Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutFinance & Admin - 1993-10-18FAC\1993-10-18 FINANCE AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE MINUTES OCTOBER 18, 1993 The Finance and Administration Committee met this date, commencing at 11:40 a.m., under the Chairmanship of Councillor C. Zehr with the following members present: Mayor D.V. Cardillo, Councillors B. Stortz, T. Galloway, G. Lorentz, J. Smola, M. Wagner, C. Weylie and J. Ziegler. Others present: Councillor M. Yantzi, Councillor G. Leadston, Messrs. T. McKay, J. Gazzola, R. Freeborn, D. Paterson, L.F. Parkhouse, J. Witmer, W. Pearce, O. den Ouden, J. Panunto, G. Sosnoski, Ms. B. Baker and Mrs. J. Koppeser. 1. JOB EVALUATION - UNION LOCAL #304 Mr. W. Mazmanian, President and Mr. Cy Hoadley, Representative, appeared on behalf of the Canadian Brotherhood of Railway, Transport and General Workers regarding the City's Job Evaluation Program and Local #304. The Committee was in receipt of various items of correspondence between Mr. Mazmanian and representatives of the Human Resources Division as well as excerpts from a Position Description Questionnaire (PDQ). It was indicated that the City's Job Evaluation System was not extended to the members of Local #304. Mr. Mazmanian offered the opinion that the evaluation undertaken in 1989 and 1990 was unfair and unequal and criticized the manner in which PDQs were completed relative to positions in Local #304. It was noted that in almost all instances these were completed by employees in the corresponding positions, however, the Local #304 PDQs were completed by other City staff with no Union representation. He also referred to conflicting statements by Human Resources staff as to whether a formal evaluation had or had not been done relative to Local #304 and cited correspondence circulated to the Committee as part of his submission. Mr. Mazmanian pointed out discrepancies between the job evaluation ratings for Bus Operators and Terminal Clerks relative to work pressure, stress and supervision. He also questioned why a Bus Mechanic would be rated only marginally higher than a Security Guard. He also referred to a letter from Mr. D. Paterson dated June 6, 1991 (Exhibit B) and questioned why the issue of job evaluation for Local #304 had not been dealt with relative to the Collective Agreement. Mr. Mazmanian argued that since Local #304 is male dominated a minority of women Transit Operators remained at existing pay levels and were denied the rate increase received by most female employees of the City under Pay Equity legislation. He suggested that though the City claims to be an equal opportunity employer this has not been the case in its dealings with Local #304. He asked that a proper job evaluation be undertaken relative to the membership of Local #304 and that the outcome be made retroactive to 1989/1990. Mr. Freeborn pointed out that the original 1989 Evaluation Program was developed on the basis of Pay Equity legislation which does not pertain to the members of Local #304. He also noted that the evaluation was principally designed for clerical and management employees and cannot be easily adapted to hourly rated positions and as a result a new system may be required. He suggested that a dilemma exists whereby Transit Operators are in contact with other employees whose rate of pay has increased as a result of the legislation. Mr. Freeborn also questioned whether under the present Social Contract legislation a new job evaluation system could be put in place at this time. Mr. McKay also pointed out that job evaluation did not apply to the City's Firefighters, Local #68 or the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers. He added that the current rate of pay is based on negotiations and that this is the same for both male and female employees. In response to a question from Councillor Lorentz, Mr. Freeborn advised that Mr. R. Miller completed a job description for Transit Operators which if implemented would have lowered the positions' rate of pay. Mr. Mazmanian argued that this description should have been done by the employees themselves rather than a Supervisor. Mr. Freeborn added that to date the Province has not legislated Pay Equity for any male dominated work groups, with these continuing to bargain through the Collective Agreement process. 1. JOB EVALUATION - UNION LOCAL #304 (cont.) FINANCE AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE MINUTES- 79 -OCTOBER 18, 1993 On a motion by Councillor B. Stortz - It was resolved: "That consideration of the concerns raised by Mr. W. Mazmanian relative to Union Local 304 and the Job Evaluation Program be deferred and referred to the November 15, 1993 Finance and Administration Committee meeting pending a staff report on the issues raised in his presentation of October 18, 1993." Councillor Lorentz asked that the staff report include a comparison of the City's practices in this area with those of other municipalities and Mayor Cardillo asked for an estimate of the cost to the City of having a further job evaluation completed by an external agency. Councillor Zehr also asked that Mr. Mazmanian receive a copy of the staff report prior to the meeting. 