HomeMy WebLinkAboutFinance & Admin - 1995-01-16FAC\1995-01-16
JAN UARY 16, 1995
FINANCE & ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE MINUTES
CITY OF KITCHENER
The Finance and Administration Committee met this date, commencing at 10:00 a.m., under the
Chairmanship of Councillor J. Ziegler with the following members present: Councillors T. Galloway, G.
Lorentz, K. Redman, Jake Smola, B. Vrbanovic, C. Weylie and M. Yantzi. Mayor Richard D. Christy was
in attendance for part of the meeting.
Others present: Messrs. T. McKay, J. Gazzola, R. Freeborn, R.W. Pritchard, T. McCabe, T. Clancy, W.
Beck, O. den Ouden, D. Paterson, J. Witmer, G. Sosnoski, Ms. L. MacDonald and Ms. D. Arnold.
1. AUDIT OF MILEAGE CLAIMS
The Committee was in receipt of a copy of the audit undertaken by the Finance Department in
1994 and covering memos from Mr. T. McKay and Mr. J. Gazzola.
Mr. McKay provided a brief history of the mileage audit, noting that the procedures for mileage
claims were first audited in 1992 and changes were subsequently made. He noted that at that
time staff had met with Tax Watch and they were generally satisfied with the results but indicated
an interest in monitoring Building Division claims. In the course of the monitoring, Mr. Austin
Beachey indicated that he felt there was still a problem with claims made by Building Inspectors
and cited three specific dates. The concerns were referred to City staff and the Finance
Department was instructed to audit all mileage claims by City employees for the period September
1, 1993 to September 30, 1994. The report indicates that there are no discrepancies in the
mileage claims which would indicate an abuse of the present system, and it was noted that the six
additional recommendations by the Finance Department to improve documentation and control
have since been implemented.
Mr. Austin Beachey appeared and expressed concern over the delay in providing him a copy of
the audit report. He also noted that in his opinion mileage claims cannot be tracked using a map
and the routes must be redriven to determine the legitimacy of claims. Mr. Beachey referred to
specific instances in Appendix A and Appendix B of the Audit Report from Ms. P. Houston dated
October 21, 1994, involving discrepancies between the figures of the auditors and the inspectors.
Mr. Beachey suggested that the Audit Report was rushed, and should have been undertaken by
non-City employees to ensure objectivity. Mr. Beachey further stated that in his opinion, the
improvements recommended in the second audit report should have been implemented long ago.
Councillor Lorentz questioned whether Mr. Beachey was suggesting that the City hire a private
auditor, at its own expense, as opposed to using qualified staff. Mr. Beachey replied that he
viewed use of staff in this particular instance as a conflict of interest and suggested using citizen
volunteers to conduct reviews, though not necessarily for this particular audit. Councillor Lorentz
disagreed and also cited the amount of staff time that has been spent to date in auditing mileage
claims and indicated his hope that this last audit will end the matter.
Councillor Jake Smola indicated agreement with the comments made by Mr. Beachey concerning
the potential conflict of interest where staff are directed to investigate fellow employees. He noted
that the concern over mileage claims arose as a result of past allegations made by Mr. John Ross.
Councillor Ziegler questioned whether staff from separate departments could undertake such an
audit, and Councillor Jake Smola suggested that this could not be done without bias. Councillor
Smola also referred to payments for mileage claimed on statutory holidays, noting that he had
seen no reply in writing to Mr. Ross' original query. Mr. Witmer clarified that in these instances,
builders had requested inspections which were undertaken on statutory holidays and for which the
City paid mileage but not overtime. Mr. McKay also pointed out that the allegations of Mr. Ross
were substantially discredited and that in fact Mr. Ross had lied in this regard. Mr. Gazzola then
explained the current process for payment of mileage claims and the various checks involved.
1. AUDIT OF MILEAGE CLAIMS - cont'd.
FINANCE & ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE MINUTES
JANUARY 167 1995
-2-
CITY OF KITCHENER
Councillor Galloway expressed the opinion that this particular circumstance does not warrant an
external investigation. He expressed his faith that staff have the necessary professional ethics
and are governed by a code of conduct as regards such audits, and that he had no reason to
suspect any lack of integrity. Councillor Jake Smola indicated his disapproval of earlier comments
made by Mr. McKay with respect to the allegations of Mr. Ross.
2. PROPOSED TRANSIT FARE INCREASE
The Committee was in receipt of a report and recommendation from Mr. W. Beck dated January 7,
1995 requesting pre-budget approval of various transit fare increases.
