The District Municipality of Muskoka Corporate And

THE DISTRICT MUNICIPALITY OF MUSKOKA

CORPORATE AND EMERGENCY SERVICES COMMITTEE

A G E N D A

Meeting No. CES-5-2007 Friday, March 30, 2007 9:00 a.m. Council Chamber, District Administration Building

Pages 1. CALL TO ORDER 2. DECLARATIONS OF PECUNIARY INTERESTS 3. FINANCE 1 – 10 a) 2007 Annual Tax Policy Review Report No. CES-5-2007-1

Recommendation

THAT the 2007 Annual Tax Policy Review be received as information;

AND THAT a by-law be prepared Setting Tax Ratios and Tax Rate Reductions

for the 2007 tax year as outlined in Report No. CES-5-2007-1;

AND THAT Option Number ____ as outlined in Report No. CES-5-2007-1, as it relates to the exempt status of the Royal Canadian Legions be approved.

11 - 12 b) Draft 2007 Corporate and Emergency Services Operating Budget and the 2007 Capital Budget and 10 Year Forecast Report No. CES-5-2007-2

* Reminder to bring your copy of the 2007 Draft Tax Supported Operating

Budget and Capital Budget and Forecast binder to the meeting. Thank you.

Recommendation

THAT the Draft 2007 Corporate and Emergency Services Operating Budget and the 2007 Capital Budget and 10-Year Forecast, as amended, be endorsed and referred to Committee of Whole Council for further consideration;

AND THAT the Draft 2007 Non-Program Operating Budget be endorsed and referred to Committee of Whole Council for further consideration.

13 - 20 c) Ontario Municipal Partnership Fund (OMPF) Report No. CES-5-2007-3

Recommendation

THAT the City of North Bay Resolution No. 2007-87 regarding Ontario Municipal Partnership (OMPF) as attached to Report No. CES-5-2007-3 be supported;

AND THAT the District Chair circulate a copy of this resolution to the

Honourable Dalton McGuinty, Premier of Ontario, the Honourable Greg Sorbara, Minister of Finance and to Norman Miller, M.P.P. Parry Sound- Muskoka, along with a statement to the effect that The District Municipality of Muskoka views this as an interim solution to the Provincial-Municipal Fiscal Imbalance and the Province must expedite the Provincial-Municipal Fiscal and Service Delivery Review with the goal to removing the costs of health and social programs from the local property tax bill. Pages

21 - 24 d) 2007 Port Carling Locks and Port Sandfield Swing Bridge Fees

Report No. CES-5-2007-4 Recommendation

THAT the fees and charges for use of the Port Carling Locks and Port Sandfield Swing Bridge for 2007 be established in accordance with Option A of “Schedule A” attached to Report No. CES-5-2007-4;

AND THAT the fee payable by the operator of the R.M.S. Segwun, Wenonah II and Wanda III from the first Monday in May to Thanksgiving Monday shall be $9,000.

4. EMERGENCY SERVICES STAFF REPORTS

25 - 26 a) Purchase of New Ambulance Report No. CES-5-2007-5

Recommendation

THAT The District Municipality of Muskoka approve the purchase of one Demers 350HP, 158 inch wheelbase, dual stretcher ambulance, at a cost of $98,035 plus taxes, plus $1,950 for the factory installed MapLocator mount and wiring for a total of $99,985;

AND THAT $1,000 will be credited by Demers to the District as an incentive further reducing the cost to $98,985;

AND THAT the trade-in value of approximately $3,500 will be used to reduce

the purchase price, thereby resulting in a final cost of $96,485 plus taxes;

AND THAT the purchase of the ambulance be financed from the Ambulance Reserve;

AND THAT Vehicle 5274 be declared surplus;

AND THAT the Commissioner of Finance and Corporate Services be authorized to accept the trade-in price offered by Demers in the amount of $3,500 to ensure the best return for the District on surplus vehicles.

5. INFORMATION ITEM

a) Correspondence – Alternate Emergency Operations Centre 27 - 28 CES-5-2007-INFO-A

b) Correspondence – OPP Attending Funerals 29 - 32 CES-5-2007-INFO-B

c) Correspondence – Essential Level Emergency Management Program 33 CES-5-2007-INFO-C

6. NEW BUSINESS

7. ADJOURNMENT THAT the Corporate and Emergency Services Committee adjourns to meet again on

Friday, April 20, 2007 at 9:00 a.m. or at the call of the Chair.

THE DISTRlq_MuNICIPALITY OF MUSKOKA

CORPORATE AND EMERGENCY SERVICES DEPARTMENT 70 PINE STREET, BRACEBRIDGE, ONTARIO P1L 1N3 Telephone (705) 645-2231 Fax (705) 645-5319 1-800-461-4210 (705 area code) wwwmuskoka.on..ca

TO: Chair and Members Corporate and Emergency Services Committee

FROM: Stephen Cairns, Commissioner of Finance and Corporate Services

DATE: March 30, 2007

SUBJECT: 2007 Annual Tax Policy Review

REPORT NO: CES-5-2007-1

RECOMMENDATION

THAT the 2007 Annual Tax Policy Review be received as information;

AND THAT a by-law be prepared Setting Tax Ratios and Tax Rate Reductions for the 2007 tax year as outlined in Report No..CES-5-2007-1;

AND THAT Option Number _ as outlined in Report No ..CES-5-2007-1, as it relates to the exempt status of the Royal Canadian Legions be approved ..

ORIGIN

The purpose of this report is to set the 2007 tax ratios for The District Municipality of Muskoka and to review other related tax policies and, where necessary, make recommendations to Council to update or amend those policies where appropriate ..

The Municipal Act requires upper tier municipalities to establish through by-law a number of tax policies, including the setting of tax ratios for the year.. For several of these policy considerations the deadline for passage of the by-laws is April 30, 2007..

In particular, those by-laws being reviewed include

o By-law No ..2006-26 "Setting Tax Ratios and Tax Rate Reductions", which is addressed in this report;

o By-law No ..2006-32 "Limiting Tax Decreases" and By-law No ..2006-27 "Establishing Sums Required and Tax Rates to be Levied" which will be prepared upon final approval of the 2007 Tax Supported Operating Budget

j\1allaging Our Legac!1 Together ANALYSIS

1) Changing Optional Phase-in Treatment of New Construction

Section 329 of the Municipal Act allows municipalities to place a lower limit on the starting tax level for eligible new construction properties ..For example, when setting the tax level of a newly constructed property with the introduction of lower limits, the tax level will be the lower of the Current Value Assessment (CVA) tax, the average level of the comparable properties supplied by MPAC, or the lower level, if the average comparable properties fall below the minimum set by- law ..In 2005, Council set the minimum percentages at: a. 2005 -70% b.. 2006 - 80% c.. 2007 - 90% d. 2008 - 100%

The advantages of setting minimum tax levels::

• Limit unrecoverable losses created by new construction adjustments not funded through the capping calculations; • Prevent properties from entering the cap protection clauses at extremely low tax levels; and • Moves new construction closer to CVA

2) Changing of Tax Ratios

Section 308 of the Municipal Act requires the upper-tier municipality to pass a by-law on or before April 30th in each year to establish the tax ratios for that year for the upper-tier municipality and its lower-tier municipalities ..Those ratios are reflected in the following table ..

The District Municipality of Muskoka does have the option of setting a tax ratio of less than 0..25 to the Farmland property class, however, given farm property's relative favourable tax burden and the fact that the existing tax ratios are within the range of fairness, staff recommend not changing the existing tax ratios ..

