November 18, 2002

G E N E R A L C O M M I T T E E M I N U T E S

THIRTY-SECOND MEETING, REGULAR, MONDAY, NOVEMBER 18, 2002

Present: Mayor Timothy H. Rigby Councillor Judy Casselman Councillor Rondi Craig Councillor Carol Disher Councillor Dawn Dodge Councillor Susan Erskine Councillor Brian Heit Councillor Ronna Katzman Councillor Joseph Kushner Councillor Wendy Patriquin Councillor Greg Washuta Councillor Bruce Williamson Excused: Councillor James Almas

Officials Present: Chief Administrative Officer, Mr. B. Robert Puhach Director of Corporate Support Services, Mr. Kenneth R. Todd Director of Recreation and Community Services, Mr. Ron Zizman Director of Transportation and Environmental Services, Mr. Paul Mustard Director of Financial Management Services, Mr. Colin Briggs Director of Economic Development and Tourism Services, Mr. Brock Dickinson Director of Planning Services, Mr. John Rodey City Solicitor, Ms. Annette Poulin Fire Chief, Mr. Al Jones Council/Committee Secretary, Mrs. Barbara Finlay

Mayor Timothy H. Rigby took the chair and called the meeting to order in Council Chambers, City Hall, at seven-o-four o’clock p.m.

ITEM NO. 570 Report from Fire Services Dated November 13, 2002 Re: Antique Fire Truck File: 68.13.99

Council received a report on October 28, 2002 from Fire Services regarding the availability of an original Merritton 1926 vintage Godfredson fire truck.

At that time the report was referred to the Budget Committee.

Within the next few days, private citizens from the Merritton Ward and other areas of the City, conducted a successful fund-raising to procure the needed resources to finance the acquisition of this truck.

Council at the November 4, 2002 meeting requested a report as to the expected maintenance and storage costs, proposed usage and to authorize the distribution of tax receipts for any donations received.

There are several requests from the group raising the money, these mainly being; ! That the truck be stored in a Merritton Station if possible.

! Signage on the vehicle would remain as the original identification of a "Merritton" Truck and, if refurbished to any extent, the markings would be redone as a Merritton entity.

! Any refurbishing would not be to the extent that it would prevent children from enjoying the experience of climbing on and playing in the vehicle.

Storage of this truck has been, and would continue to be at Station 4 on Walnut Street in the Merritton Ward as long as space permits. The vendor has indicated that the price includes a number of spare parts that have been gathered over the years for regular maintenance or in the event of restoration attempts. Storage requirements for these "parts" has not been determined as yet.

It is proposed that a committee be struck with members of the Fire Prevention Unit, Suppression staff and Management to determine policies regarding the use of this vehicle and its maintenance.

Maintenance would be in-house for the time being with most mechanical work done by either licensed mechanics at the yards or, if minor or cosmetic, staff from the Fire Services. There have been numerous offers of assistance from staff, both for working on and manning the vehicle for parades and displays. With any vehicle of this type the repairs are often dependant on the resilience, ingenuity and mechanical aptitude of the people working on it. Fortunately the Fire Services has an abundant supply of this type of personnel.

Restoration attempts at this time would be minimal and for the most part in-house. The department has access to a sign painter who is willing to re-stripe and letter the vehicle when time permits and the vendor has offered his mechanical expertise when needed.

Licensing a historic vehicle is at a cost of $18.00 per year and Financial Management Services estimates insurance rates at approximately $200.00 annually.

The City may wish to consider obtaining an up to date appraisal in order to re-establish sufficient insurance under new ownership, however while historic vehicle insurance may reduce the cost somewhat, it will also limit usage.

RECOMMENDATION:

That the City purchase the 1926 Godfredson with funds as raised and offered by local citizens and merchants for use as a City-owned Fire Prevention and Public Relations asset; and that authorization be given to issue Tax Receipts to those who donated towards this purchase.

MOVED BY COUNCILLOR PATRIQUIN:

That the recommendation contained in the report from Fire Services, Item Number 570 of the General Committee Minutes, November 18, 2002, be approved.

CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.

ITEM NO. 571 Report from the Financial Management Services Department, Dated October 30, 2002 Re: Christmas Parking Promotion - Downtown Files: 77.34.10, 35.60.9 The St. Catharines Downtown Association has requested the City’s participation in a Christmas Promotion. The Association has requested free parking available at all City metres, parking lots and garages starting each day at 12 noon from Monday, December 2, 2002 until and including Tuesday, December 31, 2002. A similar request was received and approved in 2001.

Staff recommend that free parking be approved at all City meters and hourly and machined parking lots, starting each day at 12 noon from Monday, December 2, 2002 until, and including, Tuesday, December 31, 2002. The staff recommendation does not include the monthly parking lots or the parking garages in this promotion. The staff recommendation does not include the monthly parking lots or the parking garages in this promotion.

RECOMMENDATION:

That the report from the Financial Management Services Department dated October 30, 2002 regarding Christmas Parking Promotion - Downtown be received; and that the St. Catharines Downtown Association’s request for free parking at all City meters and hourly and machined parking lots, starting each day at 12 noon from Monday, December 2, 2002 until, and including, Tuesday, December 31, 2002, be approved.

MOVED BY COUNCILLOR KATZMAN:

That the recommendation contained in the report from the Financial Management Services Department, Item Number 571 of the General Committee Minutes, November 18, 2002, be approved.

CARRIED.

ITEM NO. 572 Report from the Transportation and Environmental Services Department, Dated November 5, 2002 Re: Noise By-Law Enforcement File: 10.13.5

Council requested a staff report regarding enforcement of the noise by-law and what steps can be taken to enforce the by-law as it relates to bars and private homes. The feasibility of a By-Law Enforcement Officer being on duty in the evening hours was also to be provided.

Staff of Transportation and Environmental Services and Legal Services met with officers from the Niagara Regional Police Service (NRPS) to discuss how an after hours response with City By-Law Enforcement Officers could operate. The NRPS officers indicated that unless an NRPS officer attended with the By-Law Enforcement Officer, that they would not dispatch our By-Law Enforcement Officers to a noise complaint at a bar or private home. They stated that for safety and liability concerns, only police officers should be sent on such calls.

However, they again advised that due to current staffing levels, noise complaints would not take precedence over other higher priority calls. Depending on the number of calls, some complaints may not be dealt with as quickly as the public may expect.

An increased police presence in the Downtown, Port Dalhousie and initiatives with the Student Housing Liaison Committee, have drastically reduced the number of noise complaints that the NRPS receives, related to bars and private homes.

The NRPS continues to advise that all noise complaints related to bars and private homes be referred to them for response. Written complaints about a noise problem can also be submitted to Legal Services who will contact the owner and advise them of the requirements of the noise by-law. Most complaints received by Legal Services relate to barking dogs.

