Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutFin & Corp Svcs - 2008-09-29FINANCE & CORPORATE SERVICES COMMITTEE MINUTES SEPTEMBER 29, 200$ CITY OF KITCHENER The Finance and Corporate Services Committee met this date, commencing at 12:35 p.m. Present: Councillor B. Vrbanovic, Chair Mayor C. Zehr and Councillors J. Gazzola, G. Lorentz, J. Smola, K. Galloway and C. Weylie. Staff: C. Ladd, Chief Administrator P. Houston, General Manager, Community Services D. Chapman, General Manager, Financial Services & City Treasurer R. Browning, General Manager, Development & Technical Services T. Speck, General Manager, Corporate Services R. Gosse, Director of Legislated Services S. Turner, Director of By-law Enforcement S. Adams, Director of Community & Corporate Planning M. May, Director of Communications/Marketing L. MacDonald, Director of Legal Services & City Solicitor P. Harris, Manager of Licensing J. Billett, Committee Administrator 1. CRPS-0$-159 -WARD BOUNDARY REVIEW -FINAL REPORT The Committee considered Corporate Services Department report CRPS-08-159, dated September 23, 2008 concerning a new configuration of Ward Boundaries to be implemented for the 2010 municipal election. Dr. Robert Williams, Consultant, advised that subsequent to consideration of the recommended option in his June 2008 report, further consultation was undertaken resulting in evaluation of five issues of concern against the criterias set out in Council Policy I-50. It had been suggested that historical boundaries running east-west for Wards 7 and 8 be maintained rather than running north-south as recommended, to maintain an inherent community of interest between the Forest Hill and Forest Heights communities. Dr. Williams found no compelling reason to alter the north-south configuration, suggesting that it provides more of a benefit to the communities in that, like areas are combined relative to new growth areas versus older, established neighbourhoods. Use of King Street as a natural boundary had also been questioned and research found that Kitchener is not unique in using a central main street as a boundary. It was Dr. Williams' opinion that use of King Street is the best option for the Downtown area and pointed out that any change would create a ripple effect causing difficulties in other areas. Population figures for Ward 6 were re-visited and it is now proposed to re-configure the ward boundary to follow the Conestoga Parkway, Fischer- Hallman Road, Bleams Road and Homer Watson Boulevard; and re-assign the two Pioneer Tower Planning Communities to Ward 3. In Wards 1 and 2, placement of the Bridgeport neighbourhood with communities south of the Victoria Street/CNR raised concerns and Dr. Williams advised that after consideration of numerous combinations he maintained that the recommended option best meets the criteria of Council Policy I-50. Finally, a request by the Cherry Park Neighbourhood Association (CPNA) to include the Downtown side of Belmont Avenue in proposed Ward 9 was considered. It had been suggested by the CPNA that the boundary should be moved from the Iron Horse Trail to the lane behind businesses on the opposite side of Belmont Avenue. Dr. Williams advised that due consideration was given to the rationale given by CPNA and the impact of the change requested, and he determined that there was no compelling case for altering the boundary as requested. Ms. Debra Chapman, representative of the CPNA, spoke in support of moving the boundary of Ward 9 as requested by CPNA. She stated that by establishing the Iron Horse Trail as the ward boundary it would remove Belmont Avenue, from Union to Talbot Street, out of the Neighbourhood Association boundary; and maintained the criteria and guiding principles of the ward review were not being followed. Ms. Chapman referred to maps defining mixed use corridors and planning communities, stating that the segment of Belmont Street in question is important to the CPNA from a planning community perspective. Mayor C. Zehr suggested that the ward boundary as proposed would not make any difference in people patterns as it relates to the ability of the Association to work with businesses on Belmont Avenue. Ms. Chapman commented that having two councillors may create division. FINANCE & CORPORATE SERVICES COMMITTEE MINUTES SEPTEMBER 29, 200$ - 135 - CITY OF KITCHENER 1. CRPS-0$-159 -WARD BOUNDARY REVIEW -FINAL REPORT tCONT'D) She added that while she recognized that the City has not required neighbourhood associations to change their geographical boundaries to mirror ward boundaries, there is fear that there may be outside pressure to do so. She commented that it would not be the same in respect to canvassing for donations if Belmont businesses are outside CPNA's boundary and noted that their suggested boundary would not unduly impact population figures as it encompasses primarily a commercial area. Councillor G. Lorentz pointed out that communities of interest are also divided in Wards 7 and 8, suggesting that having two councillors would strengthen the Association and should be considered as a positive benefit. He added that he did not agree with the argument that donations would be difficult to obtain as businesses are known to support organizations city- wide. Councillor J. Gazzola agreed that having two councillors would strengthen the Association and expressed the opinion that it was more important not to divide the Belmont improvement Area (BIA). He added that businesses are not concerned with what ward an association is located in, in respect to giving support and suggested that the proposed boundary would not hurt the Association's operations. Ms. Shirley Gosselin, representative of the CPNA, stated that a lot of work has gone into establishing an identity for the Association and was opposed to the Iron Horse Trail as the ward boundary. She re-iterated that moving the line to Belmont Avenue would not impact population given that it is primarily a commercial area and alleged that the Westmount Neighbourhood Association does not consider Belmont Village as part of their neighbourhood; whereas, CPNA values their inclusion and would like it to stay in tact. Ms. Beth Esenberg, resident, advised that she lives within the boundaries of the CPNA but had until recently been of the understanding that her area was actually part of the Westmount Neighbourhood Association. She advised that she supports the recommended boundary, as by using Belmont Avenue it would result in her neighbours across the street having a different ward councillor which she could not support. Dr. Williams commented that in defining boundaries relative to the criteria and guiding principles trade-offs are inevitable and require weighing of all to reach an acceptable balance. In this instance, he pointed out that two communities of interest are involved, being the CPNA and the Belmont Improvement Area (BIA). He stated that it was his opinion that it is more important to keep the BIA in tact as it is a legal entity created under the Ontario Municipal Act; adding that he disagreed with the Neighbourhood Association that their group is being fragmented when only a narrow part consisting of commercial and retail establishments is to be excluded. He maintained that the operation of the CPNA would not be affected in any way and is not a serious inconsistency in criteria. Mr. Bob McColl, representative of the Pinegrove Community Association (PCA), advised that the most recent change from the June recommendation has impact to the PCA, which is currently grouped with the Grand Hill Neighbourhood Association, Deer Ridge Estate Social Club and Settlers Grove. He stated that it is now proposed to be grouped with the Kingsdale Neighbourhood Association to which PCA has no political or demographic