Obligated MHSW onto transportation vehicles, including the manifesting of the MHSW prior to transportation away from the Event or Depot;

(e) “Commingled Materials” means the materials listed in Schedule E that can be safely packed together for transportation as per the Packing Standards;

(f) “Depot” means a collection and transfer facility/location operated by or on behalf of the Municipality for receiving MHSW from the public and/or Exempt Small Quantity IC&I Generators and transferring same to transporters for processing or recycling;

(g) “Diversion Report” means invoices, MHSW material tonnage reports, or other such documents as may reasonably be required by SO from time to time for the validation of Claims Submissions;

(h) “End Processor” means a Service Provider that processes collected Obligated MHSW;

(i) “Event” means a one-day or other collection event, operated by or on behalf of a municipality to collect, pack, transport, weigh, and process MHSW from the public and/or Exempt Small Quantity IC&I Generators;

(j) “Exempt Small Quantity IC&I Generator” or “Exempt SQG” means a business that is not required to submit a Generator Registration Report with respect to MHSW under subsection 18 (1) of Regulation 347, made under the Environmental Protection Act (Ontario), as amended from time to time;

(k) “FOB” means free on board;

- 3 -

(l) “Generator” means the final user who generates waste which will be reused, recycled or disposed;

(m) “Lab Pack Audit” means a lab pack study conducted by a third party, with optional observation by no more than two representatives of the Member Associations at their discretion, that follows a methodology designed by SO with input from Member Associations to achieve a high level of statistical confidence, the results of which, after providing an opportunity for representatives of the Member Associations to review them in confidence, are used to determine the proportionate share of each Commingled Material to be paid by SO as set out in this Agreement;

(n) “Industry Stewardship Organization” or “ISO” means a group of stewards working collectively who manage and fund the recycling of their own designated waste, instead of paying fees directly to an Industry Funding Organization to provide these services in accordance with Section 34 of the Waste Diversion Act.

(o) ‘Manifesting” means those activities associated with preparing a manifest for Post-Collection Services in accordance with Regulation 347 made under the Environmental Protection Act (Ontario);

(p) “Member Associations” has the meaning set out in Section 4.3;

(q) “MHSW Program Plan” means the current MHSW waste diversion program as it applies to Phase 1 materials approved by the Minister pursuant to section 26 of the Waste Diversion Act, 2002 (Ontario), and any amendments thereto and replacements thereof;

(r) “MHSW Services” means the Collection Services and/or Post-Collection Services provided by the Service Provider;

(s) “Minister” means the Minister of the Environment for the Province of Ontario;

(t) “Non-Commingled Materials” means the materials listed in Schedule E that must be packed separately for transportation as per the Packing Standards;

(u) “Obligated MHSW” means MHSW designated as Phase 1 in the Minister’s program request letter to Waste Diversion Ontario received on October 25, 2010 requesting a revised waste diversion program for Phase 1 MHSW and as may be further defined by the Minister from time to time;

(v) “Packing Standards” means the Waste Packing Protocols listed in Schedule “E” as amended by SO from time to time;

(w) “Post-Collection Services” means the management of Obligated MHSW after delivery of such MHSW to a transportation Service Provider FOB the Event or Depot location, including but not limited to transportation of Obligated MHSW materials from Events and Depots, consolidation, sorting, weighing, processing, recycling, and safe disposal of residual waste and other post-collection waste management activities;

- 4 -

(x) “Service Provider” means the Municipality and/or a commercial party that provides MHSW Services to SO or the Municipality as the case may be; and

(y) “SO Portal” means SO’s online system for uploading Claims Submissions.

2.0 MHSW Services: The Parties agree that Section 2.0 of the Agreement is deleted in its entirety and replaced with the following:

2.1. Schedule “A” to this Agreement sets out schematically three different service location types for the provision of MHSW Services by the Municipality to SO. These are as follows: (a) Depot

(b) Event

For the purpose of this Agreement, SO and the Municipality have agreed that the service location types marked with an “X" below will be the ones under which the Municipality will provide MHSW Services to SO. Depot Event Event (and transportation to Depot)

2.2. SO and Municipality may agree in writing at any time to change the service location type under which Municipality is providing MHSW Services to SO herein to the other service location type listed above and described in Schedule “A” hereto or to add another service location type, and this Agreement shall be deemed to have been amended accordingly.

2.3. The Parties recognize that there may be changes, including addition or removal of some materials, to the MHSW Program Plan. In the event of such changes, either Party may request appropriate amendments to this Agreement to reflect those changes, and the Parties will negotiate same in good faith, failing which the matter will be resolved by arbitration in accordance with the provisions hereof.

2.4. The Parties also understand that an Industry Stewardship Organization (ISO) may, at any time, be approved by the Board of Waste Diversion Ontario for one or more of the Obligated MHSW materials. In the event an ISO is approved by Waste Diversion Ontario (WDO), SO will have no responsibility to pay for MHSW Services provided by the Municipality with respect to the materials for which the ISO is then responsible on and after the effective date of such approval by WDO, unless SO provides written notice to the Municipality indicating that there will not be any changes to the then current MHSW Services within 30 days of the ISO approval date.

- 5 -

5.0 Title and Compliance with Laws: The Parties agree that Section 5.0 of the Agreement is deleted in its entirety and replaced with the following:

5.1. Title to all Obligated MHSW collected by Municipality at Events and Depots will belong to SO from the time of collection, and whether the Obligated MHSW is transported to the End Processor by the Municipality’s Service Providers or SO’s Service Providers. Any contract entered into between Municipality and an End Processor for Obligated MHSW must provide that title transfers to the End Processor in accordance with the Processor Standards in Schedule “E”, as amended from time to time.

(a) Notwithstanding the foregoing, if the Municipality operates a reuse program for any Obligated MHSW, title to the Obligated MHSW being reused shall transfer to municipality one (1) second prior to being given to the person or entity requesting it for reuse purposes.

(b) Notwithstanding the foregoing, in the event an ISO is approved by WDO, title to the Obligated MHSW with respect to the materials for which the ISO is then responsible will not belong to SO or SO’s Service Providers unless SO provides written notice to the Municipality indicating that there will not be any changes to the then current MHSW Services within 30 days of the ISO approval date.

5.2. In performing the MHSW Services hereunder, Municipality represents and warrants that it will at all times, and will require its service providers to, have all Certificates of Approval and any other approvals required and that it will otherwise comply at all times and require its service providers to comply, with all applicable laws, regulations and requirements of any governmental authority having jurisdiction, including without limitation the Ontario Ministry of the Environment and the Ontario Ministry of Labour.

Fact Sheet

Information for Municipalities on the Paint ISP

Product Care will assume Stewardship Ontario’s “supply chain” for paint. What does this mean for municipalities? Product Care will: 1. Assume Stewardship Ontario’s current contract with municipalities for paint. 2. Provide municipalities with at least the same compensation and rates for collection. 3. For the first time, provide municipalities with reimbursement for paint reuse. 4. Continue to collect all types of paints, coatings, stains and their containers currently collected PLUS compensate for the collection of more types of paint (e.g., compensate for all paint aerosols, not just architectural paint). 5. Continue municipal collection depots and events (with commitments for more depots and events). 6. Ensure municipalities will not have to report to both Stewardship Ontario and Product Care for paint collection. 7. Ensure municipalities can maintain their existing relationships with transporters. 8. Replicate, to the greatest extent possible, the reporting system currently used by municipalities (Product Care will host webinars during the transition period to provide municipalities with the information required to prepare for the transition). 9. Work with WDO, Stewardship Ontario and municipalities to ensure consistent and coordinated communication and outreach. 10. Use the same collection standards. 11. Assume Stewardship Ontario’s other supply chain contracts for processing of paint and for return- to-retail collection.

To speak to a representative of: • WDO - 1-888-936-5113 x232, or email [email protected] • PCA - Mark Kurschner, President, 1-877-592-2972 x201, or email [email protected] • Stewardship Ontario - 1-888-980-9549, or email [email protected] (please put ISP in the subject line).

Waste Diversion Ontario Waste Diversion Ontario (www.wdo.ca) is the not-for-profit industry-funded organization that oversees Ontario’s recycling programs for electrical and electronic equipment (“e-waste”), used tires, Blue Box material, and hazardous waste.

December 2014 [email protected]

4711 Yonge Street, Suite 1102, Toronto ON M2N 6K8, t: 416.226.5113, f: 416.226.1368, www.wdo.ca, @WDOntario

Report No: PW 2015-05 PUBLIC WORKS Council Date: January 28, 2015

To: Warden and Members of County Council

From: Director of Public Works

Maple Leaf Foods Inc. Over-Strength Wastewater Surcharge Agreement

RECOMMENDATION

1. That a By-law be raised to authorize the Chief Administrative Officer to sign a new Over-Strength Wastewater Surcharge Agreement with Maple Leaf Foods Inc. for their Thamesford facility.

REPORT HIGHLIGHT

. The purpose of the report is to obtain County Council approval, and authorize the Chief Administrative Officer to sign a new agreement with Maple Leaf Foods Inc. (Maple Leaf) to permit the discharge of over-strength wastewater from Maple Leaf’s Thamesford facility.

Implementation Points

The new Agreement replaces the existing Agreement from September 18, 1997 and amendments dated August 9, 2000.

The charges set out in the new Agreement with Maple Leaf Foods Inc. are based on flows and sewage strength consistent with the other County over-strength wastewater surcharge Agreements. The existing Agreement was based on cost sharing of yearly budgets for operating and capital expenditures.

The implementation date will result in Maple Leaf Foods Inc. receiving a rebate from previously invoiced charges under the existing Agreement retroactive to October 1, 2014.

Financial Impact

The revised charges paid by Maple Leaf are reflected in the 2015 and subsequent Budgets.

The Treasurer has reviewed this report and agrees with the financial impact information.

Page 1 of 4

Report No: PW 2015-05 PUBLIC WORKS Council Date: January 28, 2015

Risks/Implications

If there are any changes to the legislation for discharges from Oxford County Thamesford wastewater treatment plant (WWTP), Section 6.0 of the Agreement deals with changing the effluent limits.

Strategic Plan

1. i. A County that Works Together - Strengthen, diversify and broaden the economic/prosperity base through: - Strategies to retain and support existing businesses - Increased collaborative promotion of investment opportunities 3. iii. A County that Thinks Ahead and Wisely Shapes the Future - Apply social, financial and environmental sustainability lenses to significant decisions by assessing options in regard to: - Responsible environmental stewardship

DISCUSSION

Background

The Sewer-Use By-law (By-Law No. 2719-87) regulates the discharge of sewage into County Wastewater Treatment Plants and in doing so establishes acceptable parameters and strength allowances for such discharge. By-Law No. 2719-87, Section 3 allows the County to grant exemptions, typically for over-strength concentrations of allowable parameters, subject to the execution of an Agreement authorized by the By-law.

Maple Leaf owns and operates a food industry production plant in Thamesford. The concentration of BOD5, TSS, O&G, and TP in the plant effluent wastewater discharge is normally above the concentration limits set in the Oxford County By-Law No. 2719-87 (Sewer- Use By-law). A previous capital cost-recovery Agreement dated September 18, 1997 exists between the County and Maple Leaf Foods Inc. (formerly Cold Springs Farm Limited) for the purchase and operation of the Cold Springs WWTP. A subsequent amendment dated August 9, 2000 dissolved the operating arrangement that was included in the 1997 Agreement. The existing Agreement is based on cost sharing of operational and capital costs as set out in the yearly budgets. The cost sharing formula does not recognize the impacts of the construction of the sanitary collection system and subsequent connection of residential properties or the need to set rates and build reserves for future capital projects.

Page 2 of 4

Report No: PW 2015-05 PUBLIC WORKS Council Date: January 28, 2015

In recent years, the proportion of the wastewater volumes and loadings originating from municipal sources has increased in Thamesford due to the connection of residential properties once the sanitary sewer collection system was installed. Oxford County Public Works has held a number of discussions with Maple Leaf representatives over the last few years to revise/update the existing Agreement between the two parties so that the changing proportion of Maple Leaf’s contribution to the wastewater influent flows at the Oxford County Thamesford WWTP is more accurately reflected.

The new Agreement includes a rate-based methodology for calculating the monthly over- strength surcharge fee and other service charges (based on the rates established in the Oxford County Water and Wastewater Rates By-law, currently By-Law No. 5514-2013, in addition to including an Agreement for addressing any operational issues.

Comments

The proposed Agreement (Attachment 1) is consistent with the requirements of Oxford County By-Law No. 2719-87 and with the other over-strength wastewater surcharge Agreements that the County has in place with other industrial customers that do not meet the County Sewer-Use By-law.

Under the proposed Agreement, Maple Leaf Foods Inc. will pay normal wastewater fees as per the County Rates By-Law No. 5514-2013 and over-strength sewage charges based on their flows and sewage strength. The existing Agreement based charges to Maple Leaf Foods Inc. on a proportion of operational and capital costs. The proposed funding arrangement allows the County to plan for reserves for this sewage system to deal with planned maintenance and Plant upgrades.

Upon signing of the new rate-based Agreement (dated October 1, 2014), the previous capital cost-recovery Agreement (dated September 18, 1997, as amended August 9, 2000) between the two parties will be dissolved and the new rate-based over-strength wastewater surcharge Agreement will be effective for a period of ten years from the date of the new Agreement (dated October 1, 2014), at which time it may be renewed, altered, or dissolved as negotiated between the two parties.

Any invoices previously issued to Maple Leaf from October 1, 2014, calculated based on the capital cost-recovery method will be reconciled to account for the difference in charges between the old capital cost-recovery amount and the new rate-based charge.

Page 3 of 4

Report No: PW 2015-05 PUBLIC WORKS Council Date: January 28, 2015

Conclusions

It is recommended that County Council authorize the Chief Administrative Officer to sign the attached over-strength wastewater surcharge Agreement with Maple Leaf Foods Inc.

SIGNATURE

Report Author:

Original signed by:

Shahab Shafai, M.Sc., P.Eng. Manager of Environmental Services

Departmental Approval:

Original signed by:

Robert Walton, P.Eng. Director of Public Works

Approved for submission:

Original signed by:

Peter M. Crockett, P.Eng. Chief Administrative Officer

ATTACHMENT

Attachment 1: Maple Leaf Foods Inc. - Over-Strength Wastewater Surcharge Agreement

Page 4 of 4 Attachment 1 to PW 2015-05 January 28, 2015 This agreement in duplicate this day of , 2015

BETWEEN:

COUNTY OF OXFORD hereinafter called “the County”

OF THE FIRST PART and

MAPLE LEAF FOODS INC. hereinafter called the “Company”

OF THE SECOND PART

Agreement Effective Date:

This Agreement is effective: October 1st, 2014.

WHEREAS the County enacted By-law No. 2719-87 on the 12th day of August, 1987, being a by-law to regulate the discharge of sewage into County Sewage Works (the “County Sewer Use By-law); and

WHEREAS the said By-law prohibits the discharge of industrial sewage containing certain substances in quantities in excess of the limits set by the By-law but provides that the County may permit the discharge of industrial waste which would otherwise be prohibited by the By-law to an extent fixed by agreement with the County under such conditions with respect to payment or otherwise necessary to compensate for any additional costs of treatment; and

WHEREAS the Company carries on various industrial activities within the County at premises known as 149 Brock St., Thamesford, Ontario (the “Subject Property”) which activities produces a total combined sewage discharge (the “Sewage Discharge”) in which the quantity of one or more of the Suspended Solids (hereinafter referred to as Total Suspended Solids or TSS), 5-day Biochemical Oxygen Demand (hereinafter referred to as 5-day BOD), Oil and Grease (hereinafter referred to as O&G), and total phosphorus (hereinafter referred to as TP) is above the limit set in By-law No. 2719-87; and

WHEREAS sewage discharge from the Subject Property is currently governed by an Over-strength Agreement made pursuant to Section 3 of the County Sewer Use By-law between the County and Cold Springs Farm Limited, dated September 18, 1997, as amended August 9, 2000 (the “Previous Agreement”); and

WHEREAS a new Over-strength Agreement is required in order to reflect the current operating conditions which have changed since the Previous Agreement was executed.

NOW THEREFORE this indenture witnesseth that the parties hereto mutually covenant and agree as follows:

1. The Previous Agreement is dissolved, and no longer binding as between the County and the Company (hereinafter, collectively, the “parties”).

1.2. This Over-strength Agreement (the “Agreement”) is effective for a term of ten years from the date of execution of the Agreement, at which time it may be renewed, altered or dissolved as negotiated between the parties, unless terminated in accordance with clause 3 of this Agreement.

1.3. After the expiration of such ten-year term, unless terminated in accordance with clause 3 of this Agreement, this Agreement shall continue to be in full force and effect as is, on a month to month basis, until such time as the parties agree to the renewal, alteration or dissolution of the Agreement pursuant to clause 2 of this Agreement.

Agreement|County of Oxford and Maple Leaf Foods Inc.|Page 1 of 6

2. Over-strength Agreement

2.1 The quantity of Sewage Discharge by the Company from its premises shall be determined by the County using the existing metering and sampling facilities located at the Thamesford Wastewater Treatment Plant (“WWTP”). The Company agrees that if there are malfunctions of the metering equipment, the County, acting reasonably, may estimate the quantity of sewage for the purposes of calculating the fee based on potable water readings. Subject to approval of Company, acting reasonably, the County shall develop procedures, consistent with good engineering practice, for the inspection and calibration of monitoring equipment, and shall make records available to the Company, upon request.

2.2 The Company shall be solely responsible for monthly payment to the County to cover all costs associated with Sewage Discharge from the Subject Property (“Total Monthly Wastewater Invoice”) which payment shall include a fee calculated based on the sanitary sewage rates established in the Oxford County Water and Wastewater Rates By-law (currently By-law No. 5514-2013), as amended from time to time, plus a surcharge fee for over-strength sewage (“Over-strength Discharge Fee”) as calculated in accordance with section 4 of this Agreement. Any cost recovery with respect to the payment of the Total Monthly Wastewater Invoice from other business units located at the Company’s business complex is the sole responsibility of the Company.

2.3 In calculating the Total Monthly Wastewater Invoice, the wastewater meter at the WWTP shall be used as the measure of total Sewage Discharge from the Company.

2.4 During the term of this agreement only, the quality of the Sewage Discharge from the Subject Property to the sanitary sewer or combined sewer system may exceed the limit set by the By-law with respect to the concentration of Total Suspended Solids, 5-day BOD, O&G, and TP provided that the Company maintain and utilize its pre-treatment system, currently comprising of a wastewater equalization tank and a dissolved air flotation unit, or any replacement or substitution equipment therefore, in good operating condition and that they shall not exceed the following limits at any time:

Parameter a) 5-day BOD strength of 700 milligrams per litre and maximum total loading not to exceed 1175 kilograms per day on a monthly average of all sample results. No single sample shall exceed 1000 milligrams per litre.

Parameter b) TOTAL SUSPENDED SOLIDS strength of 500 milligrams per litre and maximum total loading not to exceed 840 kilograms per day on a monthly average of all sample results. No single sample shall exceed 700 milligrams per litre.

Parameter c) O&G strength of 110 milligrams per litre and maximum total loading not to exceed 185 kilograms per day on a monthly average of all sample results. No single sample shall exceed 150 milligrams per litre.

Parameter d) TP strength of 15 milligrams per litre and maximum total loading not to exceed 25 kilogram per day on a monthly average of all sample results. No single sample shall exceed 20 milligrams per litre.

The Sewage Discharge by the Company from the Subject Property containing Total Suspended Solids, 5-day BOD, O&G, and TP in excess of the limits set out in Section 2.4 of this Agreement shall constitute a contravention of this Agreement and thus a contravention of the County Sewer Use By-law.

2.5 The allowance above the By-law limits of Total Suspended Solids of 350 mg/L, 5-day BOD of 300 mg/L, O&G of 100 mg/L, and TP of 10 mg/L shall be subject to a surcharge and this surcharge shall be calculated according to Section 4 of this Agreement.

Agreement|County of Oxford and Maple Leaf Foods Inc.|Page 2 of 6

3. Termination

3.1 This Agreement may be terminated by the Company, at its sole and absolute discretion, notwithstanding any other term, condition or covenant in this Agreement, by providing sixty (60) days prior written notice sent by registered mail to the County. The Company’s termination rights pursuant to this clause shall be absolute and unconditional.

3.2. This Agreement may be terminated by the County notwithstanding any other term, condition or covenant in this Agreement, by providing sixty days (60) prior written notice (“Termination Notice Period”) sent by registered mail to the Company if the County, acting reasonably and based on credible substantiating evidence, determines that one or more of the following conditions are met: a) The sewage from the Subject Property is causing a health or safety hazard to a sewage works employee; or b) The sewage from the Subject Property is causing damage to the sewers, significantly increasing their maintenance costs or causing a dangerous condition; or c) The sewage from the Subject Property is causing material damage to the sewage treatment process or causing a dangerous condition in the treatment works; or d) The sewage from the Subject Property is causing the biosolids from the County sewage works to fail to meet criteria relating to contaminants for spreading the biosolids on agricultural lands under any regulation made under the Nutrient Management Act or under the Environmental Protection Act (Ontario) or any other relevant regulation or any direction provided by an officer of the Ministry of the Environment or any other relevant regulatory agency; or e) The sewage from the Subject Property is causing the County sewage works effluent to contravene any requirement by or under the Ontario Water Resources Act or the Environmental Protection Act (Ontario) or any other relevant regulation or any direction provided by an officer of the Ministry of the Environment or any other relevant regulatory agency; or f) The Sewage Discharge from the Subject Property is causing a hazard to any person, animal, property or vegetation; or g) The Sewage Discharge from the Subject Property is contrary to By-law No. 2719-87 in any way other than as provided herein.

3.2.1 The notice to the Company triggering of the termination clause set out section 3.2 above, shall be accompanied by the substantiating information upon which the County determined that one or more of the conditions set out in section 3.2 (“Termination Conditions”) are met.

3.2.2 Should the Company disagree with the County’s determination that one or more of the Termination Conditions are met, the Company shall provide written notice of this disagreement within fifteen days of receiving the written Notice failing which this Agreement shall be terminated upon expiry of the Notice Termination Period (“Notice Expiry Date”) unless, within the Notice Expiry Period, the Termination Condition or Conditions specified in the notice have been rectified or otherwise resolved to the County’s satisfaction, acting reasonably, or the Company has, to the County’s satisfaction, acting reasonably commenced steps, and is acting diligently and continuously, to rectify the Termination Condition or Conditions.

3.2.3 Should the Company provide notice of disagreement pursuant to section 3.2.2 above, the parties agree to make good faith efforts to resolve the disagreement through consultative discussions. If the disagreement is not resolved by the Notice Expiry Date, and no agreement has been reached to extend the Notice Expiry Date, this Agreement shall terminate on the Notice Expiry Date.

3.3. THIS AGREEMENT may be suspended by the County at any time where the County has determined that the continued discharge of Sewage Discharge from the Subject Property in accordance with this Agreement will create an immediate threat or danger to any person, property, plant or animal life, or waters (“Emergency Situation”). This suspension shall continue until such time as the Emergency Situation no longer exists, to the County’s satisfaction.

3.4. In the event of termination of this Agreement by either party, effective immediately upon termination, the Company shall ensure full compliance with all

Agreement|County of Oxford and Maple Leaf Foods Inc.|Page 3 of 6

provisions, limits and standards set out in the County Sewer Use By-law for all Sewage Discharge from the Subject Property.

4. Over-strength Discharge Fee

4.1 The Company hereby covenants and agrees to pay the County a fee for over- strength sewage. The said fee, as determined by the County, shall become due and paid monthly. The fee payable shall be based on the following formula:

I = (A + B) x G + C

Where: I = Total Monthly Wastewater Invoice to Company A = Monthly Over-strength Surcharge Fee B = Monthly Other Services Charge C = Monthly Wastewater Volumetric Charge G = General costs associated with system, multiplier set at 1.1

Monthly Over-strength Surcharge Fee

A = (D x E x F (Parameter a)) + (D x E x F (Parameter b)) + (D x E x F (Parameter c)) + (D x E x F (Parameter d)) + H + J

Where: D = Flow (1000 m³) by flowmeter (in Section 2.3) for period or by estimate if needed E = Monthly Average Composite Sampling Results in mg/L less By-law Limit* F = Rate per kg (currently $1.65/kg) ** H = Hourly Labour Rate as determined by County x three hours x the number of samples in period J = Cost of analysis as determined by County x the number of samples (minimum bi-weekly)

Monthly Other Services Charge

B = Receiving Dissolved Air Flotation skimmings and sediments to storage for mixing and land application

* For the purposes of determining the strength, the principle of averaging is accepted, and analysis will be conducted on composite sewage samples, each collected on a time - or flow - proportional basis, over a period of not less than 24-hours. Samples will be collected at least biweekly (once every two weeks) to determine the strengths and loadings discussed in this agreement unless mutually agreed otherwise ** Rate per kg will be based on the rate established in the Oxford County Water and Wastewater Rates By-law (currently By-law No. 5514-2013), as amended from time to time.

Monthly Volumetric charge

C = (Q x R) + T Q = Total Monthly Flow from Company in m3 R = Volumetric Charge as per Oxford County Water & Wastewater Rates By-law No. 5514-2013, or as amended T = Fixed Service Charge for 6 inch connection for Thamesford as per Oxford County Water & Wastewater Rates By-law No. 5514-2013, or as amended

5. The Company’s Guaranteed Share of System Capacity

5.1 Except as hereinafter provided, the County will reserve sufficient capacity in the treatment system to guarantee that the Company may continue to discharge sewage to the limit of 1678 m3/d from the date of signing of this Agreement.

