OFlLC4 o y SOUTU • BRIVi It!NINSULA
-N
411 S COUNCIL REMUNERATION COMMITTEE August 25, 2003
(IC Fr 4
TAi LE OF CONTENTS Introduction 4 Acknowledgements 5 Background of Committee Members 6 Critical Path 7 Guidelines 8 Overview 8 Data Collection 8 Outside Data 8 Inside Data 9 Conclusions 9 Recommendations 10 Present Picture on Costs 10 South Bruce Peninsula Data 10 Municipal Average Cost per Councillors 11 Municipal Total Cost per Councillor 13 Honorarium + Per Diem + Expenses — Councillors Only 15 Honorarium + Per Diem - Councillors only 17 Honorarium + Per Diem + Expenses — Mayors Only 19 Honorarium + Per Diem — Mayors Only 19 Number of Municipal Households and cost per Household 20 Municipal Population and Cost per Population 20 Recommendation 1 Annual Salary 21 Salary Rates 21 Rational 21 Recommendation 2 Meeting Definition and Compensation 22 Rules for Attendance 22 Recommendation 3 Mileage Reimbursement 23 Seminar and/or Conference Eligibility and Number Permitted 24 Conference/Seminar Policies and Attendance Rules 25 Arran-Elderslie 25 Brockton 25 Huron- Kinloss 25 Kincardine 25
-2- COUNCIL REMUNERATION COMMITTEE August 25, 2003
Northern Bruce Peninsula 26 Saugeen Shores 26 South Bruce Peninsula 26 South Bruce 26 Recommendation 4 Conferences and Seminars 26 Spousal Attendance 27 Recommendation 5 Appropriate Meeting Dates and Times 27 Recommendation 6 Control of the Meeting Length 28 Laptop, Internet, Telephone Lines 29 Will Computers be used in Future Municipal Business? 29 Will Council Members Become More Comfortable Using Computers in the Future? 29 Is Computer Use Becoming More Popular? 30 What is the Best Method of Introducing Computer Use Into Municipal Operations? 30 Internet use in Canada 31 Households Using Internet From Home, by Purpose of use 32 Council Members Questionnaire Computer Use Data 33 Council Members Questionnaire Answers 34 Municipality Questionnaire Computer Use Data 35 Municipality Questionnaire Answers 36 Think Kingston 37 Grande Prairie, Alberta 40 Use of Computers Costs Laptop Computers 42 Use of Computer Costs Using Home Computers 43 Recommendation 7 Developing a Computer Use Plan 44 Ward System 45 The Mayor Reports Ward system Pro's and Con's 45 Municipalities Electing by Ward, Or At Large 47 Town of South Bruce Peninsula 48 Recommendation 8 The Ward System of Election be Discontinued in South Bruce Peninsula 48 Rational . 48 Number of Councillors 49 Council Members per Population — Bruce County 51 Recommendation 9 Council Be Reduced to Four Councillors Plus a Mayor 51 Conferences and Seminars 52 Spousal Attendance 53 Developing Policies 53 Recommendation 10 Concentrate on setting clear policies 53
-3- COUNCIL REMUNERATION COMMITTEE August 25, 2003
,•1 TX 3-`4
INTRODUCTION
This report is the result of Town of South Bruce Peninsula Council forming a Council Remuneration Committee and setting the following areas for consideration:
Honorariums
Meeting definition and compensation for same
Mileage (amount and eligibility)
• Seminar and conference attendance (eligible expenses and number permitted)
Appropriate meeting dates and times (COW and Council)
• Laptop use, paid internet, telephone line, computer training (Would Council then be more efficient? Paper used less?)
o The above list is a guide and is not meant to exclude other items from consideration
4 COUNCIL REMUNERATION COMMITTEE August 25, 2003
:74
CKNOVVLEDGEME TS
The committee acknowledges with thanks the following municipalities:
County of Bruce Municipality of Arran-Elderslie Municipality of Brockton Township of Huron-Kinloss Municipality of Kincardine-Bruce-Tiverton Municipality of Northern Bruce Peninsula Town of Saugeen Shores Town of South Bruce Peninsula Municipality of South Bruce for supplying information about their community in the field of remuneration, allowable expenses and computer use data.
We also acknowledge and thank the following, from South Bruce Peninsula:
Ruthann Carson Rhonda Cook Pat Stock Bill Johnston Mayor Carl Noble Councillor Dan Kerr Members of South Bruce Peninsula Council. for supplying information and giving input to the committee.
-5- COUNCIL REMUNERATION COMMITTEE August 25, 2003
AC;
ACKG OUND * F COMMITTEE
Public notices of invitation asking for volunteers for this committee resulted in five volunteers from the Municipality be ng appointed to this committee.
• Richard Husak — Sauble Beach
Plant Superintendent over 100 employees Owner/Operator Belair Motel & Cottages — 20 years President, Treasurer — Sauble Beach Lion's Club - 10 years Recipient of Lion's highest ward — Melvin Jones Fellowship Award Director, Sauble Beach Chamber of Commerce — 16 years, past 3 years President Director, Community Centre Support Group — 10 years Director, Bruce Peninsula Tourist Association
• Allan Morris Wiarton Doctor of Chiropractic Former lecturer — Canadian Memorial Chiropractic College Vice Chair Hockey Canada Past President Ontario Hockey Federation Former President Wiarton Rotary Club Recipient Paul Harris Award — Rotary's highest honour Recipient of the Queen's Jubilee Medal in 2002
• Marilyn Schinbein Sauble Beach Former Councillor and Reeve of the Town of Hanover. Past Vice President of Board of Governors of Georgian College. Owned and operated Schinbein Insurance Brokers Ltd, Hanover. A Director of the Amabel Residential Property Owners Association for past 6 years. Recipient of the Queen's Jubilee Medal in 2002 COUNCIL REMUNERATION COMMITTEE August 25, 2003
IR= 3PC/0
Dick Waugh Sauble Beach A former newspaper writer and editor Worked with the Federal Government as director of publications for 12 years Owner, in partnership, a public relations company that did speech writing for Cabinet members Formerly Councillor and Deputy Reeve of Amabel Township Original member of South Bruce Peninsula Council
ob Wilkie Sauble Beach Divisional Sales Manager RBW Owen Sound — 5 years Sales Rep of RBW Owen Sound — 20 years Private Business Owner Operator — Baker Bobs, Sauble Beach — 15 years Floraltique Florist & Antiques, Mississauga — 9 years Director Bruce Peninsula Tourism
Lori Shirreff Owen Sound Appointed by the Municipality as staff resource person Employee Town of South Bruce Peninsula Diploma in Municipal Administration and Assessment Fanshawe College 1996 AMCTO- Associate Member since 1997 Director and Member— Allenford Curling Club
June 3, 2003 saw the committee gather for the initial meeting. South Bruce Peninsula Chief Administrative Officer, Ruthann Carson presented the committee with an outline of the task, and indicated where we might start in gathering of data. She also answered questions from the committee members. We thank Ruthann for getting us off on the right path. The committee then proceeded with its first meeting. The initial meeting appointed Allan Morris as Chair.
CRiTICAL PAT The committee discussed how we were going to perform our task and one of the initial consensuses came in development of a critical path. We developed a schedule of meetings so that we would deliver the complete report to the Municipality on August 18 for delivery to council members before August 25 Council meeting, However in the process of developing the report the committee became aware that council has a Committee of the Whole on Monday August 18. Therefore the delivery date was altered to August 15 so the report could be distributed to council members 3 days before their Committee meeting. The Remuneration Committee also requested and was granted time with the Committee of the Whole on August 18 for review of the report and to answer questions coming from council members. A subsequent adjustment of date from August 18 to August 25 was necessary because of previous commitments of four of the nine Council members.
-7- COUNCIL REMUNERATION COMMITTEE August 25, 2003
iL2b 13110 VIC
OI SIDELINES By committee consensus we agreed that our recommendations must be for the betterment of the governance system through Council operations. Our focus need not address Municipal employee situations except how it affects Council governance and function.
OVERVIEW The committee members divided the areas of responsibility of collecting information and data; this collected information was brought to the whole committee for discussion, debate and consensus.
DATA COLLECTION We sought and received data from both without and within our municipality. Our staff resource person, Lori Shirreff was outstanding in gathering data the committee requested. Outside Data Municipalities within Bruce County supplied us with information in the following areas: • General information • Specific By-laws information • Council member's remuneration • Per Diem • Allowable expenses • Rules for attendance at conferences and seminars • Mileage rates Business enterprises also supplied specific information. COUNCIL REMUNERATION COMMITTEE August 25, 2003
AMA
inside D a Was mainly supplied by: • Town staff persons by interview and/or in written form • Council members by interview and/or in written.form • From Municipal records
The committee reviewed this information in depth.
CONCLUSIONS Our observation is that By-laws of various municipalities in Bruce County are inconsistent from one jurisdiction to another. This is illustrated in the method of remuneration to the Mayor and Councillors including personal expenses incurred while.on Council business. More inconsistencies are evident in attendance by Councillors at conferences and seminars and who attends these conferences. There is no consistency in the compensation to the Mayor and Councillors for their services. COUNCIL REMUNERATION COMMITTEE August 25, 2003
4*, -
Pirx 41th.
Recommendations are the result of our research, debate and discussion. Therefore it is our proposal, in keeping with the progressive forward thinking of our present council, to recommend changes to the present system of remuneration. Furthermore, the committee recommends the introduction and use of today's terms and to suggest council revamp By-laws to be more functional in our municipality.
T E P ESENT UP, 1CTU E ON C STS
The charts depicted on the following pages illustrate the present picture of remuneration from the gathered data.
