Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutFin & Corp Svcs - 2006-06-26FINANCE & CORPORATE SERVICES COMMITTEE MINUTES JUNE 26, 2006 CITY OF KITCHENER The Finance and Corporate Services Committee met this date, commencing at 1:35 p.m. Present: Councillor B. Urbanovic -Chair Mayor C. Zehr and Councillors J. Smola, G. Lorentz, J. Gazzola, M. Galloway and C. Weylie. Staff: C. Ladd, Chief Administrator S. Turner, Interim General Manager, Corporate Services P. Houston, General Manager, Financial Services & City Treasurer R. Browning, General Manager, Development & Technical Services & Fire Chief A. Pappert, General Manager, Community Services D. Chapman, Director of Financial Planning and Reporting R. Regier, Executive Director of Economic Development L. MacDonald, Director of Legal Services and City Solicitor R. Gosse, Director of Legislated Services and City Clerk J. Willmer, Director of Planning J. Witmer, Director of Building Services K. Baulk, Director of Enterprise M. Grummett, Director of Information Technology M. May, Senior Public Affairs Officer J. Sheryer, Assistant City Solicitor J. Gillett, Committee Administrator 1. CRPS-06-098 -LIQUOR LICENCE REVIEW APPLICATION - YE'S SUSHI -103 KING STREET WEST The Committee considered Corporate Services Department report CRPS-06-098, dated June 14, 2006 concerning a liquor licence application for a restaurant located at 103 King Street West. On motion by Councillor M. Galloway - itwas resolved: "That subject to the applicant entering into an agreement with the City including certain conditions of operating a licensed establishment as set out below, Council take no action to oppose the application for a liquor license for Ye's Sushi located at 103 King Street West applied for by 1696913 Ontario Inc. (herein referred to as the "Applicant"); and further, That the Mayor and Clerk be authorized to enter into an agreement with the applicant should it be willing wherein the applicant agrees to abide by the following conditions and to request they be added to its licence if the Alcohol and Gaming Commission of Ontario (AGCO) chooses to issue the licence: 1. to post in a conspicuous place and abide by the Downtown Licensed Establishments Code of Conduct; 2. to become a member of the Kitchener Downtown Business Association's License and Entertainment Committee and attend its meetings; 3. to abide to a set 30% monthly ratio of alcohol sales to gross refreshment sales including food and other sundries) din other words, alcohol sales will be limited to 30% of gross refreshment sales); 4. to stop serving alcohol by 2:00 a.m. daily; 5. to notify the Clerk of the City of Kitchener in writing of any application to change the license at the time the application for the change is made to the Alcohol and Gaming Commission, and not to expand the establishment without the consent of the City's Council; 6. to comply with the Noise By-law and the Smoking By-law; and, 7. these conditions shall bind all successors, assigns and subsequent licence holders cif any)." FINANCE & CORPORATE SERVICES COMMITTEE MINUTES JUNE 26, 2006 - 97 - CITY OF KITCHENER 2. CRPS-06-101 -LIQUOR LICENCE REVIEW APPLICATION - VICTORIA PLACE RETIREMENT RESIDENCES - 290 QUEEN STREET SOUTH The Committee considered Corporate Services Department report CRPS-06-101, dated June 16, 2006 concerning a liquor licence application for a retirement residence at 290 Queen Street South. On motion by Councillor M. Galloway - itwas resolved: "That subject to the applicant entering into an agreement with the City including certain conditions of operating a licensed establishment as set out below, Council take no action to oppose the application for a liquor license for Victoria Place Retirement Residences located at 290 Queen Street South applied for by Victoria Place Retirement Residence (herein referred to as the "Applicant"); and further, That the Mayor and Clerk be authorized to enter into an agreement with the applicant should it be willing wherein the applicant agrees to abide by the following conditions and to request they be added to its licence if the Alcohol and Gaming Commission of Ontario (AGCO) chooses to issue the licence: 1. to abide to a set 30% monthly ratio of alcohol sales to gross refreshment sales including food and other sundries) din other words, alcohol sales will be limited to 30% of gross refreshment sales); 2. to notify the Clerk of the City of Kitchener in writing of any application to change the license at the time the application for the change is made to the Alcohol and Gaming Commission, and not to expand the establishment without the consent of the City's Council; 3. to comply with the Noise By-law; and, 4. these conditions shall bind all successors, assigns and subsequent licence holders cif any)." 3. CRPS-06-100 -NEW REQUEST FOR PERMISSION TO OPERATE SIDEWALK PATIO - OLIVE & BEAN CO. - 276 KING STREET WEST The Committee considered Corporate Services Department report CRPS-06-100, dated June 14, 2006 concerning a request to operate a sidewalk patio for the 2006 season for the proposed restaurant to be located at 276 King Street West. In response to Councillor C. Weylie, Ms. J. Sheryer advised that the owner of the restaurant is required to enter into an encroachment agreement prior to commencing operation of the sidewalk patio, which will not proceed until such time as the owner meets specified conditions to the satisfaction of City staff. Ms. C. Ladd added that the applicant has been informed, in writing, that operation of the sidewalk patio cannot commence until all approvals and payment of the required licence for the restaurant are received. On motion by Councillor M. Galloway - itwas resolved: "That, subject to obtaining all necessary staff approvals and the payment of all required licence fees, the Mayor and Clerk be authorized to execute an Encroachment Agreement satisfactory to the City Solicitor, with the owner of The Olive & Bean Co., located at 276 King Street West, for the operation of a sidewalk patio along King Street West and Water Street North, for a period not to commence prior to execution of the Agreement by all parties and such use to terminate no later than October 31, 2006." 