5.2 As to the remaining capacity, the County reserves the right to allocate that capacity and give priority to existing and future development in the Village of Thamesford, but the County is prepared to allot all or part of the unused capacity to the Company so long as such excess capacity is not required by the County.

Agreement|County of Oxford and Maple Leaf Foods Inc.|Page 4 of 6

This allocation of capacity will require an amendment to this agreement to outline the terms of the allocation.

5.3 The Company agrees to pay its pro-rata share of the capital costs of future expansion/replacement/upgrade to the sewage works when such capital works are required to provide additional capacity. Provided that any such upgrade shall be subject to reasonable consultation with the Company. The Company’s pro- rata share of the capital cost will be limited solely to the proportion of additional hydraulic capacity required by the Company for its operations.

5.4 This Agreement applies solely to demands placed on the County’s Sewage Works by existing uses on the Subject Property. Sanitary servicing requirements related to any future uses or expansion of existing uses on the Subject Property, and associated demands on County Sewage Works, shall be subject to future approvals, agreements and/or development charges.

6. In the event that Ministry of the Environment imposes more stringent system effluent criteria than those established under the current Environmental Compliance Approval governing the WWTP (“revised effluent criteria”), the County reserves the right to establish more restrictive discharge limits for the Sewage Discharge from the Subject Property as necessary to ensure compliance with revised effluent criteria, provided that the County shall immediately notify the Company of any plans, warnings, initiatives actions or notices by the Ministry of the Environment and shall keep the Company fully informed of all such reduction events and activities.

7. The Company shall at all times ensure that the maximum peak flow rate from the Subject Property does not exceed 30 L/s or 475 USgpm, or such lower rate as the County may, from time to time advise as necessary in order to ensure that the sewage flow rate from the Subject Property does not adversely affect the operations of WWTP.

8. Subject to amounts disputed in good faith by written notice with reasons to the County, any overdue fees or charges under this agreement will be charged interest in accordance with the County of Oxford Receivable Management Policy Number 6.3. Collection of any overdue accounts under this agreement will follow the prescribed method under Appendix A of said policy. Subject to amounts disputed in good faith by written notice with reasons to the County, the County may terminate this Agreement at its option, without notice, if the company fails for more than three months to pay an overdue account. Termination shall not relieve the Company from its liability to make such payment due prior to termination.

9. Operational Issues

9.1 The Company agrees that subject to force majeure, while this Agreement is in force, it will continue to provide hydro-electrical power to the County, as at present until a separate new service is available from the energy provider, at which time the County shall arrange and pay for its own hydro-electric power supply.

9.2 The solids from the Company’s Dissolved Air Flotation tank will be mixed with the plant Biosolids exclusively at the discretion of the WWTP operations and their ability to accept this waste. The cost of this disposal will be invoiced separately based on the County’s costs of disposal and handling and subject to the operations decision on the quantity, if any, that can be accommodated. All such disposals will be manifested at the plant by the driver.

9.3 The County agrees to provide the Company seventy-two (72) hours notice, where possible, of planned maintenance operations at the WWTP that may affect the Company’s production schedule. The County will endeavour to consult with the Company and carry out planned maintenance at a time that will not adversely affect the Company’s processing operation. However, it is recognized by the Company that emergency maintenance must be carried out immediately by the County as required.

Agreement|County of Oxford and Maple Leaf Foods Inc.|Page 5 of 6

10. Spill Control and Pollution Prevention Planning

10.1 The Company will prepare and submit to the County within 3 months of full execution of this Agreement, a Spill Control and Pollution Prevention Plan (“the Plan”). The Plan will identify the steps that the Company will take to ensure that the flow and loading limits specified in this Agreement are met on a consistent basis. The Plan will also identify the steps that the Company will take to minimize the occurrence of spills or other incidents which will adversely affect the sewage works.

10.2 The Company will report annually to the County regarding the status of the Plan. This report shall summarize any actions taken to reduce sewage loadings and the success of those actions.

10.3 In the event of an overload condition caused by the Company or maintenance or operational problems in the sewage works caused by the Company or in the event of contravention of the limits established in this Agreement or any other applicable provisions of the Sewer Use By-law, the County may notify and require the Company to correct the situation within a timeframe established by the County, or to reduce the discharge to the sanitary sewer.

10.4 In the unanticipated event that the County is unable to comply with the discharge limits specified in its Environmental Compliance Approval for the WWTP, the County may require the Company to reduce its loadings to the sanitary sewer to loadings less than those specified in Paragraph 2 of this Agreement or take other steps deemed necessary to ensure compliance with the limits specified in the Environmental Compliance Approval.

11. Miscellaneous

11.1. If any provision of this Agreement is for any reason held by the Courts to be invalid, all remaining provisions shall remain in full force and effect.

11.2 This Agreement shall endure to the benefit of, and be binding upon the heirs, executors, administrators, successors, and assignees of the parties hereto For greater certainty it is acknowledged and agreed that this Agreement may be assigned by the Company, in its sole discretion and upon such assignment the Company shall be released from future liabilities arising pursuant to this Agreement after such assignment, provided that such future Assignee has confirmed in writing, to the satisfaction of the County, that this Agreement is fully binding upon it.

11.3. Except as specifically provided in THIS AGREEMENT, the Company is in no way relieved of its obligation to fully comply with the provisions of the County Sewer Use By-law.

11.4 Insofar as the provisions of THIS AGREEMENT may conflict with the provisions of the County Sewer Use By-law, the provisions of this agreement shall prevail.

11.5 THIS AGREEMENT shall supersede any and all earlier agreements for the discharge of sanitary sewage from the Company.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF the parties hereto have hereunto affixed their Corporate Seals attested to by the hands of their respective proper officers in that behalf duly authorized.

(Seal) Peter M. Crockett, P.Eng. Chief Administrative Officer, County of Oxford

(Seal) Rocco Cappuccitti, Sr. VP and Corporate Secretary Maple Leaf Foods Inc.

Ben Brooks, Sr. VP & General Manager, Poultry Maple Leaf Foods Inc.

Agreement|County of Oxford and Maple Leaf Foods Inc.|Page 6 of 6

Report No: HS 2015-01 HUMAN SERVICES Council Date: January 28, 2015

To: Warden and Members of County Council

From: Director, Human Services

2014/2015 Investment in Affordable Housing Program Extension

RECOMMENDATIONS

2. And further, that the Chief Administrative Officer and the Director of Human Services be authorized to execute all necessary documentation and agreements related thereto.

REPORT HIGHLIGHTS

. This report seeks Council approval to award the 2014/2015 Investment in Affordable Housing RFP for the purpose of developing 20 new affordable housing units in Oxford County.

. Approval will satisfy the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing (MMAH) requirement that 2014/2015 projects be approved prior to January 31, 2015.

Financial Impact

The 2014/2015 allocation to Oxford County for the Investment in Affordable Housing (IAH) Program is $483,900 and was included in the approved 2015 Business Plan and Budget.

IAH funding allocations expected over each of the next five years are outlined in Table 1. These funds are cost shared on a 50/50 basis between the Government of Canada and the Province of Ontario.

Page 1 of 4

Report No: HS 2015-01 HUMAN SERVICES Council Date: January 28, 2015

Table 1 Provincial / Federal Contribution

Funding 2014/2015 2015/2016 2016/2017 2017/2018 2018/2019 2019/2020 Year Expected $483,900 $1,032,400 $1,031,800 $1,031,800 $1,028,600 $490,300 Allocation

Additionally, $500,000 was included within the approved 2015 Human Services Business Plan and Budget for use as a contribution towards the development of affordable housing. These funds are not subject to provincial oversight, however will be identified in the Contribution Agreement and be registered on title as security.

The Treasurer has reviewed this report and agrees with the financial impact information.

Risks/Implications

The 2014/2015 allocation must be awarded to a “shovel ready affordable housing project” by January 31, 2015 to secure the funding through the IAH Program.

With any housing development there are inherent risks associated with construction and attaining relevant approvals. Any funds committed will be registered on title to ensure that the provisions of the Contribution Agreement are complied with.

Strategic Plan

1. ii. A County that Works Together – Enhance the quality of life for all of our citizens by: - Maintaining and strengthening core infrastructure - Ensuring a range of housing options - Implementing a healthy community strategy - Adapting programs, services and facilities to reflect evolving community needs

Page 2 of 4

Report No: HS 2015-01 HUMAN SERVICES Council Date: January 28, 2015

DISCUSSION

Background

On December 8, 2014 a Request for Proposals (RFP) was issued relative to the creation of affordable housing in Oxford County. The RFP closed on January 14, 2015 with twelve respondents submitting proposals. The procurement process is consistent with the provisions of the County of Oxford Purchasing Policy.

Response to the Request for Proposals was anticipated to be strong and speaks to the willingness of various parties to develop affordable housing. The review of the Request for Proposals was based on the following criteria to ensure compliance with the IAH Program Guidelines: . Project Location vs Demand; . Per Unit Cost; . Planning Approvals; . Construction Readiness; and . Review of Financial Forecast.

Twelve proposals were received in response to the RFP. They are identified in Attachment 1.

Comments

As mentioned there was a strong response to the Request for Proposals. It is clearly evident that the request for funding far exceeds the available funds. Staff is cognizant of the fact that many proponents assume a significant financial risk in developing proposals to the “shovel ready” requirement. With that in mind it is important to consider that there will be additional allocations made as early as April 8, 2015 and annually for the following four years. Staff expect to re-issue the request for proposals for the next round of funding on or about February 1, 2015.

The project recommended in this report for approval is considered to be “shovel ready”.

The draft 10 Year Housing and Homelessness Plan was presented to County Council via a workshop in early 2014. Following the presentation the plan was submitted to the Ministry for review and comment. The comments were incorporated into the plan and a final version will be presented for Council consideration and approval.

The issue of affordable housing and the lack there of, is a concern that is discussed at many local round tables. The 10 Year Housing Plan speaks to the full continuum of housing options and not just the creation of affordable housing. However this report is exclusive to the federal / provincial funds that can be applied to the creation of new supply.

It is important to recognize that “affordable” housing is a term generally used with respect to rents that are set at 80% of market rent. These types of developments have no impact on the hundreds of applicants waiting for subsidized housing. Those persons require rental levels that are set at 30% of their monthly income.

Page 3 of 4

Report No: HS 2015-01 HUMAN SERVICES Council Date: January 28, 2015

A range of housing in terms of affordability is a requirement of the Provincial Policy Statement (PPS)

1.4.3 Planning authorities shall provide for an appropriate range and mix of housing types and densities to meet projected requirements of current and future residents of the regional market area by: a) Establishing and implementing minimum targets for the provision of housing which is affordable to low and moderate income households. However, where planning is conducted by an upper-tier municipality, the upper-tier municipality in consultation with the lower-tier municipalities may identify a higher target(s) which shall represent the minimum target(s) for these lower-tier municipalities.

PPS policy 4.3 is one tool that municipalities may utilize to increase the supply of housing that is affordable. Additionally, there are provisions in the Municipal Act that allow municipalities to stimulate development via tax relief and/or the waiving of certain fees such as development charges. Regardless of policy established by the Province of Ontario, it remains a municipal responsibility to ensure a range of affordability relative to housing.

Conclusions

Notice of Provincial and Federal funding for the development of affordable housing was received by the County on December 19, 2014. With an expectation that the 2014/2015 projects be approved by January 31, 2015 there has been a compressed RFP schedule and approval process implemented. Of the twelve proposals submitted some are more “shovel ready” than others but all projects meet the basic requirements of the RFP. Projects not funded in 2015 will be eligible for consideration of Year 2 – 6 allocations.

SIGNATURE

Departmental Approval:

Original signed by

Paul Beaton Director, Human Services

Approved for submission:

Original signed by Peter M. Crockett, P.Eng. Chief Administrative Officer

ATTACHMENTS

Attachment 1: RFP Respondents Attachment 2: Proposal Summary

Page 4 of 4

Attachment No. 1 Report No. HS 2015-01 28-Jan-15

Proponent Project Adress UnitsCost Per Total Construction Type Shovel Ready

2348462 Ontario Ltd 249 Charles Street W., Ingersoll, ON 12 $70,000 $840,000 Construction No Curtis Wilcox 41 Broadway Street, Tillsonburg, ON 13 $25,300 $328,900 Retrofit Yes Dave & Kim Piggott 154978 15th Line, Thamesford, ON 15 $59,000 $885,000 Retrofit No Filtec Screens Inc 34 Ridell Street, Woodstock, On 20 $52,500 $1,050,000 Retrofit Yes G. Hogg Construction Ltd 190 Brock Street, Thamesford, ON 4 $68,000 $272,000 Retrofit Yes Indwell 18 Vansittart Avenue, Woodstock, ON 26 $70,000 $1,820,000 Construction Yes Innerkip Seniors Apartments Inc 30 Balsam Street, Innerkip, ON 16 $43,000 $688,000 Construction Yes Langlois Developments 243 & 247 Thames Street N., Ingersoll, ON 8 $61,625 $493,000 Construction No Reeves Realty 161 Victoria Street, Ingersoll, ON 4 $65,000 $260,000 Construction Yes Richard McIntosh 115 Commissioner Street, Embro, ON 5 $70,000 $350,000 Construction No Tillsonburg Properties for Community Living 136 Concession Sreet E., Tillsonburg, ON 14 $70,000 $980,000 Construction No Town of Tillsonburg Non-Profit Housing Corp 31 Maple Lane, Tillsonburg, ON 12 $20,000 $240,000 Construction No

Total 149 $8,206,900 Attachment # 2

Report No: HS 2015-01 HUMAN SERVICES Council Date: January 28, 2015

Project Summary:

2348462 Ontario Ltd 249 Charles Street West, Ingersoll – Funding Request $840,000

New construction of 12 units homes for persons with a disability. Proponent has participated in the program before and is prepared to construct 6 one bedroom and 6 two bedroom units at a funding rate of $70,000 per unit. Project will require some planning approvals prior to commencement. Discussions with planning staff indicate the project is viable and planning approvals could be in place by late spring.

Curtis Wilcox, 41 Broadway Street, Tillsonburg – Funding Request $328,900

Retrofit of 41 Broadway Street building including 11 additional units and the renovation of 2 existing units. Appropriate zoning is in place and project could commence within 60days. Proponent owns and manages over 229 units throughout Southwestern Ontario.

Dave and Kim Piggott, 154978 15th Line, Thamesford - Funding Request $ $885,000

Conversion of the former St Joseph’s Catholic School to 15 units of affordable senior housing and an additional 5 units of market rent. School has been listed for sale and proponent is prepared to purchase conditional on funding allocation. Property would require re zoning and may be appropriate for future funding allocations as it will not meet the Year 1 timeline however will however adhere to the timeline of Years 2 – 6.

Filtrec Screens Inc. 34 Riddell Street, Woodstock – Funding Request $1,050,000

Conversion of Central United Church to 20 affordable units and 7 market units. Project meets all criteria as listed in the RFP and further meets the timelines relative to Year 1 funding. Proponent purchased the property specifically for the development of multi residential housing. Investment to date is in excess of $500,000 and total construction cost are estimated to be $2.1 million.

G. Hogg Construction Ltd – 190 Brock Street Thamesford – Funding Request $272,000

Conversion of the former Thamesford Legion to 4 one bedroom units. Proponent is currently a multi residential landlord and has satisfied the requirements of the Year 1 funding timeline. Proponent is prepared to construct all units to be barrier free and property may accommodate two further units at a later date.

Innerkip Seniors Apartments Inc – 30 Balsam Street, Innerkip – Funding Request $688,000

Proposing to construct 16 unit addition to its existing 29 unit apartment building. There would be 12 one bedroom and four two bedroom units. This proposal meets the criteria for Year 1 funding and will leverage the existing asset to underwrite a portion of the construction cost. Innerkip Seniors Apartments is currently a provider of social housing as well and receives annual subsidy from the County of Oxford. This development will ensure that the project remains in the portfolio for an additional 20 years as their current operating agreement is set to expire in 2017.

Langlois Developments – 243 & 247 Thames Street North Ingersoll – Funding Request $493,000

Proposing to construct a 13 unit apartment building where 8 units will be affordable and 5 will be at market rent. Project could commence by June 2015 therefore Year 2 funding consideration would be appropriate.

Reeves Realty / B.W. Conn Homes Ltd. – 161 Victoria St. Ingersoll – Funding Request $260,000

Construction of 4 semi detached 2 bedroom units with a proposed start date of February 15th. Proponents have participated in the affordable housing program in the past and maintain two affordable housing developments in Ingersoll.

Richard McIntosh, 115 Commissioner St. Embro – Funding Request $350,000

Proposing to construct 4 two bedroom units and 1 one bedroom unit geared towards senior living. Property will require re zoning and preliminary planning opinion is favourable.

Indwell, 18 Vansittart Ave, Woodstock - Funding Request $1,820,000

Construction of 26 one bedroom units as Phase 2 of the Harvey Woods Lofts project. The project is development ready with zoning and site plan approval in place. This project will not meet the timeline for Year 1 approval as funding sources will not be secured prior to January 31, 2015. Consideration will be given for Year 2 – 6 funding years.

Tillsonburg Properties for Community Living 136 Concesion St. Tillsonburg – Funding Request $980,000

Construction of a 40 unit apartment building on Concession Street in Tillsonburg. Record of Site Condition has not been received by the proponent and constructionis not scheduled to commence until March 2016. This will preclude this project from Year 1 funding.

Town of Tillsonburg Non-Profit Housing, 31 Maple Lane Tillsonburg – Funding Request $240,000

Site plan approval and zoning requirements will need to be satisfied before this project is funded. The property is currently a social housing provider and receives annual funding from the County of Oxford.

Report No: CAO 2015-03 CAO/CLERK Council Date: January 28, 2015

To: Warden and Members of County Council

From: Chief Administrative Officer

Services That Work - Wave 1 Findings Report

RECOMMENDATIONS

REPORT HIGHLIGHTS

. This report presents the results of the Services That Work (STW) - Wave 1 review of the 24 services delivered organizationally by, Archives, Library, Human Services, and Public Health and Emergency Services.

. For each group of services the Wave 1 analysis included: • Service profiles and insights • Service financial allocations and insights • Results Based Accountability performance indicators • Service improvement opportunities (SIO)

. Detailed findings and recommendations are presented in the “County of Oxford Services That Work Wave 1 Findings Report”, dated January 6, 2015 (Attachment 1) prepared by Munro Strategic Perspective.

Implementation Points

Senior Management sponsored staff teams have been established to conduct further analysis of each Wave 1 SIO. This step is necessary to compile information critical to final decision-making and implementation planning. Each team will submit their findings to the Senior Management Team, who will then recommend a plan of action to Council for each SIO. To complement this stage of analysis and further inform decision making, staff will undertake stakeholder consultation campaigns appropriate for key stakeholders of each SIO.

Page 1 of 4

Report No: CAO 2015-03 CAO/CLERK Council Date: January 28, 2015

Financial Impact

There is no financial impact associated with the recommendations contained in this report.

The identified SIOs offer both potential service delivery savings opportunities and service improvement opportunities with associated costs. Further analysis is required in order to formulate more specific results-based recommendations for future consideration of Council.

The Treasurer has reviewed this report and agrees with the financial impact information.

Risks/Implications

There are no risks that could result from accepting the proposed recommendations.

Strategic Plan

5. ii. A County that Performs and Delivers Results - Deliver exceptional services by: - Regularly reviewing service level standards to assess potential for improved access to services / amenities - Conducting regular service reviews to ensure delivery effectiveness and efficiency - Developing and tracking key performance indicators against goals and efficiency - Identify best practices and appropriate benchmarking

DISCUSSION

Background

The Woodingford Lodge Service Review was initiated in 2013. Council adopted the recommendations of this review at is meeting on March 26, 2014.

The approved 2014 Business Plan and Budget included a proposal to undertake a service delivery review program beginning in 2014. The systematic review of all services over a three- year period was intended to identify efficiencies, effectiveness and community impact of existing services and explore service improvement opportunities for employing: . innovation . coordination and integration . alternative service delivery . best practices . appropriate benchmark strategies.

Page 2 of 4

Report No: CAO 2015-03 CAO/CLERK Council Date: January 28, 2015

An Ad Hoc Committee of Council was struck in January 2014 to provide oversight and input into the service delivery review program for the remainder of the 2010-2014 term of Council.

Council received an interim report (CAO 2014-11) at its meeting on July 9, 2014. At its meeting on December 10, 2014 Council appointed Deputy Warden Comiskey and Councillors Wearn, Molnar, Birtch and McKay to the Services That Work Ad Hoc Committee for the current term of Council.

Comments

The Wave 1 Findings Report

After identifying the inventory of services delivered by Oxford County, the Consultant, Munro Strategic Perspective, conducted an in-depth review of the Wave 1 services (Archives, Human Services, Library, Public Health and Emergency Services).

The review included: . Management interviews . Service performance analysis using the Results Based Accountability framework . Service-based financial allocation . Day-in-the-life visits . Benchmarking against peer municipalities . Review of legislation . Review of key documents, including budgets, audits, service standards, and Council reports

Using all of the information gathered over the course of the Wave 1 analysis, the Consultant has recommended several service improvement opportunities. The body of work is summarized in the “County of Oxford Services That Work Wave 1 Findings Report”, dated January 6, 2015 (Attachment 1).

Stakeholder Consultation

The Strategic Communication and Engagement team has begun planning a master engagement plan which will strategically engage the key stakeholders of Wave 1 services. Campaigns may range from informal conversations with staff to meetings with community partners.

The goal of stakeholder consultation will be designed to gauge the value of the associated services and the value/impact of the proposed SIO changes as input into the final analysis phase of the work.

Page 3 of 4

Report No: CAO 2015-03 CAO/CLERK Council Date: January 28, 2015

SIO Analysis

Senior Management Team sponsors and staff teams comprised from each of the departments involved in the Wave 1 group of services have begun further analyses of each SIO. Analysis will assess each SIO within the following criteria: risk, resources, timeline, cost, community impact, and strategic alignment. The results of this analysis, along with the stakeholder consultation input, will provide appropriate information for informed decision making.

The results will be presented to the Senior Management Team. Upon review, the results and appropriate recommendations for each SIO will be presented to Council for consideration and approval.

Conclusions

The “County of Oxford Services That Work Wave 1 Findings Report” received from Munro Strategic Perspective is the culmination of the work done in the first review phase of the Services That Work project. Staff believe the identified SIOs have merit and warrant further review prior to making detailed recommendations to Council. To inform the analysis, staff further recommends appropriate engagement with key stakeholders, including staff and community partners.

SIGNATURE

Author:

Original signed by Sarah Koopmans Project Manager

Approved for submission:

Original signed by Peter M. Crockett, P.Eng. Chief Administrative Officer

ATTACHMENT

Attachment No. 1: County of Oxford Services That Work Wave 1 Findings Report, dated January 6, 2015, prepared by Munro Strategic Perspective

Page 4 of 4

County of Oxford Services that Work Wave 1 Findings Report January 6, 2015

Table of Contents

Executive Summary ...... 4 Introduction ...... 7 Method and approach ...... 7 Service Inventory ...... 7 Service Financial Allocations ...... 8 Results Based Accountability™ Performance Indicators ...... 9 Service Analysis ...... 10 Service Improvement Opportunities ...... 11 Stakeholder Engagement ...... 11 Services owned by Human Services ...... 13 Service Profiles and Insights ...... 13 Service Profiles ...... 14 Service Financial Allocations ...... 15 Financial Allocations Insights: ...... 15 Results Based Accountability™ Performance Indicators ...... 17 Child Care Subsidy KPI Insights ...... 17 Community Capacity KPI Insights ...... 18 Financial Assistance KPI Highlights ...... 19 Shelter (Direct Delivered) and Shelter (Subsidy) KPI Highlights ...... 21 Service Improvement Opportunities ...... 23 Services owned by Public Health and Emergency Services ...... 24 Service Profiles and Insights ...... 24 Service Profiles ...... 25 Service Financial Allocations ...... 28 Financial Allocations Insights ...... 28 Results Based Accountability™ Performance Indicators ...... 32 Individual Health Assessment and Intervention KPI Insights ...... 32 Population Health Services KPI Insights ...... 34 Building Health Partnerships KPI Insights ...... 35 EMS KPI Insights ...... 35 Service Improvement Opportunities ...... 36 Services owned by Oxford County Library ...... 38 Service Profiles and Insights ...... 38 Service Profiles ...... 39 Service Financial Allocations ...... 40 Financial Allocations Insights ...... 40 Results Based Accountability Performance Indicators ...... 43 Library Collections KPI Insights ...... 43 Library Programming KPI Insights ...... 44 Library Public Space Access KPI Insights ...... 45 Library Reference and Information KPI insights ...... 45 Library Information Technology Access KPI Insights ...... 45 Service Improvement Opportunities ...... 47

January 6, 20152015-01-22 Page 2 of 92 Services owned by Archives (Corporate Services) ...... 48 Service Profiles and Insights ...... 48 Service Profiles ...... 48 Service Financial Allocations ...... 50 Financial Allocations Insights ...... 50 Results Based Accountability™ Performance Indicators ...... 53 Archives Collections and Resources KPI Insights ...... 53 Service Improvement Opportunities ...... 54 Appendix A: Service Inventory ...... 56 Appendix B: Service Financial Allocations ...... 68 Appendix C – Key Performance Indicators ...... 72 Appendix D: Service Improvement Opportunities ...... 89

January 6, 20152015-01-22 Page 3 of 92 Executive The County of Oxford (the County) issued a Request For Proposals Summary (RFP) requesting consulting support for the Services that Work Project, a service delivery review designed to examine the effectiveness, efficiency and value of each County service. The RFP also requested recommendations or changes in services, programs and resources, including whether specific services should be expanded, reduced, discontinued or delivered in an alternate manner.