RT 1
fa) uth 00). ce ) insul at
Honorarium per Diem TOTAL
1 South Bruce Peninsula Mayor 6,000.00 11,905.00 17,905.00 2 South Bruce Peninsula Councillor 3,000.00 9,330.00 12,330.00 3 South Bruce Peninsula Councillor 3,000.00 9,140.00 12,140.00 4 South Bruce Peninsula Councillor 3,000.00 8,820.00 11,820.00 5 South Bruce Peninsula Councillor 3,000.00 8,790.00 11,790.00 6 South Bruce Peninsula Councillor 3,000.00 8,220.00 11,220.00 7 South Bruce Peninsula Councillor 3,000.00 8,140.00 11,140.00 8 South Bruce Peninsula Councillor 3,000.00 7,920.00 10,920.00 9 South Bruce Peninsula Councillor 3,000.00 6,570.00 9,570.00
AVERAGE FOR COUNCILLORS 3,000.00 8,366.25 11,366.25
-10- COUNCIL REMUNERATION COMMITTEE August 25, 2003
;;; °
Ch 2
MUNICIPALITY AVERAGE COST PER COUNCILLOR
Honorarium per Diem Travel Expenses Minn Meals TOTAL AVERAGE Parking
Kincardine Mayor 27,000 5,750 9,974 42,724 Kincardine Councillor 11,550 10,780 14,523 36,853 Kincardine Councillor 18,000 4,830 9,649 32,479 Kincardine Deputy 21,500 2,930 7,682 32,112 Kincardine Councillor 18,000 4,480 8,291 30,771 Kincardine Councillor 18,000 2,900 8,827 29,727 Kincardine Councillor 18,000 1,925 2,486 22,411 Kincardine Councillor 18,000 925 2,456 21,381 Kincardine Councillor 18,000 1,175 833 20,008 29,829
Brockton Mayor 20,993 2,000 3,117 1,260 27,371 Brockton Deputy 12,817 845 1,697 15,360 Brockton Councillor 10,497 1,540 1,799 13,836 Brockton Councillor 10,497 1,241 1,440 13,178 Brockton Councillor 10,654 244,67 1,649 12,302 Brockton Councillor 10,654 114 1,245 12,013 Brockton Councillor 10,654 10,654 14,959 South Bruce Peninsula Mayor 6,000 11,905 2,651 20,556 South Bruce Peninsula Councillor 3,000 8,820 3,014 14,834 South Bruce Peninsula Councillor 3,000 8,790 2,853 14,643 South Bruce Peninsula Councillor 3,000 9,330 1,816 14,146 South Bruce Peninsula Councillor 3,000 7,920 2,817 13,737 South Bruce Peninsula Councillor 3,000 9,140 1,445 13,585 South Bruce Peninsula Councillor 3,000 8,140 2,071 13,211 South Bruce Peninsula Councillor 3,000 8,220 68 11-,288 South Bruce Peninsula Councillor 3,000 6,570 1,039 10,609 14,068 COUNCIL REMUNERATION COMMITTEE August 25, 2003
Arv 3i1 "19 11PC) 9Da -773
MUNICIPALITY AVERAGE COST PER COUNCILLOR
Honorarium per Diem Travel Expenses Misc Meals TOTAL AVERAGE Parking
North Bruce Peninsula Mayor 6,000 8,963 1,402 16,365 North Bruce Peninsula Councillor 4,000 8,652 478 13,130 North Bruce Peninsula Deputy 5,000 4,151 801 9,952 North Bruce Peninsula Councillor 4,000 4,102 8,102 North Bruce Peninsula Councillor 4,000 3,353 186 7,539 11,018
Saugeen Shores Mayor 23,791 345 24,136 Saugeen Shores Deputy 14,606 1,158 15,764 Saugeen Shores Councillor 8,975 2,779 11,754 Saugeen Shores Councillor 8,674 918 9,592 Saugeen Shores Councillor 8,073 1,361 9,434 Saugeen Shores Councillor 8,326 8,326 Saugeen Shores Councillor 8,212 30 8,242 Saugeen Shores Councillor 5,259 69 5,328 Saugeen Shores Councillor 3,068 340 3,408 10,665
Huron-Kinloss Mayor 11,761 1,540 13,300 Huron-Kinloss Deputy 9,996 824 149 10,968 Huron-Kinloss Councillor 7,915 879 8,794 Huron-Kinloss Councillor 7,738 467 8,205 Huron-Kinloss Councillor 7,147 589 7,735 Huron-Kinloss Councillor 6,984 439 7,423 Huron-Kinloss Councillor 6,454 496 91 7,042 9,067
Arran-Elderslie Mayor 5,000 7,175 12,175 Arran-Elderslie Councillor 3,000 6,105 9,105 Arran-Elderslie Councillor 3,000 5,265 8,265 Arran-Elderslie Councillor 3,000 5,155 8,155 Arran-Elderslie Deputy 3,500 3,505 7,005 Arran-Elderslie Councillor 3,000 3,885 6,885 Arran-Elderslie Councillor 3,000 3,635 6,635 8,318
South Bruce NO FIGURES SUPPLIED
-12- COUNCIL REMUNERATION COMMITTEE August 25, 2003 A
Ch a a 3
UNICI Lir( TsTAL COST FO 10, • UNC1L
Honorarium per Diem Travel Expenses Misc Meals SUB TOTAL TOTAL Parking
Kincardine Mayor 18,000 5,750 9,974 9,000 * 42,724 Kincardine Deputy 12,000 2,930 7,682 9,500 32,112 Kincardine Councillor 18,000 2,900 8,827 8,000 37,727 Kincardine Councillor 18,000 1,175 833 8,000 28,008 Kincardine Councillor 18,000 925 2,456 8,000 29,381 Kincardine Councillor 18,000 4,830 9,649 8,000 40,479 Kincardine Councillor 18,000 4,480 8,291 8,000 38,771 Kincardine Councillor 11,550 10,780 14,523 8,000 44,853 Kincardine Councillor 18,000 1,925 2,486 8,000 30,411 324, 465 *NOTE: Kincardine council members receive part of their honorarium from sitting as a director on the municipality owned Bruce Municipal Telephone System. It appears above in the Misc. column.
Brockton Mayor 20,993 2,000 3,117 1,260 27,371 Brockton Deputy 12,817 845 1,697 15,360 Brockton Councillor 10,497 1,540 1,799 13,836 Brockton Councillor 10,497 1,241 1,440 13,178 Brockton Councillor 10,654 114 1,245 12,013 Brockton Councillor 10,654 245 1,649 12,547 Brockton Councillor 10,654 10,654 104,714
South Bruce Peninsula Mayor 6,000 11,905 2,651 20,556 South Bruce Peninsula Councillor 3,000 8,820 3,014 14,834 South Bruce Peninsula Councillor 3,000 8,790 2,853 14;643 South Bruce Peninsula Councillor 3,000 9,330 1,816 14,146 South Bruce Peninsula Councillor 3,000 7,920 2,817 13,737 South Bruce Peninsula Councillor 3,000 9,140 1,445 13,585 South Bruce Peninsula Councillor 3,000 8,140 2,071 13,211 South Bruce Peninsula Councillor 3,000 8,220 68 11,288 South Bruce Peninsula Councillor 3,000 6,570 1,039 10,609 126,608
-13- COUNCIL REMUNERATION COMMITTEE August 25, 2003
,1*0 ?Ay 4-
MUNICIPALITY TOTAL COST FOR COUNCIL
Honorarium per Diem Travel Expenses Misc Meals SUB TOTAL TOTAL Saugeen Shores Mayor 23,791 345 24,136 Saugeen Shores Deputy 14,606 1,158 15,764 Saugeen Shores Councillor 8,975 2,779 11,754 Saugeen Shores Councillor 8,674 918 9,592 Saugeen Shores Councillor 8,073 1,361 9,434 Saugeen Shores Councillor 8,326 8,326 Saugeen Shores Councillor 8,212 30 8,242 Saugeen Shores Councillor 5,259 69 5,328 Saugeen Shores Councillor 3,068 340 3,408 95,984
Huron-Kinloss Mayor 11,761 1,540 0 0 13,300 Huron-Kinloss Deputy 9,996 824 0 149 10,968 Huron-Kinloss Councillor 7,915 879 0 8,794 Huron-Kinloss Councillor 7,738 467 0 8,205 Huron-Kinloss Councillor 7,147 589 0 7735 Huron-Kinloss Councillor 6,984 439 0 7,423 Huron-Kinloss Councillor 6,454 496 0 91 7,042 63,467 Arran-Elderslie Mayor 5,000 7,175 12,175 Arran-Elderslie Councillor 3,000 6,105 9,105 Arran-Elderslie Councillor 3,000 5,265 8,265 Arran-Elderslie Councillor 3,000 5,155 8,155 Arran-Elderslie Deputy 3,500 3,505 7,005 Arran-Elderslie Councillor 3,000 3,885 6,885 Arran-Elderslie Councillor 3,000 3,635 6,635 58,225
North Bruce Peninsula Mayor 6,000 8,963 1,402 16,365 North Bruce Peninsula Councillor 4,000 8,652 478 13,130 North Bruce Peninsula Deputy 5,000 4,151 801 9,952 North Bruce Peninsula Councillor 4,000 4,102 0 8,102 North Bruce Peninsula Councillor 4,000 3,353 186 7,539 55,089
South Bruce NO FIGURES SUPPLIED COUNCIL REMUNERATION COMMITTEE August 25, 2003 3E117000
rt 4
HONORARIUM + PER DIEM + EXPENSES COUNCILLORS ONLY
Honorarium per Diem Travel Expenses Misc TOTAL
Kincardine Councillor 11,550 10,780 14,523 36,853 Kincardine Councillor 18,000 4,830 9,649 32,479 Kincardine Deputy 21,500 2,930 7,682 32,112 Kincardine Councillor 18,000 4,480 8,291 30,771 Kincardine Councillor 18,000 2,900 8,827 29,727 Kincardine Councillor 18,000 1,925 2,486 22,411 Kincardine Councillor 18,000 925 2,456 21,381 Kincardine Councillor 18,000 1,175 833 20,008 Saugeen Shores Deputy 14,606 1,158 15,764 Brockton Deputy 12,817 845 1,697 15,360 South Bruce Peninsula Councillor 3,000 8,820 3,014 14,834 South Bruce Peninsula Councillor 3,000 8,790 2,853 14,643 South Bruce Peninsula Councillor 3,000 9,330 1,816 14,146 Brockton Councillor 10,497 1,540 1,799 13,836 South Bruce Peninsula Councillor 3,000 7,920 2,817 13,737 South Bruce Peninsula Councillor 3,000 9,140 1,445 13,585 South Bruce Peninsula Councillor 3,000 8,140 2,071 13,211 Brockton Councillor 10,497 1,241 1,440 13,178 North Bruce Penninsula Councillor 4,000 8,652 478 13,130 Brockton Councillor 10,654 244,67 1,649 12,302 Brockton Councillor 10,654 114 1,245 12,013 Saugeen Shores Councillor 8,975 2,779 11,754 South Bruce Peninsula Councillor 3,000 8,220 68 11,288 Huron Kinloss Deputy 9,996 824 149 10,968 Brockton Councillor 10,654 10,654 South Bruce Peninsula Councillor 3,000 6,570 1,039 10,609 North Bruce Penninsula Deputy 5,000 4,151 801 9,952 Saugeen Shores Councillor 8,674 918 9,592 Saugeen Shores Councillor 8,073 1,361 9,434 Arran-Elderslie Councillor 3,000 6,105 9,105 Huron Kinloss Councillor 7,915 879 8,794 Saugeen Shores Councillor 8,326 8,326 Arran-Elderslie Councillor 3,000 5,265 8,265
-15- COUNCIL REMUNERATION COMMITTEE August 25, 2003
43) "*? -3,14...11Ca 11■2:
HONORARIUM + PER DIEM + EXPENSES COUNCILLORS ONLY
Honorarium per Diem Travel Expenses Misc TOTAL