RECOMMENDATION:

That the report from the Transportation and Environmental Services Department dated November 5, 2002, respecting noise by-law enforcement, be received for information purposes.

MOVED BY COUNCILLOR WILLIAMSON:

That the recommendation contained in the report from the Transportation and Environmental Services Department, Item Number 572 of the General Committee Minutes, November 18, 2002, be approved.

MOVED BY COUNCILLOR KUSHNER:

That this matter, be referred to the Student Housing Liaison Committee; and that staff be directed to determine if police forces in other municipalities train by-law enforcement officers; and further, that staff be directed to obtain input from other interested organizations.

MOTION TO REFER CARRIED.

ITEM NO. 573 Report from the Transportation and Environmental Services Department, Dated November 4, 2002 Re: Request for Stop Controls in Various Neighbourhoods. File: 77.37.99

The use of right-of-way control at the intersection of two low volume local roads was, and still is, an accepted practice for numerous road authorities and municipalities throughout North America. St. Catharines is no exception. As such, many of the older areas within the City of St. Catharines have intersections with no physical traffic control (i.e. stop signs or yield signs). Although these intersections operate quite well and exhibit safety records that are similar to, and in some cases better than, comparable intersections with physical controls, many motorists are not accustomed to right-of-way control and are uncomfortable with this operation. As such, staff receive requests from time to time for the conversion of these intersections to stop control. Staff are in receipt of several requests at the present time.

In order to satisfy these requests, staff recommend that the following intersections outlined in TABLE 1 be converted from right-of-way control to stop control.

TABLE 1 - INTERSECTIONS TO BE CONVERTED TO STOP CONTROL

INTERSECTION ROAD 1 ROAD 2 STOP DIRECTION Yonge Street Broadway Eastbound Runcorn Street (N) Broadway Westbound Runcorn Street (S) Broadway Westbound Shoreham Street Broadway Eastbound Brigantine Court Broadway Eastbound Keefer Road Northrup Crescent Northbound Northrup Crescent Read Road Eastbound Peacock Bay Northrup Crescent Southbound Keefer Road Seaway Haulage Road Westbound

RECOMMENDATION:

That the report from the Transportation and Environmental Services Department dated November 4, 2002, regarding stop controls in various neighbourhoods, be approved; and that the intersections outlined in Table 1 be converted from right-of-way control to stop control; and further, that the City Solicitor prepare the necessary by-laws.

MOVED BY COUNCILLOR DODGE:

That the recommendation contained in the report from the Transportation and Environmental Services Department, Item Number 573 of the General Committee Minutes, November 18, 2002, be approved.

CARRIED.

ITEM NO. 574 Report from the Transportation and Environmental Services Department, Dated November 4, 2002 Re: Request for All-Way Stop on Fawell Avenue at Burdy Drive File: 77.37.99

At its meeting of October 21, 2002, City Council directed staff to report on the feasibility of installing an all-way stop at the intersection of Burdy Drive and Fawell Avenue. This request was a result of a letter submitted from an area resident with respect to concerns over the perceived speed of vehicles on Fawell Avenue. As a result of this request, staff have undertaken a review of the area and offer the following.

Fawell Avenue is a two-way, two lane local road, that operates with an average daily traffic (ADT) volume of less than 1,000 vehicles per day and connects Martindale Road with Vansickle Road North. Burdy Drive is a two-way, two lane local road with an ADT of less than 1,000 vehicles per day and intersects Fawell Avenue to form a ‘T’ intersection. The intersection of Burdy Drive at Fawell Avenue is presently under right-of-way control (i.e. no stop signs).

An analysis of traffic volumes was undertaken in order to determine if an all-way stop is warranted at this intersection. Neither the warrant for volume/collision or special pedestrian consideration was satisfied during this analysis. A review of the collision history for this intersection indicates that there have been no reported collisions at the intersection in the past five years.

With respect to concerns regarding the perceived speed of vehicles on Fawell Avenue, and to determine the speed at which motorists are actually traveling, staff conducted a spot speed study on Wednesday, October 30, 2002, during the a.m. peak period (8:00 a.m. - 9:30 a.m.) and p.m. peak period (3:30 p.m. - 4:30 p.m.). Speed samples were taken in both directions. Once reduced, the results of the speed study indicate that Fawell Avenue is operating with an average speed of 44 km/h and an 85th percentile speed of 53 km/h. The 85th percentile speed is a measurement used by transportation practitioners to determine the threshold speed at which a majority of drivers are operating at or below. Based on the results of the speed study and technical analysis, it can be concluded that a vehicular speeding problem does not exist in this area and that the volume of traffic at the intersection of Fawell Avenue and Burdy Drive does not warrant an all-way stop. As such, staff do not support the implementation of an all-way stop at this location.

Although the implementation of an all-way stop at this location is not technically supported at this time, staff recommend that the intersection be converted from right-of-way control to stop control by installing a stop sign on the south approach of Burdy Drive. Staff believe that this conversion will help minimize any confusion related to the right-of-way at this intersection.

RECOMMENDATION:

That the report from the Transportation and Environmental Services Department dated November 4, 2002, regarding a request for an all-way stop at the intersection of Fawell Avenue and Burdy Drive, be received; and that the request for the installation of an all-way stop at the intersection of Fawell Avenue and Burdy Drive, be denied; and that the intersection of Fawell Avenue and Burdy Drive be converted from right-of-way control to stop control; and that the City Solicitor be directed to prepare the necessary by-laws; and further, that Tamara-Anne Ings, 28 Fawell Avenue, St. Catharines, Ontario, L2S 2V4, be so advised.

MOVED BY COUNCILLOR DISHER:

That the recommendation contained in the report from the Transportation and Environmental Services Department, Item Number 574 of the General Committee Minutes, November 18, 2002, be approved.

CARRIED.

ITEM NO. 575 Report from the Planning Services Department Dated November 7, 2002 Re: Application to Amend Zoning By-law No. 68-121 (Zone 2) to Permit an Apartment Building Municipal Address: 109 George Street Owner: Glenn Betts File: 60.35.632, Vol. 2

The Proposal

The purpose of this application is to permit an (existing) five (5) unit apartment with front yard parking.

Site Analysis a) Location:

The subject lands are located in the Fitzgerald Neighbourhood of the City’s Central Planning District (See Appendix "A"). b) Existing Land Use

(i) Site

Comprised of 0.079 hectares (0.19 acres), the property fronts onto the west side of George Street, north of Russell Avenue. The parcel has 11.43 metres (37.5 feet) of frontage and 65.26 metres (214.1 feet) of depth. There is a two (2) storey, five (5) unit residential building currently on the site which was constructed in 1991.