Munro Strategic Perspective was initially engaged to provide consulting support to the Services that Work Project [STW] for Wave 1 and extended for Waves 2 and 3 to be conducted in 2015.

This report contains the findings and recommendations from Wave 1 of Services That Work.

The results and recommendations are the product of the combined collaborative effort of the staff and leadership of the County of Oxford, guided by Melinda Munro of Munro Strategic Perspective.

Wave 1 of the Services that Work Project reviewed Public Health and Emergency Services, Human Services, Library and Archives. These departments deliver services that support individuals and vulnerable citizens and which largely, though not entirely operate with shared mandates and funding from the provincial government. The analysis included creating a corporate Service Inventory for the County of Oxford, reviewing financial and performance information for the specific services contained in Wave 1 and review of peer municipalities and government mandates.

The result of the review is that there is a strong commitment to providing valuable outcomes to the citizens. The County works with partners in the community to deliver services effectively and has demonstrated innovation in the models of service delivery offered. The County has also demonstrated strong financial management at the departmental level to maintain expenses at a reasonable rate.

The Services that Work Project object was to apply a service-based lens to the County structure and identify opportunities to improve service delivery and outcomes. This report contains 27 recommendations for Service Improvement Opportunities to improve service outcomes, service delivery or service costs. The recommendations can be captured in the following themes:

 Streamline services to families and children: “No wrong

January 6, 20152015-01-22 Page 4 of 92 door” for vulnerable clients whether coming in for financial assistance, child care, housing, or individual health assessment and intervention by intentionally coordinating service delivery.  Place community services where people live by co-locating allied services and using Libraries as community service hubs where appropriate.  Improve the productivity of services that visit families (and businesses) and provide additional hours of services to support working families.  Maintain access to Library services in small communities by expanding the use of the facilities.  Focus service outcome efforts on shared definition of quality of life using Social Determinants of Health and Canadian Index of Well-being to plan and deliver services.

The overall potential for savings, productivity improvements and reinvestment ranges from $500,000 to $1.5M achieved over 3-4 years. The most significant SIO’s are in the table below. The full list is contained in Appendix D

Client Service Improvement Opportunity Efficiency Service

Transformation to Full Integration of Services   Supporting Families, Children and Singles

Process and Productivity Improvements for   Public Health Public Health Nurses and Inspectors Scheduling, Process and Decentralization   Strategy

After Hours Public Health Services 

January 6, 20152015-01-22 Page 5 of 92 Reimagine Libraries as Community Hubs  

Merger of Records Management and Archives 

The report also recommends several potential Key Performance Indicators [KPIs] that should be incorporated into business and strategic planning. These KPI’s can be found at Appendix C.

Finally the report contains tables of the financial information for the Wave 1 group by service covering the 2011 actuals to the 2017 forecast. Where the growth over that time exceeds 5% per year and $100,000 in absolute change, it is highlighted. The benefit of this analysis is that it illuminates where services are experiencing impacts from revenue or expense changes that may otherwise be difficult to see using a departmental view. The complete table may be found at Appendix B.

The County of Oxford has much to be proud of in the delivery of the services contained in Wave 1 and this report should not be seen as critical of the service delivery but supportive of improved outcomes for County residents.

The remaining services contained in Waves 2 and 3 will be reviewed throughout 2015 and reports will be provided at appropriate times.

January 6, 20152015-01-22 Page 6 of 92 Introduction The County of Oxford (the County) issued a Request For Proposals (RFP) requesting consulting support for the Services that Work Project, a service delivery review designed to examine the effectiveness, efficiency and value of each County service. The RFP also requested recommendations or changes in services, programs and resources, including whether specific services should be expanded, reduced, discontinued or delivered in an alternate manner.

The specific deliverables of the RFP were to produce:

1. Finalized service profiles 2. Recommendations for prioritization of services for review 3. A work plan for completion of the project 4. Specific recommendations with regards to changes in services, programs and resources, including whether specific services should be expanded, reduced, discontinued or delivered in an alternate manner 5. Quantification of financial implications of opportunities identified during the project 6. Identification of impacts for operations and service delivery resulting from recommendations, including clearly defined service levels 7. A package of service delivery standards and KPI for programs and services

Munro Strategic Perspective was initially engaged to provide consulting support to the Services that Work Project [STW] for Wave 1 and extended for Waves 2 and 3 to be conducted in 2015.

This report contains the findings and recommendations from Wave 1of Services That Work.

The results and recommendations are the product of the combined collaborative effort of the staff and leadership of the County of Oxford, guided by Melinda Munro of Munro Strategic Perspective.

Method and Service Inventory approach The service inventory for the County of Oxford was created using the Municipal Reference Model (MRM).1 The MRM is a business reference model that enables public sector organizations to view their service offerings independent of departmental or financial structure. It

1 The MRM is intellectual property owned by the Municipal Information Services Association of Canada and made available for use by the public sector.

January 6, 20152015-01-22 Page 7 of 92 enables organizations to see the true cost and resource requirements of services, as well as see where similar clients may be receiving allied services that could be better integrated. It also creates visibility for citizens about the services they pay for and receive. Finally, the service inventory also acts as a form of internal control, ensuring that all activities done and resources deployed in a municipality are directed towards the overall goals defined by Council and the community.

The diagram below illustrates the impact of the MRM in decoupling services from the organizational structure of a municipality.

Using the MRM, staff groups were led through a process of identifying the work they do, organizing that work by service and creating service profiles that contain resource and strategic information about the services delivered by the County.

The result is an inventory of 58 services grouped across five programs that capture the work of the County. The full inventory is set out in Appendix A to this report.

Service Financial Allocations After completion of the service inventory, the existing County financial information from 2011 through 2018 was allocated by service for Wave One services only. This process improves the visibility of the expenses and revenues by service, enabling management to see

January 6, 20152015-01-22 Page 8 of 92 where services are growing slower or faster or experiencing shifts in resource deployment that can be masked when financial information is viewed by the department or division. It can enable better decision making with respect to resource deployment, sharing services and setting fees.

The method used to allocate the financial information by service was to identify the key drivers of expenses and revenues by service (staff, building footprint, physical resources, clients, etc.) and allocate the existing cost accounts by percentage while reconciling to the total existing budget for the group of services being reviewed. Senior management and finance staff members were engaged in this process using a tool developed by Munro Strategic Perspective and adapted for ease of use by staff of the County.2 The results for Wave 1 can be seen in Appendix B. The insights gleaned from the results will be discussed further below.

Results Based Accountability™ Performance Indicators Key Performance Indicators (KPI) were developed for all services in the inventory using the framework of Results Based Accountability™ (RBA). The RBA framework was developed specifically for use in the public and not-for-profit sectors and it focuses on the desired outcomes of services, not just the inputs and outputs of a service. The schematic below illustrates how RBA balances four questions in creating and utilizing KPIs for decision-making:

2 Matthew Buis and David McRoberts deserve enormous credit for the work they did on the financial allocation tool. The result places the County on the leading edge for service-based financial visibility in Ontario.

January 6, 20152015-01-22 Page 9 of 92

Management staff from all Wave 1 services were engaged in identifying KPIs for the services. The KPIs were selected using a process created by Munro Strategic Perspective for identifying useful, relevant and cost effective metrics in each category. Wherever possible, existing metrics were identified and classified using the RBA framework above in order to maximize the cost effectiveness of the process. Additional metrics were identified for services in order to fill out the RBA framework, particularly metrics that answer the question: “Is anyone better off?”. Metrics selected were then defined using a Data Dictionary developed by Munro Strategic Perspective to ensure continuity and comparability of data over time. These metrics are both an internal control and a tool for continuous improvement for the County. In July, County Council approved a recommendation from STW that RBA form the basis for metrics to be used in County budget business plans going forward.

The list of metrics identified through STW Wave 1 are attached as Appendix C and listed by service. The KPIs range from low-level process metrics to high-level strategic metrics and will be used for different purposes in ongoing management of the services. The data for the metrics is not reported here except where used to support insights or recommendations. In some cases the KPI has been identified but the data collection methodology and process have yet to be formalized.

Service Analysis The service analysis phase of Wave One included several steps:

January 6, 20152015-01-22 Page 10 of 92 • Appreciative Inquiry Interviews with senior management, Project Team and Ad Hoc Committee • Day in the Life visits in all services including interviews with front line staff and some clients • Review of all legislation related to Wave 1 services • Review of key documents provided about Wave 1 services including audits, council reports, service standards, budgets, letters of understanding and best practices reports from other levels of government or peers • Review of information provided by specific peer municipalities of the County as identified by Senior Management and Munro Strategic Perspective

The insights from this review will be discussed in each service section respectively.

Service Improvement Opportunities Throughout each stage of the Wave 1 service review, opportunities for improvement were identified for analysis. They may have arisen from staff comments, management insights, data analysis, financial analysis, best practice or peer reviews. Each Service Improvement Opportunity (SIO) was catalogued and key information identified in order to determine the viability of the opportunity and to prioritize the opportunities for implementation based on their complexity, likelihood of support, cost and benefit. The criteria for prioritizing SIOs were chosen and weighted by the Senior Management Team. The criteria are set out below:

• Community Impact • Cost Impact • Chance of Success or Failure • Capacity (Human or Physical Resources) • Timing • Strategic Alignment • Council Priority

The complete list of SIOs is attached as Appendix D to this report. SIOs related to a specific group of services are listed within the corresponding section of this report.

Stakeholder Engagement The engagement of community and area municipality stakeholders is

January 6, 20152015-01-22 Page 11 of 92 being conducted by the staff of the County of Oxford. Their results will be reported to Council at an appropriate time in future.

The next sections of this report will be organized by the department which is the owner for the delivery of the service. While this somewhat contradicts the effort to create a service inventory that is decoupled from departmental structure, it still acknowledges that each service must have an owner regardless of the fact that it may require the participation of multiple departments to ensure delivery.

January 6, 20152015-01-22 Page 12 of 92 Services owned The Human Services Department is responsible for the delivery of five by Human services for the County, all of which are mandatory and supported substantially by provincial funding. Some of the mandatory services Services have discretionary elements in how they are delivered, which creates opportunities for potential efficiencies. • Financial Assistance Service Profiles and Insights • Child Care Subsidy Below is a table of the key information captured in the service profiles • Community Capacity Subsidy for this group of services. The complete service profile for a service also contains staff resources, some KPIs, a three year outlook for • Shelter (Direct service pressures and a SWOT Analysis (Strengths, Weaknesses, Delivered) Opportunities and Threats). The complete service profile is available • Shelter (Subsidy) from Information Services

Human Services as a department is uniquely organized for service delivery compared to many of its peers in Ontario, as all Oxford County Client Support Workers (CSWs) are designated to provide support in all service areas to all clients. This integration supports the client in two important ways: first, the client does not have to interact with more than one County employee to obtain access to services (this is sometimes called the “no wrong door” approach); second, the CSW is able to ensure that the client gets access to the full range of services available rather than have to make referrals to colleagues in the same department (this is sometimes called “wraparound services”). Human Services also deploys a tool for client assessment that asks questions across a variety of quality of life indicators. This quality of life tool is similar to the Social Determinants of Health promulgated by the World Health Organization and used in Canadian public health planning. This also helps the CSW determine how best to support the client to improve their situation. Human Services has also worked to co-locate with allied service providers in the County such as Employment Ontario or Ontario Early Years to extend the reach of the “no wrong door” and “wraparound service” philosophies.

The three-year outlook for the all of the services in this group suggest that the main issues for the future are changes to the local economy and local demographics that will impact the ability to provide appropriate services. The Child Care Subsidy service is already seeing significant changes due to the provincial full-day learning policy. The service profiling exercise highlighted that there are two shelter services, one where the client is a tenant who lives in a unit owned and operated by the County and the other where the County provides a subsidy to a third party in order to make a unit available. There are

January 6, 20152015-01-22 Page 13 of 92 important strategic differences between the services because in one case the County takes direct responsibility for the well-being of a tenant, whereas in the other the County deploys financial resources and policy to grow the availability of appropriate housing, leaving the direct tenant relationship with a third party. The desired outcome is the same; to ensure that Core Housing Need is met and a range of appropriate supportive and affordable housing is available in the County. In both the Shelter (Direct Delivered) and Shelter (Subsidy) Services, it is projected that the County will continue to fail to meet the Core Housing Need of the community with the risk that it will get worse due to increased housing costs and increased costs to provide supportive and affordable housing.

Service Profiles Service Client Output Net $ M/D3 County Notes Role Financial Eligible Financial $988,277 M/M Direct Opportunity for Assistance Resident Assistance improved service Payment through partnering with Public Health

Child Care Subsidy Eligible Subsidy $1,351,531 M/D Subsidy Recent County Parent/Agency Payment changes to funding model.

Shelter (Direct Tenant Unit of $2,368,207 M/D Direct County should create Delivered) Housing a long range capital funding plan which considers whether Shelter (Subsidy) Eligible Subsidy $2,746,227 M/D Subsidy building more units Service Payment or incentivizing the Provider building of units is more cost and outcome effective. Community Eligible Subsidy $525,345 M/D Subsidy County should Capacity Subsidy Agency Payment require improved reporting of outcomes per dollar subsidized

3 The letters M, D, T are used throughout to refer to whether services are Mandatory, Discretionary or Traditional. The first letter refers to the requirement to provide the service and the second letter refers to the method of delivery. For example a service which is M/M has both a mandatory requirement to delivery and a mandatory service method, where M/D means that the method of delivery is in the discretion of the County. D/D/T refers to a service which is fully discretionary but is traditionally provided by municipalities and provided by County peers.

January 6, 20152015-01-22 Page 14 of 92 Service Financial Allocations Human Services Net

17% Child Care Subsidy Net

34% Community Capacity 7% Subsidy Net Financial Assistance Net 12% Shelter (Direct Delivered) Net Shelter (Subsidy) Net

30%

Financial Allocations Insights: The Financial Assistance Service impact on the net levy has and will continue to decline due to uploading of costs to the province of Ontario. By contrast, the net increase in the Community Capacity Subsidy service has grown due to declining revenues to this service. The two Shelter services represent the bulk of the impact on the net levy. The allocations table below indicates that there has been a shift of net impact from the Shelter (Direct Delivered) to the Shelter (Subsidy) service with limited net impact on the total Shelter related levy. There has been smaller growth in the Child Care Subsidy service on the net budget. Recent provincial decisions reducing the amount allocated to municipalities for child care has driven the County to change the funding formula to address performance metrics by the providers as approved by County Council in the summer of 2014.

Service improvements recommended in this group of services are focused on improving the outcomes available from the discretionary elements of the generally mandatory services and from looking for process improvements in service delivery.

January 6, 20152015-01-22 Page 15 of 92 Yellow highlighting in the table below indicates where a service has had both a net growth or decline of greater than 5%4 per year and an absolute growth or decline of greater than $100,000.

Mandatory, Average annual discretionary or Service name 2011A 2014B 2017F Absolute change growth Rate traditional Child Care Subsidy $7,319,694.70 $6,514,599.74 $6,587,695.70 -1.67% -$731,999.00 M/M Expenses Child Care Subsidy -$6,012,141.00 -$5,163,069.00 -$5,200,709.00 2.25% $811,432.00 M/M Revenues Child Care Subsidy $1,307,553.70 $1,351,530.74 $1,386,986.70 1.01% $79,433.00 M/M Net Community Capacity $440,288.40 $525,345.28 $555,198.40 4.35% $114,910.00 M/D Subsidy Expenses Community Capacity -$502,859.00 $0.00 $0.00 16.67% $502,859.00 M/D Subsidy Revenues Community Capacity Subsidy -$62,570.60 $525,345.28 $555,198.40 164.55% $617,769.00 M/D Net Financial Assistance $16,406,109.95 $17,061,371.09 $19,395,493.99 3.04% $2,989,384.04 M/M Expenses Financial Assistance -$13,692,160.00 -$16,073,103.80 -$19,992,467.00 -7.67% -$6,300,307.00 M/M Revenues Financial $2,713,949.95 $988,267.29 -$596,973.01 -20.33% -$3,310,922.96 M/M Assistance Net Shelter (Direct $8,487,667.20 $5,074,307.84 $5,581,581.20 -5.71% $586,331.88 M/D Delivered) Expenses Shelter (Direct Delivered) $0.00 -$2,706,100.00 -$2,863,066.00 FALSE -$2,863,066.00 M/D Revenues Shelter (Direct $8,487,667.20 $2,368,207.84 $2,718,515.20 -11.33% -$5,769,152.00 M/D Delivered) Net Shelter (Subsidy) $1,969,211.15 $6,146,682.73 $3,995,144.15 17.15% $2,025,933.00 M/D Expenses Shelter (Subsidy) -$5,392,103.00 -$3,400,456.20 -$1,466,782.00 12.13% $3,925,321.00 M/D Revenues Shelter (Subsidy) -$3,422,891.85 $2,746,226.53 $2,528,362.15 28.98% $5,951,254.00 M/D Net

4 5% was chosen as an extreme limit for growth. Any growth over CPI (generally 2%) is high.

Results Based The KPIs for all services can be found in Appendix C. Accountability™ Performance Child Care Subsidy KPI Insights Indicators Insights from the KPIs related to the Child Care Subsidy service indicate that there has been a significant change in the children served since the institution of full day learning in schools. The percentage of operating spaces per licensed space has seen a sharp drop in all categories other than infant and toddler, which have remained stable. The County has already taken action to address both this shift and changing provincial priorities by changing the funding model for agencies and emphasizing efficiency (operating spaces) and innovation. No Service Improvement Opportunities are therefore proposed for this service.

Percentage of operating childcare spaces per licensed space 120%

100% 90% Infant 80% 80% 73% Toddler 60% 62% Preschool School Age 5% of all 40% 40% All Spaces children in County are JK/SK 20% served

0% 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014F

Net cost per space by type and by child served $1,800 $1,600 $1,400 $1,200 $1,000 2011 2012 $800 2013 $600 2014F $400 $200 $0 Net Cost per Net Cost per Net Cost per child licensed space operating space served

Community Capacity KPI Insights The Community Capacity Subsidy Service provides support to community agencies that support low income individuals and families with counselling, employment advice, domestic violence support and other critical services. The Subsidy ensures that the agencies are able to be viable in the County of Oxford for both clients of the Financial Assistance or Shelter Services or for other residents for whom the County does not provide direct service.

Currently the KPIs consist of raw numbers of people who have been referred to agencies which are supported by the service. The KPIs would be more helpful if they included information about the outcomes achieved by the referrals, including how many clients completed programs or obtained employment as a result of an intervention.

Therefore there is an SIO recommendation for this service that all agencies that receive a Community Capacity Subsidy must enter an RBA data agreement that provides regular updates on all of the RBA categories: Quantity, Quality, Result and Cost. This SIO is similar to an SIO being recommended for the Building Community Partnerships Service delivered by Public Health. There should be synergies between the contracts created and the management of the data generated by the two Services.

January 6, 20152015-01-22 Page 18 of 92

Cost per partner funded

$50,000 20 Number of Partners $40,000 15 $30,000 Gross Cost $20,000 10

$10,000 Net Cost 5 $- 2011 2012 2013

$(10,000) 0

Financial Assistance KPI Highlights There was some difficulty in reviewing the KPIs for Financial Assistance as the regular local monthly reports did not reconcile with the provincially generated Consolidated Municipal Service Manager (CMSM) reports. The chart below for average time on assistance is generated from the CMSM report. What the review of data shows for this service is that while the number of cases is steadily declining, the average number of months on assistance is growing, particularly for lone parent families. This likely reflects policy changes that have enabled more people to exit to employment, resulting in a higher percentage of more difficult cases. In addition, there have been policy changes that enable people to keep more earned income while still collecting some financial assistance or benefits. However, it does indicate that the average case now requires more intervention.

The other KPI of note is that the net cost per case and per beneficiary (family member of the case holder) is dropping, reflecting provincial uploading of costs.

These factors as well as reviewing the provincial Poverty Reduction Strategy and the adoption of the Social Determinants of Health across provincial ministries lead to the recommendation that all services to vulnerable families, children and singles provided by the County be integrated. This SIO is discussed in more detail in the

January 6, 20152015-01-22 Page 19 of 92 section on the Individual Health Assessment and Intervention KPI Insights.

Average months on assistance

30 Singles w 25 Children All Cases 20

Couples 15 w/o Children 10 Singles w/o Children

5 Couples w Children 0 2010 2010 2011 2011 2012 2012 2013 2013 2014 q1 q3 q1 q3 q1 q3 q1 q3 q1

Percent of cases with earnings and average earnings

$1,000 20.00

Average Earnings $750 15.00

13.23 $500 11.79 10.00

Percent of Cases with $250 5.00 Earnings

$0 0.00 2010 q1 2011 q1 2012 q1 2013 q1 2014 q1

January 6, 20152015-01-22 Page 20 of 92 Net costs for Financial Assistance per case or beneficiary $2,000

$1,500

$1,000 Net cost per OW Case Net cost per OW Beneficiary

$500

$0 2010 2011 2012 2013

Shelter (Direct Delivered) and Shelter (Subsidy) KPI Highlights As noted above, there are two Shelter services. The Director of Human Services reports that the County is serving 10% or less of people who meet the provincial test for Core Housing Need. In order to increase the ability to support people in need, it will be an important exercise to be able to review the overall cost effectiveness of direct delivery over subsidy support. There are limits on the amount of funding that municipalities can provide in this area, so it is therefore important to know whether direct delivery or incentivized third party delivery provides the best client outcomes. The review of the financial KPIs indicates that the burden on the net levy is not currently growing, though the split between the direct and subsidized service has changed. However, in order to meet the growing need some investment will be necessary. A long-term capital plan creates the opportunity to avoid unplanned additional expenses through a regular build-up of reserves and partnerships with private and not-for- profit sector operators. Additionally, the long term strategy should consider the option of shifting the direct delivered service to a lower cost external provider as has happened in other communities.

January 6, 20152015-01-22 Page 21 of 92

Net shelter costs - Historical and forecast $10,000,000

$8,000,000

$6,000,000

$4,000,000 Shelter (Direct Delivered) Net $2,000,000 Shelter (Subsidy) Net $0 2011A 2014B 2016F 2017F Less than 10% -$2,000,000 of Core Housing Need is served -$4,000,000

-$6,000,000

January 6, 20152015-01-22 Page 22 of 92 Service Improvement Opportunities

Opportunity Risks and Potential Timeframe Barriers Implications Savings / Productivity Adopt Social Improved County-wide Nominal Less than one Low Determinants of Health planning year Transformation to Full Improved client service, $100 – 500K More than one Medium Integration of Services combining multiple year Supporting Families, unions and staff Children and Singles Long Term Housing and Improved planning, Net expense One year to Medium to high Homelessness Capital increased County develop, more Plan expense than one year to implement Housing / Shelter First Improved client >$500k in Social One year to Medium to high Strategy outcomes, intense staff Return on review, more and financial Investment than one year to requirements implement Community Capacity Improved visibility of Nominal Less than one Low to medium Subsidy Review agency service delivery, year resistance by providers Case Conferencing for Improved learning and Nominal Less than one Low HS Staff client support year Integrated Program Determination of Nominal Less than one Medium – Benefits Evaluation whether integrated year baseline data service delivery has may be greater client impact unavailable Digital Signatures for Improved paper and data Nominal Less than one Low Human Services Clients management; client year resistance

January 6, 20152015-01-22 Page 23 of 92 Services owned The Public Health and Emergency Services (PHES) Department is by Public responsible for the delivery of 11 services for the County, all of which are mandatory and supported substantially by provincial funding. Health and Some of the mandatory services have discretionary elements in how Emergency they are delivered which creates opportunities for potential Services efficiencies.

• Building Health Service Profiles and Insights Partnerships Below is a table of the key information captured in the service profiles • Case and for this group of services. In addition, the complete profile contains Outbreak staff resources, some KPIs, a three year outlook for service pressures Management and a SWOT Analysis. The complete service profile is available from • Health Advocacy Information Services. and Promotion • Health Monitoring Public Health and Emergency Services is a somewhat unique and Surveillance combination of services in that both the typical public health services • Health Resource focused on population health management are combined with the Distribution first responders and community emergency planning. While all staff • Health Protection are health providers, the focus of the activity is mixed between direct Certification client interventions (Individual Health Assessment and Intervention • Individual Health and EMS) and population level interventions such as Case and Assessment and Outbreak Management and Inspections and Enforcement. Review of Intervention the service profiles indicated that there is some overlap of clients • Inspections, between PHES and Human Services, mainly where clients are low Investigations and income families and individuals, particularly children. Enforcement • Emergency Recent provincial policy in both public health and poverty reduction Management has directed public health departments to focus efforts on people • EMS “with risk,” as the greatest overall population benefit can be obtained • 911 Call Taking from providing targeted support to those groups. Additionally, the continued provincial and federal emphasis on the Social Determinants of Health suggests that when attention is paid to the causes of poverty, some of the poor health behaviours naturally mitigate, such as smoking and substance abuse. In other words, providing better housing, education and community connection opportunities can have a natural impact on obesity and smoking rates, thus improving the population health outcomes that are the focus of this group of services.