Saugeen Shores Councillor 8,212 30 8,242 Huron Kinloss Councillor 7,738 467 8,205 Arran-Elderslie Councillor 3,000 5,155 8,155 North Bruce Penninsula Councillor 4,000 4,102 8,102 Huron Kinloss Councillor 7,147 589 7,735 North Bruce Penninsula Councillor 4,000 3,353 186 7,539 North Bruce Penninsula Councillor 4,000 3,353 186 7,539 Huron Kinloss Councillor 6,984 439 7,423 Huron Kinloss Councillor 6,984 439 7,423 Huron Kinloss Councillor 6,454 496 91 7,042 Huron Kinloss Councillor 6,454 496 91 7,042 Arran-Elderslie Deputy 3,500 3,505 7,005 Arran-Elderslie Deputy 3,500 3,505 7,005 Arran-Elderslie Councillor 3,000 3,885 6,885 Arran-Elderslie Councillor 3,000 3,885 6,885 Arran-Elderslie Councillor 3,000 3,635 6,635 Arran-Elderslie Councillor 3,000 3,635 6,635 Saugeen Shores Councillor 5,259 69 5,328 Saugeen Shores Councillor 5,259 69 5,328 Saugeen Shores Councillor 3,068 340 3,408 Saugeen Shores Councillor 3,068 340 3,408
AVERAGE 12,355 COUNCIL REMUNERATION COMMITTEE August 25, 2003
CI)
Chart 5 HONORARIUM + PER DIEM COUNCILLORS ONLY
Honorarium per Diem TOTAL
1 Kincardine Deputy 21,500 2,930 24,430 2 Kincardine Councillor 18,000 4,830 22,830 O Kincardine Councillor 18,000 4,480 22,480 4 Kincardine Councillor 11,550 10,780 22,330 5 Kincardine Councillor 18,000 2,900 20,900 6 Kincardine Councillor 18,000 1,925 19,925 7 Kincardine Councillor 18,000 1,175 19,175 8 Kincardine Councillor 18,000 925 18,925 9 Saugeen Shores Deputy 14,606 14,606 10 Brockton Deputy 12,817 12,817 11 North Bruce Peninsula Councillor 4,000 8,652 12,652 12 South Bruce Peninsula Councillor 3,000 9,330 12,330 13 South Bruce Peninsula Councillor 3,000 9,140 12,140 14 South Bruce Peninsula Councillor 3,000 8,820 11,820 15 South Bruce Peninsula Councillor 3,000 8,790 11,790 16 South Bruce Peninsula Councillor 3,000 8,220 11,220 17 South Bruce Peninsula Councillor 3,000 8,140 11,140 18 South Bruce Peninsula Councillor 3,000 7,920 10,920 19 Brockton Councillor 10,654 10,654 20 Brockton Councillor 10,654 10,654 21 Brockton Councillor 10,654 10,654 22 Brockton Councillor 10,497 10,497 23 Brockton Councillor 10,497 10,497 24 Huron-Kinloss Deputy 9,996 9,996 26 South Bruce Peninsula Councillor 3,000 6,670 9,670 26 North Bruce Peninsula Deputy 5,000 4,151 9,151 27 Arran-Elderslie Councillor 3,000 6,105 9,105 28 Saugeen Shores Councillor 8,975 8,975 29 Saugeen Shores Councillor 8,674 8,674 30 Saugeen Shores Councillor 8,326 8,326 31 Arran-Elderslie Councillor 3,000 5,265 8,265 32 Saugeen Shores Councillor 8,212 8,212 33 Arran-Elderslie Councillor 3,000 5,155 8,155 34 North Bruce Peninsula Councillor 4,000 4,102 8,102
-17- COUNCIL REMUNERATION COMMITTEE August 25, 2003
i■,"1•1, ,!t C 'OP
HONORARIUM + PER DIEM COUNCILLORS ONLY
Honorarium per Diem TOTAL 36 Saugeen Shores Councillor 8,073 8,073 36 Huron-Kinloss Councillor 7,915 7,915 37 Huron-Kinloss Councillor 7,738 7,738 38 North Bruce Peninsula Councillor 4,000 3,353 7,353 39 North Bruce Peninsula Councillor 4,000 3,353 7,353 40 Huron-Kinloss Councillor 7,147 7,147 41 Arran-Elderslie Deputy 3,500 3,505 7,005 42 Arran-Elderslie Deputy 3,500 3,505 7,005 43 Huron-Kinloss Councillor 6,984 6,984 Huron-Kinloss Councillor 6,984 6,984 46 Arran-Elderslie Councillor 3,000 3,885 6,885 46 Arran-Elderslie Councillor 3,000 3,885 6,885 47 Arran-Eiderslie Councillor 3,000 3,635 6,635 48 Arran-Elderslie Councillor 3,000 3,635 6,635 Huron-Klnloss Councillor 6,454 6,454 60 Huron-Kinloss Councillor 6,454 6,454 61 Saugeen Shores Councillor 5,259 5,259 62 Saugeen Shores Councillor 5,259 5,259 63 Saugeen Shores Councillor 3,068 3,068 64 Saugeen Shores Councillor 3,068 3,068
Average 10,594
-1 8- COUNCIL REMUNERATION COMMITTEE August 25, 2003
V
Ch 11*
MAYORS ONLY HONORARIUM + PER DIEM + EXPENSES
Honorarium per Diem Travel Expenses Misc TOTAL Parking 1 Kincardine Mayor 27,000 5,750 9,974 42,724 Brockton Mayor 20,993 2,000 3,117 1,260 27,371 3 Saugeen Shores Mayor 23,791 345 24,136 4 South Bruce Peninsula Mayor 6,000 11,906 2,661 20,666 5 North Bruce Peninsula Mayor 6,000 8,963 1,402 16,365 6 Huron-Kinloss Mayor 11,761 1,540 0 13,300 7 Arran-Elderslie Mayor 5,000 7,175 12,175
AVERAGE 22,375 7
MAYORS ONLY HONORARIUMS -4- PER DIEM ONLY
Honorarium per Diem TOTAL
1 Kincardine Mayor 27,000 5,750 32,750 2 Saugeen Shores Mayor 23,791 23,791 3 Brockton Mayor 20,993 2,000 22,993 4 South Bruce Peninsula Mayor 6,000 11,905 17,905 5 North Bruce Peninsula Mayor 6,000 8,963 14,963 6 Arran-Elderslie Mayor 5,000 7,175 12,175 7 Huron-Kinloss Mayor 11,761 11,761
AVERAGE 19,477
-19- COUNCIL REMUNERATION COMMITTEE August 25, 2003
D AID'=
Ch
NUMBER OF MUNICIPAL HOUSEHOLDS AND COST PER HOUSEHOLD
NUMBER TOTAL PER HOUSEHOLDS POPULATION COST HOUSE
Kincardine 5,257 11,029 268,465 51.07 Brockton 3,987 9,658 104,714 26.26 Arran Elderslie 2,705 6,577 58,225 21.52 South Bruce Peninsula 8,741 8,090 126,608 1878 Huron-Kinloss 3,560 6,224 63,467 17.83 Saugeen Shores 6,215 11,388 95,984 15.44 Northern Bruce Peninsula 4,477 3,599 55,089 12.30 South Bruce Township 2,278 6,063 NO DATA
Ch rt 9
MUNICIPAL POPULATION AND COST PER POPULATION
NUMBER TOTAL PE HOUSEHOL • POPULATION COST • PULATION
Kincardine 5,257 11,029 268,465 24.34 South Bruce Peninsula 6,741 8,090 126,608 15.65 Northern Bruce Peninsula 4,477 3,599 55,089 15.31 Brockton 3,987 9,658 104,714 10.84 Huron-Kinloss 3,560 6,224 63,467 10.20 Arran Elderslie 2,705 6,577 58,225 8.85 Saugeen Shores 6,215 11,388 95,984 8.43 South Bruce Township 2,278 6,063 NO DATA
-20- COUNCIL REMUNERATION COMMITTEE August 25, 2003
■ ■ gig . g
RECOMMENDATION
HONORARIUMS - Council me bers receive an annual salary. The term honorariums should be dropped in favour of the term salary.
ANNUAL SALARY We recommend that council members be paid an annual Salary, Per Diem will no longer be a separate item but be included in the salary:
ry Rates Mayor $18,000 per annum
Councillors $12,000 per annum
We further recommend that the remuneration rate for Council be adjusted to reflect the Consumer Price Index (CPI) as published by Statistics Canada for the immediately preceeding calendar year and the adjusted remuneration shall become the new base remuneration. One of the biggest time wasters and emotion wasters connected with council work is the subject of increase of remuneration for Council members. Also it puts Councillors in the position of having to vote themselves a pay raise. In the public forum that can be difficult. We recommend that Council members' salaries be adjusted to the Consumer Price Index so that it automates the movement of Council salaries UP or DOWN according to the Index. We have recommended a fair salary base. Keying that salary to the Consumer Price Index should not create problems. By tying the fair salaries to the Cost of Living Index insures that the salaries remain fair without the hassles associated with this topic.
Expenses will be items separate from salary as they are at present. Salaries will not include these expenses:
• Cost of lodging while at conference • Cost of meals up to $70. (Breakfast $15, Lunch $20 Dinner $35) Per day • Telephone • Mileage at current rate Taxi fare/parking • Conference/seminar attendance • Conference/seminar registration fees
RATIONAL To arrive at a salary which did not include per Diem, expenses, conferences and mileage, the Remuneration Committee examined all of the communities that are in Bruce County. When we only used the salary and the per diem, we found that the average income was just over $10,600 for Councillors (Chart 5). On the same basis, the mayor was almost $19,500 (Chart 7). In reaching our recommendation, the committee felt that the Councillors of South Bruce Peninsula, along with the Mayor, represented one of the most populated regions. We also felt that generally, people run for public office, not to be compensated, but for the betterment of the community. We therefore decided that a salary of $18,000 for the Mayor and a salary of $12,000 for Councillors was appropriate.
-21- COUNCIL REMUNERATION COMMITTEE August 25, 2003
RECOMMENDATION 2 EETING DEFINITION AND COM ENSATION
The Committees of Council would all come under the remuneration in the form of a yearly salary. There is no per diem allowance for these meetings.
• Formal council meetings • Committee of the Whole meetings • Committees of Council, i.e. Committee of Adjustment, Youth Committee, Seniors Committee, etc. • Committee meetings in the community
The Mayor can authorize persons to attend and designate the expenses allowed for special meetings, if they fall outside of the expense guidelines listed here and in Recommendation 4. Legitimate expenses are as follows: • Registration fees • Cost of lodging • Cost of meals up to $70. (Breakfast $15, Lunch $20 Dinner $35) Per day • Telephone • Taxi fare/parking • Mileage at current rate
Special meetings are those where there is an extraordinary event outside the normal realm of Council business, such as special luncheon, special dinner, special meeting, a dignitary's visit etc.
