Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
Business Excellence Advisory Board 2005
(N. erTHE TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY i MEETING OF THE BUSINESS EXCELLENCE ADVISORY BOARD #1/05 March 4, 2005 The Business Excellence Advisory Board Meeting #1/05, was held in the South Theatre, Black Creek Pioneer Village, on Friday, March 4, 2005. The Chair David Barrow, called the meeting to order at 9:20 a.m. PRESENT Chair Dave Barrow Member Rob Ford Dick O'Brien Chair, Authority Bill O'Donnell Member REGRETS Member Bas Balkissoon Member Bill Fisch Member Peter Milczyn Vice Chair Maja Prentice RES. #C1/05 - MINUTES Moved by: Seconded by: Bill O'Donnell Rob Ford THAT the Minutes of Meeting #7/04, held on January 14, 2005, be approved. PRESENTATIONS A presentation by Nick Foglia, Marketing Manager for Conservation Parks and the Kortright Centre, TRCA, in regards to 2004 Highlights and 2005 New Initiatives for the Conservation Parks and the Kortright Centre for Conservation. (a) CARRIED 1 RES. #C2 /05 - PRESENTATIONS Moved by: Seconded by: Dick O'Brien Bill O'Donnell THAT above -noted presentation (a) be heard and received. CARRIED t SECTION I - ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY ACTION RES. #C3 /05 - COMMUNITY TRANSFORMATION PARTNERSHIP, 2005 BUSINESS PLAN Approval of the 2005 business plan for the Community Transformation Partnership. Moved by: Seconded by: Rob Ford Bill O'Donnell THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT the 2005 business plan for the Community Transformation Partnership be approved; AND FURTHER THAT staff be directed to put funding partnerships in place to achieve the objectives outlined in the business plan. CARRIED BACKGROUND Since 2000, the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) has been exploring the concept of sustainability and the role that it should play in helping to make the Toronto region one of the most liveable city regions in the world. To this end, TRCA business units have worked to incorporate the principles of sustainability into their business plans and products. TRCA staff have also been involved in the development of a variety of new programs and products that reflect the TRCA's evolving role in the sustainability of the Toronto region. At Authority Meeting #2/04, held on February 27, 2004, Resolution #A45/04 was approved as follows: THAT the program of activities set out in the staff report and as presented in the summary of The Living City Centre programs be endorsed. AND FURTHER THAT staff be directed to seek further opportunities and new partnerships which will support the efforts of the Toronto Region Conservation Authority's member municipalities to create more sustainable urban and rural communities. 2 At subsequent meetings, the Authority directed staff to pursue the development of a variety of pilot programs and partnerships that contribute to the future sustainability of the city region. Some of the initiatives identified included: retrofit of The Living City Centre at Kortright; partnership with the Canada Green Building Council; Mayors' Megawatt Challenge; Greening Health Care; Sustainable Schools; Home Energy Clinic; and, the Sustainable Communities Development project. These programs, although diverse, share several key characteristics: • Engaging Leadership: working with individuals and organizations that are natural leaders and can act as champions in the various market sectors. • Market Transformation: catalyzing and building on changes in the market to achieve large scale, systemic change. • Partnership and Collaboration: bringing together the strengths of other parties and existing initiatives to achieve more than could otherwise be achieved individually. • Measurement and Feedback: demonstrating sustained, quantifiable improvements in target areas such as energy efficiency, greenhouse gas emissions, water conservation, waste management, green buildings and sustainable community development. In order to best support and articulate the focus of these diverse projects and programs, they have been identified as part of a new area of business -- Community Transformation Partnership -- with a specific business plan for 2005. The development of a business plan for these new programs represents a significant step forward for the TRCA in broadening its partnerships and its influence on the sustainability of the Toronto region. RATIONALE The TRCA's development of new programs that support its interest in sustainability is still in process, but significant headway has been made. A number of these new programs, such as the Mayors' Megawatt Challenge, are making the transition from pilot project to ongoing program, while many others are still in the pilot or concept stage. The development of a one -year business plan is a significant step forward for this program area as it provides a structure to