4. CSD-06-086 - ONTARIO MILLENIUM PARTNERSHIP INITIATIVE - CONTRACT FOR HURON NATURAL AREA The Committee considered Corporate Services Department report CSD-06-086, dated June 15, 2006 concerning a funding agreement between the Province and the Region of Waterloo FINANCE & CORPORATE SERVICES COMMITTEE MINUTES JUNE 26, 2006 - 98 - CITY OF KITCHENER 4. CSD-06-086 - ONTARIO MILLENIUM PARTNERSHIP INITIATIVE - CONTRACT FOR HURON NATURAL AREA (CONT'D) for an Ontario Millennium Partnership Initiative relative to the Huron Natural Area Project, which sets out all detailed terms and conditions of the provincial funding along with the process for filing payment requests and final reports. Councillor M. Galloway advised that the Huron Natural Area Project was approved to receive a portion of the City's allocation from the Ontario Superbuild Corporation, Millennium Partnerships Initiative, in 2003 following which an extension to complete Phase 1 was granted to December 31, 2006. He noted that the proposed agreement under consideration this date represents the next step in moving the project forward. Councillor G. Lorentz added that funding for this project will be withdrawn by the Province if it is not used by the December deadline. At the request of Councillor J. Gazzola, Ms. P. Houston agreed to provide a list of other outstanding projects slated to come forward in regard to the Ontario Superbuild funding program. On motion by Councillor M. Galloway - itwas resolved: "That the Regional Municipality of Waterloo be requested to execute the Millennium Partnerships Initiative Funding Agreement with the Province of Ontario by its Minister of Natural Resources for the Huron Natural Area Project (the "Funding Agreement"); and, That the Mayor and Clerk be authorized to sign the Agreement between the Regional Municipality of Waterloo and the Corporation of the City of Kitchener in a form as satisfactory to the City Solicitor, pursuant to which the City will indemnify and be responsible for all obligations of the Regional Municipality of Waterloo under the Funding Agreement; and further, That the City of Kitchener's Chief Administrative Officer be authorized to sign and submit to the Regional Municipality of Waterloo any and all payment requests, reports, certificates and other documentation required to facilitate requests for disbursements pursuant to the Funding Agreement." 5. CRPS-06-097 -APPEAL -HOT DOG CART LOCATION - 351 MARGARET AVENUE The Committee considered Corporate Services Department report CRPS-06-097, dated June 14, 2006 concerning a request to operate a refreshment vehicle (hot dog cart) at 351 Margaret Avenue, which does not meet the distance separation requirements between refreshment vehicles and/or places of refreshment. Mr. Stephen Spaetzel, owner of the hot dog cart, attended to appeal the Manager of ~icensing's decision not to issue a licence for his proposed location and circulated this date a written submission in support of the requested licence. He advised that the location is directly across from the Breithaupt Centre which has a small food service and is within the limits of the required 200 metre distance separation. He noted that the Head of the food service at Breithaupt Centre raised the issue of his refreshment cart at a recent committee meeting and no objections were forthcoming. He added that the Breithaupt Centre will financially benefit from his operation in that, the owner of the property on which his cart will be located has committed to donate all rental fees collected from his operation to the 'Outreach Program' at Breithaupt Centre. He further advised that another hot dog cart is already located approximately 366 metres from his proposed location, which is within the limits of the required 400 metre distance separation. Copies of correspondence from the owner of the other cart stating no objection to the proposed location, as well as from the property owner regarding the proposed donation, were attached to Mr. Spaetzel's written submission. Councillor J. Smola spoke in support of the request for a licence acknowledging that Mr. Spaetzel had sufficiently addressed all concerns relative to his proposed location. FINANCE & CORPORATE SERVICES COMMITTEE MINUTES JUNE 26, 2006 - 99 - CITY 4F KITCHENER 5. CRPS-06-097 -APPEAL -HOT DOG CART LOCATION - 351 MARGARET AVENUE (C4NT'D) Staff advised that if approved, the licence would be in effect for a period expiring December 31, 2006. On motion by Councillor J. Smola - itwas resolved: "That an appeal by Stephen Spaetzel to the Manager of ~icensing's decision not to issue a licence for the operation of a hot dog cart at 351 Margaret Avenue be granted and a licence be issued for the specified location for a period expiring December 31, 2006." 6. DTS-06-098 - DEVELOPMENT CHARGE COMPENSATION REQUEST - PETER KRUSE, INTRUST -HIDDEN VALLEY ESTATES - SUBDIVISION 30T-04201- HIDDEN VALLEY ROAD The Committee considered this date Development and Technical Services Department report DTS-06-098, dated June 22, 2006 regarding an agreement with the subdivider of Hidden Valley Estates for compensation of design and construction of sanitary sewage facilities in the dower Hidden Valley Community and applicable development charge credits. The report recommends that required funding in the amount of approximately $800,000. be included in the City's 2007-2016 Capital Forecast for the year 2016 and staff report to the Committee with a proposed policy on development charge fund agreements to be considered no later than final approval of the 2007-2016 Capital Forecast. The Committee was also in receipt this date of correspondence dated June 22, 2006 from Ms. Carol Wiebe, MHBC Planning, on behalf of the subdivider, requesting a modification to City staff's recommendation, wherein reimbursement would be made to the subdivider in 2 installments; i.e. $200,000. in 2009 and the balance in 2016, rather than one installment in 2016. Mr. J. Willmer advised that the project was included in the 2004 Development Charge Background Study as being 100% related infrastructure to accommodate growth and accordingly, the cost is to be paid out of the Development Charge