HomeMy WebLinkAboutFIN-2021-62 - 2022 Final BudgetStaffReport`
Financia! Services Department www.0chener. ca
REPORT TO: Finance and Corporate Services Committee
DATE OF MEETING: December 13, 2021
SUBMITTED BY: Ryan Hagey, Director of Financial Planning, 519-741-2200 ext. 7353
PREPARED BY: Ryan Hagey, Director of Financial Planning, 519-741-2200 ext. 7353
WARD(S) INVOLVED: All
DATE OF REPORT: December 7, 2021
REPORT NO.: FIN -2021-62
SUBJECT: 2022 Final Budget
RECOMMENDATION:
For discussion.
REPORT HIGHLIGHTS:
• Detailed reports/presentations related to the Operating and Capital budgets have
already been reviewed by Council in dedicated meetings.
• All utility rates (gas, water, sewer and storm) as well as user fees have already been
approved by Council.
• The proposed tax rate increase of 1.9% represents a $21 impact to the average
homeowner.
• The final budget package provides supplemental information which will ultimately result
in an approved budget and property tax levy for all City services
BACKGROUND:
The budget is the City of Kitchener's annual financial plan, and is the primary basis of
financial decision making. The budget process includes stand alone meetings to discuss
the operating and capital budgets, as well as opportunities for public input. All of this
culminates in budgets being struck as part of the final budget discussion and approval. This
process allows Council to prioritize the programs and services delivered by the City and sets
direction for the work to be completed this year as well as future years referenced in the
budget forecast.
This final budget day report and supporting information is purposely short. Detailed reports
and presentations on the Operating and Capital budgets were already considered and
discussed by Committee in November. As well, all utility rates (gas, water, sewer and storm)
as well as user fees have already been approved by Council.
*** This information is available in accessible formats upon request. ***
Please call 519-741-2345 or TTY 1-866-969-9994 for assistance.
Page 3 of 117
This final budget day package is meant to supplement those more thorough budget
documents and is primarily meant to provide follow up information requested about the
Operating Budget, Capital Budget, and specific information required by the Municipal Act.
A summary of the impact on the average
homeowner is shown in the graphic to the
right. The proposed tax rate increase of
1.9% is slightly below the two-year
average for CPI inflation (2.0%), which is
Council's endorsed tax rate setting policy,
and is well below the current annual rate
of inflation (3.1 %). The approved water
utilities rate increase of 2.2% is less than
half of the originally projected 4.5%
increase for 2022 and is largely driven by
passing through Regional increases to
water supply and sanitary processing
while holding the City's portion of the rate
flat at 2021 levels. The approved natural
gas rate increase of 10.4%, is driven
primarily by increasing market costs for
natural gas and is consistent with
increases proposed by other Ontario gas
distribution companies.
or $21/year — Pending Approval
water utilities increase is L. r cent
or 'Sera/Year - APPROVED
Gas increase is 10.7 per cent or
$74/year - APPROVED
REPORT:
Operating Budget Summary
The operating budget was presented to Committee on November 15th. The proposed tax
rate increase is 1.9%, which equates to an additional $21 per year for the average Kitchener
home. The final tax rate increase will be decided as part of the Final Budget Day
deliberations and could be adjusted based on amendments made throughout the meeting.
In addition to the operating budget package, follow up information on the following subjects
is included as part of the Final Budget package:
• Neighbour's Day
• Funding ask from House of Friendship
• Funding ask from Social Development Centre
• Resource related to purpose-built rental housing
• Resource related to heritage
• Snow clearing near Kitchener Market
• Mileage & Per Diems
• Public Input
The rates for all of the City's enterprises (Building, Golf, Parking, Gas, Water, Sanitary, and
Stormwater) have already been approved by Council in separate reports. One follow up
issue is included based on Council's direction.
• Building rate increase scenarios
Page 4 of 117
Capital Budget Summary
The capital budget was presented to Committee on November 29th. The proposed Capital
Budget includes more than 400 projects with a total cost over the 10 years of roughly $1.413,
with $133M of it coming in the first year. In addition to the capital budget package, follow
up information on the following subjects is included as part of the Final Budget package:
• Additional Funding for Affordable Housing/Capital Priorities
3 Capital Priorities & Options
o Affordable Housing, Facilities Infrastructure Gap, Community Trails
Traffic Calming
Capital Budget Investment Options
In addition to proposed budget, the 2022 Capital Budget also includes options for Council
to make additional investments in three priority areas. Options in a) affordable housing, b)
reducing the City's facilities infrastructure gap, and c) community trails are provided at the
funding levels of $250,000, $500,000 and $1,000,000 and shown in the graphic below. More
detailed information about each of these options is provided in specific issue papers later in
the budget package.
Capital Investment Options
$250k
50% of DCS is 50% of DCs
75 units 150 units
isLyle Hallman
Pool
Upgrades
550 metres
of trails
Comfort
Station
Upgrades
.SII
40 50% of DCs
300 units
LED lighting
& paving at
facility
parking lots
1,100 metres2,200 metres
of trails 0 of trails
As part of the Capital Budget discussions in November, Council asked staff to find additional
funding for these priority areas. Staff have accomplished this and identified nearly $1.8M of
additional funding that could invested as shown in the table below.
Original Funding
Additional Unrestricted Funding
Additional Restricted Funding
Total
Amnunt Cnmment
$1,000,000 Can be used on any priority
$1,250,000 Can be used on any priority
$500,000 Only available for Facilities or Trails
$2,750,000 1
Council will determine how these funds are allocated as part of Final Budget Day.
Page 5 of 117
Information Required by the Municipal Act
Regulation 284/09 of the Municipal Act requires that before Council adopts the annual
budget, it must first receive a report about "excluded expenses" and adopt that report by
resolution. This resolution is included as part of the Final Budget Day resolution. Public
Sector Accounting Board (PSAB) changes effective in 2009 require the annual Consolidated
Financial Statements to be prepared using full accrual accounting. As a result, certain
expenses are included in the financial statements that are not included in the budget. For
the City of Kitchener these include amortization expense on tangible capital assets and post -
employment benefit expense.
Amortization expense on tangible capital assets of $51.8M was recorded in the 2020
consolidated financial statements. This expense is meant to represent the rate at which the
City is depleting its assets (based on historical cost). It can therefore be used as a rough
indication of what should be budgeted for replacement of these assets.
Employee future benefits expense, which includes the sick leave benefit plan, post-
retirement benefits, and future payments to the Workplace Safety and Insurance Board, in
the consolidated financial statements, was $2.8M.
If these expenses were excluded in the financial statements, the 2020 accumulated surplus
would increase by $54.6M (the combined amount of amortization expense on tangible
capital assets and employee future benefits expense). There is no impact on future tangible
capital asset funding requirements based on the exclusion of these expenses.
STRATEGIC PLAN ALIGNMENT:
This report supports the delivery of core services.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:
The financial impacts on the average homeowner of services provided to citizens by the City
of Kitchener are shown in the table below. All utility rates have been previously approved
by Council.
Assumptions:
City Taxes: Current Assessed Value (CVA) of $326,000
Storm Water: property classified as Residential Single Detached Medium
Water & Sanitary: water consumption of 170m3 annually
Natural Gas: gas consumption of 2,100m3 annually
Page 6 of 117
Impact
on
Homeowner
2021
2022
$ Change
% Change
Taxes
$
1,138
$
1,159
$ 21
1.9%
Stormwater
$
197
$
209
$ 12
6.0%
Water
$
421
$
427
$ 6
1.4%
Sanitary
$
530
$
538
$ 8
1.6%
Gas
$
709
$
783
74
10.4%
Assumptions:
City Taxes: Current Assessed Value (CVA) of $326,000
Storm Water: property classified as Residential Single Detached Medium
Water & Sanitary: water consumption of 170m3 annually
Natural Gas: gas consumption of 2,100m3 annually
Page 6 of 117
COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT:
INFORM — This report has been posted to the City's website with the agenda in advance of
the council / committee meeting.
CONSULT — Citizens have an opportunity to provide input about priority areas of the budget
through a number of processes. Their input comes through public consultation efforts for
comprehensive master plans (e.g. Leisure Facilities Master Plan), strategies (e.g. Urban
Forestry Strategy, Customer Service Strategy), or specific issues (e.g. City Hall Outdoor
Spaces). As part of those processes, staff considers the feedback received from the public
as they make their recommendations and share it with Council when those
recommendations are presented for approval. The budget is the process whereby Council
affirms approved priorities and allocates funds to bring these concepts into reality.
In addition to the opportunities for input on specific topics, staff continued to employ a suite
of traditional and electronic engagement methods in an effort to effectively inform and
consult citizens about the budget at large. Staff proactively provided information about the
budget process via media outreach and the City's website. Citizens were also encouraged
to provide their input by:
• Writing, emailing or phoning City Hall
• Attending a virtual public input sessions held on November 15
• Responding to the City's Face book/Twitter posts about the budget
• Utilizing Engage Kitchener online budget survey
o The survey is now closed with results summarized in issue paper BD14
• Contacting their ward councillor
PREVIOUS REPORTS/AUTHORITIES:
The 2022 budget has been discussed in detail by Council during previous meetings set
aside exclusively to consider the budget. The more detailed reports include:
• FIN -2021-58, 2022 Operating Budget
• FIN -2021-60, 2022 Capital Budget and 10 -Year Forecast
As well, the City hosted a stand-alone public input meetings on November 15 regarding the
budget.
APPROVED BY: Jonathan Lautenbach, Chief Financial Officer, Financial Services
Page 7 of 117
Definitions, Abbreviations & Acronyms
Definitions
Assessment growth refers to property taxes from new and/or expanded homes and/or businesses to
pay for the services they receive.
Base Budget funds programs and services already offered to the public and includes the costs (e.g.
staffing, materials, supplies) and revenues (e.g. user fees, recoveries) to deliver the program/service.
Boards are separate organizations established by the City to provide programs and services as allowed
under the Municipal Act. For Kitchener, the Boards include Centre in the Square (CITS) and Kitchener
Public Library (KPL).
Brownfield properties are formerly developed sites that are no longer being used for those purposes. In
the City context, they are often former industrial or commercial sites with known or suspected pollution.
Canada Community -Building fund (formerly Federal Gas Tax) is annual funding provided to the City by
the federal government for capital improvements.
Capital Budget funds investments in municipal infrastructure (or assets) that provide a long-term
benefit to the community. Examples of capital costs include building or replacing roads, water mains,
vehicles, community centres and parks.
Capital out of Current is a funding transfer from the operating budget to the capital pool.
Capital Pool is used to fund tax supported capital projects. The capital pool is funded by a) capital out of
current, b) debt, c) gas utility investment reserve, and d) hydro utility investment reserve.
Corporate Allocations are general expenses like debt charges and contributions to the capital budget.
Debt is funding the City has borrowed to complete capital projects.
Debt to Reserve Ratio is the amount of the City's debt divided by the amount the City has in reserves.
The target debt to reserve ratio is 1:1; meaning the City would have one dollar saved in reserves for
every dollar of debt it has issued.
Development Charges are fees imposed on development to fund growth related capital costs.
Enterprises are self -funding business lines operated by the City and are fully funded by their own user
rates, not property taxes. The City's enterprises are Golf, Building, Parking, Natural Gas, Water, Sanitary
Sewer, and Stormwater.
Page 8 of 117
Definitions, Abbreviations & Acronyms
Existing Capital Balances are capital funding that have already been approved by Council, but have not
been spent. Some capital projects take multiple years to complete (e.g. road reconstruction, building a
new community centre), so the funding may accumulate for future spending.
Impacts Due to Growth are additional operating costs required to support the expansion of service
areas as the city continues to grow.
Interdivision/Internal Charges are costs charged by one City division to another City division for work
completed on their behalf. For instance, the Building enterprise pays other City divisions for financial,
technological, and legal support.
Issue Papers are brief documents (typically 1-2 pages in length) that provide information about budget
issues, usually relating to new items included in the proposed budget.
Net Tax Levy is the amount of funding required from property taxes. It equals all of the tax supported
gross expenditures minus all other revenues.
Operating Budget funds the day-to-day costs of the municipality to provide its programs and services.
Examples of operating costs include salaries and wages for city employees; utility costs, such as water
and electricity; and operating supplies, such as road salt.
Reserve/Reserve Funds are used to set aside funding now to be used for a specific purpose in the
future. The city maintains reserves for both operating purposes (e.g. rate stabilization reserve funds),
capital purposes (e.g. fleet and equipment reserve fund) and as required by legislation (e.g. federal gas
tax reserve fund).
Strategic Plan articulates a vision "together we will build an innovative, caring, and vibrant Kitchener"
and mission "proudly providing valued services for our community", for the City. Following each
municipal election, this document is updated with Council's new strategic goals and key activities for the
upcoming term.
Strategic Initiatives are program/service enhancements that help achieve the goals of the City's
Strategic Plan.
Tax Supported programs/services are funded in part or completely by property taxes. Examples include
road & sidewalk maintenance, fire protection, and community centre programming.
User Fees are charges for programs and services provided by the City, which reduces dependence on
property taxes as a funding source. Typically they are charged for programs/services where customers
have a choice on whether or not to use them. Examples of user fees include swimming lessons and
marriage licenses.
Page 9 of 117
Definitions, Abbreviations & Acronyms
Acronyms & Abbreviations
AIRP —Accelerated Infrastructure Replacement Program
AMP —Asset Management Plan
CAO —Chief Administrative Officer's Department
CC — Capital out of Current
CCB — Canada Community Building Fund
CITS — Centre in the Square
COR — Corporate Services Department
CPI — Consumer Price Index
CRM — Customer Relationship Management
CSD —Community Services Department
CVA — Current Value Assessment
DC — Development Charges
DSD — Development Services Department
DT — Downtown
EDIF — Economic Development Investment Fund
FIN — Financial Services Department
FTE — Full Time Equivalent
GHG — Green House Gas
GIS — Geographic Information System
INS— Infrastructure Services Department
KMAC— Kitchener Memorial Auditorium Complex
KOF — Kitchener Operations Facility
KPL — Kitchener Public Library
KU — Kitchener Utilities
LTFP — Long Term Financial Plan
MGMT - Management
MPAC —Municipal Property Assessment Corporation
MPI — Municipal Price Index
MTCE — Maintenance
MTO — Ministry of Transportation
PIL — Payment in Lieu of Taxes
PSAB — Public Sector Accounting Board
SOGR — State of Good Repair
SWM — Stormwater Management
TCA—Tangible Capital Asset
TIG —Tax Increment Grant
TSRF —Tax Stabilization Reserve Fund
VPP —Victoria Park Pavilion
WIP —Water Infrastructure Program
YTD —Year to Date
Page 10 of 117
N C
N c
O
N y
OQ
"O
ca
fL �
M --� L
M f
C d i
d
E cL Lc
U Oy C
N
N
N
�
C
L
Ol r
>
r
OJ
vLr l
v v
-
rl OJ
U]
fl
N
ON
1
i0
T Q
N
O
0
v
C
r
v O O
OlJ
O
N
u
r
M
vl
r•
vl Q
i 'a+
f0
oo
cl
C
N
4
l�
oo r
oo
u
LUa
m
N
.N -i
M
O
v
r C
mr
T
N
r C
l�0 M
3 0
cl
Ili Q
> 3
of
U]
M
r• �
m ti
O
U
C
C7
E C
O
U
M
O ]
N
C
Z
-
C
^'
V/
Y U
i w c
O
0
v
LL
0
0
> w Z z
w
U
v
H C
Z z
{A w
}
0 Y Y
3
F-
'p
Y
bA U
u
w>
h
L.L
0 0
3
O
u
sl
u
U_ W
E v C C
y r4
w
C
C v
C
>> z
0
O u f0 O O
10
sl
-
O O N 4,0
m o D
F
OU
f0 f0
f0
i
f0
LL
W O w
x
C C
v v f0 v v
0
C v
O �'
C 0
O '.0
C
O
_
0
u m
a=
u u
0
u v
i
m
O
o o
LL z v u
U
LL LL a a LL
O3 O O O
N
N
O O O O
y0
C
0
O v
O
O
L
f0 N Y1 f0 Y f0
v 0 v v v
O
v
f0
v
�n
f0 U
v t
f0 p
v v v
N
v
U > U O U C U
0
v '-
U f0
u3:
U 'V v
Ua+
C U .0 U .0 O C
-0
C j,
C �n
Y O -0
C O
OJ 0 OJ U v v
v
v—
v
v f0 OJ
OJ U
>
> O�
0
f0
O v >
CO a+ CO �n CO �n CO
CO U
CO Q
m
0 o 0 0 0 0
rl O7 C l0 v
N Ol D7 D7 l0 IX
O D7 l0 N vl C
' N
l0 rl
C
l0
Ol r
N M
C rl
r
OJ
vLr l
D7 Q
C IX
rl OJ
U]
m
OJ v
ON
. -I
O
rl
T Q
N
l0
ui
M
M fl
O o)
O M
N
rl
D7
�
N C
1p Q
Nvl
r
M
vl
r•
vl Q
�
l0 Lr!l
T
r•
oo
cl
M
C
N
00
r
M
oo r
oo
u
LUa
m
N
.N -i
M
rn
cl
v
r C
mr
T
N
r C
l�0 M
((D
O
cl
Ili Q
N
of
U]
M
r• �
m ti
W
Lu U
W
to
r
vl l0
a
M
c
N
> w
Z
C
00 0
D7 N
N
r
O
v
C C
M r
� M
M
r•
rl IX
loo0 vel
Q0l
N
n C
D O
C
Ol
O c
ly
rl rl N
ui
M
00 a
0
N
O
C
00
D7 N
� M
r
M
vl
r•
M r
rl IX
m Ol
C
N
r Q
l0)
0 M
00
OJ
a
Ql Q
N Ol D7 N Ol e
M C O 0 M
ly M ly N O
M M � rl
m l0 D7 Ol C
M M r• l0 vl
ri
ly M ly N O
M M C rl
rl U] N vl D7
N 0 N r r
M M D7 l0 l0
rl
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 u
vl M l0 C C N o
r• M N N M N . c
OJ
O l0 l0 rl vl r• Ol
M Q�l m m 0
N rl
OJ vl O vl N . N c
O C- N N M u
M0 00
C O
vl l0 vl C vl cl rl o
rl rl N vl rl �
OJ 0)
Ql O
C r•
rl vl vl
C
N
rl c
vl c
cl l0
O C l0
rl
O O
U] m
U] vl m
00 vl
:T
C M
M
l0
rl M1
rl rl N
vl
rl �
0
m
rn
c
0
C
v
>
O
LL
0 W
Q
Q
a�
0
O
O
0
Q i
OJ 0) C M rl c
Ql O - vl - w vl c
cl l0 O C N vl O c
l0 OJ rl O m O r• U
Ol C rl r• N l0 u
C C C vl M r• rl
rl rl N vl rl �
OJ 0) C M rl c
01 O - vl - w vl c
cl lc O N vl O c
l0 M l0 vl M O r•
M M M r M1
rl rl N vl rl �
N
II n
O
W
M
M
ut
Oi
oo
I
Ln
oo
O
ry
iv
N
In
rl
00 0 0
C O M rl U
to m u� oq o
0 N r r c
C
iE00 O m C
oo 0 N r r u
C 0 O v M1
N N r T O
0 O I vl u
U] rl c
a O
OJ C M N c
0 OJ r T u
C OJ Ql C M1
N 0 N
Z
F
Z
cW
w
U
F
W
Z F
W Z
O
W
y
0
F O
K
5;LL
0
_
>
O
LL
0 W
Q
Q
a�
a~c F-
Q i
u
LUa
Q z
Z O
z
z
] F-
a r
LU
H
V
O_ a
F— W
a
U
((D
O
a
LU
z
of
5 Z
-
pO
uJ o
V a
W
Lu U
W
w
H
a
uJ o
NW
O
> w
Z
w
0
0 W
u
V a F- (D
i w c
_ 0 0
Q
W U
w
Z Q W
F -
> w Z z
w
U
m
H C
Z z
{A w
}
U
F-
w
O Z w
U Z
LU > w z
u
w>
W>
N w
y
> N
F �n
>
LU >
u
O O �n
(A ( Q
U_ W
W c
y r4
w
z
w
a
>> z
a a a
m y
CL
a L a
LL
O
m o D
F
u- Z g u
Z
Z
�
a 0 F
o
LL
W O w
x
0
Q
=
w (D
Z= w Z
Z Q Q w
Z z
Z
a s
Z
_
0
u m
a=
u u
0
u v
i
m
O
o o
LL z v u
U
LL LL a a LL
LL
0
u v
N
II n
O
W
M
M
ut
Oi
oo
I
Ln
oo
O
ry
iv
N
In
rl
00 0 0
C O M rl U
to m u� oq o
0 N r r c
C
iE00 O m C
oo 0 N r r u
C 0 O v M1
N N r T O
0 O I vl u
U] rl c
a O
OJ C M N c
0 OJ r T u
C OJ Ql C M1
N 0 N
Z
W
Z
F O
°C a
a r
0
0
O
Q z
Z O
z
z
] F-
H
V
O_ a
F— W
a
U
((D
O
W
a
>
z
W
u
5 Z
-
0
Z
ut
W
Lu U
W
W
w u
JU
w
w
U;
F
O
Z w
( 0
0
>z
Z in
o ut
_ 0 0
0
Z Q W
F -
Q
0.
O a
z O a
- O ¢
0
LU
Z
z Z w
Q
z
w w
>
LU >
0
Z z
(D Q Q w
Y U=
Z
u
o o
w
w a F o
s
o a v v
o �
N O ,
4
N ° .3 uC
N L
O
> O 3 h
j O O bA Q
m 'o
v o 0
Y C
v bA
Y O t 4 0
y u ami o
E CL O t 4•
O O3
U u t m0
K
O O Oi 0 Y
y O 1? O
C
J E bOA N
m E
a
u
mw v Y4 w
u c
41
O y o
C m
m J
t m
O
O
O O 0 O
bn Y d
C y
t0 0 y
U w 0 m
� N m
N
v ri
J
G Cbl O
N C a a n m
00
.-I
BOJ U]
O aM b V m
N m
m
n
C I�
O
N E
N
O 11
N (0
d
1'
.-I
M
� O �
C 0j
Wd 00
O W
N w
} a �
Ci
M
0 d
00 C
N J `""�
O C O p
N C U]
a m ,�
C
O
d
W w
m
N N w
> N w
M N U
ma �o
CL tw
E v
Y
V m a
v
'0 bA
� 0
C Oa0 N
N fYi fYi
00
l0 O W
Il N N
N 0 am
O 0000 n
M a o
o rl
M V1
Ili N ll
a m
.ti oooo
O
M N 00
O M
0 W W
ti V N
N
N
oo N N
l0 O O
C Il w
M M w
O N 00
m N N
M O
M M
a
In
N
M M to
O Ol N
O N 00
oo
0 n
L
O
V N
O
M O O C N O u
ul O l 0) O O 00
00 O O O N O M
N O C .--i M 000 m00 I�
l T lN0 U) .�
00-I
M O p T N O u
ul O l0 0) O O 00
m C O O N C M
0) O N l0 00 C
ul .--I l0 I� l0 l0
� N
� M N
H
c
u
F
W
,
o
a
_a
F
0
a
O
�
u
m
O
0
o
W
v
oa
=o
a
�
O
W
0.