The District Municipality of Provincial Muskoka Range of Class Current Tax Fairness Options Ratio Residential 1..0 1.0 N/A Multi Residential 1.0 1..0-1 ..1 Can change ratios within range Commercial 1..1 0..6- 1 1 Industrial 1..1 0..6-1 ..1 Pipeline .7 0..6-1 ..1 Farmland ..25 ..25 Can change ratio below ..25 Managed Forest ..25 .25 N/A

3) Vacant Unit Rebates

Section 364 of the Municipal Act requires municipalities to establish a program to provide tax rebates to owners of property that have vacant portions if that property is in any of the commercial classes or industrial classes ..The percentage reduction options are as follows: o 30% - commercial o 35% - industrial o 30% - 35% - blended rate The District Municipality of Muskoka's current policy (By-law 2006-26) allows for a blended rate for both commercial and industrial properties of 30% ..

4) Tax Reduction for Farmland Awaiting Development Subclasses

Section 383 of the Municipal Act allows municipalities to establish two categories of farmland awaiting development

• Type (1) with subdivision registered may be taxed at between 25% - 75% of the residential tax rate and can only be increased by 10% per annum..

• Type (4) with building permit issued may be taxed at up to 100% of zoned class rate.

The District Municipality of Muskoka's current policy (By-law 2006-26) sets the tax rate at 35% for type (1) properties and 100% for type (2) properties.

5) Tax Capping Options - Commercial, Industrial and Multi-residential

Section 329 of the Municipal Act allows municipalities to

• Continue with the existing 5% capping rule (last year's taxes + 5% + overall levy change); • Increase the annual cap from 5% of last year's capped taxes up to 10% and/or;

• Set the upper limit on annual increases at the greater of the existing 5% capped rule or the optional rate (5-10%) vs ..5% of previous year's annualized taxes;

• A minimum threshold of up to $250;

• Or a combination of the above ..

In 2005, Council passed the following resolution and by-law

THA ithe tax capping options for the Commercial, Industrial & Multi-Residential classes be established at an upper limit on annual increases at the greater of the existing 5% capped rule or 10% of previous year's annualized taxes with a minimum threshold of $250;·

The introduction of these capping rules dramatically reduced the number of properties effected by claw backs while increasing the rate at which capped properties move to their full CVA tax levels (elimination of tax subsidies to properties receiving relatively small reductions in the $1 to $250 range).. It is therefore recommended that this policy remain in effect for 2007..

6) Optional Classes

Section 308 of the Municipal Act allows for up to 5 optional classes

• New multi-residential • Office buildings • Shopping centres • Parking lots • Large industrial

In order to elect a new optional class, a by-law must be passed by October 31st of the preceding tax year. The District Municipality of Muskoka has not exercised this option due largely to the relative equity of the various property classes to market value .. The current legislation and the passage of the October 31st deadline date for the establishment of optional classes precludes any new initatives being introduced prior to the 2006 taxation year as it relates to the assessment/taxation issues on residential waterfront properties raised by the Muskoka Taxation Task Force Ad Hoc Committee ..In 2005, Council passed the following resolution

AND THA T the District Chair formally approach the Minister of Finance with the recommendations to change legislation to allow the District of Muskoka authority to establish • a separate and distinct optional class, independent of the residential class for residential waterfront properties comprising of· o Residential vacant land on water o Residential improved land on water • an annual tax ratio for that class within a prescribed range of fairness of ..7 to 1..0 • a maximum assessment level on properties within a given property code ..

The Minister of Finance acknowledged The District Municipality of Muskoka's position and directed the correspondence to Ministry staff for further consultation ..To date, there has been no formal position taken by the Province on The District Municipality of Muskoka's proposaL

7) Graduated tax rates

Section 314 of the Municipal Act allows municipalities to establish two or three bands of assessment of property for the purposes of facilitating graduated tax rates within the commercial property class and the industrial property class ..

The purpose of graduated tax rates is to provide tax relief for properties with lower values and increase the proportional tax burden for properties with higher values ..In practice, the introduction of graduated tax rates is discriminatory, adds greater confusion and complexity to the tax bill and may create additional, undesirable tax impacts within the class ..

The District Municipality of Muskoka has not opted for the use of graduated tax rates.

8) Senior Deferral

Section 319 of the Municipal Act authorizes municipalities to pass a by-law providing for deferrals or cancellation of, or to provide relief in respect of, all or part of an assessment related tax increase over the past year, on property in the Residential property class for persons assessed as owners who are:

• Low-income seniors as defined in the bylaw, or

• Low-income persons with disabilities as defined by by-law.

If the relief is in the form of the cancellation of taxes, the school board must share in the write-off of the taxes ..The municipality has the right to charge penalty and interest on any amounts deferred prior to 2001 until such time as it is paid at the rate to be determined by the municipality .. The deferred portion of the taxes is deemed to be a lien on the property and must be paid when the property is sold .. The District Municipality of Muskoka's current Senior Deferral Policy (By-law 99-19) is as follows

Eligible Person

Owners of real property (single family dwelling unit) in The District Municipality of Muskoka in the Residential/Farmland property class for not less than one year who are

• "Low-income person with disabilities" - A person who is in receipt of assistance paid under the Ontario Disability Support Program Act, 1997 or in receipt of a disability amount paid under the Family Benefits Act (Ontario), or the spouses of such persons, or • "Low-income senior" - A person who is 65 years of age or older and in receipt of an increment paid under the Guaranteed Income Supplement (GIS), as established under Part II of the Old Age Security Act (Canada), or the spouses of such persons, (Note,' For a single person, OAS stops being paid at an income of $14,255 while the GIS stops being paid at an income of $12, 816)

Annual applications must be made on or before the last day of February in each year and every year,

• The deferment of assessment related tax increase beginning in 1998 or in subsequent years, • Deferred amount is considered a lien on the property similar to other property tax, • Interest is applied to the amount of the accumulated property tax deferred., • The interest rate is adjusted annually to the prime rate as at January 1st of each year"

9) Legion Exemptions

Section 325 of the Municipal Act provided The District Municipality of Muskoka with the authority to exempt property actually used and occupied as a memorial home, clubhouse or athletic ground by veterans was removed from the Municipal Act and placed in the Assessment Act through Bill 151, the Budget Measures Act, 2006" The result is that The District Municipality of Muskoka can no longer provide exemptions on taxes levied for upper-tier purposes. Any exemptions, under the Assessment Act, are under the authority of the Area Municipalities. This authority only extends to taxes levied on behalf of the upper and lower tier municipalities and not on behalf of school boards"

The District Municipality of Muskoka'scurrent policy (By-law 2003-9) exempts real property actually used and occupied as a memorial home, clubhouse or athletic grounds by persons who served in the armed forces of His or Her Majesty or an ally of His or Her Majesty in any way, The exempt period under the by-law was from January 1,2003 to December 31,2012"

The following table highlights the exempt status of Legions across Muskoka by Area Municipality and the potential taxes exempted based on the 2006 taxation year Note the local authority for which those taxes are levied must absorb any exemption" Current Exem tions Tax Dollars Urban Urban General General Municipality Service Education Service Education Levy Levy Area Area District X X 9,343 10,232 - Bracebridge X X X 1,014 129 760 Gravenhurst 1,318 108 1,220 Georgian Bay 452 78 628 Huntsville X X 4,990 - 4,142 Lake of Bays N/A N/A - - - Muskoka Lakes 508 29 1,531

17,625 10,576 8,281 Total

The District Municipality of Muskoka has the following options:

>- Option number one is to repeal the existing by-law in the event that there is no legislative requirement coming from the Province to amend the legislation or to allow grandfathering of existing by-laws ..Legions lose their exemption .. i. Increased revenues to the District of $19,575 iL Increased revenues to the Area Municipalities of $6,893

>- Option number two is to approach each of the Area Municipalities to provide exemptions under the Assessment Act. Under this option, exemptions may not be extended in all cases if the Area Municipalities maintain their existing policies L Decreased revenues to District of $0 iL Decreased revenues to Area Municipalities of $2,493

>- Option number three is to provide a separate category of charity under Section 361 of the Municipal Act. This could provide the Legions with relief through a rebate on all taxes including education taxes. By using this section, The District Municipality of Muskoka would be mandating the Area Municipalities to effectively write off taxes that are inconsistent with their current practice. L Decreased revenues to District of $0 iL Decreased revenues to Area Municipalities of $2,493 iiL Decreased revenues to the Board of Education of $8,281

10) Charity Rebates

Section 361 of the Municipal Act requires municipalities to provide rebates to charities, and may extend that rebate program to non-profit organizations ..The Act stipulates that municipalities must rebate at least 40% of the taxes paid by registered charities.