RULES FOR ATTENDANCE The committee has concern that Councillors may take advantage of the salary structure by missing meetings, particularly Council meetings and Committee of the Whole meetings. • We understand that, by law, when a councillor is absent for 3 months, without approval of council, they may be removed from council. We suggest this particular issue be followed as it is decreed by law • Further, a councillor should be penalized for missing meetings, without good reason • Our suggestion is that if a councillor misses a meeting, without good reason, they be penalized $250, for each missed meeting
-22 COUNCIL REMUNERATION COMMITTEE August 25, 2003 dt 1St )
This brings the situation where someone must determine if a councillor's absence is for good reason'. The individual with the most responsibility within Council is the Mayor. We suggest the Mayor make the decision on for good reason', whether it has merit or not. Any action taken by the Mayor, in relationship to this situation, shall be referred to the Council for approval or rejection within fifteen days following the decision.
RECOMMENDATION 3
MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT
For council and committee meetings at the Town Hall the following is the allowance for council members based on proximity to the Town Hall: ▪ 0 to 4.5 km no allowance • 4.5 to 9 km $300 per year • 9 to 12 km $500 per year • beyond 12 km $750 per year
For meetings other than at the municipal building mileage will be paid on an actual basis at the rate currently in effect for Bruce County (presently 0.36 dollars.)
-23- COUNCIL REMUNERATION COMMITTEE August 25, 2003
/EX:1001Fri' 14; I
CIIA T 0
SEMINAR AND OR CONFERENCE (Eligible expenses and number permitted)
r S nt St tus Br ce C • ty
NUMBER
Municipalities with written policy 5
Municipalities with no written policy 3
Conference Attendance Councillor attends 1 5
Councillor attends 2 2
Councillor attends 3 1
Mayor attends 2 1
Mayor attends 3 1
Mayor attends any number 6
Warden attends any number 1
1 day seminars, in most cases, all council can attend as well as the Mayor COUNCIL REMUNERATION COMMITTEE August 25, 2003
M'm t30
Spousal Attendance from around the County: Registration program paid 5 Will not pay any expenses Will not pay for programs Only pay on prior approval
NOTE:
In cases, where attendance is on a "Need to know" basis, but there is not a budget item to cover the costs of someone attending. Council needs to address this issue. We suggest that, providing funds are available in a Committee or Department budget or contingency funds, the council make the decision whether to allow someone to attend the conference or seminar.
CONFERENCE/SEMINAR POLICIES ATTENIIP ANC E SUMMARY
ARRAN-ELDERSLIE; • Has a written policy • Councillors and full time staff can attend 1 convention per year • No more than 3 Councillors/staff can attend a single convention ▪ Municipality will NOT pay any expenses for a spouse of a member BROCKTON • Has a written policy a Each Councillor (& spouse) can attend 1 convention per year • The Mayor (& spouse) can attend 3 conventions
HURON-KINLOSS a A Councillor can attend 1 convention per year.
KINCARDINE There is no written policy regarding number of conferences/seminars a Councillor can attend • It is generally budgeted.that a Councillor can attend 1 conference a year, if recommended by Council or committee If funds are available in a department/committee budget, there is no limit on 1 day seminars • The same criterion applies to managers • Municipality will NOT pay for spouse (unless prior approval given)
-25- COUNCIL REMUNERATION COMMITTEE August 25, 2003
NORTHERN BRUCE PENINSULA No written policy on Conferences
SAUGEEN SHORES ▪ Has a written policy EI Mayor and Councillor can attend 2 conventions
SOUTH BRUCE PENINSULA
1 Councillor (& spouse) attended Ontario Small Urban Municipalities • 4 Councillors ( & spouse) can attend Association of Municipalities of Ontario • All can attend Municipal Affairs 1 day conference • Mayor and Councillor attended Rural Ontario Municipal Assoc. and Good Roads combined together, also the Public Works Manager • All attended 1 day conference Annual Ministry of Municipal Affairs • Mayor and 1 Councillor attended Environmental Forum - Shorelines and Water Quality in Grey-Bruce for 3 days • 1 Councillor attended Ontario Rural Council for 2 days • 1 Councillor attended Rural Development Conference • All attended 1 day Conference of the Ministry of Municipal Affairs
SOUTH BRUCE Has a written policy • Councillors (& spouse) can attend 1 convention (up to 3 days) Spousal allowance; Differences between single and double for accommodation Will NOT pay for cost of companion programs
RECOMMENDATION 4
CONFERENCES AND SEMINA S • Councillors (8) be allowed two conferences per year. A rotation system could be instituted to assure each Councillor has the opportunity to attend different conferences over the three year term of office. • The mayor would be allowed three conferences per year. This would enable covering the main conferences such as Good Roads, AMO and OSUM • Two Councillors or the Mayor and one Councillor could cover each conference adequately. A summary report containing the important information from the conference must be submitted to council in reasonable time
-26-- COUNCIL REMUNERATION COMMITTEE August 25, 2003 JE 1:300 a IRJE4cc _
• The Mayor may attend any number of one day seminars. Useful information may be gained from these mini conferences a A Councillor may attend 1 one day seminar. This allows council to attend nine seminars per year (substitutions may be allowed when a Councillor cannot attend a particular seminar) • If additional seminar or conference attendance is deemed important by Council, then Council must prior approve such attendance Legitimate expenses are as follows:
• Registration fees Es Cost of lodging while at conference • Cost of meals up to $70. (Breakfast $15, Lunch $20 Dinner $35) Per day • Telephone • Mileage at current rate • Taxi fare/parking
Sp usal Attendance
Although not a direct benefit to the taxpayers, spousal attendance at conferences could be considered a "Thank You" to the spouse, for all the time a Councillor gives to the municipality. Often the social aspect of a conference, such as a banquet, includes the spouse. Therefore:
01 A spouse attending a conference will have their banquet fee paid by the municipality. Other costs such as a partner's program will not be reimbursed.
RECOMMENDATION 5
APPROPRIATE MEETING ATES AND TIMES OF COUNCIL
m In summer, Friday afternoon once per month for June, July, August and September Move meetings to different location in the Municipality Sauble Beach Park Head Purple Valley Red Bay Are possible sites.
-27- COUNCIL REMUNERATION COMMITTEE August 25, 2003
YE)
REC MMENDATION 6
CONTROL OF EETING LENGTH Committee members are aware of complaints about the length of Council meetings and Committee of the Whole meetings, This should be of concern to Council. The committee is not aware of the problems that extend meetings past reasonable length. However we have suggestions for efficient meeting protocol. Moreover, Council should be cooperative in following good meeting protocol to make the meeting productive and efficient.
efore the Meeting
• An agenda is the tool to keep your group involved and on the right track during a meeting. ▪ Meeting agenda is distributed a few days in advance so all members can prepare in advance.
Dori g the Meeting Keep the Meeting Moving
The following is a list of suggestions to help you keep your meetings moving in the right direction.
• Start and end on time. • Review the agenda and set priorities for the meeting • Stick to the.actenda • New items brought forth that are not on the meeting agenda should be placed in the next mee ng agenda so that Council members may give proper consideration to the issues before debate
A en the Meeting Take Time to Review
The following is a list of suggestions to help you review your meeting outcomes.
• Give recognition and appreciation to excellent and timely progress. • Put unfinished business on the agenda for the next meeting. • Discuss any problems from the meeting with other officers for timely action. COUNCIL REMUNERATION COMMITTEE August 25, 2003
'W; a "n-
Laptop use, paid Internet, tele 411, ho e line, computer training (Would Council then be more efficient? Paper used less?)
Committee members were supplied with an estimate cost of supplying Councillors with laptop computers. The estimate was addressed to Mayor Carl Noble and marked 'Confidential'. However the chair received verbal agreement from the Mayor to use this estimate in our discussions. Information was retrieved from Statistics Canada's web site illustrating increase in use in households in Canada and the Provinces.
We gathered further information from two municipalities that may be on the cutting edge of technology but are pointing the way of the future in municipal use of the "Information Revolution" (a term used by Grande Prairie) Kingston, Ontario and surrounding municipalities are developing, in a cooperative effort, best uses of digital technology (Page 41). Grande Prairie, Alberta has an initiative called "CyberCity" that prepares the community for the information revolution (Page 44).
These are strong indications that use of computers in municipal operations is growing, and will continue, to grow. In another part of our search for data we sent a questionnaire to each Municipalitiy in Bruce County (Page 35) and a separate questionnaire to South Bruce Peninsula Council members (Page 33). From this we have estimated costs (best guess) at two different approaches to the computerization of council.
However, before discussing the cost of laptop computers for all Council members there are other factors that must be considered.
i. Will computers be used in future municipal business? . Will Council members become more comfortable using computers in the future? . Is computer use becoming more popular? . What is the best method of introducing computer use into municipal operations?
Will computers be used in future municipal business? There is no question that the future of administration, information, governance and business of municipalities the use of computers will increase at an even more rapid rate in the future.
Will Council members become more comfortable using computers in the future? Yes. There is a need to use new technology. Educating present council members (and staff) on function and use will aid in making Councillors more relaxed with the technology. All Councillors have the use of home computers which means they have the capability to work on their computer skills. As we move forward people who were 'brought up on computers' are the future Councillors. With their comfort, computer use will never be a question discussed. COUNCIL REMUNERATION COMMITTEE August 25, 2003
"WsePto.
Is computer use becoming more popular? The finding of Statistics Canada leaves no doubt that the use of computers in Canada is going through rapid growth. If one would reflect upon the use of radio, television and telephone over the years you will develop an understanding of the future of computers in our homes and in our lives. Believe it or not there was a time when homes maybe had 1 radio, and later 1 television set, and 1 telephone. Care to do the count now in the average Canadian home?
What is the best method of introducing computer use into municipal operations? The committee will outline our thoughts on this in our recommendations for this section
-30- COUNCIL REMUNERATION COMMITTEE August 25, 2003
4.4 -9-114tT
CHA T11
rs Statistics Stailisliquo ilo lb Canada Canada Canada' Francais ContacIt Us Search Canada site The Daily 'Canadian Community Census Statis ics Profiles
Internet Use in Canada
Overall, more than 8 million households, or about two-thirds of the total, contained someone last year who had used the Internet at some time in their life from one location or another, either from home, work, school or a library.
Of these households, 7.2 million had at least one member who used the Internet regularly. This group represented 50% of all 12 million households, up from 51% in 2000. .
In 2001, more than 5.8 million, 49% of all households had at least one member that regularly used the Internet from home, an increase of 1.1 million from the previous year. This was somewhat less than the gain of 1.4 million between 1999 and 2000.
An estimated 2.2 million households spent almost $2 billion shopping on the Internet in 2001, according to the electronic commerce component of the Household Internet Use Survey. These households placed 13.4 million orders over the Internet from various locations.