(ii) Neighbourhood

North: Single Detached Residential South: Commercial East: George Street and a mix of residential uses West: Single Detached Residential c) Official Plan

The Official Plan designates the lands for Neighbourhood Residential use, which permits all forms of residential development and intensification subject to the policies of the Plan. The proposal complies with the Official Plan. d) Zoning

By-law No. 68-121 (Zone 2) zones the lands Neighbourhood Commercial (C3) permitting a wide range of commercial and institutional uses, including dwellings over or behind businesses. The proposal is to amend this zoning to Residential Fourth Density (R4) permitting a five (5) unit apartment building and buildings accessory thereto, with provisions to permit front yard parking.

Previous Applications

In 1993 Council approved an application by the current owner to rezone the subject property from Neighbourhood Commercial (C3) to Residential Fourth Density (R4) to permit a five (5) unit apartment building, subject to a number of conditions. Certain conditions were not met at that time and, as a result, the By-law to rezone the property from commercial to residential was never passed by Council. Details will be discussed further in the Planning Considerations section of this report.

Circulation Comments

The application was circulated to all appropriate departments and agencies for their comments and requirements. No objections to the proposal were received.

Preliminary Information Meeting

A preliminary information meeting was hosted by the Planning Services Department on October 23, 2002. The purpose of this meeting was to present the applicant’s proposal and allow an opportunity for questions to be asked and comments to be received by City Staff before decisions are made. There were two (2) persons in attendance. In a letter dated October 21, 2002 Mr. P. Adshead (113 George Street) stated his objection to the proposal. Subsequent to the preliminary information meeting, which Mr. Adshead attended, he verbally advised staff that he does not object to a residential zoning for the lands. Planning Considerations

The proposed change in zoning from commercial to residential complies with the City’s Official Plan. Section 3.1 of the Official Plan provides for a range of all forms of dwelling unit types throughout the City’s designated residential precincts. Section 3.3 of the Plan provides Location, Site and Form Guidelines for Residential Development. Section 3.3.2.1, Location, provides that: (a) "medium density residential development and intensification shall be located on or near arterial or collector streets and in proximity to shopping facilities, parks and open space, natural areas and transit as a means of efficiently using land services and amenities" and is (b) "particularly appropriate on sites adjacent to or near existing higher or medium density development".

The Fitzgerald Neighbourhood is an established residential area on the northern periphery of the Central Area. There is a mix of residential uses, together with commercial and institutional uses as well. There are three (3) low-rise apartment buildings/complexes in the Lake Street, Carlton Street, Russell Avenue, Terry Fox Trail "Quadrangle". The property is located in close proximity to commercial uses along Lake Street, together with the Lake/Carlton Plaza, and the Russell Avenue Community Centre (and associated green space), St. Patrick’s Park and the Terry Fox Trail. It is also near a collector road (Russell Avenue). Further, Russell Avenue is a transit route.

The issues surrounding this application are framed primarily around site function and layout. Specifically the provision and location of parking and implementation of the previously approved Site Plan Agreement.

On June 25, 1990, Council passed By-law No. 90-259, authorizing a Site Plan Agreement and approving Plans for the two (2) storey building currently on the site. The Agreement required the provision of standard site improvements for commercial uses. On July 19, 1993, Council granted approval to an application to rezone the subject property to residential subject to conditions. Specifically that, as a condition of the Amending By-law being passed, a minimum of eight (8) parking spaces be provided, and that an Amended Site Plan Agreement be entered into by the owner. Although there was already a Site Plan Agreement on the property, an amendment was required in order to bring the site into compliance with residential standards for this zone, which does not permit parking in the front yard. At the request of the owner, Council subsequently considered removing the requirement to amend the Site Plan on a number of occasions but never did so. As a result a By-law to rezone the property from commercial to residential was never passed by Council.

The current application before Council proposes to address the aforementioned matter by requesting an exemption to Section 3.8.1 of By-law No. 68-121 (Zone 2) in order to allow the existing front yard parking to remain. The existing five (5) unit apartment generates a parking requirement of eight (8) parking spaces based on a ratio of 1.5 spaces per unit. There are ten (10) spaces on the lands under review (four (4) in the front yard and six (6) in the rear yard). On review, the front yard parking has achieved a degree of compatibility within the neighbourhood and in relationship to adjoining properties. Specifically, landscaping screens the parking area from the street. Further, there is a gravel parking area associated with a commercial use to the south (corner of Russell Avenue and George Street). A driveway into the subject lands and wood board fence separates the parking area from the single detached home to the north. Based upon this, Staff believe the request is reasonable and support the proposed exemption to Section 3.8.1 of By-law No. 68-121. Should Council approve this application, an Amended Site Plan Agreement would not be required and the zoning amendment from commercial to residential could proceed without this condition. With respect to the proposed reductions to side yard setback and lot frontage, the southerly side yard of the building abuts an asphalt parking area. Further, the frontage provided maintains adequate space for vehicle access to the rear of the property.

In accordance with established procedures, the date for the public meeting is provided in the recommendation and notices for the public meeting.

Staff Recommendation: That approval be granted to an amendment to By-law No. 68-121 (Zone 2) for the lands described as Part Lots 27 and 28, Plan 70 and municipally known as 109 George Street to rezone the lands from Neighbourhood Commercial (C3) to Residential Fourth Density (R4) to permit a five (5) unit apartment building, subject to the following conditions: i) maximum number of apartment dwelling units - five (5); ii) minimum parking - 1.5 spaces per rental dwelling unit; iii) that notwithstanding Section 3.8.1 of By-law No. 68-121, parking shall be permitted to extend beyond the face of the building; iv) minimum lot frontage - 11.43 metres (37.5 feet); v) minimum (southerly) side yard setback - 0 metres and that the City Solicitor be directed to prepare the necessary By-law to give effect to Council’s decision; and that the Notice of Decision required by the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c.P.13, as amended, be processed by the City Clerk; and that upon expiration of the appeal period, the City Clerk be directed to forward an application to the Ontario Municipal Board for approval of the proposed Zoning By-law if any appeals are received; and further, that Mr. Glenn Betts, 85 Russell Avenue, St. Catharines, Ontario, L2R 1V6, be so advised.

RECOMMENDATION:

That the report from the Planning Services Department, dated November 7, 2002, regarding the proposal to amend Zoning By-law No. 68-121 (Zone 2) for lands known as 109 George Street, be referred to City Council for consideration after the public meeting scheduled for December 2, 2002.

MOVED BY COUNCILLOR DISHER:

That the recommendation contained in the report from the Planning Services Department, Item Number 575 of the General Committee Minutes, November 18, 2002, be approved.

CARRIED.