O
U
�
�
c
C
41
41
O
fa
`u
`u
o
C
C
z
�
O
O
O
4)
4)
LU
4)
J
J v
J
al
al al
W
al
f0
f0 v
~
N
v
u
v
u
W C
~
v
u
W p
w
5 a
W
^
W
41
�
} g
w o z
bOA
bOA
m
bOA
w
a
w }
a> J
z o L
aC
w m
o
0 0
0
0 0 0
0
oo O
O
N N O
O
.--i 0
N
N l0 O
O
J
Z
Z w F
C
O
u N
m
W
a
d
W
u
N
U] u
oo
N
N
W
l0
M o
W
m o o
M
I� O
C
O
m
n ul O
IR C O
c -I
m
M 0l0
W Q
S Z
N w O
l0
� O
0)
oo n
O
ul N
M
O Z o
N
M OOlyi
T N O
u
ul O
m C
l0
O
0) O O
O N C
m
M
N
0) O
ul c -I
l0
l0 OJ
I� l0
C
l0
u N
M
M O O C N O u
ul O l 0) O O 00
00 O O O N O M
N O C .--i M 000 m00 I�
l T lN0 U) .�
00-I
M O p T N O u
ul O l0 0) O O 00
m C O O N C M
0) O N l0 00 C
ul .--I l0 I� l0 l0
� N
� M N
H
F
W
F
�
C
_
�
U
W
Z
(D
Z
a
o
W
0.
c
X
Z
O
LU
z
w a
a
F-
a
Fw
LU
W
F -
m
Q
W
W
m
m
~
W
Z
X Z
W C
~
W p
w
5 a
W
^
W
w
} g
w o z
F
a M
X Q
m
m LL m
w
a
w }
a> J
z o L
aC
w m
o
o v,
x
W
aC
r O Z
z z
w
W
J
Z
Z w F
LU
U H Z
W
a
d
W
Z
Z Z
H
nLU
H
z
W
z
J
w F
W
o_
a
o_
i
Z X O
W W
S z
a
H
W
Z
X Z
O_ :E
o_ U}
W Q
S Z
Z
W<
l7 C7 C7
U
UU r o
0 0
W
Q H (D
o
O Z o
ME
N
(1)
a m
W) LO '
r r
N�
L.L
O
co
N ++
7
� � N
r.L 4)
K
W 0�tz CL
L
4) w
>
coC
m >
z 0
O N
CO — O
00
.,t CF)
co O O
O ql*
O
r �
M (D r—
CO
N M
r r
r �
O O
M N
N
00 N
co O
CO
r �
co co
N
I-- C r
M
r
rn O
O O
I— LO M
M 1-
r �
00
O
M
ti
O
M
ti
Go
co N 0000 0
(3� (h O
(fl O
O LO
(O o
I� O O
O O
00 I-
1— (O o
L(i 0o O
(D (3)
CO LO
N 00 0
O
O O
LO 00
(O V o
(7 O O
LO 00
� rn
o
O
L(i 06-
O
O
N
O
N—
N
O
CO
N
O
M
I—
N
O)
-� N
O
LO
LO
Q
LO—
O
L
3
m N
Q
�O
O
LU
++
>
00
00
CO
—
O
co
CO
I—
—
I--
O
W)
W)
00
N
C
O
M
L
a�
c
.a O
LO
LO
LO
r
(D
3 N
m
E
U
E
E
U)
++
00
'9t
(D
z
N
LO
r-
i
VQ
N
N
N
1C:
a)
Lr
N
O
LO
amco
LO
coa)
LO
—
O
114
0)L
N
m
y+
m
L
(D
N
o
�
CO
N
M
N
N
O
M
Q
L
U
-a C
LO
LO
L
r
(O
N
m
+r
co
N
co
LO
CO
LO
co
CF)
O
N N
O
O
M
.a O
LO
LO
LO
r
(D
N
m
-a
CO
CO
00
I—
I—
00
LO
O
+,
N
O
CO
V N
O
Lf
Lf
V
—
Lf
p N
a
CO
N
LO
r-
00
O
z
+,
y
N
N
V
N
V
(O
V
O
r—
Ln
O
0
O
N
m
U
LU
O
a
F-
LU
LU
LU
a
z
w
=
=
W
~
F-
g
U
z
~a
Y
W
W
.�
"
oN
LL
z
w
?
CL
a>
w
Q
Fn
LU
N
W
co
W
U
U
X
W
m
L
O
�
L
a�
co
0
d
0)
(5
b
U
L
m
w
o
a m
W) LO '
r r
N�
L.L
O
co
N ++
7
� � N
r.L 4)
K
W 0�tz CL
L
4) w
>
coC
m >
z 0
O N
CO — O
00
.,t CF)
co O O
O ql*
O
r �
M (D r—
CO
N M
r r
r �
O O
M N
N
00 N
co O
CO
r �
co co
N
I-- C r
M
r
rn O
O O
I— LO M
M 1-
r �
00
O
M
ti
O
M
ti
Go
co N 0000 0
(3� (h O
(fl O
O LO
(O o
I� O O
O O
00 I-
1— (O o
L(i 0o O
(D (3)
CO LO
N 00 0
O
O O
LO 00
(O V o
(7 O O
LO 00
� rn
o
O
L(i 06-
ME
a
L
z
Q
N
X
L
Q
�O
O
LU
>
W
N
o0
00
O
LO
C
O
W
o
a�
c
Q
wY
Y
E
U
E
E
U)
z
C
L
L
i
VQ
o�4N
1C:
a)
amco
coa)
mm
114
0)L
y+
m
N
o
.E
.x
>
O
Q
Q
U
U
ME
W W C
W Ft
U F
U CL �
~ W C
Z <
LL W
O LL G
—JL
oo
U U u
rnLO'IT
titim0
L
m
LO
0
OY
O
ciNN�
L
ti
ti �
(D
N -
'
O
oO
C14 N N
E (DLO
cn
N
U
O
L C:r
O1
N
^ Q
cu
LO C7 � N
�
a
m
N �
v
0
°m
O
N
LO ti 00
O
00
LO
0
0
O O
N
O
ti
ti �
C7
N —
I
N N N
N �
z
LO C7 00
N
W
X
O
0 0) o
N
m
a
W
N N70
H
ti ff
O N
��
O
O
ti
U)
0
W
to U)
s= E
L
a
CO C7
C7
N
�
W
>
C-4 N N
O~�~
z
o
N
m
O co
S
LO
ti
O IT
IT
M CO C7
N
N N
LO
N
C-4 N N
N
m
O
CO
�
LO
co
ti
ti
CO
�
N M
N N
LO
C�7
C-4 N N
N
m
C
O �
��
_
^
�
ti
CO
N
CO
ti
� N
C�
N N
LO
IT
N
4) p N N
'0 N
L
CL
LO N
C7
CO ti CO
00
LO
N
LO
I
C07 N
N
70 C-4 N N
N
m
o 0
N N
M co '
a) O
r �
r � '
oo co
r �
M CY) '
LO ' N '
LO M
N
L
(D
o)
L.1.
o) O
N N
QE N
x OLU
�tz CL
O 0
N N W
> � _
z ~O
N �
L
0
N�
ciNN�
L
_
-�
(D
O
N N
O
oO
E (DLO
cn
N
U
O
L C:r
O1
^ ^ ^ ^
^ Q
cu
LO C7 � N
�
a
G) NCj
N �
v
0
°m
N N
m
m
Q
E E
Oco
OO
N �
�
O
U
N
W
(6 (6
N �
z
LO C7 00
(n
W
X
O
0 0) o
N
O
H
a
W
N N70
H
Q
O N
4 U 4—
O
U)
N X
W
to U)
s= E
L
a
o a
�
01- w
�
� �
W
>
O O
O~�~
z
o
o 0
N N
M co '
a) O
r �
r � '
oo co
r �
M CY) '
LO ' N '
LO M
N
L
(D
o)
L.1.
o) O
N N
QE N
x OLU
�tz CL
O 0
N N W
> � _
z ~O
N �
0
N�
ciNN�
L
_
-�
(D
O
N N
O
oO
E (DLO
cn
N
'W^
V!
O
L C:r
O1
^ ^ ^ ^
^ Q
cu
LO C7 � N
�
a
G) NCj
N �
v
mC:a��
°m
N N
m
m
J
E E
Oco
OO
N �
CO
O
x
�
N
^ ^ ^ ^
N �
LO C7 00
^ ^ ^ ^
N
O � LO
C)
^ ^ ^ ^
N OO
N CID
-
p
^^^^
N�
LO
N
O C7
CID
N �
0
zcu
L
_
LL
(D
O
o y
W
O
oO
E (DLO
cn
O
'W^
V!
O
L C:r
W
^ Q
i
O
`/
L
(B
O
C6 ( i c
v
mC:a��
°m
m
m
J
E E
.�~
Q•y
O Q � Ucu
x
�
LO
LI ,1
a)
r- O
Co
N =
N
3
N N d
M co
X
d N
O -L
W Co
O +4+
N N W
c
d >
z O
co co I—
M
� V
0-- 0 00
O
> >
Ln 19t 00
ti
M
O
M
m O
co (.0
00 N 00 M
Cl)
co
N r—
-e
00
O
(Y) O
co co
I� (O I-- M
W
w
M (D
-e
—
O
Ln O
�O
N
CO
a
00 co-
hO
C)
ti
N
N
U
(0 V
co 0')
M
1—
Lo
Lo M Ln
r
00
00
co
00 co
M
N
3 N
M
N m
�
r
Ln N
(D
LO CO
00 N N
m
00 O
r r
00
(0 O
U)
(2)
�
1--(D co 00 00
Cl)
I— M 00
00
Ln
O
Ln � � (D —
Cl)
(D r— N
(D
(D
O
N
y
O (D Ln I— M
Cl)
(D
N
O
O
Ln
CA
Ln
1 �
N
N
O
N
N
(o
o
(D I-- CF)
-e
(D qqt O
M
O
O
+,
— N Ln CF)
M
N I-- I--
ti
(D
O
O
y
O Ln Ln I-- N
v-
O (D N
a)
—
O
N
C
Ln
cr�
N
N
O
N
m
(D 00 (D CF)
T-
CF) qqt M
w
Ln
O
+,
CN CF) CF) N I—
N
CF) r—qqt
T"
O
O
y
O Mq-t I— N
a)
00 (D N
00
O
L
N
1- V 1- 1-:
00
V
(D
N
N
N >+
7 O
N
c
m
O
E
O
(D O I-- —
W)
W)
O
O
C y
q-* — (O (D
N
(D 1-- 00
T"
—
O
O (o
4+
(O M (.0 N
(D
(.0 (.0 N
(D
O
O
a)
4N
N
M
ti
tD
N
a
7 O
N
2
m
--�
coN
/Ln
V N
0 0
-a
Ln Ln CO
-e
Oq-t co
ti
co
O
Ln O
00 O r— co co
00
q -t r— co
1�
0')
O
O O
+- r
OO � Ln N
N
Ln (D co
W)
N
O
UC -4
O
N
Lp
(D
N
p N
a
00 I— 00 S co
O
r—q-t co
I*
(D
O
++
O Nt 00 Nt (D
W)
O I— co
-e
O
O
N
00 O (D N
a)
(D (D co
w
M
O
.a N
CD
M
(D
(D
N
0
N
m
U
W
O
a
�
LU
N
)
D
'LU
^ /
W
V/
W U
Q
io
U
O
zaz
Q
>_
o
w w P:
;
Co (n
0
L
N
w
O O c
L
ch
H z w
0 >
(o N
w
S=
Ywa
1 E
y
�= a) X
WO
m
H
U'
LL Z
W
L O
w
a)N
aCU
wrO
Z
p
O O OU
t
Z
rY
W
O
wWN
�l
C�vo�
r Q
o W
X
d
>
UaLo
C)�
w
z
o
LO
LI ,1
a)
r- O
Co
N =
N
3
N N d
M co
X
d N
O -L
W Co
O +4+
N N W
c
d >
z O
co co I—
M
� V
O 00
a)
> >
r r
00
(0 IT -
LO I--
M
m O
co (.0
O
O o
co
ti
0') V
CO CO Ln
T-
(Y) O
co co
o
W
W
w
rn (Y)
Ln
M
00
Ln O
(D
CO
Co
a
CO m
00 co-
hO
C)
0)
N V
CO M
LO
(0 V
co 0')
M
1—
Lo
Lo M Ln
r
00
00
co
00 co
M
N
00 L
M
N m
�
r
Ln N
(D
LO CO
00 N N
00
00 O
r r
00
(0 O
V7
o
;
> >
z
Q (n
a)
LL
L
Q
_
W
�
O o
w
W W
0 0
W
E
O
o 0
to
o
W
W
-,
U O 0) V
`m
Z
C L S=
m
Co
a
CO m
I C
a)
N
0)
m Co
J
—
E E
Q
Q-0
E.X
_
�OQQU
co
a)
�!!
V7
v N
LO O
LO�°
N N
O
m
to
n
04 O
'p
O ,�
M to
m
to
ul m �o
N N
n
m
O 7
O l
O
W
N
0
^ M
M
0 M
I, 0 0
N
m
l0 m
N
l0
N
m
N
0
M N
I,
N
to
N
y N
M
N
I�
lj 0
r
N
o
to O
I, S
M
O w m
m
00 N
m
W
'pN
M N
N
ul m O
co N m
w
M
O1 W
Mr,
�--�
l0
(O
a
� N
N�
N
N N
N
N
N
to N
to �
N
u)A N
Nro
n
to
I� W N
'p N
N m
M
^I I, m
oo
ca
m
�--�
0
LO o6
V
co rl W
M
ro
O
LO N
m
� N
N
Z
LU
N W M
W
N
co
co
cn
to N
n N
2
O O
N
H
u
O
U
Leo
LO
rI N
�
Ln
�
-p N
N LO
LO
O')I,
n
Ol m
7
W
m
M 00
� N
7
N
cN-I DD
M
N cN-I
cln-I
cln-I
y N
W LO
N
LO W
oo
i (A W
n°°
d N
LO
to O
7 n
n
u)n O
LO
00 W
00
LO
M
'p N
3
M M
N
m
ul N LO
ul
LO
m
G)
LO
LO
m
W
N
N
N
N W
u) N
M
N
N N
M
N
LO
N
d`~
Nvro
l0 M
M
LO n
m
m
M
N
u N
M
m
O
Ln
O N
W
W �
N
N
w
C
01
N N
O
w r,
M N
ri
N
N oo
M
'�c
ti
ti
a`
9
or -10
> m
p
w O-
to
M N
N
O1 m
co m
00
l0
M
'p N
7 LO
m
Lr) LO W
oo
M
I,
m
N
(O
M N
N
N^
Z u °
M
N
N
Z
m
M m N
m
l0
rI
M
r, m
M
O
o 0
0
m 0
F-
N
N
0
0 O
N
U
W_
I, 0 0
N
W n
M
I,
O O
0
O N N
m
m
l0
M LO
l0 m
M
N
M
N
I�
lj 0
r
N
o
O
N
a
n m
Lo m
N m
�
O O
F-
LU
m m
I,
O
a
N 00
LO Il
M
N
a
O
m 0
N
N
0
u ) O
N
O w Ln
N
W N
w M
N
O O
I� W N
T
O
N m
M
N
N
4*
M
oo
lj
ca
N
N
0
V
y
LU Z
O LO LO
O
LO N
M LO O
°
O O
Z
LU
N W M
W
Il
V
M O
N N
N O
LO
0
CL 0)
�
0
2
M V
N
0
u
o O
N
U
7 m LO
O
rI N
O M O
M
O O
I, m
M O
N
m
LO
W I-
W N W
N LO
o
o
YD: O
6L 0
a,
_
N � �
O`
M LO
� _
0 }.
�
'6
oc
0Q
C
C CL
E
in CL
o
i (A W
n°°
d N
Q O` a
a0,
en >
a0, a
o_ O
LO
O O
W 1
H Q}
O
05
W (7 O
OL 5
W o O
d
>
U (7 (A
W
C7
a
C7
H Z
0
U1
O
Q
y
O
C7
0
T T
N N
O O
n n '
T T
n n
W W
m m
Ln
W W
W W
N N
T T
T T
O O
r4
.N.. N '
.11
m
M m N
m
l0
rI
M
r, m
M
O
o 0
m 0
N
N
0
0 O
N
I, 0 0
N
W n
M
I,
O O
O N N
m
m
l0
M LO
l0 m
M
N
M
N
I�
lj 0
r
N
o
O
N
n m
Lo m
N m
O O
m m
I,
O
a
N 00
LO Il
M
N
M
N
O
m 0
N
N
0
u ) O
N
O w Ln
N
W N
w M
N
O O
I� W N
T
O
N m
M
N
N
M
N
M
oo
lj
N
N
0
O
N
O LO LO
O
LO N
M LO O
W
O O
N W M
W
Il
V
M O
N N
N O
LO
N
N
M
oo
M V
N
0
o O
N
7 m LO
O
rI N
O M O
M
O O
I, m
M O
N
m
LO
W I-
W N W
N LO
N
to
o
N
._.
c
M LO
M N
o O
N
n - -
M N
co
N
� N
m m
W� W�
N LO
LO
O O
W 1
7 V V
M LO
M N
O O
Ul
U1
O
O
O �
_
U1 N
J J
C
C
C
01
N N
C C
QO
N ;
9
or -10
> m
p
w O-
cL _
O
Z
`°�.
v
ti
W
Y Y
Q
Q U
Y Y
u o
E E
Z u °
E E
a> w
a>i v
Z
a m
E E
K v m m
E E
O
C C t
J J
IW C C H to
E X
K N '6 H N
C X
cL
C
O¢¢ V
O
Q ¢ V
m
~
FE
V~f
V
.11
0
a
W
0
ca
W H Z
J
W F-
Y0.
0
LL 0 0[
O Q }
U C7 In
UD
to N
v O
m N
d Ln
to N
� o
� N
m
to N
� O
3 N
m
m
N
to
'o O
3 N
m
� N
to N
v O
� N
m
� a -I
d N
u O
� N
O
a`
� N
N
� O
3 N
m
Ln oo N n
Lr a oo a
oo oo
M M
n n
r` r`
M M
a Ln N
7 N r
Lo m m m n
to to
M M
M O m n
M Q Q
to to
M M
M O n n
m M m n
r` Ln P. n
M Ln N
M M
Lor, va
fa r- oo a
I:t I:t Qf Q
oo m
N N
0 0 o c
Ln O Ln v
M r` m n
m O a -I
N M —
ti 00 ti
ti
O O r`
N M
7 c -I
Ln N
Ln co
M Ln
O Ln
r" Ln
r` ll�
M Ln
Leo m
� a
M Ln
m Ln
M Ln
m m
n �
m o
M Ln
N
N
v
[Y
v
C
Q N
Cc
NO
O
SZ
d � v3i
O Q
W x
Ol E
H
6 E `.
V)
X O
•Q
2;
N
V i \
s
CL
C
3 U
00 CL Y W
d
)
Z O
C7
E X
ti 00 ti
ti
O O r`
N M
7 c -I
Ln N
Ln co
M Ln
O Ln
r" Ln
r` ll�
M Ln
Leo m
� a
M Ln
m Ln
M Ln
m m
n �
m o
M Ln
Ln u
N r
oo o
N
Ln u
oo o
r; r
N �
Ln n
r; r
N �
Ln u
N r
r; r
N �
o c
Lo u
N �
O c
Ln u
M n
N �
.11
U1 N
C C
v ;
v
C
Q N
Cc
NO
v
_
O O
O Q
W x
O
6 E `.
V)
ti ti
2;
N
Y
s
CL
C
3 U
bn m v m
E E
} C C bn
O 'c s
>
E E
N N -a -a
m Q -a -a O
E X
(D O ¢ ¢ v
Ln u
N r
oo o
N
Ln u
oo o
r; r
N �
Ln n
r; r
N �
Ln u
N r
r; r
N �
o c
Lo u
N �
O c
Ln u
M n
N �
.11
41 LPI
OA N
- O
3 N
co
O7 �
� N
� O
� N
m
� M
� N
� O
� N
m
� N
� N
� O
� N
m
'a ri
O7 N
U �
� N
O
CL
d �
� N
� O
� N
m
ri N
Ln O
O n
uD N
ut oo
n M
O M
n uo
Ln N
d' LD
00 rn
W Ln
M Ln
Ln N
Ln Ln
O W
ri d
Ln N
M d'
LMD rl
00 d'
d' N
r -I 00
r-4 rl
n u)
CY) d'
d' N
uo uo
00 r -I
Ln Ln
n M
d' N
Q1
d'
M
M
M
n
M
N
O
M
00
00
N
00
N
O
O1
ri
u)
N
O1
ut
d'
d
N
M
d'
O
Ln
N
O
N
O
d
N
N
ut
Ll
O1
M
Ln
Ln
N
Ln
M
r -i
Ln
M
O
Ln
0
d'
O
Ln
lD
O
Ln
00 ri Ln n
LLnn Ln O Qy1 d
m m d
r -I r -I
Lnn n
O L
Lr
m m d
ci ci
�o ut �o u
LMn LQ1n n
N N d
r -I ci
n O N C
r -I r -I O1 n
Ln rn �o u
ci ci n
ci ci
Ln r -I O Lr
�
O O d
ci ci n
ci ci
00 n uo a
O Ln W 0 00 a
Ol O fr
r -I
O1 N uD r
�
LLnn m a
O O fr
r -I r -I
Ql
M
Q1
M
N
N
O
M
n
n
N
N
N
N
N
N
uo
W
d'
N
rn
O
N
Ln
uo
d
N
000 a
Ol O
00 a
Ln u
M n
Ln Lf
df C
Ln u
ri
Ln Lf
N r,
M n
Ln Lf
Z
00
ri
oM
00
o
O
00
n
E
W
u)
0
O1
ko
0)
00
r i
O
06
G
00
d'
O
0)
n
N
u)
u
O
I '
r
Ln1 Ln
'
00
rn
u)
In
co
00 `i
tD
O
0
M
00
Q)
n
LLn
co
L
L
>.
n
OC
0)
O
O
r^I
ko
u)
V
w
O
LCi
O
CL
in
M
n
N
O
r -I
n
u
W
N
O
Ln
N
Ln
oc
n
M
0
a,
LO
^
LLI
N
00Ln
dC
M co
O
m
^
v
p
Ln
Q) W
O
W
N
V
ccO
n
0)
00
O
w
00
00
O
M
uo
N
r -I
O
0) M
m
d
to
�
dr
W
N
c -I
c -I
n
00
u)
00
N
00
M
O
M
M
M
W
Z
N
W
d
M
rl
W
w
N
SZ
SZ
W
W
O
+' 0
C
u
u
Z
W
X
v
0
SZ
N
Q
o
O
E
f13
Ln
N
0
Y
a
Q
a O
Z
ate .+
W
0
7
W
o
v
Q
L
to
7
i
i
°C
°o
0 W
w
0
_vf
z
W
Ln
C7 In
w
U
O
0
z
°
O
L
L
Q
W
O
O
>
V
O
LA
u OL
W
a
v U
V
V
W
L
L
C
W
4-
L
rC
000 a
Ol O
00 a
Ln u
M n
Ln Lf
df C
Ln u
ri
Ln Lf
N r,
M n
Ln Lf
Ln N Ln
001 O^
N 00 u)
N
Ln N Ln
ri O O
w O1 N
N 00 u)
N
dC N Ln
N 001 O^
.Zf W u)
N
M r4 Ln
rl O O
M 0) N
.Zf W u)
N
M N Ln
Ln 0
O a) O^
LPL 00 u)
N
rl O O
M 001 000
LPI 01 01
N
M O O
rl 0) 00
.Z 0 0
N
rn
00
ri
oM
00
o
O
00
n
Yfu
VI
W
u)
W
O1
ko
0)
00
r i
f0
V
06
n
00
d'
O
0)
n
N
u)
N
L
O
I '
r
Ln1 Ln
'
00
rn
u)
In
co
00 `i
tD
O
N
M
00
Q)
n
LLn
co
L
L
>.
n
O
0)
O
O
r^I
ko
u)
V
w
LCi
O
d
in
M
n
N
O
r -I
n
n
W
N
O
Ln
N
Ln
oc
n
M
0
ci
LO
^
00
N
00Ln
dC
M co
O
m
^
v
d
Ln
Q) W
O
N
V
V
n
0)
00
O
00
00
00
cco
M
uo
N
r -I
Ln
0) M
Ln
d
�
�
dr
I
N
c -I
c -I
n
00
u)
00
N
00
M
O
M
M
M
I '
Ln
N
r -I
M
rl
n
V
n
Ln N Ln
001 O^
N 00 u)
N
Ln N Ln
ri O O
w O1 N
N 00 u)
N
dC N Ln
N 001 O^
.Zf W u)
N
M r4 Ln
rl O O
M 0) N
.Zf W u)
N
M N Ln
Ln 0
O a) O^
LPL 00 u)
N
rl O O
M 001 000
LPI 01 01
N
M O O
rl 0) 00
.Z 0 0
N
0
oM
0
o
�
Yfu
VI
fu
u)
N
ko
0)
N
f0
V
u V
fL
0ko
n
O
�
N
n
N
L
Ln
co
c I
co
m
rn
O
In
co
00 `i
`�
O
Ln
m
Q)
n
Ln
co
L
L
>.
n
O
0)
O
O
0
ko
Ln
O
w
O
O
N
Ln
n
L l
m
Ln
n
O
N
to
0)
N
LD
oc
N
M
0
ci
d
^
Ln
N
CO
M co
O
w
v
Q) W
N
>
>
L
V
0)
N
M N0
0)
cco
01 M
N
N
n
C
f0
0) M
N
�
�
m
Ln N Ln
001 O^
N 00 u)
N
Ln N Ln
ri O O
w O1 N
N 00 u)
N
dC N Ln
N 001 O^
.Zf W u)
N
M r4 Ln
rl O O
M 0) N
.Zf W u)
N
M N Ln
Ln 0
O a) O^
LPL 00 u)
N
rl O O
M 001 000
LPI 01 01
N
M O O
rl 0) 00
.Z 0 0
N
ti
O
co
(D
c�
0 0 0 a
O00) 00
Ln N O
0 0 0
O00) 00
Uf N O
0 0 0
00 aa) On
Ln N O
0 0 0
O OD O
Ln N O
0 0 0
�
OD m
ri N O
0 0 0
O O O
O O O
Yfu
VI
fu
f0
V
u V
fL
N
L
L
O
O
w
`�
L
L
>.