A charity is eligible if:

• It is a registered charity as defined in subsection 248 (1) of the Income Tax Act (Canada) that has a registration number issued by the Canada Customs and Revenue Agency; and

• It occupies a property in one of the Commercial classes or Industrial classes, within the meaning of subsection 308 (1) 2001, c..25, s..361 (2) ..

Municipalities also have the option to expand the program

• To provide for rebates to organizations that are similar to eligible charities or a class of such organizations defined by the municipality .. • To expand eligibility if the charities or similar organizations occupy property in any class of real property ..

• To provide for rebates that are greater than 40% .. • To provide for different rebate amounts for different eligible charities or similar organizations up to 100 per cent of the taxes paid ..

Using the expanded program options, the District can establish a separate class for Land that is used and occupied as a memorial home, clubhouse or athletic grounds by persons who served in the armed forces of His or Her Majesty or an ally of His or Her Majesty in any war (this wording is consistent with that used for Legions within the Assessment Act) and provide 100% rebate ..

The issues with this option are

~ By using this section, The District Municipality of Muskoka would be mandating the Area Municipalities to effectively write off taxes that, in several circumstances is inconsistent with their current practice ..

~ The Legion must occupy a property in the Commercial or Industrial classes .. Currently all of the Legions are classed under the residential class ..This classification was done mainly for administrative purposed to avoid the Charity Rebate process ..

~ Once a sub-class is established there is a real potential that other organizations will seek similar exemptions ..The decision to accept or reject those requests without a clear set of criteria will be difficult

~ The financial burden of any exemption is transferred to other property owners .. This is especially true in the case of special area charges (i.e ..water and sewer).. If any exemption is made for real or perceived community interest, then those costs should be borne by the community at large and financed through the general tax levy ..

The District Municipality of Muskoka's current policy (By-law 98-74) provides for:

• Rebates of 40% on registered charities occupying commercial and industrial properties ..

• Rebates of 40% on similar not-for-profit organizations occupying commercial and industrial properties as defined by by-law..

51 o Organizations must apply to the Area Municipality on or before October 1 of the year to which the rebate applies ..

o Determination as to whether or not an organization qualifies shall be made by the Area Treasurer in consultation with the District Treasurer.. • Primary function:

0 Children's services 0 Community services 0 Education and training services 0 Family services 0 Health services 0 Immigration services 0 Legal services 0 Senior services 0 Veterans Clubs 0 Women's or Youth Services • Organizations for the advancement of science, education, philosophy, religion, arts, sports, recreation, culture and heritage, public health and human rights and equity ..

Not included are political or lobby groups, private clubs, trade unions, professional, business or trade organizations and social clubs ..

11) Heritage Properties

Section 365 ..2 of the Municipal Act provides municipalities with the authority to establish a program to provide tax reductions or refunds in respect to eligible heritage property.. The amount of the tax reduction or refund provided by a local municipality in respect to an eligible heritage property must be between 10 and 40 percent of the taxes for municipal and school purposes levied on the property that are attributable to the land, building or structure, or a portion of the building or structure that is the eligible heritage property ..

The property must meet the following criteria

• It must be designated under Part IV (individual property) or Part V (District) of the Heritage Act.

• It must be SUbject to a Heritage Easement Agreement or another legally binding agreement satisfactory to the municipality. The purpose of the agreement is to ensure the property's preservation by providing a municipality with a legal interest in the property that is registered on the title of the property., These agreements can be for a perpetual or fixed term., Perpetual easements are preferred as it provides indefinite protection and run with the title of the property"

• Municipalities also have the option to define additional criteria to meet their local requirements.

The District Municipality of Muskoka does not have a tax policy on heritage properties. As such, the administration and cost of the program, such as the rebate itself and the staff time to negotiate, inspect and enforce the easement agreements has not been allowed for in the 2007 draft operating budget. Typically the preservation of heritage properties is an Area Municipality function" The District Muncipality of Muskoka as such would have to coordinate or complement any local initiative taken at the area leveL

12) Unduly Burdensome for Uncapped Classes

Section 365 of the Municipal Act allows municipalities to pass a by-law to provide for the cancellation, reduction or refund of taxes levied for local municipal and school board purposes in the year by the Council in respect to an eligible property of any person who makes an application in that year to the municipality for that relief and whose taxes are considered by the Council to be unduly burdensome, as defined in the by-law

• "eligible property" means a property classified in the Residential property class, the Farmland property class, or the Managed Forests property class"

• If an upper-tier municipality has passed a by-law under subsection (2), the amount of the taxes cancelled, reduced or refunded shall be shared by the municipalities and school boards that share the revenue from the taxes on the property affected by the by-law in the same proportion that those municipalities and school boards share in those revenues,

The District Municipality of Muskoka has no policy as it relates to unduly burdensome tax relief. 13) Phase-in Program for Non-Capped Classes Upper-tier municipalities have the option of establishing a program to phase-in all property tax changes that occur in the year of a reassessment, including municipal budgetary increases .. Phase-in can apply for any or all of the property classes and may be spread over a period of up to eight years. For the purposes of a phase-in program, the residential, farm and managed forests classes are deemed to be one class ..

A phase-in program is self-financing ..Properties entitled to decreases will be required to forego a portion or all of their decrease in order to fund the phase-in of tax increases ..Should a program shortfall occur, the upper-tier municipality and its area municipalities must share any shortfall occurring as a result of a phase-in program.. This includes the education portion of the shortfall, as the Province does not share in a phase-in program..

A phase-in program can use thresholds based on percentages or dollar amounts ..The program may phase-in equal amounts each year, provided that the amount phased-in each year is no more than the amount phased-in for the previous year ..

Although phase-in programs were useful when CVA was originally introduced or when reassessments were done every three years, the adoption of annual reassessments makes this option of limited use ..It is therefore recommended that no phase-in program be implemented for the 2007 taxation year.

14) Brownfield Development

Section 365 ..1of the Municipal Act will provide the authority for local municipalities (Le..lower tier municipalities in two tier structures) to pass by-laws to provide tax reductions during the period when lands are being rehabilitated and redeveloped.. In addition, tax reductions for upper tier taxes can be provided as well where an upper tier has passed a resolution setting out the level of assistance it is prepared to provide ..

Tax reductions for school purposes can also be provided if the Minister of Finance consents to the local municipality's by-law prior to its passing .. The Minister may also set conditions and terms with regard to the nature of the assistance for education purposes ..

The eligible property can only be eligible for tax assistance if it is within an approved community improvement plan under the Planning Act Specifically, an eligible property is one for which a phase two environmental site assessment has been conducted and the community improvement project area contains provisions in respect of tax assistance ..

Any proposal under this section of the Act, similar to Heritage Properties, would have to be coordinated with the Area Municipalities in advance before any decision or financial impact could be quantified ..

ALTERNATIVES

The existing tax policies and the new tax policy considerations for the 2006 taxation year were presented to the Area Treasurers in March.. The purpose of the presentation was to gain consensus and therefore consistency in tax policy applications affecting local ratepayers .. EXISTING POLICY

The Area Treasurers at their March meeting recommended that the existing tax policies continue unchanged from what was approved in prior years, with the exception of the tax exemption for the Royal Canadian Legions where there was no consensus on a preferred option.