2. LICENCE REQUEST - MONSTER BINGO (BIG BROTHERS OF K-W) The Committee was in receipt of a report and recommendation from Mrs. J. Koppeser dated October 14, 1993 concerning an application from the Big Brothers of Kitchener-Waterloo for a bingo on October 10, 1994 at the Kiwanis Arena. Mr. Pat McMahon was in attendance on behalf of the Big Brothers and in support of the organization's request dated October 14, 1993. On a motion by Mayor D.V. Cardillo - It was resolved: "That the City of Kitchener has no objection to a Provincial Licence being issued to the Big Brothers of Kitchener-Waterloo, to hold a Monster Bingo on October 10, 1994, at the Kiwanis Arena in the Kitchener Memorial Auditorium Complex." 3. BINGO PRIZE BOARD INCREASE The Committee was in receipt of a report and recommendation from Mrs. J. Koppeser dated September 27, 1993 which was previously circulated with the October 4, 1993 agenda. Mr. Parkhouse pointed out that the recommendation is in response to the request originally submitted by the Concourse Charities Bingo Committee and that staff do not have a strong position either for or against the request. Mr. Ron Gaus appeared on behalf of the Northstar Youth Organization and advised that local bingos have lost customers as a result of the prize board increases in outlying municipalities. He indicated his support for a maximum $3,500.00 prize board on specific nights, noting that not every session could support this amount. Ms. Judi Langford, Region of Waterloo Swim Club and Mr. Scott Morley, Director, K-W Sertoma Speed Skating Club, appeared on behalf of their respective organizations and advised that they share a bingo hall and related equipment. Mr. Morley suggested that bingo profits for both organizations would be in jeopardy if two or three other halls in the City operated $3,500.00 prize board bingos while they remained at the $2,500.00 maximum. He noted that both organizations raise a percentage of their annual operating budgets from bingo events and neither object to fair competition. He suggested, however, that if the prize board is raised to a $3,500.00 maximum, it would be reasonable to assume increased attendence, an increase in the price of bingo paper and that some bingo halls would be put out of business. Mr. Morley offered to opinion that increasing the prize board would make Kitchener more competitive with other municipalities, but could hurt other local charities. He cautioned that the proposed six month trial period may be too long and that some organizations would not be able to stay in business for that period of time. He suggested a trial period of at least two months but no greater three. 3. BINGO PRIZE BOARD INCREASE (cont.) Councillor Stortz asked whether attempts had been made to meet with other municipalities concerning the prize board issue. Mrs. Koppeser confirmed that a meeting had been held and noted that Cambridge, which has only one bingo hall, operates a $3,500.00 prize board and does FINANCE AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE MINUTES- 80 -OCTOBER 18, 1993 not wish to change their practice. She advised that both Kitchener and Waterloo currently operate at a $2,500.00 maximum, while other area municipalities are just getting into the bingo business at this time. Councillor Lorentz asked whether the non-profit organizations would lose additional customers if the prize board were increased for a six month period then reduced to its current $2,500.00 level. Mr. Morley replied that this was possible and also referred to the mobility of bingo players and an increase in paper cost as factors contributing to a further loss. Councillor Stortz inquired whether Councillor Lorentz in his capacity as a member of the Regional Licensing Committee could attempt to obtain an agreement from Regional municipalities as to a uniform prize board amount. Councillor Lorentz replied that this may not be a problem provided the Committee has the necessary jurisdiction, but pointed out that this measure would not increase the number of bingo players in the Region. He indicated that he would speak with Regional staff and if appropriate pursue the suggestion of Councillor Stortz. Councillor Galloway inquired whether it would appropriate to delay making a decision at this time and Mr. Morley replied that though an option it has been noted that the Breslau facility is already attracting business. Mr. Wayne