O
O
ri
N
D
ci
c
v
v
>
>
>
L
V
N
>
>
4%
n
C
C
f0
n
_
fu
�-
i
p
f0
O
L
C
f0
0 �
a0
Y
w
.0
a>0
f0
p
Q)
O
o
+J
fu
ol
Z
W
X
v
0
o
N
Q
o
O
E
f13
LnLn
N
0
6L
ate .+
W
7
SZ
i
i
mLU
SZ
7
i
i
w
0
v
O U
V
V
LL
u OL
O
v U
V
V
W
L
L
C
W
4-
L
rC
f0
In
N
m
COm
w
In
Q
N
CO
CO
O
m
E
D
m
aQ
y
to
LU
aQ x
Lu
Y
D
Q
c
E
c
EE
E
X
x°
Q
*
a
U
ttA
ti
O
co
(D
c�
0 0 0 a
O00) 00
Ln N O
0 0 0
O00) 00
Uf N O
0 0 0
00 aa) On
Ln N O
0 0 0
O OD O
Ln N O
0 0 0
�
OD m
ri N O
0 0 0
O O O
O O O
ti
4-
0
rn
a�
c�
.11
0L1 N
N cl cl o
cl
ci I, M N Ln M
01 Ol
I� Ol lQ M 01
� �
Ln M
O M Vf
M O
o 0 0
O O n
00
N
Ol tD M tD
M z
n
M
tD ci I- N M ci
n I-
00 W
W W O I, O
N
M O
m O
Lf1 I,
N
O �.�• N
' zt
O `�
M C
Ln m 00
M
3
Ol
M (7 M
c -I
Ln m m m
N l0 O N M
01 m
ci Ol ci O
O v N
^ ti
ci
N
N
ti M
S M O
m
n M M
N M
cl N
0L1 N n
Ol W o
N
cl � lQ ci Ln I,
M M
N M N n
"'�
Ol
O lQ Vf
"'� O
o 0 0
'a N
r14 r14 CT) Lf)
l
ci
M
ci lQ Ol
M M M
I- N
n n
N
c -I I, O 00
N -I
t0 a
Ol ll
N
l
N O Vf
O `�
M C
O O 00
LI) Ol 00
3
lQ c
(7 0 c -I
c -I
M Ln O Ln
N &(7 M N
N
W c N
Ol O
to 00
c
U
O -4
v N
ri M
S M0
m
lQ M M
ci M
N
c
0L1 N
O Lf1 Lr)
m ci O m ci m
Ol zt Ol N
Ln 00
W
O c -I 01
M O
00 O
Lf1 I, n Lf)
Lf1
Lf) N O O c -I M
M M
I, M Ol N
0 0
tD
O lQ N
0
0 0 O0
M N
3
O M lQ
l0 l0 (7
N
c -I
lQ O M� n lQ
N l0 W N O
N N
N 00
Ol 01
t0 Ol
O
W
O N
v Lr
N t0
m
-zt M O
m
lQ M N
ci M
ci
y N
lQ V N o
O
Ln I� Ln O ci W
Ln L Lf 01
O
N Ln
Ln 00
MO
o 0 0
00 O
Ol M lQ Lf)
ci
O W lQ Ln lQ lQ
O O
ci O Ol M n
M r,
c -I Mr,
Ol l0
0
0 0 0
'a N
c l W M
N
lQ I- W M lQ N
M M
ci M
Ol
Ol O
M0
3
M � 0
c -I
N Lr r- N (7
Ol 0�
to a)
aj
v 00
Cl t0
ci m
�
m
lQ M N
ci N
ci
0L1 N
Ln ci o
Ln
tD N ci N ci N
M M
Ln M tD M Ln
n Ln
M M
N W N
M O
o 0 0
00 O
'a3
lQ (14 Lf)
lQ
Ln lQ Ln Ln Ln I�
l0 tD
`
WlQ Oc
lQ O
W N N
0
1 0 a)
0
N
I, Ln N
O M r-
ci
Ln Ln m M r-4 4
N Lf0 M W
i N
(7
t cl
I, ci 01
fV O
Do
lQ M N
ci N
ci
N
Ln Ol lQ o
M
M I, F N M Ol
O O
W O n O Vf
aO
O�
^ O
C
M <D tD O
0)
i M W
cci lQ O
Vf Ln
Ln Ol ci 00
cri 00
Ol �
O lQ l0
N
0 cri
U N
N I, Lf)
n
Ln lQ � c -I O
Ln Ln
M Ln
O W
c -I O O
N -zz Ln M lQ
Ln Lf1
Ol Ln Lf1 01
lQ Lr
M N N
ti M
O
lQ M M
ci N
N
L
o_
0L1 N
W M Ln o
N
Ln c 1 N M Ln
N N
CO N N ci N
`"'�
lQ ci
O t -4
n O
o 0 0
'a 0
M rn 0
W
N M Ln ci lQ W
O O
'
� O r- N O
� 0
Ol N
ci N
O^ �
0 0 0
N
3
Ol N l0
N
c -I
Ln O W-4 ci Ol
N Lf1 Lf1 M l0Ol
n n
v
M n c l M 01
c -I ca
Ln co
M M
W 01
v a
M
O O O
m
Ln M N
ci N
u U
U N
N �
p
Q W
W
�
� T
T O
Z
N
O N
0
a
N
7
.5
a
C
a
N
U
> >
>
U C
C
t0
0
aJ0
O O
aJ
O
aC
v
a C a
w I
o
C
hp > >
>
v
W
C
OC
O
ai
C aJ
fl_
O O
o o
ai
{�
m o
o
m
!r
-0 aJ
f0
Z
W X
ai
N
— X
ai
O
Ln
Q
W
v
O L
=
LL
y
O V
Y �..+
O V
N N
W U =
CY O'
W
m
V1 U W
^ v U
N
Z
v U
N
0 O
GC ('
W ai W
��.+ ��.+
A (M
d
W
W O> p
E
0 ai F
Q O>
E
Q
W>- Z_
a is ai z
ai
C v a .Q
ar E
CA
U— a) v
U
Il U O
v (U
U
E
W J
W N
C
O aJ (0 U U
•iy
X O N
�
<D i
C
W <D w_-
C
C
= CO 7
2
L
3 w
ai
c v O O
Z
o v f0
m CO
o
° v
m m
'nn
V W
Z 7 Oy LL LU
v
C (Y
d O O.
O
m C aJ m
E E
W m U
O- i aJ m
E E
K K V
Y a
a^ a o O z=
v ww
--c
~
c
E.E
z LxL
U c c
E E
�
�3�oa�L��3��
�.
a
_x
�a-6-
-6'o
_x
LLa°
O
Z v o n w
Z
v
�—"
ar C m
Sao
v
a
v
v v v
a
W1)u0V,�OWa�V,��
� � L
moaa�u
�oaa�au
Za }
o
LU O `^
a >
Q
X
F
U N Ln
IY (7
w
Z* O
N
U
o o o
N
N
00
C
O
O
W
W
0 O n n
-a
N
Oj1
'a N
LNn Oj1
3
00
Ol
N l0 l0 N
m
N
N
ci
Ln
N
N
N
I
N
co
N
n w w N
'a N
001
mm
w Ol
3
I,
00
N Ln Ln N
m
N
t v
U C
c U a a
', al U U
O
O W
aO� �
o v
Ln Ln oo W
'a N
Oj1
Ln LNn w w Ln
3
l0
l0
N Ln Ln c -I
m
N
N
ci
M
N
(n O
W Q n O H H
bhp 0
Ln
W
" Ol N� O Ol
'a N
I, W
Ln
Ln W w w I, Ol
3
l0
Ln
N Ln O
m
N
N
I
N
W
Ln
O O
ba 0
O
O
-4
O
N
mm LLnn LLnn o^i
3
m
m
N m N
Lnn
N
N
ci
W N
Ln
O W m
W w
00
-U
W N
N
w
O Ln
�
.--I
N
N N N
O
N
N
ci
i
a
N
a -I
N
M
o
N
Ln Ln
�I* �
WLn
co Ln
N
N
00
C
O
Z
W n
a +,
N N N
'a N
t u
LLnn
Ln LLnn LLnn
Ln
3
m
ci
N
N N N
N
00
N
N
I
N
N N �
O O �
> >
a v o o v
�0 0 v
D c v
z w a a
O Ln xCC
LL
LU O 0 O M -
M al U
Z N >
(A C Lu w 0 - U L U W 0 O i U
W
Z '° v N C a, a, `° m ,
6 = N 16
Z m '^ v m CO CO = m= c v�
O i tlmuD W tio u~ c ca
ba
C s
N al _0 _0 SIA C J al -O N -O SIA
m Q Q v Q Q v
O O
a
N
00
C
O
Z
o
a +,
O
b`o
0
O
t u
0
00
o
oc
o aa)i
00
m
0
O
ao v -0
W
co
N
a`)
O N 1 t
0
,
O Y
00
l0
Ln
O O
J C7
Z�—
t v
U C
c U a a
', al U U
= W Q
N
aO� �
o v
t
UO O O
OC
~ LU
F-
a
N al al
Y O
W
.�
W .� E C C
LL
O
O ,�.,
N -O ro O ro ro
Q
W
(n O
W Q n O H H
F- O>-
o W
a
0 (n Ln
m
l0
O
O
Ln
N N
N N �
O O �
> >
a v o o v
�0 0 v
D c v
z w a a
O Ln xCC
LL
LU O 0 O M -
M al U
Z N >
(A C Lu w 0 - U L U W 0 O i U
W
Z '° v N C a, a, `° m ,
6 = N 16
Z m '^ v m CO CO = m= c v�
O i tlmuD W tio u~ c ca
ba
C s
N al _0 _0 SIA C J al -O N -O SIA
m Q Q v Q Q v
O O
a
N
00
N
o
Ln
m
0
O
0 0
Ln Ln
ZT l0 c^ -I
00
m
LLnn
00
m
0
O
N N
t 0 r -I
co
N
zt
- ,
,
00
l0
Ln
O O
N
Ln
N O ci
Il
•--�
ci
O�1
Ln
m
00
m
l0
O
O
Ln
N N
N
l0
N
0 ,
00
l0
Ln
O O
N
Lnn
Ln
r,
00
0
Ln-:1-LLnn .N -I
N
O
<D
O
of
�
l00
cm -I
(n
a)
00
01
0
O
O
Ln Ln
N N
ci
c -I
N
a -I
N
M
m ,
N
N
v
0
00
t0
Ln
O O
N
O1 Ln O
in
m
coLfl
00
w
00
m
o
0 0
N
M
00
O
N N
Nm
N
N
oq
00
t0
l6
O O
N
Ol c -I Ol
Ol
`�
0
00
O
Ln
M
00
m
o0
0
W 0
m
0
m
00
l0
O
N N
(n
N
m"
,
m
c^ -I
N
00
t0
B6
O
N
.ZT n 00
O1
Nm
O m
O
m
W
Ln
�
00 N
00
r,
r,
r1l
W
v
N
co 00
0
to
O
N
M
N
M
00
0
N
vo,ry
1-1
o
o
O
Ln
zt
o
0 0
�
N
�
<D
O
O
N N
co
N
m
,
v
-4
00
0
0
O O
N
N N �
O O �
> >
a v o o v
�0 0 v
D c v
z w a a
O Ln xCC
LL
LU O 0 O M -
M al U
Z N >
(A C Lu w 0 - U L U W 0 O i U
W
Z '° v N C a, a, `° m ,
6 = N 16
Z m '^ v m CO CO = m= c v�
O i tlmuD W tio u~ c ca
ba
C s
N al _0 _0 SIA C J al -O N -O SIA
m Q Q v Q Q v
O O
a
Ca
0
^-)
W
co
m
LL
N
N
O
N
^W,
W
4-j
4-j
E
E
O
V
L
t
Stw
w
O
�=
}'
U
V
O
v
O
O
i
E'
OP
U
i
t
S
S
O
O
u
u
O
�=
N
m
U+�+
'-
m
LL.V
-W
w
+j
�
@j
t
c
a�
L
o
E
CL
C:
E
W
v,
�•J
A�
/,J
r -M7
�,J
A
Lt
—
co
9
0)
N
c
0
0-
V)
Q)
U
E
N
Ca
d
N
N
N
N
L
N
W
v
m
b.0
},
f6
41
a)
t1A
bD
bD
i
O
_
41
4-J
t1A
Q
�
�
o
�
�
Q
L
41
41
O
Q
41
Q)
bD
O
41
�_
�
O
�O
�l
t
N
O
ca
U
L
L
Q
O
t+--
0 O
U
>
u
41
L
4-j
-
O
N
Y
E
O
U
a--+
O
Q
_O
41
41 41
>O
Q
4-j
O
bD
z
C6
—
�
� Y
00
O
Ln
Ln
Ln
}'
Q
>C6
O
a _0
O
41
z
' °bD
U
�
N
O
j
v .O
O
-
Q
L
0--o
E
ate-+
a) .0
L1
O
o
Q
O
c6
bD
_0
a)
f6
41
a)
t1A
bD
bD
_
N
�
m
Q
U
41
bD
�
O
�O
�l
t
N
U
L
U
t+--
0 O
L
u
-
O
N
Y
O
U
++
S
Q
L
41
C6N
4-j
O
L
-00
>
00
O
Ln
Ln
Q
bD
O
�
N
O
j
v .O
O
O Q
Q
v
F—
c
O
a—
u
V
}
0
z
ml
L
CL
6.m
Lj-
C
Rs
-i
N
Q
N
L
L
O
O
a -J
N
c6
� o
4- O
ca N
O II
XO
p� O
4-j cl
O �
L
X >
N ca
� U
'— N �
0 U
-0 o2 L
O
N
v O >'
O z cv�
ti
4-
0
LO
N
N
44
/ cn
to 4- +-i
U O �--+
na--+
i E
O =3
ro 0ro
O O 0
O OLr) MJ po Q N O
O
Ln
U +-+
Zj p E cn
• 4--4— O .—
• O =3E +-+ 4A0
C)-
0, O U t! D
O� r�-I O
tA
AL
ca V)U u,
Ln ra _0 a cn
O _ E
• c _O O O +0
r.1
7
N
.0
w.
.y
m
LL
■
0
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
Q
O
N
O
O
D
O
O
E
cn
O
v
Ln
O
—
O
O
`~
L
N
U
p
a -J
O
cB
Q
U
00
O
O
U N
U
D
Ln
L
N
N
Wit/?
O
O'er
>-
>
N
O ,
3
i/ i
E
J
tw
m E
V
O U
N
L
c
Q
Q
N
O
LL
O
cB
b.0
CL :t
cB
O Q
-0 M
:3
U
Q)U^,,
W
Q) u
N
>N
LL
O
O
Q
> O
0 S
O
O
ai0
C
Q
0
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
N
Ln
n
N
41
C:
ro
—)
U
O
D
O
D
O
U
to
LL
N
a -J
U
.7
a -J
N
Q)
Of
Ca
O
a
m
•m`
a
W
i
i
LL
m
i
O
a
ti
4-
0
co
N
N
c6
0
0
0
0 0
N
Ln
RZI-
cB
O
=3
O
O rl
O
0
O
O
3
O
�
O
O M
�
IA-
t%-
� N
p
N
,}
O
L
N
bn
=
O c
:F3
cr
L
U-
fB
c
+ +
U
N O
=3
t3A
=3
>
N
o
}'N
f�6
m
r4
++
CL
0
O
^
Q N
p
=3
'n
O m
L
p
O
N
3E
X
O
N
O
cB Lu
=3
cn
+N-+
N L.LL
N
N
Ln
N
Q�
U
Q
U
t1A
m
O
—
O O
cB
+1
N Q
I3
O
m
t3A
m
i
Q)
}7
N
L
N •=
O
-
N`^
Q
ZS
O
L!)
U
.� L
-Ln
QMo
•
•
•
•
0
0
0
0 0
N
Ln
RZI-
� 00
O
O
O
O rl
O
O
O
O O
to
LL
fl3
M
L
O
to
z
O
N
N
L
U
S=
N
N
Q)
tS
N
Of
N
i
N
U
4-J
E
_O N
>
N N
C) i
_
Li-
0
LO
�U
O N
(/) Ln
N �
O
E E
O O
i i
4- 4-
N N
N N
t]A t]A
S= S=
S= S=
LL LL
I
ti
4-
0
rn
N
N
c6
D_
O
O
O
O O
O
N
O
O N
O
M
O
O M
�
IA-
t%-
� N
to
LL
fl3
M
L
O
to
z
O
N
N
L
U
S=
N
N
Q)
tS
N
Of
N
i
N
U
4-J
E
_O N
>
N N
C) i
_
Li-
0
LO
�U
O N
(/) Ln
N �
O
E E
O O
i i
4- 4-
N N
N N
t]A t]A
S= S=
S= S=
LL LL
I
ti
4-
0
rn
N
N
c6
D_
+ c
i Y —
O +� m
d u O aj rg a q�
1
L
VI Q al Q U to O
N Ln i O E
Lo
4-
0
EL
L N y
Y QJ C
N O
00 N LA Y O_ 'n
.L _v
O
�,VLn
Ln
X E v
P 7
aj
UD 'A LA
QJ
U
C) L
a �
N -F-
0
J
4B
M .s QJ
Qn --,,e U
L rp
M
M Q
01
V
>
O
Q
CL
L.
CL
LLI
a
No
bo
a
N
.N
L
a
U
U
�
�
x
N
4-J
a
\
N
�
�
i
i
N
0
O
Ln
X E v
P 7
aj
UD 'A LA
QJ
U
C) L
a �
N -F-
0
J
4B
M .s QJ
Qn --,,e U
L rp
M
M Q
01
Q
f6
Q
0
0 0
0
O
lzt O
O
lD
(N r1
m
m
4 m
r1
O
O
_O
L
L
a -J
cc
a -J
.C:
cc
O
—0 00
7(
L
_O
a -J
f6
f6
f6
0
0
0
O
a)
O
�
m
N
m
N
N
O
L
a -J
.C:
cc
V)
7(
L
a -J
O
-
_O
dJ
a--+
E
V
f6a..r
v
vi
N
N
Z
E
E
O
U
O
}d L
t1A =3
u
U
O cn
Q cB
EN
00
C U
O CSA
LU C
C: C
O cB
=3 .�
U (B
0
i
N
O U
�L
Q .0
c
N O
N /L
V
bD
O c
t1A +d
L
0 Q
Q
::3 =3
m Ln
0
c -I
M
0
O
in
c
O
V)
_0 O >
O
_0 _ a�
E
C: cn ca
O O o
� }, _0U
too ca O .—
UL
E
p a) 0
_0 _
-0 (1)C:
O
-0 O U
cc _0 -I -J (1) > 5 _0
.—
OU, O
V) CL p !0- U
p � O
O
� .-
O i 0 O
=3cn O
�
-C Q fu -0
.bn Q i
E = ca
E O
.— O v, V O
0 LL
I
0 I p l I
ti
4-
0
m
C'7
a�
(6
<Z
,RT C) C)
CO 00 C)
IN*
r
C) r` r`
C) O7 r
r
o
O
N
rn rn C)
ai
� C»
ai
X
c
o
Z� N
O ti
M
ti�SONLO
CO
M
CD
N
LO M N
r
M (D r
N
°6
r
m
r
N
r 07 r
N
5
0
L
r
r
to
W
r
to!)-
N
to!)-
(D O (D
O7 00 00
N
r
O 07 194M
O7 O7 r
M
O
N
T"
Ci
QI)
LO 07 r
1`
N qlm 00
r
M
t� r
O
NMcN�NO
CO o0 C
ti
a
w
L
•O CD N
194MC'O r
00
194Mr N00
L
a
r
r
r
r
r a r
r
r
LO ti O_
M
� N_ (D
M
O
C
C� cfl r
r CO'94MM
00
rn tiV
co 07 co
M
vm
ti
M
M
N
A N Na)
M r
O
r
m
r
r
r (3) r
N
r
r
r
ti
4-
0
m
C'7
a�
(6
<Z
cncn
11-1
U
N
N
L
0
U
Cn
cn
U
X
c
(^
D
W
Q
},
�
�
S✓
22
U
U
L
a)
Q
s✓
�
°6
L
EN
0
L
Q
W
0
5
0
L
^
I -
m
QL
W
N
Z3
O
�
N
N
W
Z
U
.5
0
O
cn
z
w
a
w
ti
4-
0
m
C'7
a�
(6
<Z
cncn
N
L
0
U
Cn
cn
U
X
c
(^
D
W
Q
�
�
S✓
—
_
U
U
m
a)
Q
°6
cn
cn
EN
0
L
Q
W
0
5
m
^
I -
^^
1
W
ti
4-
0
m
C'7
a�
(6
<Z
LO
to
N
M
N O
~ U
� O
L
N
N
� m
O
�} N
CL
U O
O (!J
i
co >
O
Z
70 .� �
O
C/) 70
0
C/) U
O �
LU (B
U cin v)
C: -- >
0
O Z
N _
Co
70 U
70 o cn
c
O
U U
O
70
W
U c/)
0
0
LO
O—
.-.
U
(D
T-
OOO(DOcc
++
O
O
ti
N
tC
O
O
O
O
O
to
tU N
O
00
C7
(D
00
O
O
O
00
f`
LO
tV
O
Lr)
O
C7
t
N
C7
f`
O
00
e
LO
O
LO
O
LO
O
O
00
le
N
O
00
f`
It
—
00
m
M
L
co
N
M
6ei-
Q
6ei-
00
(0
it
c)
00
0
00
0
0
to
O
LO
ti
N
le
Lr)
ti
O
C7
O
00
C/)
O
00
LO't
to
C7
O
C7
O
O
to
V
O
C7
f`
N
N
O
C7
O
00
O
tC>
04 .� Q
000
0
N
O
T-
CN7
O
LO�
O
a)
O N
L
M
N
a
0
O
Q
E
rn
c0
it
o
Ln
00
0
LO
C7
00
f`
N
N
0
LO
00
0
0
le
a)
N
O
LO
to
N
LO
00
N
LO
le
00
L
ti
N
M
O
O
O
L
L
tC
O
N
MM
O
O
ttj
m
E
E.