Respectfully submitted,

Stephen Cairns Commissioner of Finance and Corporate Services THE DlirRIG MUNICIPALITY OF MUSKOKA

CORPORATE AND EMERGENCY SERVICES DEPARTMENT 70 PINE STREET, BRACEBRIDGE, ONTARIO P1L 1N3 Telephone (705) 645-2231 Fax (705) 645-5319 1-800-461-4210 (705 area code) wwwmuskokaon.ca

TO: Chair and Members Corporate and Emergency Services Committee

FROM: Stephen Cairns, Commissioner of Finance and Corporate Services

DATE: March 30, 2007

SUBJECT: Draft 2007 Corporate and Emergency Services Operating Budget and the 2007 Capital Budget and 10-Year Forecast

REPORT NO: CES-5-2007-2

RECOMMENDATION

AND THAT the Draft 2007 Non-Program Operating Budget be endorsed and referred to Committee of Whole Council for further consideration ..

ORIGIN

The 2007 Draft Tax Supported Operating Budget and Capital Budget and Forecast were circulated to Council on March 13, 2007.. This report, along with an accompanying presentation, will deal with the Corporate and Emergency Services (under the CORPORATE SERVICES tab) and the Non-Program (under the NON PROGRAM tab) components of the Draft BUdget

ANALYSIS

Draft 2007 Corporate and Emergency Services Operating Budget

The Draft 2007 Corporate and Emergency Services Operating Budget, as presented in the Budget binder, has a year-aver-year net reduction of $242,538 or -1..2%..Subsequent to the printing of the 2007 Draft Operating Budget, an additional service level change request came forward to increase the hours for the Prosecutor's Assistant position in Legal Services from part time to full time., Including this request, the year-aver-year net reduction in the budget is $236,348 ..It is this request that the "as amended" refers to in the resolution to endorse the 2007 Draft Operating Budget

The bUdget document provides greater detail as to the year-aver-year budget adjustments by functional area; however, the net overall reduction in the budget is attributed to four main items:

> Increased POA fines revenue > Decreased Health Unit requisition > Increased Provincial Funding for Ambulance Services > Increase in fleet rates which eliminated the fleet operation's budget deficit

lvlallaging Our Legacy Together Also included in the 2007 Draft Operating Budget is $44,648 in service level change requests .. These requests have been summarized in the following table ..More detail on these requests is included under the APPENDICES tab in the budget document.

Increase of one POA clerical staff to assist administration CAO office $10,000 and provide reception relief POA 15,500 Conversion of Part Time Prosecutor's Assistant position Circulated with 6,190 to Full Time cover letter $31,690

Contracted Capital Project Coordinator $4,000 One full time custodial staff to perform janitorial services to water and sewer and general tax supported facilities (budget represents tax supported 8,958 $12,958 portion only) Total Corporate and Emergency Services $44,648

The Corporate and Emergency Services 2007 Draft Capital BUdget contains $4,571,000 in expenditures for 2007.. A detailed listing of these projects is contained on the yellow pages within the bUdget document following the functional operating budgets.

The major items making up the 2007 Capital Budget are as follows:

$239,000 2,000,000 353,000 910,000 629,000 295,000 145,000 Total $4,571,000

Draft 2007 Non Program Budget

The Draft 2007 Budget shows a net increase in revenues of $144,656 and is comprised of the following items:

}- OMPF funding budgeted at $797,346, an increase of ($244,346) }- Reduced costs from the closure of the Old Pines Pool ($18,760) }- Elimination of savings - job rate / gapping now in departmental budgets $100,000 }- Increase in interdepartmental charges and reduced facility costs $18,450 Total ($144,656)

To assist Committee members, staff will be presenting a PowerPoint presentation of the budgets at the Committee meeting The presentation will highlight, in more detail, the major budget drivers influencing the 2007 Draft Operating and Capital Budgets .. IlC:~ Stephen Cairns Commissioner of Finance and Corporate Services THE DISTRIG MUNICIPALITY OF MUSKOKA

CORPORATE AND EMERGENCY SERVICES DEPARTMENT 70 PINE STREET, BRACEBRIDGE, ONTARIO P1L 1N3 Telephone (705) 645-2231 Fax (705) 645-5319 1-800-461-4210 (705 area code) www.muskoka.onca

TO: Chair and Members Corporate and Emergency Services Committee

FROM: Stephen Cairns, Commissioner of Finance and Corporate Services

DATE: March 30,2007

SUBJECT: Ontario Municipal Partnership Fund (OMPF)

REPORT NO: CES-5-2007-3

RECOMMENDATION

THAT the City of North Bay Resolution No ..2007-87 regarding Ontario Municipal Partnership (OMPF) as attached to Report No..CES-5-2007-3 be supported;

AND THAT the District Chair circulate a copy of this resolution to the Honourable Dalton McGuinty, Premier of Ontario, the Honourable Greg Sorbara, Minister of Finance and to Norman Miller, M..P..P. Parry Sound-Muskoka, along with a statement to the effect that The District Municipality of Muskoka views this as an interim solution to the Provincial-Municipal Fiscal Imbalance and the Province must expedite the Provincial-Municipal Fiscal and Service Delivery Review with the goal to removing the costs of health and social programs from the local property tax bill.

ORIGIN

On March 5, 2007, the Mayor of North Bay attended Council as a delegation to gain support on his City's resolution concerning OMPF. The essence of the recommendation was that the grants be adjusted annually for inflationary increases from a base level for those municipalities that experienced a reduction in funding between the OMPF and the Community Reinvestment Fund (CRF) programs ..The base level is defined as the amount of funding as reconciled under the CRF program for costs incurred in 2004 ..Attached is a copy of North Bay's resolution ..

ANALYSIS

The proposal is based on the assumption that the costs to finance the recommendation would be funded by new Provincial funding and would not come at the expense of other municipalities who currently receive OMPF funding., In total, the Province would have to fund an additional $52 million" The District Municipality of Muskoka's share of this funding would be $1 A million and would increase annually by an inflationary adjustment.

Although Muskoka received significantly less monies under the OMPF program than it would have under the CRF (based on the 2005 budget, the CRF funding would have exceeded $2..4 million), municipalities within The District Municipality of Muskoka as a whole received more., The J\1anaging Our Legacy Together following table shows the funding from 2004 to 2007 for all of the municipalities within The District Municipality of Muskoka under the two programs ..

r· W OMPF 1 CRF 1 2006 20M I1 ,.·.~u··,· n r.'· ..'._.'''''._.'._.'._._,_.'.'."''_"_""wm.'Mwwm.m. 'District of Muskoka 553,001 553,000 ! !~E~.~~~~~~~.. 1,195,848 688,0001 Gral.enhurst ,·······rw······1:112~5961········· 1, ""265,000; 'HuntslAlle 1,474, 1 995,000 i ..... ,','m',"_,·".'··_.v'w ,.... , ..; .....,...... GeorgianBay 522,533 466,0 480,953 429,6 ~~k~~!~~ys =""' , ,_,','W""· •.MuskokaLakes 1,505,400 1,468,188 973,0001 Totail 7,127,769 3,474,000 i 6,565,934L ...... ··········· ..'·'···r''"w..·.··,.,r7 "r'r'rr'r"~"".j

As noted in an April 2005 report to Council, "The overall impact on the total tax bill for taxpayers within the District of Muskoka will be favourable with an overall increase in provincial funding of $2 ..8 million over 2004 .. This benefit may however be short lived until such time as the costs of these downloaded programs outweigh this funding announcement."