The three year outlook for the population health related services suggests that changes in demographics, as well as emerging disease profiles and policy shifts, will have an impact on the capacity and resources to respond. There is some anticipation of additional

January 6, 20152015-01-22 Page 24 of 92 expectations being put onto municipalities in relation to the Inspections and Enforcement Service. Oxford County has particular challenges in relation to immunization, and the ability of PHES to creatively work with the community has been seen in its ability to respond to and limit outbreaks. Additionally, the change in focus to the Social Determinants of Health will have an impact on the way the Public Health Advocacy and Promotion and Building Health Partnerships focus efforts on improving population health as the focus moves from changing health behaviours to changing the environmental conditions leading to poor health. The changes in the way Canadian census data is collected and reported will also continue to be a challenge for the population based services in being able to observe and report fluctuations in health outcomes.

For the services directed to individual health interventions, the most significant change is the alteration in provincial policy from universal service delivery to “targeted universality,” where “with risk” families are provided more intensive support. The current percentage of families with children that consent to more support is only 52% with a provincial goal of 100%. This change in practice will require both a different philosophy of service and different deployment of resources in the field.

For the Emergency Medical Service, the three year outlook raises concerns about significantly increasing hospital turnaround times and response times, as well as the potential for a provincial mandate of a Community Paramedicine Program that could, if not planned with foresight, add significant cost.

Service Profiles Service Client Output Net $ M/D County Notes role

Building Health Community Partnership $988,277 M/D Direct Opportunity to Partnerships partner improve outcomes through governance and monitoring

January 6, 20152015-01-22 Page 25 of 92 Service Client Output Net $ M/D County Notes role

Case and Individual or Managed case $131,509 M/M Direct Potential to Outbreak institution improve service Management exposed to a with after-hours disease of service public importance

Health Advocacy Target Campaign $394,281 M/D Direct Opportunity to and Promotions audience improve outcomes through governance and monitoring

Health Monitoring Persons Health $487,182 M/M Direct and Surveillance interested in Information health data Report

Health Protection Person Certificate $1,154 M/D Direct Certification requiring certification

Health Resource Health care Resource $43,109 M/M Direct Distribution provider (vaccine, condoms, etc)

Individual Health Persons eligible Care encounter $657,452 M/D Direct Opportunity to Assessment and for individual improve Intervention care outcomes by intentional coordination with Human Services Inspections, Owner of Incidence of $344,102 M/M Direct Opportunity to Investigation and inspected non-compliance improve Enforcement premise productivity through process review Emergency County of Emergency $83,937 M/M Direct Opportunity to Management Oxford Response Plan reduce service after all plans developed in 2017

January 6, 20152015-01-22 Page 26 of 92 Service Client Output Net $ M/D County Notes role

Emergency Ill or injured Care and $5,257,635 M/M Direct Opportunity to Medical Service person rehabilitation improve encounter productivity by addressing hospital wait times 911 Call Taking 911 caller Call taken and $48,937 M/M Contract-ed Opportunities to dispatched review new technology

January 6, 20152015-01-22 Page 27 of 92 Service Financial Allocations Public Health and Emergency Services net

31% All Other Public Health

Emergency Medical Services (EMS) Net 69%

All other 911 Call Taking and Dispatch Net

Building Health Partnerships/Collaborations/N etworks Net 2% Case and Outbreak Management Service Net 15% 7% Emergency Management Net 5% 3%

Health Advocacy and Promotion Net

Health Monitoring and 17% Surveillance Net 28% Health Protection Certification Net

Health Resource Distribution 21% Net

2% 0% Individual Health Assessment and Intervention Net

Inspections, Investigations and Enforcement Net

Financial Allocations Insights

January 6, 20152015-01-22 Page 28 of 92 The services which show some risk of growth significantly above CPI5 are the Health Advocacy and Promotion Service, the Health Monitoring and Surveillance Service and the Individual Health Assessment and Intervention Service. While the total dollar increase between the 2011 actuals and the 2017 forecast is small (only $530,000 for the three combined over 6 years), the rate of growth is worthy of note.

Also worthy of note is the growth in the expenses for Emergency Management. While the dollars are lower than the cut-off for this analysis of $100,000, this is a new service. The current delivery model uses contract employees, which is wise given that when all the plans are finally in place, the monitoring activity may not require as many full-time staff.

The largest cost service in this group by a significant margin is the EMS service. Its overall growth in cost from 2011 to the 2017 forecast is less than 3% per year, but that growth represents over $800,000. This service has recently seen revenue reductions in the elimination of the patient transfer service, however that decision was taken to reduce expenses and improve response times.

5 Consumer Price Index. This was chosen because it roughly reflects the expectation of the public for growth in expenses, including public services.

January 6, 20152015-01-22 Page 29 of 92 Yellow highlighting indicates where a service has had both a net growth or decline of greater than 5% per year and an absolute growth or decline of greater than $100,000. Mandatory, Service name 2011A 2014B 2017F Average Absolute discretionary annual change or traditional growth Rate M/M 911 Call Taking and Dispatch Expenses $28,285.00 $46,937.00 $51,350.00 13.59% $23,065.00 M/M 911 Call Taking and Dispatch Revenue $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 FALSE $0.00 M/M 911 Call Taking and Dispatch Net $28,285.00 $46,937.00 $51,350.00 13.59% $23,065.00 M/D Building Health $679,889.37 $843,077.05 $754,140.88 1.82% $74,251.51 Partnerships/Collaborations/Networks Expenses M/D Building Health -$536,082.91 -$674,667.92 -$572,982.20 -1.15% -$36,899.29 Partnerships/Collaborations/Networks Revenues M/D Building Health $143,806.46 $168,409.13 $181,158.68 4.33% $37,352.22 Partnerships/Collaborations/NetworksNet M/M Case and Outbreak Management Service $528,054.05 $615,188.09 $640,451.55 3.55% $112,397.50 Expenses M/M Case and Outbreak Management Service -$416,038.32 -$483,679.02 -$498,782.12 -3.31% -$82,743.80 Revenues M/M Case and Outbreak Management Service $112,015.73 $131,509.07 $141,669.43 4.41% $29,653.70 Net M/M Emergency Management Expenses $143,780.26 $214,990.38 $225,474.56 9.47% $81,694.30 M/M Emergency Management Revenues -$77,582.16 -$131,053.70 -$136,977.30 -12.76% -$59,395.14 M/M Emergency Management Net $66,198.10 $83,936.68 $88,497.26 5.61% $22,299.16 M/M Emergency Medical Services (EMS) $9,741,093.07 $10,438,857.15 $10,845,684.88 1.89% $1,104,591.81 Expenses M/M Emergency Medical Services (EMS) -$4,991,746.00 -$5,181,222.00 -$5,268,975.00 -0.93% -$277,229.00 Revenues M/M Emergency Medical Services (EMS) Net $4,749,347.07 $5,257,635.15 $5,576,709.88 2.90% $827,362.81 M/D Health Advocacy and Promotion Expenses $1,853,176.98 $2,036,282.85 $2,004,260.09 1.36% $151,083.11 M/D Health Advocacy and Promotion Revenues -$1,559,565.29 -$1,642,001.77 -$1,582,611.32 -0.25% -$23,046.03 M/D Health Advocacy and Promotion Net $293,611.69 $394,281.08 $421,648.77 7.27% $128,037.08

Mandatory, Service name 2011A 2014B 2017F Average Absolute discretionary annual change or traditional growth Rate M/M Health Monitoring and Surveillance $1,890,101.46 $2,100,034.36 $2,130,358.88 2.12% $240,257.42 Expenses M/M Health Monitoring and Surveillance -$1,560,847.01 -$1,612,852.48 -$1,613,786.92 -0.57% -$52,939.91 Revenues M/D Health Monitoring and Surveillance Net $329,254.45 $487,181.88 $516,571.96 9.48% $187,317.51 M/D Health Protection Certification Expenses $25,120.25 $19,752.37 $20,293.34 -3.20% -$4,826.91 M/D Health Protection Certification Revenues -$25,189.52 -$18,597.54 -$19,062.41 4.05% $6,127.11 M/D Health Protection Certification Net -$69.27 $1,154.83 $1,230.93 312.83% $1,300.20 M/D Health Resource Distribution Expenses $108,355.57 $122,714.96 $129,215.75 3.21% $20,860.18 M/D Health Resource Distribution Revenues -$85,932.15 -$79,606.42 -$82,008.81 0.76% $3,923.34 M/D Health Resource Distribution Net $22,423.42 $43,108.54 $47,206.94 18.42% $24,783.52 M/D Individual Health Assessment and $2,393,757.12 $2,815,276.98 $2,767,229.52 2.60% $373,472.40 Intervention Expenses M/D Individual Health Assessment and -$1,905,441.49 -$2,157,824.50 -$2,063,503.25 -1.38% -$158,061.76 Intervention Revenues M/D Individual Health Assessment and $488,315.63 $657,452.48 $703,726.27 7.35% $215,410.64 Intervention Net M/M Inspections, Investigations and Enforcement $1,297,643.38 $1,263,039.68 $1,321,859.07 0.31% $24,215.69 Expenses M/M Inspections, Investigations and Enforcement -$965,674.15 -$918,937.65 -$951,142.67 0.25% $14,531.48 Revenues M/M Inspections, Investigations and $331,969.23 $344,102.03 $370,716.40 1.95% $38,747.17 Enforcement Net

January 6, 20152015-01-22 Page 31 of 92 Results Based Accountability™ The KPIs for all services can be found in Appendix C. Performance

Indicators Individual Health Assessment and Intervention KPI Insights Individual Health Assessment and Intervention includes several specifically funded sub-services: Healthy Baby Healthy Children; Children in Need of Treatment (dental); Healthy Smiles (dental); Immunization of School Children; Sexual Health and Needle Exchange. The overall goal of this service is to provide specific client interventions that target populations “with risk” to improve their individual health outcomes and the overall population health of the community. The immunization and sexual health services are still provided as universal services, while the other are moving to targeted universality.

Of note, the change in 2012 to target the Healthy Baby, Healthy Children sub-service to families “with risk” has been a challenge for the County. The challenge arises both from obtaining consent from families and providing the more intensive level of service necessary for this client type. The rates of families providing consent to be visited have grown but are not as high as the provincial mandate. Public Health reports that this has been a challenge for the nurses. In addition to having more families consent to be visited, business practices within this service have also hampered productivity. Due to a number of factors, including use of a provincial database for record management, staff who visit families on the road are required to attend at Woodstock headquarters to pick up paper medical files, carry them in secure bags, and return them to Woodstock at the end of the work day. This results in both a substantial loss in productive time taken up by travelling and a data insecurity risk if paper files are lost. Using the staff who work around Tillsonburg as an example, the loss in productive time is one hour per day multiplied by three staff. Extended to the other staff engaged in this work, the loss of productivity is significant.

Percentage of with-risk families consenting to PH visits 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% 2013 2014 2015F

There are three SIOs recommended that specifically respond to this need: Transformation to Full Integration of Services Supporting Families, Children and Singles; Public Health Inspectors and Nurses Scheduling, Process and Decentralization Strategy and After Hours Services.

The integration of the Individual Health Assessment and Intervention Services with Financial Assistance, Shelter and Child Care Subsidy support the philosophies of “no wrong door” and “wraparound services” for vulnerable clients. Using linked caseloads, colocation and case conferencing, the public health nurses and client support workers will be able to address the needs of the client and support each other in enabling more with-risk families to access available services. The intentional cooperation of Public Health services and Financial Assistance services is not unknown in Ontario. It is a recommended strategy flowing from the Ontario Poverty Reduction Strategy and is contemplated in the Ontario Public Health Standards for the Healthy Babies, Healthy Children program. It is also a model used in Haldimand-Norfolk where Public Health and Social Services are combined in a single department. For two years, two public health nurses were embedded in the Financial Assistance service to identify clients who could benefit from intensive supports. While this approach was changed in 2014, Haldimand continues to recognize the need for shared client supports between health and social services. The County of Simcoe is also moving to a stronger recognition of social impacts on health outcomes as it adopts the Social Determinants of Health as a policy driver. Sudbury Public Health Unit has also moved in this direction after identifying that the majority of users of its well-baby clinics were families with high incomes, rather

January 6, 20152015-01-22 Page 33 of 92 than families with risk indicators. Rather than add staff to either Human Services or Public Health to address the need for a wider range of supports, the integration of services leverages the existing professional skills among County staff to achieve the same outcome.

After Hours Services are recommended as an additional strategy for supporting vulnerable clients as well as working families. Currently if a child misses a school immunization or if a person requires sexual health services or needle exchange support, they are required to attend during business hours. This obliges working people to take time away from work. A review of the need and the resources to provide after-hours services is warranted.

The Service Improvement Opportunity related to Reimagining the Libraries as Community Hubs (see below) could provide additional support through making a wider range of satellite offices available through library buildings and building the Library Programming Service into the additional supports to vulnerable families.

Population Health Services KPI Insights This group of services are focussed on improving the overall health outcomes of the community at large, including reducing the burden of diseases related to smoking, substance abuse and obesity, falls and injuries, and food and water borne illnesses and rabies, among others. The services range from promotion and advocacy to training and certification and inspections and enforcement. Overall the number of activities has grown, however a method of tying the activity metrics to the outcome metrics is difficult and has not yet been fully developed. This makes it difficult to know what activities create the greatest impact on helping people become better off. Below are some examples of the population health services metrics.

Public Health Promotion and Advocacy • 2% reduction in % of population (19+) exceeding low risk alcohol drinking guidelines between 2011 and 2014

• 7% reduction in fall related emergency visits in older adults (65+) between 2011 and 2014

Case and Outbreak Management • 25% reduction in length of respiratory outbreaks between 2011 and 2014 • 8% reduction in Chlamydia cases per 1000 between 2011 and 2014

January 6, 20152015-01-22 Page 34 of 92

Health Protection Certification • 70% increase in number of food handlers certified per year between 2011 and 2014

Health Resource Distribution • 71% increase in number of vaccine doses distributed between 2011 and 2014

Inspections and Enforcement • 79% increase in number of fixed premises inspections completed between 2012 and 2014 • 52% increase in the number of complaints, service requests, and referrals for inspection between 2011 and 2014

There is only one Service Improvement Opportunity recommended in this group of services; Public Health Inspectors and Nurses Scheduling, Process and Decentralization Strategy. This SIO is directed at ensuring that the services are being provided in the most productive and effective way and has the potential to identify efficiencies that can be taken as savings or reinvested into the anticipated downloading of more inspections responsibilities.

Building Health Partnerships KPI Insights Currently there is no data for the quantity, quality or results of the Building Health Partnerships Service, however the annual rate of increase in the service cost is about 4%, and the gross cost was budgeted in 2014 as $843,077. Some KPIs are currently being studied by the province to evaluate effective partnerships. These KPIs while useful, are currently focused on the quality of the meetings and engagement rather than the outcomes targeted by the partnerships. Given the substantial commitment of funds and resources, this service should develop outcomes based KPIs and the partnership groups should be held to account for achieving the outcomes.

There is one SIO recommended for this service which is similar to an SIO recommended for the Community Capacity Building Service; Building Health Partnerships Governance and Results Management Policy. As noted above there is opportunity for synergy in the development and monitoring of data for these two services using compatible tools and the same staff.

EMS KPI Insights

January 6, 20152015-01-22 Page 35 of 92 EMS is a very strong collector and user of performance data. Some improvement could be gained in identifying “is anyone better off?” measures related to patient outcomes. The issue of greatest concern for EMS is the substantial increase in wait times that can be observed in the tables below. The percentage of all cases that wait longer than 30 minutes at the hospital has risen from 0.66% to 5.09% in four years.

Hospital Delay Events and Percentage of All Patient Encounters 500 20% 469 450 18% 400 16% 350 14% Hospital Turnaround Delays (# of events >30 300 12% mins) 250 10% 200 8% Percent of all Patient Encounters with Hospital 150 6% 5.09% Turnaround Times > 30 100 64 4% mins 50 0.66% 2% 0 0% 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014F

There are three SIOs recommended for EMS: Review of Response Time Standard and Deployment, Review of Hospital Wait Times and EMS Fleet Review. The third SIO will be conducted in collaboration with the review of the entire Corporate Fleet.

Service Improvement Opportunities

Opportunity Risks and Potential Timeframe Barriers Implications Savings / Productivity Adopt Social Improved county-wide Nominal Less than one Low Determinants of Health planning year Provide County-wide Improved county-wide Nominal Less than one Low Staff Training on Social planning year Determinants of Health Transformation to Full Improved client service, $100 – 500K More than one Medium Integration of Services combining multiple year Supporting Families, unions and staff.

January 6, 20152015-01-22 Page 36 of 92 Opportunity Risks and Potential Timeframe Barriers Implications Savings / Productivity Children and Singles

Public Health Nurse and Improved planning and $100 – 500K One year to Medium Inspectors Scheduling, productivity, reduced develop, more Process and travel time and expense than one year to Decentralization implement Strategy After Hours Services Improved client service, Nominal Less than one Low to medium potential for staff year resistance Building Health Improved accountability Nominal Less than one Low to medium Partnerships for partnership year Governance and outcomes, potential for Management partner resistance. Community Improved planning for Net expense More than one Low (for Paramedicine Planning potential future year planning) download PHES Records Improved use of digital Nominal Less than one Low to medium Management resources and reduced year cost and risk of paper storage Review EMS Response Improved productivity Unknown More than one Medium Time Standard and and service response year Deployment EMS Hospital Wait Improved productivity Nominal Less than one Medium to high Times Review with shortened and year reduced number of turn around delays, may be hospital resistance to change EMS Fleet Review Potential for improved Unknown Within Wave 2 Low shared service with PW 911 Call Taking and Planning for improved or Net expense More than one Low Dispatch Review changed technology or year single source dispatch

January 6, 20152015-01-22 Page 37 of 92 Services owned Oxford County Library (Library) provides five services for the County, by Oxford all of which are discretionary. The Ontario Public Libraries Act, RSO 1990, c. P.44 provides that where a County library system is County Library established, there are requirements for the operation of the library (Corporate board. However, the Act does contemplate the cessation of a library system and there is nothing that mandates a County create a library Services) system. Libraries are a traditional municipal service and often cited as an important element of quality of life and economic development for • Library Collections communities. All of Oxford’s peer municipalities have libraries. • Library Programming Service Profiles and Insights • Library Public Below is a table of the key information captured in the service profiles Space Access for this group of services. The complete service profile for a service • Library also contains staff resources, some KPIs, a three year outlook for Information service pressures and a SWOT Analysis. The complete service profile Technology is available from Information Services. Access

• Library Reference While libraries are often discussed as single services, it is important to and Information differentiate the different services they provide to different clients. Some services, such as Library Collections, are typically only available to card holders (borrowing), while others like Reference and Information or Programming are available to anyone. Also some services, like Public Space Access, are not about the collection or information but rather the physical space which people or groups may make use of independently. Access to public space for meetings or independent programs is an important municipal service. The other important insight to be gleaned from identifying the different services is that not all branches can or do provide the entire suite of services. Some are too small to provide Programming or Public Space Access and some are served by branch supervisors who, while very skilled, are not professional librarians able to provide the complete Reference and Information Service.

The three year outlook for the Library services suggests that increasing demand for electronic resources both in the library itself and available for use and download from remote locations will grow and change the culture of library use. The traditional notion of a library as a quiet place of individual reading and study is evolving to a learning space for teams and groups, with emphasis on access to electronic tools such as computers with Internet access. The skills of librarians are also evolving to recognize the increased public familiarity with electronic searching. The change in demographics as the number of children declines and seniors increases will also have

January 6, 20152015-01-22 Page 38 of 92 an impact on library collections and programming.

Service Profiles Service Client Output Net $ M/D County Notes role Library Card holder Item for $1,306,826 D/D/T Direct Some branches Collections borrowing under- (print, performing – electronic) opportunity to expand services through creating community hubs Library IT Access Technology Wired or $612,822 D/D/T Direct Service is user wireless session growing overall, but slow in some branches, Library Program Program $517,401 D/D/T Direct Programming attendant Library Public Tenant / Square foot of $123,335 D/D/T Direct This service is Space Access renter space for not available at independent small branches use Library Information Question $348,401 D/D/T Direct This service is Reference and seeker answered limited at small Information branches

January 6, 20152015-01-22 Page 39 of 92

Service Financial Allocations Library net

4% 12% Library Collections Net

Library IT Access Net 44% Library Programming 19% Net Library Public Space Access Net Library Reference and 21% Information Net

Financial Allocations Insights The largest expense for the Library is the Collections Service. This makes sense as it is the largest driver of all library services, except Public Space Access. The Library services have seen some significant year over year growth, as indicated by the yellow highlighted lines in the table below. However, the addition of the Tillsonburg Library is largely responsible for the additional costs. What is important to analyze is whether the ratio of cost to outcomes has remained stable or improved which the table below confirms. Nevertheless, it is important when considering the ongoing use of the libraries that not all branches are seeing improvements, or they are seeing declining or flat usage with increasing costs. Libraries are largely a net expense to the County with revenues coming from small provincial grants, late and user fees and some private donations. Changing the revenue options for libraries would mean increasing the options for private donations or sponsorships or using the space differently to create opportunities for leases. The SIO for Re-imagining Libraries as Community Hubs includes the option of providing lease space to allied services.

January 6, 20152015-01-22 Page 40 of 92 Traffic, all branches

350.00 330.31 300.00 transactions per hour 250.00 in person 200.00 visits per hour 171.36 cost per hour 150.00

$110.40 100.00 cost per capita 50.00 (catchment) $29.17 0.00 2011 2012 2013 2014

Branch name Y/Y % change in Year over year % Y/Y % change in visits per hour change in cost per hour (2010 – 2014) transactions per open (2010 – hour (2010 – 2014) 2014) Brownsville 8% -1% 4% Burgessville -18% -18% -3% Embro -2% -12% -2% Harrington 0% -14% 9% Ingersoll 5% 1% 7% Innerkip -3% 4% 7% Mt Elgin -9% 0% 3% Norwich -11% -3% 0% Otterville 3% -7% -1% Plattsville 3% 6% -13% Princeton -18% -7% 3% Tavistock 2% -4% 3% Thamesford -1% -5% -9% Tillsonburg Excluded due to only two years of data All Branches* 7% 1% -1% *does not include headquarters or central administration

January 6, 20152015-01-22 Page 41 of 92 Yellow highlighting indicates where a service has had both a net growth or decline of greater than 5% per year and an absolute growth or decline of greater than $100,000.

Mandatory, Service name 2011A 2014B 2017F Average Absolute change discretionary annual or traditional growth rate D/D/T Library Collections Expenses $1,368,583.75 $1,672,606.76 $1,726,882.12 4.36% $358,298.38 D/D/T Library Collections Revenues -$209,559.07 -$365,780.89 -$156,850.00 4.19% $52,709.07 D/D/T Library Collections Net $1,159,024.68 $1,306,825.87 $1,570,032.12 5.91% $411,007.44 D/D/T Library Information Technology Access Expenses $567,963.02 $661,152.82 $682,422.69 3.36% $114,459.67 D/D/T Library Information Technology Access Revenues -$108,397.56 -$48,330.53 -$33,244.00 11.56% $75,153.56 D/D/T Library Information Technology Access Net $459,565.46 $612,822.29 $649,178.69 6.88% $189,613.23 D/D/T Library Programming Expenses $554,262.84 $721,362.47 $750,779.34 5.91% $196,516.50 D/D/T Library Programming Revenues -$126,625.88 -$149,961.29 -$67,037.50 7.84% $59,588.38 D/D/T Library Programming Net $427,636.96 $571,401.18 $683,741.84 9.98% $256,104.88 D/D/T Library Public Space Access Expenses $128,184.89 $177,833.97 $184,344.94 7.30% $56,160.05 D/D/T Library Public Space Access Revenues -$43,581.68 -$54,498.76 -$25,717.50 6.83% $17,864.18 D/D/T Library Public Space Access Net $84,603.21 $123,335.21 $158,627.44 14.58% $74,024.23 D/D/T Library Reference and Information Expenses $284,212.50 $375,688.98 $389,586.91 6.18% $105,374.41 D/D/T Library Reference and Information Revenues -$18,289.81 -$27,287.53 -$11,435.00 6.25% $6,854.81 D/D/T Library Reference and Information Net $265,922.69 $348,401.45 $378,151.91 7.03% $112,229.22

Results Based The KPIs for all services can be found in Appendix C. Accountability Performance Overall, the data management in the Oxford County Library is more Indicators mature than some other services in Wave 1. There is good data on most of the library services with the exception of metrics for Library Public Space Access and Library Reference and Information. As a result the metrics analysis yielded useful information about the system.

Library Collections KPI Insights The circulation of items in the library has seen a year over year growth of 5%, since 2010, with a large jump in 2013 after the Tillsonburg branch opened. This suggests that the library is still a popular service in the community. The growth is not steady across all branches, as seen above. This is interesting given that the collection size has remained roughly the same through the same time period. Of course, the collection is culled and updated regularly to remain relevant to the community. The cost of maintaining the collection, though stable in size, has also grown by over 5% year over year since 2011, reflecting the growing expense of print and electronic materials.

The number of active cards has grown just under 1% per year with new cards showing a large jump after Tillsonburg opened. Together with the growing circulation, this suggests card holders are becoming more active. It is important to note that the catchment areas of some branches have very low percentages of card holders. This trend suggests there is room to grow participation in library services.

Percentage of catchment area with card holders 50 45 40 35 30 25 2011 20 2012 15 2013 10 2014 5 0

Library Programming KPI Insights The data provided demonstrates that the number of programs is growing about 9% year over year and the attendance by about 12% year over year. This service is not available to the same degree at all branches, since some do not have sufficient space to provide separate program areas and therefore the options are limited. Library Programming 25,000

20,000

15,000 programs offered

10,000 program attendance

5,000

0 2010 2011 2012 2013

January 6, 20152015-01-22 Page 44 of 92 Library Public Space Access KPI Insights As noted, this service is not about providing general access to space during open hours, but providing space to groups for independent use such as meetings or programming. This service is not available at all branches as there are some with no separate space for independent meetings. There were no KPIs provided for this service.