O
LO
LO
m N
C7
�vU
N
m
N
H}
to
W
i
to
LO
to
N
M
N O
~ U
� O
L
N
N
� m
O
�} N
CL
U O
O (!J
i
co >
O
Z
70 .� �
O
C/) 70
0
C/) U
O �
LU (B
U cin v)
C: -- >
0
O Z
N _
Co
70 U
70 o cn
c
O
U U
O
70
W
U c/)
0
0
LO
.-.
U
vi
L
co
Q
C/)
+
C/)
0
0
0
O
Q
E
cn
Q
Q
0
Cu
L
U
O
0
"-
U
M
0
0
0
U
ocn
E
E.
C7
�vU
m
W
i
O
O_
W
.-
O
O
E
uj
_
Z
O
Z
O
D
U�
p
Z
a
-a
Q
co
U
O
N
O
U�
p
LU
w
W
LO
to
N
M
N O
~ U
� O
L
N
N
� m
O
�} N
CL
U O
O (!J
i
co >
O
Z
70 .� �
O
C/) 70
0
C/) U
O �
LU (B
U cin v)
C: -- >
0
O Z
N _
Co
70 U
70 o cn
c
O
U U
O
70
W
U c/)
0
0
LO
4—j
co
L
L
4—j
W
ti
4-
0
rn
(Y)
a�
c�
a
ate-+
ate-+
ate-+
a--+
4--+
V)
4--+
V)
4--+
V)
V)
V)
V)
V)
-0
-0
-0
0
0
�
f6
f6
f6
f6
f6
f6
f6
f6
f6
f6
i
i
4-J
i
V)
V)
V)
'
V)
V)
V)
te
aJ
ateJ
te
4-J
ate-+
i
i
'
(aj
ateJ
f6
cn
j
m
V)
V)
ti
4-
0
rn
(Y)
a�
c�
a
0
0
• —
a--�
X
_0
Q)
N
�
=3
CLQ
Co
_0
ca
a -J
-0
NCa
_0
V
0
�0
0
C:nC
—0
UD
• -
N
W
i
�•
C:
(3)
�
�
�
4-J0
aN
a -J
-0
(3)
N
V
E
—o
—o
V
E
m
m
z
v
bn
Ca
V
Ca
CL
0
ago
.c
m
CITY OF KITCHENER
2022 BUDGET ISSUE PAPER
ISSUE: BD 01— Building Rate Increase Scenarios
FUND: Operating
DEPARTMENT: Development Services Department — Building Division
PREPARER: Mike Seiling, Director & Chief Building Official
BUDGET IMPACT: None
During the Operating Budget review session, staff was directed to provide information showing
possible rate increases that would improve the Building's projected deficit in 2022.
In 2022, the Building Enterprise is projecting a deficit of $1.4M and is purposely being planned
in order to reduce Building's stabilization reserve balance (projected to by $12.3M at the end of
2022), which is above its maximum target ($9.7M). These figures can be seen in the Building 5 -
Year Proiection shown below.
The stabilization reserve balance builds up in years when Building ends the year in a surplus
position, and is drawn down in years where there is a deficit. Maintaining a healthy balance in
the reserve is sound financial practice to help manage unplanned economic downturns without
needing drastic measures like laying off staff or significant rate increases. The minimum and
maximum targets for the reserve are meant to be guideposts that protect against negative
financial outcomes, but also ensure fees are not excessive and building up funds beyond what is
likely needed.
Given the significant balance in the reserve, staff are not recommending any change to Building
fees for 2022. This action (no change) has already been approved by Council as part of the user
fee report (FIN -2021-57). Any adjustment to these fees for 2022 would require a
reconsideration of Council, and would also require public notice to be given as required by the
Building Code Act.
Page 42 of 117
CITY OF KITCHENER
BUILDING ENTERPRISE
5 YEAR OPERATING BUDGET PROJECTION
(000's)
Budget
Budget
Budget
Budget
Budget
2022
2023
2024
2025
2026
Total Revenue
5,x35
5,364
5,262
5,341
5,416
Total Expenses
6,444
6.523
6,578
6,71 G
6;923
Net Revenue (Expense)
(1,408)
(1,260)
(1,316)
(1,408)
(1,512)
"Transfer (to)lfrom Stabilization Reserve
1,4x8
1,26G
1,316
174x9
1,512
Overall Enterprise Result
-
-
-
STABILIZATION RESERVE FUND
Opening Balance
13,631
12,364
117233
10,x34
8,732
Add: Transfer (to)!from Enterprise
(1,4x8)
(1,26x)
(17316)
(1,4x9)
(1,512)
Add: Interest revenuef(expense)
142
129
117
1G4
91
Closing Balance12,364
11,233
10,034
8,730
7,308
Minimum Benchmark (100% of expenses)
6 444
6.523
6.578
6,710
6.923
Maximum Benchmark (150% of expenses)
9.666
9,785
9,867
10.065
10.384
Revenue Rate Assumption
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
The stabilization reserve balance builds up in years when Building ends the year in a surplus
position, and is drawn down in years where there is a deficit. Maintaining a healthy balance in
the reserve is sound financial practice to help manage unplanned economic downturns without
needing drastic measures like laying off staff or significant rate increases. The minimum and
maximum targets for the reserve are meant to be guideposts that protect against negative
financial outcomes, but also ensure fees are not excessive and building up funds beyond what is
likely needed.
Given the significant balance in the reserve, staff are not recommending any change to Building
fees for 2022. This action (no change) has already been approved by Council as part of the user
fee report (FIN -2021-57). Any adjustment to these fees for 2022 would require a
reconsideration of Council, and would also require public notice to be given as required by the
Building Code Act.
Page 42 of 117
CITY OF KITCHENER
2022 BUDGET ISSUE PAPER
For illustrative purposes, rate increases of 2%, 5%, and 10% in 2022 and then no increase for
the remaining years have been modeled to show the impact on Building's bottom line (net
revenue/expense). The rate increases and their approximate impacts in 2022 are:
• 2% _ $100,000 improvement
• 5% _ $250,000 improvement
• 10% _ $500,000 improvement
In addition, the table below shows the impacts on the Building stabilization reserve balance
(shown in $000s) of the original proposed rates (no change from 2021 rates) and three different
increases to Building fees in 2022.
Ending
Building Stabilization
Reserve
Balances at Different
Rate Increases
0% (Original)
$12,364
$11,233
$10,034
$8,730
$7,308
2%
$12,466
$11,442
$10,351
$9,157
$7,886
5%
$12,616
$11,751
$10,820
$9,790
$8,689
10%
$12,868
$12,269
$11,607
$10,850
$10,033
Minimum
$6,444
$6,523
$6,578
$6,710
$6,923
Maximum
$9,666
$9,785
$9,867
$10,065
$10,384
That Building fees for 2022 remain unchanged (0% change compared to 2021) as approved by
Council as part of report FIN -2021-57, 2022 User Fees.
Page 43 of 117
4-j
co
co
4-j
U
4-j
O
CL
DC
n
00"—ft%
O
M
^
lD
-0
co
bn
4-J
,
bn
O
-
.
bn
CO
N
—
O
�
�
N
z
LL.
>
0
CL
O
-0
DC
cn
V
cn
�
�
co
m
ca
N
+-+
�
V
U
•�
V
bn
-0
z�
�
U
4-j
O
CL
DC
n
00"—ft%
O
M
^
lD
co
bn
bn
>
>
0
CL
co
O
cn
V
cn
�
�
co
N
+-+
N
N
V
bn
-0
�
ca
>
C
m
�O
O
ca
ca
ca
0
T)
O
CL
O
Q
O
CO
O
L—
CL
ate-+
.CL
co
U
0
cc
0
0
a
•
L
+-J
cc
LL
•
M,
H
E
E
U
•
bn
E
e
co
a--+
Q
N
L
�
�
U
b -o
ca
O
cn
r
cn
�
O
V
�
a
�
O
C�0
ca
b-0
V
_0
ca
�
a--�
LL
O
O
—0
._
a�
0
—
�
a -J
�
a
i
—
0
T)
O
CL
O
Q
O
CO
O
L—
CL
ate-+
.CL
co
U
0
cc
0
0
a
•
L
+-J
cc
LL
•
M,
H
E
E
U
•
bn
E
e
CITY OF KITCHENER
2022 BUDGET ISSUE PAPER
ISSUE: BD02 — Additional Funding for Affordable Housing/Other Capital Options
FUND: Operating
DEPARTMENT: Financial Services Department — Financial Planning & Reporting
PREPARER: Ryan Hagey, Director of Financial Planning & Reporting
BUDGET IMPACT: For Council's Direction
During the Capital Budget review session, staff was directed to provide information about
funding sources for an additional $1M -$2M for affordable housing or the other capital options
being considered by Council as part of the 2022 budget process. As well there were some
technical/policy questions about the City's ability to partner with Kitchener Housing, and the
ability of school boards to waive development charges (DCs).
Funding Options
During the budget discussion Council asked about a few specific funding options which are
expanded on below.
1) Special Levy — not recommended
Some municipalities have implemented special levies as a way to address funding needs for
infrastructure. The City of Kitchener currently does not have any special levies for this purpose,
but it was considered as part of the Long -Term Financial Plan to address the Facilities
Infrastructure Gap. Council decided they did not want to move forward with a special levy at
that time as it would have been a departure from a long-standing practice of delivering
property tax increases at or below the rate of inflation. A special levy is something that could
be revisited and considered again in the future, but staff would recommend that any discussion
regarding instituting a special levy be done in the context of a larger funding strategy to address
a specific issue and capital needs.
If a special levy were added for affordable housing, it would be an additional cost on top of the
normal budget increase. The table below shows the impact of a special levy in terms of the
average homeowner (property assessed at $326,000) and how much funding it would generate
in property taxes.
Impact of a Special
0.25% $3
$336,000
0.50% $6
$672,000
0.75% $8
$1,009,000
1.00% $11
$1,345,000
There would be jurisdictional considerations if a special levy was something Council was
interested in pursuing, specifically for affordable housing. A special levy would normally be
identified as a separate line on the property tax bill and introducing one for the purpose of
affordable housing could potentially be considered a double tax since the Region of Waterloo is
Page 47 of 117
CITY OF KITCHENER
2022 BUDGET ISSUE PAPER
the primary level of government responsible for social services in the region and already
collects taxes for the purpose of supporting affordable housing. Through the City's Housing for
All Strategy, 43 actions were identified that, from staff perspective, were still within the City's
jurisdiction and included several actions that would not require significant funding. To
summarize, the introduction of a special levy for affordable housing is not recommended for
the following reasons:
• Special levies should only be considered through the development of a comprehensive
funding strategy to address a specific issue or capital needs
• Introducing a special levy for affordable housing would be problematic as there are
jurisdictional considerations (City vs Region) and it could be considered a double tax
• The level of funding required to implement the 43 actions in the Housing for All Strategy
is not significant enough to warrant considering a special levy
• Other funding sources are available to create an affordable housing reserve
2) Debt — not recommended
As discussed during the Capital budget meeting, the City would not be able to issue debt for
affordable housing, unless it were creating a physical asset owned by the City. This means the
City could not issue debt for the program outlined in the issue paper (deposit funds in an
affordable housing reserve to offset development charges with the specific terms to be
determined in early 2022).
Debt could potentially be an option for the other capital priorities, although staff would not
recommend it at this time. The draft debt policy prepared during the development of the Long -
Term Financial Plan had wording on the potential uses of debt as shown below.
Debt will be considered as a means to finance:
• New, non-recurring infrastructure requirements (acquisition, design, construction)
• Portion of growth -related project costs not covered from Development Charges
• Capital Projects that will result in additional or new services for residents
• Replacement of infrastructure, where the cost of deferring replacement exceeds the
debt servicing costs and where other sources of financing are not readily available
• Projects that are partly grant funded and require matching funds to proceed
• Projects where a business case has identified debt as an effective financing option
If debt were used as a funding source there would also be interest costs of borrowing the
money. If the City were to borrow $1M at 2.5% (which is reasonable given the average interest
rate over the past few years), it would incur a total of $142,500 in interest charges which would
be an increase to the operating budget. Interest rates for City debt issues made in the fall of
each year dating back to 2014 are shown in the graph below, and economic outlooks generally
show interest rates increasing at some point in 2022.
Page 48 of 117
3.S0%
3.00%
2.50%
2.00%
1.50%
1.00%
050%
0.00%
CITY OF KITCHENER
2022 BUDGET ISSUE PAPER
10 -Year Deka Interest Rates
?014 ),s 11: ?"I, ?nth 2020 2021
Staff intend to bring forward the debt policy in 2022 and comprehensively revisit funding
options to further address the Facilities Infrastructure Gap during the next term of Council.
Further, other sources of funding have been identified (see next section of the issue paper)
which would not incur interest costs associated with issuing debt. To summarize, issuing debt is
not recommended for the following reasons:
• The City wouldn't be able to issue debt for affordable housing unless it is to fund a
capital project where physical asset is being created
• Debt should be used strategically to fund capital infrastructure needs only when other
sources of funding are not available
• Issuing debt results in interest costs that would be an increase to the operating budget
• A debt policy will be brought forward in 2022 to help guide decisions related to debt
• Other funding sources are available to create an affordable housing reserve
3) Proposed Funding Sources: $1.25M unrestricted (recommended) + $500,000 restricted (for
Council's direction)
Given Council's direction to find additional funding for affordable housing or the other capital
priorities, staff have identified nearly $1.8M of additional funding which are described below.
Part 1 - Unrestricted funding $1.25M - recommended
A small number of capital projects could provide an additional $1.25M to the Capital Pool which
could then be reallocated to any of the three capital priorities being considered as part of the
2022 budget process. Capital Pool funds are unrestricted in how they can be invested, whereas
some other funding sources like the Canada Community Building fund or CCB have limitations
on how they can be used. The table below shows the sources of funding that total $1.25M.
Proposed Capital Pool Funding Sources
r- i Amount V Comment
1 Capital Closeout $ 247,000 Close out occurred late in the fall
2 Capital Contingency $ 217,000 Closeout existing balance
3 Cycling Infrastructure $ 286,000 Swap 2022 funding from Capital Pool to CCB
4 City Hall Outdoor Spaces $ 500,000 Swap 2022 funding from Capital Pool to CCB
TOTAL $ 1,250,000
Page 49 of 117
CITY OF KITCHENER
2022 BUDGET ISSUE PAPER
1. Capital Closeout — this Capital Pool closeout occurred late in the fall.
2. Capital Contingency — these Capital Pool funds were previously approved by Council
through prior budgets and are an existing capital project account with no specific plans.
3. Cycling Infrastructure & City Hall Outdoor Spaces—these projects are included in the
proposed 2022 capital budget and are currently funded by the Capital Pool. There is
adequate funding in the Canadian Community Building (CCB) reserve forecast to switch
the funding for these projects to CCB, freeing up additional Capital Pool funding.
Part 2 - Restricted Funding $500,000 (can only be used for Facility Infrastructure Gap or Trails)
for Council's direction
In addition to the $1.25M noted above which could be used towards any of the capital
priorities, an additional $500,000 of CCB funding could be transferred out of the CCB reserve.
Since this is CCB funding, it could only be used towards the options listed under Facilities
Infrastructure Gap or Community Trails, as affordable housing is not an eligible service under
CCB legislation.
The CCB reserve is an ongoing capital funding source that is managed over the 10 -year capital
forecast, not just for a single year. The reserve balance is projected to be drawn down over
each of the next four budgets, and drawing even more out of the reserve now would reduce
funding flexibility in the future related to , capital project cost escalations or other
unanticipated budget requests. Offsetting these concerns, there are typically some capital
funds returned to the CCB reserve each year as part of the City's regular process to review
capital projects and close out funds from completed projects to the appropriate reserves. All
things considered, staff believe an additional transfer of $500,000 from the CCB reserve to the
Facilities and/or Trails capital priority projects is a viable option for Council to consider as part
of the 2022 budget process.
To summarize, should Council wish to increase the $1M in one-time capital funding for
affordable housing and other investment options, staff would recommend:
• Adding $1.25M in unrestricted available funding that could be used for any of the
investment priority options (Affordable Housing, Facilities, Community Trails)
• Consider allocating an additional $500k in restricted CCB funding (Facilities, Community
Trails)
• Combined proposed funding would increase one-time capital funding to $2.75M
Other Technical/Policy Questions
Partnering with Kitchener Housing
Staff were also asked to investigate whether the City could partner with Kitchener Housing.
Based on an initial review, there is nothing that would preclude the City in partnering with
Kitchener Housing Inc in a strategic partnership, however the City's ability to partner with a
non-profit like Kitchener Housing to develop and administer housing projects would likely need
to be explored further. The City has no legislative powers granted to a Housing Service Manager
Page 50 of 117
CITY OF KITCHENER
2022 BUDGET ISSUE PAPER
under the Housing Services Act, so the City has little ability to gain necessary funding for capital,
maintenance and supports for residents as the funds must first flow to the Region of Waterloo.
Further, this would require exploration of the administrative staffing requirements to manage a
residential asset, and the risk involved in a proposed partnership with a non-profit including
sharing the asset and entering into a residential construction project where the City would be
the owner. The City may also be required to enter into a formal procurement process for
services related to managing the residential asset, which may preclude Kitchener Housing as
the preferred partner.
Education Development Charges
During the Capital budget discussion, Council asked whether school boards would be able to
waive their portion of DCs for affordable housing developments. Finance staff followed up with
the local school boards (public & Catholic) and received the following combined response:
"We do not have an ability to waive fees as this type of exemption is not listed in the
current bylaw. The next opportunity for consideration would be in 2025-26 when the by-
law would next be reviewed."
The original funding identified for capital priorities was $1M. Based on Council's direction
during the Capital Budget discussions to identify an additional $1M to $2M of funding, staff
have identified an additional $1.25M that could be directed towards any of the capital
priorities, and another $500,000 that could only be used for options related to the Facilities
Infrastructure Gap or Community Trails. The funding available is summarized in the table
below.
Funding Type
Amount
Comment
Original Funding
$1,000,000
Can be used on any priority
Additional Unrestricted Funding
$1,250,000
Can be used on any priority
Additional Restricted Funding
$500,000
Only available for Facilities or Trails
Total
$2,750,000
That the funding of $1.25M as outlined in issue paper BD02 (Section 3, Part 1) be reallocated
towards the Capital Pool; and
That the funding of $500,000 as outlined in issue paper BD02 (Section 3, Part 2) be for Council's
direction.
Page 51 of 117
CITY OF KITCHENER
2022 BUDGET ISSUE PAPER
ISSUE: BD03 - Affordable Housing Reserve & Development Charges Grant
FUND: Capital
DEPARTMENT: Development Services — Planning
PREPARER: Andrew Ramsaroop, Engagement and Program Manager — Affordable
Housing
BUDGET IMPACT: For Council's Direction
As part of the 2022 budget process, Council will be deciding on capital investment options in
three different areas: affordable housing, facilities infrastructure gap, and community trails.
Each area has three different funding levels, $250,000, $500,000, or $1,000,000. This issue
paper deals with affordable housing.
In response to growing housing unaffordability, the City approved its first housing strategy -
Housing for All in 2020. It contains over 40 actions for the City to help create more affordable
housing opportunities in our community and support the Region's goals of ending
homelessness. Housing for All identified the need for approximately 500 supportive housing
units, over 5,000 community housing units, and a need for over 9000 affordable rental housing
units in our city. Council identified addressing the need for more supportive housing as one of
its priorities. It also identified working with the Region and School Boards to review the
feasibility and implications of reducing the development charges for affordable housing
development.
Currently, three policies support the development of affordable and supportive housing in
Kitchener:
1. Waivers of application fees and building permit fees for affordable rental housing;
2. Deferral of development charge (DC) payments over a 20 -year period; and
3. Waiver of interest on deferred DC payments interest policy.
These policies help make affordable and supportive housing developments more feasible,
however, the cost of having to pay the City's portion of DCs has been identified by non -profits
as being a barrier to providing and developing supportive housing. Under current legislation,
affordable and supportive housing developments like all other residential developments are
subjected to paying DCs. These fees cannot be waived and must be paid in order to satisfy
legislated requirements. However, the City could provide a grant to qualifying developments to
partially or fully offset their DC costs, thereby improving the financial viability of these projects.
Although a full DC grant would have the largest impact on a project, partial DC grants would
also improve project viability. In providing financial relief from paying DCs (full or partial), the
non-profit housing provider is able to allocate the savings into other aspects of the
development that may have shortfalls that they would otherwise need to fundraise for, or seek
further support. This is especially important for affordable and supportive housing
developments that have not received Rapid Housing Initiative funding or other Federal and
Provincial funding and will help to bring more units to occupancy within Housing for All's
timeframe.
Page 52 of 117
CITY OF KITCHENER
2022 BUDGET ISSUE PAPER
Currently, The Region of Waterloo has a Regional Development Charge Grant for affordable
housing projects for its share of DCs as available funds permit. Providing relief from
development charge requirements has a direct impact on affordable housing locally and lifting
people out of homelessness. It also better enables the City to reach its goals of seeing more
affordable and supportive housing units created in Kitchener.
As part of the 2022 budget process Council can approve the creation of an Affordable Housing
reserve, which was one of the actions identified through the Housing forAll strategy, and
allocate funding to be transferred into the reserve. Then through a separate report to come
back in the first half of 2022, Council could approve a DC grant policy and the specific
parameters of the Affordable Housing reserve. This will allow adequate time for research and
consultation instead of trying to complete all of that work in the midst of the 2022 budget
process.
The table below shows the number of units that could potentially receive a development
charge (DC) grant but is for illustrative purposes only. As noted above, if funding is approved
for this initiative, staff would come back in the first half of 2022 with a policy which would
provide Council with an opportunity to determine how much of a grant to provide to qualifying
developments.
As can be seen in the table, the number of units that could benefit from this program ranges
from 25 to 600. For instance, if Council approved $250,000 during the budget process, and
later through the policy discussion chose a grant of 25%, 100-150 units could benefit from the
program, depending on whether they were built in the central neighbourhoods or in the
suburbs as shown in this part of the calculation table.
25% Grant 2021 Grant Units @
DC Rate 25% $250,000
Suburban Multiple $ 9,831 $ 2,458 100
Central Multiple $ 6,585 $ 1,646 150
%Grant 2021 Grant Units @
DC Hat's §n/ $250,000
Suburban Multiple $ 9,831 $ 4,916 50
Central Multiple $ 6,585 $ 3,293 75
100% Grant
Suburban Multiple
Central Multiple
For Council's direction.
2021 Grant Units @
DC Rate 100% $250,000
$ 9,831 $ 9,831 25
$ 6,585 $ 6,585 37
Units @
Units @
$500,000
$1,000,000
200
400
300
600
Units @
Units @
$500,000
$1,000,000
100
200
150
300
Units @
Units @
$500,000
$1,000,000
50
100
75
150
Page 53 of 117
CITY OF KITCHENER
2022 BUDGET ISSUE PAPER
ISSUE: BD04 — Reducing the City's Facilities Infrastructure Gap
FUND: Capital
DEPARTMENT: Infrastructure Services — Facilities Management
PREPARER: Asad Qureshi, Director Facilities Management
BUDGET IMPACT: For Council's Direction
As part of the 2022 budget process, Council will be deciding on capital investment options in
three different areas: affordable housing, facilities infrastructure gap, and community trails.
Each area has three different funding levels, $250,000, $500,000, or $1,000,000. This issue
paper deals with the facility infrastructure gap.
The City of Kitchener owns 255 facilities varying in function and age. The Facilities Management
(FM) division is responsible for operating and maintaining these buildings in a state of good
repair (SOGR). The current 10 -Year facility infrastructure gap has been calculated at $185M.
Investment in SOGR program will result in reduction of infrastructure deficit.
Closing the facilities infrastructure gap and ensuring City facilities are accessible and energy
efficient is a high priority for the City. FM staff have reviewed the most immediate unfunded
needs and have identified the following projects which could be completed in 2022/2023.
Several components at Lyle Hallman pool are reaching the end of their useful lives and require
replacement. The work will include replacing the existing windows in the pool area with more
energy efficient models, replacing the existing walkway and installing tactile indicators to
improve accessibility, and replacing the overhang at the entrance of the building.