ITEM NO. 576 Report from the Transportation and Environmental Services Department, Dated November 11, 2002 Re: Mid-Peninsula Transportation Corridor Status Report Files: 77.2.8

As Council is aware, the Ministry of Transportation, Ontario (MTO), in partnership with the Region of Niagara, Region of Halton and the City of Hamilton are currently preparing a Terms of Reference (ToR) for an Individual Environmental Assessment (EA) that is to be completed for the proposed Mid- Peninsula Corridor. The ToR will detail the requirements of the EA and will include the following:

C A description of the purpose of the undertaking; C The range and types of alternatives that the proponent intends to consider; C A description of the environment and potential effects; C An EA work plan (including how alternatives will be generated, how effects will be assessed, how alternatives will be evaluated and a monitoring strategy); C A consultation plan; C The identification of other approvals required; and, C A proposed schedule (the schedule is just a guide to provide stakeholders with an understanding of the anticipated time requirements).

Subsequent to preparing the ToR and receiving final approval from the Ministry of Environment, the MTO will commence the EA activities for the Mid-Peninsula Corridor.

Although Council has expressed concern in the past regarding the financial implications that the Mid- Peninsula Corridor will have on the City, these impacts are not known at this time; however their identification is mandatary as part of the EA process. (See Appendix "B") It is important to note that the study of the Mid-Peninsula Corridor is in its infancy and will take several years to complete. Staff will keep Council apprised of any major developments that result from the EA process.

RECOMMENDATION:

That the report from the Transportation and Environmental Services Department dated November 11, 2002, regarding the proposed Mid-Peninsula Transportation Corridor, be received for information purposes.

MOVED BY COUNCILLOR WILLIAMSON:

That the recommendation contained in the report from the Transportation and Environmental Services Department, Item Number 576 of the General Committee Minutes, November 18, 2002, be approved.

CARRIED.

ITEM NO. 577 Report from the Transportation and Environmental Services Department, Dated November 6, 2002 Re: Provincial Minimum Road Maintenance Standards Compliance Files: 68.81.9; 35.31.1

The Province amended the Municipal Act in 1996, to include provisions dealing with municipal liability in relation to the repairs of highways and bridges. This was in response to concerns from over five hundred municipalities who had requested assistance in risk management of road maintenance operations.

The new defense provides that a municipality will not be liable for failing to maintain a road or bridge in a reasonable state of repair, if it has met minimum standards established by regulation. The standards are not mandatory, but the defence will only be available where a municipality has met the standard.

On August 8, 2002, the Province of Ontario passed into law Ontario Regulation 239/02 for Minimum Maintenance Standards for Municipal Highways. This Regulation came into force on November 1, 2002. It classifies all levels of municipal roads and establishes minimum standards for patrolling, conditions requiring repair, including snow removal and maximum acceptable lengths of time before repairs must be initiated.

To provide compliance with this regulation, all of the City’s roads must be inspected every 7, 14, or 30 days, depending on their classification. The entire inventory of City streets has been divided into routes to be driven every month in order to meet the Provincial inspection requirements. Initially, one worker with a vehicle has been assigned full time to perform the road patrols, document the inspections, and initiate work orders for correction of all deficiencies determined. Maintenance or repair actions must be provided within a specified number of hours or days. This road patrol activity has now been initiated in St. Catharines for November. The actual labour and equipment costs required to patrol all City streets as required is still to be confirmed. The preliminary estimated cost of this new activity is $60,000, and this has been included in the proposed 2003 roads budget.

RECOMMENDATION:

That the report from the Transportation and Environmental Services Department dated November 6, 2002, respecting Provincial minimum road maintenance standards compliance, be received for information purposes.

MOVED BY COUNCILLOR WILLIAMSON:

That the recommendation contained in the report from the Transportation and Environmental Services Department, Item Number 577 of the General Committee Minutes, November 18, 2002, be approved.

CARRIED.

ITEM NO. 578 Report from the Recreation and Community Services Department, November 6, 2002 Re: Feasibility of Providing Parking Space in Bermuda Park File: 68.31.171

On Monday November 4, 2002 Council requested information on the feasibility of providing parking spaces within Bermuda Park as a means of addressing on street parking problems associated with the use of the park.

Amenities in Bermuda Park include a soccer field used week day evenings and weekend mornings by ladies soccer and a playground which received new equipment within the last month. The soccer field generates traffic and on street parking in the area. The playground is used primarily by residents within walking distance within the neighborhood.

The playground equipment was recently located on the Bermuda Drive frontage in an attempt to improve accessibility and visibility and reduce loitering. The previous playground location was through a pedestrian access from Leaside Drive and offered poor access and no street visibility and became a source of problems to adjacent residents due to loitering in dark hours. The new location on the Bermuda Drive frontage addresses these concerns and has been chosen in consultation with adjacent residents to minimize conflict with their properties.

The only opportunity to provide off street parking within the park is along the street frontage on Bermuda Drive. (See Appendix "C") Space exists toward the easterly portion of the street frontage which could house a small parking area containing approximately 15 spaces. The cost to provide this would be approximately $60,000.00. A parking area in this location would create conflict with adjacent residential properties and the playground area. The provision of 15 spaces would not contribute to alleviating the on street parking now occurring. The information provided in the Transportation and Environmental Services Department report of November 4, 2002 regarding parking concerns on Bermuda Drive did not present a situation severe enough to warrant construction of a parking area within the park. This is currently an unbudgeted item and as such is not recommended.

RECOMMENDATION: That the report from the Recreation and Community Services Department dated November 6, 2002, respecting the feasibility of providing off street parking within Bermuda Park, be received for information purposes.

MOVED BY COUNCILLOR WASHUTA:

That staff be directed to allocate $60,000.00 from the Recreation and Community Services Department Budget to provide a parking area within Bermuda Park.

MOVED BY COUNCILLOR CRAIG:

That further consideration of the provision of off street parking within Bermuda Park, be deferred pending completion of a staff review of the allocation of park facilities.

MOTION TO DEFER CARRIED.

ITEM NO. 579 Report from the Governance Ad Hoc Committee Dated November 1, 2002 Re: Federal Election Boundaries File: 35.49.10

On August 17, 2002 the Federal Electoral Boundaries Commission for Ontario released proposals for the re-distribution of Federal Electoral Ridings in the province. The Federal Electoral Boundaries Commission of Ontario is responsible for creating boundaries for both federal and provincial ridings in Ontario.

The purpose of this report is to provide an outline to Council on the following:

● Process for Changing Federal Electoral Boundaries ● Principles of Electoral Boundary Change ● Commission Recommendations ● Current Electoral Situation in Niagara ● Proposed Options ● Recommendations

Process for Changing Federal Electoral Boundaries in Ontario

The increase in Canada’s population in the past ten (10) years has necessitated a change to the total number of electoral districts represented in the House of Commons from 301 to 308.

The number of electoral districts in the House of Commons is derived from a formula set out in the Constitution Act, 1867. This formula takes into account changes to provincial population between decennial censuses.