As noted above in the financial allocations table, the cost of this service has grown substantially by over 14% year over year since 2011, however that reflects the addition of Tillsonburg. The value of the increase over that time is less than $100,000 and therefore not of significant concern.

Library Reference and Information KPI insights This service provides answers to reference questions from the public whether present in the library or over the phone or internet. Between 13,000 and 14,000 questions were asked of librarians in 2011 and 2012 respectively. The cost of providing this service, as seen above, has been growing faster than 7% year over year with an absolute growth value of over $100,000.

Library Information Technology Access KPI Insights This service is not about providing access to e-books or other electronic materials, but about access to information technology services like computers, Wi-Fi or Internet access, and education on technology. It is an important public service to provide access to information and electronic services to people without private access.

January 6, 20152015-01-22 Page 45 of 92 Library IT Access data 6 website visits per hour 5

All Branches computer 4 uses per hour

3 wireless uses per hour

2 Other e-service circulation (Fregal, Tumble, Online database) / hour 1 e-book transactions per hour 0 2011 2012 2013 2014

The main service improvement opportunity recommended for all the Library Services is to Re-imagine the Libraries as Community Hubs. This SIO is focused on expanding the role that libraries and library buildings play in the communities where they are housed. Libraries have always been places for community to gather and connect, but with the advent of increased technological access and changing demographics, they are no longer the quiet domain of books but rather they are interactive and vibrant spaces.

It is recommended that the library space become open to uses by other County services, particularly the Financial Assistance, Child Care Subsidy and Shelter Services as well as the Individual Health Assessment and Intervention Service and County-wide Customer Service. The space could also become available to other allied services. In some respects the model would operate like the Livingston Centre in Tillsonburg but would include the library.

The SIO may require some renovations to some branches and changes in the way other services are delivered (decentralized). This model is used in other library services such as Middlesex. There are also library systems who have recognized the needs of vulnerable members of the community by adding specialized social work staff (Edmonton and Brantford). In this case rather than add staff to the Library complement, the SIO suggests leveraging the existing Public Health Nurses and Client Support Workers by co-locating them in the

January 6, 20152015-01-22 Page 46 of 92 library branches.

In support of this SIO are some additional opportunities aimed at finding improvements in efficiencies, management and space which would all be necessary steps in the larger SIO.

Service Improvement Opportunities Opportunity Risks and Potential Timeframe Barriers implications savings / productivity Reimagine Libraries as Improved services to $100 – 500K More than one Medium to high County Multi-Service clients, improved library year Hubs services, improved library traffic Library Resource Review Improved client service, Less than $100K More than one Medium efficiencies in service year delivery Library Space Needs Reduced costs and $100 – 500K One year to Medium Review efficiencies, improved develop, more client service. than one year to implement Library Governance Potential efficiencies in Nominal Less than one Low Review staff time usage. year

January 6, 20152015-01-22 Page 47 of 92 Services owned Oxford County Archives (Archives) provides three services for the by Archives County, all of which are discretionary. Archives services are ones that are traditionally provided by municipalities, and all of Oxford’s peers (Corporate have similar services. Also, the Archives Collections and Resource Services) Management Service is also similar to the Records Management Service, with the exception that archives are designed to preserve • Archives original records in perpetuity using specialized techniques. Collections and Resource Service Profiles and Insights Management Below is a table of the key information captured in the service profiles • Archives Outreach for this group of services. The complete service profile for a service and Programming also contains staff resources, some KPIs, a three year outlook for • Archives service pressures and a SWOT Analysis. The complete service profile Reference and is available from Information Services. Information Similar to the library, archives are often considered as single services, however the profiling of the work done by the Archives department illuminated three unique services: Archives Collections and Resource Management; Archives Outreach and Programming; and Archives Reference and Information. The Archives Collections and Resource Management service is the traditional work of collecting and preserving documents and records. The client is the County of Oxford. The Archives Outreach and Programming Service provides educational opportunities to members of the public and children in schools, and the Archives Reference and Information Service answers questions and provides support to professional researchers.

The three year outlook for the Archives suggests that the drivers of change are the number of records managed, especially unique collections and changes in both the available technology and technology expectations of users. Some of Oxford’s peers provide online databases of existing records for easy search and access.

The Archives does not manage records, outreach or information requests for the other area municipalities. This is in contrast to the peer counties that were reviewed in the STW project (Stratford-Perth, Wellington and Elgin).

Service Profiles Service Client Output Net $ M/D County Notes role

January 6, 20152015-01-22 Page 48 of 92 Service Client Output Net $ M/D County Notes role Archives County of Record $121,644 D/D/T Direct Service has seen Collections and Oxford managed increased cost Management without increased productivity Archives Program Programmed $79,319 D/D/T Direct Service has seen Outreach and attendee activity a stagnant Programming number of presentations with increased cost. Archives Researcher Information $79,319 D/D/T Direct Service has seen Reference and request increased cost Information without increased productivity

January 6, 20152015-01-22 Page 49 of 92 Service Financial Allocations Archives net

28%

44% Archives Collections Net Archives Programming Net Archives Reference 28% and Information Net

Financial Allocations Insights Relative to many other services provided by the County of Oxford, the three Archives services are not very expensive. Their total net cost is $280,282, though due to some recent resource changes, they have shown a 30% increase in cost without a corresponding increase in productivity. The drivers of cost for the Archives services are personnel and specialized storage space to safely preserve the official records of the County.

The Archives services are largely a net expense for the County: they do not have revenue except from some specialized document preservation. It is possible to create a revenue model for allowing professional researchers to have access to the Archives or charging for programming as is done in some peer municipalities.

January 6, 20152015-01-22 Page 50 of 92 Net Archives costs $160,000.00

$120,000.00 Archives Collections and Resources Management Service $80,000.00 Net Archives Outreach and Programming Service $40,000.00 Net

Archives Reference $0.00 and Information Net

Net Outreach and Programming cost per program delivered $16,000.00

$12,000.00

$8,000.00

$4,000.00

$- 2012 2013 2014 (Forecast)

January 6, 20152015-01-22 Page 51 of 92 Yellow highlighting indicates where a service has had both a net growth or decline of greater than 5% per year and an absolute growth or decline of greater than $100,000.

Mandatory, Service name 2011A 2014B 2017F Average Absolute discretionary annual change or traditional growth rate D/D/T Archives Collections and Resources Management $97,653.16 $124,644.08 $131,842.48 5.84% $34,189.32 Service Expenses D/D/T Archives Collections and Resources Management -$32,156.00 -$3,000.00 $0.00 16.67% $32,156.00 Service Revenues D/D/T Archives Collections and Resources $65,497.16 $121,644.08 $131,842.48 16.88% $66,345.32 Management Service Net D/D/T Archives Outreach and Programming Service $62,142.92 $79,318.96 $83,899.76 5.84% $21,756.84 Expenses D/D/T Archives Outreach and Programming Service $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 FALSE $0.00 Revenues D/D/T Archives Outreach and Programming Service $62,142.92 $79,318.96 $83,899.76 5.84% $21,756.84 Net D/D/T Archives Reference and Information Expenses $62,142.92 $79,318.96 $83,899.76 5.84% $21,756.84 D/D/T Archives Reference and Information Revenues $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 FALSE $0.00 D/D/T Archives Reference and Information Net $62,142.92 $79,318.96 $83,899.76 5.84% $21,756.84

Results Based The KPIs for all services can be found in Appendix C. Accountability™ Performance Archives Collections and Resources KPI Insights Indicators There was relatively little KPI information provided for the Archives services except for what was in the 2014 Budget and Business Plans. This made it somewhat difficult to do any outcomes analysis. However, using that information as a measure of quantity, some insights were possible. The total of reference requests is falling slightly as is the number of student presentations. Compared to some of the peer municipalities, Oxford’s number of research requests seems low (Elgin – 2000 per year; Stratford-Perth – 4000 per year), however these are larger archives, which may account for some of the difference.

Total reference requests 800

700

600

500

400 Total Reference 300 Requests

200

100

0 2012 2013 2014 (Forecast)

Archives Outreach and Programming 6

Student presentations 3

Community 2 presentations

0 2012 2013 2014 (Forecast)

Service There are four proposed service improvement opportunities which Improvement range from expanding the Archives services to include all area Opportunities municipalities to merging the Archives Collections and Resources service with the Records Management service. The SIOs are focused on trying to expand productivity and potential revenue sources or lower costs by reducing services. The Library Programming Service could address the loss of the Archives Outreach and Programming Service through expanding its Local History Programming.

All the SIOs are listed below.

Opportunity Risks and Potential Timeframe Barriers implications savings / productivity Archives and Records Reduced duplication and Nominal Less than one Low (in process) Management Process improved management year and Policy of records collected

January 6, 20152015-01-22 Page 54 of 92 Archives Outreach and Reduction in costs, >$100k Less than one Medium Programming Service reduced duplication year Volunteer Service Delivery or Merger with Public Library History Programming Expand Archives to all Increased costs and Unknown More than one Medium Area Municipalities responsibilities. year Merge Archives and Reduction in cost, $100k - $500k More than one Medium Records Management reduction in service levels year (elimination of service), centralized management of all records.

January 6, 20152015-01-22 Page 55 of 92 Appendix A: Service Inventory

Service Service Service description Output Direct client Value proposition program name grouping

Community Child Care Subsidy An external service that provides funding to Subsidy payment Child care provider To ensure a range of affordable child Child Care service providers in support of care options for parents in Oxford affordable child care in Oxford County County.

Community Community Capacity An external service that provides subsidies to Dollar of community Community partner To support Oxford County support Subsidy support human services Community Partners capacity subsidy residents by increasing the in Oxford County. availability and reducing the duplication of services to individual and families in need.

Community Financial Assistance An external service that provides financial Payment ($ of financial Eligible resident To marginally improve the quality of assistance to eligible residents of Oxford assistance) life of eligible Oxford Residents by County providing financial assistance.

Community Library Public Space An external service providing welcoming and Library room for public Tenant To provide low or no-cost public Access accessible meeting places. use space for independent use by the public to hold meetings, programs, classes or other community events.

Community Library Technology An external service providing public access to Wired or wireless session Technology user Equality of access to online Access technology and the internet. information and resources through high quality workstations and new technologies.

Community Shelter (Direct An external service that provides units of Housing unit Tenant To improve quality of life by Delivered) shelter to eligible residents of Oxford County reducing the incidence of homelessness and ensuring housing affordability for residents of Oxford County.

Service Service Service description Output Direct client Value proposition program name grouping

Community Shelter (Subsidy) An external service that provides subsidies to Subsidy payment Housing provider To improve quality of life by community partners delivering shelter to reducing the incidence of residents of Oxford County homelessness and ensuring housing affordability for residents of Oxford County.

Community Strategic Planning and An internal service responsible for Plan Local Government Ensure County and Area Municipal Policy researching, developing, reviewing and land use policies (OP), documents maintaining local land use planning (Zoning, Site Plan guidelines) documents (OP and Zoning), undertaking decisions, processes and initiatives special planning related projects and protect the environment, support providing recommendations and advice to long term sustainability, support the County and eight Area Municipalities land County and Area Municipality goals use planning related matters of a policy or and objectives and are compliant strategic nature and/or with a high level of with the law. complexity or potential corporate impact.

Community Tourism Industry An external service that develops and Partnership / agreement Tourism operator Promoting Tourism as a source of Support coordinates strategies and marketing to (government, for profit, economic growth potential for support the growth of the tourism industry in not-for-profit) Oxford County. Promoting local Oxford County. tourism offerings.

Community Tourism Visitor Support An external service that provides information Number of visitor Visitors Promotion of Oxford County as a to tourists. interactions tourist destination, improved communication with visitors and potential visitors, improved quality of life for residents through awareness of local activities and events.

January 6, 20152015-01-22 Page 57 of 92 Service Service Service description Output Direct client Value proposition program name grouping

Drinking Water Drinking Water Supply An external service that supplies drinking Megalitres of drinking Water customer To directly impact the quality of life Supply water from source to tap to water customers. water delivered of customers by reducing the potential for water-borne disease, allowing for economic development and fire protection, and providing opportunities for recreational activities.

Environmental Curbside Waste An external service that provides curbside Tonne of waste and Generator of waste The provision of curbside garbage Collection garbage and recycling collection to residents recycling material material (garbage and and recycling collection in a manner living in the County of Oxford (includes collected Blue Box materials) that is efficient and cost effective, residential, industrial, commercial, and responsive to customer needs, institutional properties) who meet the protective of the natural curbside collection requirements. environment, and considerate of public safety.

Environmental Waste Diversion and An external service that diverts and disposes Tonne of waste processed Landfill customer The provision of waste management Disposal of waste for Oxford County. (disposed plus diverted) (garbage hauler, resident) in a manner that protects the natural environment, public health, and water sources and provides beneficial reuse of resources.

Environmental Wastewater Treatment An external service that collects and treats a Megalitre of wastewater Wastewater customer Ensure protection of the cubic metre of wastewater from a treated environment and public health of wastewater customer. residents and visitors to Oxford County and partners in the watershed.

Environmental Woodlands An external service which protects County (TBD) Owner or operator of The management of the lands and Conservation woodlands through by-law enforcement. inspected premises forests in Oxford County manner to allow for the protection of the natural environment, public health, water sources, and natural resources of the County.

January 6, 20152015-01-22 Page 58 of 92 Service Service Service description Output Direct client Value proposition program name grouping

Information Archives Outreach and An external service that provides education Programmed activity Program attendee The provision of information to Programming opportunities to interested persons about the interested program attendees about archives of the County of Oxford available historical information

Information Archives Reference and An external service that provides access to Information request Researcher (Institutional To provide access to researchers Information the inactive historical records of the County or individual) including institutions to the inactive of Oxford. historical records of the county.

Information Library Collections An external service offering loans of print, Library material accessed Library card holder To provide access to a collection of audiovisual and electronic materials to the materials responsive to community public needs for entertainment, education, and informational needs of all ages.

Information Library Programming An external service offering programming Library program Program participant To provide programming that and events that respond to the literacy needs animates the literacy opportunities of the community. provided by the public library.

Information Library Reference and An external service offering answers to Reference transaction Reference information To ensure equality of access to high Information reference questions in person or via other seeker quality and trustworthy information. channels (email, web, phone)

Public Health & 911 Call Taking and An external service that provides 911 Call taken and dispatched 911 caller Provides a single universal number Safety Dispatch answering services to people reporting for citizens to access help regardless emergencies and directs calls to appropriate of the nature of the emergency emergency service dispatch centres improving the response time for according to the callers request. assistance.

January 6, 20152015-01-22 Page 59 of 92 Service Service Service description Output Direct client Value proposition program name grouping

Public Health & Building Health An external service that initiates the bringing Number of Community partner Bringing people and services Safety Partnerships/Collaborat together of community health partnerships/networks together to promote a more ions/Networks agencies/services/residents who may not integrated /connected service have worked together before to address new delivery across Oxford. and emerging issues through the provision of the expertise and operational support required to develop and sustain Partnerships/Collaborations/Networks.

Public Health & Case and Outbreak An external service that responds to cases Case managed Individual or institution To prevent or reduce the burden of Safety Management and outbreaks of infectious disease of public exposed to an infectious infectious diseases of public health health importance in Oxford County disease of public health importance importance

Public Health & Emergency Medical An external service that provides emergency Care and rehabilitation Ill or injured person To provide reliable pre-hospital Safety Service (EMS) care to stabilize a patient’s condition, encounter emergency medical care and initiates rapid transport to hospitals, and transportation of the medically ill facilitates both emergency and non- and injured. emergency transfers between medical facilities.

Public Health & Health Advocacy and An external offering comprehensive health Advocacy or promotional Eligible resident To promote healthy people, healthy Safety Promotion promotion approaches to improve the health encounter places in Oxford County. behaviours and outcomes of people in Oxford County.

January 6, 20152015-01-22 Page 60 of 92 Service Service Service description Output Direct client Value proposition program name grouping

Public Health & Health Protection An external service offering formal lessons on Certificate or license Persons or agencies To prevent or reduce the burden of Safety Certification safe food handling practices and principles, issued for training requiring public health food-borne illness, drinking water and education and training of training to work or illness and recreational water illness. owners/operators of small drinking water operate equipment systems and recreational water facilities, including public pools and spas.

Public Health & Health Resource An external service offering publicly funded Health supply (vaccine, Health care provider Reduce or eliminate the burden of Safety Distribution vaccines and antibiotics for treatment of anti-biotic or condom) sexually transmitted, blood-borne sexually transmitted infections to health infections and vaccine preventable service providers. disease.

Public Health & Individual Health An external service providing health Care encounter Client in need of public To prevent or reduce or eliminate Safety Assessment and assessment, care, treatment and referrals for health intervention the burden of illness Intervention individuals and families.

Public Health & Inspections, An external service providing investigation, Incident of non- Owner or operator of To prevent or reduce the burden of Safety Investigations and inspection and enforcement for compliance compliance inspected premises food-borne illness, water-borne Enforcement under the Health Protection and Promotion illness related to drinking water, Act and other prescribed legislation water-borne illness and injury related to recreational water use, illness related to tobacco use, vaccine preventable diseases and infectious diseases of public health importance

Public Health & Long Term Care An external service that provides resident Long term care bed Long term care resident To provide community-focused, Safety centred care bed for an eligible Long Term consistently high quality of long Care Resident. term care for residents of Oxford County and set the benchmark for other long term care in the County.

January 6, 20152015-01-22 Page 61 of 92 Service Service Service description Output Direct client Value proposition program name grouping

Public Health & Roads An External Service that provides a Km of Centre-line kilometre of Road user People are able to move safely and Safety Roadway to a Road User roadway efficiently throughout the County.

Supporting Accounting An Internal service that provides accounts Transaction processed County of Oxford To provide accurately and timely receivable, accounts payable and payroll invoicing, collection and payment to services for the County of Oxford. those working with or employed by the County of Oxford.

Supporting Administrative Support An internal service which provides Service encounter County of Oxford To provide essential support to all administrative support to all County County departments; to be the face departments and services. of the County to the public (telephone, walk-in, email, etc.); to facilitate excellent service delivery both internally and externally.

Supporting Archives Collections An internal service that acquires and Record managed County of Oxford The preservation of the vital and and Resource conserves the inactive historical records of valuable reords of the County of Management the County of Oxford, its agencies, boards Oxford. and commissions.

Supporting Business Applications An internal service that provides business Business application Local Government To ensure an efficient, cost effective applications for the County of Oxford and and coordinated suite of business Area Municipalities applications that support service delivery by the County of Oxford and area municipalities to their clients.

Supporting Communications An internal service that provides professional Communications advisory County of Oxford To promote and protect brand consultation and guidelines to promote and or promotional encounter recognition and reputation to instill protect corporate identity and reputation public confidence and support a positive organizational culture.

January 6, 20152015-01-22 Page 62 of 92 Service Service Service description Output Direct client Value proposition program name grouping

Supporting Compensation and An internal service that provides Total compensation County of Oxford To contribute expertise that Benefits compensation and benefits to County of package Employee supports our partners’ work in Oxford employees advancing the collective interests of our community.

Supporting Corporate Leadership An internal service which oversees the Gross annual expenditures County of Oxford The County of Oxford being viewed implementation of Council decisions and as an effective, efficient and well provides direction to the organization and managed organization who delivers employees of the organization valued services to a public confident that they receive value for money.

Supporting Council Support An internal service that supports County Lawful decision of Council County of Oxford County of Oxford and its officers are Council’s lawful decision making for the / Board of Health protected from legal consequences County of Oxford. by acting lawfully. Public transparency and confidence in democratic government in the County of Oxford.

Supporting County of Oxford An internal service that provides connectivity Number of connected Local government and To provide connectivity to County of Integrated Network to all municipalities of Oxford County. locations community partners Oxford departments and staff, and (COIN) to Area Municipalities and community partners.

Supporting Development An internal service providing professional Development application Local Government Ensure County and Area Municipal Application recommendations and advice to the County processed (County of Oxford and land use policies (OP), documents and eight Area Municipalities regarding Area Municipalities) (Zoning, Site Plan guidelines) development applications and other day to decisions, processes and initiatives day land use planning related matters. protect the environment, support long term sustainability, support County and Area Municipality goals and objectives and are compliant with the law.

January 6, 20152015-01-22 Page 63 of 92 Service Service Service description Output Direct client Value proposition program name grouping

Supporting Emergency A service that develops and coordinates all Emergency response plan County of Oxford To detail a plan of action for the Management appropriate event response activities, with efficient deployment and clarity of roles and accountability, across all coordination of the County of departments and relevant organizations Oxford services, resources, agencies during an emergency and ensures the and personnel to provide the earliest continuity of essential municipal services. possible response

Supporting Engineering Design and An internal service which provides Capital project Project sponsor To provide the local governments Construction engineering design and construction project with sustainable capital services to the County of Oxford and Area infrastructure projects Municipalities, as well as to some boundary municipalities.

Supporting Fiscal Management An internal service that provides financial Financial report County of Oxford To facilitate good financial reporting for the County of Oxford. stewardship of County financial assets and liabilities on behalf of Oxford County taxpayers.

Supporting Fleet and Equipment An Internal service that supplies vehicles and Vehicle or piece of County of Oxford To efficiently provide safe and equipment to the County of Oxford to equipment environmentally appropriate support service delivery. vehicles and equipment to the County of Oxford.

Supporting IT Infrastructure An internal service that provides and Managed device Local government To provide technical service to maintains technology and infrastructure County of Oxford departments and management for the County of Oxford and staff, and to Area municipality local Area Municipalities. departments and staff.

Supporting Labour Relations An internal service that manages labour Collective agreement County of Oxford To ensure that the County of Oxford relations on behalf of the County of Oxford is able to deliver excellent services to the public through management of Union relationships.

January 6, 20152015-01-22 Page 64 of 92 Service Service Service description Output Direct client Value proposition program name grouping

Supporting Occupational Health An Internal service that provides safe Safe work site County of Oxford Ensure that the County of Oxford and Safety workplaces for employees provides a safe environment to reduce the risk of harm and loss to employees and other occupants of County workplaces.

Supporting Project Management An internal service that provides professional Project managed County of Oxford To ensure large and important project management services for projects of corporate projects are managed in a corporate importance. consistent and professional manner

Supporting Property Management An Internal Service that manages a Square Square metre of property County of Oxford (and To provide Well maintained Metre of Property for the County of Oxford. managed Province of Ontario) buildings and property appropriate to the services delivered.

Supporting Provincial Offences The Provincial Offences is a procedural law Charges received Ministry of the Attorney To facilitate the administration of Adminstration for administering and prosecuting provincial General justice for the protection of public offences including those committed under safety. the Highway Traffic Act, the Compulsory Automobile Insurance Act, the Trespass to Property Act, the Liquor Licence Act, and other provincial legislation, municipal by- laws and minor federal offences. The POA governs all aspects of the legal prosecution process, from serving an offence notice to an accused person to conducting trials including sentencing and appeals.

January 6, 20152015-01-22 Page 65 of 92 Service Service Service description Output Direct client Value proposition program name grouping

Supporting Public Works An internal service to provide administrative Service encounter County of Oxford To provide essential administration Administration support to all divisions of Public Works and; and support services to all Public Provides external customer service to the Works divisions in order to maintain general public satisfied and informed customers (both external and internal).

Supporting Records Management An internal service that provides for the Record managed County of Oxford To retain and preserve the County’s safekeeping of the County’s official records, official records in a secure and both paper and electronic, and facilitates accessible manner. To facilitate compliance with applicable access and compliance with the privacy privacy laws. provisions of the Municipal Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act, 2001 (“MFIPPA”), the Personal Health Information Protection Act, 2004 (“PHIPA”) and all other applicable privacy legislation.

Supporting Recruitment and An internal service that provides the County Qualified employee County of Oxford To ensure that the County of Oxford Retention of Oxford with qualified employees through is able to deliver excellent services to the life cycle of their employment. the public through qualified employees.

Supporting Risk Management An internal service which exists to protect the Claim resolved County of Oxford To protect the County’s assets municipality and its officers, employees, (property and people) from volunteers and Councillors against risks that pecuniary loss, liability, damage or may involve pecuniary loss or liability, injury. To provide an efficient, cost property damage or injury. effective and coordinated risk management and insurance program. To instill risk awareness into the corporate culture.

January 6, 20152015-01-22 Page 66 of 92 Service Service Service description Output Direct client Value proposition program name grouping

Supporting Staff Development An internal service that manages learning Development session Learning/development To ensure that the County of Oxford and development opportunities on behalf of recipient is able to deliver excellent services to the County of Oxford the public through qualified employees.

Supporting Treasury An internal service that provides cash flow, Account managed County of Oxford To facilitate good financial investment, and debt management for the stewardship of County and County of Oxford. municipal financial assets and liabilities on behalf of Oxford County taxpayers.