This statement highlights the fundamental distinction between the two programs ..The OMPF funding broke the principle of compensating municipalities for the cost of download~d services and brought in the concepts of equalization and ability to pay ..Under these two concepts The District Municipality of Muskoka receives no recognition for the escalating costs of social services programs, despite the fact that the net cost to the District has increased from $6 ..8 million in 2004 to $ $8..2 million in 2007 (a 20% increase).

The City of North Bay resolution can be supported given that does not come at the expense of other municipalities currently receiving OMPF monies, however, in endorsing the North Bay resolution Council must emphasize that this is only an interim solution ..The ultimate solution is to remove the financial burden on the local tax bill for funding the costs of health and social programs, which are more appropriately financed at the Provincial and Federal levels ..

The Association of Municipalities of Ontario has continually advocated for the Province to address this fiscal imbalance ..Their efforts, along with other associations, has encouraged the Province to revisit the delivery and financing of "municipal services" through a Provincial-Municipal Fiscal and Service Delivery Review.. The problem is that this review will not be completed until the spring of 2008 ..Adding to this uncertainty is the potential for a new government between now and when the review is completed ..

The real goal is to remove the costs of health and social services from the local property tax bill. Across Ontario this accounts for 31% of municipal gross expenditures ..In The District Municipality of Muskoka's 2007 Draft Budget this accounts for 44% of gross expenditures or 27% of the general tax levy ..

Attached for your information is a copy of the City of North Bay resolution and a copy of a PowerPoint presentation that provides more detail as to the mechanics of the OMPF funding model. RespectfullyM--C:p~~-= submitted, Stephen Cairns Commissioner of Finance and Corporate Services ""',,~/ The Corporation of the City of North Bay 200 Mcintyre St East OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK PO Box 360 CORPORATE SERVICES DIVISION NOR~:~BAY Nonh Bay. Ontario Direct Line (705) 474-0626, ext 510 ONTARIO CANAQA Canada P1 B 81-18 Fax Line (705) 495-4353 ~"·j~r;~.J}~~"hWt;i1~~~~~~ Tel: (705) 4740400 E-maiL [email protected]

7 February 2007

Premier Dalton McGuinty Room 281, Main Legislative Building TORONTO,ON M7A1A4

Dear Sir:

This is Resolution No, 2007-87 which was passed by Council at its Regular Meeting held Monday, February 5, 2007.

Resolution No. 2007-87:.

"WHEREAS the level of provincial unconditional funding from the Community Reinvestment Fund (CRF) and the Ontario Municipal Partnership Fund (OMPF) has remained at $16,611,000 since 2001;

AND WHEREAS during the same period the City of North Bay's Operating Budget expenditures have increased by 30%;

AND WHEREAS during the same period the City of North Bay's tax levy has increased by 41 2%;

AND WHEREAS while the Provincial share of funding for Operating Budget expenditures has dropped from 21..7% to 16.7%, the local tax levy share has increased from 56.,5% to 61..3% during the same period;

AND WHEREAS the transition from the CRF to the OMPF was scheduled to result in reductions in block funding from the Province;

AND WHEREAS the province has chosen to defer the reductions by providing one-time funding to ensure the funding does not fall below the 2004 level;

AND WHEREAS the 2004 CRF level of funding was based on a reconciliation of Local Services Realignment costs to 2002;

AND WHEREAS the Province did complete a reconciliation to update Local Services Realignment costs to 2004 levels and reimbursed the City of North Bay the additional $970,000 to recognize the increased costs bringing the reconciled CRF funding for 2004 to $17,581,000;

AND WHEREAS the citizens of North Bay have had to absorb the Local Services Realignment cost increases for 2003 and 2004 and inflationary increases since 2004; Premier Dalton McGuinty 7 February 2007 Page 2

AND WHEREAS the Province has increased funding levels for the OMPF by $168 million or 25% since it was introduced in March 2005;

AND WHEREAS the City of North Bay has not received any increase in OMPF funding;

AND WHEREAS the Province, the Association of Municipalities of Ontario and the City of Toronto have embarked on a Provincial-Municipal Fiscal and Service Delivery Review to be completed in the spring of 2008;

THEREFORE BE IT RESOL VED THAT the Council of the City of North Bay petition the Province of Ontario to guarantee a minimum increase in the OMPF for 2007 of $1,617,000, being the reconciled CRF Local Services Realignment costs for 2003 and 2004 totalling $970,000 and an inflationary increase of 3.7% totalling $647,000, thereby bringing the stable funding guarantee up to $18,228,000 in 2007;

AND FURTHER THAT copies of this resolution be forwarded to the Honourable Dalton McGuinty, Premier of Ontario, the Honourable Greg Sorbara, Minister of Finance, the Honourable John Gerretsen, Minister of Municipal Affairs & Housing, the Honourable Rick Bartolucci, Minister of Northern Development and Mines, Ms. Monique Smith, MP.P. (Nipissing), the Association of Municipalities of Ontario, Federation of Northern Ontario Municipalities and Leaders of the Opposition Parties .."

Sincerely, t fjJU Q_.d Catherine Conrad, City Clerk.

CMC/cjc

Copy to Greg Sorbara, Minister of Finance John Gerretsen, Minister of Municipal Affairs & Housing Rick Bartolucci, Minister of Northern Development & Mines Monique Smith, MPP (Nipissing) Association of Municipalities of Ontario Federation of Northern Ontario Municipalities Howard Hampton, Leader of Opposition John Tory, Leader of Opposition

W ICLERKIRMSIF111200710MPFIGENERALI0001 doc Stated Purpose CRF OMPF

? Part.ofLocalServices Replace CRF Reahgnment $ Complexity Understanding the Ontario ...•SocialAssistance.. ••I neqUi'ty , APohbclnlg Administrativeburden Municipal Partnership Fund w m uance Ass' . h '. Landtax rebates 1stWit PublicHealth SocialServiceProgram ChildcareI Children'sAid CosI'~p C ts POA ° ICing os Education tax room Equalization measures , Northern & Rural Targeted Savings challenges PreparedbyStephen(aims ~"""~;"»=··V'">>>''''='_''''~''··0;'''''''''''~«>9'''

Eligible Social Programs Program Components (2006 Municipal Share - $7,240,492) Social Programs Grant m Ontario Disability Support Program (ODSP) Equalization Grant m Ontario Disability Benefits (ODB) m ODSP Administration Assessment Ontario Works Support o Land tax rebates Ontario Works Administration Northern & Rural Communities Grant m Childcare Support Policing Services Grant m Childcare Administration Stabilization Grant m National Childcare Benefit Reinvestment One-time Funding Social Housing Social Programs Gran (Total Household Income Threshol

The grant is based on the costs of these programs Total Household Income = Number of households that exceed what could be raised by levying a .18% (per MPAC data) X Average household income (per property tax rate on assessed properties in 2006 (..178% in 2007) latest Statistics Canada) 44,300 $24,402 = $1,081,012,000 This equates to $29 million or 60% ofthe District's x general tax levy of $48 million .75% of the Total Household Income is compared to The likelihood of receiving funding under this section Eligible Costs after assessment threshold grant is therefore minimal, as social program costs would * $1,081,012,000 X 75% or $8,107,590 have to increase by a factor of 4 before the District No grant as the $8,107,590 is greater than even begins to qualify for a grant $7,240,492 in eligible costs

Social Programs (Northern & Rural Social Program Grant Equalization Grant Component)