Fund. He stated that the subdivider would normally front-end the project and be compensated by development charge credits at the time of building permit issuance; or alternatively, could wait for the City to undertake the work. In this instance, the project cost is approximately $1.1 M and the eligible development charge credits approximately $300,000. resulting in an $800,000. difference. He indicated that movement has been made on issues related to the subdivision from both sides and the parties involved are close to an agreement with the only outstanding matter being the difference between 1 or 2 repayment installments. Mr. Willmer responded to questions, advising that a review of the Development Charge By-law must be completed by 2009. Ms. P. Houston added that the subject agreement will be included in the new by-law, and the outstanding amount recognized as a liability for budgeting purposes. Ms. Carol Wiebe attended on behalf of the subdivider in support of the requested modification to the agreement to require a first installment of $200,000. in 2009. She noted that the project was first identified in the Development Charge Background Study at a cost estimate of $2.1 M but is now estimated to cost $1.1 M. She advised that the City will recover full costs through the development charge collection system and stands to collect a higher amount than required as until the Development Charge By-law is adjusted in 2009, the City will collect on the basis of the higher cost estimate. She suggested that her client's requested method of reimbursement is not unreasonable given the additional funding to be collected between 2004 - 2009 and in comparison to the overall development charge account, the amount of the first installment is minimal. She added that this plan was approved in 2005 in accordance with the City's Staging of Development program and should receive the same priority as other developments approved at the same time. FINANCE & CORPORATE SERVICES COMMITTEE MINUTES JUNE 26, 2006 -100 - CITY OF KITCHENER 6. DTS-06-098 -DEVELOPMENT CHARGE COMPENSATION REQUEST - PETER KRUSE, INTRUST -HIDDEN VALLEY ESTATES - SUBDIVISION 30T-04201- HIDDEN VALLEY ROAD (CONT'D) In response to Councillor J. Gazzola, Ms. Wiebe advised that her client would be satisfied with the arrangement proposed by staff; however, ideally would prefer their suggested approach to receiving the full amount sooner than 2016. Councillor J. Gazzola spoke in support of the staff recommendation and development of a policy to give clear direction in like situations. He cautioned that this approval should not be taken as precedent in the development industry in that, staff will be coming forward with a proposed policy to deal with such matters. At the request of Councillor J. Gazzola, Ms. P. Houston agreed to request Engineering staff to provide additional information concerning an $11 M expenditure allocated in 2008 of the Development Charges -Engineering Services Reserve Schedule. On motion by Councillor J. Gazzola - itwas resolved: "That the Mayor and Clerk be authorized to execute an agreement between the Corporation of the City of Kitchener and Hidden Valley Estates Inc. to the satisfaction of the City Solicitor, for the purpose of committing to compensating the subdivider for the difference between its costs for the design and construction of sanitary sewage facilities in the Lower Hidden Valley Community and the Development Charge credits to which the subdivider is entitled less any cost-sharing agreement with other benefiting landowners; and, That the City commits to including the necessary funds in its 2007-2016 Year Capital Forecast, for the year 2016, in the amount of approximately $800,000.; and further, That staff be directed to report to the Finance and Corporate Services Committee with a proposed policy on Development Charge Refund Agreements, to be considered no later than the final approval of the 2007-2016 Capital Forecast." It is noted that the above recommendation was considered at the special Council meeting held later this same date. 7. CAO-06-043 - RESULTS OF PUBLIC CONSULTATION - CENTRAL LIBRARY /CENTRE BLOCK REDEVELOPMENT The Committee considered this date Chief Administrator's Office report CAO-06-043, dated June 21, 2006 outlining results of a three phased consultation process on the Kitchener Public library (KPL) new central library /Centre Block redevelopment projects. The report recommends that a Request for Proposals ~RFP) for redevelopment of the Centre Block be developed without requiring construction of a new central library and the information received from the consultation process be shared and discussed with KPH to assess how to proceed with addressing its future needs. Mr. Dan Carli, Chair - KPH Board, spoke in response to the staff report, reaffirming KPL's need for a new expanded central library and belief that the Centre Block is the best location. He referred to extensive research and public consultation undertaken by KPL wherein over 1,500 residents participated in a variety of forums with the majority supporting a new central library; and an equally thorough process of evaluating nine different sites, including the existing, to arrive at the Centre Block as the preferred location. He stated that the Board acknowledges that economic conditions have changed since the business case was presented in 2004, which needs to be taken into account in making a decision and that the results of the recent public consultation are the basis for the recommendations put forward by staff this date. He also acknowledged that the 386 citizens forum participants did not support a central library on the Centre Block; however, suggested KP~'s own consultation of 1,500 residents demonstrates there is support for a new central library. He added that the Board's position is supported by the recent Environics survey and the 'Who Are You, Kitchener?' consultation process wherein it is confirmed there is a high satisfaction, and high support for spending on FINANCE & CORPORATE SERVICES COMMITTEE MINUTES JUNE 26.2006 -101 - CITY 4F KITCHENER 7. CA4-06-043 -RESULTS 4F PUBLIC CONSULTATION - CENTRAL LIBRARY /CENTRE BLOCK