Comfort stations at City facilities are heavily used by the public. A review of these facilities has
identified four (Victoria Park, Huron Natural Area, Wilson park and Breithaupt park) that
require extensive refurbishing/upgrading. The work will include any needed structural or
cosmetic repairs, accessibility improvements (where applicable), as well as replacing existing
fixtures with more energy/water efficient fixtures.
The City has already replaced its streetlights with more energy efficient LED models. While the
lighting at some City parking lots have been upgraded, there are still many other where an
upgrade to more energy efficient LEDs is required. At the same time, the pavement in several
City parking lots is also in need of repair. The work will include the conversion of conventional
lights to LEDs and upgrades to pavement at several City facilities such as community centres,
arenas and fire stations. FM has prepared a prioritized list of parking lots based on current
condition and could complete the work over the next two years.
Project budget estimated cost is summarized below:
Lyle Hallman pool
$250,000
Comfort station upgrades
$500,000
LED lighting upgrades and repaving of parking lots
$1,000,000
For Council's direction
Page 54 of 117
CITY OF KITCHENER
2022 BUDGET ISSUE PAPER
ISSUE: BD05 — Enhancing Community Trails
FUND: Capital
DEPARTMENT: Infrastructure Services — Parks and Cemeteries
PREPARER: Niall Lobley, Director of Parks and Cemeteries
BUDGET IMPACT: For Council's Direction
As part of the 2022 budget process, Council will be deciding on capital investment options in
three different areas: affordable housing, facilities infrastructure gap, and community trails.
Each area has three different funding levels, $250,000, $500,000, or $1,000,000. This issue
paper deals with community trails.
The Cycling & Trails Master Plan (CTMP) was completed in 2020 and is expected to be a catalyst
for building a city where people willingly and joyfully choose active transportation for
recreation and getting around. With a focus on planning and designing for "all ages and
abilities," the City is making it safer and more comfortable for everyone to get out walking,
rolling and cycling. The CTMP identifies the need for additional funding in both the short and
long term to achieve the goals identified in the plan.
The Community Trails General provision supports the development of trails within the City of
Kitchener. Three principal project types are funded by the Community Trails General Provision:
1. Repair and replacement of pedestrian bridges. The City owns and maintains 65
pedestrian bridges serving our trails network. Investment, repair and replacement is
largely reactionary and driven by the findings of the OSIM (Ontario Structure Inspection
Manual) Bridge Inspections undertaken on a biannual basis.
2. Development of new trail. New trail is informed by the Cycling and Trails Master Plan
and largely focuses on developing alternative routes or infilling gaps within the trails
network.
3. Upgrade of existing walkways and trails to meet the needs of Kitchener's growing and
changing community as directed by the Cycling and Trails Master Plan. The focus of this
work is on upgrading existing granular trails and walkways to asphalt trails and is
directed by the Cycling and Trails Master Plan
Funding for trails is also supported by individual Capital Budget requests (such as for the recent
upgrades to the Iron Horse Trail) and by grant funding ($2M of improvements to the Walter
Bean Trail are supported by DMAF, $650,000 of Federal Gas Tax money has recently been
allocated toward bridge replacements, and Council endorsed a successful application for
$1.55M of stimulus funding to support trail and bridge projects).
A project list stemming from priorities within the Cycling and Trails Master Plan has been
developed, and funding allocated from the Community Trails General provision toward
completing this work.
Page 55 of 117
CITY OF KITCHENER
2022 BUDGET ISSUE PAPER
Between 2022 and 2030, approximately 9.2km of trail upgrades are planned and approximately
2.5km of new trail is planned. Four bridges are currently being replaced (in Vanier Park, in
Victoria Park, at Rothsay Avenue, and Lynn Valley) and an additional five are tentatively
scheduled for replacement between 2022 and 2030.
The Cycling and Trails Master Plan indicates the need for 70km of off-road trail to be
constructed to meet the needs for a connected community; 13km of this is considered an
immediate or short term (by 2030) need. An additional 17km is identified as a medium term
priority and 40km as a long term priority.
The Cycling and Trails Master Plan provides a construction estimate of $450 per meter for trails.
The nature of construction, landscape and works required alongside trail construction (such as
grading, drainage etc.) all have an impact on trail costs, so in some cases this will be a generous
allowance, in others, it may be under -reflective of true costs, but broadly speaking, this
provides a reasonable number on which budget estimates can be proposed.
Three options for consideration are outlined below under financial implications and show an
approximate number of linear meters of trail that will be constructed in each scenario and an
operating impact of these additional trail lengths. In all scenarios, staff will rely on direction
provided within the Cycling and Trails Master Plan to inform project priority and so investment
will expedite the delivery of priorities within the Plan.
Trail construction requires planning and design work as well as permit approvals and site
analysis. Staff already have a full construction plan in 2022. It is anticipated that projects to the
value of $250,000 could be added to the 2022 work plan, however, larger projects which are
more complex could be planned in 2022, but construction would be in 2023.
The additional increase to the Community Trails General provision for each option is outlined
below alongside the estimated Operating Impacts. Operating impacts occur in year following
trail construction; 2022 capital works impact 2023 onwards operating budget.
Additional
2022 2023 Meters
Operating
Impact
Option 1 $ 250,000 $ - 550
$ 6,000
Option 2 $ - $ 500,000 1100
$ 12,000
Option 3 1 $ - $ 1,000,000 2200
$ 24,000
For Council's direction.
Page 56 of 117
CITY OF KITCHENER
2022 BUDGET ISSUE PAPER
ISSUE: BD06 — Increased Small Scale Traffic Calming
FUND: Capital
DEPARTMENT: Development Services Department—Transportation Services
PREPARER: Barry Cronkite, Director of Transportation Services
BUDGET ASK: None
During the 2022 Capital Budget review session, staff was directed to investigate the impacts of
increasing the Small Scale Traffic Calming by 3 flexible delineator locations per ward.
In 2017, Transportation Services launched a seasonal traffic calming program that included the
installation of approximately 40 flexible delineators and 5 speed advisory signs throughout the
City of Kitchener. The program has been met with general acceptance from the community and
has resulted in many more requests. As a result, there has been a continual annual increase of
the seasonal traffic calming program and flexible delineators, with the only exception being
2020 due to pandemic constraints. In total, the seasonal traffic calming program currently
consists of 11 flexible delineators per ward that can then be used to address up to 11 roadways
and 5 speed advisory signs that are deployed throughout the City on a rotational basis, covering
an approximate 50 locations per year.
Staff does not recommend the installation of more than the current number flexible delineators
contained within the program at this time. Their current effectiveness may be diminished if too
many delineators are installed and the public simply views these delineators as "sign pollution".
Further, due to the scale of the program, some of the streets being targeted for
implementation may not warrant such measures. Further, staff will be bringing forward a
Vision Zero Strategy in late 2021/2022 with action items that could supplement the seasonal
traffic calming program on a go forward basis.
The purchase and installation/removal of each additional flexible delineator beyond the current
proposed program is approximately $600; $250 per delineator and $350 for install/removals.
The increase of 30 additional signs in 2022 will cost $18,000. There are sufficient funds in the
proposed 2022 seasonal traffic calming capital budget to accommodate this request should
Council choose to proceed with the additional measures. However, each additional flexible
delineator has an ongoing operational cost of $350 beyond 2022, and this cost should be
referred to the 2023 operating budget deliberations.
Staff recommend no change to the existing seasonal traffic calming program.
Should Council proceed with approval of 3 additional flexible delineators per ward in 2022, the
programming change can be accommodated within the proposed seasonal traffic calming
capital budget. Additional operating costs in 2023 and beyond would then need to be referred
to the 2023 operating budget deliberations.
Page 57 of 117
ti
4-
0
CO
LO
(1)
E-
a
ti
C
of
a+
-0
-0
L
L
}
N
of
N
_
p
v;
O
0
O
a)
LO
-0
N
m
c
m
O
(�
~—
'U
?�
'
�O
rn
N
N
E
.V
C1A
fB
N
0
O
`-
O
C:
OCL
N
II
N
O
N
'n
}
0
>
=
+'
p
-CN
LN
O
of
fB
'cn0
.�
-0E
(n
m
N
cn
,�
C:
L
��
N
O
fB
—
N
N
+'
fB
X
N
Ln
N
Q
c-
>
Vf
4A
E
E
ca'
0
'N
Q
aIn'
�,
S
L
'n
u
OO
O
O
bD
fB
Q
0-
E
E
O
O
U
Q
N
Q41
E
—
O
NN
'n
cn
N
p
Ln
p0L
cn
Q
>
m
cm:
•—
+
N
O
O
0
0
cn
Q)4A
>
bb
p
C:m
N
4 j
0
cn
O
(1)
'=A3
Qu
Q
CxA
U
NCL
0
Q
C1A
cB
L
+�+
n
p
cNi�
co
L
L
.p
N
U
.Q
fB
Q
O
O
O
N
E
fB
N
N
_N
a)
0
'5
•E
°
"
N
°'
Q
O
E
o
o
-0:3a�
O
L
w
Q
N
-c-Q
.S
Q
N
U
L
>
fB
L
O
U
Q
N
(6
U
D
i
oL
o
E
cB
IF-
Mo
D
a
Q
.�
N
cB
N
c
O
•
7
•bn
O
O
C
N
O
•U
.V
C:
N
O
N
S
=
p
-CN
LN
'cn0
a
-0E
N
O
of
'n_N
p
41
>
Vf
E
Q
0
'N
�
�,
S
L
'n
u
OO
O
O
3-6
LLQ
0-
E
E
O
U
N
�
N
Q41
U
O
L4A
O
NN
Ln
p0L
COi
O
+O
0
Q
C1A
cB
L
+�+
n
p
cNi�
N
Q
0
0
N
of
) N
N
D
O
_
�,
O
om
L
O
L
w
N_0
Q
-c-Q
.S
N
U
Q
tio
c
7
O
L
N
N
U
O
E
ODp
N
>
L
_0
Q
N
fB
N
O
O
N(U
w
0
O
L
Ln
N
> O
L
fB
(D
i
N
=3O
OL
CL
Q
L
+,m
L
—
O
>
>
.
N
OU
W
'N
O
L
N
N
-CL
=
Q
in
N
O
O
Ln�
cB
`n
N
H
_
N
(10i
O
Q
Q
N
?�
+�
CSA
L
:3
C
E
N
U
N
fB
O
.O
.O
m
E
a+
�
i
N
O
N
c
E
mw
N
+,
=
m
w
-C
a
co
co
a
Q
_O
co
-c
w
c
cn
U
.0
L
O
•
•
•
•
•
•
(n
ti
C
N
+'
-0
-0
L
L
N
N
_
0
v;
0
0
O
0
cB
c
m
m
O
~—
'v
+,j
0
rn
N
N
ELn
.V
w0
'cB
N0
0
4-
O
C:
O
N
N
O
}+
cn
N
O
>
cB
+ +
+'
w0
O
-CN
L
O
+'
vi
CL
m
N
'vf=30
.�
U
_
fB
_U
O
L
��
O
fB
—
N
N
+'
fB
X
L
Ln
}+
>
Ln
E
_N
c
0
0
•N
CL
`}
In
S
0
N
w
Q)
N
N
Ln
U
O
C
O
O
bD
Q
Q
E
N
N
_
O
O
0
Q
E
�
N
i
O
U
—
O
'L
'n
cn
N
N
0
O
+�
N
L
cB
Q
>
m
N
,�
+�
N
O
O
cB
0
0
cn
Q)w0
>
w0
O
N
4 j
0
cn
O
(1)
'=A3
Q
U
Q
w0
U
(1)
L
C
NCL
0
N
Q
w0
++
c
N
O
Ln
N
co
L
L
.O
N
U
.�
fB
C
O
L
a+
_O
O
O
N
fB
N
N
_N
N
N
0
4'
N
O
CL
OL
N
E
L
N
L
>
�
cB
N
L
O
tio
U
N
c6
U
D
L
0
0
E
cm
��
fB
0
N
N
O
7
•
O
•bn
ol
O
C
NO
•U
.V
C:
N
O
N
S
E
O
-CN
L
�
C:
>
N
'vf=30
C:'N
O
Ln
O
}+
>
Ln
E
_N
Q
0
•N
`}
S
0
N
w
Q)
N
N
Ln
U
O
C
O
O
'N
'L
Q
E
N
N
w=
O
0
'Vf
i
O
LN
O
'L
O
O
L
c
w0
Q
N
-0
_0O_
'L
4 -JL
0
N
c
c
ate-+
(10
(1)
L
C
4-
O
N
Q
w0
++
c
N
O
Ln
N
N
Co
Q)
C
L
a+
O
OL
>
N
cn
N
N
0
4'
O
CL
OL
tio
7
O
ol
L
N
N
U
OU
O
Ln
L
c
_0
N
fB
N
O
O
N
w0
O
L
w
N
N
>O
E
awn
L
L
wo
c
fB
M
i
a�
m
4-
a
i
N
ULaL+
�
0
O
CL
-0
L
L
+w�0
—
'
-
O>
O
O
co
=3'L
fB
U
a+
L
Q
O
c
O
`^
U
0
O
.-
N
y
HO}
>
=3
C:
.3
a,
_
O=3-
O
te�c
N
N
m
Q
O
OD
3
a--+
a+
-0
c
U
N
j
3
"
N
.2
U
E
fB
-0
_N
N
m
0
O
Q)
m
.N
C
�
O
a)
N
a)
E
w0
N
o
�
=
m
ate-+
of
+j
N
O
i
m
O
U
w0
0
L
0
L
C
Ot�=
O
O
wo
c
N
O
4m
m
U
L
W
N
-C
d
4-
cB
cB
d
Q U
cB
L
4.
c
.c
U
L
O
•
•
•
•
•
•
(n
ti
cn
N
+'
-0-0
_N
`n—
L
.L
,}
N
N
—
vi
O O
0
O
fB
fB
O
H
3
0
N
N
m0
p
O
'U
O
N_
I I
-C
Ln
�}
>
(�
+'
+'
4A
O
N
fB
.M_
U
-
a
M
of
O
��
fB
—
N
N
Ln
+�
c
fB
0Ln
x
N
N
N
Q
fB
Q
a'Q.
cB
(n
E
aQ
—
a.d
(�
.—
0
c
m
ate+
C
�
Q) —
c
Q
L
_Q
p
fB
Q
(10
0
N
Q)>
fB
O
O
_
v
U
w
CL
0
c
0_
•�
.p
N
U
N
C
.Q
,}
.�
p
0
O
O
N
E
fB
N
N4�0
Q
L>
N
0
4�0
4�0
c-
N
co
N
D
'�
N
D
m
_
i
U
N N
U
i
cB
cB
a
Q
.�
M=
O
•
•
O
s
co
E
OD
+>.+
of
N
O
N
•U
.0
mOD
N
C:
-CN
O
N
=
E
p
'.
Oof
N
'vf
a
CSA
N
p
0
+
Vf
L
N
_N
Q
0
bjO
0-
E
U
OO
OQ
O
UO=0-6EO
N
U
N
�N
O
L4A
O
�
0LNO
CL
41
+O
O
+'
c�i�
—
Q
C1A
cB
L
+�+
n
p
cNi�
N
W
N
O
W
0
0
Q
O
N
N�
LN
0_
N
+L+
E
:�
0
p
c
w_0
N
+,
of
Q)
N
_0
N
Q
D
O
Q
.�
�,
N
O
U
co
L
Q
O
L
ttoc
7
O
L
N
N
UO
U
4A
p
Q
N
L
_0
N
L
fB
N
O
N
N
O
N
O
E
4A
N
0
O
N
=3
OL
O
CL
L
C
-0
CLO
�
O
>
>
.
N
OL
W
'N
O
C
N
fB
N
U
-CQ
Q
in
N
=3
_0
O
O
Ln�
cB
`n
N
H
>
_
N
cu
i
L
O
Q
3
cB
N��
NN
N
a'
U
N
CAN
E
NUS
N
O
�-0
a
O
-0�o
+
0
N
E
O
E
N
+fB,
fB
-C
a
0COCOaQ_-C0w
CO
w
c
U
.�
L
O
•
•
•
•
•
•
(n
.N
O
2
u
c�
O
0 -
CL Q
co
E
c
(a
2
.0
CL
co
i,
c�
O
0
c
O
+,
O
N
J
�
N
+=
U
O
L
J
�
O
N
U
Q
�
�
O
�
�
U
N
�
N
�
N
pM00
� U
U
a�
cis
0
�=N
U :E
mQu
�
th i
a0�
�
O
iQ
N
N
O
0
2
W
N
Z'
.0
c�
0
c
�
v
J
�
N
+=
U
O
L
u
W
Q
�
Oi
pM00
U
a�
cis
0
�=N
U :E
mQu
�
th i
a0�
�
O
iQ
<
aI
4
Ln
t0 N
1� O
*'
Z
*'
u
u
.c
0 0
c�
O
d¢
d
ani
a fu
U
U
N
O
ate--+
b.0
Q
4 -UO
�
4-J
a1
ate
UL
O
ro CL
4-J
O
O
-J
_0
o
—
•�
�
Q
�
aJ
>
�
�
m
aJ
O
+-j
�,
�
�
�
O �
•�
ClA
�
v
ca
�
cn
�
•Q 2
O
O
.�
•�
-0
•O
O
bn
O
O
�
�
•N aJ
�
•�
�
DC
aJ
>
v
O
C
CLO
0-�
O
Ln
O
QU
ca
N
0
w
_0
0`~aJ
w
0
•cn
bn N
a)
>
m
Q
N
•C
ca
.0 �
N
O
O
0-0
O
+-+
+-,
aJ
N
0
•�
w
ca
�
DC
c
•—
�
ca
O
+.+
O
QO
-0
O
•N
�
-0
ca —
=
4-JJO
O
_O
"
N
a)
4-J
0
W
O
w
w
f6
�
b.0
E'U
N
'U
C:
U
t�A
o
.N
41 O
C
m
C
DC
Q
U
L�
Q
Q
w
O
w
LL
.v
Clio
'N
p
b.0
•�
U
O
b.0O
O
Oca
_�
�cn
O
=
-0
+-+
_0
._
a
.c
QJ
)
O
>
•—
cn
O
•�
Q
X
_W
�
E
N
—
�
>O
L
N
ca
>
O
O
�
N
�
•�
Q
f6
aN-+
o
tea✓
L
O
U
N
C:
O
_N
•p
•O
cn
DC
>
O
U
O
N
>
N
D
�
4-J
bD
L
N
a-
?>
�J
J
Q
E
QO
Q
�
OU
p
OU
Ln
N
L
b.0
O O
ca a -J
4-J to
E
O
E
L
O
Q
O
E
•� O
O
N O
ca � ca
O
.N O p
O
U � N
u O N
a_+
U
C:i
0 •N O
Q
W N Q
Q O
•� X
W
a -J _0
� N
O > 0
U —
0
O
Ln
Q
bD
N
•> ca
N
DC �
� •U
O Lh
N
N
N +�
O �
= ca
ClA E
•0 ate-+
O -
J �
U W
O
-0 � U
C6 C6
O � �
+, }, N
b-0 W O
•� •� vNi
>
U
L >`
U, O .v
ca • — —
O
V E 0-
U
E o p
c
•��- p O
�O
•Ul � ON 0
—
�
ca U CL +�
ca ; tw
0-0 -0 c:
Ul 0 >
.N Ln 0
1.O 2—V C:
O C: _0 cn
OO C:
U 4- U L
ti
4-
0
LO
m
(1)
c�
a
L
O
O
OE: V
LL
� O
O (1)
- N
N
-0 O
O =3
V o
a--' V
L
N O
O
J�^ JLn
0 0
4j)- 4j)- i/l-
Aj
i�
LL
v
U
N
aA
C
C:
L.L
fa O
�� -I
L
O
�
�
L
L
�
O
O
i,
i`
LL
O
O
O
v
•
U
U
O
Coco
Coco
Coco
Coco
• O
Lli
O
LA
O
N
Lr)
4j)- 4j)- i/l-
Aj
i�
LL
v
U
N
aA
C
C:
L.L
fa O
�� -I
/ cn
U OLn
E
�_ 4A cn
O =3
ro 0'ro
LU
O OLr) MJ po Q N O
O
Ln
U +-+
Zj p E cn
• 4--4— O .—
• O =3E +-+ 4A0
C)-
0, O U t! D
O� r�-I O
tA
AL
ca V)U u,
Ln ra _0 a cn
O _ E
• c _O O O +0
4—j
co
4-
0
co
m
(1)
c�
a
-1-j
V
�
�
-0
Ca
0
V
b -A
,
Q1
00
.M%
0
m
L—
CL
b-0
r—I
C:
N
+�
• —
O
N
CL
-
LL
bO
O
V
Q)
tw
i
Ca
Fa
E
�
CO
�
C�0
C:
C:
i
_0
0
m
O
M
bn
Q
4-)
0
Q
OAC
ate-+
Ln
E
0
V
a
co
.0
a
O
0
CSA
CL
m
bn
0
m
Ln0
O
m
Ln
Ln
bn
bn
0
m
i
O
Q
Q
Ln
X
bn
0
m
Q
LU
ti
4-
0
rn
m
a�
c�
4-
0
L
E
C:
ca
E
0
ca
0
w
_0V
C: ..
•— O
tw _0
mw
_Sle a--+
V M
Ul
-0
C�0 �
C
O
JA
O
Z
z
0
LL
O
O
2
E
O
ca
bn
bn
N
O
i
cn
E
w
O
co
w
CSA
Ca
n
CITY OF KITCHENER
2022 BUDGET ISSUE PAPER
ISSUE: BD07 — Neighbours Day Funding Increase
FUND: Operating
DEPARTMENT: Neighbourhood Programs and Services
PREPARER: Mark Hildebrand, Director Neighbourhood Programs and Services
BUDGET IMPACT: $30,000 (increase Neighbours Day total budget to $50,000)
During the Operating Budget review session, staff was directed provide information identifying ways
that the City could enhance Neighbours Day coming out of the pandemic, if the budget was
permanently increased to $50,000.
The first Neighbours Day event began in 2015 and had two goals. First, it was a chance to highlight the
City's 13 community centres to people who may not typically visit them. Just as important, it was also
an opportunity to provide formal and informal neighbourhood groups the opportunity to organize
their own events that encouraged increased connections with one another. Traditionally, Neighbours
Day hosted approximately 20-30 events across the city with thousands of residents attending. Events
could be as small as a community BBQ on a court, in a neighbourhood park or townhouse complex
common space. They could also be larger, including a multitude of activities with bands, games, crafts,
demonstrations etc. While the City has traditionally provided some minimal funding to support a
limited number of small grassroots celebrations, there is no existing funding earmarked for this
purpose. As a result, most of the celebrations have generally occurred in neighbourhoods that have
the financial and volunteer resources to organize this type of event without City support.
As a result of the pandemic restrictions, Neighbours Day 2021 gave staff the opportunity to focus even
more on smaller events in neighbourhoods and on people's properties, across the city. The theme of
Neighbours Day 2021 was "Host your own porch party'. Residents volunteered to offer their houses
to host and promote a neighbourhood concert on their porch or driveway. Staff focused strategic
support to as many residents as possible, making it easy for them to host a porch party; with City staff
organizing, connecting and arranging for local musicians to perform at individual homes. The day was
a tremendous success with over 50 homes hosting small-scale events across the city. Also, new willing
individuals were enthusiastically participating and hosting concerts, acting as connectors directly in
their neighbourhoods, knowing that they had staff support in the background.
There are many ways that Neighbours Day could be enhanced if the budget was increased. By
providing strategic support, similar to that in 2021, an increased budget provides significant
opportunity to not only expand the number of events that are run during Neighbours Day, but also the
opportunity to program to a wider variety of neighbourhoods that have traditionally not participated
due to lack of volunteers, knowledge and/or resources. As a result, there are more residents
volunteering, participating and connecting with one another.
In order to have a total budget of $50,000 for Neighbours Day operations, an increase of $30,000 (or
a tax rate increase of 0.02%) would be required.
For Council direction.