Grant is equal to the amount eligible social Funding is made available on a sliding scale for programs exceed 14% (13% in 2007) of local municipalities whose total assessment per household is less than $185,000 in 2006 ($187,000 in 2007) municipal tax revenue (both upper & lower tier) The District's total assessment per household is 2006 Data $368,925 .. $82,839,895 x 14%$ or $11,597,585 Available to only single tier and lower tier No grant as the $11,597,585 is greater than municipalities $7,240,492 in eligible costs Farmland and Management Northern Communities Grant Forest Assessment Muskoka as of 2004 was reclassified as Municipalities who have between 5% and 20% of their tax base made up of farmland and managed being part of Central Ontario and not forest assessment receive a grant on a sliding scale .. part of Northern Ontario Municipalities that have over 20% of their $230 per Household in 2006 - $235 per Household in 2007 assessment in these types of properties receive a No grant - only available to sin grant equal to 300% ofthe revenues generated by municipalities those properties The District receives no funding as these properti only make up ..2% of its total assessment base

This grant provides funding equal to 50% Municipalities with a rural and small community measu of eligible police costs above $150 per or more receive the full per household grant of ($153 for 20 household for municipalities that have a $156 for 2007) rural and small measure of 75% or more. All the area municipalities' measures within the District Of Muskoka were deemed to be 100% and thereby received the full The District's costs, as calculated by the grant Ministry, of $172 per household result in The District, which would by definition be 100%, receives no District's only ongoing funding ($494,991 in grants under this section despite the fact it faces the same 2006 - $797,347 in 2007)) challenges of servicing rural and small communities. The grant is only for single and lower tier municipalities Household costs of $750 or more may be This segment of the OMPF grant comprises 100% of the grant funded up to 75% vs. the 50% for costs received by the area municipalities - they receive no other between $150 and $750 .. grants under this program Note: In the previous CRF formula the grant was equal

"~A .. to ..l0~Q.~..91ihe.«Qsts.pRQlLe ..$gQ..P§[119J!§..ehQlg/.

11 12 Stabilization Grant FINANCIAL CONCLUSIONS The current OMPF announcement, from the District's This grant provides funding to municipalities that perspective, is not good news as it attempts to deal would have experienced a drop in funding from what was committed to them under CRF. with ever increasing costs of downloaded programs .. The District was the only municipality which would Total District wide benefit will be short lived as over have seen their grant reduced under this program time the costs ofthe downloaded programs outweigh without this stabilization grant The District received the increased OMPF funding .. $58,009 in stabilization funding in 2006 Based on the 2005 budget the grant under the " Total grant with stabilization in 2006 was $553.000 previous CRF funding would have been $24 million In 2007 the stabilization funding will be phased out vs ..the $553,000 under this program. .. and the District will receive $797,347 '" The 2007 grant is for the Policing component only

13 14

Future Implications Distortion in local accountability between upper & lower tier municipalities with a disconnect between program costs and grant eligibility Increased burden placed on local property taxes

TO: Chair and Members Corporate and Emergency Services Committee

FROM: Debi Guy Finance Manager, Revenue

DATE: March 30, 2007

SUBJECT: 2007 Port Carling Locks and Port Sandfield Swing Bridge Fees

REPORT NO: CES-5-2007-4

RECOMMENDATION

AND THAT the fee payable by the operator of the R.M.S. Segwun, Wenonah II and Wanda III from the first Monday in May to Thanksgiving Monday shall be $9,000.

ORIGIN

Annual review of By-Law establishing the Port Carling Locks and Port Sandfield Swing Bridge user fees.

BACKGROUND

Although it has been five years since an increase in the one-way passage fee for recreational vessels, the Yearly Pass fee has been increased each year. A review of the traffic statistics reveals that the number of passages each year has decreased substantially. This could be a result of increased fees and increased gas prices. The fee structure will be reviewed after the 2007 statistical information is processed.

The staffing for 2007 will remain the same as in 2006 with four staff including one Lockmaster. This level of staffing allows for coverage at the large and small lock during the hours of operation so that warranted fees are collected. The Township of Muskoka Lakes provides the staffing, uniforms, equipment and operating supplies at a cost of approximately $55,000 per year.

Should Council believe that a fee increase is necessary, then Option B as outlined in Schedule “A” is recommended and accordingly Schedule “A” should be amended to reflect passage fee increases. The notable difference is that a one-way passage for recreational vessels would be sold for $6.00 instead of $5.00 and it is recommended that the package of 10 One-Way Passages be sold for $45.00 instead of $40.00.

FINANCIAL CONSIDERATION

The recommendation of Option B as outlined in Schedule "A" would generate an increase in revenue of approximately $8,500 based on 2006 traffic.. The increase in revenue was not reflected in the draft 2007 Budget figures as it was assumed the rates would remain the same .. Respectfully submitted, with--- the concurrence of, with the concurrence of,

Debi Guy Mike Duman, Stephen Cairns Finance Manager, Revenue Director of Finance Commissioner of Finance and Corporate Services SCHEDULE "A"

Option A

PORT CARLING LOCKS AND PORT SANDFIELD BRIDGE FEES 2007

PORT CARLING LOCKS

VESSELS CAPABLE OF USING SMALL LOCKS (LIFTING OF BRIDGE NOT REQUIRED)

One Way Yearly Pass Passage Per Vessel 1 One recreational boat capable of using small locks $5.,00 $80,00 whether small locks or large locks are used. 2 Small Commercial Boats (Barges, etc,,) capable of $25,,00 $300,00 using small locks whether small locks or large locks are used. 3 One package of 10 one way passages for vessels $40.,00 described in (1) above.

LARGE LOCKS One Way Yearly Pass Passage Per Vessel 4 (a) Large Commercial/Recreational Boats (without lift bridge)" $90,,00 $900.,00 (b) Outside normal operating hours $140.00 N/A 5 (a) Large Commercial/Recreational Boats (with lift bridge)., $115,,00 $1,250.,00 (b) Outside normal operating hours. $165.00 N/A 6 Where operation of the large locks is requested by Yearly Pass holders outside of normal operating $50,,00 N/A hours as set forth in Schedule "A" attached to Report No., CES-5-2007 -4"

MISCELLANEOUS 7 Dock facilities: Berthage fees for pleasure craft or Per day or $60,00 commercial vessels of any kind are either of part thereof per metre of after 3 hours: length per $2.00 per metre month 8 Overnight Berthage fees for Tour Boats $75.00/night

NOTE: 1) A Yearly Pass is for normal hours of operation only., 2) Fees are collected for berthage from first Monday of May to Labour Day Monday only ..

PORT SANDFIELD SWING BRIDGE

Where operation of swing bridge is requested, $75,,00 per opening -.,;

SCHEDULE "A"

Option B

PORT CARLING LOCKS AND PORT SANDFIELD BRIDGE FEES 2007

PORT CARLING LOCKS

VESSELS CAPABLE OF USING SMALL LOCKS (LIFTING OF BRIDGE NOT REQUIRED)

One Way Yearly Pass Passage Per Vessel 1 One recreational boat capable of using small locks $6 ..00 $85.00 whether small locks or large locks are used. 2 Small Commercial Boats (Barges, etc.) capable of $30..00 $330.00 using small locks whether small locks or large locks are used. 3 One package of 10 one way passages for vessels $45.00 described in (1) above.

LARGE LOCKS One Way Yearly Pass Passage Per Vessel 4 (a) LarQe Commercial/Recreational Boats (without lift bridQe). $95.00 $950.00 (b) Outside normal operating hours. $145.00 N/A 5 (a) Large Commercial/Recreational Boats (with lift bridge). $120.00 $1,300.00 (b) Outside normal operating hours. $170.00 N/A 6 Where operation of the large locks is requested by Yearly Pass holders outside of normal operating $55 ..00 N/A hours as set forth in Schedule "A" attached to Report No .. CES-5-2007 -4..

MISCELLANEOUS 7 Dock facilities: Berthage fees for pleasure craft or Per day or $65.00 commercial vessels of any kind are either of: part thereof per metre of after 3 hours:: length per $2.50 per metre month 8 Overnight Berthage fees for Tour Boats $80.00/night

NOTE: 1) A Yearly Pass is for normal hours of operation only. 2) Fees are collected for berthage from the first Monday of May to Labour Day weekend only ..