REDEVELOPMENT (C~NT'D) public library services. Mr. Carli advised that if it is Council's preference that other alternatives be explored, the Board will fully support this decision and work with the City to achieve their common goal to serve the needs of Kitchener residents. Mr. Carli responded to questions, advising that the KPL Board will remain objective in looking at alternatives and while it still believes the Centre Block is the best location, will support whatever decision of Council is made and work with Council to address the library's needs. Ms. S. Lewis, CEO -KPL, added that the library's consultation process was primarily conducted in 2003 - 2004 through a variety of forums and if desired, the results could be made available to Council. At the request of Mayor C. Zehr, Mr. Carli agreed to provide results of the KPL public consultations to members of Council prior to the July 4 Council meeting. Mr. Carli responded to further questions, advising that branch library systems depend on the support of a strong central library, noting that if plans for a new central library do not go ahead it leaves the existing library at capacity. Ms. C. Ladd commented on the availability of the $32.5 M notionally allocated from the Economic Development Investment Fund (EDIF), for a new central library on the Centre Block, advising that until further discussion is held between all parties it is unknown what, if any part, of these funds would be made available for enhancements to the existing library and / or an alternative location. Councillor J. Gazzola expressed a desire to hear from members of the Centre Block Steering Committee and Ms. Ladd advised that the citizen lay members of the CBSC had chosen to respond by corresponding directly to Council. Councillor Gazzola made reference to comments of the citizen lay members in their correspondence, that suggests the City should take time to re-assess the Centre Block rather that proceeding to an RFP at this time. Ms. Ladd responded that the market is now very active and there is concern that opportunity would be lost if an RFP was not pursued at this time. She stated that in the event proposals received do not meet expectations, none need proceed and in such instance, staff recommend the City move on and keep trying to get the right fit. She added that what is desired is a mix of interactive commercial and residential uses that would promote 24 / 7 population in the downtown, augmented by public open space. Ms. Ladd further commented that if directed, staff will work on developing the RFP over the summer months and come back with a full package for Council's review, including information as to any incentives that may or may not be included in the RFP. At the request of Councillor J. Gazzola, Ms. P. Houston agreed to provide additional information concerning the costs associated with acquiring the Centre Block site, its subsequent maintenance and its current market value. Mayor C. Zehr commented that the matter of the EDIF funds in terms of what if any part is to be made available for enhancements and 1 or a central library on another location is a separate issue and should be left open for discussion with KPL. He agreed that while a conscious decision was made not to have the CBSC citizen lay members participate in the Citizen's Forum to ensure the process would be unprejudiced, it would now be helpful to hear their points of view and asked that they be invited to attend the July 4 Council meeting. Mayor Zehr stated that results of the forum clearly indicate citizen support for an improved / enhanced library which supports statements made by KPL over the past number of years and which still need to be addressed. He commented that it is important to separate the library issue from the Centre Block and to ask the question of the public what is envisioned in terms of support for an improved /enhanced library. He added that when the library proposal was first considered the City had acquired the Centre Block, presenting incentive to combine the two; however, with the changing economy suggested this may no longer be necessary. He expressed support for the staff recommendation and taking time to assess proposals. In the event nothing is acceptable as a result of the RFP and depending on where library discussions are at the time, he suggested it may still be possible to reconsider locating a central library on the Centre Block site. FINANCE & CORPORATE SERVICES COMMITTEE MINUTES JUNE 26.2006 -102 - CITY 4F KITCHENER 7. CA4-06-043 -RESULTS 4F PUBLIC CONSULTATION - CENTRAL LIBRARY /CENTRE BLOCK REDEVELOPMENT (C~NT'D) Mayor C. Zehr proposed that in light of the additional information requested of the KPH and staff, and the desire to hear from the Centre Block Steering Committee citizen lay members, the Committee not take a position on the staff recommendation this date but rather defer the matter to the July 4, 2006 Council meeting. Councillor B. Vrbanovic asked, and it was agreed, that Mayor Zehr set aside his request for deferral until such time as all other members of the Committee had opportunity to comment on the issues addressed in the staff report. Councillor C. Weylie agreed that a strong central library is needed to support more branch libraries and if not on the Centre Block, other locations should be investigated. She added that key to the RFP is to ensure that the City will benefit by gaining assessment income from the Centre Block and having a residential population in the downtown. Councillor Weylie inquired as to who holds responsibility for development of the Centre Block should a proposal be approved as a result of the RFP and Ms. Ladd advised that the RFP is an expression of interest to develop on a private basis and therefore, the proponent of the project would be responsible for its development. Councillor J. Gazzola questioned the rationale of delaying the decision for one week, expressing the opinion that the public having been actively involved is looking for a definitive answer and it is important to put forward Council's position on the matter. He commented that while he agrees with the need for a new central library he was opposed to the Centre Block