In Ontario the population changed from 10,084,885 to 11,410,046 during the period from

1991 - 2001. The number of electoral districts in Ontario increased from 103 to 106. As a result of the increase in the number of electoral seats in Ontario, the Federal Electoral Boundaries Commission for Ontario is responsible for the process of realigning the federal boundaries in accordance with the following procedure:

(1) The Commission proposes boundaries for electoral districts, which are contained in its proposed redistribution plan.

(2) The redistribution plan is published in newspaper advertisements that contain maps of the proposed electoral boundaries, and indicate the times and locations of public hearings. Interested individuals may appear at the hearings to express their views on the Commission’s proposals, after notifying the Commission in writing of their intention to make representations. Written notification must take place within fifty-three days after the date of the publication to the last advertisement.

(3) After the public hearings, the Commission reviews its initial redistribution plan, makes revisions where appropriate, and submits its final report to the Chief Electoral Officer of Canada. The final report is required no later than April 16, 2003.

(4) The report is referred to the House of Commons and is examined by a parliamentary committee. The committee has 30 days (or longer if the House of Commons is not sitting) to discuss any objections to the report.

(5) Once Parliament has considered the report, it is returned to the Commission, along with the minutes of the House of Commons committee. The Commission then decides whether to make any modifications to its report and provides a final certified copy of its report to the Chief Electoral Officer of Canada.

(6) Once the Chief Electoral Officer of Canada has received the final reports of all Commissions, a draft order is prepared, referred to as a "representation order," describing and naming the electoral districts established by all the Commissions.

(7) Within five days of receiving the draft representation order, the Governor in Council must publicly announce the new boundaries in a proclamation, which must then be published in the Canada Gazette.

(8) The new boundaries cannot be used in an election until at least one year has passed between the date the representation order was proclaimed and the date that Parliament is dissolved for a general election.

A number of public hearings are scheduled across the province commencing on October 21, 2002, and ending December 3, 2002. A public hearing is scheduled for Tuesday, November 19, 2002 in Council Chambers at City Hall in St. Catharines commencing at 9:30 a.m. Mayor Rigby has already been confirmed as a presenter at the hearing. The Mayor will be making a presentation on behalf of Council.

Principles of Electoral Boundary Change

The Commission is required to apply the principles contained in the Electoral Boundaries

Readjustment Act. The Act directs the Commission to ensure that each electoral district in the province shall, as reasonably as possible, correspond to the electoral quotient for the Province of Ontario. The provincial quotient for electoral districts is a population of 107,642. This quotient is established by dividing the population of the province (11,410,046) by the number of electoral districts (106) assigned to the province.

When examining the re-distribution of electoral districts the Commission may depart from the provincial quotient where necessary or desirable to:

(i) respect the community of interest or community of identity in, or the historical pattern of an electoral district in the province, or

(ii) ensure a manageable geographic size for electoral districts in sparsely populated, rural, or northern regions of the province. When considering these principles, the Commission must make every effort to ensure that, except in extraordinary circumstances, the population of each electoral district in the province remains within 25 per cent (plus or minus) of the electoral quotient. This would mean that the maximum population per electoral district should be no more than 134,553 and the minimum population 80,732. One of the overriding principles in the Electoral Boundaries Act, however, is that the population of each electoral district be as close as possible to the provincial quotient (107, 642). This ensures fairness in the overall concept of "representation by population".

In 1996, the Province of Ontario enacted the Representation Act. The legislation indicates that for purposes of representation in the Ontario Legislative Assembly, Ontario is divided into electoral districts whose numbers, names and boundaries are identical to those of its federal electoral districts.

The Act also states that when there is a federal readjustment, new provincial electoral districts are deemed to be established in accordance with the new federal electoral districts.

Commission Recommendations:

In Ontario, due to the population growth that has occurred during the last 10 years, there will be an increase from 103 electoral districts to 106 electoral districts. Population shifts throughout the province, the effects of municipal amalgamations and the additional three (3) districts have created substantial changes in the electoral boundaries proposed by the Commission.

The primary trends in population patterns over the past ten (10) years has been an increase in southern Ontario, and in particular around the Greater Toronto Area (GTA), while there has been a decrease in population throughout northern Ontario.

Currently, twenty (20) electoral districts in southern Ontario exceed the allowed 25 per cent variance, meaning twenty (20) electoral districts currently have a population larger than 134,553. Ten (10) of the current electoral districts are smaller than the allowable variance with populations less than 80,732.

The Commission’s recommended proposals are as follows:

● removal of one (1) electoral district from northern Ontario. ● removal of one (1) electoral district from Hamilton-Niagara. ● the addition of five (5) new electoral districts in the GTA area of Toronto.

The following are the proposed electoral districts for the Niagara area (Appendix "D") put forth by the Commission:

Electoral % of Variance Municipalities Population District (Quotient 107,642)

St. Catharines St. Catharines (north) 117,527 +9.18% Niagara-on-the-Lake Niagara-on-the-Lake

Niagara Niagara Falls 106,958 -0.63% Fort Erie Fort Erie|

Welland Thorold Welland St. Catharines (south) 116,640 +8.36% Port Colborne Wainfleet Pelham Lincoln Hamilton- Grimsby 113,397 +5.35% Lincoln Hamilton (Stoney Creek - south)

As previously outlined in this report, should the Commission’s recommendations be approved, the provincial electoral districts would automatically be altered as well.

Current Electoral Situation in Niagara

There are currently five (5) federal electoral boundaries within the Niagara Region as outlined in the attached map. (Appendix "E").

The existing population distribution of the five ridings in the Niagara Region is as follows:

Electoral % of Variance District Municipalities Population (Quotient 107,642) Welland Thorold Niagara Centre 104,146 -3.4% St. Catharines (south) Pelham

St. Catharines St. Catharines (north) 103,678 -3.7%

Fort Erie Port Colborne Lincoln Erie-Lincoln 98,312 -8.67% Wainfleet West Lincoln Dunnville

Niagara Falls Niagara-on-the-Lake Niagara Falls 95,722 -11.07% Thorold (east of Welland Canal)

Grimsby Stoney Creek Stoney Creek 109,970 +2.16% Glanbrook

As noted in the above table, the population for the five (5) electoral districts ranges between 95,722 and 109,970. The acceptable range under the principles outlined in the Electoral Boundaries Adjustment Act is plus or minus 25% representing a population range of 80,732 to 134,553. The lowest current percentage variance found in the Niagara Falls electoral district, is -11.07%, well within the 25% variance guideline.

Federal Electoral Boundary Options:

Option No. 1 - Status Quo

The current population (2001 Census figures) in the Niagara Region is 410,570. The Niagara Region currently has five (5) federal electoral districts within its boundaries, namely St. Catharines, Niagara Falls, Niagara Centre, Erie-Lincoln, and a portion of Stoney Creek. The Town of Grimsby, with a population of 21,295 is the only municipality within Regional Niagara included in an electoral district outside the Regional Niagara boundaries. The Town of Dunnville, which is part of Haldimand, is included in the Erie-Lincoln riding.