See The Daily July 25, 2002
See The Daily September 19, 2002
THE FOLLOWING IS THE ADDRESS FOR STATISTICS CANADA TO SEE INFORMATION PERTAINING TO COMPUTER USE IN CANADA
htt . //www.cio-d i/GS-CD/es-ae/es-aewra perfi le _e.asp?p=w&h1=1023
-31- COUNCIL REMUNERATION COMMITTEE August 25, 2003
n",MOrr, as: „mg ib 7*, it
CHART 12
Statistics Stalistique ii Canada Canada Caria I
Francais Contact Us Search Canada site The Daily Canadian Community Our products Home Census Statistics Profiles and services Other links Ho seEloids usi g the .rtertetfroi hoe, by p pos r OT use
1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 Regular home-use households % Purpose of use E-mail 83.1 85.6 91.7 93.3 94.7 Electronic banking 19.7 22.9 27.7 36.6 44.4 Purchasing goods/services 9.2 10.9 19.0 23.8 26.0 Medical/health information 42.5 54.2 57.1 61.8 Formal education/training 29.9 32.0 47.3 47.0 Government information 36.4 44.1 47.1 52.5 Search for employment 30.5 33.2 General browsing 84.7 78.1 84.7 90.1 91.0 Playing games 34.3 42.7 45.3 50.1 Chat groups 25.4 26.2 27.4 28.0 Obtaining/saving music 27.1 44.3 47.9 Listening to radio 17.5 23.2 25.3 Find sports-related information 43.2 45.3 Financial information 46.1 46.8 View the news 50.8 53.8 Travel information/arrangements 54.6 56.3 Other Internet services 13.7 .-11.6 34.7-. 44.1 43.3 Last Modified: 2003-06-27.
-32-
COUNCIL REMUNERATION COMMITTEE August 25, 2003
NUE 7-77F-74— cil. 14111E 1%T)C10 'TX AT
CHART 13
COUNCIL ME ERS UEST1ONN E
CO PUTEF Y USE DATA
This questionnaire is to help the committee in designing recommendations concerning future computer use in the affairs of the municipality.
We are on a short time line to bring recommendations to Council so we will appreciate your attention to these questions and the prompt return of your answers.
1. Are you computer literate? Y N If "no" skip to question 6 2. Do you have a computer at home? Y N
3. Do you have a lap top computer? Y N
4. Is your computer type PC Mac Other?
5. Do you have an e-mail address? Y N
6. Should councillors be supplied with a laptop computer for municipal work? Y N
7. Will computer use be extensive in municipal work in the future? Y N
8. Are you interested in basic computer training directed at practical use? Y N
9. Are you aware of what an intranet is? Y N
DO YOU HAVE COMMENTS FOR THE COMMITTEE?
-33- COUNCIL REMUNERATION COMMITTEE August 25, 2003
ff] ;10 Pia
CHAT C U CL MEMBERS AriS ERS
COMPUTE USE COUNCIL MEMBE S
Number Assigned .1 2 3 4 5 6 7
•". Computer literate 1 1 0.5 1 1 0 1 5.5
2 Home computer 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 7
3 Lap top computer 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 2
4 Type PC PC PC PC PC PC PC , 5 email address 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 6
6 Supply laptops 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 4
7 Extensive future use 1 1 Not sure 1 1 DNA 1 5
8 computer training 0 1 1 1 1 1 0 5
know Intranet 1 1 0 1 0 1 0 4 COUNCIL REMUNERATION COMMITTEE August 25, 2003
1=AX . 'U. -
C A-T 15
ICIP A LITY QUESTIONNAIRE
COK3PUTER USE 111) TA
This questionnaire is to help the committee in designing recommendations concerning future computer use in the affairs of the municipality.
We are on a short time line to bring recommendations to Council so we will appreciate your attention to these questions and the prompt return of your answers.
1. Are your council members computer literate? All Some None
2. Should councillors be supplied with a laptop computer for municipal work? Y N
3. Does your municipality supply council members with laptop computers? All Some None
4. Do council members use their home computer for municipal business? All Some None
5. Do council members have an e-mail address? Al! Some None
6. Is computer use presently extensive in your municipal work? Y N
7. Will computer use be extensive in municipal work in the future? Y N
8. Is your municipal system based on mainframe technology? Or PC Mac Other?
9. Do you supply council members with basic computer training directed at practical use? Y N
10. Does you municipality have an intranet system? Y N
11. If answer "no" to number 10, is an intranet system in future plans? Y N
DO YOU HAVE COMMENTS FOR THE COMMITTEE?
-35- COUNCIL REMUNERATION COMMITTEE August 25, 2003 M40
C A ?Ik T 16
ICIPAL ANS ERS
COMPUTE USE MUNICIPALITDES
SCALE 3=NO 2= SOME 1=YES TOTAL
ASSIIGNE" NU BE 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 ( UNICIIP LITY)
1 Computer literate 2 2 2 2 1 2 2 13
2 Should supply LT 3 3 1 1 1 3 3 15
3 Do you 3 3 3 1 1 3 3 17
4 Use home computers 1 3 2 1 3 2 3 15
5 email address 1 3 2 2 1 2 2 13
0 Extensive in municipal 1 1 1 1 1 1 7
7 Extensive future 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 7
8 Your base system ? PC MF MF MF PC PC
9 Supply computer train 3 3 3 1 1 3 3 17
10 Have Intranet system 3 1 1 1 3 3 3 15
11 Intranet in future 3 1 1 1 1 3 3 13
-36- • COUNCIL REMUNERATION COMMITTEE August 25, 2003
■ '1; del&.•: '11 FTX At,
IN( jSTC N
Municipal Technology Summit Report and Analysis Thursday, June 14, 2001
ackground
Municipalities across Ontario are being faced with making decisions regarding the adoption and use of computers, networks and information and communications technologies (ICT). There is a requirement to look at these tools as efficient and effective ways to meet the new challenges and reporting requirements that face municipal governments today. A well planned and implemented municipal ICT strategy will offer opportunities for municipal councils and administrators to affect positive change in the way their business is conducted, their constituents receive information and services and in dealing with the requirements of other government agencies. Municipalities and communities that recognize the fundamental need to move their organizations into the information age are beginning to build the local 'smart communities' of the future.
A clear justification and rationale is required for municipal administrators and councils to support the development and implementation of new technologies and new ways of doing things; in many cases actually re-engineering processes.
Re, ional Activities
By virtue of its population density and proximity to other area municipalities, the City of Kingston serves as a center of commerce and advanced education for the region. As the region's largest urban center, it has sufficient ICT requirements and resources to lead in the adoption of technologies to support municipal applications. In recent years, Kingston has participated in smart community funding applications and upgraded its core financial and human resources systems. In its quest to further improve municipal efficiencies and effectiveness, the City is now undertaking a project to identify service clusters within its organization and the potential for electronic service delivery to its citizens.
Municipalities in the surrounding region, and further to the north in the counties of Frontenac and Lennox and Addington, have also come to realize the requirement to adopt new technologies and applications to run their municipal operations. However, the critical population or assessment base does not exist in these communities as it does in Kingston. Consequently, the challenges in developing a rationale for such adoption are greater. In addition, a number of smaller municipalities are making plans to upgrade hardware and software systems as well as improve their access to the Internet.
-37- COUNCIL REMUNERATION COMMITTEE August 25, 2003
icsnr 'MX WI:"
Summit Objectives
The Municipal Technology Summit held in Napanee had two main objectives. Firstly, it was anticipated that through a discussion of municipal requirements, critical issues, significant initiatives and areas of commonality would become evident. Wherever commonality was demonstrated, it was hoped that there would be a commitment to continue regional discussions and look for opportunities to collaborate to broaden the area of participation and impact of municipal applications. Through discussion, opportunities for cooperation would become apparent and economies of scale and cost recovery/diversion would be realized among rural as well as between rural and urban municipalities. Secondly, it was expected that the value of working together regionally would extend to the current Connect Ontario initiative, where the Ministry of Energy, Science and Technology has advised that the Kingston and Area Network (KANnet) and Land O'Lakes Communication Network (LOLCN) projects become one.
Outcomes and Observations
During the Summit it became very clear that municipalities in this region face many of the same requirements and challenges in conducting business in today's changing environment. With an ever-increasing demand on scarce municipal resources, it is evident that duplicating efforts is not the best use of these resources.
Summit participants pointed out it was important to look at the municipal operations from within as well as look for collaborative opportunities between and among municipalities with common needs. Contrasted with this observation is the degree of ease or difficulty in developing a business case for implementing new technologies between rural and urban municipalities. Where population and assessment bases are lower, this rationale really only works when it is shared with more than one municipality.
The specific needs for information collected from the workshop participants reflects municipal requirements across the Province and beyond. With the adoption of new applications, this information needs to be available electronically, in formats that can be shared between municipal governments and departments, as well as many other individuals and agencies. Given that municipalities across the Province have identified common requirements and are striving to develop smart services and applications for their communities, the opportunity to collaborate and learn from each other quickly extends beyond any one region. That message is being encouraged and supported by the Ministries involved in Connect Ontario. The electronic forum on the Regional Networks for Ontario web site (http://www.rno.on.ca ) is designed to facilitate such an exchange and communities applying for Connect Ontario funds are encouraged to subscribe.
Considering the number of requirements for information sourced from the Province, it is clear that discussion of the opportunities for sharing data, standards, processes and technologies are needed. COUNCIL REMUNERATION COMMITTEE August 25, 2003 laJlEY/P0C) "
Opportunities for Collaboration
Increasing ICT knowledge and awareness within municipal councils and administrations remains critical to the development and implementation of municipal information technology strategies and applications, This too, is a requirement expressed across the Province and one that local community based network organizations such as KANnet and LOLCN are working to meet.
The requirement to update hardware and software is very common across Ontario, particularly in municipalities with populations under 50,000. In many of these cases, municipalities have been well served by older legacy financial systems, operating in DOS or UNIX environments. New performance based reporting requirements and benchmarks present a challenge that many of these existing systems are incapable of managing or adapting to. Furthermore, software developers are reluctant to invest in updating or even maintaining these programs any longer. Consequently, with the decline in technical support for these older systems and the higher price of windows based financial applications, smaller municipalities have a real impetus to work together. Today's technology enables the sharing of robust, sophisticated applications in a secure proprietary environment that no single municipality could afford,
There is a desire to discuss and adopt hardware platforms that will allow for increased sharing and communications down the road. It was recognized that even if municipalities are not ready to share a given application or data at this time, they would like to be able to when they are ready. Municipalities in regions across Ontario are showing interest in developing and sharing standards in hardware and software to enable shared applications and data not only between their organizations but also with the provincial ministries and agencies.
Next Steps
With an active discussion of the many common requirements and critical issues from the workshops, participants decided that maintaining a collaborative municipal approach across the region was beneficial. The comprehensive surveys currently in circulation will be completed and summarized for sharing with the group and a follow up meeting will be planned for the fall. Efforts will continue in developing a single business plan for the region to apply for Connect Ontario/GeoSmart funding, The City of Kingston promised to share the outcomes of its current electronic service delivery initiative. All participants agreed to participate in an electronic discussion and exchange as these processes and initiatives move forward.
-39- COUNCIL REMUNERATION COMMITTEE August 25, 2003
* E P AIRE, AL Z E TA
Learnin About and Preparing to Participate and Compete in the informatio Age.