location, expressing the view that the public wants the central library to remain where it is now. He stated that he would support deferral as he would like to hear from the Centre Block Steering Committee citizen lay members, following which a final decision should be made. Councillor G. Lorentz spoke in support of the staff recommendation; however, agreed that it is important that all information be received and considered prior to a decision being made. He added that he would not be in support of delaying beyond the July 4 Council meeting as it was also important that the public receive Council's final decision on the matter. Councillor M. Galloway expressed disappointment that a full debate would not proceed this date. He voiced the opinion that having heard from the public it is clear the Centre Block is not the right location but that the library warrants enhancement of its branches as well as the main facility. He acknowledged the change in economics and the importance of making a decision to ensure a solid project is developed on the Centre Block; and was hopeful the staff recommendation would be affirmed on July 4. Mayor Zehr advised that his only intent in requesting the matter be deferred one week was to allow the additional information to be received and an invitation extended to the CBSC citizen lay members to attend on July 4. Councillor J. Smola expressed the opinion that the library should re-examine its existing location and agreed that information gathered from the citizen forums should be shared with the library. He added that it was his opinion demolition of the Forsyth factory now provides opportunity to receive desirable proposals for the Centre Block site. Councillor B. Vrbanovic commented that deferral will allow the public to have an opportunity to be aware of the staff recommendation and respond over the coming week, if desired, prior to Council making a final decision. He stated that for the future of the library it would be important to move forward in a timely manner and demonstrate commitment to resolving the issue of a central library. He agreed that more discussion is needed but it was his opinion a new central library should not come at the expense of enhancing its branch system. He added that he was in agreement with moving ahead with the RFP and that it should be clear on the general direction desired for the Centre Block. FINANCE & CORPORATE SERVICES COMMITTEE MINUTES JUNE 26, 2006 -103 - CITY 4F KITCHENER 7. CA4-06-043 -RESULTS 4F PUBLIC CONSULTATION - CENTRAL LIBRARY /CENTRE BLOCK REDEVELOPMENT (C~NT'D) On motion by Mayor C. Zehr - itwas resolved: "That the staff recommendation contained in Chief Administrator's Office report CAO- 06-043 (C. Ladd), dated June 21, 2006, concerning the results and recommendations arising from a 3-phased public consultation process on the Kitchener Public Library (KPL) new main library /Centre Block redevelopment project, be deferred and referred to the July 4, 2006 Council meeting, to allow the KPL and Cit provide additional information as requested by the Finance and Corporate Committee and to extend an invitation to lay members of the Centre Block Committee to attend the July 4 meeting." 8. FIN-06-020 -FINANCIAL REPORT AS 4F MAY 31, 2006 y staff to Services Steering The Committee considered Financial Services Department report FIN-06-020, dated June 20, 2006 which provides an Interim Financial Report as of May 31, 2006. Mr. D. Chapman advised that in addition to the interim financial statement, the report includes an assessment of best practices associated with the review of financial information by governance bodies. He noted that a $2.5 M surplus in operating is projected for year-end based on 2 key variances: projected supplementary tax revenues and investment income. It was also noted that winter maintenance operations are currently projected to be under-spent by $220,000. at year-end as a result of fewer winter storms to date. He commented on negative variances related to the Water and Sanitary Sewer Utilities of $0.5 M which include: lower than anticipated consumption in the first 5 months of the year; a retroactive water billing from the City of Waterloo; and higher than anticipated inflow and infiltration. Mr. Chapman responded to questions, advising that the retroactive water billing is related to revenue collected over 2003-05 from Kitchener residents in the Falconridge area for water supplied by the City of Waterloo but which was not paid for by the City of Kitchener. He noted that staff are taking measures to ensure this is rectified in future through across-border service agreement. In regard to higher than anticipated inflow and infiltration, Ms. P. Houston advised that it is her experience such variance is not unusual based on the type of weather being experienced; however, she agreed to request Engineering staff to provide additional information in this regard. Councillor J. Gazzola referred to the Statement of Operations as it relates to a variance in revenues for the Financial Services Department wherein the budget estimate is $84,000. versus an actual of $211,000. Mr. Chapman pointed out that Financial Services collects revenues for a number of recoveries for works undertaken by Utilities and the variance is a matter of timing of collection in relation to allocation of budget funds. He advised that this will be corrected in future budgets. Mr. Chapman then addressed projected year-end deficits of approximately $630,000. advising that the majority relates to costs associated with an appeal against the City's Development Charge By-law. Ms. L. MacDonald advised, on inquiry, that it would not be appropriate to comment in public on matters related to the appeal process until a decision is rendered so as not to prejudice the outcome of the hearing. Councillor Gazzola then inquired with respect to the projected surplus in the Building Enterprise, asking if building fees were too high. Mr. J. Witmer advised that approximately $670,000. was included in the budget as a contribution to a reserve fund to draw on in times of economic downturn. He added that staff will be meeting with representatives of the industry and having