Page 71 of 117
CITY OF KITCHENER
2022 BUDGET ISSUE PAPER
ISSUE: BD08 — House of Friendship Food Distribution at Community Centres
FUND: Operating
DEPARTMENT: Community Services
PREPARER: Mark Hildebrand, Director Neighbourhood Programs and Services
BUDGET IMPACT: $50,000
House of Friendship provides several food related programs (emergency food distribution,
community gardens, cooking) at 5 of the City's community centres, for our residents experiencing
poverty. Originally only offered at Chandler Mowat and Kingsdale Community Centres, in 2019
the House of Friendship, in partnership with the Food Bank of Waterloo Region and City of
Kitchener, received an annual $250,000 Ontario Trillium Foundation (OTF) grant, for 3 years, to
expand the program to Centreville Chicopee, Forest Heights, and Victoria Hills community
centres. These food programs are funded by several sources, including a portion of the $150,000
Tier 1 grant (2021 funding) from the City. In March 2022, the OTF grant will be wrapping up, and
to continue current food programming at all 5 City facilities, alternate funding sources will be
needed.
On December 2, 2021 the House of Friendship sent a letter to the City requesting additional
funding to support food distribution at our community centres.
Prior to the program expansion in 2019, House of Friendship served approximately 2,500
individuals experiencing poverty during the year, out of Chandler Mowat and Kingsdale
Community Centre. Since adding the other 3 community centre sites, this number has doubled
to approximately 5,000 community members. The number of individuals served is only one
factor to consider when identifying need. Consideration also has to be given to the number of
times that individuals have accessed the food programs, and this has also increased, tripling in
the first eight months of 2021 compared to 2019. Focusing in on some specific sites, program
use at Kingsdale, Centreville and Victoria Hills has continued to rise through 2021, seeing the
average households served/week rising by about 25 households in the last two months.
The loss of the OTF grant ($250,000) will have a significant impact on the current food programs.
The House of Friendship has been working with the Food Bank of Waterloo Region and other
donors to raise the additional dollars needed to cover the funding shortfall. As part of that work,
it is requesting the City provide an additional $50,000 in ongoing operating funding to continue
the food distribution program within our centres. If House of Friendship is not able to find
alternate sources of funding, they would continue to explore the use of volunteers and other
community capacity for support. However, it would not be possible to make up the full deficit in
this manner and it is likely House of Friendship would have to pull back on food distribution at
the three community centre sites.
Page 72 of 117
CITY OF KITCHENER
2022 BUDGET ISSUE PAPER
An increase of the size being requested by the
through the City's existing Tier 1 grant budget.
tax rate increase of 0.04%).
House of Friendship cannot feasibly be funded
The requested budget increase is $50,000 (or a
On a related note, in 2022 staff intend to look at moving House of Friendship out of the grants
process and continuing the City's partnership with them through a contracted fee-for-service
model.
For Council consideration and direction.
Page 73 of 117
CITY OF KITCHENER
2022 BUDGET ISSUE PAPER
ISSUE: BD09 — Social Development Centre Waterloo Region Funding Request
FUND: Capital
DEPARTMENT: Development Services — Planning Division
PREPARER: Justin Readman, General Manager — Development Services
BUDGET IMPACT: $63,200
During the Capital Budget review session, staff was directed to provide information on the
Social Development Centre Waterloo Region's (SDCWR) request for $63,200 additional funding.
2020 Budget
During the 2020 budget, Council identified an annual operating fund of $125,000 to support
affordable housing initiatives. More specifically, the 2020 issue paper stated that future
funding would be allocated based on the findings of the affordable housing strategy. At that
time, several Councillors expressed they did not want to see this fund go towards staffing costs.
Current Funding with the Social Development Centre
The City of Kitchener provides $11,526 in Tier 1 grant funding to the Social Development Centre
Waterloo Region (SDCWR) for supports to Festival of Neighbourhoods. In 2020 SDCWR and the
University of Waterloo were provided with $10,000 to conduct research on displacement within
the City of Kitchener. City of Kitchener staff also assisted SDCWR with their successful $99,000
grant from the CMHC Community Based Tenant Initiative Fund to support the Lived Experience
Working Group Pilot identified in Housing for All. The City of Kitchener is also providing
$30,000 to provide remuneration, meeting expenses, reducing technology barriers, capacity
building and research for the lived experience members that form the lived experience working
group.
SDCWR 2022 Funding Ask
Through the public budget input session, SDCWR has made a request to the City for funding for
two part-time staffing resources. SDCWR has requested $27,700 which is proposed primarily for
staffing for the Civic Hub Program Support with stated outcomes of mobilizing lived experience
voices and marginalized populations in conversations and consultations regarding municipal
elections, COVID recovery in neighbourhoods, planning and development, equity and social
justice, accessibility services, etc. SDCWR is also seeking $35,500 primarily to cover staffing
costs of Eviction Prevention Work with stated outcomes of resources and advocacy for
Kitchener citizens as they struggle to access Housing Stability services, Landlord and Tenant
Board, Human Rights Tribunal, and other resources to keep them from falling into
homelessness.
Civic Hub
The Request from the Social Development Centre has identified two focus areas. One of the
areas (civic hub) is not directly related to implementing Housing for All and targets more broad
civic supports related to lived experience around municipal elections, COVID recovery, planning
and development, equity and social justice, etc. Given that this is not directly tied to
implementing Housing for All it should not be funded with Housing for All implementation
Page 74 of 117
CITY OF KITCHENER
2022 BUDGET ISSUE PAPER
money. The City of Kitchener also has a formalized grant intake process, which SDCWR had not
submitted a request through to support this specific work. Should Council wish to choose to
fund a program of this nature, outside of that formalized process, then it could set a precedent
for other organizations to sidestep the established grant process.
Eviction Prevention and Housing for All
SDCWR's second funding request is for eviction prevention work. Within Housing for All there
are two actions related to tenants/evictions. These are:
• Track and monitor renovictions, where tenants are displaced from their homes
to allow major renovations or redevelopment to proceed and housing held for
investment in Kitchener.
• Report to Council on the feasibility and implications of the following potential
policy: Tenant Assistance Policy and implementing Bylaw to mitigate impacts
from redevelopment of rental apartments on current tenants, including
consideration of developers providing advanced notice and assistance to
residents including relocation plans
Initial work has happened on understanding displacement through the 2020 research funding
with the Social Development Centre and the University of Waterloo. Staff have not yet
reported to Council on the feasibility and implications of a tenant assistance policy and
implementing bylaw as staff have been focused on other actions in Housing for All, such as
helping the approvals of supportive housing projects, transitioning A Better Tent City and
establishing the lived experience working group. Therefore, it would be premature to fund a
program that Council has not yet considered the implications of and its specific role as a local
municipality.
Region of Waterloo Resources
The Region of Waterloo has a Renter's Toolkit web page that contains links to existing
community resources and supports for people at risk of homelessness or require assistance
with respect to housing. Council asked whether the SDCWR had engaged the Region of
Waterloo on funding for this proposal and the response was that those discussions had not yet
happened. By directly funding the proposed body of work, as outlined by SDCWR, Kitchener
Council could begin to take on the role of the Housing Service Manager (a role assigned through
legislation to the Region of Waterloo).
Next Steps
The City of Kitchener has expressed concern about the practice of renovictions and tenant
displacement and the City's Housing for All strategy contains actions to understand and explore
the City's role. Kitchener and the Social Development Centre Waterloo Region have
successfully collaborated on Housing for All implementation (research on displacement and
advancing the lived experience working group). There is an opportunity to collaborate and
explore the feasibility of a tenant assistance policy in 2022; however, funding dedicated staffing
for a program that has not yet been defined is premature.
Page 75 of 117
CITY OF KITCHENER
2022 BUDGET ISSUE PAPER
Staff have also assisted the Social Development Centre Waterloo Region on successful grant
applications to other funding bodies and could support further assistance in 2022.
The funding request from the Social Development Centre Waterloo Region is $63,200 (or a tax
rate increase of 0.05%).
That the additional funding of $63,200 not be approved
That staff be directed to work with the Social Development Centre Waterloo Region on a grant
submission request to the Region of Waterloo or other funders to further develop the Civic Hub
Program and Eviction Prevention Work; and further,
That research on the feasibility and implications of a tenant assistance policy conducted by City
of Kitchener staff include engagement with the Social Development Centre and other local not
for profits.
Page 76 of 117
CITY OF KITCHENER
2022 BUDGET ISSUE PAPER
ISSUE: BD10 — Resources to Explore Planning Policies to Accelerate Purpose -Built
Rental Development
FUND: Operating
DEPARTMENT: Development Services Department — Planning Division
PREPARER: Rosa Bustamante, Director of Planning
BUDGET IMPACT: $120,000 ($30,000 Building, $90,000 tax)
During the Capital Budget review session, staff was directed to report back on the availability of
staffing / consulting resources related to a review of policy to accelerate purpose-built rentals.
In August 2021, a Council Strategy Session was held on the Policy Workplan priorities. At that
time, staff confirmed that the City's next Official Plan Review will commence in 2023 and that
there are staff resources available to closely review and update the City's Official Plan policies.
Given that there is a significant review of the Regional Official Plan and then a review of the
City's Official Plan in 2023 it would be premature to retain consulting services to study how to
bring on purpose-built rentals more quickly from a policy perspective. It is also important to
note that planning case law has been clear that municipalities cannot regulate tenure (i.e.
owners vs renters) nor can municipalities prevent an applicant from choosing to apply for a plan
of condominium for a specific development.
Staff understand that one of the greatest incentives the local municipality can provide relates
to development approvals, as time is money within the development industry. In 2020,
Planning piloted a project manager role. This role focused on accelerating affordable housing
and high priority project development approvals, identifying process efficiencies, digital
transformation and managing affordable housing incentives.
The project manager role provided consistent file management, issue resolution and
coordination approvals. Using this model, the approvals timeline for the Block Line Road YWCA
women's supportive housing project was approximately 2.5 months (72 days) from application
to full site plan approval versus the provincial average of 18 months (Source: Altus Group
Economic Consulting (Sept. 2020) BILD Municipal Benchmarking Study).
72 [t.,y .
construction Perlad
March 2021 May 2021 June 2021 December 2021 Early 2022
Application Approval in Full Site Plan Middie Picture Expected
Received Principle Approval Above Completion
Figure 1: YWCA's Supportive Housing Development Timeline
Page 77 of 117
CITY OF KITCHENER
2022 BUDGET ISSUE PAPER
Expanding the project manager program also allows for further customer service improvements
within the planning division. This includes being a conduit back into the planning team to
identify areas for process and/or policy improvement to encourage greater investment in
affordable housing/rentals.
The project manager model did not contemplate providing dedicated project manager
resources to purpose-built rental projects. Should Council wish to incentivize purpose-built
rentals, then an additional FTE and associated funding would be required to expedite purpose-
built rental development applications. This role would also include a benefit to the Building
division, so if approved, staff propose the Building enterprise fund 25% of the position.
The estimated cost of an additional Project Manager position, including fringe benefits, is
$120,000, which would be funded $30,000 from Building and $90,000 from taxes (or a tax rate
increase of 0.07%).
That Council approve an additional FTE and associated operating budget to fund a Project
Manager with the Planning Division that is focused on accelerating purpose-built rental
development applications.
Page 78 of 117
CITY OF KITCHENER
2022 BUDGET ISSUE PAPER
ISSUE: BD11—Heritage Planning Resource
FUND: Operating
DEPARTMENT: Development Services Department — Planning Division
PREPARER: Rosa Bustamante, Director of Planning
BUDGET IMPACT: $120,000
During the Operating Budget review session, staff was directed to report back on the need for
an additional Heritage Planner to implement the work of Heritage Kitchener subcommittees.
The current staff complement of Heritage planners is two full time equivalents (FTEs). The
current heritage planning work plan includes:
• Supporting Heritage Kitchener,
• Advancing the profile of Heritage Planning through corporate initiatives,
• Providing heritage advice throughout the development review process,
• Administering the Heritage Grant and Tax Refund Program,
• Delivering the bi-annual Mike and Pat Wagner Heritage Awards,
• Reviewing and making recommendations on Heritage Permit applications, and
• Advancing planned policy planning work where applicable including neighbourhood
specific planning reviews, secondary plans and the Cultural Heritage Landscapes.
At the August 2021 Council Strategic Session, Council provided input into prioritization of the
Policy Planning work plan. At that time, specific heritage planning work, such as
implementation of the Cultural Heritage Landscape Plan or advancing work through Heritage
Kitchener was not identified as a priority for the 2022/23 work plan. The work to implement the
55 different Cultural Heritage Landscapes is a resource -intensive project. Some of this work is
being implemented through other projects, such as the Neighbourhood Planning Reviews and
planned secondary plans to better align resources (consultation, communications), and to
ensure a comprehensive review of a neighbourhood's planning framework.
The Council approved Terms of Reference for Heritage Kitchener specifically states the policy
purpose of the committee as follows:
Advises Council on matters involving conservation of heritage resources within
Kitchener, both publicly and privately owned. Heritage Kitchener is a local
architectural conservation advisory committee, as defined in the Ontario
Heritage Act.
The responsibilities of Heritage Kitchener include:
• Advising Council on matters pursuant to the Ontario Heritage Act,
Examining, researching, developing and preparing a detailed inventory of those
properties it feels should be designated pursuant to Part IV and Part V of the Ontario
Heritage Act,
Annually reviewing local issues, proposing committee priorities and developing
workplans based upon the identified priorities of the Committee,
Page 79 of 117
CITY OF KITCHENER
2022 BUDGET ISSUE PAPER
• Recommending to Council approval of grants pursuant to the Municipal Designated
Heritage Property Grant Program,
• Promote greater public awareness of our built heritage and heritage conservation issues
through exhibits, openings, posters, the plaquing program, guides and special events,
and
• Assisting and lending advice to owners of heritage properties in terms of good
conservation practice.
Currently, Heritage Kitchener is supported by a Committee Clerk from Legislated Services as
well as the Heritage planners. Given the scope of responsibilities of Heritage Kitchener, the
committee is adequately supported by the three City staff who participate in Heritage
Kitchener.
Recently, members of Heritage Kitchener have expressed more interest in exploring initiatives
related to decolonizing heritage and supporting projects related to equity, diversity and
inclusivity. While it is commendable that Heritage Kitchener would like to explore decolonizing
heritage, heritage planning staff have communicated to Heritage Kitchener that many of their
ideas fall under the work program that will be led by the Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion (EDI)
team. The Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion staff have not yet been invited to Heritage Kitchener
to present their work plan, timing on their initiatives and how the EDI team can work with
Heritage Kitchener in a reciprocal relationship that respects the roles and responsibilities of the
Heritage Kitchener and the EDI office. This dialogue is necessary before consideration of
funding of additional resources.
The estimated cost of an additional Heritage Planner position, including fringe benefits, is
$120,000 (or a tax rate increase of 0.09%).
That an additional Heritage Planner FTE and associated budget not be approved at this time.
Page 80 of 117
CITY OF KITCHENER
2022 BUDGET ISSUE PAPER
ISSUE: BD12 — Downtown Snow Clearing
FUND: Operating
DEPARTMENT: INS — Parks & Cemeteries
PREPARER: Niall Lobley, Director, Parks & Cemeteries
BUDGET IMPACT: None (costs would be borne by properties benefitting from the service)
During the Operating Budget review session, staff was directed to provide information about
expanding the Downtown area for winter sidewalk maintenance by the City of Kitchener to
improve access to the Market District and light rail transit (LRT).
The City of Kitchener provides an elevated level of service to the Commercial Core with respect
to snow clearing. The Commercial Core is defined by the 'Sidewalks — Downtown Snow
Removal' bylaw, Chapter 877.
This by-law identifies the streets where the City will clear the snow from the downtown
sidewalks. Portions of these sidewalks front onto City and Regional property, but for the
balance the bylaw states that the annual cost related to this service will be charged to the
property owner. Approximately 487 properties (304 Residential and 183 Commercial) receive a
special charge on their property tax bill related to snow clearing. For 2021, the revenue
provided through the special charge to property owners in the downtown under this by-law
was approximately $85,000.
Properties outside the defined area are subject to the provisions of the Snow and Ice bylaw,
Chapter 687. This places the responsibility for snow and ice removal of sidewalks to the private
property owner.
The service level provided in the downtown is significantly higher than the service level of the
bylaw. In the downtown, staff attempt to always maintain the streets free from snow and ice.
Snow clearing and treatment work is ongoing throughout winter and even in more significant
snow events, sidewalks are repeatedly cleared every 6 — 8 hours. The rationale for the higher
service level in the downtown is due to the high presence of commercial properties and to
support economic activity in the core.
Areas of the City relying on the Snow and Ice bylaw are required to be cleared of snow and ice
within 24 hours of a weather event. Both service levels are higher than the Municipal
Maintenance Standards, MMS, established provincially, which requires snow (to a max depth of
less than or equal to 8 cm) and ice removal within 48 hours
Through a comprehensive review of sidewalk snow clearing practices between 2017 and 2020,
Council approved implementation of the assisted services sidewalk and windrow clearing
program and implementation of a proactive by-law enforcement program; however, did not
approve expansion of City -led winter sidewalk maintenance.
Page 81 of 117
CITY OF KITCHENER
2022 BUDGET ISSUE PAPER
The streets Council has requested additional information for snow clearing are generally
residential streets outside the defined downtown area in Chapter 877. All property on these
streets is private and so all costs for clearing would be met by property owners on these
streets. Based on a spatial review, the additional sidewalks on Charles, Eby, and Cedar
represent 800 meters of additional sidewalk. These streets are currently cleared by property
owners within 24 hours of snow or ice events. There is not a history of non-compliance or
complaint with Bylaw for these streets failing to achieve the bylaw standards.
If additional streets are to be added to the bylaw (i.e. costs recovery vs. from the general tax
base), it will require amendments to the current by-law and will also require consultation with
property owners who are impacted as some property owners already have private contractors
providing this service. Further, under the Municipal Act, if a street is added to the service area,
all properties and owners identified within the designate service area must pay the levy. That
is, a property owner cannot opt out if they do not want the service.
It is not possible to amend the bylaw for winter, 2021/22. Further, providing this service in
winter 2021/22 could not be supported operationally.
• The Downtown levy is currently $27.81 per linear meter. Amending the by-law to
incorporate the approximately 800 meter of additional sidewalk would result in
additional revenue of $22,250 based on the currently approved 2021 User Fee.
That no action be taken towards implementing snow clearing on additional streets near the
Kitchener Market at this time given direction from the Winter Sidewalk work recently
completed; and
That staff ensure these streets are a focus for proactive winter sidewalk bylaw enforcement.
Page 82 of 117
ISSUE:
FUND:
DEPARTMENT:
PREPARER:
BUDGET IMPACT
CITY OF KITCHENER
2022 BUDGET ISSUE PAPER
BD13 — Mileage & Per Diem rates
Operating
All
Bonnie Saunderson, Corporate Financial Advisor
None
To provide a comparison of the current mileage and per diem rates used by local municipalities.
Mileage Rate
Canada Revenue Agency (CRA) has prescribed mileage rates under section 4306 of the Income
Tax Regulations that are considered to be reasonable, and therefore are tax-exempt
automobile allowances. For 2021, the prescribed mileage rates are $0.59/km for the first 5,000
kilometres driven, and $0.53/km for each additional kilometre.
In previous years, City staff would prepare a theoretical calculation for the average cost per
kilometre to own and operate a vehicle and make recommendations based on this analysis.
Instead, staff are recommending to align Kitchener's mileage rates to the CRA rates each year,
as they are in a position to determine the most appropriate rate for taxation purposes.
Per Diem Rates
The following is a comparison of current per diem rates used by local municipalities.
Discussions with these other local municipalities indicate per diem rates will be held at 2021
levels with no increase. It is recommended that the City also maintain its per diem rates at
existing levels.
CURRENT:
Municipality
Breakfast
Lunch
Dinner
Incidentals
Total
City of Kitchener
$ 15
$ 20
$ 35
$ -
$ 70
City of Cambridge
$ 15
$ 20
$ 35
$ -
$ 70
City of Waterloo
$ 15
$ 25
$ 35
$ -
$ 75
Region of Waterloo
$ 12
$ 16
$ 30
$ 10
$ 68
Based on current budgets (which are based off pre -pandemic operating norms), if the mileage
rate is increased to match the current CRA rate, it would increase the City's annual costs by
$35,425. No adjustment to the budget is proposed as:
• The impact calculation is based on actual use which will vary from year to year, and will
most likely decrease based on increased use of technology for virtual meetings
• The impact would be spread amongst several City divisions
Page 83 of 117
CITY OF KITCHENER
2022 BUDGET ISSUE PAPER
That effective January 111 of each year, the City of Kitchener adopt the CRA prescribed mileage
rate for that year as the City's per kilometre reimbursement rate. For 2022, the mileage rate
will be $0.59/km for the first 5,000 kilometres driven, and $0.53 for each additional kilometre.
That the City of Kitchener's per diem rates remain at $70/day ($15 for breakfast, $20 for lunch,
$35 for dinner).
Page 84 of 117
CITY OF KITCHENER
2022 BUDGET ISSUE PAPER
ISSUE: BD14 — 2022 Budget Public Input
FUND: Operating and Capital
DEPARTMENT: General
PREPARER: Debbie Andrade, Manager of Budgets
BUDGET IMPACT: None
As part of the annual budget process, the City connects with citizens in many ways. The City
holds a Public Input Night where residents can provide their opinion on the budget directly to
Council. Additionally, the public can provide feedback using an online survey tool in which
results are summarized and presented to Council.
The primary method of resident feedback about the budget is through the City's online survey.
This year a total of 228 people responded to the survey, down from 474 in 2020 and 255 in
2019 (the 2021 survey had minimal participation in the midst of the pandemic). The survey
included a total of 13 questions capturing general demographics, feedback on the proposed tax
and utilities rate increases, strategic plan goals, as well as an opportunity to vote for the
different capital investment options being considered by Council through the 2022 budget.
Highlights from the survey are noted below with more detailed, written comments included
later in the issue paper.
Capital Investment Options
One of the main questions through this year's survey is what to do with $11V! of unallocated
capital funding. Based on the survey results, half of the respondents said to split the funding
over multiple priorities, while half of the respondents said to spend all of the money on a single
priority (with affordable housing being the preferred priority area). A summary of this can be
seen in the graph below.
Split the $1M vs Put All $1M to One Priority
■ Split the $1M ■ Affordable Housing ■ Facilities Trails ■ Other
Page 85 of 117
CITY OF KITCHENER
2022 BUDGET ISSUE PAPER
Looking at the more detailed results, affordable housing was the most popular capital priority
at either a $1M or $500k investment. Of those who split funding, the most common options
were $500k each for affordable housing and facilities, or $500k for affordable housing, with
$250k each for facilities and trails. These options are summarized in the table below.
Option 1 Option 2 Option
Affordable Housing $1,000,000 $500,000 $500,000
Facilities $0 $500,000_ $250,000
Trails $0 $0 1 $250,000
Fuding for the cmdain
nF an a8wdaWa hm—
Addrnsing the Cl O
fmdldes hdruftudk}e
h W"
0aw
M 101 IN 200
250
GINW[an oplolam
*to
• snauoo-
#Y,SCUJ➢Ob
Page 86 of 117
CITY OF KITCHENER
2022 BUDGET ISSUE PAPER
Proposed Tax Rate
The majority of respondents think the proposed tax rate is reasonable.
• 61.9% said the tax rate increase is reasonable
• 13.6% said the tax rate increase is neither reasonable nor unreasonable
• 24.5% said the tax rate increase is unreasonable
27(„x)
3103-6%)
=-M
W {aa.1%4
ChmMun aptkwm
0 Vmy rau name Saifiewhad reas*ftab 9 0 Nellher remsnrMn nyunMWnade ■ :SanwAnt untesSwaM
• vmy unra&mAsbk,
Page 87 of 117
CITY OF KITCHENER
2022 BUDGET ISSUE PAPER
Proposed Water Utilities Rate
The majority of respondents also think the proposed water utilities rate is reasonable.