Executive Summary The CyberCity Initiative aims to help Grande Prairians to learn about and prepare to participate and compete in the Information Revolution that is sweeping the developed world. The initiative has principal thrusts: ▪ Cooperative deployment of shared high-speed equipment, systems and software providing universal interactive access to data and information • Generation of awareness throughout every segment of the community concerning the opportunities and challenges of living and competing in the Information Age • Assurance of affordable, managed, interoperable equipment and network connections which are reliable, expandable and secure
Through effective deployment of this initiative, the following advantages will be gained for all Grande Prairians: • Assurance of universal access and ability to contribute to global information exchange • Advantages of scale resulting from cooperative sharing of networking facilities and services between schools, libraries, hospitals, governments/agencies/institutions, businesses and individuals. • Improved work force effectiveness resulting from a concentrated effort by educators to make global information exchange and collaboration fundamental parts of problem-solving discipline starting in the earliest grades, to provide significant enhancement of adult-learning opportunities, and to offer education to all citizens concerning their information technology rights and the new ways of thinking. • Planned community growth resulting from encouragement of economic development and tourism. • Improved management and operation of municipal government services: D. For collection of opinion, reaction and direction from the electorate D For distribution of information to the electorate, and D For internal inter-departmental operations and planning D for internal interactive exchange of information between administrative and legislative levels, between and among teams and their members, between staff and management and for exchange of ideas and practices with other governments throughout the world.
As even a casual reading of the Information Technology literature will indicate, the Information Age is sweeping over us like a tidal wave. Tide waits for no man; and this is a revolutionary tide sweeping through economic and social life. It will touch us all, one way or the other. Its speed is much faster than previous revolutions we have read about or experienced. Because the competitive prizes will go to the swift and agile, we need to assist our electorate in every way, and make fundamental changes to the body of policy and regulation that will enable our citizens to best position themselves to exploit the opportunities this revolution will bring. Ultimately, the target of the CyberCity Initiative is to reach every residence, business, institution and office with an effective interactive electronic
-40- COUNCIL REMUNERATION COMMITTEE August 25, 2003
1191: .21, X
connection to the world, and to help every Grande Prairian acquire the know-how necessary to exploit it. To the degree that we succeed, it will deliver very significant benefits to Grande Prairie and the region, and substantially achieve our purposes.
The page introducing the CyberCity Initiative contains extensive further descriptive information and associated links. A preliminary discussion paper outlines the origin, vision and goals of the initiative. A background paper provides extensive excerpts from and links to national information technology policy papers and proposes guiding principles and policy objectives. A mailing list and its archive contain both the detailed discussion and a summary of the significant milestones which have brought us to the present state of affairs. Related .agencies/associations and resources are identified with ample links. Links to these and other related pages (including Grande Prairie information technology papers) may be found in the introduction to the CyberCity Initiative cited above. A further reading page with frequently asked questions and a suggested reading order is also available. COUNCIL REMUNERATION COMMITTEE August 25, 2003 M C RT 17 USE OF COMPUTERS ESTIMATED COSTS LAPTOP COMPUTERS LAPTOPS FOR COUNCIL PER GST PST TOTAL MONTHS ITEM TOTAL 0.07 0.08 9 LAPTOP COMPUTERS 2,600 23,400 1,638 1,872 26,910 9 FLOPPY DRIVES 150 1,350 95 108 1,553 9 PORTABLE PRINTERS 529 4,761 333 381 5,475 9 CARRYING CASES 54 486 34 39 559 9 TRAINING 100 900 63 72 1,035 1 SCANNER FOR TOWN HALL 500 500 35 40 575 HARD COSTS 36,107 9 INTERNET CONNECTIONS 23 207 14 244 12 2,928 9 PHONE LINES 36 324 23 26 409 12 4,903 18 CARTRIDGES 90 1,620 113 130 1,953 2,160 SOFT COSTS 653 7,831 COST PROJECTION YEAR 1 YEAR 2 YEAR 3 YEAR 4 HARD COSTS 36,107 36,107 SOFT COSTS 7,831 7,831 7,831 7,831 TOTAL 43,937 7,831 7,831 43,937 103,536 COUNCIL REMUNERATION COMMITTEE August 25, 2003 4.. AP. CHART 'I * USE OF C • MPUTE S ESTIMATED COSTS COUNCILLORS USING OWN HOME COMPUTERS All council members have the use of a computer (survey). This projection is for the Councillors to use their home computers rather than incurring large capital expenditure. GST PST SU TOTAL MONTHS TOTAL 0.07 0.08 1 INTERNET CONNECTION . 5 Month 12.48 0.87 13.35 12.00 160.24 1 WEAR & TEAR ALLOWANCE 40,00 2.80 3.20 46.00 12.00 552.00 3 INK CARTRIDGES @ $75. 225.00 15.75 18.00 258.75 258.75 SUB TOTAL TOTAL 970:99 9 COUNCILLORS TOTAL PER YEAR 8,738.94 PER YEAR COST 8,738.94 YEAR 1 YEAR 2 YEAR 3 YEAR 4 TOTAL 8,738.94 8,738.94 8,738.94 8,738.94 34,955.76 a Other costs may be incurred to enable software compatibility, that is to be sure files can be transferred back and forth . Ink costs are NOT an increase in expense, rather a shift from cost to office administration supplies to Councillors E Paper costs can be handled in one of two ways: Town supply Councillors or Councillors expense to Town. No increase in cost . Internet connection at one-half monthly cost on BMTS COUNCIL REMUNERATION COMMITTEE August 25, 2003 'TX RECOMMENDATION 7 In the opinion of the Committee members, it is premature to discuss supplying Councillors with laptop computers at this time, not that this shouldn't be an initiative for the future. The future is in computerization. There should be development and planning for the ultimate use of computers considering the following steps and others that are discovered along the way: • Develop a protocol of formatting, naming, storing, transferring files • Council members and staff must be comfortable using e-mail, for interacting with one another • Council members and staff must be comfortable downloading files and surfing net for specific information • Supply practical education to Council members and staff on the effective use of computers • Decide upon a critical path for instituting full computer use in municipal operations • Investigate Government grants and aids in instituting systems for the information age In the meantime, staff and Council should begin working through Councillors' home computers. Through the development of a protocol and use of same all will become more comfortable with the use of computer potential. Moreover, incompatibility problems will arise and be solved. A program of education for staff and council should be undertaken to move the process along as smoothly and quickly as possible. COUNCIL REMUNERATION COMMITTEE August 25, 2003 tF2mtt 3,14, tt. SYSTE A War 111; System — o's d C n's 05/14/2002 Prior to 1971, Aurora was represented by a Mayor, Reeve, Deputy Reeve and 5 Councillors. When Regional government was created in 1971, the make up of Council went to a Mayor and eight Councillors, elected at large. In 1990, Council was taken to the OMB by the Valhalla ratepayers group, supported by the Tamarac ratepayers group, to be forced to create a ward system in Aurora. The arguments in favor of a ward system included O the deduction that it would be less expensive for people to run in a small ward than across the Town at large. • And, that it would be easier for candidates to know their ward and it's constituents and visa versa, which in turn may encourage more res dents to vote for someone they know. • As well, it would ensure representation from each ward area, which is not guaranteed at this time. • If the Town was divided into wards today using Yonge-Wellington as the basis for SW/MN/NE/SE ward boundaries, we would have the following representation, (out of those that ran in the last election, in brackets), NW-1(2), SW-6(8), SE-1(1) and NE-0(1). Arguments against a ward system in this OMB hearing included O the fact that the proponents represented two specific areas in town only, • that there did not appear to be an "at-large" interest in the division of the municipality into wards. • As well, it was viewed as apparent that the current system was working very well. It was further stated that, "The evidence has revealed that no sectorization, geographically, ethnically or socially, within the municipality tempting separation for the purposes of having representation on Counc I." COUNCIL REMUNERATION COMMITTEE August 25, 2003 Arguments in favour of staying with an 'at large' system included • that Aurora "was indeed a single, cohesive community whose services have been provided, from all appearances, consistently on a single community basis such as a library, a fire hall, a cemetery, etc. • And further, "there has been nothing in evidence demonstrating any historical inequity with regard to distribution and representation in respect of the electorate ..." • In bringing this issue forward to today, we should consider some of the realities out there - Aurora is the size of almost any single ward in Toronto which has 1-2 representatives, not 9. • People keep advocating for less government, not more. • In our Strategic Plan, we proudly boast about our Town and the community spirit we, as residents, have in collectively supporting the many Town events and activities. • A ward system has the potential to divide our town into specific area interest groups and I am concerned about that. Ward Councillors may support and vote the way of their specific interest areas, if they hope to get re-elected, and this may not always be with the best interests of the entire town. ® There is the potential for more of a "me" sectorization as opposed to the "we" in the best interests of the town at large. • Ward elections help to perpetuate and even accentuate differences and divisions within the municipality, • The budget process could be a good test of that observation. • Having