consultants analyse the fees to ensure they, as well contributions to the Reserve Fund, are appropriate. Councillor Gazzola then referred to a net loss of $1,600. in food service revenues at Doon Valley Golf Club versus a $25,000. profit in 2005. Mr. K. Baulk noted that a number of catered events were held in the winter of 2005 which contributed to a higher profit and tournaments FINANCE & CORPORATE SERVICES COMMITTEE MINUTES JUNE 26.2006 -104 - CITY 4F KITCHENER 8. FIN-06-020 -FINANCIAL REPORT AS 4F MAY 31, 2006 (C~NT'D held in May last year have been booked this year in June. He suggested that by year-end the numbers will balance out and the actual for 2006 will be similar to 2005. Mr. D. Chapman then commented on an assessment of best practices in response to a request from Council to review the frequency of, and approach to, presenting interim financial statements. Recommendations of a Joint Committee on Corporate Governance suggests that financial reports and related financial documents should be reviewed quarterly. Staff and KPMG generally agree with the Joint Committee recommendations; however, current practice equates to only 3 reports annually in May, August and December as opposed to quarter-ends in March, June, September and December. This is largely because preparation of a March statement conflicts with the municipal year-end process which is delayed due to timing of the municipal budget process; and reporting on June statements could not be made until late August due to Council's summer schedule. Mr. Chapman then reviewed 3 options for reporting, outlining benefits, disadvantages and comparisons to other municipalities for each option. It was noted that monthly statements may contain misleading information as budget allocations are not precise by month, and would not be analysed given insufficient staff resources to project variances monthly. It was further noted that the least frequent reporting method, Option 3 (3 times annually), enables in-depth review of results and analysis of variances and accommodates municipal financial processes including the budget and year- end, as well as Council's meeting schedule. In response to Mayor C. Zehr, Mr. Chapman advised that it requires the service of 6 staff over the equivalent of a 3 week period to appropriately analyse and prepare interim financial statements. Mayor Zehr commented that he was inclined to support Option 3; however, he inquired if any advantage would be gained by extending reporting over the summer months to September rather than August. Mr. Chapman commented that it would likely provide greater confidence in year-end projections; however, he noted that the budget process for the next year begins in September and there would be concerns over staff availability. Ms. P. Houston added that a September timeframe would result in the proforma budget not being presented until late October, resulting in a much shorter reaction time in terms of making any adjustments. Councillor J. Gazzola indicated that while he had no difficulty with Option 3, he still believed monthly statements should be made available for members of Council. Councillor M. Galloway commented that quarterly reporting is an accepted practice in the business community and was all that is needed, noting that Council can ask questions and receive answers of staff at any time in regard to financial matters. Councillor C. Weylie referred to a variance related to tax write-offs /rebates wherein the projected estimate was approximately $109,000. versus an actual of $217,000. Mr. Chapman advised that this is the first year a sizeable downtown incentive rebate has been posted and in review of this matter, he expected the associated amount to be transferred to another account. At the request of Councillor C. Weylie, staff agreed in future to include explanations of all variances over 10% within the interim financial statements. On motion by Mayor C. Zehr - itwas resolved: "That the Financial Report as of May 31, 2006, attached to Financial Services Department report FIN-06-020, be received for information." On motion by Mayor C. Zehr - itwas resolved: "That the current practice of providing interim financial statements for review by Council in May, August and December of each year be continued, as outlined in Option 3 of Financial Services Department report FIN-06-020." FINANCE & CORPORATE SERVICES COMMITTEE MINUTES JUNE 26, 2006 -105 - CITY OF KITCHENER 9. FIN-06-021- 2007 CAPITAL AND OPERATING BUDGET PLAN The Committee considered Financial Services Department report FIN-06-021, dated June 20, 2006 regarding a general approach and timetable for preparation of the 2007 budget. Mr. D. Chapman advised that early in 2007 a 3 year strategic financial plan will be developed through Compass Kitchener and the 'Who Are You, Kitchener?' data to align priorities with financial resources. The process will result in a 3 year operating forecast by department with identified strategies to achieve budget targets; clear delineation of commonalities between key corporate plans, financial plan, annual operating budget process and community input; discussion and recommendations to address financial issues through strategies and policies; and a future work plan. In addition, he noted there is need to adjust the timing of the budget presentations due to the 2006 Municipal Election and Council's preference to delay budget approval to permit review of the December 2006 Financial Report prior to budget adoption. Mr. Chapman then reviewed key dates proposed for the 2007 budget process, including new initiatives of establishing a period of public consultation; independent review of water /sewer budgets and rates; and review of year-end financial results prior to adoption of the budget. In response to Councillor M. Galloway, Mr. Chapman advised that the year-end financial report will be an internal report rather than the audited report, which will be presented in its usual timeframe in June 2007. He added that staff expect to be able to provide final surplus figures at the time of the internal year-end report. Councillor J. Gazzola requested explanation as to why a proforma budget would not be presented