• 54.5% said the water utilities rate increase is reasonable
• 17.4% said the water utilities rate increase is neither reasonable nor unreasonable
• 28.1% said the water utilities rate increase unreasonable
E2 (YJ.7%6
Oue®tlnn optlorm
i very Ies"I& le=:rna*had raagn>fta a ''l Netther reasonaMe nos unfaa"taWa 4) SnffE fist uftram*nable
9 vary L h119Marset16
Page 88 of 117
CITY OF KITCHENER
2022 BUDGET ISSUE PAPER
Where Respondents Getting Their Budget Information
Most of the respondents are getting their information on the 2022 budget from the City's
website and many of the survey participants haven't looked for information before this year.
The results from this question will help staff prepare for future public engagement
opportunities.
i1a
ice
E
W,
ap
W
50
40
so
10
I n
ICU
Ckieeflun Optima
0 1 MV4Wt km5ked r8r In !! §E ]fi tr_-lve TrIe City-& buL16)L11 JOLT 060 11 't a CII$ 40cw fnKu 60=1
Tfte G!" watelte 0 LuLa1 iwpapen. r-, []lh&r IpiEwe duv ILie:.
Page 89 of 117
CITY OF KITCHENER
2022 BUDGET ISSUE PAPER
Demographics - Ward
Responses came from every ward within the City. The largest number of responses came from
Ward 10, followed by ward 9, and then ward 2.
36(16.2%) -
16 (;7.2'x;
Question options
2 `3 `4 99'•5 r-6 407 daa X19 4010
12 ;s.a
1 R (6.896)
Page 90 of 117
CITY OF KITCHENER
2022 BUDGET ISSUE PAPER
Demographics - Age
Most respondents were in their 30s, 40s or 50s.
34 (1&2" -
4 io.o`_;
55(211ki
431(27.2%)
Ouentlan odors
Jule: la )mai s oid 11 Pm&f iml 16 snswan $ 65 yeara cid and above • 6D 6o- 64 years old -f) 5d l0 59 yaaas o6d
4D la 49 years old 1.4 3D In 39 yaws old 1®io 29 years obd
Page 91 of 117
CITY OF KITCHENER
2022 BUDGET ISSUE PAPER
Demographics — Associated Groups
The following chart is a breakdown of participants by associated groups.
G,
so
40
24
I$
�0 1s
I i L
aa.
(kiesCon aptk3ns
! P11e4LM uut In arnwey '.7 Nwvo! ft PWM NamrM. molt 61 MAIIN 2LGE70. 0 InMHOMM fm Relvgee
Mnrntwv' W a ra;lai2ed gruup iq POMM" hadisataillly
Page 92 of 117
CITY OF KITCHENER
2022 BUDGET ISSUE PAPER
Demographics — Gender
The following chart is a breakdown of participants by gender.
911
W
so
so
so
as
sa
20
!o
WP
G,L-su4Fa ope
• A pander MM U00d sheave k * P"W neq ps tr rwee � � ea � Mph wll► � perwar • T�S�Iflr
Tmr* Men i Trans Wowma i +dw FkM f Osnder O Geer M Alan # WINF mn
There are no financial implications.
For information only.
Page 93 of 117
CITY OF KITCHENER
2022 BUDGET ISSUE PAPER
Written Comments
Affordable Housing
• I'd like to see the money split between immediate housing projects and a reserve
fund for said projects. Imagine the public housing that could be created on the land
taken up by a single hole on a golf course that I'll never use, let alone the whole
course!
• In order to reach zero homelessness by 2025, the City will need to invest in
considerable affordable housing. As of 2021, just over 1000 people in Waterloo
Region are unhoused, with a large proportion in Kitchener. The number of unhoused
is likely to increase. Other infrastructure should also be invested into some extent,
so I would prefer a higher increase in taxes for more investments in infrastructure.
• Affordable Housing is important in the City of Kitchener: I understand that the
Province and the Federal Government are also pitching in to help our City.
• 600 homes are still not enough housing for our homeless population. Aren't there
over 2600 people waiting for subsidized housing? People need a place to live first.
Then you can pave some parking lots (actually don't pave the parking lots at all,
make them into public spaces instead please).
• I would put $750,000 towards affordable housing and $250,000 towards trails.
• Need support workers for affordable and supportive housing.
• Affordable housing should be required of developers. They are making healthy
profits and could afford to provide some affordable housing
• Affordable housing is the key problem.
• "If we can support the people of this city we affordable housing, we can give people
a chance to be productive. It can pay for itself. Trails are wonderful but how can we
invest in trails when we have homeless people living in sheds? Help families be
successful, with safe affordable housing. They'll pay taxes on the long run. We can
build trails then.
• Additional $250k to housing
• 1 million to offset housing costs isn't a lot but perhaps it can be combined with FCM
or federal funding.
• It has been YEARS of discussing affordable housing. With the lack of movement and
slow progress of ending chronic homelessness and to sustain housing prevention has
been lack luster in RoW. Shelter systems are collapsing and there is always a lack of
resources for housing. We NEED AFFORDABLE housing years ago. It's so crucial to
develop housing as it intersects with education, the work/labour market and the
future of KW. Poverty rates are rising and increased service use for programs like
emergency food, social assistance and police/justice programs. All of these costs
completely outweigh affordable housing investments.
Page 94 of 117
CITY OF KITCHENER
2022 BUDGET ISSUE PAPER
• Affordable living should be the main concern over anything else at all. Pools can
wait. Trails can wait. People are struggling to live in Affordable housing. Help these
people first I'm not sure how there is even any other options being considered here.
• 1 did not select affordable housing as I believe each high-rise rental that is built
should have 10% affordable units. This is city is allowing developers to get rich
without helping the region solve 'real' problems.
• We are in a housing crisis. Affordable housing is top priority.
• more affordable housing. no one can afford to live here as no new apartments are
getting built. it's all condos!
• Let's help people who are marginalized. Not into beautification of our city. That can
wait. Maybe next year. Marginalized populations need help NOW! Invest in housing.
• The ranges for the amount of housing is confusing -- invest in as many nice
affordable living units as possible... 500 more meters of trail may not be significant
in some areas, but it's a start. Lyle Hallman pool is used by various members of the
community, especially in the winter months it's a great place to exercise
Lower Taxes
• Save the money go reduce taxes
• Tax breaks. It's almost impossible to live here without an income of $120,000/year.
• Lower our taxes
• How about give it back in tax relief
• $1,000,000 for property tax reduction.
• I have some leftover capital, don't know how, but how do you think I should spend
it???? Why not save it, invest it for something that we really need. Or, how about
giving everyone a rebate?
• if there is excess money left over that means the city is overcharging taxpayers.
Maybe that million should go towards to pay for the water utilities instead of just
spending it for the sake of spending it.
• why does every surplus have to be spent? Why can't it be used to keep tax increases
down?
• Put it towards anything that doesn't have to increase the taxes or corporate utilities
for homeowners. We need to stop taking it from those who own homes or there
will be an increased need for affordable housing and the foodbank. Please just stop.
• do not spend money if not needed so you have a reason to increase the taxes again
as you already are planning to do so .
• This money should be left in the tax paying residence pocket rather than a surplus
that the city has no idea what to do with.
Other Comments
• Housing is a regional responsibility that should be funded by them. I believe the
current state of the trail system is relatively good compared to the state of some
of our pools and arenas etc.
Page 95 of 117
CITY OF KITCHENER
2022 BUDGET ISSUE PAPER
• Cleaning services
• Stop funding bike lanes and bike environments that no one uses.
• i click other by accident
• Shaded areas as well as seating at parks and splash pads.
• Slow cars down on our street oprington drive where they seem to think it's a
racetrack between Victoria and benesfort drive
• "Learn to be financially responsible in the growth of the city. Anyone can grow
an economy with constant city growth, the trick is to grow your economy
without constant city and tax growth. Hire an independent auditor to expose the
frivolous spending of council and what the total cost of these programs cost. (
Indigenous costs the lands of the city and surrounding area were sold by Chief
Brant who was also a slave owner. Perhaps the city should get their own
appointed committee members to acknowledge these facts).
• A Community space for Indigenous and marginalized folks to gather, seek
community, and care
• Climate change initiatives - bus shelters with green rooftops - bee gardens, lots
of tree planting and solar panels in parking lots.
• Indigenous Community Hub
• NONE of these are worth this funding. More community centers should be
updated. Streets need to be plowed earlier and regularly.
• Food
• How about a rainy day fund. Silly me that's what we do with the surplus gas
utility money.
• Refurbishment and update to city parks (not trails) including the park at River
and Manchester Rd specifically.
• creating more FULL-TIME jobs with benefits and closer to the living wage
• Transforming the City to withstand destructive climate events, to keep people
safe when these happen and to become an environmentally sustainable
community.
• Proper bike lanes which are part of interconnected networks.
• improving sidewalks in areas like mine where 3 buses twice per day drop off kids
and a senior residence. I've told people who trip on it to sue the city, I am tired
of complaining.
• Infrastructure upgrades... roads, water lines, etc.
• Sidewalk winter maintenance program
• Save it for a rainy day like most households have to do. Because you have a
surplus, you are going to throw it away. A coworker once explained that to me
on how you spend in on anything, just spend it or lose it. That is simply
incredible
• The performing arts have suffered greatly since the pandemic began. Please
make sure that they are considered in the new budget.
Page 96 of 117
CITY OF KITCHENER
2022 BUDGET ISSUE PAPER
• We need more buses. GRT drivers are professional at their jobs but I see too
many times that they are off -schedule due to detours or heavy traffic beyond
their control; they are "stretched too thin." As a result, we passengers are late to
work and medical appointments. Not acceptable. More buses on the road
(running more frequently) would relieve these problems.
• Invest in utilizing the streetlighting mesh network for smarter city services.
• forest heights pool is still and has been for years totally oversubscribed,
southwest of Kitchener needs pools and rinks
• Camera's in high crime areas.
• Imagine how many affordable homes and nice trails we could build if we didn't
spend 10s of millions on unnecessary policing.
• Trails are very important
• City facilities parking in general should not receive any more than the minimum
upkeep necessary. Affordable housing should come at a greater cost to current
and new residents at not at the expense of improvements otherwise included
here.
• Managed to find money by reallocating a couple of million dollars from the
police's nearly $200M budget. Additional social support funding is sorely needed.
So many kids are without necessary supports and opportunities to thrive.
• ME!!! the revenue tool deserves some consideration perhaps.
• Use the funds to offset the water rate increase
• Shoveling sidewalks at key points, beefing up bylaw inspections of city sidewalks
during winter
• 1 would like to see improvements to pedestrian and cycling infrastructure around
City facilities as opposed to repaving parking lots. We should be encouraging AT
as much as possible. Add more secure bike parking and improved pathways
through parking lots for pedestrians so we're not walking through parking lots to
get places.
• "Addressing the city's infrastructure debt is fine, but I'm not sure that repaving
parking lots is a great use of money when we should be shifting transportation
modes away from cars. Would that land be better reallocated to housing?
Investing in cycling infrastructure is great, but I think the focus on trails is going
to result in little shift in transportation mode. That money would better be spent
on a contiguous network of separated bicycle lanes (not just painted road
gutters), and much better maintenance (e.g. snow clearing in winter, sweeping in
other seasons, and maintenance of smooth paving without obstructions) -- that
would actually induce demand, which is the goal. I would not spend any city
resources on an affordable housing reserve. Your money and energies are better
spent streamlining the approval process and making fundamental changes to
land use policies that have been blocking development of sufficient housing in
the region for my entire adult life. It's intergenerational warfare, and you have to
stop."
Page 97 of 117
CITY OF KITCHENER
2022 BUDGET ISSUE PAPER
• Improving walking and cycling infrastructure.
• Economic growth and support, fraud prevention.
• Curious if community trail fund could be drawn out further with gravel trails
rather than asphalt
• "Underserved populations. And repairs to existing public housing. Mental health,
drug addiction. No policing."
• Parks are desperately needed to support the new development.
• 1 think additional investment should be more rounded to include more for
community benefit between the facilities and community trails which benefit the
City as a whole and that the Region should step up for more of the affordable
housing reserve. I realize this does not match your options but should be noted.
• City Parks and green space control vandalism
• Social services; outreach for vulnerable populations
• 1 would like to see more investment in mental health and social program
resources.
• Instead of a tax increase put that money into water and sewer
Affordable Housing
• Addictions and mental health supports need urgent funding, along with
increasing supportive housing stock. It's disgraceful that we have people living on
the street while we worry about if parking lot lights need to be converted to LED
or if the irrigation systems at our golf courses need to be repaired. Please help
these people!
• HOUSING. Rent is too high
• housing and homelessness.
• No more condos! Affordable housing should include freehold and semi detached
homes. Building more condos is not going to change the fact that people who
live here drive cars. Our cities are not meant to function like downtown Toronto.
The LRT is not a substitute for a subway system nor should it be. Increasing the
city's population is only going to make pollution and traffic worse.
• Affordable housing, supporting shelter systems, safer streets, reducing traffic
speeds on residential roads
• Just housing. We're in a crisis
• "Yes tax relief. The drug epidemic. Affordable housing. Our city is looking rough
not the Parks, buildings, in streets but the community and the people. Also
something should be done about creating interaction with communities. This is
the loneliest most boring city I've loved in. No sense of community at all. "
• While I appreciate the push to make choices with limited funds ($1 million) I am
disappointed that increasing taxes is not an option here. I believe that both
housing and trails need high levels of investment. That may not be possible with
Page 98 of 117
CITY OF KITCHENER
2022 BUDGET ISSUE PAPER
the suggested 1.9% increase, but it may very well be possible with an increase
closer to the rate of inflation. I'd rather see slightly more of increase shared
amongst all residents to ensure that we have quality municipal services for all,
then just having bragging rights that 'we kept taxes low'.
• Investment in affordable housing should be backed by zoning policy for new
developments - force developers to include family units & below-market
units if they are going to build in Kitchener. Otherwise investment in affordable
housing will get undermined by current incentives for developers to build
investment units only therefore pushing housing prices up continuously.
• Housing for all, Indigenous space
• " affordable housing is #1 "hair on fire" issue- speed up implementation of
downtown cycle grid phase 1 and subsequent phases. Phase 1 could be done by
now but it was spread over 3 years. Postpone all other roadworks and complete
the cycling network please. "
• HOUSING all around Ontario and maintaining the city as is instead of turning it
into a concrete jungle or a driving nightmare with traffic.
• Getting homeless people off the streets and into housing.
• Affordable housing and Equity
• "I just want to say thank you for your hard work. I am especially impressed by
your wonderful transit. My family just moved here and we love the LRT, we use
it all the time. I know some people were not ""on board"" with it but, I really
think it was worth it. And your parks are amazing! Your city planning is stellar.
Housing affordability is so important, but the sprawl is also really depressing. Can
we focus on density?"
• Housing
• Housing for low- and middle-income brackets.
• Housing in the community has become unaffordable. Research regarding caps on
housing costs would be useful. Reducing waitlists for people - disabled
individuals in particular - so they may receive access to affordable or community
housing should be our priority.
• Homelessness and housing affordability is the most pressing issue in this
community currently and must be addressed first. The Point in time count shows
homelessness had tripled since 2018. You need to make significant investments
in the shelter system as well as affordable and supportive housing.
• Incentives (even if just a reduction on the revenue side) to encourage more low
to mid -rise multi unit or dense townhome developments in the core areas. We
provided large development cost benefits to high intensity developers around
the LRT. We need more forward thinking on how to provide more family
oriented and blended density as high density 1-2 bed apartments are still in high
velocity. This could help relieve the pressure on the SDH market where families
still are not served be the new housing stock in the core.
Page 99 of 117
CITY OF KITCHENER
2022 BUDGET ISSUE PAPER
• Further investments in infrastructure, more density for the downtown core,
encouraging more building of homes.
• "Affordable housing. Libraries for their continued role in learning and supporting
newcomers and marginalized communities "
• "Roads! Undeserved pop. Repairs to existing public housing. Social services. No
policing issues. No more transit stuff. Didn't want LRT to begin with.
No buildings like Rim Park. No updating to existing government buildings.
Example the City hall project. Undeserved and financial assistance to ppl on
social services.
Mental health, drug addiction.
• 1 think that the police budget should be reduced and redirected to other
infrastructure and housing projects
Lower Taxes
• Cuts not adding on
• Lowered taxes, affordability, and sustainability
Other Comments
• Not bike lanes
• Social assistance programs that low income and retired community members can
keep their houses, utilities, and eat. It is unjust that they have worked so hard for
our community in the past and now with the cost of living skyrocketing out of
control, they have to go without the basics of life.
• Increase spending in built heritage conservation programs, such as property grants.
These are still at the level of 20 years ago, while costs to care for a heritage building
have increased 10 -fold and more. Also, built heritage promotion and education
(walking tour brochures, interpretive plaques, more and better information on the
city website, etc.) should be adequately funded and prioritized by management.
Low level staff and volunteers don't have the financial resources required to do the
job they would like to do.
• Safety
• sidewalk clearing
• 1 think it is important to note that the infrastructure gap funding also looks at energy
efficiency leading to climate change mitigation.
• In today's landscape, almost all of these 'priorities' do not represent good fiscal
management and especially NOT the mandate of 40 km/hr residential areas.
• Reconciliation, climate change action/environmental stewardship
• Regular maintenance to city funded playgrounds and parks. Many are in disrepair
and unsafe
• Environmental leadership and vibrant community
Page 100 of 117
CITY OF KITCHENER
2022 BUDGET ISSUE PAPER
• Cancellation of the road speed fiasco or ask the region to pay for the cost since most
of the problem is driver frustration caused by the Irt. Elevate the Irt tracks from
blockline station along Courtland ave . And lowering the line once it crosses
Courtland. This would make a massive improvement in traffic flow in entire
fairway/manitou/Courtland corridor.
• 1 like that the City recently voted in favor of helping the fire service who do an
amazing job!
• Look at the list of services the united way supports and pick from that list that isn't
funded currently.
• Efficiency - utilizing the taxpayer funds most effective way possible.
• No
• No staff increase, wage gap $70,000 max any city workers
• Accessibility across the board. Considering 22% of Ontarians 15 and over have some
sort of disability, this will need to be worked into all plans, especially since this is
number is likely to increase more and more as the median age of the population
increases over the coming decades.
• Stop taking down trees: forests to build houses. Keep trees and trails and decrease
the number of homes being built
• "I find it interesting that you completely skip over the proposed 12.7% increase to
gas in this survey. Could that be because it is a completely out of line increase
proposal? Majority of your residents and taxpayers have yet to financially recover
from the effects of the pandemic. A 12.7% increase to gas could potentially break
residents, especially during the winter months, it will increase even further than the
12.7% once to add on the extra carbon taxes that will accumulate on what you for
usage. If you are going to ask residents their opinion on proposals, you should be
asking questions about all proposals, not just what you deem as reasonable."
• Park upgrades and natural area enhancement, restoration and management for
biodiversity
• Local parks
• Residential street speed and congestion issues. Too much street parking is currently
allowed on main neighborhood streets making it unsafe for pedestrians.
• Trees should be a major focus in all urban areas. There is not enough canopy cover
on downtown streets.
• 1 want to know how we are continuing to invest in green energy and equitable
access to food and care for children living in poverty.
• Repair the sports fields! Have them properly maintained!
• Not replacing thousands of signs to decrease the speed limit, this is political
posturing at its worst, this change on paper won't make our streets safer or give
drivers the infrastructure they pay to use through taxes. I support some of the
invasive, targeted traffic calming measures though, these make sense at our schools
and parks.
Page 101 of 117
CITY OF KITCHENER
2022 BUDGET ISSUE PAPER
• 1 would like to see an efficiencies list - where has the city made gains? The news is
full of problems - it would be great to see solutions or gains. Kitchener is a great
place to live, and we need to promote how efficiently it is run.
• Continuing to give neighborhood associations money to hold events and
programming through the growing funds grant.
• Parking for parks
• should reduce traffic calming
• sidewalks... you want more people walking. also, more stop signs. forget speed
bumps, and those 40km dividers only cause more dangerous situations than they fix.
• Security. We've seen so many cars and sheds broken into in our ward.
• Cut back on staffing or maybe tell the city works crews that all the time they spend
at McDonalds on Fairway Road is on their own time. Wow, never heard of starting
your shift on break with full pay, I must have been in the wrong line of work.
• How about treating everyone equal. You know, like all lives matter. Where was this
caring community years ago where discrimination was practiced openly and
allowed?
• In step with people friendly transportation, it would be encouraging to see a trend
toward less car centric development and car centric transportation systems
• stop virtue signaling in areas that are out of the municipal jurisdiction and focus on
running the city efficiently and effectively
• Regionalize the fire department
• Accessibility, affordability, and wellbeing. Not necessarily in that order.
• Environmental leadership which needs to be vastly increased
• Education on how we, as individual families, can do our part to reduce the impacts
of climate change. Working with the Region to make our trash sorting (e.g. recycling)
more simple and efficient and providing us with low-cost/cost-free ways to reduce
our carbon emissions at the individual level. Should we, for example, buy an electric
furnace or hot water heater rather than a gas one? Will this cause a drastic increase
in the cost of utilities? This is one of many examples of which I don't know the
answer but would like to have an honest one!
• bringing back fluoride to our water system. Studies in various jurisdictions shows it
reduces cavities. Communities that got rid of fluoride in the water system have seen
increases in cavities.
• As stated above, a better public transport system is needed, more buses and more
frequent runs. Since ION started and the Charles Street terminal is no longer being
used, bus drivers are unable to meet schedules and be on time at the downtown bus
stops. Traveling by bus is seen as the down and dirty way of travel, due in large part
to the severe unreliability of GRT. People from other places agree completely that
Kitchener's system is extremely unreliable and poorly organized. Investing money in
fixing that is an absolute necessity. If people want to walk, they can always use the
street like I've been doing for twenty years; no need for more trails.
Page 102 of 117
CITY OF KITCHENER
2022 BUDGET ISSUE PAPER
• Snow plowing city sidewalks. It is absolutely dreadful how quickly city sidewalks
become almost unusable for parents with strollers or the elderly, or anyone worried
about slipping or with mobility issues. For all the talk of inclusivity our city sidewalks
come winter are a sharp reminder of the false rhetoric of such language.
• Installing water fountains at the city's parks.
• start listening to staff, council! you're the uneducated ones making horrendous
decisions that are keeping this city light years behind where it should be, rest
assured all these people moving to the area will be demanding services that you
were too short sighted and too cheap to implement
• Upstream services which provide supports and aid to the community for mental
health, drug treatment, homelessness
• Making customer service more accessible for all in the city
• Please continue to invest in cycling infrastructure across the city. There are a lot of
gaps in the network that need to be filled before we have a safe, functional system
for everyone who wants to cycle.
• Anything that reduces climate change impact. Transit options, etc. Not more money
into roads.
• "upgrading safety and security - buses, trains and comfort stations with ballistic -
proof and vandalism proof glass, comfort stations need the feet exposure gap closed
permanently, the warmth should not escape the internal environment of the station
when inside it regardless of whether sitting or standing. upgrading efficiency and
effectiveness - intelligent region (smart city and smart home) energy re -harvesting
device technology mandatory provisioning for personal access devices,
personal/public transportation vehicles, home cooking appliances, smart grid
resources, this will save the city an average resources cost of between 47.5% and
89.9% per each month or higher amount value whilst it will save the home an
average resources cost of between 15% and 38.5% per each month or higher
amount value which depends on the type of device/machine and method/medium
being utilized and the variable amount of utilization, how much and how often its
being used."
• Eco friendly and sustainable upgrades to the city
• Redirecting police funds to community projects that actually benefit the entire
community.
• No.
• Do not spend my tax money on Ezra ave parties. Stop them before they start.
• Yes! As a Kitchener Ranger season ticket holder, parking at the Aud is a nightmare.
Looking at the ION, you want a 63 -year-old man getting dropped off at Borden and
walking 25 minutes in the bitter winter weather to get to game to cut down on
pollution and environmental issues by leaving my car at home and using the ION.
Taking a city bus is roughly an hour. Bring back restaurants that shuttle fans on
school busses or have shuttle from Borden directly to Aud running every 10 minutes.