relationship and maintained they are more closely aligned with the groups in the Doon area. He pointed out that he had only become aware of the most recent change over the weekend and asked that the Committee consider deferring the matter to allow the four groups to discuss the impact of the change. He added that Mr. Bill Thompson had asked him to convey an additional reason for deferral in that, a presentation is to be made by the Citizens for Better Government to Council in the near future which he suggested may negate this process. Councillor G. Lorentz disagreed that how the groups would operate would change, expressing the opinion that how they operate has nothing to do with political boundaries. Mr. McColl stated that while having two Ward Councillors may have merit, it may also result in a split vote between the Councillors. He added that while neighbourhood associations are mostly recreational in nature their groups have been more issue oriented. Mr. McColl stated that the deferral would allow the groups to formulate a consensus but at this time have had no time for dialogue. Councillor Lorentz questioned how the change would impact the Association's FINANCE & CORPORATE SERVICES COMMITTEE MINUTES SEPTEMBER 29.200$ - 136 - CITY OF KITCHENER 1. CRPS-0$-159 -WARD BOUNDARY REVIEW -FINAL REPORT tCONT'D) operations. Mr. McColl acknowledged that in daily life the change would not be significant, however, he noted that where joint issues arise it is beneficial to come together as one voice through the Ward Councillor and it may have impact on their ability to do so. Councillor J. Gazzola stated that Wards 3 and 6 required adjustments to address an imbalance in population and expressed the opinion that the groups in question would still be together regardless of their proposed ward boundary. He added that the PCA is close to Hidden Valley more so than Mill Park and he did not see working with the groups in Doon changing. Mr. McColl agreed that it would not change how the groups operate, however, he suggested that geographically the PCA is closer to Mill Park and will be more connected in future through the Walter Bean Grand River Trail pedestrian bridge. He added that historically these have been one political area and should not be split without proper consultation. Councillor Gazzola inquired how active the delegation had been during the public consultation process and Mr. McColl advised that all available materials were reviewed and until the most recent change, it was determined that there was no need to attend public sessions as it appeared to the groups that it was unfolding as it should be. Mayor C. Zehr stated that while a presentation is to be made by the Citizens for Better Government it was necessary to proceed with this process in the absence of a concrete movement for change in governance. He asked if the groups would have sufficient time over the coming week to formulate a response to bring forward to Council at its meeting of October 6, 2008. He added that it was his opinion traffic patterns would not change with the construction of a pedestrian bridge nor by what is being recommended as the ward boundary. Mr. McColl agreed that the ward boundary would not affect movement but re-iterated that historically these groups have been inter-connected. He suggested that while the executive of the groups may have discussion over the coming week it would not likely be possible to bring forward a consensus of the people by the next Council meeting. Councillor K. Galloway referred to the gap between Huron Park and Laurentian West, divided by the Huron Industrial Park, Huron Natural area and the Williamsburg Cemetery, suggesting that it is the same concept. Mr. McColl stated that the area does differ in that it is a developing area that will see new residential growth but did agree that other areas do have separations similar to that proposed for the PCA. In response to Councillor Gazzola, Dr. Williams advised that the proposed move from Doon to Kingsdale is to balance loss of population in Ward 6 and was of the opinion that it is a reasonable trade-off that preserves the political associations in the area. Councillor B. Vrbanovic referred to the Bridgeport neighbourhoods, questioning if consideration had been given to a link that would add Bridgeport to Ward 10, from the other side of Ottawa Street that was part of Ward 2 and underneath on Krug Street. Dr. Williams advised that numerous combinations had been considered, noting that the area of Bridgeport over past years has been connected to a variety of differing areas and the notion of some logical partnering did not out-weigh the impact of creating a boundary along the Victoria/CNR Rail Line. In the larger picture, he maintained that using the Conestoga Parkway was the best fit for the new ward system in this area. Councillor Gazzola spoke in support of the proposed configuration. He acknowledged the difficulty in reaching a perfect solution, expressing the opinion the recommended option comes very close and will work well for the City. Mayor C. Zehr requested clarification of process timelines in respect to the next election. Mr. R. Gosse advised that if approved by Council, a by-law to adopt the new ward boundaries will be presented on October 6, 2008. A 45 day appeal period will follow bringing the process to late November, after which staff will begin work with the Municipal Property Assessment Corporation to re-subdivide the City into the new wards. The latter process will take many months and at the same time staff will begin preparation for the 2010 municipal election. Mr. Gosse advised that conclusion of this part of the process now will allow staff to better organize for the next municipal election. FINANCE & CORPORATE SERVICES COMMITTEE MINUTES SEPTEMBER 29, 200$ - 137 - CITY OF KITCHENER 1. CRPS-A$-159 -WARD BOUNDARY REVIEW -FINAL REPORT tCONT'D) Mayor Zehr stated that he was not convinced by the arguments put forward for deferral, commenting that historically there has been linkage between Wards 3 and 4 and the recommended option would not significantly affect how communities relate to each other. It was his opinion the recommended option provides a balanced approach. Councillors C. Weylie and G. Lorentz spoke in support of the recommended configuration, commenting that the focus of communities of interest will remain the same and not be dictated by the proposed ward boundaries. Councillor B. Vrbanovic stated that ideally he would like to see the Bridgeport neighbourhoods addressed differently; however, he advised that he would accede to Dr. Williams' expertise and support the recommended configuration. The following motion was Carried Unanimously on a recorded vote. On motion by Councillor J. Gazzola - it was resolved: "That the Ward Boundary configuration recommended by Dr. R. Williams in his report entitled, `2008 Ward Boundary Review Final Report Addendum', dated September 2008, be adopted as the ward boundaries to come into effect in 2010; and further, That a By-law be prepared for the October 6, 2008 regular Council meeting to enact the adopted ward boundaries in accordance with the Municipal Act." 2. CRPS-0$-15$ -ACCOUNTABILITY & TRANSPARENCY COMMITTEE - RECOMMENDATION OF COMMITTEE AND CODE OF CONDUCT The Committee considered Corporate Services Department report CRPS-08-158, dated September 22, 2008 concerning a draft Code of Conduct for members of Council, Local Boards and Advisory Committees; retaining of an Integrity Commissioner; and disposition of discretionary appointments under the Municipal Act. Mr. R. Gosse advised that in December 2007, Council fulfilled mandatory provisions under the Municipal Act to adopt an Accountability and Transparency Policy and retain a Meeting Investigator, LAS, to conduct