at this time. Mr. Chapman responded that an extensive review of service levels is anticipated through the 2007 budget process and as such, it could be misleading to project a tax rate increase largely predicated on an assumption that existing service levels would be maintained. Ms. P. Houston added that because of the number of initiatives there will be significant public consultation, the results of which will need to be incorporated into budget projections. Councillor B. Vrbanovic commented that it would not be appropriate given the municipal election this year to put forward a projected tax rate increase that is not likely to be achieved. In regard to key dates, Councillor Vrbanovic asked that timing of the capital budget review be adjusted to take place prior to the proposed public consultation, thereby allowing public input to be received and considered in establishing capital priorities. Ms. P. Houston advised that capital priorities were the focus of consultation in 2004 and it was intended that operating be the focus of the next budget; however, it was agreed that given capital priorities could change, staff would review the key dates and make any necessary adjustments. On motion by Councillor M. Galloway - itwas resolved: "That the general approach and timetable outlined in Financial Services Department report FIN-06-021, be supported as the basis for the preparation of the 2007 budget." 10. DTS-06-088 -ENVIRONMENTAL REMEDIATION STRATEGY The Committee considered Development and Technical Services Department report DTS-06- 088, April 25, 2006 concerning establishment of an Environmental Remediation Strategy and development of an implementation plan to support this initiative. Mr. J. Witmer commented that the City has, and is likely to, experience a legacy of environmental issues related to its industrial heritage and accordingly, a strategy to address these matters has been developed. He noted that the framework focuses on City-owned lands and City activities 1 operations, current and past that have generated environmental issues. The strategy supports efforts and objectives of the Healthy Community Plan working group and its purpose is to ensure that the City is a leader in environmental remediation by being proactive, informed, responsive, consistent, fiscally responsible, regulatory compliant and in a defensible position when involved in environmental matters. This strategy identifies how and when the City could initially become involved in environmental matters and assesses risks and obligations. Mr. Witmer then reviewed defined objectives and activities identified as priorities FINANCE & CORPORATE SERVICES COMMITTEE MINUTES JUNE 26, 2006 -106 - CITY OF KITCHENER 10. DTS-06-088 -ENVIRONMENTAL REMEDIATION STRATEGY (CONT'D) for the strategy, as developed by across-departmental staff team. He concluded that allocation of funding for initial priorities and future obligations has been identified in the 10 Year Capital Forecast; however, additional funding may be required in 2007-2008 to satisfy regulatory requirements. Mayor C. Zehr spoke in support of the staff recommendation, commenting that he has received positive feedback within the community in regard to the City's involvement in these matters and among his colleagues across the Province, the City is gaining a proactive reputation in terms of addressing environmental issues. In response to Councillor J. Gazzola, Mr. J. Witmer advised that associated costs have not been included in the report at this time by design. He stated that more discussion is required among staff and with Council in regard to establishing priority activities and it is intended to have full discussion regarding costing at budget time. He added that where feasible staff will bring forward environmental issues in open session. On motion by Mayor C. Zehr - itwas resolved: "That the proposed components of the Environmental Remediation Strategy, as outlined in Development and Technical Services Department report DTS-06-088, be endorsed and staff be directed to prepare an implementation plan which supports these initiatives for Council's consideration." 11. DTS-06-109 - WORKPLAN FOR REMEDIATION AND MONITORING AT PRIVATE RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES IN THE GUELPH STREET PARK STUDY AREA The Committee considered Development and Technical Services Department report DTS-06- 109, dated May 31, 2006 concerning a workplan for remediation and monitoring at private residential properties in the Guelph Street Park study area. Mr. J. Witmer advised that further off-site testing of the municipal road allowance in the area of Guelph Street and Clifton Road was undertaken as part of the restoration workplan for the Guelph Street Park area. The testing revealed additional deposits of ash fill and a subsequent comprehensive testing of the sub-soils on private residential properties was completed along Guelph Street, Clifton Road and Birch Avenue to define the limits of the affected area. A restoration workplan for the affected area has been prepared and accepted by the Ministry of Environment and will require entering into access agreements to undertake restoration on privately owned residential properties. Mr. Witmer noted that 3 of the 4 property owners affected have expressed a desire to remain within the area and accordingly, restoration will require demolition of the 4semi-detached units, removal of the ash fill 1 unsuitable soils from the site, installation of clean compacted fill and construction of new semi-detached units. The process will take approximately 1 year before residents will be returned to their homes. The fourth property owner has decided to move from the area and that unit will be acquired and once re-built, will be sold to recover costs. Councillor J. Gazzola enquired if the property owners had any obligation in respect to restoration costs. Mr. Witmer advised that the property owners purchased their homes in good faith long after the ash fill was deposited and having no knowledge of the contamination should not be impaired by the need for restoration of the site. He added that there is no information to suggest that any persons were