The electoral districts for this option are as follows:

Electoral % of Variance Municipalities Population District (Quotient 107,642) Welland Thorold Niagara Centre 104,146 -3.4% St. Catharines (south) Pelham

St. Catharines St. Catharines (north) 103,678 -3.7%

Fort Erie Port Colborne Lincoln Erie-Lincoln 98,312 -8.67% Wainfleet West Lincoln Dunnville

Niagara Falls Niagara-on-the-Lake Niagara Falls 95,722 -11.07% Thorold (east of Welland Canal)

Grimsby Stoney Creek Stoney Creek 109,970 +2.16% Glanbrook

The following is the rationale for the status quo option:

● the population of 410,570 in the Niagara Region warrants the retention of 5 electoral districts. ● the variance between the electoral quotient and the actual population of the current 5 districts is 4.9%, well within the ± 25% guideline established in the Electoral Boundaries Readjustment Act. ● there are 12 other electoral districts in the Commission’s proposals that have variances of greater than 11.07% which is the greatest variance that currently exists in the electoral district of Niagara Falls. ● the growth in the Niagara Region, as outlined by H.R.D.C. is predicted to be above the national growth rate. ● recognition of the importance of Niagara’s rural and agricultural areas must be taken into account determining electoral districts. ● the Commission’s proposal to include the Municipalities of Pelham, Lincoln, West Lincoln and Grimsby with Hamilton and Stoney Creek is contrary to the principles of the Electoral Boundaries Readjustment Act due to the fact that communities of interest in Niagara are not being preserved and the proposals destroy the historical pattern of electoral districts in Niagara.

Option No. 2 - Status Quo (modified) Option (Appendix "F")

The status quo (modified) option would see the creation of four (4) electoral districts contained entirely within the boundaries of the Region of Niagara. The Town of Grimsby would be added to the riding of Erie-Lincoln. The Town of Dunnville would be removed and form part of the Haldimand-Norfolk electoral district. The average electoral quotient in the Niagara Region would then be 95.36% with a variance of -4.64%. This is well within the ± 25% guideline established by the principles of the Electoral Boundaries Readjustment Act.

The electoral districts for this option are as follows:

Electoral % of Variance Municipalities Population District (Quotient 107,642) Welland Thorold Niagara Centre 104,146 -3.4% St. Catharines (south) Pelham

St. Catharines St. Catharines (north) 103,678 -3.7%

Fort Erie Port Colborne Lincoln Erie-Lincoln 107,020 -0.99% West Lincoln Wainfleet Grimsby

Niagara Falls Niagara-on-the-Lake Niagara Falls 95,722 -11.07% Thorold (east of Welland Canal)

The following is the rationale for this option: the modified electoral districts create populations that are well within the ± 25% variance outlined by the Commission. this option ensures community of interest due to the fact that the electoral boundaries are consistent with many other public institutions and the services they provide:

● Regional Municipality of Niagara ● District School Boards ● Police Services ● Fire Services ● Library Boards ● Hydro Commissions ● Judicial Districts ● Telephone Directories ● Newspaper Coverage ● Cable TV Areas ● Social Service Provisions ● Regional Land-Use Policies

Option No. 3 - Niagara M.P.’s Proposal (Appendix "G")

This option, which was developed by the local Federal M.P.’s (Maloney, Pillitteri, Lastewka, Tirabassi), and focuses on keeping all of the ridings within the boundaries of the Regional Municipality of Niagara, reflects the principles of the Electoral Boundaries Readjustment Act. The M.P.’s proposal stresses that, although the "rural riding" has a variance of 18.7% the municipalities within this riding are experiencing rapid growth, such as Grimsby and Lincoln.

This proposal, put forth by the Federal M.P.’s from Niagara is as follows:

Electoral % of Variance Municipalities Population District (Quotient 107,642) Welland Fort Erie Niagara South 101,255 -5.9% Port Colborne Wainfleet

St. Catharines St. Catharines (north) 114,944 +6.80%

Thorold Pelham Rural Riding Lincoln 87,490 -18.70% Grimsby West Lincoln

Niagara Falls Niagara Falls St. Catharines (south) 106,881 -0.7% Niagara-on-the-Lake

Option No. 4 - Tirabassi Proposal (Appendix "H")

This proposal was developed by Federal M.P. for Niagara Centre, Tony Tirabassi. The proposal is as follows:

Electoral % of Variance Municipalities Population District (Quotient107,642) St. Catharines St. Catharines 112,849 +4.84% (north and west)

Niagara Falls Niagara Falls Niagara-on-the-Lake 108,976 +1.24% St. Catharines (south)

Welland Thorold Niagara Centre 102,335 -4.9% Pelham Lincoln

Port Colborne Fort Erie Erie Wainfleet 86,410 -19.7% West Lincoln Grimsby This proposal keeps all of the four (4) ridings within the boundaries of the Regional Municipality of Niagara while also attempting to maintain existing municipal boundaries. This helps to ensure the principle of "community interest" under the Act is maintained.

Option No. 5 - Four City Model

As part of the governance discussions during 2000, Council directed staff to prepare a report which would provide further refinement of the Berkley Group Report. The Council asked staff to develop a four (4) city model considering the following factors:

● easily identifiable boundaries ● combine areas having similar social, cultural and physical characteristics ● enable each area to support ample economic opportunities

The four city model is as follows:

Electoral % of Variance District Municipalities Population (Quotient 107,642) Niagara Falls City 1 Niagara-on-the-Lake 120,795 12.22% Fort Erie

Welland Port Colborne City 2 Thorold (south) 85,528 -20.5% Pelham (south) Wainfleet (east)

Grimsby West Lincoln City 3 44,992 -58.20% Wainfleet (west) Lincoln (west)

St. Catharines Lincoln (east) City 4 157,178 +46.0% Thorold (north) Pelham (north)

The four city model, although adhering to the principles of communities of interest and servicing areas does not meet the variance threshold of ±25 of the population quotient (107,642). City 2 has a variance of 58.2%, well outside the variance threshold.

SUMMARY:

Based on the options outlined in this report it is recommended that Option 2: Status Quo (Modified) Option be endorsed by Council.

Option 2: Status Quo (Modified) reflects the principles of the Electoral Boundaries Readjustment Act as follows:

● the average quotient for all four (4) electoral districts is 102,643 or 95.3% which is well within the guidelines outlined in the Act. ● the average variance is -4.7% which is well within the ±25% variance guidelines outlined in the Act. ● the electoral district within Niagara with the greatest variance (Niagara Falls) is -11.07% which is within the ±25% variance. ● the status quo (modified) option maintains the principle of community interest by having all four electoral districts contained completely within the Region of Niagara Boundaries. ● The creation of four electoral ridings within the Region of Niagara ensures a manageable geographic size for electoral districts within the Region. ● the change in federal electoral boundaries will also adjust the provincial electoral boundaries and the boundaries outlined in this option are in keeping with provincial communities of interest and service provision. ● there are at least twelve electoral districts proposed by the Commission that have a greater variance than the largest variance in the Niagara Region (Niagara Falls is -11.07%) and 49 electoral districts that have a greater variance than the average of the four electoral districts in Niagara (-4.7%).