Lohnes and Mr. Max Rausch appeared on behalf of the Kitchener Charities Bingo Palace. Mr. Rausch suggested that the activity summary provided by Licensing staff should also include Nevada and Super Jackpot profits. He questioned why the prize board should be increased given the fact that all organizations appear to be making a profit. He also pointed out that the initial agreement governing these events was made by all affected charities and that if any changes are to be made, they should all be given an opportunity to comment. Mr. Lohnes suggested that increasing the price of bingo paper is an impossibility given the lower cost in other municipalities. He pointed out that an increase in the prize board would require his organization to increase the number of players by approximately 50, which in his opinion could not be done. Councillor Leadston inquired whether a meeting of the affected non-profit organizations and charities to discuss the issue would be appropriate, with their comments returned for consideration. He also suggested that the City could provide a suitable meeting forum. Councillor Lorentz concurred pointing out that a meeting of the charities to discuss the issue is the most appropriate solution given the fact that they will be most directly affected. Mr. Lohnes suggested that the current prize board be maintained and the situation monitored to determine the impact of the new bingo hall. Mr. Joseph Sutherland appeared on behalf of the Knights of Columbus and referred to the bingo profits which his organization gives back to the community. He noted that the number of profitable bingos has decreased in 1993 and that an increase in the prize board would adversely affect his organization's ability to run profitable bingos because of the need for additional players. In response to a question from Councillor Lorentz, Mr. Sutherland indicated that he would be in favour of maintaining the present prize board amount. Mr. Don Woltz appeared on behalf of the Dutch Boy Drum and Bugle Corps and suggested that operators of their own halls would be in a better position to make a profit than those who rent facilities. He added that the $3,500.00 prize board is needed to compete with new halls such as the one in Breslau which will likely have a major impact on other local bingos. On a motion by Mayor D.V. Cardillo - It was resolved: "That no action be taken at this time relative to a proposed increase in the prize board for bingos being operated in the City of Kitchener pending further input from the affected organizations." 3. BINGO PRIZE BOARD INCREASE (cont.) On a motion by Councillor G. Lorentz - It was resolved: "That City staff be directed to facilitate dialogue between the local non-profit organizations and charities who would be affected by an increase in the maximum prize board for bingos being operated in Kitchener in order to obtain their comments and suggestions." 4. LIABILITY CLAIM - 15 WILKINS DRIVE Consideration of the claim of Mr. J. Crawford was deferred at the October 4, 1993 meeting FINANCE AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE MINUTES- 81 -OCTOBER 18, 1993 pending receipt and review by staff of a report from Murray H. Schmitt, Consulting Engineer. The Committee was advised that the report is not yet available and that Mr. Crawford has requested a further deferral to the November 15, 1993 meeting. By general consent, the Committee agreed to the deferral request. 5. FACADE/INTERIOR LOAN PROGRAM The Committee was in receipt of a memorandum from Ms. G. Redgwell outlining a resolution from the Downtown Action Committee concerning additional funding for the Program. They were also in receipt of a report and recommendation from Mr. J. Witmer and Mr. W. Pearce (PD #109/93) dated October 15, 1993 outlining disbursements to date and associated benefits. Mr. Witmer referred to the recommendation that an additional $250,000.00 be allocated to the Program, citing its overwhelming success to date. Mr. W. Pearce gave a slide presentation illustrating some of the improvements made in the downtown as a result of the loans, 30% of which are forgivable. He also noted that approximately $500,000.00 in improvements have been made with the accompanying creation of approximately 23 jobs. He also referred to an extensive waiting list included in his report. Councillor Zehr inquired how the additional $250,000.00 requested would be funded, given the fact that approximately $75,000.00 of this amount is forgivable. Mr. Gazzola replied that the previous $250,000.00 amount allocated by Council has yet to funded and referred to a number of Reserve Funds which could be debited. Councillor Ziegler inquired how the non-forgivable portion of the loan was secured and why the Program has digressed to include interior renovations