investigations related to complaints concerning closed meetings. A report concerning discretionary matters under the Municipal Act, including a draft Code of Conduct and appointments of an Ombudsman, Auditor General and Lobbyist Registrar was tabled in June 2008. At that time, staff was directed to undertake further public consultation, as well as issue a Request for Proposals (RFP) for an Integrity Commissioner, who would investigate and report on complaints/allegations of non-compliance of the Code of Conduct. Mr. Gosse stated that the draft Code was based on the City of Toronto's Code of Conduct which has been used by most cities who have since adopted a Code. The Code will apply to members of Council, Local Boards and Advisory Committees, and under provisions of the Act, the only Local Boards that the Code will apply to is the two Business Improvement Associations and Kitchener Housing. Mr. Gosse clarified that in respect to receipt of gifts or benefits, no member of Council is permitted to accept any gift or benefit that is connected directly or indirectly with the performance of his/her duties of office, unless such gift or benefit falls within the criteria of exemptions set out in the Code. The Accountability and Transparency Committee recognized that there may be occasions when it is appropriate or even expected that a member of Council accept a gift or benefit. Several examples of situations that would fall under the various criteria for exemptions was provided, including but not limited to: provision of a free meal at a grand opening of a new restaurant; a gift from a visiting foreign dignitary; and attendance at charity golf tournaments as a representative of the City or VIP, which may involve golf fees and subsequent banquet. The Committee recognized that with exemptions a reporting method is necessary and has recommended that any gift received over $500. must be disclosed in writing to the City Clerk within 30 days of receipt. Mr. Gosse acknowledged concerns that have been raised in respect to the dollar value suggested for reporting the total of gifts/benefits that may be received from any one source within a 12 FINANCE & CORPORATE SERVICES COMMITTEE MINUTES SEPTEMBER 29.200$ - 13$ - CITY OF KITCHENER 2. CRPS-0$-15$ -ACCOUNTABILITY & TRANSPARENCY COMMITTEE - RECOMMENDATION OF COMMITTEE AND CODE OF CONDUCT -tCONT'D) month period which was set at $5,000. He commented that it was the Committee's view that it is unlikely any member of Council would place their position in jeopardy but felt that it was important to have an up-set limit. The figure of $5,000. was not reached by consensus and was the only matter put to a vote. Mr. Gosse added that the City of Toronto has dollar values of $300. and $300., while others range from $100.-$100. or no limits, leaving it to the discretion of members of Council. Mr. Gosse advised that in reviewing the discretionary appointments, the Committee determined that while each has merit, it would be difficult at this time to justify in terms of need, cost and effectiveness and was generally felt not to be an effective use of taxpayers dollars. He noted that the City has already appointed an independent auditor as required by legislation and also has an internal auditor to review business functions and measure performance of the City. Mr. Gosse advised that the Committee had been mandated to review Council's Procedural By-law; however, as they were subsequently advised that the City intends to undertake a complete review of the By-law during 2009 due to the increased size of Council in 2010, they felt their review would be redundant and better accomplished through the more thorough review by Council and staff. Mr. Gosse advised that staff is recommending GJ Levine be appointed as the City's Integrity Commissioner should Council choose to adopt the Code of Conduct. He advised that three submissions were received as a result of the RFP and GJ Levine was put forward having satisfied all criteria at the best dollar value. Councillor J. Gazzola questioned why not all Boards would be subject to the Code of Conduct and in particular, referenced the Centre in the Square. Mr. Gosse explained that the Municipal Act quantifies what constitutes a Local Board and those included were the only ones to which the Code may be applied. He noted that the Centre in the Square is governed by separate legislation and is therefore not considered a Local Board of the City. Councillor Gazzola inquired if it was possible to go beyond provisions of the Act. Mr. Gosse advised that where the Act is silent Council may apply the Code to other entities, such as Advisory Committees which have been included; however, where the Act is specific Council cannot go beyond what is stipulated. Councillor Gazzola asked for clarification of the fee associated with the Integrity Commissioner. Mr. Gosse advised that in all three submissions the proponent requested a retainer plus an hourly rate. Mayor C. Zehr requested clarification in regard to how the Committee derived the amount of $5,000. for gifts/benefits received from any one source. Mr. Gosse advised that the Committee initially thought it should be discretionary with no up-set limit as they believed members of Council would not place their positions in jeopardy. As discussion continued it became apparent that some members were uncomfortable with no up-set limit and $5,000. was simply an amount put forward. As there was no consensus, the amount was voted on and the motion carried by one. Mayor Zehr also requested clarification of the reporting structure and when the information is to be made public. Mr. Gosse advised that any single gift/benefit over $500. must be reported to the City Clerk within 30 days of receipt and would be recorded in an ongoing list that would be available to the public. He added that staff has considered adding the list to the annual remuneration report and/or posting it to the City's website. Councillor K. Galloway inquired if the Code specifies that no one may receive cash. Mr. Gosse advised that although agift/benefit is not defined it is inferred that members of Council would not be able to accept cash. He added that an amendment to the Code would be required to specifically include such a provision. In response to Councillor G. Lorentz, Mr. Gosse advised that Council chose to give direction to the Accountability and Transparency Committee to proceed with drafting a Code of Conduct, acknowledging that adoption of a Code is discretionary, not mandated. He added that other area municipalities are in varying stages of discussion but have yet to adopt a Code. Mr. Gosse also clarified the composition of the Accountability and Transparency Committee, advising that it consisted of two members of Council, four staff members, four FINANCE & CORPORATE SERVICES COMMITTEE MINUTES SEPTEMBER 29.200$ - 139 - CITY OF KITCHENER 2. CRPS-0$-15$ -ACCOUNTABILITY & TRANSPARENCY COMMITTEE - RECOMMENDATION OF COMMITTEE AND CODE OF CONDUCT -tCONT'D) members of the public and two media representatives. He added that the 2 media representatives were looked upon as also representing the public at large. Mr. Brock Lasso attended to raise concerns with respect to the draft Code of Conduct, requesting that a list of what is available to members of Council in respect to "perks" be published annually, citing examples of: salary, transportation, health benefits and vacation pay. He did not support the dollar values specified for receipt of gifts/benefits that would not be subject to recording suggesting that they are too large and alleged that Kitchener is the most difficult municipality from which to obtain information. Mr. Lasso referred to the composition of the Accountability and Transparency Committee, suggesting that it