Mr. Beck referred to his report and noted that a five cent fare increase is generally accepted, and
pointed out that many other municipalities with a fare that is either the same or greater do not
provide the level of service enjoyed by Kitchener residents. Mr. Beck also advised that staff are
examining the possibility of fare policy changes which would incorporate the use of tokens.
Councillor Redman questioned how the City's ridership figures compare to other similar sized
municipalities, and Mr. Beck replied that the City's ridership decreases are about one half of most
other cities. He noted that there is a general downward spiral in ridership across Ontario and
Canada, but that one to two percent decreases in Kitchener suggest that ridership is stabilizing. In
response to a further question, he also advised that staff are proposing service increases in some
areas of Kitchener and Waterloo. Councillor Galloway questioned whether any increase in
revenue as a result of a fare increase would be offset by a decrease in ridership and asked how
easily information could be assembled on ridership decreases in other municipalities.
Mr. Freeborn indicated that the dilemma of Transit involves keeping pace with increasing costs
without decreases in ridership, and indicated that staff feel small fare increases are a more
reasonable approach than larger increases made necessary by years where fares are not
increased at all.
Councillor Weylie suggested that if the City is not using a token system, the monthly pass should
be priced to make it more advantageous to regular weekday users of the transit system. Mr. Beck
replied that at present the City loses approximately $1 million dollars in revenue as a result of
issuing passes and the introduction of tokens would address her concerns. Councillor Weylie
asked that if a fare increase is enacted, Project Lift be advised immediately after approval by
Council in order that they can correspondingly increase their fares. Councillor Yantzi commented
that if the City feels that encouraging the use of public transit is a priority, fare increases would
reduce ridership and send the wrong message to service users. Mr. Freeborn compared the traffic
situation and cost of daily parking in the City of Toronto with that of the City of Kitchener and noted
that less expensive and more readily available parking as well as less downtown traffic congestion
mitigate against greater use of public transit.
Mr. Rudy Grosz, appeared on behalf of CAW Local #4304 representing Transit Drivers as well as
Transit and Fleet Maintenance persons. Mr. Grosz advised of his membership's interest in the
discussion over fare increases and of the numerous meetings held with management and user
groups, at which all parties agreed to the need for a different transit fare system. Mr. Grosz stated
that the drivers feel for a City this size, Kitchener's transit system is second to none. He also
pointed out that passengers are generally upset by fare changes and that drivers take the brunt of
customer dissatisfaction. He referred to a second fare increase under consideration for June of
1995 and indicated that his Membership does not support two fare changes over a five month
period. Mr. Grosz suggested that if this is necessary, the fare change should be implemented in
one rather than two stages. Mr. Grosz advised that his Membership wants to see ridership
increases and improved service as well as implementation of other revenue generating
alternatives before any further fare increases.
PROPOSED TRANSIT FARE INCREASE - cont'd.
Mayor Richard D. Christy entered the meeting at this time.
FINANCE & ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE MINUTES
JANUARY 167 1995 - 3 - CITY OF KITCHENER
Councillor Redman inquired as to when the information obtained from the transit user group would
be brought to Council. Mr. Freeborn replied that this information would be presented in the context
of any amendments to the fare structure and would likely be available in June of 1995 at the
earliest. Councillor Yantzi complimented the drivers and the Union on their team effort in
delivering transit services, and in response to his question, Mr. Grosz indicated that in his opinion,
ridership will decline in February due to the fare increase and would not recover by the time of a
second increase in June of 1995. Councillor Lorentz questioned whether the Union would support
an increase if it were delayed until June of 1995. Mr. Grosz replied that the membership favours a
different fare system which may increase ridership in a way more palatable to transit users. In
response to a further question from Councillor Lorentz, Mr. Freeborn advised that if the February
fare increases are not approved, this would have a revenue impact on the Division's 1995
Operating Budget of approximately $100,000.00 over 1994 figures. Councillor Jake Smola
inquired as to the impact of the recent School Board decision to start classes earlier in the day,
and Mr. Beck replied that this has meant more buses are required to service fewer students during
peak periods and though there will be a revenue impact, to date the projections are substantially
on target. He also advised that it is generally the practice of staff to make minor service reductions
to offset ridership or revenue declines. Mr. Beck also indicated that at a future Public Works and
Transportation Committee meeting, the Transit Division would present initiatives for promoting
service use.
Councillor G. Lorentz put forward a motion to defer consideration of any transit fare increases until
June, 1995.