January 6, 20152015-01-22 Page 67 of 92 Appendix B: Service Financial Allocations Average Mandatory, annual Absolute discretionary Service name 2011A 2014B 2017F growth change or traditional Rate M/M Child Care Subsidy Expenses $7,319,694.70 $6,514,599.74 $6,587,695.70 -1.67% -$731,999.00

M/M Child Care Subsidy Revenues -$6,012,141.00 -$5,163,069.00 -$5,200,709.00 2.25% $811,432.00

M/M Child Care Subsidy Net $1,307,553.70 $1,351,530.74 $1,386,986.70 1.01% $79,433.00

M/D Community Capacity Subsidy Expenses $440,288.40 $525,345.28 $555,198.40 4.35% $114,910.00

M/D Community Capacity Subsidy Revenues -$502,859.00 $0.00 $0.00 16.67% $502,859.00

M/D Community Capacity Subsidy Net -$62,570.60 $525,345.28 $555,198.40 164.55% $617,769.00

M/M Financial Assistance Expenses $16,406,109.95 $17,061,371.09 $19,395,493.99 3.04% $2,989,384.04

M/M Financial Assistance Revenues -$13,692,160.00 -$16,073,103.80 -$19,992,467.00 -7.67% -$6,300,307.00

M/M Financial Assistance Net $2,713,949.95 $988,267.29 -$596,973.01 -20.33% -$3,310,922.96

M/D Shelter (Direct Delivered) Expenses $8,487,667.20 $5,074,307.84 $5,581,581.20 -5.71% $586,331.88

M/D Shelter (Direct Delivered) Revenues $0.00 -$2,706,100.00 -$2,863,066.00 FALSE -$2,863,066.00

M/D Shelter (Direct Delivered) Net $8,487,667.20 $2,368,207.84 $2,718,515.20 -11.33% -$5,769,152.00

M/D Shelter (Subsidy) Expenses $1,969,211.15 $6,146,682.73 $3,995,144.15 17.15% $2,025,933.00

M/D Shelter (Subsidy) Revenues -$5,392,103.00 -$3,400,456.20 -$1,466,782.00 12.13% $3,925,321.00

M/D Shelter (Subsidy) Net -$3,422,891.85 $2,746,226.53 $2,528,362.15 28.98% $5,951,254.00

M/M 911 Call Taking and Dispatch Expenses $28,285.00 $46,937.00 $51,350.00 13.59% $23,065.00

M/M 911 Call Taking and Dispatch Revenue $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 FALSE $0.00

M/M 911 Call Taking and Dispatch Net $28,285.00 $46,937.00 $51,350.00 13.59% $23,065.00

M/D Building Health Partnerships/Collaborations/Networks Expenses $679,889.37 $843,077.05 $754,140.88 1.82% $74,251.51

M/D Building Health Partnerships/Collaborations/Networks Revenues -$536,082.91 -$674,667.92 -$572,982.20 -1.15% -$36,899.29

M/D Building Health Partnerships/Collaborations/Networks Net $143,806.46 $168,409.13 $181,158.68 4.33% $37,352.22

M/M Case and Outbreak Management Service Expenses $528,054.05 $615,188.09 $640,451.55 3.55% $112,397.50

January 6, 20152015-01-22 Page 68 of 92 Average Mandatory, annual Absolute discretionary Service name 2011A 2014B 2017F growth change or traditional Rate M/M Case and Outbreak Management Service Revenues -$416,038.32 -$483,679.02 -$498,782.12 -3.31% -$82,743.80

M/M Case and Outbreak Management Service Net $112,015.73 $131,509.07 $141,669.43 4.41% $29,653.70

M/M Emergency Management Expenses $143,780.26 $214,990.38 $225,474.56 9.47% $81,694.30

M/M Emergency Management Revenues -$77,582.16 -$131,053.70 -$136,977.30 -12.76% -$59,395.14

M/M Emergency Management Net $66,198.10 $83,936.68 $88,497.26 5.61% $22,299.16

M/M Emergency Medical Services (EMS) Expenses $9,741,093.07 $10,438,857.15 $10,845,684.88 1.89% $1,104,591.81

M/M Emergency Medical Services (EMS) Revenues -$4,991,746.00 -$5,181,222.00 -$5,268,975.00 -0.93% -$277,229.00

M/M Emergency Medical Services (EMS) Net $4,749,347.07 $5,257,635.15 $5,576,709.88 2.90% $827,362.81

M/D Health Advocacy and Promotion Expenses $1,853,176.98 $2,036,282.85 $2,004,260.09 1.36% $151,083.11

M/D Health Advocacy and Promotion Revenues -$1,559,565.29 -$1,642,001.77 -$1,582,611.32 -0.25% -$23,046.03

M/D Health Advocacy and Promotion Net $293,611.69 $394,281.08 $421,648.77 7.27% $128,037.08

M/M Health Monitoring and Surveillance Expenses $1,890,101.46 $2,100,034.36 $2,130,358.88 2.12% $240,257.42

M/M Health Monitoring and Surveillance Revenues -$1,560,847.01 -$1,612,852.48 -$1,613,786.92 -0.57% -$52,939.91

M/D Health Monitoring and Surveillance Net $329,254.45 $487,181.88 $516,571.96 9.48% $187,317.51

M/D Health Protection Certification Expenses $25,120.25 $19,752.37 $20,293.34 -3.20% -$4,826.91

M/D Health Protection Certification Revenues -$25,189.52 -$18,597.54 -$19,062.41 4.05% $6,127.11

M/D Health Protection Certification Net -$69.27 $1,154.83 $1,230.93 312.83% $1,300.20

M/D Health Resource Distribution Expenses $108,355.57 $122,714.96 $129,215.75 3.21% $20,860.18

M/D Health Resource Distribution Revenues -$85,932.15 -$79,606.42 -$82,008.81 0.76% $3,923.34

M/D Health Resource Distribution Net $22,423.42 $43,108.54 $47,206.94 18.42% $24,783.52

M/D Individual Health Assessment and Intervention Expenses $2,393,757.12 $2,815,276.98 $2,767,229.52 2.60% $373,472.40

M/D Individual Health Assessment and Intervention Revenues -$1,905,441.49 -$2,157,824.50 -$2,063,503.25 -1.38% -$158,061.76

M/D Individual Health Assessment and Intervention Net $488,315.63 $657,452.48 $703,726.27 7.35% $215,410.64

M/M Inspections, Investigations and Enforcement Expenses $1,297,643.38 $1,263,039.68 $1,321,859.07 0.31% $24,215.69

January 6, 20152015-01-22 Page 69 of 92 Average Mandatory, annual Absolute discretionary Service name 2011A 2014B 2017F growth change or traditional Rate M/M Inspections, Investigations and Enforcement Revenues -$965,674.15 -$918,937.65 -$951,142.67 0.25% $14,531.48

M/M Inspections, Investigations and Enforcement Net $331,969.23 $344,102.03 $370,716.40 1.95% $38,747.17

D/D/T Library Collections Expenses $1,368,583.75 $1,672,606.76 $1,726,882.12 4.36% $358,298.38 D/D/T Library Collections Revenues -$209,559.07 -$365,780.89 -$156,850.00 4.19% $52,709.07

D/D/T Library Collections Net $1,159,024.68 $1,306,825.87 $1,570,032.12 5.91% $411,007.44

D/D/T Library Information Technology Access Expenses $567,963.02 $661,152.82 $682,422.69 3.36% $114,459.67 D/D/T Library Information Technology Access Revenues -$108,397.56 -$48,330.53 -$33,244.00 11.56% $75,153.56

D/D/T Library Information Technology Access Net $459,565.46 $612,822.29 $649,178.69 6.88% $189,613.23

D/D/T Library Programming Expenses $554,262.84 $721,362.47 $750,779.34 5.91% $196,516.50 D/D/T Library Programming Revenues -$126,625.88 -$149,961.29 -$67,037.50 7.84% $59,588.38

D/D/T Library Programming Net $427,636.96 $571,401.18 $683,741.84 9.98% $256,104.88

D/D/T Library Public Space Access Expenses $128,184.89 $177,833.97 $184,344.94 7.30% $56,160.05 D/D/T Library Public Space Access Revenues -$43,581.68 -$54,498.76 -$25,717.50 6.83% $17,864.18

D/D/T Library Public Space Access Net $84,603.21 $123,335.21 $158,627.44 14.58% $74,024.23

D/D/T Library Reference and Information Expenses $284,212.50 $375,688.98 $389,586.91 6.18% $105,374.41

D/D/T Library Reference and Information Revenues -$18,289.81 -$27,287.53 -$11,435.00 6.25% $6,854.81

D/D/T Library Reference and Information Net $265,922.69 $348,401.45 $378,151.91 7.03% $112,229.22 Archives Collections and Resources Management Service D/D/T $97,653.16 $124,644.08 $131,842.48 5.84% $34,189.32 Expenses Archives Collections and Resources Management Service D/D/T -$32,156.00 -$3,000.00 $0.00 16.67% $32,156.00 Revenues D/D/T Archives Collections and Resources Management Service Net $65,497.16 $121,644.08 $131,842.48 16.88% $66,345.32

D/D/T Archives Outreach and Programming Service Expenses $62,142.92 $79,318.96 $83,899.76 5.84% $21,756.84

D/D/T Archives Outreach and Programming Service Net $62,142.92 $79,318.96 $83,899.76 5.84% $21,756.84

D/D/T Archives Reference and Information Expenses $62,142.92 $79,318.96 $83,899.76 5.84% $21,756.84

D/D/T Archives Reference and Information Revenues $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 FALSE $0.00 D/D/T Archives Reference and Information Net $62,142.92 $79,318.96 $83,899.76 5.84% $21,756.84

January 6, 20152015-01-22 Page 70 of 92

January 6, 20152015-01-22 Page 71 of 92 Appendix C – Key Performance Indicators

Division Service Metric name Metric type

Archives Archives Collections and Resources Management Internal collection Quantity

Archives Archives Collections and Resources Management External collection Quantity

Archives Archives Collections and Resources Management Transcription Quantity

Archives Archives Collections and Resources Management Number out of 50 of Archeion descriptions submitted Quantity

Archives Archives Collections and Resources Management Archives Collections and Resources Management service expenses Cost

Archives Archives Collections and Resources Management Archives Collections and Resources Management service revenues Cost

Archives Archives Collections and Resources Management Archives Collections and Resources Management service net Cost

Archives Archives Collections and Resources Management Net cost per fond Cost

Archives Archives Outreach and Programming Student presentations Quantity Archives Archives Outreach and Programming Community presentations Quantity Archives Archives Outreach and Programming Displays Quantity Archives Archives Outreach and Programming Joint venture requests Quantity Archives Archives Outreach and Programming Tours Quantity Archives Archives Outreach and Programming Joint projects Quantity Archives Archives Outreach and Programming Archives Outreach and Programming service expenses Cost Archives Archives Outreach and Programming Archives Outreach and Programming service revenues Cost Archives Archives Outreach and Programming Archives Outreach and Programming service net Cost

Archives Archives Outreach and Programming Net Outreach and Programming cost per program delivered Cost

Archives Archives Reference and Information Number of internal reference requests Quantity Archives Archives Reference and Information Number of external reference requests Quantity Archives Archives Reference and Information Number of general reference requests Quantity

January 6, 20152015-01-22 Page 72 of 92 Division Service Metric name Metric type

Archives Archives Reference and Information Total requests Quantity Archives Archives Reference and Information Percentage of internal reference requests Quality Archives Archives Reference and Information Percentage of external reference requests Quality Archives Archives Reference and Information Percentage of general reference requests Quality Archives Archives Reference and Information Number of Archeion hits Quality Archives Archives Reference and Information Number of Archeion requests Quality Archives Archives Reference and Information Percentage of Archeion requests of total requests Quality Archives Archives Reference and Information Archives Reference and Information Expenses Cost Archives Archives Reference and Information Archives Reference and Information Revenues Cost Archives Archives Reference and Information Archives Reference and Information Net Cost

Archives Archives Reference and Information Net Reference and Information Cost per Request Received Cost

Emergency Medical Services Emergency Management BIAs Completed/Reviewed (Number completed/Number of divisions) Quantity

Emergency Medical Services Emergency Management Number of Emergency Management Exercises / Number of Plans Quantity

Number of identified staff trained in Emergency Management Emergency Medical Services Emergency Management Quantity (IMS/BEM) Number of individuals who received information on emergency Emergency Medical Services Emergency Management Quantity preparedness Number of community safety / awareness campaigns delivered Emergency Medical Services Emergency Management Quantity (presentations/trade fairs/etc.)

Emergency Medical Services Emergency Management Number of media safety / awareness campaigns delivered Quantity

Emergency Medical Services Emergency Management Percentage of households with 72 hour kits Quantity Number of Populations that may need assistance with Emergency Medical Services Emergency Management Quantity evacuation/shelter-in-place have been identified Emergency Medical Services Emergency Management Percentage of EMCPA essential level requirements met Quality Emergency Medical Services Emergency Management Percentage of ECG participated in annual exercise Quality Emergency Medical Services Emergency Management Participant satisfaction with exercise Quality Percentage of emergency plans reviewed within required time frames. Emergency Medical Services Emergency Management Quality (Number of reviews/Number of plans)

January 6, 20152015-01-22 Page 73 of 92 Division Service Metric name Metric type

Hazard identification and risk assessment process in place and Emergency Medical Services Emergency Management Quality updated annually (Yes/No) Percentage of identified hazards / risks with mitigation Emergency Medical Services Emergency Management Quality strategies/plans in place Median number of community partners/organizations engaged with in Emergency Medical Services Emergency Management Quality an emergency planning event/exercise Emergency Medical Services Emergency Management Participant satisfaction with exercise Quality Continuity of Operations Plans (Number plans/Number of Emergency Medical Services Emergency Management Result essential services) Percentage of corrective action/improvements implemented (Number Emergency Medical Services Emergency Management Result identified/Number implemented) Percentage of improvement plans developed based on after action Emergency Medical Services Emergency Management Result reports Frequency in which EOC telecommunications equipment are reviewed Emergency Medical Services Emergency Management Result and tested

Time for pre-identified staff with lead incident management roles Emergency Medical Services Emergency Management Result acknowledge receipt and understanding of alert notification

Emergency Medical Services Emergency Management Emergency Management expenses Cost Emergency Medical Services Emergency Management Emergency Management revenues Cost Emergency Medical Services Emergency Management Emergency Management net Cost Emergency Medical Services Emergency Management Cost per Community Operations Plan Cost Emergency Medical Services Emergency Medical Service Patient encounters Quantity Emergency Medical Services Emergency Medical Service Hospital turnaround time (total minutes) Quantity Emergency Medical Services Emergency Medical Service 90th percentile response (urban and rural) Quantity Emergency Medical Services Emergency Medical Service 90th percentile response (urban) Quantity Emergency Medical Services Emergency Medical Service 90th percentile response (rural) Quantity Emergency Medical Services Emergency Medical Service Calls per 1000 residents Quantity Emergency Medical Services Emergency Medical Service Vehicle standbys (Code 8) Quantity Emergency Medical Services Emergency Medical Service MOHLTC service review recommendations Quantity Emergency Medical Services Emergency Medical Service Average patient age Quantity Emergency Medical Services Emergency Medical Service Crew reaction time (avg.) Quantity

January 6, 20152015-01-22 Page 74 of 92 Division Service Metric name Metric type

Emergency Medical Services Emergency Medical Service Response time standard urban Quantity Emergency Medical Services Emergency Medical Service Response time standard rural Quantity

Emergency Medical Services Emergency Medical Service Hospital turnaround delays (Number of events >30 mins.) Quality

Emergency Medical Services Emergency Medical Service Hospital turnaround time (average minutes / event) Quality Percent of all patient encounters with hospital turnaround times > 30 Emergency Medical Services Emergency Medical Service Quality mins. Percent of patients showing improved vital signs after treatment (or at Emergency Medical Services Emergency Medical Service Result hospital) Emergency Medical Services Emergency Medical Service Response time standard urban met (Y/N) Result Emergency Medical Services Emergency Medical Service Response time standard urban met (Y/N) Result

Emergency Medical Services Emergency Medical Service Difference between response time standard and actual result (urban) Result

Emergency Medical Services Emergency Medical Service Difference between response time standard and actual result (rural) Result

Emergency Medical Services Emergency Medical Service Gross expenditure Cost Emergency Medical Services Emergency Medical Service Cost per capita Cost Emergency Medical Services Emergency Medical Service Cost per hour of service Cost Emergency Medical Services Emergency Medical Service Gross expenditure per patient encounter Cost Emergency Medical Services Emergency Medical Service EMS service expenses Cost Emergency Medical Services Emergency Medical Service EMS service revenues Cost Emergency Medical Services Emergency Medical Service EMS service net Cost Emergency Medical Services Emergency Medical Service Net service cost per patient encounter Cost Emergency Medical Services Emergency Medical Service Percent growth in net service cost Y/Y Cost Human Services Child Care Subsidy Number of licensed child care spaces - Infant Quantity Human Services Child Care Subsidy Number of licensed child care spaces - toddler Quantity Human Services Child Care Subsidy Number of licensed child care spaces - preschool Quantity Human Services Child Care Subsidy Number of licensed child care spaces - JK/SK Quantity Human Services Child Care Subsidy Number of licensed child care spaces - school age Quantity Human Services Child Care Subsidy Number of operating child care spaces - infant Quantity Human Services Child Care Subsidy Number of operating child care spaces - toddler Quantity

January 6, 20152015-01-22 Page 75 of 92 Division Service Metric name Metric type

Human Services Child Care Subsidy Number of operating child care spaces - preschool Quantity Human Services Child Care Subsidy Number of operating child care spaces - JK/SK Quantity Human Services Child Care Subsidy Number of operating child care spaces - school age Quantity Number of Oxford County child care operations supported - through Human Services Child Care Subsidy Quantity quarterly operating funding Number of Oxford County child care operations supported - through Human Services Child Care Subsidy Quantity fee subsidy Human Services Child Care Subsidy Number of children 0-4 Quantity Human Services Child Care Subsidy Number of children 5-9 Quantity Human Services Child Care Subsidy Number of children 10-14 Quantity Human Services Child Care Subsidy Number of licensed spaces per child 0-4 Quantity Human Services Child Care Subsidy Number of licensed spaces per child 5-9 Quantity Human Services Child Care Subsidy Number of licensed spaces per child 10-14 Quantity Human Services Child Care Subsidy Number of licensed spaces per child 0-14 Quantity

Human Services Child Care Subsidy Percentage of operating spaces per licenced space - infant Quality

Human Services Child Care Subsidy Percentage of operating spaces per licenced space - toddler Quality

Human Services Child Care Subsidy Percentage of operating spaces per licenced space - preschool Quality

Human Services Child Care Subsidy Percentage of operating spaces per licenced space -JK/SK Quality

Human Services Child Care Subsidy Percentage of operating spaces per licenced space - school age Quality

Human Services Child Care Subsidy Percentage of all operating spaces per licensed space Quality Human Services Child Care Subsidy Number of children served Result Human Services Child Care Subsidy Percentage of children served Result Human Services Child Care Subsidy Number of children 0-14 Result Human Services Child Care Subsidy Number of children served by age group - toddler Result Human Services Child Care Subsidy Number of children served by age group -pPreschool Result Human Services Child Care Subsidy Number of children served by age group - JK/SK Result Human Services Child Care Subsidy Number of children served by age group - school age Result

January 6, 20152015-01-22 Page 76 of 92 Division Service Metric name Metric type

Human Services Child Care Subsidy Number of children served by age group - over 12 Result Human Services Child Care Subsidy Length of waitlist Result Human Services Child Care Subsidy Child Care Subsidy expenses Cost Human Services Child Care Subsidy Child Care Subsidy revenues Cost Human Services Child Care Subsidy Child Care Subsidy net Cost Human Services Child Care Subsidy Net cost per licensed space Cost Human Services Child Care Subsidy Net cost per operating space Cost Human Services Child Care Subsidy Net cost per child served Cost Number of applications received (OW application distribution list- Human Services Financial Assistance Quantity Shared Drive)

Number of referrals to the DAU (Disability Adjudication Unit Human Services Financial Assistance Quantity (OW-Intake Performance Report-Screening-Monthly)

Number of cases referred to FSW as a result of EVP (OW-CVP Human Services Financial Assistance Quantity Performance Report-Monthly)

Human Services Financial Assistance Number of referrals to FSW at application (manual tracking) Quantity

Number of referrals to FSW during case management (manual Human Services Financial Assistance Quantity tracking) Average number of exits from social assistance (OW Human Services Financial Assistance Quantity Termination Details Report-Monthly) Average time on social assistance (days) (OW-Avg time/Avg Human Services Financial Assistance Earnings-Monthly) Months on Assistance (BU summary Quality report-monthly) Number of internal review requests (OW-Internal Review Human Services Financial Assistance Quality Performance Report-Monthly) Percentage of decisions upheld by the internal review (OW- Human Services Financial Assistance Quality Internal Review Performance Report-Monthly)

Percentage of applications eligible for Financial Assistance Human Services Financial Assistance Result (OW-Intake Performance Report-Screening-Monthly)

Average days to determine eligibility (OW-Intake Performance Report- Human Services Financial Assistance Result Screening-Monthly)

January 6, 20152015-01-22 Page 77 of 92 Division Service Metric name Metric type

Number of participants finding employment (Participation Human Services Financial Assistance Result Report-Monthly)

Percentage of cases with earnings (Average Time/Average Human Services Financial Assistance Result Earnings Performance Report-Monthly)

Number of cases with earnings (Average Time/Average Earnings Human Services Financial Assistance Result Performance Report-Monthly) Average Earnings (Average Time/Average Earnings Performance Human Services Financial Assistance Result Report-Monthly) Average Percentage of cases that exit as a result of employment (OW- Human Services Financial Assistance Result Termination Details Report-Monthly) Number of cases granted ODSP (OW-Termination Details Human Services Financial Assistance Result Report-Monthly) Human Services Financial Assistance Total OW cases (CMSM report) Quantity Human Services Financial Assistance Total OW beneficiaries (CMSM report) Quantity Human Services Financial Assistance Percentage of all cases finding employment Result Human Services Financial Assistance Percentage of all beneficiaries finding employment Result Human Services Financial Assistance Financial Assistance expenses Cost Human Services Financial Assistance Financial Assistance revenues Cost Human Services Financial Assistance Financial Assistance net Cost Human Services Financial Assistance Net cost per OW case Cost Human Services Financial Assistance Net cost per OW beneficiary Cost Human Services Shelter (Direct Delivered) Number of units owned Quantity Human Services Shelter (Direct Delivered) Number of new clients housed Quantity Human Services Shelter (Direct Delivered) Number of accessible units Quantity

Human Services Shelter (Direct Delivered) Number of applicants waiting for rent geared to income (RGI) housing Quantity

Percentage of applicants on the waitlist housed not currently Human Services Shelter (Direct Delivered) Quantity tracked

Human Services Shelter (Direct Delivered) Total number of RGI housing in Oxford County Quantity

Human Services Shelter (Direct Delivered) Percentage of RGIowned and managed by Oxford County Quantity

January 6, 20152015-01-22 Page 78 of 92 Division Service Metric name Metric type

Human Services Shelter (Direct Delivered) Number market rent tenants in Oxford -owned RGI housing Quality

Number of clients in Oxford RGI housing moving to higher level Human Services Shelter (Direct Delivered) Result housing Human Services Shelter (Direct Delivered) Annual maintenance costs on Oxford-owned units Cost Human Services Shelter (Direct Delivered) Annual capital investment on Oxford-owned units Cost Human Services Shelter (Direct Delivered) Shelter (Direct Delivered) expenses Cost Human Services Shelter (Direct Delivered) Shelter (Direct Delivered) revenues Cost Human Services Shelter (Direct Delivered) Shelter (Direct Delivered) net Cost Number of applicants housed (Shelter subsidy) (Affordable Human Services Shelter (Subsidy) Quantity Housing Strategy) Number of non-profit housing providers subsidized (Affordable Human Services Shelter (Subsidy) Quantity Housing Strategy)

Number of RGI housing units subsidized with non-profit housing Human Services Shelter (Subsidy) Quantity providers (Affordable Housing Strategy)

Number of rent supplement units subsidized (Affordable Housing Human Services Shelter (Subsidy) Quantity Strategy) Number of clients supported through the County Bridge Program Human Services Shelter (Subsidy) Quantity (Affordable Housing Strategy) Human Services Shelter (Subsidy) Number of domiciliary hostels funded Quantity Human Services Shelter (Subsidy) Number of emergency shelter programs funded Quantity

Human Services Shelter (Subsidy) Average numberof emergency shelter program bed days Quantity

Number of operational reviews completed Affordable Housing Human Services Shelter (Subsidy) Quantity Strategy

Human Services Shelter (Subsidy) Number of clients supported in domiciliary hostels Quantity

Human Services Shelter (Subsidy) Number of clients supported in emergency shelter programs Quantity

Human Services Shelter (Subsidy) Number of clients living in affordable housing Quantity Number of affordable housing units (including non-Oxford-owned RGI Human Services Shelter (Subsidy) Quantity housing)

January 6, 20152015-01-22 Page 79 of 92 Division Service Metric name Metric type

Human Services Shelter (Subsidy) Number of low income households assisted with home ownerships Quantity

Human Services Shelter (Subsidy) Number of affordable housing units using infilling, brownfields, etc. Quantity

Human Services Shelter (Subsidy) Number clients receiving homelessness prevention services Quantity

Human Services Shelter (Subsidy) Increase in collaborative and integrative services Quality

Human Services Shelter (Subsidy) Average number of domiciliary hostel bed days funded Result

Number clients receiving homelessness prevention services remaining Human Services Shelter (Subsidy) Result in stable housing for more than one year