should have been a majority of citizens, appointed by an independent body and asked that consideration be given to appointing an Auditor General on a part time basis by an independent body, and to eliminate the existing auditor retained by the City to ensure partiality. Councillor G. Lorentz inquired if the delegation, as a resident of the City of Waterloo, was aware of what Waterloo is doing in respect to a Code of Conduct. Mr. Lasso stated that Waterloo is considering a similar Code of Conduct and intends to make presentations to Waterloo Council as well. He noted, however, that he also has an interest in Kitchener as he pays property tax to this city as well. Councillor K. Galloway asked Mr. Lasso for examples of how the public might be engaged to participate on committees. Mr. Lasso suggested that lack of public response is the result of lack of information and he had suggested that an independent committee be appointed by citizens to undertake the appointment process to committees. He added that information could be provided through newsletters, media and the City's website. Mayor C. Zehr questioned if the dollar value was zero and members of Council were invited, or expected, to attend a function for which the City would pay the cost, if the delegation would consider that a "perk". Mr. Lasso suggested that it would be but further commented that if a Council member attended a Kitchener Rangers game it would be a question of whether attendance was part of the member's duty or personal. He stated that he had no difficulty with "perks" related to the course of Council's duties. Mayor C. Zehr commented that he attends approximately 300 events a year of which most have no cost involved. He provided several examples of events where the City may pay associated costs, as well as some instances in which he may attend with his wife for whom he personally pays for or has paid a portion of his costs so as not to unduly burden the City and/or charity involved. He asked the delegation if these instances would constitute a "perk" and Mr. Lasso indicated that he did not believe so but suggested it would be a mute point if a reporting system was in place and the discretionary appointments made, as all would be scrutinized. He re-iterated that a list of what goes along with Council duties should be compiled and published so that the public is aware of what Council is entitled to. Mr. Ed Redgwell also raised concerns with the proposed dollar value of gifts/benefits and was of the understanding that there was an existing limit of $300. which is now proposed to be increased to $500. He questioned why $300. would not be enough. He noted that the $5,000. limit from any one source could result in a member of Council receiving $20,000. worth of undisclosed gifts/benefits over the course of a 4 year term and while it is not expected any Council member would take advantage, he suggested that once in place it would invite indiscretion. He stated that he would not object to an amount of $100. to $150., asking that Council not approve the recommended dollar values and ensure complete transparency of all activities. In response to Councillor K. Galloway, Mr. Redgwell stated that he did not automatically assume the dollar value means cash but rather agift/benefit would be something tangible, such as a case of wine. FINANCE & CORPORATE SERVICES COMMITTEE MINUTES SEPTEMBER 29.200$ - 140 - CITY OF KITCHENER 2. CRPS-0$-15$ -ACCOUNTABILITY & TRANSPARENCY COMMITTEE - RECOMMENDATION OF COMMITTEE AND CODE OF CONDUCT -tCONT'D) Mayor C. Zehr questioned that if the dollar value set for an individual gift/benefit and the total of gifts/benefits from any one source was the same if that would be acceptable. Mr. Redgwell stated that if the dollar value per year was $500. he did not see that as a major concern; however, he suggested that a target of $150. would be more acceptable. Councillor B. Vrbanovic clarified for the delegation that there currently is no policy stipulating a limit and the purpose of adopting a Code Conduct today was to put policy in place. He suggested that the figure of $300. may stem from other municipal Codes, such as Toronto. He added that the dollar values of $500. and $5,000. had not come from Council but rather is a recommendation of the Accountability & Transparency Committee. Councillor Vrbanovic asked the delegation to clarify his expectation in respect to reporting and Mr. Redgwell stated that he would not object to a limit of $100-$150. as long as everything is reported. Mayor C. Zehr commented that he welcomed the Code of Conduct suggesting it codifies what is already being done and would not change his actions in any way. He pointed out that in some cases there is a personal cost to attending events and it is important that the public understand that it is not a free ride. He agreed that there is no compelling reason at this time to proceed with the discretionary appointments and pointed out that once the by-law to enact the Code of Conduct is adopted it would apply to the current Council. On motion by Mayor C. Zehr, the Committee's recommendation contained in Corporate Services Department report CRPS-08-158 was brought forward for consideration, as amended to change the value of any individual gift or benefit required to be reported from $500. to $300.; and the total value from any one source over 12 months from $5,000 to $300.; and to add provision that under no circumstance should a gift of cash be accepted. On motion by Councillor J. Gazzola, a motion to amend Mayor Zehr's motion was brought forward for consideration to provide that the dollar value of any single gift or benefit be changed from $300. to $100. Councillor Gazzola pointed out that he and Mayor Zehr had sat on the Accountability & Transparency Committee but chose to leave the meeting in which the dollar values were discussed as they wished the public representatives to decide on the matter. He stated that given Councillors cannot accept any gift or benefit unless it falls within the specified exemptions he could see no reason why gifts/benefits over $100. should not be reported in the interest of ensuring transparency. Councillor J. Gazzola's motion to amend the main motion was then voted on and Carried, on a recorded voted, with Councillors J. Gazzola, G. Lorentz, J. Smola, K. Galloway, B. Vrbanovic and C. Weylie voting in favour and Mayor C. Zehr voting in opposition. The main motion, as amended, was then voted on and Carried Unanimously, on a recorded vote. On motion by Mayor C. Zehr - it was resolved: "That the draft policy entitled `Code of Conduct for members of Council, Local Boards and Advisory Committees', attached to Corporate Services Department report CRPS- 08-158, be approved, as amended to change the value of any individual gift or benefit required to be reported from $500. to $100., and the total value from any one source over 12 months from $5,000. to $300., and to add provision that under no circumstance should a gift of cash of any amount be accepted by a member of Council; and, That the law office of GJ Levine be retained as the City's Integrity Commissioner for one year with an option for a second year, subject to the City and the firm entering into an agreement to the satisfaction of the City Solicitor; and, FINANCE & CORPORATE SERVICES COMMITTEE MINUTES SEPTEMBER 29, 200$ - 141 - CITY OF KITCHENER 2. CRPS-0$-15$ -ACCOUNTABILITY & TRANSPARENCY COMMITTEE - RECOMMENDATION OF COMMITTEE AND CODE OF CONDUCT -tCONT'D) That staff be directed to establish an Integrity Commissioner budget in the amount of $10,000. for the 2009 budget; and, That the discretionary appointments contained in Part V.1 of the Municipal Act (Accountability and Transparency) being: an Ombudsman, an Auditor General and Lobbyist Registrar not be appointed at this time; and, That the Accountability and Transparency Policy, dated December 10, 2007, be amended by including a clause that the question of the appointments of an Ombudsman, Auditor General and Lobbyist Registrar, be reviewed each term of Council; and further, That the review of the Procedural By-law as mandated to the Accountability and Transparency Committee be undertaken by staff and Council in 2009." 