Councillor Yantzi expressed an interest in seeing more information on the impact of such a
decision, and Councillor Galloway asked whether any municipality has attempted anything
dramatic such as a 50% reduction in monthly passes, to determine the impact on ridership. Mr.
Beck replied that he not aware of any extensive experimentation by other systems, but noted that a
monthly pass priced at half the current amount would not pay for itself. Councillor Ziegler
suggested that Council would be making a mistake if they did not pass the moderate increase
along at this time. He pointed out that Kitchener is at present in the Iow to mid range relative to
fares in other cities and that the present system conveys real value for the fare charged.
Councillor Jake Smola suggested a review of the staffing structure of each of Transit and Fleet
Divisions. In the way of information, Mr. Gazzola advised that the transit service presently
operates with a $8 million dollar deficit, $3 million of which is paid for by the Province and the
balance through taxes and user fees.
Councillor Lorentz indicated that he would not object to this issue being referred to Budget
deliberations, and pointed out that the City should not be assuming a 2% decrease in ridership as
a result of fare increases, but should be looking at ways to actively increase ridership. Mayor
Christy agreed that the issue should be debated further during the budget process, but in the
interim asked to see the Marketing Plan prepared by the Transit Division in anticipation of a 2%
decrease in ridership.
Councillor Lorentz agreed to amend his previous motion so as to refer discussion to the 1995
budget process.
On a motion by Councillor G. Lorentz,
It was resolved:
"That consideration of the revised fare structure proposed by the Transit
Division and as outlined in the report of Mr. W. Beck dated January 7, 1995
be deferred and referred to the 1995 budget process."
3. AMENDMENT OF CHAPTER 530 (DOGS) - ELECTRONIC FENCING
The Committee was in receipt of a report and recommendation from Ms. D. Arnold dated January
11, 1995 concerning an amendment to the Municipal Code with respect to the conditional use of
electronic fencing.
FINANCE & ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE MINUTES
JANUARY 167 1995 - 4 - CITY OF KITCHENER
Mr. Don Diebold, Invisible Fencing of the Golden Triangle, appeared in support of the staff
recommendation and suggested an amendment to condition number three which would have the
effect of requiring that notice of the use of electronic fencing be posted adjacent to all normal entry
doors as opposed to being mounted on the front door. He then read suggested wording for the
amendment.
Moved by Mayor Richard D. Christy
"That Chapter 530 (Dogs) of the City of Kitchener Municipal Code be
amended to provide that an owner of a dog may use electronic fencing as a
means to keep such dog on the property of the owner, subject to the following
conditions:
a)
Such property must be registered with the Kitchener-Waterloo
Humane Society;
b)
The electronic fencing shall restrict the dog's area to no closer
than two metres from any abutting public property;
c)
A sign(s) advising the public that this type of containment is in
use shall be placed adjacent to any normal entry door and be
clearly visible from any public property; and,
d)
Electronic fencing shall not be permitted as a means of
containment for a dog declared potentially dangerous or
dangerous pursuant to Sections 530.5.9 and 530.5.10
respectively."
Councillor Galloway suggested that it may be too onerous to require purchasers of electronic
fencing to notify the Humane Society if the animal in question is not dangerous or potentially
dangerous. Ms. Arnold clarified that it was envisioned that a simple telephone call would suffice in
order to make the Society aware of the use of electronic fencing on a particular property.
The previous motion by Mayor Richard D. Christy to amend Chapter 530 was then voted on and
CARRIED.
4. MOBILE SIGN REQUEST - 171 QUEEN STREET SOUTH
The Committee was in receipt of submissions from Mrs. Gwen Mott dated December 13 and 19,
1994 as well as Planning and Development Department Report #PD 95/2 recommending that
Council grant no further extensions for the use of a portable sign at 171 Queen Street South.
Mr. McCabe circulated photographs of the subject property and pointed out that it is in a
"conversion area" comprised of mixed residential and commercial uses. He advised that
traditionally, the City has prohibited mobile signs in these areas for aesthetic reasons. Mr.
McCabe pointed out that with regard to the subject property, the area in question is principally
residential and that some existing regulations would not be met by the current sign. He suggested
that the whole issue should be looked at rather than dealing with Mrs. Mott's request in isolation.
In response to a question from Councillor Galloway, Mr. McCabe advised that Mrs. Mott could
have approached the Committee of Adjustment to request a minor variance for the sign.