Number of clients using shelters finding and remaining in stable Human Services Shelter (Subsidy) Result housing for more than one year Number of HS clients with improved affordable suitable and stable Human Services Shelter (Subsidy) Result housing Human Services Shelter (Subsidy) Dollar amount of housing subsidy to providers - operating Cost Human Services Shelter (Subsidy) Dollar amount of housing subsidy to providers - capital Cost Human Services Shelter (Subsidy) Dollar amount of subsidy to individuals Cost Human Services Shelter (Subsidy) Shelter (Subsidy) expenses Cost Human Services Shelter (Subsidy) Shelter (Subsidy) revenues Cost Human Services Shelter (Subsidy) Shelter (Subsidy) net Cost Human Services Shelter (Subsidy) Shelter (Subsidy) cost per unit subsidized Cost Human Services Shelter (Subsidy) Shelter (Subsidy) cost per person housed Cost Human Services Shelter (Subsidy) Shelter (Subsidy) Cost per agency supported Cost Shelter (Subsidy) cost per person housed per day (includes shelter and Human Services Shelter (Subsidy) Cost domiciliary Hostels)

Human Services Shelter (Subsidy) Shelter (Subsidy) cost for RGI housing (non-Oxford) Cost

Human Services Shelter (Subsidy) Shelter (Subsidy) cost per unit RGI housing (non-Oxford) Cost

Library Library Collections Number of circulations per year Quantity Library Library Collections Number of purchase requests Quantity

January 6, 20152015-01-22 Page 80 of 92 Division Service Metric name Metric type

Library Library Collections Number of requests filled Quantity Library Library Collections Inter-library loan requests received Quantity Library Library Collections Inter-library loan requests sent Quantity Library Library Collections New library cards Quantity Library Library Collections Active library cards Quantity Library Library Collections Inactive library cards Quantity Library Library Collections Collection usage change Quantity Library Library Collections Collection usage by age Quantity Library Library Collections Collection usage by shelf (AF) Quantity Library Library Collections Collection usage by shelf (AN) Quantity Library Library Collections Collection usage by shelf (DVD) Quantity Library Library Collections Collection usage by shelf (JF) Quantity Library Library Collections Collection usage by shelf (JN) Quantity Library Library Collections Collection usage by shelf (LP) Quantity Library Library Collections Collection usage by shelf (YF) Quantity Library Library Collections Collection usage by genre Quantity Library Library Collections Collection size Quality Library Library Collections Average hold wait physical Quality Library Library Collections Average hold wait electronic (days) Quality Library Library Collections Collection usage by frequency (power) Quality Library Library Collections Collection usage by frequency (frequently used) Quality Library Library Collections Collection usage by frequency (infrequently used) Quality Library Library Collections Collection usage by frequency (never used) Quality Library Library Collections Cost per usage Cost Library Library Collections Library Collections expenses Cost Library Library Collections Library Collections revenues Cost Library Library Collections Library Collections net Cost Library Library Programming Programs offered Quantity Library Library Programming Program attendance Quantity

January 6, 20152015-01-22 Page 81 of 92 Division Service Metric name Metric type

Library Library Programming Program attend groups - adults Quantity Library Library Programming Program attend groups - children Quantity Library Library Programming Program attend groups -seniors Quantity Library Library Programming Program attend groups - teens Quantity Library Library Programming Population underserved Quantity Library Library Programming Joint program attend Quantity Library Library Programming Outreach program attendance Quantity Library Library Programming Program feedback Quality Library Library Programming Rates of literacy Result Library Library Programming Library Programming expenses Cost Library Library Programming Library Programming revenues Cost Library Library Programming Library Programming net Cost Library Library Programming Net cost per program Cost Library Library Programming Net cost per participant Cost Library Library Public Space Access Paid room rentals Quantity Library Library Public Space Access Free room rentals Quantity Library Library Public Space Access Events held Quantity Library Library Public Space Access Event attendance Quantity Library Library Reference and Information Annual standard reference trans (MTC) Quantity Library Library Reference and Information Annual reader advisory questions (MTC) Quantity Library Library Reference and Information Electronic reference transactions (MTC) Quantity Library Library Reference and Information Online hits Quantity Library Library Reference and Information County posts promos Quantity Library Library Reference and Information Reference feedback Quality Library Library Reference and Information Outreach loc act Result Library Library Reference and Information Referrals County Communications Result Library Library Reference and Information Reference requests qual Result Library Library Reference and Information Electronic cost per use Cost Library Library Reference and Information Product cost per use Cost

January 6, 20152015-01-22 Page 82 of 92 Division Service Metric name Metric type

Library Library Reference and Information Library Reference and Information expenses Cost Library Library Reference and Information Library Reference and Information revenues Cost Library Library Reference and Information Library Reference and Information net Cost Net cost per reference transactions (sum standard, readers advisory Library Library Reference and Information Cost and electronic) Library Library Technology Access Number of public access computers Quantity Library Library Technology Access Number of public use devices Quantity Library Library Technology Access Computer usage (time) Quantity Library Library Technology Access Wireless usage (time) Quantity Library Library Technology Access Public access computers wait times Quantity Library Library Technology Access Attendance at individual sessions Quantity Library Library Technology Access Attendance at group sessions Quantity Library Library Technology Access Number of IT sessions Quantity Library Library Technology Access Age of public access computers Quality Library Library Technology Access Technology feedback Quality Library Library Technology Access Number of new technology services Quality Library Library Technology Access Library Information Technology Access expenses Cost Library Library Technology Access Library Information Technology Access revenues Cost Library Library Technology Access Library Information Technology Access net Cost Library Library Collections Net cost per active card Cost Library Library Collections Net cost per circulated item Cost Library Library Public Space Access Library Public Space Access expenses Cost Library Library Public Space Access Library Public Space Access revenues Cost Library Library Public Space Access Library Public Space Access net Cost Public Health Promotion Public Health Advocacy and Promotion Number of anti-smoking campaigns (by type) Quantity Range or coverage of anti-smoking campaigns (views, hits, individuals Public Health Promotion Public Health Advocacy and Promotion Quantity reached) Public Health Promotion Public Health Advocacy and Promotion Number of alcohol intervention campaigns (by type) Quantity Range or coverage of alcohol consumption campaigns (views, hits, Public Health Promotion Public Health Advocacy and Promotion Quantity individuals reached)

January 6, 20152015-01-22 Page 83 of 92 Division Service Metric name Metric type

Percentage of population (19+) that exceeds the Low Risk Alcohol Public Health Promotion Public Health Advocacy and Promotion Result Drinking Guidelines Public Health Promotion Public Health Advocacy and Promotion Fall-related emergency visits in older adults aged 65+ Result Public Health Promotion Public Health Advocacy and Promotion Maintenance of the Baby-Friendly Initiative (BFI) Result Public Health Promotion Public Health Advocacy and Promotion Reduction in smoking rates Result Public Health Promotion Public Health Advocacy and Promotion Public Health Promotion and Advocacy expenses Cost Public Health Promotion Public Health Advocacy and Promotion Public Health Promotion and Advocacy revenues Cost Public Health Promotion Public Health Advocacy and Promotion Public Health Promotion and Advocacy net Cost

Public Health Promotion Public Health Advocacy and Promotion Cost per Public Health Promotion And Advocacy campaign Cost

Public Health Individual Health Assessment and Percentage of schools screened for dental requirements (Children in Public Health Promotion Quantity Intervention Need of Treatment) Public Health Individual Health Assessment and Number of children provided dental care through Children in Need of Public Health Promotion Quantity Intervention Treatment Public Health Individual Health Assessment and Public Health Promotion Number of children treated through Healthy Smiles Quantity Intervention Public Health Individual Health Assessment and Public Health Promotion Percentage of with-risk Families consenting to visits Quantity Intervention Public Health Individual Health Assessment and Public Health Promotion Percentage of with-risk families of all families screened with risk Quantity Intervention Public Health Individual Health Assessment and Public Health Promotion Number of visits per with-risk family Quantity Intervention Public Health Individual Health Assessment and Public Health Promotion Total number of families visited (HBHC) Quantity Intervention Public Health Individual Health Assessment and Public Health Promotion Number of Well Baby clinics held Quantity Intervention Public Health Individual Health Assessment and Public Health Promotion Number of with-risk children referred to other services (by type) Quality Intervention Public Health Individual Health Assessment and Public Health Promotion Number of babies per Well Baby clinic Quality Intervention Public Health Individual Health Assessment and Public Health Promotion Parental satisfaction with Well Baby clinic Quality Intervention Public Health Individual Health Assessment and Public Health Promotion Parental satisfaction with HBHC home visiting Quality Intervention

January 6, 20152015-01-22 Page 84 of 92 Division Service Metric name Metric type

Public Health Individual Health Assessment and Percentage of children treated through CINOT obtaining primary Public Health Promotion Result Intervention dental practitioner Public Health Individual Health Assessment and Percentage of children treated through CINOT requiring follow up Public Health Promotion Result Intervention treatment in less than 1 year Public Health Individual Health Assessment and Percent of all LICO children in Oxford County treated through Healthy Public Health Promotion Result Intervention Smiles Public Health Individual Health Assessment and Percentage of children treated through Healthy Smiles obtaining Public Health Promotion Result Intervention primary dental practitioner Public Health Individual Health Assessment and Percentage of children treated through Healthy Smiles requiring Public Health Promotion Result Intervention follow up treatment in less than 1 year Public Health Individual Health Assessment and Public Health Promotion Number of with-risk children meeting NDDS Milestones Result Intervention Public Health Individual Health Assessment and Public Health Promotion Number of with-risk children meeting EDI scores Result Intervention Public Health Individual Health Assessment and Public Health Promotion Number of with-risk children meeting NCAST scores. Result Intervention Public Health Individual Health Assessment and Public Health Promotion Number of with risk babies per well-baby cliinic Result Intervention Public Health Individual Health Assessment and Public Health Promotion Individual Health Assessment and Intervention expenses Cost Intervention Public Health Individual Health Assessment and Public Health Promotion Individual Health Assessment and Intervention revenue Cost Intervention Public Health Individual Health Assessment and Public Health Promotion Individual Health Assessment and Intervention net Cost Intervention Public Health Individual Health Assessment and Cost per individual treated (count of all HBHC, CINOT, Sexual Health, Public Health Promotion Cost Intervention etc.)

Public Health Protection Building Health Partnerships/Collaborations/Networks Building Health Partnerships expenses Cost

Public Health Protection Building Health Partnerships/Collaborations/Networks Building Health Partnerships revenue Cost

Public Health Protection Building Health Partnerships/Collaborations/Networks Building Health Partnerships net Cost

Public Health Protection Building Health Partnerships/Collaborations/Networks Cost per partnership Cost

Public Health Protection Case and Outbreak Management Number of institutional outbreaks managed Quantity

January 6, 20152015-01-22 Page 85 of 92 Division Service Metric name Metric type

Number of non-institutional outbreaks of reportable / communicable Public Health Protection Case and Outbreak Management Quantity diseases managed Percentage of gonorrhea cases receiving follow-up within 48 business Public Health Protection Case and Outbreak Management Quality hours

Public Health Protection Case and Outbreak Management Percentage of iGAS investigation started within 24 hours of receipt Quality

Public Health Protection Case and Outbreak Management Length of respiratory outbreaks (time frame?) Result Public Health Protection Case and Outbreak Management Case and Outbreak Management expenses Cost Public Health Protection Case and Outbreak Management Case and Outbreak Management revenues Cost Public Health Protection Case and Outbreak Management Case and Outbreak Management net Cost Public Health Protection Case and Outbreak Management Cost per outbreak managed? Cost Public Health Protection Health Advocacy and Promotion Chlamydia rate (cases per 1000, or per 100,000)? Result Percentage of dogs involved in rabies investigations that are up-to- Public Health Protection Health Advocacy and Promotion Result date for rabies immunizations

Public Health Protection Health Monitoring and Surveillance Percentage of weeks where county flu activity is reported to MOHLTC Quality

Public Health Protection Health Monitoring and Surveillance Percentage of private well water results contaminated with bacteria Result

Public Health Protection Health Monitoring and Surveillance Health Monitoring and Surveillance Public Health Protection Expenses Cost

Public Health Protection Health Monitoring and Surveillance Health Monitoring and Surveillance Public Health Protection Revenue Cost

Public Health Protection Health Monitoring and Surveillance Health Monitoring and Surveillance Public Health Protection Net Cost

Public Health Protection Health Monitoring and Surveillance Cost per surveillance report Cost Public Health Protection Health Protection Certification Number of food handlers certified in a year Quantity

Public Health Protection Health Protection Certification Certified food handlers as a percentage of all food handlers Result

Public Health Protection Health Protection Certification Health Protection Certification Public Health Protection Expenses Cost Public Health Protection Health Protection Certification Health Protection Certification Public Health Protection Revenue Cost Public Health Protection Health Protection Certification Health Protection Certification Public Health Protection Net Cost Public Health Protection Health Protection Certification Cost per certification issued Cost

January 6, 20152015-01-22 Page 86 of 92 Division Service Metric name Metric type

Public Health Protection Health Resource Distribution Number of vaccine doses distributed Quantity Public Health Protection Health Resource Distribution Health Resource Distribution Public Health Protection Expenses Cost Public Health Protection Health Resource Distribution Health Resource Distribution Public Health Protection Revenue Cost Public Health Protection Health Resource Distribution Health Resource Distribution Public Health Protection Net Cost Public Health Protection Health Resource Distribution Cost per vaccine distributed Cost Public Health Protection Individual Health Assessment and Intervention Immunizations given at health unit immunization clinic Quantity Public Health Protection Individual Health Assessment and Intervention Number of sexual health clients assessed Quantity Public Health Protection Individual Health Assessment and Intervention Number of users of Needle Exchange Program Quantity Public Health Protection Individual Health Assessment and Intervention Number of individuals seen in sexual health clinic Quantity

Public Health Protection Individual Health Assessment and Intervention Number of reportable sexually transmitted diseases treated (by type) Quantity

Public Health Protection Individual Health Assessment and Intervention Vaccine wastage Quality Number of users of Needle Exchange Program clients referred to other Public Health Protection Individual Health Assessment and Intervention Quality community services

Percentage of users of Needle Exchange Program exiting to substance Public Health Protection Individual Health Assessment and Intervention Result abuse program or other improvement

Rate of reportable sexually transmitted diseases for Oxford County (by Public Health Protection Individual Health Assessment and Intervention Result type)

Public Health Protection Inspections, Investigations and Enforcement Percentage of vaccine fridge inspections completed annually Quantity

Public Health Protection Inspections, Investigations and Enforcement Percentage of Class A pools inspected while in operation Quantity Public Health Protection Inspections, Investigations and Enforcement Percentage of public spas inspected while in operation Quantity

Public Health Protection Inspections, Investigations and Enforcement Total number of Fixed Premises Public Health inspections Quantity

Public Health Protection Inspections, Investigations and Enforcement Percentage of high-risk food inspections completed Quantity

Public Health Protection Inspections, Investigations and Enforcement Percentage of moderate-risk food inspections completed Quantity

Percentage of low and moderate-risk small drinking water systems Public Health Protection Inspections, Investigations and Enforcement Quantity (SDWS) inspections completed for those that are due for re-inspection

January 6, 20152015-01-22 Page 87 of 92 Division Service Metric name Metric type

Public Health Protection Inspections, Investigations and Enforcement Number of complaints, service requests,rReferrals - inspection Quantity

Percentage of secondary schools inspected once per year for Public Health Protection Inspections, Investigations and Enforcement Quantity compliance with section 10 of the Smoke-Free Ontario Act (SFOA)

Percentage of tobacco retailers inspected once per year for Public Health Protection Inspections, Investigations and Enforcement compliance with display, handling and promotion sections of the Quantity Smoke-Free Ontario Act (SFOA) Percentage of tobacco retailers inspected for compliance with section Public Health Protection Inspections, Investigations and Enforcement Quantity 3 of the Smoke-Free Ontario Act (SFOA) Percentage of suspect rabies exposures where investigation initiated Public Health Protection Inspections, Investigations and Enforcement Quality within one day of notification Public Health Protection Inspections, Investigations and Enforcement Food premises violations Result Food premises in violation as a percentage of all food premises Public Health Protection Inspections, Investigations and Enforcement Result inspected Percentage of tobacco vendors in compliance with youth access Public Health Protection Inspections, Investigations and Enforcement Result legislation at the time of last inspection

Public Health Protection Inspections, Investigations and Enforcement Number of school pupil records reviewed that do not meet ISPA Result

Public Health Protection Inspections, Investigations and Enforcement Inspections, Investigations and Enforcement expenses Cost Public Health Protection Inspections, Investigations and Enforcement Inspections, Investigations and Enforcement revenues Cost Public Health Protection Inspections, Investigations and Enforcement Inspections, Investigations and Enforcement net Cost

January 6, 20152015-01-22 Page 88 of 92 Appendix D: Service Improvement Opportunities

Potential SIO ID number Opportunity Risks and Implications Savings / Timeframe Barriers Productivity HSPH.01.01 Adopt Social Determinants Improved County-wide Nominal Less than one year Low of Health planning HSPH.01.03 Transformation to Full Improved client service, $100 – 500K More than one Medium Integration of Services combining multiple unions year Supporting Families, and staff Children and Singles HS.03.01 Long Term Housing and Improved planning, Net expense One year to Medium to high Homelessness Capital Plan increased County expense develop, more than one year to implement HS.03.03 Housing / Shelter First Improved client outcomes, >$500k in Social One year to Medium to high Strategy intense staff and financial Return on review, more than requirements Investment one year to implement HS.07.00 Community Capacity Improved visibility of agency Nominal Less than one year Low to medium Subsidy Review service delivery, resistance by providers

January 6, 20152015-01-22 Page 89 of 92 Potential SIO ID number Opportunity Risks and Implications Savings / Timeframe Barriers Productivity Case Conferencing for HS Improved learning and client Nominal Less than one year Low HS.06.00 Staff support Integrated Program Determination of whether Nominal Less than one year Medium – baseline HS.01.00 Benefits Evaluation integrated service delivery data may be has greater client impact unavailable Digital Signatures for Improved paper and data Nominal Less than one year Low HS.02.00 Human Services Clients management; client resistance Provide County-wide Staff Improved county-wide Nominal Less than one year Low HSPH.01.02 Training on Social planning Determinants of Health Quality of Life Tool and Improved coordination of Nominal Less than one year Medium HSPH.01.05 Social Determinants of planning and services Health Process Linking Public Health Nurse and Improved planning and $100 – 500K One year to Medium PH.03.00 Inspectors Scheduling, productivity, reduced travel develop, more Process and time and expense than one year to Decentralization Strategy implement After Hours Services Improved client service, Nominal Less than one year Low to medium PH.02.00 potential for staff resistance Building Health Improved accountability for Nominal Less than one year Low to medium PH.01.00 Partnerships Governance partnership outcomes, and Management potential for partner resistance. PH.07.00 PHES Process Improved use of digital Nominal Less than one year Low to medium Improvements resources and reduced cost and risk of paper storage EMS.04.00 Community Paramedicine Improved planning for Net expense More than one Low (for planning) Planning potential future download year

January 6, 20152015-01-22 Page 90 of 92 Potential SIO ID number Opportunity Risks and Implications Savings / Timeframe Barriers Productivity Review EMS Response Time Improved productivity and Unknown More than one Medium EMS.03.01 Standard and Deployment service response year EMS Hospital Wait Times Improved productivity with Nominal Less than one year Medium to high EMS.03.02 Review shortened and reduced number of turn around delays, may be hospital resistance to change EMS Fleet Review Potential for improved Unknown Within Wave 2 Low EMS.01.00 shared service with PW 911 Call Taking and Planning for improved or Net expense More than one Low EMS.02.01/02 Dispatch Review changed technology or year single source dispatch

Reimagine Libraries as Improved services to clients, $100 – 500K More than one Medium to high LB.01.06 County Multi-Service Hubs improved library services, year improved library traffic Library Resource Review Improved client service, Less than $100K More than one Medium LB.01.03 efficiencies in service year delivery Library Space Needs Reduced costs and $100 – 500K One year to Medium LB.01.04 Review efficiencies, improved client develop, more service. than one year to implement LB.01.01 Library Governance Review Potential efficiencies in staff Nominal Less than one year Low time usage.

January 6, 20152015-01-22 Page 91 of 92 Potential SIO ID number Opportunity Risks and Implications Savings / Timeframe Barriers Productivity Archives and Records Reduced duplication and Nominal Less than one year Low (in process) AR.01.00 Management Process and improved management of Policy records collected Archives Outreach and Reduction in costs, reduced >$100k Less than one year Medium AR.02.00 Programming Service duplication Volunteer Service Delivery or Merger with Public Library History Programming Expand Archives to all Area Increased costs and Unknown More than one Medium AR.03.00 Municipalities responsibilities. year Merge Archives and Reduction in cost, and $100k - $500k More than one Medium AR.04.00 Records Management service levels (elimination of year service), centralized mgmt of all records.

January 6, 20152015-01-22 Page 92 of 92 PENDING ITEMS

Council Lead Meeting Date Issue Pending Action Dept. Time Frame 10-Sep-14 Report PW 2014-50 - Acceptance of Liquid Waste at Oxford County Staff to develop policy and report - Res. No. 4, PW Spring 2015 Wastewater Treatment Facilities 25-June-14, delegation request to pass resolution to not accept leachate from privately owned or operated landfills for treatment deferred until such time 10-Sep-14 Report CAO 2014-12 - University of Ottawa - Woodstock Satellite Staff to negotiate partnership agreement and report CAO Spring 2015 Campus Proposal 24-Sep-14 Resolution No. 5 - Deferring recommendation contained in Report No. Gathering and provision of information to Havelock PW 2014 - Q4 PW 2014-55 - Woodstock Sanitary Sewer and Watermain Extension Corners Ratepayers Association delegation and report Project and By-law No. 5622-2014 to impose the cost to ratepayers back to Council 08-Oct-14 Resolution No. 12 - procedures around water and sewer hook-up Staff Report CS 2015 - Q1 programs - new developed or boundary adjusted areas 10-Dec-14 2015 Budget Meeting To Do List - Public Works - winter control Pursue as part of Collective Agreement negotiations PW 2015 - Q4 staff optimization 17-Dec-14 2015 Budget Meeting To Do List - Strategic Plan review with new Council Workshop CAO 2015-Q1 Council 14-Jan-15 Resolution No. 9 - Presentation made on behalf of SouthWestern CAO Report CAO 2015-Q1 Integrated Fibre Technology (SWIFT) 14-Jan-15 2015 Budget Meeting To Do List - Building Conditions Assessment Staff Report prior to moving forward PW 2015-Q1 COUNTY OF OXFORD

BY-LAW NO. 5662-2015

BEING a by-law to adopt the estimated expenditure for the year 2015.

WHEREAS Section 289 of the Municipal Act, 2001, directs County Council in each year to prepare and adopt estimates of all sums required during the year for the purposes of the County.

AND WHEREAS Section 401 of the Municipal Act, 2001, provides that a municipality may incur debt for municipal purposes, whether by borrowing money or in any other way, and may issue debentures and prescribed financial instruments and enter prescribed financial agreements for, or in relation to, the debt.

AND WHEREAS the total taxable assessment according to the 2014 Assessment Rolls as returned, has been received.

THEREFORE THE COUNCIL OF THE COUNTY OF OXFORD ENACTS AS FOLLOWS:

1. That the Budget Summary, attached as Schedule “A", including a General Levy in the amount of $52,227,258 be adopted.

2. That the General Levy be raised by all lower tier municipalities within the County of Oxford.

3. That the Budget Summary, attached as Schedule “B", including a Library Levy in the amount of $3,392,810, be adopted.

4. That the Library Levy be raised by the following lower tier municipalities within the County of Oxford:

 Township of Blandford-Blenheim;  Township of East-Zorra-Tavistock;  Township of Norwich;  Township of South-West Oxford;  Township of Zorra;  Town of Ingersoll; and  Town of Tillsonburg.

5. That the Capital Plan, attached as Schedule “C”, be undertaken and shall be financed in accordance with the plan, which includes incurring prescribed long- term debt up to a maximum of $11,915,000 plus any unfinanced capital projects carried over from 2014 as set out in the audited financial statements.

READ a first and second time this 28th day of January, 2015.

READ a third time and finally passed in this 28th day of January, 2015.