3. CRPS-0$-154 -INCREASE OF LICENSING FEE FOR BINGO EVENTS The Committee considered Corporate Services Department report CRPS-08-154, dated September 19, 2008 concerning a request to increase licensing fees for bingo events. Mr. Bill Pegg, K-W Gaming Centre Sponsors Association, advised that when the Alcohol and Gaming Commission of Ontario (AGCO) introduced the new Bingo Revenue Model on May 1, 2007 the intent was to maintain the existing levels of revenue of the municipalities which previously was based on 3% of the prize board. Mr. Pegg stated that the current prize board has not changed and therefore, he questioned the need for the proposed increases in licensing fees. Councillor J. Gazzola asked if the current licensing fees cover the City's cost. Ms. P. Harris advised that in the past the fees collected did not cover the cost to administer bingo licences and in her opinion, a fee of $140. per session would be required to generate enough revenue to cover cost. Councillor J. Gazzola asked Mr. Pegg if he had any concerns if the City wished to cover its cost. Mr. Pegg responded that the City's cost is not a concern of the Association, but rather their concern deals with the intent of the AGCO to maintain revenues based on the previous 3% of the prize board; and if the prize board has not changed why should the fees. Councillor Gazzola suggested that fees collected from the bingo licenses should be like other fees collected by the City, in that, they should cover the cost incurred. He added that once the fees reach the level where they are covering cost then it should be only a matter of increasing fees in future to maintain that level. On motion by Councillor J. Gazzola - it was resolved: "That the fee per bingo event being charged to organizations conducting bingo in Kitchener be increased from $120. to $125. for licences coming into effect January 1, 2009; and further, That the fee per bingo event being charged to organizations conducting bingo in Kitchener be increased from $125. to $130. for licences coming into effect January 1, 2010." Councillor J. Smola assumed the Chair at this time. 4. FIN-0$-097 AND KPL REPORT -CENTRAL LIBRARY FUNDING OPTIONS The Committee considered Financial Services Department report FIN-08-097, dated September 1, 2008 and Kitchener Public Library Board (KPL) report, dated September 17, FINANCE & CORPORATE SERVICES COMMITTEE MINUTES SEPTEMBER 29, 200$ - 142 - CITY OF KITCHENER 4. FIN-0$-097 AND KPL REPORT -CENTRAL LIBRARY FUNDING OPTIONS tCONT'D) 2008 concerning an analysis of funding options for the Central Library Project and recommendations of KPL. Mr. D. Chapman outlined three construction options which include: Option 1 -renovate; Option 2 -renovate and add 30,000 sq. ft.; and Option 3 -renovate and add 54,400 sq. ft. Funding shortfalls were identified in terms of a lease versus phase approach to construction, as follows: Option 1 - $0.4 M lease / $nil phase; Option 2 - $14.2 Mlease / $12.1 M phase; and Option 3 - $27.8 Mlease / $26.1 M phase. Mr. Chapman then highlighted various funding options, including: • fundraising: $5 M campaign goal at estimated 20% associated costs; $2-$4 M net target; requirement for contingency plan; • issue tax supported debt or increase contributions from current: no flexibility to increase debt load or fund additional capital from tax base; • adjust KPL's capital forecast: potential re-allocation of $1.15 M by delaying KPL projects (RFID and automation system); defer some central library project costs to 2012-2014; • adjust other City capital projects: Council direction required to delay City projects amounting to $0.5 M; • delay the central library project: not recommended as inflation would have significant impact on cost and KPL has need of renovations to upgrade its facility to meet community growth; • grants: potential sources include Ministry of Culture, M13, Building Canada Fund, lnvesfing in Onfario Acf grant, energy efficiency; opportunities limited; energy grants may cover only incremental cost; • development charges: up to $6.5 M estimated over 10 years; central library and south- end library both eligible (south-end estimated to cost $10 M of which $9 M is attributed to development charges); funding one project will impact the other; • advance operating budget increase: advancing to 2010 off-sets some phasing/leasing costs; will result in direct levy impact earlier than anticipated (Option 1 - $299,000. or 0.3%; Option 2 - $817,000 or 0.9%; Option 3 - $1,221,000.0 or 1.4%); • reduction of parking spaces: business case contemplates 200 new parking spaces which exceeds current zoning requirements (Option 1 - 21 new spaces; Option 2 - 112; Option 3 - 153); reducing parking to required levels saves $5.6 M to $2 M; some parking can be accommodated underground on site, the total number to be determined during the design phase; still need to consider linkages with future Civic District developments in design concept; • parking revenue: capital investment philosophy provides for additional debt where business case establishes a payback for debt service cost; evaluated potential for parking revenues to support a special debt issue for parking costs similar to approach used to fund Charles/Benton parking structure; approach not recommended for central library project as level of cost recovery is not sufficient; • modify design features: develop scenarios to reduce cost to bring costs in-line with available funding. Mr. Chapman reviewed costs associated with the funding options, highlighting projected residual shortfalls in Options 2 and 3 and advising that Option 2 (renovate and add 30,000 sq. ft.) appears to be financially feasible; whereas, there is no ability to fund Option 3. Councillor J. Gazzola questioned if staff have a preferred option. Mr. Chapman responded that it was not staff's mandate to recommend an option but have determined through the funding option analysis that Option 1 and 2 appear feasible and staff would not support Option 3 as there is no ability to fund it. Councillor Gazzola requested clarification of development charge funding. Mr. Chapman explained that the Development Charge Act provides a standard service level that can be applied to the library based on a per capita formula over a 10 year period which is how the estimated $6.5 M was derived. The exact figure is to be confirmed in review of the Development Charge Background Study to be undertaken in 2009. Councillor Gazzola referred to the lnvesfing in Onfario Acf grant allocation questioning the potential to use some of the funding toward the Library project. Mr. Chapman stated that a portion of the grant funding could potentially be used; however, this would not follow the Provincial focus of investing in core infrastructure and staff have already FINANCE & CORPORATE SERVICES COMMITTEE MINUTES SEPTEMBER 29.200$ - 143 - CITY OF KITCHENER 4. FIN-0$-097 AND KPL REPORT -CENTRAL LIBRARY FUNDING OPTIONS tCONT'D) identified a significant shortfall in funding the City's infrastructure renewal program. Councillor Gazzola questioned existing Library parking arrangements and Mr. Chapman advised that library parking is currently on a City-owned parking lot and the City receives the parking revenues to off-set operating costs. Councillor B. Vrbanovic requested clarification of development charges as they relate