4. MOBILE SIGN REQUEST - 171 QUEEN STREET SOUTH - cont'd.
Councillor Yantzi pointed out that sandwich boards do not provide appropriate signage in this
instance, and that though the area is residential in nature there is heavy vehicular traffic along
Queen Street. Mr. McCabe replied that Frederick Street has similar circumstances and similar
aesthetic concerns and added that the advantage of a Committee of Adjustment application would
be in obtaining neighbourhood input on the sign. Councillor Lorentz asked whether the City has
received any complaints regarding this sign to date, and Mr. McCabe replied in the negative.
Councillor Lorentz suggested the installation of a permanent sign.
FINANCE & ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE MINUTES
JANUARY 167 1995
-5-
CITY OF KITCHENER
Mrs. Gwen Mott, a tenant at 171 Queen Street South, appeared in support of her request for
permission to use a mobile sign on the property. She pointed out that the residential component of
the neighbourhood is comprised almost exclusively of apartments and indicated that some
flexibility is required in order to keep businesses in the downtown viable. In response to a request
for clarification, it was indicated that Mrs. Mott is seeking a further extension for the use of a
portable sign which she believes is necessary for her business.
Mr. McCabe repeated that the required distance separation must also be considered as it relates
to permanent and temporary signs, and that in his opinion the best solution is a better oriented
permanent sign.
On a motion by Councillor M. Yantzi,
It was resolved:
"That Council grant a further three month temporary extension (January 16,
1995 - April 16, 1995) for use of the mobile sign presently located at 171
Queen Street South, to allow either an application to the Committee of
Adjustment concerning the present location or discussions between the
applicant and the property owner concerning installation of a permanent sign,
and further,
That the applicant obtain a sign permit with respect to the above extension."
5. WATER METER PROBLEMS
The Committee was in receipt of correspondence from Councillor J. Ziegler concerning problems
at 111 Geneva Crescent and 107 Selkirk Drive. He noted that the problems occurred as a result
of a discrepancy in readings obtained from the inside and outside water meters, and in particular a
malfunction of the outside meter.
Councillor Ziegler indicated he is primarily interested in giving the ratepayer a reasonable amount
of time to pay the accumulated amount owing, and also to discount this amount in recognition of
the circumstances.
Mr. Gazzola reviewed the Administrative Policy currently in place and noted that of the 65,000
water meters presently in the City, this problem occurs at the rate of ten to twelve units per year.
He pointed out that when staff are aware of a discrepancy between an inside and outside meter,
the outside device is changed, then a sixty day period is allowed to monitor the consumption
patterns after which an attempt is made to determine how long the meter has been defective. In
this regard, Mr. Gazzola advised that staff look at statistics for the previous fifteen months and that
based on this and daily consumption patterns, arrive at an estimated consumption during the
period of the defect. He stressed that there is no question that the water was used based on the
inside meter reading, but the question is how the amount owing is to be billed. Mr. Gazzola also
noted that staff are flexible in terms of payment schedules and that payment is requested without
penalty or interest. He also suggested that the current policy would be changed if Council felt this
was appropriate.
5. WATER METER PROBLEMS - cont'd.
Councillor Ziegler advised that most residents he has been in contact with received large bills all
at once and panicked over the amount owing. He suggested that the City has to accept some
responsibility for errors in this regard, and on this basis should have a generous policy since City
equipment was at fault. Mr. Gazzola pointed out that at this time people in this position are
already receiving a substantial break on the amount owing.
On a motion by Councillor G. Lorentz
It was resolved:
FINANCE & ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE MINUTES
JANUARY 167 1995 - 6 - CITY OF KITCHENER
"That Councillor J. Ziegler work with Mr. J. Gazzola to develop a draft policy
regarding billing practices in instances where discrepancies occur between
the readings on the inside and outside water meters as a result of defective
equipment."
6. APPOINTMENT - KITCHENER PUBLIC LIBRARY BOARD
The Committee was in receipt of a report and recommendation from Mr. L. Parkhouse dated
December 21, 1994 concerning the Waterloo County Board of Education representative on the
KPL Board.
On a motion by Mayor Richard D. Christy,
It was resolved:
"That Kitchener City Council accept the recommendation of the Waterloo
County Board of Education and appoint Ms. Susan Milne and Mr. Eric Bow to
represent that Board on the Kitchener Public Library Board for a term of three
(3) years, expiring November 30, 1997.'
7. APPOINTMENT - KITCHENER HOUSING INCORPORATED BOARD OF DIRECTORS
The Committee was in receipt of a report and recommendation from Mr. L. Parkhouse dated
January 4, 1995 concerning the appointment of a Community Director.