PORT SANDFIELD SWING BRIDGE

Where operation of swing bridge is requested. $80 ..00 per opening THE DISTRIG MUNICIPALITY OF MUSKOKA

CORPORATE AND EMERGENCY SERVICES DEPARTMENT 70 PINE STREET, BRACEBRIDGE, ONTARIO P1L 1N3 Telephone (705) 645-2231 Fax (705) 645-5319 1-800-461-4210 (705 area code) WWVl/.muskoka.on..ca

TO: Chair and Members Corporate and Emergency Services

FROM: Terri Burton Director, Land Ambulance Program

DATE: March 30, 2007

SUBJECT: Purchase of New Ambulance

REPORT NO: CES-5-2007-5

RECOMMENDATION

AND THAT $1,000 will be credited by Demers to the District as an incentive further reducing the cost to $98,985;

AND THAT the trade-in value of approximately $3,500 will be used to reduce the purchase price, thereby resulting in a final cost of $96,485 plus taxes;

AND THAT the purchase of the ambulance be financed from the Ambulance Reserve;

AND THAT Vehicle 5274 be declared surplus;

ORIGIN

To advise Committee that Muskoka Ambulance requires one new replacement ambulance for delivery in spring 2007..

ANALYSIS

Vehicle 5274 is no longer able to provide the required Ambulance service delivery for Muskoka and a replacement ambulance is required ..

Vehicle Year- New Year reconditioned 5274 1999 2003 - refurb Prior to 2004, vehicles have been procured through the Ministry of Health and Long Term Care, Judson Division.. Since the closure of Judson on March 31, 2004, Municipalities have placed orders directly with the two authorized distributors .. The Ministry of Health and Long Term Care have advised that there are two authorized vendors of record, Demers and Crestline ..

In conjunction with Muskoka Ambulance, Muskoka has completed a vehicle review process.. It was determined that the E350HP Demers 158 inch wheelbase, dual stretcher ambulance would be best suited for Muskoka.

In addition, the Demers quote includes Convex mirrors, power mirrors, LED light package and extra rear strobe lights ..

Notable differences in warranty are as follows:

Demers 60 month warranty Crestline 24 month warranty

Demers Paint 36-month paint warranty Crestline Paint 24-month pain warranty

FINANCIAL CONSIDERATIONS

Quotes were received from both authorized vendors as follows:

DEMERS - FORD E350HP, 158-INCH WHEELBASE, YEAR 2006 $98,035 plus $1,950 for the mounting hardware and wiring for MapLocator totalling $99,985 plus taxes., Further incentives and trade-in value reduces the cost to $95,485,.

CRESTLINE - FORD E350HP, 158-INCH WHEELBASE, YEAR 2006, $100,554 plus $1,515 for the mounting hardware and wiring for MapLocator totalling $102,069 plus taxes., There were no further incentives or trade-in allowance from Crestline at the time of this report

The purchase of the vehicles will be from funding within the Ambulance Reserve and is lower than the provisional budget for 2007 for vehicle replacement

Respectfully submitted, With the concurrence of,

Terri Burton Stephen Cairns Director, Land Ambulance Program Commissioner of Finance and Corporate Services CES-5-2007 -INFO-A

~ The Corporation of the Town of Bracebridge R. Murray Clarke, Chief Administrative Officer ~ Andrew D..Nelan, Municipal Treasurer BRACEBRIDGE TheHeart of Muskoka

March 15,2007

Mr. Donald P. Currie CEMC Muskoka District Municipality of Muskoka 70 Pine Street Bracebridge, ON P1L 1N3

Dear Mr. Currie:

Re: Alternate Location for the District Emergency Operations Centre

I am pleased to attach a Certified True Copy of Town of Bracebridge By-law 2007-009, which authorizes the District to utilize either the Municipal Office or the Bracebridge Sportsplex if required for a major emergency.

We are pleased to work closely with the District to ensure that measures are in place in the event of an emergency.

Yours tru I ~)WJAktn Lori McDonald Clerk

IAttachment THE CORPORATION OF THE TOWN OF BRACEBRIDGE

BY-LAW NO. 2007 - 009

BEING A BY-LAW TO AUTHORIZE AN AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE TOWN OF BRACEBRIDGE AND THE DISTRICT OF MUSKOKA FOR THE RECIPROCAL USE OF EMERGENCY OPERATIONS CENTRES

WHEREAS the Municipal Act, 2001, Section 20 (1), authorizes municipalities to enter into an agreement with one or more municipalities or Io'cal bodies for their joint benefit;

AND WHEREAS the Council of the Town of Bracebridge deems it expedient to enter into a reciprocal agreement with the District of Municipality of Muskoka for the reciprocal use of facilities to be used for the purpose ;of emergency operations control centre;

NOW THEREFORE THE COUNCIL OF THE. CORPORATION OF THE TOWN OF BRACEBRIDGE ENACTS AS FOLLOWS:

1. That we agree to the reciprocal use of the DistriCt Municipality of Muskoka offices located at 70 Pine Street, Bracebridge, Ontario; and the Town of Bracebridge municipal office located at 1000 Taylor Court, ;and the Bracebridge Sportsplex located at 110 Clearbrook Trail, for the purpose of Emergency Operations Control Centres, in the event that one party is unable to utilize their existing facility.

2. By-law 2004-106 is hereby repealed.

READ A FIRST, SECOND AND THIRD TIME AND FINALLY PASSED THIS 31st DAY OF JANUARY 2007.,

~~._.- Clerk

THIS IS C,ER~TIFI [I;TOB A TR,UE COPY OF TH;YOAI!,INfL \ ( UJ ) l~-'l LORI McDONALD, Clerk, for the Town of Bracebridge,. Commissioner for Affidavits, etc. CES-5-2007 -INFO-B THE ISTRIG UNICIPALITY OF USKOKA

70 PINE STREET, BRACEBRIDGE, ONTARIO P1L 1N3 Telephone (705) 645-2231 Fax (705) 645··5319 1-'800-461-4210 (705 area code) www.muskoka..on.ca

Office of the District Chair

February 20, 2007

Commissioner Julian Fantino Ontario Provincial Police 777 Memorial Avenue Orillia, ON L3V 7V3

Dear Commissioner Fantino:

As you are probably aware from the recent local media coverage in Muskoka, our Municipality has inquired about the Ontario Provincial Police policy pertaining to members attending funerals of fellow officers. The attached December 12, 2006 letter from Superintendent Truax was discussed at a meeting of our Corporate and Emergency Services Committee meeting in January. It was never our intention to question the exemplary service of Staff Sergeant Bigley or any officer of the OPP. Rather, given the responsibility of Council for police services, we did wish to respond to the initial inquiry concerning OPP policy that we had received from a member of the public (copy attached).

Having said this however, I can assure you that I profoundly regret the anguish this discussion has caused for the Bigley family, the community and the OPP. Therefore, I would suggest we set this matter aside until another time when it is more appropriate for Muskoka to better understand the operational and cost implications to the Province of Ontario and the ratepayers of the District of Muskoka when such sad occasions do occur. Representatives of our Council and I would be pleased to meet with you and the appropriate OPP personnel at a mutually convenient time to discuss and learn more about this policy matter face to face. Please contact me to establish a meeting date"

In closing, please be assured of our Council's support for the excellent police services Muskoka receives from the OPP. We look forward to continue working closely with the OPP Detachments serving the District.