to the south-end library. Mr. D. Chapman advised that if funding is used for the central library project, the 10 year window on development charge revenues for library projects results in funding not being available for the south-end library and requiring a delay in that project. Councillor Vrbanovic noted that the Development Charge Background Study is to be reviewed in 2009 with the south-end library not to be constructed until after that time and questioned if funding would be available as a result of the new background study. Mr. Chapman advised that would be the case only if the project is outside the 10 year window; noting that at present both projects are within that timeframe and the total amount of $6.5 M is for both projects. Ms. C. Ladd added that development charges are governed by legislation which does not allow the 10 year cap on standard service levels to be exceeded and makes provision as to how the amounts are calculated. Councillor Vrbanovic inquired if staff was comfortable with KPL's recommended option and proposed method of funding. Mr. Chapman responded that KPL's recommendations are consistent with the analysis undertaken and staff is comfortable with it. In response to Mayor C. Zehr, Mr. Chapman advised that provisions in the Development Charge Act applying to the standard service levels have been identified as problematic and the issues submitted for consideration to the Province which may or may not result in amendment to the Act. Councillor K. Galloway questioned if all development charges are used for the south-end branch if that would negate proceeding with the central library and/or impact any other projects. Mr. Chapman responded that projects are evaluated on aservice-by-service basis and the library is an entity onto its own. Councillor Galloway inquired as to the net levy impact of the central library project. Mr. Chapman advised that the three options range from a net levy of 0.3%-1.4% which is to be phased in over the two year construction period. Mr. Dan Carli, Chair and Ms. Sonia Lewis, CEO, KPL, attended in support of KPL's recommendations. It was noted that costs for the 3 options range from $30.4 M to $58.6 M. Mr. Carli stated that Option 2 with minor modifications is feasible and is being recommended by KPL as the preferred option to improve and enhance the central library. It was pointed out that this option will increase library space by 30%, allowing KPL to expand and develop services to best meet the needs of a growing community. Of the 11 funding options analysed, KPL is recommending pursuing 6 of these sources, as well as a phased construction. The KPL Board is committed to raising $4 M net for the project, with a fundraising campaign to be developed by KPL's new Development Manager, Libby Ellis. Other funding sources would include delay of KPL capital projects ($1.1 M); development charges ($528,000); annual operating budget increase ($817,000); reduction in parking spaces to within zoning requirements ($4.4 M); design modifications ($1 M); and phasing construction to eliminate leasing costs. The total cost of the project is estimated at $39.8 M. Mr. Carli advised that it is proposed to move ahead with the architect selection and design phase in October 2008, with construction to commence in July 2010 and be completed by 2013. Mr. Carli expressed the view that the recommended option is the best possible plan to revitalize the central library in an affordable manner and aligns with Council's philosophy of creating a healthy Kitchener. Councillor J. Gazzola stated that he could support Option 2 in principle but did have concerns with respect to how the project is proposed to be funded. He suggested that given the number of users, implementing a fee for borrowing books as opposed to free access should be considered. Mr. Carli advised that under the Public Libraries Act the KPL has no jurisdiction to implement such a user fee. Councillor Gazzola stated that he was opposed to a fundraising campaign and disappointed to see that certain capital projects are proposed not to proceed. He suggested that the automation system is needed to save on operating costs. Mr. Carli responded that the first phase of the automation system related to self check-out will proceed, which is the portion believed to generate the most benefit; whereas, the self check- FINANCE & CORPORATE SERVICES COMMITTEE MINUTES SEPTEMBER 29.200$ - 144 - CITY OF KITCHENER 4. FIN-0$-097 AND KPL REPORT -CENTRAL LIBRARY FUNDING OPTIONS tCONT'D) in portion is to be delayed by several years. Councillor Gazzola also raised concerns with advancing operating funds, commenting that Council has to deal with many competing budget interests and establishing precedent of advancing operating funds to pay for capital projects is not the right way to go. Mayor C. Zehr requested clarification concerning advancement of operating funds. Mr. Carli stated that the advancement is not to fund capital costs of the project but rather represents true operating costs during the construction period. Mr. D. Chapman added that standard practice is to allocate increased operating costs in the year construction is completed; whereas, it is proposed to advance these costs during the 2 year construction period. Councillor K. Galloway inquired as to the feasibility of finding additional modifications to further decrease the cost of the project. Ms. S. Lewis advised that it is intended to pursue cost reduction modifications during the design phase by an estimated $1 M. Councillor Galloway inquired what the impact would be if KPL does not meet its fundraising goal. Mr. Carli stated that during the design phase a fundraising plan will be developed that will include a contingency plan. Councillor Vrbanovic also raised concerns with the impact advancing operating funds may have and referred back to the question of using a portion of the Investing in Ontario Act grant, as it was his opinion the central library can also be considered as infrastructure. Mr. Chapman responded that technically it would be feasible to use those funds in this manner but reiterated that it would not be consistent with the Province's intent and to the extent allocated, it would perpetuate the City's infrastructure deficit. Councillor Vrbanovic suggested that the City must deal with its infrastructure in any event whether through the Provincial grant or otherwise. Mr. Chapman agreed, however, he noted that the library project differs slightly in that it is a renovation versus true replacement of infrastructure. Councillor K. Galloway requested clarification of the plan to reduce parking. Mr. Carli advised that the number of parking spaces is to be reduced from 200 new spaces originally contemplated to 112 new spaces, which still meets the City's zoning requirements. The spaces will be underground and KPL is still committed to working with the Civic District to link with future parking developments in the vicinity. Councillor Galloway also requested clarification of how the $1.6 M in advanced operating funds is to be divided. Mr. D. Chapman advised that $817,000. is to be allocated beginning in 2010 through the 2 year construction period. Councillor Vrbanovic inquired as to the total project costs, exclusive of the fundraising amount, that the City is contributing. Mr. D. Chapman advised that the City's contribution comprises: $32.5 from the Economic Development Investment Fund (EDIF); $1.15 M from deferral of KPL Capital Projects; $528,000 from Development Charges; and $1.6 M in advanced operating funds; for a total of $35,812,000. Councillor Galloway inquired as to the impact to the south-end library project of allocating $528,000 in development charges to the central library project. Mr. Chapman advised that the impact will be quantified