Councillors at large gives any resident in town the opportunity to call all Councillors for help, not just one or two. • As it stands today, you will always find someone willing to listen and help you at any time. In a ward system, if your representative(s) is not on board, it May be more difficult to find help. For those that feel their chances might be better to get on Council in a ward design, you do not have to live in a ward to be elected to it. Conversely, residents could find that they were being represented by someone who did not live in their ward. Municipalities that are geographically spread out with hamlets and villages like King, Georgina or Whitchurch-Stouffville, have wards to represent these distinct areas in a large geographic area. Municipalities like Vaughan, Richmond Hill and Markham, with large ethnic diversity as well as populations well over 100,000 have wards for these reasons. However, I do not consider Aurora comparable in these areas to these municipalities and would strongly advocate the "at large" system to allow for the 8 best candidates to serve all residents of our Town in a manner that is equal and fair to all. If you see something in this column that you wish to respond to, I welcome your comments, either through the paper, to the Town Hall by mail - Box 1000, Aurora, Ontario, L4G 6J1 or e-mail at tjonesAtown.aurora.on.ca COUNCIL REMUNERATION COMMITTEE August 25, 2003 NICIP LITIES ELECTING Y RD, ®I AT L RGE Arran-Elderslie Ward system (Always haS been, always will be.) Brockton At large Huron-Kinloss At large Kincardine At large - Mayor, deputy Mayor Councillors by ward Ward system 6 Councillors Saugeen Shores At large - Mayor, Deputy Mayor, and Vice Deputy mayor, South Bruce At large -Warden Councillors by ward Northern Bruce Peninsula At large (No confirmation, but our best recollection it is at large.) South Bruce Peninsula At large — Mayor Councillors by ward TOWN OF SOUTH:RULE PENINSULA Ward Voters for 2003 WARD VOTERS PERCENT 1 3,556 26.7 2 2,817 21.1 3 3,667 27.5 4 3,302 24.7 TOTAL 13,342 100.0 COUNCIL REMUNERATION COMMITTEE August 25, 2003 AV 747; 14: RECOMMENDATION 8 T E ARD SYSTEM OF ELECTION • ISCONTINUED IN SOUTH BRUCE 11111, ENINSULA TIO NAL: • Eliminating the Ward System means the best people will be chosen at large for Council and they will be representing the entire Municipality • The Ward System tends to fractionalize the Municipality, creates cliques, and promotes the "us & them" mentality. This is unproductive to the growth and strength of our community • There is a nice balance of population from one ward to another therefore, no ward should dominate an "At large" election COUNCIL REMUNERATION COMMITTEE August 25, 2003 -E tZSy 30S C T 19 N M ER of COUNCILLORS M Statistics Sttatistique Canada Canada Francais 'Contact Us •Help Search Canada site The Daily Canadian Communit Our roducts Statistics Profile's services •• Search Search Results for "SOUTI I BRUCE Community FlighliEhts for South Bruce Peninsula Population Population Statistics for: South Bruce Peninsula (Tow n), Ontario I APPLY MAP I Characteristics South lcmcc Peninsula (I\ Onta *o ei\ Population in 2001 (-I) 8,090 11,410,0461 Population in 1996 (2) 8,004 A 10,753,5731 1996 to 2001 population change (%) 1.1 6.1 Total private dwellings 6,741 4,556,240 Population density per square kilometre 15.2 12,6 Land area (square km) 531.92 907,655.5 COUNCIL REMUNERATION COMMITTEE August 25,2003 Characteristics Southl race eninsula ntario Total Male Female Total Male Female ge Characteristics of the Population Total - All persons C2) 8,090 3,975 4,120 11,410,050 5,577,055 5,832,990 Age 0-4 320 170 155 671,250 343,340 327,905 Age 5-14 935 500 435 1,561,500 801,355 760,145 Age 15-19 480 245 235 769,420 394,915 374,500 Age 20-24 345 175 175 718,420 359,645 358,775 Age 25-44 1,700 820 875 3,518,010 1,724,535 1,793,480 Age 45-54 1,160 565 595 1,635,280 801,540 833,740 Age 55-64 1,240 600 640 1,064,000 520,565 543,430 Age 65-74 1,120 570 550 818,165 383,625 434,545 Age 75-84 595 255 335 503,930 202,265 301,665 Age 85 and over 185 75 110 150,075 45,260 104,810 Median age of the population 47.3 46.5 47.9 37.2 36.4 38.0 % of the population ages 15 and over 84.4 83.1 85.7 80.4 79.5 81.3 Last modified: 2003 07 04 COUNCIL REMUNERATION COMMITTEE August 25, 2003 2,1-4 k A MfC 11,k7i'e CHART 20 COUNCIL MEMBERS PER POPULATION RUCE COUNTY MAYOR COUNCIL TOTAL POP PER POP North Bruce Peninsula Councillor 1 4 5 3,600 720 Huron-Kinloss Councillor 1 6 7 6,220 889 South Bruce Peninsula Councillor 1 8 9 8,090 899 Arran-Elderslie Councillor 1 6 7 6,575 939 Kincardine Councillor 1 8 9 11,025 1,225 Saugeen Shores Councillor 1 8 9 11,385 1,265 Brockton Councillor 1 6 7 9,660 1,380 South Bruce 6,065 Average 1,045 Sout Ca■ eni sula reduced to 1 4 5 8,090 1,618 RECOMMENDATION 9 COU CIL • UCED TO FOUR COUNCILLO LUS A AYOR Ti • L: • A4 member Council would be more effective and expedient in processing Council business • There will be more efficient debate and discussions about Town business • There will be less tendency for council to micromanage items and let staff carry out their function more effectively -51- COUNCIL REMUNERATION COMMITTEE August 25, 2003 PrIE • A 9 member Council serving a population of 899 residents per Councillor is overkill • 5 Physicians service a larger population than that of South Bruce Peninsula • A 5 member Council serving a population of 1,618 residents per Councillor is not an oveiwhelming task and comes in line with other Bruce County's larger municipalities • The result would mean a savings to the Taxpayers of approximately $48,000 in salaries CONFE ENCES AND SEMINARS d on a Mayor and C•uncillors Str cture • Councillors (4) allowed three conferences per year. A rotation system could be instituted to assure each Councillor has the opportunity to attend different conferences over the three year term of office • The mayor allowed four conferences per year. This would enable covering the main conferences such as Good Roads, AMO and OSUM • Two Councillors or the Mayor and one Councillor could cover each conference adequately • A summary report containing the important information from the conference must be submitted in reasonable time • The Mayor may attend any number of one day seminars. Useful information may be gained from these mini conferences • A Councillor may attend 2 one day seminars. This allows council to attend ten seminars per year (substitutions may be allowed when a Councillor cannot attend a particular seminar) • If additional seminar or conference attendance is deemed important by Council then Council must prior approve such attendance Legitimate expenses are as follows: ▪ Cost of lodging while at conference • Cost of meals up to $70. (Breakfast $15, Lunch $20 Dinner $35) Per day • Telephone • Mileage at current rate • Taxi fare/parking • Registration fees -52- COUNCIL REMUNERATION COMMITTEE August 25, 2003 Spousal Attendance Although not a direct benefit to the taxpayers, spousal attendance at conferences could be considered a "Thank You" to the spouse, for all the time a Councillor gives to the municipality. Often the social aspect of a conference, such as a banquet, includes the spouse. Therefore: A spouse attending a conference will have their banquet fee paid by the municipality. Other costs such as a partner's program will not be reimbursed. DEVELOPING POLICIES The committee wishes to emphasize to Council that: • The duty of Council is to set policy for the operation of our community • The duty of staff is to carry out the policy set by the Council • All committee members are aware of times when Councillors have interfered with staff, knowingly or unknowingly RECO MENDAT1ON 10 Council members concentrate on setting clear and concise policies so that staff can carry out those policies in an efficient manner. COUNCIL REMUNERATION COMMITTEE August 25, 2003 'iF iv iF .10D Fri A,11:301 tistics Car 'SCAses, t9 r ces t II is r . Statistics Stabslique I+ Canada Canada IN lacr° Francais Contact Us Help Search ana a site The Daily Canadian Communit . Our roducts "Home '103111111111111 Statistics Profiles and services Search Search Results Cur "arras-eklerslie" rumniui ity Cor Arran-Ulerslie Population Population Statistics for: Arran-Bderslie (Tow nship), Ontario APPLY l MAP Characteristics Arran-Elderslic a. Ontario Population in 2001 I° 6,577 11,410,046 t Population in 1996 (2) 6,851 A 10,753,573 t 1996 to 2001 population change (%) -4.0 6.1 Total private dwellings 2,705 4,556,240 Population density per square kilometre 14.3 12.6 Land area (square km) 460.13 907,655.5 Characteristics Arran-Elderslie ntario itt\ Total Male Female Total Male Female Age Characteristics of the Population Total - All persons (2) 6,575 3,255 3,325 11,410,050 5,577,055 5,832,990 Age 0-4 340 155 185 671,250 343,340 327,905 Age 5-14 1,005 510 495 1,561,500 801,355 760,145 Age 15-19 545 280 265 769,420 394,915 374,500 Age 20-24 365 195 170 718,420 359,645 358,775 Age 25-44 1,610 800 805 3,518,010 1,724,535 1,793,480 Age 45-54 995 495 500 1,635,280 801,540 833,740 Age 55-64 690 370 325 1,064,000 520,565 543,430 Age 65-74 515 240 280 818,165 383,625 434,545 Age 75-84 365 165 205 503,930 202,265 301,665 Age 85 and over 140 40 100 150,075 45,260 104,810 Median age of the population 39.3 38.8 39.8 37.2 36.4 38.0 % of the population ages 15 and over 79.6 79.6 79.5 80.4 79.5 81.3 Last modified: 2003 07 04 Statistics Stasisliquo Canada Canada Ca lad Francais Contact Us elp earc Canada site The Daily Canadian Communit Our roducts Home and services c.MrtA11111 Statistics Profiles • other links Search Search Results lot. "BROCKTON" Community 1 Iignlights l'or Brockton Population Population Statistics for: Brockton (Tow nship), Ontario "zr APPLY MAP Ch racteristics rockton erntario 71\. .. Population in 2001 W 9,658 11,410,046 1 Population in 1996 W 10,163 A 10,753,573 .1 1996 to 2001 population change (%) -5.0 6.1 Total private dwellings 3,987 4,556,240 Population density per square kilometre 17. I 12,6 Land area (square kin) 565.07 907,655.5 Characteristics rockton iS Ontario Total Male Female Total Male Female Age Characteristics of the Population Total - All persons w 9,660 4,815 4,840 11,410,050 5,577,055 5,832,990 Age 0-4 485 250 235 671,250 343,340 327,905 Age 5-14 1,350 690 660 1,561,500 801,355 760,145 Age 15-19 860 455 410 769,420 394,915 374,500 Age 20-24 495 265 235 718,420 359,645 358,775 Age 25-44 2,480 1,260 1,220 3,518,010 1,724,535 1,793,480 