• free programming for children and youth
Page 103 of 117
CITY OF KITCHENER
2022 BUDGET ISSUE PAPER
• Myself.
• NO
• Reduce police budget. Increase public services elsewhere.
• MEH! the revenue tool deserves some consideration perhaps.
• Need better value to the for the taxpayers instead of this Liberal spend at all costs
way of thinking
• Indigenous Community Centre
• It's been a while since I had read the strategic plan, primary focuses are still safety of
the community. This interests with race and diversity - there is still tons of
discriminations in RoW towards BIPOC groups especially Indigenous communities.
There's also a huge rise of domestic violence towards women and children over the
last year. It's crucial to reflect on how COVID has massively affected the strategic
plans and goals. It's also important to be mindful of the growing GTA population
who are moving to RoW and commuting to work. This is effect the local community.
I don't have much thought on transportation, but it should be accessible. LRT
expansion to Cambridge would be great.
• Keep it up with the improved cycling grid. Continue to encourage revitalization of
the downtown. Encourage influx of new businesses downtown that will help the
growing population in the area.
• Decreasing driving infrastructure. Improving cycling and walking infrastructure.
• Push for improved connection to other regions! More frequent / faster GO service to
Toronto, build the expressway to Guelph, advocate for more highways & rail
infrastructure.
• Plant carbon eating trees that provide shade.
• Improving love my hood funding
• Climate change - capital improvements to reduce emissions
• Mental health services and programs. Investments in places that provide assistance
and supports for vulnerable people in the community, like youth services, addictions
recovery services and gender-based violence supports.
• Parks
• Planning for extreme weather events and its impact on the city's infrastructure.
• Improved care of City Parks and green space. Curb Vandalism of statues and
structures in parks. Especially Rockway gardens.
• Addressing climate change.
• Let's not get into wasting money on things like Rim Park, LRT, and rejuvenating City
Hall. Terrible allocation of taxpayers money! No one wanted any of it. After Covid
let's do what's necessary, not frivolous.
• New auditorium should be a priority. Cut the SJW back about 10 notches.
• I believe some further research into potential impacts of climate change on this
region should be researched (ie, do our storm water management systems need
upgrading, do we need more resources for heat waves, etc). Also, more investment
Page 104 of 117
CITY OF KITCHENER
2022 BUDGET ISSUE PAPER
into green technologies such as solar installations and electric vehicle infrastructure
since that is the direction we are going (ie, if we are going to be phasing out gas
powered cars, we will need more charging infrastructure or at least be prepared for
it).
• Mental health and addiction support
• How about amalgamating with the City of Waterloo and save some of the
duplication that exists within both Cities.
• "Mental health and small business. I do not want to see any increase to the police
budget. I think it's ridiculous they got more money for 2021 and are renovating
while the region has been struggling. Waste of money. Same for the bike lanes."
• All areas. The city takes money, it's time to become run like a business. The
employees of the city are being paid very highly, and with a golden pension. Time to
change this.
Affordable Housing
• If tax increases are going towards poverty reduction, Indigenous services, affordable
housing, and initiatives countering homelessness, I support them.
• I think the tax rate is perfectly acceptable. What isn't acceptable is how the money is
distributed to serviced. Specifically, how can we justify spending money on road upkeep
while there is unhoused people?
• 1 understand the need however many people on the lower end are struggling to keep
their house and extra tax burden will cause them to sell and possibly become homeless.
• if there was an additional percentage that specifically went for the city to renovate
existing stock or to put measures in place to increase affordable housing - it would be
reasonable to add to manage this crisis
Roads/Sidewalks
• Please stop spending my taxes on bicycle routes which only a small amount of people
use.
• Same wasted money, quit wasting time and money on the downtown. This constant
revitalization is unneeded let the developers fund it. The money being spent on road
signs has no pay back, at least photo radar would recoup the cost.
• We already pay high property taxes, yet the money is wasted on bike lanes and now
lowering speed limits.
• 1 think spending so much money on changing speed limits to 40km/hr is ridiculous. It's
not going to slow drivers down. I understand the importance around school zones, but
we have better things to do in the community with the funds.
• Stop funding cyclists and excess administrators with tax dollars
• Difficult to say without seeing entire budget. The cost of everything is increasing, so
increasing taxes is not always an issue ---BUT seeing the money go toward things like
bike lanes that nobody wants is upsetting.
Page 105 of 117
CITY OF KITCHENER
2022 BUDGET ISSUE PAPER
• Would gladly pay more for sidewalk clearing
• Increase it more if it means the city will clear snow from sidewalks.
• depends upon how you spend it, I've been waiting 20 years to get my sidewalk fixed.
You just "fixed" over 100 feet of sidewalk on sprucedale that I walk every day and the
residents has no problems with
Facilities/Parks
• Increased cost to disproportionately support the overpaid Fire service is not something
the community can afford, improve services we use daily like facilities and parks.
• make sure the monies go toward infrastructure improvements
City Finances
• No problem with paying slightly more tax if we address climate change and affordability.
• As long as wages keep up
• 1 support increasing taxes to the point where city services and infrastructure catch up to
our current population and service needs.
• Nobody likes tax increases but they are necessary to maintain the great city that we live
in.
• 1 support the need for taxes and tax increases. So long as the money is being
appropriately spent.
• Not charging enough in taxes in 2022 may mean higher increases in future years. I
would prefer continued responsible increases, rather than higher increases in future
years.
• The average household increase should reflect the median cost of housing in Kitchener
• Taxes need to be raise if people want to have the services
• Cut some of the programs, we don't need a Library everywhere for example, we don't
need the city doing the leaf removal just make people bag them and then do that
pickup, cut woke projects if people want them they can fun them.
• 1 think the increase is too much and unnecessary.
• 1 would consider an increase at the rate of inflation reasonable. I would be in favor of an
increase above inflation if services that I valued were expanded.
• 1 don't think now is the time for an increase
• No need to increase taxes. Paying too much as it is
• Costs are going up by leaps and bounds in every direction. This increase is above for
example rent control values of 1.2%. Like our homes, we have had to find ways to do
more with less and our city should do the same!
• 1 worry about what taxes will be when homes are reassessed much higher with the price
increases over the last few years.
• 1.9 % seems a bit too much. We already pay over $5000 annually
• Housing is very unaffordable along with city taxes. Services have been cut for 2 years
with out a decrease in collections from those in the region that need it most
Page 106 of 117
CITY OF KITCHENER
2022 BUDGET ISSUE PAPER
• 1 think our tax increase should be higher. Other Cities have much higher rates, including
Waterloo, let's invest more in projects that attract people to the City which only helps
future generations and increase the $ we have also for future generations
• The rate should be much closer to inflation (or even slightly higher) to ensure the city is
able to maintain (and add) needed municipal services.
• Knowing the increase in building permits over the past 2 years & also knowing that
the amount of annual supplementary taxes collected during the year any increase is
questionable. Now is the appropriate time for a zero -based budget.
• Not enough for the kinds of investments we should be making in the people living here
• Taxes to high already no increase needed
• Any increase at this time when inflation is running so high is totally unreasonable. The
average family is struggling to afford food and their mortgage so can't afford to pay for
needless expenditures in this budget.
• Should at least match inflation; not doing so will mean cutting/reducing services over
time. Please pay all city employees a living wage.
• With Covid happening, you should be keeping this to a zero increase, or close to it. A lot
of people are struggling and once all federal support stops, this will only make matters
worse.
• 1 am supportive of the tax increase - would prefer to see a higher increase and improved
services
• 1 think I expect as tax increase since the cost of maintenance of city services continues
to increase as energy and personnel costs increase. But I hope the city finds ways to
reduce costs such as energy savings.
• Stop increasing taxes, be more efficient with the tax dollars you already have. Natural
growth by increasing number of properties should handle additional services for those
people.
• As long as you're keeping it below the inflation rate, I find it reasonable.
• The city risks being underfunded. It should increase taxes to match inflation as
minimum. It would be difficult to believe that any homeowner could not afford a
$40/year increase on their taxes.
• Property taxes need to be increase to cover costs and to reflect current property values.
Residents in the core should not be subsidizing sprawl and unsustainable suburban
developments
• If the increase is below the rate of inflation, what are we cutting as part of city services
to keep things this low? Or is part of the expected increase offset by fixed costs spread
over a larger tax base?
• I'm actually kind of concerned, that's it's not enough! I am grateful for the city's
efficiency, but will it be underfunded?
• 1 would be in favor of paying higher property taxes to improve or increase services.
Page 107 of 117
CITY OF KITCHENER
2022 BUDGET ISSUE PAPER
• 1 have owned my home for over 21 years and increases in taxes, utilities and living
expenses makes me dangerously close to losing my home. I do not support a tax
increase. Please find ways to get revenue elsewhere.
• Should be 0 increase
• 1 do believe the city can manage its fiscal resources better. The recent panic that we are
somehow a racist community has led to significant resources for new diversity, anti -
racism hires that has been made in, quite frankly, a false panic.
• Shouldn't a fiscally prudent budget grow with inflation? Why is getting less real money a
sound outcome? I don't understand what you think you are doing, except trying to get
reelected.
• It is too high, people need time to catch up from the financial stress caused by the
pandemic. Everything is going up in price at a time when no one has the extra money.
• The tax rate is reasonable.
• Taxes need to rise with inflation to afford the services of a city
• This is only the city portion of all the taxes we pay. All the other taxes within the Region
plus rate hikes for utilities all combine to add up to WAY TOO MUCH. And also, our tax
monies are not always spent on projects that have any real added value.
• An overall negative real rate increase seems fine. It makes me wonder what is being left
on the table by not increasing at the rate of inflation, but I realize this may provide relief
for some taxpayers.
• taxes should be lower
• Considering this tax increase will be paired with utilities increases & regional tax
increases, while the 1.9% seems reasonable, there are people whose jobs do not come
with such a yearly increase & may have more difficulties when they're all put
together
• With lockdowns and cuts to programs and services along with the housing crisis and
extremely high inflation, the region and its residents cannot afford a raise in taxes. We
should be getting a discount or taxes cut due to services not offered.
• 1 am against tax increases. My service level hasn't changed in years, my cost of taxes has
increased every year.
Other
• Do I get a raise to cover this off?
• It's getting out of hand for seniors
• 1 am 31 years old working full time making $22/hour and I can't afford to move out and
buy a home let alone afford increasing property taxes, water and gas on top of it all.
• Hope this revenue is not wasted.
• None
• Why not make owners if multi -million -dollar homes pay a higher rate than the rest of us
trying to make it by.
• We as homeowners and/or renters are BARELY making ends meet as it is. We are still
recovering and you want to raise taxes! BRAVO!
Page 108 of 117
CITY OF KITCHENER
2022 BUDGET ISSUE PAPER
• It's not enough to proactively provide necessary services like emergency shelter and
climate change initiatives
• People are going through enough inflation and do not need more
• old people cannot afford to live is own home
• Everyone just getting back to work now. Have other bills to pay no need for city to raise
taxes at this time. City has got money from province and the feds that they have not
used yet. My pockets are empty.
• The city allows many more new home developments and yet those who already own a
home will have to pay... how many new homes will be built and those will pay property
tax too no????
• Tax increase on natural gas must be reflected if supply and demand eases.
• Majority of property taxpayers do not see any benefits from community services or
programs run.
• 1 do not know why the Water Tax has to increase each year
• You say this is well under the rate of inflation but you don't say which rate of inflation
you are referring to ... comparing it to the standard rate of inflation makes little sense as
it does not measure or compare increases in municipal costs.
• Worried how the increase will effect my future rent payments.
• 1 would be interested to see a report on the affects of COVID19 and the budget.
• If Kitchener is expanding, doesn't the new residential properties bring more tax income
for the city. Those are new income for the city! How about the members of the city
council take a pay cut. City management take a pay cut.
• 1 don't know what to think, but if it is below the rate of inflation, you would have to be
making cuts, and I don't know what those are.
• Coming out of the pandemic, we already know inflation is creating price increases. All
the more reason to look for ways to cut back, rather than increase taxes.
• 1 think condos are over taxed
• Real estate values have gone up and there is a further increase in mill rate
• Taxes are already too high and those of us on fixed incomes can't afford them to
continue to rise
• It is too much for those on fixed incomes.
• Seems fair....
• It seems that city/regional budgets always are higher than what most folks increases are
for income. As each year goes by, my actual dollar that I have to live on, is less. Why do
we not go back to the Ray Days of the 90's, but this time, include all.
• Align with reality on what people are going to get with increases in wages, not more.
• Regionalize the fire department
• It's only ever going to go up. Wages are not keeping up. Do what you will, I guess, but
there are a lot of us only a paycheck or two from being unable to make rent, and
landlords love to pass taxes on to tenant fees.
• People have been hard hit financially by Covid-19. Would be nice to have no increase
• demand outstrips supply for housing; for luxury housing (maybe over $1M valuation)
and low-density neighborhoods, we should increase property taxes substantially
• Seems appropriate
Page 109 of 117
CITY OF KITCHENER
2022 BUDGET ISSUE PAPER
• The proposed revenue inflow for the city will be spent on projects that do not better the
city as a whole, but rather pet projects for councilors that appeal to the vocal minority
and end up impairing the city budget for years to come
• The problem is the insanity that people have bid up home prices. Houses in my area
have doubled in value in 9 years. So even a tax hike of 1.9% changes things if the house
you purchased for under $300,000 is not valued at over million dollars.
• 1 have never owned property and have no comments re property taxes.
• 1 think it's fair when you think about inflation
• I'd prefer tax decreases but modest increases are ok
• Kitchener should continue to focus on growing valuable services, making sure this is
possible should be the number one priority.
• with all the new building fees being collected the increase shouldn't be this high. Also, if
the City stopped paying for items not in its mandate
• Good its below inflation
• the tax increase should be two or three times that amount, our council consistently
manages to embrace regressive polices while disregarding all staff recommendations,
that's why Kitchener will forever remain small town
• Very reasonable
• Should be based on what we need to spend, not what is "reasonable."
• I'm not afraid to spend more for increased social service
• Can we afford a tax increase below the rate of inflation?
• Utilities should cost more to encourage conservation
• Stop the increase
• Worth it to have funds go back into the community
• Landlords are going to download this onto tenants
• Thank you for keeping it a low increase
• Reasonable increase, pleased it isn't raising higher given that this has been a challenging
year financially for many
• If it is used to protect and care for Kitchener that is acceptable.
• Fair
• There should also be some relief for lower income households who are hit harder by any
increase
• all you know is to increase taxes every year . Kitchener has already the highest tax in the
region .
• I'd like to see taxation go toward services that consistently make a positive difference,
and I am not sure they do. I get confused between Regional and municipal taxes.
• every year the city takes more and gives less. maybe trim the fat a bit and give the
money tools, ie ratepayers, some consideration.
• Honestly - I don't really understand property taxes or the need to increase. I don't know
what is "fair" or "unfair." It would be great to know where I can learn more information.
I do not housing is become more unaffordable the poverty gap is increasing.
• workers are not receiving increase in their salary on the current rate of inflation neither
• I'm honestly surprised how low it is
• So long as it doesn't go to fund that stupid airport expansion.
Page 110 of 117
CITY OF KITCHENER
2022 BUDGET ISSUE PAPER
• Some can afford it, some cannot.
• It badly affects the poor, out of work and pensioners.
• I hope the money actually gets spent where it is supposed to
• Times are tough. Ppl can't afford it. And increases seem to go to things I have no
interest.
• Does the City feel there is a need to reduce spending on projects that are not
immediately necessary?
• I understand the costs are rising on all aspects of life, thanks for making efforts to keep
this reasonable in light of covid and challenges.
• It's been a tough 2 years. Give it until next year to discuss tax increases
• Although the rate is less than inflation my salary hasn't increased in a decade but I'm
probably the only one.
• It doesn't take into account the income of the person living there.
• 1 don't like them but know they are necessary.
• It is greater than my increase in my pension. Please reduce it.
Growth/Development
• Disclaimer: I'm a homeowner in Kitchener who works for a consultant in the Region,
working on water/wastewater projects. I'm worried about the viability of the continued
urban sprawl, and the future costs associated with the upkeep
• Should match inflation at least, probably more to accommodate rapid housing
developments.
• our community is growing, putting a strain on those resources, yes, the money should
be there to replace existing and old infrastructures, but it's the city's choice, and the
gov't who allows all these people in Canada without fixing our current issues
• Sounds reasonable only as long as new developments are being charged for the new
infrastructure they require, and not burdening existing taxpayers with these costs
• 1 think increases should be higher for new development and for business than
residential owners and was unaware of a pause to road reconstruction due to covid
everything appeared on track.
• The region needs to do more to reduce these costs and have the townships pay more as
they continue to allow sprawl (Breslau)
Infrastructure
• Again, understandably needed to support the infrastructure for all the new members of
our community but the added pressure will affect those who are longtime homeowners
before the boom and growth.
• Clean drinking water is a must this also helps repair aging infrastructure
• It is important to invest in long term infrastructure. I'm glad to see you doing that. This
increase can also be very variable depending on conservation habits people use in their
homes.
Page 111 of 117
CITY OF KITCHENER
2022 BUDGET ISSUE PAPER
• Hope to see this revenue spent thoughtfully where infrastructure improvements are
needed the most
• Older neighborhoods have yet to have decades old pipes replaced
• When we use poorly made products/overrated life spans this increase will more than
likely fall behind.
• 1 live in an old area and know how important the upgrades are!
• Thanks to Kitchener and the Region for their upgrades to the Strange St. pumping
station and those in the service area.
• Sewers need to be kept up pumping stations need to be maintained
Cost/Pricing
• 12% is a little harsh
• Not charging enough for our water utilities now may mean higher increases later. I
would prefer continued responsible increases, rather than higher increases in future
years.
• Another stealth tax, that goes beyond the 1.9% target.
• Too high of a percentage for people recovering from a pandemic
• It's getting out of hand for seniors
• 1 am 31 years old working full time making $22/hour and I can't afford to move out and
buy a home let alone afford increasing property taxes, water and gas on top of it all.
• 2.2% seems too much, our salaries have not increased that much in the last two years.
• With the housing crisis, people can't afford to pay more for their utilities
• Another fine example of hiding cost tell the region to cut cost the their water charges to
the city. Perhaps the city source their own water without regional interference.
• Under 2 percent would be ideal taking into consideration the other increases with ppty
taxes and natural gas. consideration
• Increase the rates to whatever we need to
• The increase seems in line with anticipated expenses.
• Paying for safe water is a priority. However, water is also a human right. There should be
allowances for families who cannot afford an increase.
• Do not want and increase
• Why should the taxpayer have to pay for the Covid shut down. Many people weren't
working or lost jobs. So you take more from them?
• Increases year after year are becoming unsustainable. Where does it end?
• The price of Water in Kitchener is an extra Tax, and I am disappointed in the rate that it
increases each year.
• 1 find water rates too high already.
• If you saved that money over the last 2 years cause of covid why do we have to pay
more now.
• 1 don't know if that amount is enough or too much
• Water rates have grown every year for over a decade! When do rate payers get a break?
Page 112 of 117
CITY OF KITCHENER
2022 BUDGET ISSUE PAPER
• If reconstruction plans were put on hold, are there not savings?
• Water rates are very high and have gone up considerably faster than inflation when
averaged over last 20 years
• Again, stop increasing fees.
• The stormwater charge is too high and is too blunt an instrument.
• Water should cost more; cheap water incentivizes wastefulness.
• seems reasonable after many years of well over inflation increases
• It's already a struggle to pay for utilities and everything else is increasing.
• Every year utilities, it seems, go up in cost with little clear sense as to why?
• Water infrastructure is important, however, with these increases the minimum charge
of 3 m3 should be removed to help those that actively use less water.
• what does Capital road reconstruction have to do with water rates?
• Ridiculously high in addition to proposed property tax
• Very reasonable
• My Water bill continues to rise year after year. Am angry that I am paying same
percentage for needed work as people who had low bills for years when work was not
at necessary level. Perhaps address this by charging a sliding tax rate.
• Water already feels like a major expense.
• Water increase is fine but concerned about the gas
• Good to do but keep the cost low
• Seems like a high increase. Would prefer half of that. $13
• Water rates have increased way too much in the past 10 years
• Same as above, any increase in costs should come with relief for lower income
household who are disproportionally hurt by cost increases
• See my comment above. Please stop putting all the ways to increase revenue on
homeowners. You are increasing us to the point where we may need to sell. It's just
wrong.
• Kitchener has already highest price in region on water. The quality is the same,
• Should be little to no increase
• Again, households with a low income may not be able to afford these increases. I am
more curious if there is a sliding scale for households based on yearly income.
• If the road reconstruction project was paused, then why do we need additional funding
to re -start it? That doesn't make sense. Also not clear why an increase in rate is needed
to purchase more services. Shouldn't new residents' taxes be covering that?
• Again, people need a break from everything increasing
• The cost of water is not bad; however, the sewer rate is atrocious. In addition, there is
no recognition between inside and outside water usage in the billing. I'm not certain
what portion of this relates to cost and what to future.
• Should be kept in line with budget increase.
Page 113 of 117
CITY OF KITCHENER
2022 BUDGET ISSUE PAPER
• No. Times are tough. Ppl can't afford this year. Try next year perhaps. Covid has made it
tough. Cost of living increases are not available to everyone and this is an added
financial burden. Everything has gone up. Gas, groceries cleaning products.
• Again... although the rate is less than inflation my salary hasn't increased in a decade.
• Perhaps there is an area where some items can wait to a future budget.
• Why are they going up? I'm sure there is some fat that can be trimmed to negate an
increase.
Other
• Water is a basic need.
• See number 4
• Ag
• See previous
• If we want people to do better with conservation, it should be a sliding scale that
increases with usage. Other nations have much higher water costs and it promotes
conservation.
• Ridiculous!
• Same as last comment
• Canada have most of water
• Water is a necessity of life just like the air we breathe. We need reasonable rates so
there should be a basic amount of water free with anything above that the charged at
increasing threshold so that those who use too much get charged accordingly.
• No sense at all.
• Road construction is a concern during a climate emergency. I think it should be revisited
and any road widening cancelled.
• It is a necessary service and needs to be maintained. Arguably our most important
service is clean water and sanitation since it has such an impact on our health.
• Clean water is a right and rates could be controlled if there wasn't so much wastage
(e.g. lawn watering should be banned)
• Quit dividing water into supply, sewage and runoff into three different services on the
water bill. It doesn't fool anyone into thinking water is cheaper, as we know that it is all
water services. It does confuse those who are ESL.
• Pandemic caused the delay so not much can be done about it.
• Stop funding cyclists and excess administration and increases won't be needed
• What does the pandemic have to do with it? Workers were still doing their jobs, that
did not stop.
• Need to stop people dumping pool water curbside
• See the previous comment.
• I am worried increase will go to increase overhead and pension benefits for existing
employees
• Getting a land value tax to get better revenue from wasteful parking lots could help
better cover costs
Page 114 of 117
CITY OF KITCHENER
2022 BUDGET ISSUE PAPER
• Should be based on what we need to spend, not what is "reasonable."
• Increase usage more to encourage conservation
• Landlords are going to download this onto tenants
• Roads should only be considered alongside water if the road construction is preserving
water cleanliness and flooding safety or something to that effect.
• every year the city takes more and gives less. maybe trim the fat a bit and give the
money tools, ie ratepayers, some consideration.
• Water is not anymore safer in Kitchener....
• Tough 2 years. Let's revisit next budget.
• Higher costs for mediocre service (not repairs or infrastructure) -- fixed costs sb
leveraged
• So long as the road construction is strategically planned i.e., don't pave the road and
then the next year need to fix water pipes
Page 115 of 117
N
i
0
0
a�
oc
.11
.11
O
>
—0
O
a -J
co
.O
E
O
C:
O
(�
a--+
U
O
i
U-0
O
O
(3)0
O
4-J
4-j
=
-0
C:
4-J
O
. S
cA
E
—0
-0
-0
bn
C:
10
C.UO
C:
U
U-
L.
.11