On a motion by Mayor Richard D. Christy,
It was resolved:
"That Kitchener City Council approve the appointment of Ms. Myra South as
a Community Director on the Kitchener Housing Inc. Board of Directors for a
term of one (1) year, expiring November 30, 1995."
8. KAPS COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION - BIRTH ACKNOWLEDGEMENT LETTERS
The Committee was in receipt of a report and recommendation from Mr. L. Neil dated January 11,
1995 concerning a charge for the above letters. They were also in receipt this date of a
memorandum from Ms. L. MacDonald dated January 16, 1995 pointing out that the City has no
legal authority under the Vital Statistics Act for the issuance of birth acknowledgment letters, nor
authority to charge a fee in this regard.
Councillor Ziegler expressed his ongoing opposition in principle to awarding staff under the KAPS
Program for suggestions which impose user fees for items which are currently paid for out of taxes.
Mr. McKay pointed out that the vast majority of KAPS suggestions relate to decreases in
expenditures, and that Council sees user fee suggestions almost exclusively as a result of the
need for further approval.
8. KAPS COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION - BIRTH ADKNOWLEDGEMENT LETTERS - cont'd.
Moved by Councillor G. Lorentz
"That effective February 1, 1995, the City of Kitchener impose a $20.00 fee
for the issuance of birth acknowledgement letters by the Kitchener Division
Registrar (City Clerk)."
Councillor Lorentz indicated that he supports the recommendation on the basis that the fee
charged relates to cost recovery only. In response to a question from Councillor Vrbanovic, Mr.
Pritchard provided background information on the issuance of birth certificates and the need for a
birth acknowledgement letter. He also pointed out that notwithstanding the present legislation, the
Registrar General has indicated that City Clerks may issue such letters, though this is not
FINANCE & ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE MINUTES
JANUARY 167 1995 - 7 - CITY OF KITCHENER
required. He advised that in his opinion such letters should be issued by the City, and that a fee
should be charged based on the fact that this service is used by a limited number of citizens.
Councillor Lorentz asked why a $20.00 fee is recommended, and Mr. Pritchard replied that the
service provided is comparable to that provided for the issuance of local improvement letters.
A motion by Councillor T. Galloway to amend the fee by reducing it from $20.00 to $10.00 was
voted on and LOST.
The main motion by Councillor G. Lorentz to impose a $20.00 fee for the issuance of birth
acknowledgement letters was then voted on and CARRIED.
9. POLICIES - HUMAN RESOURCES
The Committee was in receipt of a report from Mr. D. Paterson dated January 6, 1995 requesting
consideration of two new policies and three revised policies.
Mr. Paterson referred to his report and the draft policies which he indicated had been reviewed by
Management Committee, with subsequent changes.
Councillor Galloway questioned the need for an Attendance Policy on the basis that this is a
normal organizational expectation. Mr. Paterson replied that it is advisable to have such a policy
in cases involving arbitration where the arbitrator is looking for evidence of corporate direction. He
clarified that at present several City departments have attendance policies, and that this is an
umbrella to indicate general corporate expectations.
Councillor Vrbanovic inquired as to how benefits will be dealt with under the Self Funded Leave
Policy, and Mr. Paterson advised that this is addressed in the written contract with an employee.
He noted that an individual would have the option of paying to maintain benefits or using a spousal
plan, though in any case this would not be a corporate expense. In response to a further question
from Councillor Jake Smola, Mr. Paterson advised that such a policy would not likely be applicable
in lieu of sick leave, and is most often used to allow a staff member to further their education. He
added that all leaves must be agreed to by the department and the City and can be cancelled.
On a motion by Councillor M. Yantzi,
It was resolved:
"That Council adopt the two (2) new policies (Attendance, and Self-Funded
Leave of Absence) and three (3) revised policies (Tuition Assistance, Drug
and Alcohol, Mileage) as outlined in the report of Mr. D. Paterson dated
January 6, 1995."
10. EMPLOYMENT EQUITY LEGISLATION
A deferral of this item to the January 30, 1995 meeting was requested and agreed to by the
Committee.
11. NEXT MEETING
The next regularly scheduled meeting of the Finance and Administration Committee will be held on
Monday, January 30, 1995.
12. ADJOURNMENT
On motion, the meeting adjourned at 12:20 p.m.
FINANCE & ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE MINUTES
JANUARY 167 1995
-8-
CITY OF KITCHENER
........... G. Sosnoski
........... Manager of Corporate
........... Records/Assistant City Clerk