and equipment. Mr. McKay replied that a report had been considered by Council approximately two years ago dealing with an extension of the Program beyond the original facade component. He noted that the number of tenantless buildings prompted the extension as well as the expectation that the costs would be offset by an increase in the amount of business taxes being paid. He also advised that the non-forgivable portion is secured against the property. Mr. Gazzola clarified that Council is now allowing security based on a note. Councillor Stortz indicated it was never intended that the municipality be exposed to potential loss. Mr. McKay referred to the yearly forgivable portion of the loan, noting that this in effect becomes a Capital project and must be budgeted. Councillor Galloway asked whether the Program would sustain itself in future and Mr. McKay replied that the cashflow would sustain itself, however, repayment would never offset the forgivable portion of the loan. He questioned whether the forgivable percentage of 30% should be lowered or this component eliminated entirely. Mr. Gazzola added that at this point the Program is not a revolving fund and has to be sustained from other sources. Councillor Galloway expressed concern over the applicability of the Program to the downtown core alone. Councillor Stortz stated that he did not expect to request additional funding and that in future he hoped for a partnership with private lending institutions. Councillor Zehr referred to the chart in the staff report summarizing disbursements and questioned why the City's contribution was not always significantly less than that of the business 5. FACADE/INTERIOR LOAN PROGRAM (cont.) owner. Mr. Pearce replied that some businesses by virtue of their size could not afford a larger contribution, while other businesses have spent considerably more than the City's contribution. Councillor Zehr questioned the impact on the Program if a minimum expenditure was required of the owner or tenant. Mayor Cardillo inquired as to the tax revenue implications referred to in the staff report. Mr. den Ouden noted that there was a marginal increase in assessment, however, in some cases there was no increase at all and in one example the organization may become totally tax exempt. Councillor Stortz put forward the recommendation in the staff report involving an additional allocation of $250,000.00 to the Facade/Interior Loan Program. Councillor Stortz argued that the Program allows the City to take a leadership role in revitalizing the downtown and in may cases the payback exceeds the amount spent. He stated that the absolute success of the Program implies continuing support and is a good business investment in the downtown core. Councillor Ziegler replied that he would expect any program to be successful 30% of the funds are given away and questioned the limited applicability to the downtown area. FINANCE AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE MINUTES- 82 -OCTOBER 18, 1993 Councillor Wagner encouraged the Committee to consider the intangible benefits of the Program relative to the City as a whole and the downtown in particular. Councillor Galloway suggested that if the Program continues there should be a quantification of costs and an annual upset limit for the Program. Councillor Zehr agreed that this should be dealt with in the long term and suggested that the staff recommendation be amended to indicate that it is conditional upon funding being in place by the October 26, 1993 Council meeting. Councillor Stortz accepted the suggestion of Councillor Zehr as a friendly amendment. Mr. McKay suggested that given the favourable loan interest rate provided by the City, the Committee may wish to consider a reduction in the forgivable portion of the loan from 30% to 10% with subsequent monitoring to determine the impact. Councillor Smola agreed that both the amount of the forgivable portion and the rate of interest should be examined. Councillor Leadston asked that staff indicate which of the past participants in the Program and those on the waiting list are owners as opposed to tenants. Moved by Councillor J. Ziegler - "That the forgivable portion of any Facade/Interior Loan be reduced from 30% to 10% and that criteria involving access to the Program be either developed or refined." Councillor Stortz advised that up until one year ago the Program had a 20% forgivable portion and was under utilized. He suggested that the lower interest rate is not a sufficient incentive to participate. The amending motion by Councillor J. Ziegler to reduce the forgivable portion of the loan and address the issue of access criteria was voted on and . LOST The main motion by Councillor B. Stortz was then voted on and . it was resolved "That conditional upon funding being finalized by the Council meeting of October 26, 1993, an additional $250,000.00 be allocated to the Facade/Interior Loan Program." 