unduly exposed, the fill being compacted well below surface; and that the purpose of initiating the plan is to stabilize the area. At the request of Councillor J. Gazzola, Mr. Witmer agreed to provide additional information concerning associated costs of the Guelph Street Park Study Area restoration plan. Mayor C. Zehr commented that under the circumstances, the property owners affected would have no reason to expect to lose investment in their homes and was of the opinion the proposed plan was a responsible approach to take. FINANCE & CORPORATE SERVICES COMMITTEE MINUTES JUNE 26, 2006 -107 - CITY 4F KITCHENER 11. DTS-06-109 - WORKPLAN FAR REMEDIATION AND M~NIT4RING AT PRIVATE RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES IN THE GUELPH STREET PARK STUDY AREA (C~NT'D) On motion by Councillor J. Smola - itwas resolved: "That the remediation plan for the Guelph Street Park Community be approved, as outlined in the Frontline Environmental Management Inc. report, entitled, "Workplan for Remediation and Monitoring at Private Residential Properties in the Guelph Street Park Study Area", dated January 6, 2006; and, That the Mayor and Clerk be authorized to execute documentation, satisfactory to the City Solicitor, as follows: a) to acquire the property at 278 Clifton Road; b) with the property owners at 274, 276 and 280 Clifton Road for the restoration of the lands, amenities and replacement of the semi-detached units; c) with the property owners at 270 and 282 Clifton Road and 834 Guelph Street, for thepurpose of gaining access and conducting restoration work thereon to complete the Workplan; and, d) with Sunlight Heritage Homes (828421 Ontario Inc.) to construct a replacement unit at 278 Clifton Road for subsequent re-sale notwithstanding Chapter 170 Purchasing) of the City of Kitchener Municipal Code; and further, That staff be directed to: a) tender the demolition of the four homes on Clifton Road as identified in the Remediation and Monitoring Workplan; and, b) retain the services of Frontline Environmental Management Inc. for the supervision and completion of the Remediation and Monitoring Workplan and the filing of the Environmental Restoration Report." 12. CA4-06-047 -WIRELESS INTERNET SERVICE AGREEMENT The Committee considered Chief Administrator's Office report CAO-06-047, dated June 22, 2006 concerning an agreement for wireless internet service. Ms. C. Ladd advised that Atria Networks Inc. is offering the Cities of Kitchener, Waterloo, Cambridge and the Region of Waterloo opportunity to purchase user licenses at a preferred rate to connect to their wireless internet service within the Region. She noted advantages for applications such as Building Inspection, By-law Enforcement and Mobile Road Crews, and economic development benefits in marketing a wireless region. She added that Atria expects to have the Region's urban areas populated with wireless technology by the end of 2006, although there will still be work to be undertaken in 2007 to fully complete the network. Mr. M. Grummett expanded on applications that could be applied to wireless technologies, advising that the network would fit well with the City's infrastructure management system and be in keeping with our customer service strategy of providing timely information. He noted that the proposal is aggressive and staff are monitoring its progress to ensure there is time for testing of Atria's and other wireless technology. In response to questions, staff advised that the City would purchase 25 accounts for testing internally at the preferred rate of $25. versus a retail rate of $30. Councillor C. Weylie suggested that more hot spots should be added to the downtown area and Mr. Grummett advised that more could be installed but there would be a fee for the additional service. At the request of Councillor C. Weylie, Ms. Ladd agreed to provide additional information concerning the number of hot spots in downtown Waterloo. Councillor J. Gazzola enquired if the public would have the capability to access the network free of charge in certain facilities, such as the Kitchener Market or City Hall. Mr. Grummett FINANCE & CORPORATE SERVICES COMMITTEE MINUTES JUNE 26, 2006 -108 - CITY 4F KITCHENER 12. CA4-06-047 -WIRELESS INTERNET SERVICE AGREEMENT (CONT'D) advised that it may be possible for such service to be provided at cost to the City; however, it is not part of the company's current offer. He also noted that while free service will be available at main library facilities it will not be available at branch libraries due to the costs involved. Councillor B. Vrbanovic requested that staff have further discussion with Atria in regard to making free public access available in certain City facilities. Ms. C. Ladd advised that discussion of this nature was undertaken during original negotiations with Atria, who indicated they would provide the service on the basis that municipal subscription rates would increase to off-set the associated cost. At the request of Councillor B. Vrbanovic, it was agreed that staff would report back with options to provide free public access to the service either through further discussions with Atria or as a City initiative, and the associated costing. On motion by Councillor G. Lorentz - itwas resolved: "That the Mayor and Clerk be authorized to execute a User license Agreement with Atria Networks Inc., satisfactory to the City Solicitor, for wireless internet service as described in Chief Administrator's Office report CAO-06-047, dated June 26, 2006; and, That the Mayor and Clerk be authorized to execute a licensed Attachment Agreement with Atria Networks Inc., satisfactory to the City Solicitor, for the purposes of affixing and maintaining wireless devices to poles/light standards to support the wireless network; and further, That staff report to the Finance and Corporate Services Committee outlining options to pursue public access ports to wireless internet service within specified City facilities either through further dialogue with Atria Networks Inc. or as a City initiative, including associated costing." 13. ADJOURNMENT On motion, the meeting adjourned at 4:07 p.m. Janet Gillett, AMCT Committee Administrator