Yours Respectfully,

GordAdams District Chair

Attachments (2) cc: Superintendent Dave Truax Managing Our Legac!J Together ( (

Ontario Police CentralRegion Provincial provinciale r--.-~9r------f,~'!Oion duCentre Police de l'Ontario CQQY Actio Memorial Ave. '777, aye Memorial Chair ~/ a Oril ia ON L3V 7V3 Orillia ON L3V 7V3 C.A.O. ljf aTel (705) 329-7400 Fax: (705) 329-7407 Clerk Finance & Corp. Servo o g FiI Reference: 122-50 December 12, 2006 Public Works o a Planning o a Community Servo o a Mr. Gord Adams Legal o a Disblct Chair Computer o a The District Municipality of Musk oka Personnel o a C.E.M;C. o a 70 Pine Street Uind Ambulance o a Bracebridge ON P1L 1N3 Committee o 0 Council o a Correspondence D. a Dear Mr. Adams: Comments:

Thank you for your e-mail, addressed to Inspector W.R. Bl no on, Commander ofthe Bracebridge Ontario Provincial Police (OPP) Detachment, requesting that the OPP respond to the concerns of Mr. Richard Corcelli in regard to the attendance ofOPP officers at the funeral ceremony ofthelate StaffSergeantL.W. (Larry) Bigley. As the Regional Director of Operations for Central Region, I was partially aware the funeral arrangements for Staff Sergeant Bigley, and am pleased to respond.

The OPP provides every opportullity for its members to attend funeral services held in honour of a deceased member. OPP poltcy does not provide for payment of overtime, travel or other expenses by its members wishing to attend a funeral service. opp policy states that police vehicles may be used to attend a funeral, as long as normal operations of OPP detachments are not affected. Attendance by on duty personnel is at the discretion of the individual's OPP Detachment Commander.

Throughout most of his career, Staff Sergeant Bigley was involved in the OPP Canine Program, within which he later held the position of the OPP Canine Provincial Coordinator. As the Coordinator, his duties entailed training canine handlers and their dogs from many police agencies within this province, the Ministry of Natural Resources and the OPP. He also trained canine teams from across Canada. Staff Sergeant Bigley was regarded as the expert in producing highly-trained working dogs and canine teamwork with their handlers. As the lead ofthe Canine Program, his work undoubtedly went above and beyond his normal working hours. Staff Sergeant Bigley was highly respected and an exceptional and compassionate police officer who developed many friendships and close acquaintances during his career. He was also well known in the community of Gravenhurst, and has a daughter who is a serving member of the Bracebridge OPP Detachment.

When Staff Sergeant Bigley learned of his unfortunate medical cir.cumstance, he received an outpouring of expressions ~fwell wishes and received m~ny vi~itors, even whiI~:endli.i:irig difficult treatmen.ts: When the news of his passing was heard, many friends ahd colleagues extended their deepest condolences to the family and to the OPP. It was expected that the funeral would be well represented by many who had the pleasure of knowing and working with Staff Sergeant Bigley.

RECEIVED PEG 1 4 2006 , , ( (

Mr. Gord Adams Page two

The opp believes that officers who attend the funeral of a fellow officer is justified. The public expression of SUPPOIt anq. sympathy towards Staff Sergeant Bigley's family and community acknowledge the tribute paid to a fine and well respected member ofthe OPP.

I trust my explanation addresses the concerns of Mr. Corcelli.

Yours truly,

~~ D.D . (Dave) Truax Superintendent Regional Director ,-Operations Central Region rtmJ Page 1 of 1

Adams, Gord

Subject: FW: OPP Policy on Paid Compassionate Leave

October 2, 2006

Dear Chair Adams:

You will no doubt be aware of the unfortunate passing a week ago of OPP Sergeant Larry Bigley, program coordinator for the OPP's Canine Academy. Sergeant Bigley succumbed to cancer after an arduous struggle and from all accounts was an exemplary officer who will leave a rich legacy to be followed by the Canine Corps.

On Tues. Sept 26, Sergeant Bigley's funeral was held at Trinity United Church in Gravenhurst. One could not help but note, the large number of OPP officers in town for the funeral; the number of marked OPP cruisers in town; the number of OPP motorcycles in town; the uniformed guards at Cosby Funeral Home entrance; traffic stopped on Muskoka Rd N by uniformed OPP officers as the cortege left the church; OPP cruisers parked at local motels on the evening previous to the funeral, [presumably for overnight accommodation]..

The local press reported that, "...up to 500 people, including about 50 dog teams and OPP officers in full dress uniform were expected to attend Bigley's funeral.'; Another photo heading read, n•..••hundreds of OPP officers and doz.ens of members ofthe canine unit turned Qut in full uniform in Gravenhurst on Tuesday for the funeral of OPP Staff Sergeant Larry Bigley, lining Muskoka Road North for the funeral procession".

My question is not of the quite appropriate outpourings of grief and support for Sergeant Bigley's family by his colleagues but of the cost to the taxpayer for opp paid attendance at a funeral for an officer who died of natural causes, relative to established, [??], OPP policy. One might assume that all of these officers Were not on their own time.

In North America, we have become accustomed to the show of strength and collegiality from colleagues attending funerals ahd marching in nl,lmbers when a police officer, fireman or emergency worker dies on duty and I believe that, by and large, this is Universally accepted by an understanding public. .

But I think that some clarification of policy is necessary when an officer dies of a terminal disease, which was discovered 19 months before his death, and something approaching a state funeral is held. Were these officers on paid duty or were they using vacation days or time off without pay? Were their travel expenses paid for by the OPP? Was the use of opp vEihicies charged out to enforcement? If so, was this cost chargecj out to local enforcement or to a corporate staff expense line for events of this nature? Again, if so, how does the OPP explain the many hours of lost tillie in a policing environment where there is never enough staff or equipment to do the policing job at hand.

I would appreciate your clarification of this issue after introduction of the item at Muskoka Corporate & Emergency Services Committee meeting.

Yours truly,

Richard Corcelli Gravenhurst, ON CES-5-2007 -INFO-C

Ministry of Community Safety Ministere de la Securite communautaire and Correctional Services et des Services correctionnels Emergency Management Ontario Gestion des situations d'urgence Ontario 77 Wellesley Street West 77, rue Wellesley Ouest Box 222 C,P,222 Toronto ON M7A IN3 Toronto ON M7A IN3

Office ofthe Chief Bureau du chef

Telephone/Telephone (416) 314-3723 Facsimile/ TeIecopieur (416) 314-3758 E-mail Information"[email protected],on,ca

File Reference/Reference EM007-00021

March 19. 2007

Dear Head of Council:

As you are aware, the Emergency Management and Civil Protection Act requires the implementation of a mandatory Essential Level emergency management program by all Ontario municipalities. Since the inception of this legislation Emergency Management Ontario (EMO) has provided guidance, resources, and tools to all communities to assist them in meeting the requirements of the Act, and of the associated Ontario Regulation 380/04. Both the Act and the Regulation specify activities that must be conducted on an annual basis by municipalities in order to maintain full compliance.

At this time I am writing to advise you that a review of our records indicates that in 2006 your municipality completed all of the steps that are required for the maintenance of the Essential Level Emergency Management Program required by this legislation. The implementation of sound community emergency management programs, which are integrated with those of other levels of government, is a key element of our shared responsibility to the residents of Ontario. Such a partnership will lead to the fulfillment of our mutual goal, which is the creation of safer and more disaster-resilient communities. Your municipality is to be congratulated on its commitment to public safety in Ontario"

It is the responsibility of municipalities to ensure that they are compliant with Provincial legislation and regulated standards at all times. EMO is committed to working with your community and staff to assist you in maintaining your program in 2007. Your local EMO Field Officer will be contacting you to determine how we may continue to be of help in this regard.

Should you have any questions please do not hesitate to contact Joy Mcleod, Deputy Chief, Program Delivery at 416,·314-8610.

~ Dan Hefkey Chief cc: CEMC EMO Field Officer