6. 1994 PRO FORMA BUDGET By generally consent, it was agreed that the Finance and Administration Committee would reconvene this date immediately after the meeting of the Planning and Economic Development Committee to consider the Pro Forma Budget 7. KITCHENER EMPLOYEE ASSISTANCE PROGRAM (KEAP) REVIEW The Committee was in receipt of reports from Mr. R. Freeborn (October 7, 1993) and Mr. J. Panunto (October 6, 1993) comprising a review of the Program and a recommendation to implement a user fee for the second and subsequent visits. On a motion by Councillor J. Smola - It was resolved: "That the 1994 Budget for the Kitchener Employee Assistance Program (KEAP) be reduced to $44,400.00, and at the same time a user fee of $8.00 per visit be introduced to be paid by the employee for the second and subsequent visits." The Committee adjourned at 1:55 p.m. and reconvened at 5:40 p.m. with all members of Council present except Councillors T. Galloway and G. Leadston. 8. 1994 PRO FORMA BUDGET Mr. Gazzola reviewed the expenditure and revenue worksheets noting concern over assessment appeal writeoffs as a result of a carryover of Review Board Hearings from 1992. It was also noted that the scenario presented this date resulting in a 1.9% levy increase is based on grants and user fees increasing by a net value of 2%. FINANCE AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE MINUTES- 83 -OCTOBER 18, 1993 Councillor Zehr asked that the Committee provide direction to staff, particularly as regards the targeted levy increase. Councillor Stortz asked for an indication of the City's budget position prior to the Province imposing the Social Contract, the Expenditure Control Plan and widening the applicability of the Sales Tax. Mr. Gazzola replied that if not for the Expenditure Control Plan and the Social Contract the City would be starting with a levy decrease of approximately 1.5 to 2%. A brief discussion took place concerning the impact of the Provincial initiatives and taxpayer expectations. In response to a question from Councillor Ziegler, Mr. Gazzola advised that the Pro Forma Budget utilizes $1,750,000.00 from the Tax Stabilization Reserve Fund and it is anticipated that approximately $1,250,000.00 will remain in the Fund by year end. Councillor Wagner repeated an earlier request for an impact assessment relative to any increase in Transit fares. Councillor Stortz suggested that the 1.9% scenario be approved as a starting point with further direction to staff to itemize the reductions needed to reduce the levy increase to below 1.9%. Mr. McKay advised of a reduction in the City's Social Contract target which he indicated would allow for more flexibility in 1995 and 1996. Councillor Lorentz questioned the impact of deferring payment of the new City Hall for a further year. Mr. Gazzola explained that at present the City Hall Fund contains an amount equal to the interest payments on short term loans. Councillor Lorentz offered the opinion that the City may be too aggressive in its strategy to pay off the building given the fact that majority of homeowners take in excess of 20 years to pay their mortgages. Mr. Gazzola replied that over the past decade Council policy has put the City in a position where it is able to pay cash for the building rather than borrowing and making interest payments which themselves must be budgeted. In response to a question from Councillor Smola, Mr. Gazzola indicated that the proposed user fees are budgeted based on an effective date January 1, 1994. On a motion by Councillor B. Stortz - It was resolved: "That in preparing the 1994 draft Budgets, staff be directed to incorporate the allocations in the Pro Forma Budget scenario resulting in a 1.9% levy increase as outlined by Mr. J. Gazzola in his presentation to the Finance and Administration Committee on October 18, 1993 and in addition to itemize suggested reductions which would reduce the projected increase to below 1.9%." 8. 1994 PRO FORMA BUDGET (cont.) Councillor Zehr suggested that the proposed reductions which would lower the levy increase to below 1.9% should include a range between 1.9 and 0%. Mr. Gazzola cautioned that it will be difficult to attain the 1.9% target as this is already based on no increases in the Operating Budgets over 1993 amounts. 9. NEXT MEETING The next regularly scheduled meeting of the Finance and Administration Committee will be held on . Monday, November 1, 1993 10. ADJOURNMENT On motion, the meeting adjourned at 6:05 p.m. _________________________________ FINANCE AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE MINUTES- 84 -OCTOBER 18, 1993 G. Sosnoski Manager of Corporate Records/Assistant City Clerk