RECOMMENDATION:

That the Council of the City of St. Catharines endorse the Modified Status Quo option outlined in the report from the Governance Ad Hoc Committee dated November 1, 2002; and that this position be presented to the Federal Electoral Boundaries Commission for Ontario; and further, that all local M.P.’s and M.P.P.’s be so notified. FORTHWITH

MOVED BY COUNCILLOR PATRIQUIN:

That the recommendation contained in the report from the Governance Ad Hoc Committee, Item Number 579 of the General Committee Minutes, November 18, 2002, be approved.

CARRIED FORTHWITH.

ITEM NO. 580 Report from the Recreation and Community Services Department, Dated November 13, 2002 Re: Christmas Lighting at various Corporation Sites (November 21, 2002 - January 11, 2003) File: 16.6.1; 68.32.1

The purpose of this report, is to provide City Council with the 2002 - 2003 Christmas lighting hours at various Corporation sites. Christmas lighting is found at the following sites:

● City Hall ● Montebello Park ● Memorial Park ● Victoria Lawn Cemetery ● Rennie Park ● Ontario Jaycee Gardens ● Recreation and Community Services Offices - 320 Geneva Street ● Streetscape at Ontario and St. Paul Streets

In recent years, the Christmas lighting hours at all of the sites has been from 4:30 p.m. to 12:00 a.m. (Monday to Sunday). In order to reduce costs and increase efficiency, Staff is recommending the Christmas lighting hours be changed. The proposed hours of operation would be from 6:00 p.m. to 10:00 p.m. (Monday to Sunday). Lighting at the sites would commence on Friday, November 22, 2002, and terminate on Saturday, January 11, 2003. RECOMMENDATION:

That the report regarding the Christmas lighting hours at the various Corporation sites, be received for information purposes; and that the proposed hours of lighting for the 2002 - 2003 Christmas season (November 21 to January 11) of 6:00 p.m. to 10:00 p.m. from Monday to Sunday, be approved.

MOVED BY COUNCILLOR HEIT:

That the report regarding the Christmas lighting hours at the various Corporation sites, be received for information purposes; and that the proposed hours of lighting for the 2002 - 2003 Christmas season (November 21 to January 8) of 4:30 p.m. to 10:00 p.m. from Monday to Sunday, be approved.

CARRIED.

ITEM NO. 581 Report from the Economic Development and Tourism Services Department, Dated November 11, 2002 Re: Request by the Niagara District Health Council for Letter of Support for the Niagara Physician Recruitment and Retention Co-ordinator Program File: 68.45.114

At its meeting of September 16, 2002, City Council requested staff to report on the request from the Niagara District Health Council for a letter of support for the Niagara Physician Recruitment and Retention Co-ordinator program. This report has been prepared to provide Council with the information as requested.

Background

In June 2001, the Niagara District Health Council began the Niagara Physician Recruitment and Retention Co-ordinator program. At that time, the Niagara District Health Council received $95,000 from the Region of Niagara to fund this program for a one-year pilot period. The budget was not fully utilized in that period, and it is expected to cover a period of 19 months (end of December, 2002). The Niagara District Health Council is presently undergoing an evaluation of the program and will be seeking continued support from the Regional Municipality of Niagara for 2003.

The Niagara Physician Recruitment and Retention Co-ordinator has been active in a number of areas, including the following:

● Assisting municipalities to develop community recruitment teams ● Working collaboratively with the hospitals on recruitment of specialists and associated community visits ● Working with the Rural Ontario Medical Program (ROMP) and McMaster University to promote educational opportunities and future practice opportunities in Niagara ● Developing marketing and promotional materials, including a web site and regional CD ● Responding to physician inquiries and following up with interested candidates ● Arranging community visits and coordinating community visitation reimbursements through the Underserviced Area Program of the Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care ● Co-ordinating the Niagara contingent at the annual Health Professionals Recruitment Tour From June 2001 to August 31st 2002, the regional coordinator arranged fifty-three community tours for eighteen family physicians. Eleven of these tours were conducted in St. Catharines by City staff. In the same time period, thirteen family physicians have either set up a full-time practice or are doing locums in the Niagara Region, including two in St. Catharines.

Co-operation between EDTS department staff and the regional recruitment coordinator has been extensive over the past year. While the regional coordinator is responsible for attracting inquiries and arranging community tours, each community is responsible for actually conducting the tours and promoting their medical opportunities to the interested candidates. This partnership is an important step in alleviating the present medical crisis that Niagara is experiencing.

In addition to conducting community tours for family physicians, EDTS staff have been active on a number of other fronts, including:

● Development of a "Quality of Life" promotional piece for physicians ● Twenty-five Community tours for specialist physicians (with eight specialists joining the NHS in St. Catharines) ● Advertising medical opportunities on Provincial websites (www.pairo.org; www.romponline.com) ● Attendance at the Rural Ontario Medical Program conference in Peterborough ● Participation on Underserviced Areas Medical Tour in Kingston, Ottawa, Hamilton, and Toronto

RECOMMENDATION:

That the report from the Economic Development and Tourism Services Department, dated November 11, 2002, respecting a request from the Niagara District Health Council for a letter of support, be received; and that the City of St. Catharines write a letter of support in favour of continued funding from the Regional Municipality of Niagara for the District Health Council’s Recruitment and Retention Co ordinator program.

MOVED BY COUNCILLOR ERSKINE:

That the recommendation contained in the report from the Economic Development and Tourism Services Department, Item Number 581 of the General Committee Minutes, November 18, 2002, be approved.

CARRIED.

ITEM NO. 582 Report from the Economic Development and Tourism Services Department, Dated November 11, 2002 Re: Request from Council for Resolution to Prohibit the Practice of Providing Financial Incentives to Recruit Medical Professionals to Communities File: 68.45.114

Background:

At its meeting of August 26, 2002, City Council requested staff to prepare a resolution that would disallow communities from engaging in the practice of providing financial incentives to lure medical professionals to a community.