DAVID MAYBERRY, WARDEN

BRENDA J. TABOR, CLERK

By-law No. 5662-2015 Schedule "A"

COUNTY OF OXFORD (EXCLUDING LIBRARY) 2015 BUDGET REPORT

2015 2014 2014 REQUESTED BUDGET BUDGET FORECAST BUDGET BUDGET VARIANCE % VARIANCE REVENUES TAXATION (1,349,000) (1,349,000) (1,269,000) 80,000 (5.93%) FEDERAL (3,125,137) (5,174,999) (3,061,137) 2,113,862 (40.85%) PROVINCIAL (46,170,085) (44,151,530) (48,394,918) (4,243,388) 9.61% OTHER GRANTS (311,751) (237,900) (217,867) 20,033 (8.42%) WATER/WASTEWATER RATES (33,247,300) (33,299,179) (34,756,096) (1,456,917) 4.38% DONATIONS (17,250) (12,000) (22,000) (10,000) 83.33% USER FEES (32,385,917) (32,371,697) (32,435,420) (63,723) 0.20% INTEREST (950,952) (750,000) (950,000) (200,000) 26.67% DEVELOPMENT CHARGES (3,562,500) (3,300,500) (3,505,500) (205,000) 6.21% OTHER (1,268,562) (811,500) (835,000) (23,500) 2.90% TOTAL REVENUES (122,388,454) (121,458,305) (125,446,938) (3,988,633) 3.28% SALARIES AND BENEFITS 54,460,886 54,576,727 55,222,106 645,379 1.18% OPERATING AND PROGRAM EXPENSES 84,927,808 86,557,149 89,083,403 2,526,254 2.92% DEBT REPAYMENT 14,454,463 14,426,919 14,749,368 322,449 2.24% INTERDEPARTMENTAL ALLOCATIONS (15,180,012) (15,035,395) (16,095,297) (1,059,902) 7.05% CAPITAL 29,841,633 43,295,143 59,373,536 16,078,393 37.14% OTHER 4,895,916 (11,246,995) (24,658,920) (13,411,925) 119.25% TOTAL COUNTY OF OXFORD (EXCLUDING LIBRARY) 51,012,240 51,115,243 52,227,258 1,112,015 2.18% By-law No. 5662-2015 Schedule "A-1"

COUNTY OF OXFORD (EXCLUDING LIBRARY) 2015 BUDGET FOR PSAB

PRINCIPAL LOCAL AREA TRANSFERS 2015 2015 DEBT MUNICIPAL DEBT DEBENTURE TO/FROM AMORTIZATION PSAB BUDGET REPAYMENT (1) REPAYMENTS (2) CAPITAL PROCEEDS SURPLUS (3) (4) BUDGET REVENUES (125,446,938) - 5,778,157 - - - - (119,668,781) SALARIES AND BENEFITS 55,222,106 ------55,222,106 OPERATING AND PROGRAM EXPENSES 89,083,403 - - 640,000 - - - 89,723,403 DEBT REPAYMENT 14,749,368 (6,259,604) (5,778,156) - - - - 2,711,608 INTERDEPARTMENTAL ALLOCATIONS (16,095,297) - - 171,970 - - - (15,923,327) CAPITAL 59,373,536 - - (58,575,439) - (798,097) - - OTHER (24,658,920) - - - 11,915,000 12,743,920 14,445,575 14,445,575 TOTAL COUNTY OF OXFORD (EXCLUDING 52,227,258 (6,259,604) 1 (57,763,469) 11,915,000 11,945,823 14,445,575 26,510,584

1. Prinicpal debt repayment for County debt 2. This represents the repayment of the local area municipalities debt 3. This represents the transfers to and from Reserves and Reserve Funds 4. Estimated based on 2013 actual amortization By-law No. 5662-2015 Schedule "B"

LIBRARY 2015 BUDGET REPORT

2015 2014 2014 REQUESTED BUDGET BUDGET FORECAST BUDGET BUDGET VARIANCE % VARIANCE REVENUES PRIOR YEAR SURPLUS (136,270) (147,150) (17,280) 129,870 (88.26%) FEDERAL (16,750) (16,768) (16,852) (84) 0.50% PROVINCIAL (138,904) (140,229) (162,490) (22,261) 15.87% DONATIONS (5,493) (5,000) (5,000) - - % USER FEES (33,325) (27,650) (33,225) (5,575) 20.16% INTEREST (950) - - - - % DEVELOPMENT CHARGES (120,000) (55,000) (100,000) (45,000) 81.82% TOTAL REVENUES (451,692) (391,797) (334,847) 56,950 (14.54%) SALARIES AND BENEFITS 2,034,750 2,030,841 2,185,865 155,024 7.63% OPERATING AND PROGRAM EXPENSES 1,244,896 1,271,190 1,283,524 12,334 0.97% DEBT REPAYMENT 226,614 226,614 221,468 (5,146) (2.27%) OTHER (109,062) (174,062) 36,800 210,862 (121.14%) TOTAL LIBRARY 2,945,506 2,962,786 3,392,810 430,024 14.51% By-law No. 5662-2015 Schedule "B-1"

LIBRARY 2015 BUDGET FOR PSAB

2015 CAPITAL PLAN BUDGET

2014 2014 CARRY NEW 2015 W/WW GAS TAX 2014 CAPITAL PERCENTAGE UNFINANCED FORWARD REQUESTED CAPITAL RATES & DEVELOPMENT REBATE/ OTHER DESCRIPTION FORECAST BUDGET SPENT CAPITAL (1) BUDGET (2) BUDGET (3) BUDGET TAXATION RESERVES RESERVES CHARGES GRANTS DEBENTURES SOURCES OPERATIONAL CAPITAL STAFF TRAINING EQUIPMENT 14,825 ------INFORMATION SYSTEMS COMPUTER EQUIPMENT 581,699 651,078 - - - 268,000 268,000 - - 268,000 - - - - POA FURNISHINGS 3,000 3,000 ------FACILITIES FURNISHINGS 16,085 45,000 - - - 10,000 10,000 10,000 ------FLEET VEHICLES 918,000 1,193,000 - - - 1,633,000 1,633,000 40,000 - 1,593,000 - - - - WASTEWATER GENERAL OP EQUIPMENT - - - - - 6,500 6,500 - 6,500 - - - - - WATER GENERAL OP EQUIPMENT - - - - - 6,500 6,500 - 6,500 - - - - - WASTE MANAGEMENT - MONITORING WELLS 28,000 45,000 ------CAPITAL ADMIN EQUIPMENT 20,000 32,000 - - - 15,000 15,000 15,000 ------WOODINGFORD LODGE EQUIPMENT 59,491 73,300 - - - 78,500 78,500 78,500 ------WOODINGFORD LODGE FURNISHINGS 23,409 24,500 - - - 131,123 131,123 131,123 ------EMERGENCY SERVICES FLEET 270,000 270,000 - - - 345,000 345,000 - - 345,000 - - - - EMERGENCY SERVICES EQUIPMENT 215,200 245,200 - - - 53,590 53,590 - - 53,590 - - - - TOTAL OPERATIONAL CAPITAL 2,149,709 2,582,078 83 - - 2,547,213 2,547,213 274,623 13,000 2,259,590 - - - - COMBINED PROJECTS STUDY/SERVICING 900004 SERVICING STUDY 33,000 73,000 - - 40,000 50,000 90,000 50,000 - 40,000 - - - - TOTAL STUDY/SERVICING 33,000 73,000 45 - 40,000 50,000 90,000 50,000 - 40,000 - - - - COMBINED PROJECTS 900014 TRAILS 75,000 ------900015 BIOSOLIDS/TRANSFER STATION - - - - - 1,250,000 1,250,000 - 516,000 300,000 234,000 200,000 - - TOTAL COMBINED PROJECTS 75,000 - - - - 1,250,000 1,250,000 - 516,000 300,000 234,000 200,000 - - TOTAL COMBINED PROJECTS 108,000 73,000 148 - 40,000 1,300,000 1,340,000 50,000 516,000 340,000 234,000 200,000 - - FACILITIES FACILITIES 911000 FACILITIES CONDITION ASSESSMENT - - - - - 325,000 325,000 - - 325,000 - - - - 911002 COURTHOUSE RENOVATIONS 334,127 771,000 - - 436,000 1,605,000 2,041,000 - - 1,041,000 - - 1,000,000 - 911006 GREEN ENERGY CAPITAL - - - - - 309,000 309,000 - - 309,000 - - - - 911070 93 GRAHAM 179,352 190,000 ------911304 WOODSTOCK YARD FACILITIES 499,529 500,000 ------911900 FACILITIES SOLAR PROJECT 200,000 - - 204,274 275,726 - 480,000 - - - - - 480,000 - 915010 EMS MILL ST 57,000 55,000 - 455,823 - - 455,823 - - 200,823 255,000 - - - 916140 TILLSONBURG LIBRARY 16,000 ------983610 H.S.I SHELTER BUILDING 549,642 690,000 - - - 745,000 745,000 405,000 - 340,000 - - - - 983910 WOODINGFORD LODGE BUILDING 462,580 380,000 - - - 640,000 640,000 240,000 - 400,000 - - - - TOTAL FACILITIES 2,298,230 2,586,000 89 660,097 711,726 3,624,000 4,995,823 645,000 - 2,615,823 255,000 - 1,480,000 - TOTAL FACILITIES 2,298,230 2,586,000 89 660,097 711,726 3,624,000 4,995,823 645,000 - 2,615,823 255,000 - 1,480,000 - ROADS ROADS 930001 ROADS NEEDS STUDY - - - - - 70,000 70,000 70,000 ------930004 CR 4 100,000 170,000 - - 70,000 - 70,000 - - - 70,000 - - - 930005 CR 5 - - - - - 25,000 25,000 - - 25,000 - - - - 930007 CR 7 110,000 150,000 ------930008 CR 8 150,000 2,500,000 - - 2,278,000 122,000 2,400,000 122,000 - 678,000 - 1,600,000 - - 930012 CR 12 100,000 150,000 - - 50,000 1,150,000 1,200,000 1,065,000 - 85,000 50,000 - - - 930013 CR 13 - 100,000 ------

1. Unfinanced Capital: Project expenses incurred however not financed. 2. Carry Forward Budget: Prior year's approved budget not spent. 3. New Requested Budget: Additional or new project budget requested. Page 1 of 4 By-law No. 5662-2015 Schedule "C"

2015 CAPITAL PLAN BUDGET

2014 2014 CARRY NEW 2015 W/WW GAS TAX 2014 CAPITAL PERCENTAGE UNFINANCED FORWARD REQUESTED CAPITAL RATES & DEVELOPMENT REBATE/ OTHER DESCRIPTION FORECAST BUDGET SPENT CAPITAL (1) BUDGET (2) BUDGET (3) BUDGET TAXATION RESERVES RESERVES CHARGES GRANTS DEBENTURES SOURCES 930015 CR 15 300,000 1,232,000 - - - 200,000 200,000 200,000 ------930016 CR 16 20,000 70,000 - - 50,000 50,000 100,000 50,000 - 50,000 - - - - 930020 CR 20 1,800,000 2,165,000 - - 365,000 3,300,000 3,665,000 1,433,000 - 1,623,500 490,000 - - 118,500 930036 CR 36 100,000 300,000 - - 200,000 1,600,000 1,800,000 1,600,000 - 200,000 - - - - 930037 CR 37 190,000 ------930099 RR REHAB & RECONSTRUCTION 4,950,000 4,700,000 - - - 4,400,000 4,400,000 1,190,000 - - - 3,210,000 - - 930115 DRAIN IMPROV 410,000 410,000 - - - 150,000 150,000 150,000 ------930119 CR 119 - - - - - 25,000 25,000 - - - 25,000 - - - 930200 BRIDGE REHAB 1,110,000 2,110,000 - - 1,000,000 1,250,000 2,250,000 720,000 - 1,000,000 - 530,000 - - 930250 SURFACE TREATMENTS 905,000 880,000 - - - 720,000 720,000 720,000 ------930300 TRAFFIC SIGNALS - 200,000 ------930301 TRAFFIC - THA TRAFFIC CALMING 47,000 - - - - 100,000 100,000 100,000 ------TOTAL ROADS 10,292,000 15,137,000 68 - 4,013,000 13,162,000 17,175,000 7,420,000 - 3,661,500 635,000 5,340,000 - 118,500 TOTAL ROADS 10,292,000 15,137,000 68 - 4,013,000 13,162,000 17,175,000 7,420,000 - 3,661,500 635,000 5,340,000 - 118,500 WASTEWATER WOODSTOCK - WW 950131 WDSTK - WWTP RECEIVING STATION 15,000 815,000 - - 800,000 400,000 1,200,000 - 1,200,000 - - - - - 950132 WDSTK - WWTP ELECTRICAL SUPPLY - - - - - 700,000 700,000 - 700,000 - - - - - 950141 WDSTK - TRUNK SEWER JACK POOLE 50,000 730,000 - - 680,000 200,000 880,000 - 880,000 - - - - - 950150 WDSTK - SANITARY EXTENSION 80,000 50,000 ------950158 WDSTK - CITY PROJECTS 889,000 900,000 - - - 1,230,000 1,230,000 - 1,230,000 - - - - - 950160 WDSTK - PARKINSON RD SANITARY 5,000 40,000 - - 35,000 60,000 95,000 - - 25,000 - - - 70,000 950161 WDSTK - DEVONSHIRE & CR4 SANIT - - - - - 320,000 320,000 ------320,000 950163 WDSTK - LANSDOWNE PS 50,000 145,000 - - 95,000 1,505,000 1,600,000 - 1,505,000 - 95,000 - - - 950165 WDSTK - SANITARY OVERSIZING - 40,000 ------TOTAL WOODSTOCK - WW 1,089,000 2,720,000 40 - 1,610,000 4,415,000 6,025,000 - 5,515,000 25,000 95,000 - - 390,000 TILLSONBURG - WW 950226 TBURG - TOWN PROJECTS 688,000 688,000 - - - 104,000 104,000 - 104,000 - - - - - 950227 TBURG - NORTH ST TRUNK SEWER 330,000 480,000 - - - 1,490,000 1,490,000 - - 55,000 1,217,000 - - 218,000 TOTAL TILLSONBURG - WW 1,018,000 1,168,000 87 - - 1,594,000 1,594,000 - 104,000 55,000 1,217,000 - - 218,000 INGERSOLL - WW 900012 ING - HWY 401 SERVICE - 800,000 - - 725,000 - 725,000 ------725,000 950308 ING - DIGESTER CLEAN & UPGRADE 12,000 ------950311 ING - WWTP 2,706,000 4,291,000 - - 1,585,000 10,039,000 11,624,000 - 1,350,000 - 390,000 - 9,884,000 - 950320 ING - CARNEGIE SPS REPLACEMENT 75,000 680,000 - - 605,000 45,000 650,000 - 650,000 - - - - - 950330 ING - TOWN PROJECTS 235,000 338,000 - - - 738,000 738,000 - 738,000 - - - - - 950331 ING - MUTUAL ST EXTENSION 2,000 180,000 - 2,000 178,000 - 180,000 ------180,000 950340 ING - ROYLANS/ELM/CEDAR - 105,000 ------950350 ING - SOUTH SERVICING 1,877,000 2,620,000 - - 693,000 1,202,000 1,895,000 ------1,895,000 950361 ING - PARK AVE SANITARY - - - - - 100,000 100,000 ------100,000 950380 ING - REPLACEMENT / REHAB 1,000 75,000 ------TOTAL INGERSOLL - WW 4,908,000 9,089,000 54 2,000 3,786,000 12,124,000 15,912,000 - 2,738,000 - 390,000 - 9,884,000 2,900,000 TAVISTOCK - WW 950504 TAV - WWTP EXPANSION/UPGRADE 16,000 20,000 - - 4,000 6,000 10,000 - 10,000 - - - - - 950505 TAV - WWTP AERATION UPGRADE 135,000 350,000 - 135,000 115,000 - 250,000 - - - - - 250,000 - 950507 TAV - BIOSOLIDS CLEAN-OUT 500,000 500,000 ------950508 TAV - BERM REPAIR 1,000 300,000 - 1,000 300,000 - 301,000 - - - - - 301,000 -

2015 CAPITAL PLAN BUDGET

2014 2014 CARRY NEW 2015 W/WW GAS TAX 2014 CAPITAL PERCENTAGE UNFINANCED FORWARD REQUESTED CAPITAL RATES & DEVELOPMENT REBATE/ OTHER DESCRIPTION FORECAST BUDGET SPENT CAPITAL (1) BUDGET (2) BUDGET (3) BUDGET TAXATION RESERVES RESERVES CHARGES GRANTS DEBENTURES SOURCES 950550 TAV - SANITARY REPLACEMENTS - - - - - 120,000 120,000 - 120,000 - - - - - TOTAL TAVISTOCK - WW 652,000 1,170,000 56 136,000 419,000 126,000 681,000 - 130,000 - - - 551,000 - PLATTSVILLE - WW 950650 PLAT - SANITARY REPLACEMENTS 10,000 150,000 - - 140,000 60,000 200,000 - 200,000 - - - - - TOTAL PLATTSVILLE - WW 10,000 150,000 7 - 140,000 60,000 200,000 - 200,000 - - - - - DRUMBO - WW 950810 DRUMBO - WWTP 50,000 400,000 - - 350,000 50,000 400,000 - 150,000 - 250,000 - - - TOTAL DRUMBO - WW 50,000 400,000 13 - 350,000 50,000 400,000 - 150,000 - 250,000 - - - NORWICH - WW 950401 NORWICH - EAST END SANITARY SERVICIN - - - - - 40,000 40,000 - 40,000 - - - - - 950408 NOR - WWTP EXPANSION 5,000 37,000 - - 32,000 20,000 52,000 - - - 52,000 - - - 950409 NOR - BIOSOLIDS CLEAN-OUT - - - - - 350,000 350,000 - 350,000 - - - - - 950415 NOR - WWTP FM NORTH CELL 21,000 120,000 - - 89,000 21,000 110,000 - 110,000 - - - - - 950450 NOR - SANITARY REPLACEMENTS 20,000 20,000 - - - 75,000 75,000 - 75,000 - - - - - TOTAL NORWICH - WW 46,000 177,000 26 - 121,000 506,000 627,000 - 575,000 - 52,000 - - - THAMESFORD - WW 950715 THAMES - WWTP INTEG CLARIFIER 77,000 77,000 ------950720 THAMES - WWTP ENERGY AUDIT 43,000 39,000 ------TOTAL THAMESFORD - WW 120,000 116,000 103 ------MT ELGIN - WW 950902 MT ELGIN - WW SERVICING 873,000 1,158,000 - - 66,000 - 66,000 ------66,000 TOTAL MT ELGIN - WW 873,000 1,158,000 75 - 66,000 - 66,000 ------66,000 EMBRO - WW 951002 EMBRO - ODOUR CONTROL 30,000 290,000 - - 25,000 - 25,000 - 25,000 - - - - - TOTAL EMBRO - WW 30,000 290,000 10 - 25,000 - 25,000 - 25,000 - - - - - INNERKIP - WW 951102 INNERKIP - ODOUR CONTROL - - - - - 50,000 50,000 - 50,000 - - - - - TOTAL INNERKIP - WW - - - - - 50,000 50,000 - 50,000 - - - - - TOTAL WASTEWATER 8,796,000 16,438,000 54 138,000 6,517,000 18,925,000 25,580,000 - 9,487,000 80,000 2,004,000 - 10,435,000 3,574,000 WATER WOODSTOCK - W 960110 WDSTK -UNDISCLOSED LAND ACQUIS 237,000 250,000 - - - 250,000 250,000 - 250,000 - - - - - 960115 WDSTK - PARKINSON WM REPLACE 520,000 480,000 - - - 500,000 500,000 - 500,000 - - - - - 960136 WDSTK - ADDITIONAL SUPPLY 570,000 425,000 ------960138 WDSTK - SUTHERLAND BACKWASH 37,000 25,000 ------960141 WDSTK - CITY PROJECTS 1,416,000 900,000 - - - 1,335,000 1,335,000 - 1,335,000 - - - - - 960143 WDSTK - ICI CAPACITY BUY-BACK - - - - - 67,500 67,500 - 67,500 - - - - - 960149 WDSTK - CITY PROJ OVERSIZING - 45,000 ------960159 WDSTK - WATER DISTRIB MASTER - - - - - 100,000 100,000 - 100,000 - - - - - 960162 WDSK - TRANSMISSION MAIN REHAB AND R - - - - - 150,000 150,000 - 150,000 - - - - - 960163 WDSK - CR17 & 11th LINE WM - - - - - 170,000 170,000 - 170,000 - - - - - 960165 WDSK - COMMERCE WAY BPS 241,000 268,000 ------960172 WDSTK - SPRUCEDALE WATERMAIN - - - - - 10,000 10,000 - 10,000 - - - - - 960180 WDSTK - REPLACEMENT REHAB 70,000 70,000 - - - 262,000 262,000 - 262,000 - - - - - TOTAL WOODSTOCK - W 3,091,000 2,463,000 125 - - 2,844,500 2,844,500 - 2,844,500 - - - - - TILLSONBURG - W 960235 TBURG - TOWN PROJECTS 535,000 320,000 - - - 409,000 409,000 - 409,000 - - - - -

2015 CAPITAL PLAN BUDGET

BY-LAW NO. 5663-2015

BEING a By-law to declare real property located at 2 Station Street, Drumbo, in the Township of Blandford-Blenheim, designated as Part Lot 1 W of Wilmot Street Block B Plan 199, in the Township of Blandford-Blenheim, as surplus to the needs of the County.

WHEREAS, Section 9 of the Municipal Act, 2001, S.O. 2001, Chapter 25, provides that a municipality has the capacity, rights, powers and privileges of a natural person for the purpose of exercising its authority under this or any other Act.

AND WHEREAS, Council has adopted procedures for the disposal of surplus property.

AND WHEREAS, Council has adopted Public Works Report No. PW 2014-45, dated August 13, 2014.

NOW THEREFORE, the Council of the County of Oxford enacts as follows:

1. That property located at 2 Station Street, Drumbo, in the Township of Blandford-Blenheim, designated as Part Lot 1 W of Wilmot Street Block B Plan 199, in the Township of Blandford-Blenheim, is declared surplus to the needs of the County.

2. That the Chief Administrative Officer is hereby authorized and instructed to execute all agreements and documents related to the disposal of the declared surplus property.

READ a first and second time this 28th day of January, 2015

READ a third time and finally passed this 28th day of January, 2015

DAVID MAYBERRY, WARDEN

BRENDA J. TABOR, CLERK

COUNTY OF OXFORD

BY-LAW NO. 5664-2015

BEING a By-law to declare real property located at 12 Vine Street, Beachville, in the Township of South-West Oxford, designated as Lot 4, 6-7 Plan 725 South- West Oxford, in the Township of South-West Oxford, as surplus to the needs of the County.

AND WHEREAS, Council has adopted procedures for the disposal of surplus property.

AND WHEREAS, Council has adopted Public Works Report No. PW 2014-45, dated August 13, 2014.

NOW THEREFORE, the Council of the County of Oxford enacts as follows:

1. That property located at 12 Vine Street, Beachville, in the Township of South-West Oxford, designated as Lot 4, 6-7 Plan 725 South-West Oxford, in the Township of South-West Oxford, is declared surplus to the needs of the County.

2. That the Chief Administrative Officer is hereby authorized and instructed to execute all agreements and documents related to the disposal of the declared surplus property.

READ a first and second time this 28th day of January, 2015

READ a third time and finally passed this 28th day of January, 2015

DAVID MAYBERRY, WARDEN

BRENDA J. TABOR, CLERK

COUNTY OF OXFORD

BY-LAW NO. 5665-2015

BEING a By-law to repeal By-law No. 5245-2011 and enact a new By-law to appoint members to the Land Division Committee.

WHEREAS, Section 56(1) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, as amended, provides that County Council may appoint a Land Division Committee for the purposes of granting consents under the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, as amended.

NOW THEREFORE, the Council of the County of Oxford enacts as follows:

1. That By-law No. 5245-2011 be and the same is hereby repealed.

2. That the following lay persons be and the same are hereby appointed to the Land Division Committee for the County of Oxford and shall hold office until their successors are appointed:

Gordon Brumby Harvey Elliott Brian George Mark Hacon Russell Jull Tom Rock Arend Tenhove

3. That this By-law is deemed to have come into force January 14, 2015.

READ a first and second time this 28th day of January, 2015.

READ a third time and finally passed this 28th day of January, 2015.

DAVID MAYBERRY, WARDEN

BRENDA J. TABOR, CLERK

COUNTY OF OXFORD

BY-LAW NO. 5666-2015

BEING a By-law to repeal By-law No. 5246-2011 a By-law to appoint citizen members to the Accessibility Advisory Committee.

WHEREAS, Section 14 of County of Oxford Procedure By-law No. 5532-2013, passed by Council on December 11, 2013, provides for the composition and duties of Committees of Council and for the adoption of their Terms of Reference.

AND WHEREAS, Subsection 14.2 of County of Oxford Procedure By-law No. 5532-2013, provides for the review of Committee Terms of Reference with each term of Council and prior to any new Committee appointments.

AND WHEREAS, Subsections 14.5, 14.6, and 14.7 of County of Oxford Procedure By-law No. 5532-2013, provide for the term of office and appointment procedures of Committee members.

AND WHEREAS, Council has adopted a recommendation contained in Report No. CAO 2014-18, dated December 10, 2014, as amended, which established and adopted Terms of Reference for Boards and Committees of Council in accordance with Section 14.2 of County of Oxford Procedure By-law No. 5532-2013, one of which was the Accessibility Advisory Committee.

AND WHEREAS, Council has appointed members to the Accessibility Advisory Committee in accordance with Section 14 of County of Oxford Procedure By-law No. 5532-2013 and the Accessibility Advisory Committee’s Terms of Reference effectively rendering By-law No. 5246-2011 redundant.

NOW THEREFORE, the Council of the County of Oxford enacts as follows:

1. That By-law No. 5246-2011 is hereby repealed.

READ a first and second time this 28th day of January, 2015.

READ a third time and finally passed this 28th day of January, 2015.

DAVID MAYBERRY, WARDEN

BRENDA J. TABOR, CLERK

COUNTY OF OXFORD

BY-LAW NO. 5667-2015

BEING a By-law to confirm all actions and proceedings of the Council of the County of Oxford at the meeting at which this By-law is passed.

The Council of the County of Oxford enacts as follows:

1. That all decisions made by Council at the meeting at which this By-law is passed, in respect of each report, resolution or other action passed and taken by the Council at this meeting, are hereby adopted, ratified and confirmed.

2. That the Warden and/or the proper officers of the County are hereby authorized and directed to do all things necessary to give effect to the said decisions referred to in Section 1 of this By-law, to obtain approvals where required, and except where otherwise provided, to execute all necessary documents and the Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to affix the corporate seal where necessary.

3. That nothing in this By-law has the effect of giving to any decision or resolution the status of a By-law where any legal prerequisite to the enactment of a specific By-law has not be satisfied.

4. That all decisions, as referred to in Section 1 of this By-law, supercede any prior decisions of Council to the contrary.

READ a first and second time this 28th day of January, 2015.

READ a third time and finally passed this 28th day of January, 2015.

DAVID MAYBERRY, WARDEN

BRENDA J. TABOR, CLERK