Age 45-54 1,460 735 725 1,635,280 801,540 833,740 Age 55-64 1,020 525 495 1,064,000 520,565 543,430 Age 65-74 795 380 410 818,165 383,625 434,545 Age 75-84 505 200 300 503,930 202,265 301,665 Age 85 and over 200 60 145 150,075 45,260 104,810 Median age of the population 39.6 38.8 40.5 37.2 36.4 38.0 c1/0 of the population ages 15 and over 81.0 80.6 81.4 80.4 79.5 81.3 Last modified: 2003 07 04 Statistics Statistique M Canada Canada Francais Contact Us Help Search Canada site The Daily Canadian Communit Our roducts Home. ensue Statistics Profiles and se rvICas Search Search Results lor "HURON-KIN LOSS" Community I I ig,hlights ror Huron-Kinioss Population Statistics for: Huron-Kinloss (Tow nship), Ontario APPLY MAP Characteristics uron-Kin loss Sntario .A.r Population in 2001 11) 6,224 11,410,046 t Population in 1996 (2) 6,284 A 10,753,573 t 1996 to 2001 population change (%) -1.0 6.1 Total private dwellings 3,560 4,556,240 Population density per square kilometre 13.1 12.6 Land area (square km) 475.44 907,655.5 Characteristics Huron-Kin loss lk? Ontario /I\ Total Male Female Total Male Female Age Characteristics of the Population Total - All persons (2) 6,220 3,130 3,090 11,410,050 5,577,055 5,832,990 Age 0-4 330 180 145 671,250 343,340 327,905 Age 5-14 925 485 450 1,561,500 801,355 760,145 Age 15-19 490 265 225 769,420 394,915 374,500 Age 20-24 350 175 175 718,420 359,645 358,775 Age 25-44 1,325 665 655 3,518,010 1,724,535 1,793,480 Age 45-54 970 500 470 1,635,280 801,540 833,740 Age 55-64 730 360 370 1,064,000 520,565 543,430 Age 65-74 615 305 310 818,165 383,625 434,545 Age 75-84 375 160 215 503,930 202,265 301,665 Age 85 and over 115 35 80 150,075 45,260 104,810 Median age of the population 41.9 40.8 43.1 37.2 36.4 38.0 % of the population ages 15 and over 79.8 78.8 80.9 80.4 79.5 81.3 Last modified: 2003 07 04 Statistics Statistiquo Canada Canada Contact Us Canadian Our roducts Eir-M11111111 Statistics Search I-- Search Results lor "K INICARD1N1 " Community I Ii Might nor Kincardine Population Population Statistics for: Kincardine (Tow nship), Ontario APPLY MAP Characteristics Kincardine it, ntario liN. Population in 2001 (1) 11,029 11,410,046 1 Population in 1996 L2) 11,908 A 10,753,573 1 1996 to 2001 population change (%) -7.4 6.1 Total private dwellings 5,257 4,556,240 Population density per square kilometre 19.1 12.6 Land area (square km) 578.38 907,655.5 Characteristics ncardine s Ontario .4\.. Total Male Female Total Male Female Age Characteristics of the Population Total - All persons (3) 11,025 5,370 5,660 11,410,050 5,577,055 5,832,990 Age 0-4 435 215 215 671,250 343,340 327,905 Age 5-14 1,530 755 775 1,561,500 801,355 760,145 Age 15-19 945 490 450 769,420 394,915 374,500 Age 20-24 530 260 270 718,420 359,645 358,775 Age 25-44 2,500 1,185 1,315 3,518,010 1,724,535 1,793,480 Age 45-54 2,005 1,000 1,005 1,635,280 801,540 833,740 Age 55-64 1,420 720 695 1,064,000 520,565 543,430 Age 65-74 955 475 480 818,165 383,625 434,545 Age 75-84 550 225 325 503,930 202,265 301,665 Age 85 and over 170 45 125 150,075 45,260 104,810 Median age of the population 42.8 42.6 43.0 37.2 36.4 38.0 % of the population ages 15 and over 82.2 82.0 82.4 80.4 79.5 81.3 Last modified: 2003 07 04 Statistics Staiistiquo Canada Canada Francais -Contact Us Help Search Canada site The Daily Census Search V Search Results For "NORTI ILIZN PkNINSt 11 ,A " Community I Iighlights for Northern Bruce Peninsula [-• Population Population Statistics for: Northern Bruce Peninsula (Tow nship), Ontario APPLY MAP Characteristics Northern li ruce Peninsula it.. Ontario .&? Population in 2001 (I) 3,599 11,410,046 t Population in 1996 (2) 3,500 A 10,753,573 1996 to 2001 population change (%) 2.8 6.1 Total private dwellings 4,477 4,556,240 Population density per square kilometre 4.6 12.6 Land area (square km) 782.23 907,655.5 Characteristics Northern ruce Peninsula ntario ..e% Total Male Female Total Male Female Age Characteristics of the Population Total - All persons LI) 3,600 1,795 1,800 11,410,050 5,577,055 5,832,990 Age 0-4 115 60 50 671,250 343,340 327,905 Age 5-14 375 190 180 1,561,500 801,355 760,145 Age 15-19 180 100 75 769,420 394,915 374,500 Age 20-24 110 55 60 718,420 359,645 358,775 Age 25-44 680 340 345 3,518,010 1,724,535 1,793,480 Age 45-54 520 255 270 1,635,280 801,540 833,740 Age 55-64 660 330 330 1,064,000 520,565 543,430 Age 65-74 630 315 315 818,165 383,625 434,545 Age 75-84 260 115 140 503,930 202,265 301,665 Age 85 and over 70 25 45 150,075 45,260 104,810 Median age of the population 51.7 50.8 52.6 37.2 36.4 38.0 % of the population ages 15 and over 86.5 85.8 87.0 80.4 79.5 81.3 Last modified: 2003 07 04 ,ffl Statistics Statistique 14 1111 Canada Canada Catiad Francais Contact Us p earc The Daily Canadian Census Statistics Profiles and services le' Search L- Search Results for "SAUGaN SHORLS" C'ornmuniLy Highlights for Saugeen Shores -- Population Population Statistics for: Saugeen Shores (Tow n), Ontario APPLY MAP C t ar•cteristics Sa gem Shores Li\ ntario 4\ Population in 2001 W 11,388 11,410,046 Population in 1996 (-2) 12,084 A 10,753,573 -1- 1996 to 2001 population change (%) -5.8 6.1 Total private dwellings 6,215 4,556,240 Population density per square kilometre 66.8 12.6 Land area (square km) 170.58 907,655.5 Characteristics Saugeen Shores 1.x4 Ontario Total Male Female Total Male Female Age Characteristics of the Population Total - All persons (2) 11,385 5,495 5,895 11,410,050 5,577,055 5,832,990 Age 0-4 380 185 195 671,250 343,340 327,905 Age 5-14 1,425 730 695 1,561,500 801,355 760,145 Age 15-19 945 440 500 769,420 394,915 374,500 Age 20-24 555 305 250 718,420 359,645 358,775 Age 25-44 2,435 1,145 1,290 3,518,010 1,724,535 1,793,480 Age 45-54 2,145 1,050 1,095 1,635,280 801,540 833,740 Age 55-64 1,460 730 730 1,064,000 520,565 543,430 Age 65-74 1,170 570 600 818,165 383,625 434,545 Age 75-84 675 275 400 503,930 202,265 301,665 Age 85 and over 200 60 140 150,075 45,260 104,810 Median age of the population 44.8 44.4 45.1 37.2 36.4 38.0 % of the population ages 15 and over 84.1 83.3 84.9 80.4 79.5 81.3 Last modified: 2003 07 04 Statistics Stalisliquo Canada Canada Canada] Francais Contact Us HelP Search Canada site The Daily Canadian Communit 'Our roducts Home Census Statistics PrOfiles and services Ott r links I-- Search V Search Results For "SOUTI . I RUCT PkNINSt I,A" Community I lighlights for South Bruce Peninsula Population Population Statistics for: South Bruce Peninsula (Tow n), Ontario APPLY P Characteristics South uce Peninsula nta rio Population in 2001 a) 8,090 11,410,046 Population in 1996 La) 8,004 A 10,753,573 1 1996 to 2001 population change (%) 1.1 6.1 Total private dwellings 6,741 4,556,240 Population density per square kilometre 15.2 12.6 Land area (square km) 531.92 907,655.5 Characteristics South truce Peninsula & ntario /1\ Total Male Female Total Male Female Age Characteristics of the Population Total - All persons L) 8,090 3,975 4,120 11,410,050 5,577,055 5,832,990 Age 0-4 320 170 155 671,250 343,340 327,905 Age 5-14 935 500 435 1,561,500 801,355 760,145 Age 15-19 480 245 235 769,420 394,915 374,500 Age 20-24 345 175 175 718,420 359,645 358,775 Age 25-44 1,700 820 875 3,518,010 1,724,535 1,793,480 Age 45-54 1,160 565 595 1,635,280 801,540 833,740 Age 55-64 1,240 600 640 1,064,000 520,565 543,430 Age 65-74 1,120 570 550 818,165 383,625 434,545 Age 75-84 595 255 335 503,930 202,265 301,665 Age 85 and over 185 75 110 150,075 45,260 104,810 Median age of the population 47.3 46.5 47.9 37.2 36.4 38.0 % of the population ages 15 and over 84.4 83.1 85.7 80.4 79.5 81.3 Last modified: 2003 07 04 Statistics Staitistique G.E Canada Canada an ad Francais Contact Us Search Canada site The Daily Canadian Communit Our roducts Home Statistics Profiles and services. Other links 1-- Search Search Results for "SOUITI BRUCF," 1-' Community I lighlights For South Bruce -- Population Population Statistics for: South Bruce (Tow nship), Ontario APPLY MAP Characteristics South LruceL •ntario /1\ Population in 2001 W 6,063 11,410,046 1 Population in 1996 (2J 6,248 A 10,753,573 1996 to 2001 population change (%) -3.0 6.1 Total private dwellings 2,278 4,556,240 Population density per square kilometre 12.4 12.6 Land area (square km) 487.19 907,655.5 Characteristics South ¢1) uce Ontario Total ale Female Total ale Female Age Characteristics of the Population Total - All persons i3-1 6,065 3,100 2,965 11,410,050 5,577,055 5,832,990 Age 0-4 395 200 190 671,250 343,340 327,905 Age 5-14 1,015 525 490 1,561,500 801,355 760,145 Age 15-19 535 290 250 769,420 394,915 374,500 Age 20-24 380 215 165 718,420 359,645 358,775 Age 25-44 1,570 770 805 3,518,010 1,724,535 1,793,480 Age 45-54 830 445 390 1,635,280 801,540 833,740 Age 55-64 565 300 260 1,064,000 520,565 543,430 Age 65-74 440 210 230 818,165 383,625 434,545 Age 75-84 280 130 145 503,930 202,265 301,665 Age 85 and over 50 15 35 150,075 45,260 104,810 Median age of the population 36.1 35.7 36.5 37.2 36.4 38.0 % of the population ages 15 and over 76.8 76.7 77.2 80.4 79.5 81.3 Last modified: 2003 07 04 Statistics Stagistiquo Canada Canada Cana 7111M1111111 Contact Us o p Search ana a site Canadian Communit Our, roducts Homo Ststisfios Profiles and services Other links More free tables in Canadian Statistics Population Population Statistics for: Bruce County (Census Division), Ontario Characteristics nice County ntario Population in 2001 W 63,892 11,410,046 t Population in 1996 C2j 65,680 t 10,753,573 I 1996 to 2001 population change (%) 6.1 Total private dwellings 4,556,240 Population density per square kilometre 15.4 12.6 Land area (square km) 4,155.53 907,655.5 Characteristics Bruce County Ontario Lt Total Male Female Total Male Female Age Characteristics of he•opulation Total - All persons LI) 63,895 31,570 32,320 11,410,050 5,577,055 5,832,990 Age 0-4 2,890 1,475 1,415 671,250 343,340 327,905 Age 5-14 8,800 4,510 4,285 1,561,500 801,355 760,145 Age 15-19 5,100 2,615 2,485 769,420 394,915 374,500 Age 20-24 3,205 1,680 1,530 718,420 359,645 358,775 Age 25-44 14,675 7,180 7,495 3,518,010 1,724,535 1,793,480 Age 45-54 10,230 5,110 5,125 1,635,280 801,540 833,740 Age 55-64 7,890 4,000 3,895 1,064,000 520,565 543,430 Age 65-74 6,330 3,105 3,220 818,165 383,625 434,545 Age 75-84 3,630 1,545 2,085 503,930 202,265 301,665 Age 85 and over 1,140 360 785 150,075 45,260 104,810 Median age of the population 42.4 41.8 43.0 37.2 36.4 38.0 % of the population ages 15 and over 81.7 81.1 82.3 80.4 79.5 81.3 Last modified: 2003 07 04