Resolution: "Whereas, the doctor shortage crisis has reached an unprecedented high in Ontario with an estimated need for 726 family physicians, and over 400 multi_specialty physicians; and

Whereas, south_central Ontario is in need of more than 300 family physicians and 125 multi_specialty physicians; and

Whereas, the Niagara region is in need of 84 family physicians and 30 multi_specialty physicians; and

Whereas, the increasing population growth rate of Ontario, the escalating growth rate of the elderly population (doubling by 2016), the increasing rate of family physician retirements (one in five to retire in the next five years), increasing number of communities recruiting physicians (300+ in Ontario, in addition to the 10,000 active US recruiters), the decreasing percentage of graduating physicians choosing Family Practice medicine (80% in 1992 to 45% in 2000), are all creating intense competition for our scarce medical resources; and

Whereas, some communities in Ontario are offering financial incentives to entice family physicians to their areas; and

Whereas, these incentives are compounding the problem of family physician recruitment for some communities that don't have extra financial resources; and

Whereas, the Ontario Municipal Act clearly prohibits "bonusing" or providing financial incentives to any commercial business interest as a means of luring them to a community; and

Therefore, Be It Resolved, that the Provincial government should disallow communities from engaging in the practice of providing financial incentives to lure medical professionals, effective immediately; and

Be It Finally Resolved, that the Provincial government begin to aggressively work towards alleviating the present medical professional shortage."

RECOMMENDATION:

That the report from the Economic Development and Tourism Services Department dated November 11, 2002, respecting a resolution to prohibit the practice of providing financial incentives to recruit medical professionals to communities, be approved; and that the City of St. Catharines ask all other municipalities in Ontario to endorse this resolution; and further, that the City of St. Catharines send the list of endorsements to the Provincial government.

MOVED BY COUNCILLOR CRAIG:

That the recommendation contained in the report from the Economic Development and Tourism Services Department, Item Number 582 of the General Committee Minutes, November 18, 2002, be approved.

CARRIED.

ITEM NO. 583 Report from the Planning Services Department Dated November 14, 2002 Re: Accommodation in Port Dalhousie Core Area File: 60.35.1, Vol. TT

The Proposal On October 28, 2002 Council after a public meeting approved a rezoning of lands in the Port Dalhousie Core to add hotels/inns as an additional use in this area. Council directed that the rezoning not apply to public lands. As a result of the Council resolution, the area to actually be rezoned is different than was shown in the report originally considered by General Committee. The Schedule attached as Appendix "I" shows the lands being rezoned based on Council's decision and minor corrections to reflect property boundaries.

No further public meeting is required for the application since this schedule will implement Council's intent.

RECOMMENDATION:

That the report from the Planning Services Department dated November 14, 2002, regarding the application amend By-law 88-72 (Zone 1) to add hotels/inns as a permitted use in the C-4 zone and on lands zoned C3-Ex-2 and Harbour Zone (HZ) in the area of the Port Dalhousie core, be received; and that having considered the matter, no further public notice is required; and further, that the City Solicitor be directed to prepare the necessary By-law to amend By-law 88-72 (Zone 1) to add hotels and inns as a permitted use in the C-4 zone and on lands zoned C3-Ex-2 and Harbour Zone (HZ) in the area of the Port Dalhousie core as shown on the attached Schedule. FORTHWITH

MOVED BY COUNCILLOR ERSKINE:

That the recommendation contained in the report form the Planning Services Department, Item Number 583 of the General Committee Minutes, November 18, 2002, be approved.

CARRIED FORTHWITH.

ITEM NO. 584 Report from Financial Management Services Department Date: November 14, 2002, Re: 2003 Draft City Departmental Expenditure Budgets File: 10.57.12

2003 Budget Process

City Council at its February 18, 2002 Council meeting amended the budget process to require that the draft budget be tabled at a City Council meeting and then referred to the Finance Ad Hoc Committee for consideration and recommendation.

The Finance Ad Hoc Committee has requested staff to provide them with an early look at the City’s 2003 Departmental Expenditure Budgets. As a result, staff have prepared an expenditure budget document for their review and consideration.

This preliminary expenditure budget document does not include:

● Outside Boards and Commissions (e.g. Transit, Library and Museum). ● 2002 Actuals.

The revenue section of the budget is not anticipated to be available until February of 2003. City staff is awaiting a variety of information including: - The return of the 2003 assessment roll on December 17, 2002. The 2003 taxation year is a reassessment year based on a June 30, 2001 valuation day. Assessment notices were mailed to all property owners in Ontario at the end of October 2002.

- Provincial Grants.

- Regional tax policies.

New Municipal Act

The New Municipal Act comes into effect January 1, 2003. This Act has a number of implications for the 2003 budget process.

Section 290 (4) allows the City to pass a by-law to require that the current year’s budget of every board, commission or other body, which the City is required by law to levy a tax or provide money, be submitted to the City on or before March 1st in each year.

Section 291 (1) states the City must give public notice of its intention to adopt or amend the budget at a Council meeting specified in the notice.

The City to insure timely preparation of the operating budget should establish a deadline for Boards and Commissions to make their submissions. In 2003 it is suggested that March 1st be established. Historically the Boards and Commissions have presented their budgets in late February or early March. Therefore, establishing a March 1st deadline is not anticipated to cause any problem.

The City has in prior years given public notice of its intention to adopt the Operating Budget. In the past the Mayor and/or the Finance Ad Hoc committee Chair has announced at the Council meeting prior, that at the next Council meeting, the City’s Operating Budget would be considered. City staff believe that this meets the requirement of Section 291 (1) and recommend the practice be continued.

RECOMMENDATION:

That the report from Financial Management Services Department dated November 14, 2002 regarding the 2003 Draft City Departmental Expenditure Budgets, (Appendix ‘J’), be received for information purposes; and that the draft departmental expenditure budgets, be referred to the Finance Ad Hoc Committee for consideration and recommendation; and that the City Solicitor be directed to prepare the necessary by-law to require all Boards, Commissions, Associations, etc., to submit their budgets to City Council on or before March 1st in each year; and further, that all Boards, Commissions, Associations, etc., be so advised.

MOVED BY COUNCILLOR CRAIG:

That the recommendation contained in the report from the Financial Management Services Department, Item Number 584 of the General Committee Minutes, November 18, 2002, be approved.

CARRIED.

ITEM NO. 585 Report from the Corporate Support Services Department, November 14, 2002 Re: Correspondence List for the Mayor and Members of Council File: 10.12.13

The Corporate Support Services Department has submitted for the approval of Council, a Correspondence List comprised of various communications. (Appendix K)

RECOMMENDATION:

That the Correspondence List for the Mayor and Members of Council, dated November 18, 2002, be approved.

MOVED BY COUNCILLOR WASHUTA:

That the recommendation contained in the report from the Corporate Support Services Department, Item Number 585 of the General Committee Minutes, November 18, 2002, be approved.

CARRIED.

ITEM NO. 586 Boards/Commissions/Standing Committees of Council File: 35.60.99

Councillors Disher and Casselman gave verbal reports.

MOVED BY COUNCILLOR DODGE:

That the verbal reports, be received.

CARRIED.

There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at eight fifty-five o’clock p.m.