through the review in 2009 of the Development Charges Background Study. He added that at this time, the cap is estimated at $6.5 M for library services and while timing of the south-end library project is not likely to be impacted, ability to fund the project through development charges may be impacted. On motion by Councillor B. Vrbanovic, the recommendation contained in KPL's report, dated September 17, 2008 was brought forward for consideration, as modified to approve a total City contribution of $35,812,000., together with $4,000,000 to be raised by KPL through a capital fundraising program; and a report from staff on the feasibility of using funding from the lnvesfing in Ontario Acf grant to fund advancement of operating costs during the 2 year construction period. Councillor B. Vrbanovic commented that the decision to go ahead with the central library project is as essential as other decisions made, citing EDIF as an example. He added that the proposed option is affordable and ensures continuance of the role libraries have now and into the future in meeting the needs of the community. FINANCE & CORPORATE SERVICES COMMITTEE MINUTES SEPTEMBER 29.200$ - 145 - CITY OF KITCHENER 4. FIN-A$-097 AND KPL REPORT -CENTRAL LIBRARY FUNDING OPTIONS tCONT'D) Councillor Gazzola spoke in support of the motion, despite having some concerns with the proposed fundraising campaign and advancement of operating funds but felt there was still time to further refine funding options over the coming months. He agreed with the notion of using funding from the lnvesfing in Onfario Acf grant and was pleased to have the project move forward. Councillor Galloway advised that while she could agree the library is an essential service, she was not in favour of expending the additional capital costs over and above the $32.5 M allocated through EDIF. She disagreed with the notion of using the lnvesfing in Onfario Acf grant funds as it would not meet the Province's intent and also with advancing operating funds as it would increase the levy by 0.9% in 2010, and Council has never pre-committed operating funds prior to the completion year of a construction project. She stated that she would prefer to see the dollars used toward increasing the library branch system with smaller, satellite centres. Mayor C. Zehr spoke in support of the motion, commenting that a strong central library is needed to support branch systems. He recognized the need for a branch in the south-end which he hoped could still be incorporated through other means and encouraged KPL to investigate modification designs for further savings in the central library. He agreed that use of funding from the lnvesfing in Onfario Acf grant is valid but would require considerable thought given the impact to the City's infrastructure replacement program. He also suggested that while he was not excited about the fundraising, it was a means of getting the public involved and perhaps having users pay something toward the facility. Councillor G. Lorentz expressed appreciation for the innovative funding options put forward and encouraged staff and the KPL to continue to look at creative ways to fund this project, as well as the south-end branch, going forward. Councillor Galloway agreed that a main library supports the branch system but was of the opinion sufficient renovations could be made within the EDIF allocation of $32.5 M to enhance the central library. She added that her concerns were not solely with the south-end library but rather extend to other areas of the City where there is also need for branch libraries. Councillor Vrbanovic commented that the library has struggled with the issue of branch libraries for some time and it becomes a matter of determining the most effective way to provide services within available dollars. The motion of Councillor B. Vrbanovic was then voted on and Carried, on a recorded vote, with Mayor C. Zehr and Councillor's J. Gazzola, G. Lorentz, J. Smola, B. Vrbanovic and C. Weylie voting in favour and Councillor K. Galloway voting in opposition. On motion by Councillor B. Vrbanovic - it was resolved: "That a preliminary capital budget of $35,812,000., together with $4,000,000. to be raised from a capital fundraising campaign by the Kitchener Public Library Board (KPL), as outlined in Financial Services Department report FIN-08-097and KPL report dated September 17, 2008, be approved, for a modified "Option 2 (Phased)" Central Library Project, funded as follows: Cost Reduction Strategies Reduction in Parkin Costs $3,808,000 Modification of Desi n Features $1,000,000 Total Cost Reductions $4,808,000 FINANCE & CORPORATE SERVICES COMMITTEE MINUTES SEPTEMBER 29, 200$ - 146 - CITY OF KITCHENER 4. FIN-A8-097 AND KPL REPORT -CENTRAL LIBRARY FUNDING OPTIONS tCONT'D) Revised Project Costs after Reductions Ori final Project Costs in 2010 dollars $44,620,000 Cost Reductions $4,808,000 Revised Project Costs $39,812,000 Funding Sources Economic Develo ment Investment Fund $32,500,000 Deferral of Other KPL Ca ital Pro'ects $1,150,000 Develo ment Char es $528,000 Advancement of KPL Operating Budget total for 2 ears $1,634,000 Sub-Total $35,812,000 KPL Ca ital Fundraisin Cam ai n + $4,000,000 Total Fundin $39,812,000 and, That City Finance staff report to a future Finance & Corporate Services Committee meeting as to the feasibility of using a portion of the Province's lnvesfing in Onfario Acf grant allocation to fund advancement of the KPL operating budget over the 2 year construction period; and, That the approved capital forecast be adjusted by reallocating $1.15 M to the Central Library Project, $450,000. in 2012 from phase 2 of the Radio Frequency Identification Technology project, and $500,000. in 2013 and $200,000. in 2014 from the Library Automation System Replacement project; and, That an addition of $500,000. for the Library Automation System Replacement be referred to the 2009 capital budget process for inclusion in KPL's 2018 capital forecast; and, That City Finance staff include forecast growth related expenditures for a Central Library in the 2009 Development Charges Background Study; and, That $817,000. be allocated to KPL's base budget in the 2010 operating budget projection to off-set phasing costs during construction; and, That an advancement of $1.1 M be approved from the Economic Development Investment Fund from 2010 to 2009 for pre-construction funding; and, That, working with City Purchasing staff, KPL be authorized to issue separate Requests for Proposals for architectural services and project management consulting, and seek Council's pre-approval of these expenditures prior to awarding the contracts, and, That KPL propose a final construction budget to Council when cost estimates have been further refined during the design phase; and further, That KPL keep Council and the public advised of progress with the project through established channels of communication." Councillor B. Vrbanovic assumed the Chair at this time. 5. CRPS-A8-155 -EXEMPTION TO CHAPTER 450 (NOISE) OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE - BETHANY EVANGELICAL MISSIONARY CHURCH The Committee considered Corporate Services Department report CRPS-08-155, dated September 22, 2008 concerning a noise exemption request. FINANCE & CORPORATE SERVICES COMMITTEE MINUTES SEPTEMBER 29, 200$ - 147 - CITY OF KITCHENER 5. CRPS-0$-155 -EXEMPTION TO CHAPTER 450 (NOISE) OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE - BETHANY EVANGELICAL MISSIONARY CHURCH tCONT'D) On motion by Councillor G. Lorentz - it was resolved: "That an exemption to Chapter 450 (Noise) of the City of Kitchener Municipal Code be granted to the Bethany Evangelical Missionary Church for their annual Christmas Pageant from December 4 to December 7, 2008, between the hours of 6:00 P.M. and 9:00 P.M., daily." 6. CRPS-0$-156 -EXEMPTION TO CHAPTER 450 (NOISE) OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE - DOWNTOWN STREET CLEANING The Committee considered Corporate Services Department report CRPS-08-156, dated September 22, 2008 concerning a noise exemption request. On motion by Councillor G. Lorentz - it was resolved: "That an exemption to Chapter 450 (Noise) of the City of Kitchener Municipal Code be granted to permit the Community Services Department, through an independent contractor, to undertake cleaning of the streets and sidewalks in the Downtown Core between the hours of 10:00 PM and 6:00 AM between October 5 and October 10, 2008." 7. CRPS-0$-160 -EXEMPTION TO CHAPTER 450 (NOISE) OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE - 67 CEDAR STREET NORTH The Committee considered Corporate Services Department report CRPS-08-160, dated September 24, 2008 concerning a noise exemption request. On motion by Councillor G. Lorentz - it was resolved: "That an exemption to Chapter 450 (Noise) of the City of Kitchener Municipal Code be granted to Wayne LeDrew at 67 Cedar Street North for a party to be held at his residence between the hours of 8:00 PM and 1:00 AM on October 11, 2008." 8. CRPS-0$-147 -ENVIRONMENTAL COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION - WATERLOO REGION GREEN SOLUTIONS (REEP) - ANNUAL REQUEST FOR FINANCIAL SUPPORT The Committee considered Corporate Services Department report CRPS-08-147, dated September 12, 2008 concerning a request for financial support of the Waterloo Region Green Solutions, Residential Energy Efficiency Project (REEP). On motion by Councillor G. Lorentz - it was resolved: "That subject to consideration during the 2009 budget deliberations, $25,000. be allocated to the Waterloo Region Green Solutions, Residential Energy Efficiency Project (REEP), as part of the Environmental Committee's 2009 operating budget." 9. CRPS-0$-151 -ENVIRONMENTAL COMMITTEE RECOMENDATION - REVISED COMMUNITY ENVIRONMENTAL IMPROVEMENT GRANT CRITERIA & SUBMISSION PROCESS The Committee considered Corporate Services Department report CRPS-08-151, dated September 12, 2008 concerning revisions to the criteria and submission process for the Community Environmental Improvement Grant program. FINANCE & CORPORATE SERVICES COMMITTEE MINUTES SEPTEMBER 29, 200$ - 14$ - CITY OF KITCHENER 9. CRPS-0$-151 -ENVIRONMENTAL COMMITTEE RECOMENDATION - REVISED COMMUNITY ENVIRONMENTAL IMPROVEMENT GRANT CRITERIA & SUBMISSION PROCESS tCONT'D) It was noted on the agenda that any recommendation arising from the Committee concerning this matter would be considered at the special Council meeting to be held later this same date. Councillor J. Gazzola questioned the reason for advancing the recommendation to the special Council meeting this date. Councillor B. Vrbanovic advised that it was his understanding that the review of the grant process had delayed standard timing for placement of advertising for nominations and Council's approval this date would allow advertising to proceed in a timely manner. He added that it may also be connected to the submission deadline for inclusion in the Your Kitchener newsletter which is Thursday of the current week. Mr. M. May stated that if it is desired to consider the Committee's recommendation at the October 6, 2008 regular Council meeting staff will still accommodate the placement of advertising in the Your Kitchener newsletter. Accordingly, it was agreed that the following motion would not go forward to the special Council meeting this date but rather be considered at the October 6 Council meeting. On motion by Councillor G. Lorentz - it was resolved: "That Council Policy I-590 (Grant Program -Community Environmental Improvement) be amended to repeal and replace Section 3 (Grant Criteria) and Section 4 (Grant Submission Process) with the revised criteria and submission process, as outlined in Corporate Services Department report CRPS-08-151; and further, That staff be directed to undertake a review of the Community Environmental Improvement Grant program to determine if the program continues to effectively meet its overall objectives and to identify options for moving forward." 10. CRPS-0$-157 -REQUEST TO SELL REFRESHMENTS - OH BABY FITNESS VICTORIA PARK -OCTOBER 5, 200$ The Committee considered Corporate Services Department report CRPS-08-157, dated September 22, 2008 concerning a request to sell refreshments. Councillor B. Vrbanovic advised that staff is requesting that any recommendation from the Committee concerning this matter be considered at the special Council meeting to be held later this date due to the timing of this event. The Committee agreed to this request. On motion by Councillor G. Lorentz - it was resolved: "That the request of Oh Baby Fitness to sell refreshments in Victoria Park on October 5, 2008 be approved, provided the necessary licence is obtained, including Health approval." 11. CRPS-0$-094 -AMENDMENT TO HUMAN RESOURCES POLICY 11-270 - SMOKE FREE WORK ENVIRONMENT The Committee considered Corporate Services Department report CRPS-08-094, dated September 18, 2008 concerning an amendment to Policy II-270 (Smoke Free Work Environment), to prohibit smoking within 9 m of the entrance to any City-owned and/or managed building. Councillor J. Gazzola questioned the need for this amendment. Mr. S. Turner advised that the current policy does not address the exterior of City facilities and concerns have been raised with respect to the public having to pass by staff smoking near entrances to City facilities. Councillor Gazzola suggested that the amendment would serve no purpose if there is no intention to enforce the issue. Mr. Turner responded that enforcement in the instance of FINANCE & CORPORATE SERVICES COMMITTEE MINUTES SEPTEMBER 29, 200$ - 149 - CITY OF KITCHENER 11. CRPS-0$-094 -AMENDMENT TO HUMAN RESOURCES POLICY 11-270 - SMOKE FREE WORK ENVIRONMENT tCONT'D) a member of the public who violates the policy would be dealt with under current procedures for prohibited activities and in the instance of a City employee, they would be subject to discipline under current disciplinary practices. He added that areas where smoking is to be prohibited will be signed and/or otherwise demarcated where appropriate. Councillor Vrbanovic inquired how those who rent out City facilities will be dealt with. Mr. Turner advised that rental agreements will stipulate no smoking areas and in discussions with Community Services staff indication has been given that users are in favour of the amendment. On motion by Councillor G. Lorentz - it was resolved: "That Council Policy II-270 be amended to prohibit smoking within 9 metres of the entrance to any building under the jurisdiction of the City of Kitchener, effective January 26, 2009; and further, That the City's list of Prohibited Activities relating to City facilities be amended to include smoking within 9 metres of the entrance to any building under the jurisdiction of the City of Kitchener." 12. CRPS-0$-150 -FEES FOR ENCROACHMENTS ON ROAD ALLOWANCES The Committee considered Corporate Services Department report CRPS-08-150, dated September 24, 2008 concerning a request to exempt existing and future agreements related to encroachments on City road allowances from the annual encroachment fee. On motion by Councillor C. Weylie - it was resolved: "That notwithstanding the resolution adopted by Council on June 23, 2008 regarding an annual fee for encroachment agreements, pursuant to Corporate Services Department report CRPS-08-093, the annual encroachment fee will not apply to existing and future agreements relating to encroachments on City road allowances." 13. ADJOURNMENT On motion, the meeting adjourned at 4:40 p.m. Janet Billett Committee Administrator