focus existing programs and criteria against which to evaluate future initiatives. The business plan also provides a set of measurable objectives that address the overall impact of the programs in reducing greenhouse gas emissions, electrical demand savings, water savings, waste reductions, etc.. DETAILS OF WORK TO BE DONE Over the next year, staff will continue to work on this new program area, following the strategies and actions outlined in the business plan, including the establishment of ongoing programs, the development of new programs and concepts as well as the identification and establishment of new strategic partnerships that support the TRCA's Sustainable Communities objective of The Living City vision. Report prepared by: Bernie McIntyre extension 5326 For Information contact: Bernie McIntyre extension 5326 Date: January 24, 2005 Attachments: 1 3 Attachment 1 The Living City: Community Transformation Partnership Business Plan for 2005 The Living CityVision The quality of life on Earth is being determined in rapidly expanding city regions. Our vision is for a new kind of community, The Living City, where human settlement can flourish forever as part of nature's beauty and diversity." The Community Transformation Partnership is an initiative of Toronto and Region Conservation (TRCA) under their Sustainable Communities objective in support of achieving The Living City vision. The Sustainable Communities objective helps community members understand and take action toward sustainable living and city building that improves the quality of life for residents, businesses and nature. The Community Transformation Partnership is a collaboration among business, governments, communities and other stakeholders to create and deliver programs that achieve significant, measurable change in the sustainability of communities and city regions. The Community Transformation Partnership (CTP) sponsors, develops and manages programs which share several key characteristics: • Engaging Leadership: Working with individuals and organizations that are natural leaders and can act as champions in the various market sectors. • Market Transformation: Catalyzing and building on changes in the market to achieve large scale, systemic change. • Partnership and Collaboration: Bringing together the strengths of other parties and existing initiatives to achieve more than could otherwise be achieved individually. • Measurement and Feedback: Demonstrating sustained, quantifiable improvements in target areas such as energy efficiency, greenhouse gas emissions, water conservation, waste management, green buildings and sustainable community development. TRCA Objectives • Healthy Rivers and Shorelines > Regional Biodiversity • Sustainable Communities [Community Transformation Programs] > Business Excellence 4 The Living City Objectives and Measures of Success Through 2005, the CTP will build on the established success of its programs to reach new and measurable objectives. These are divided into six categories. 1. Program Recognition 2. Sustainable Financial Model 3. Program Impact 4. Program Reach [geographic coverage] 5. Program Scope [sectors served and sustainability issues addressed] 6. Program Participation [number and size of organizations taking part] 1. Program Recognition Success of the programs requires recognition, a positive image and active support among funding partners, participating organizations (municipalities, hospital corporations, etc.) and the individuals taking part. In 2005, the CTP aims to: • establish and maintain a high profile with all stakeholders; and • develop a strong reputation for effectiveness and achieving results. Measures of Success Target audiences for program recognition are current and prospective funders, participating organizations, and the individuals who actually take part in the programs. Measure of success and objectives for 2005 are listed below. * 5 -point rating 2. Sustainable Financial Model The CTP will increase its revenues and revenue sources and contain operating costs in order to break even in 2005 and position itself to generate a budget surplus in subsequent years. Measures of Success 2004 2005 objectives Program funding - participants 135,000 342,000 - government 246,400 943,087 - utility 0 607,200 - private sector 183,000 136,600 Funder satisfaction not measured 4.0 * Participant satisfaction not measured 4.0 * Workshop evaluations 4.2 4.0 * Number of newsletters 3 6 * 5 -point rating 2. Sustainable Financial Model The CTP will increase its revenues and revenue sources and contain operating costs in order to break even in 2005 and position itself to generate a budget surplus in subsequent years. Measures of Success 2004 2005 objectives Program revenues - total $564,700 $2,028,700 • participants 24% 17% • government 43% 46% • utilities 0% 30% • private sector • 33% 7% Operating costs $752,000 $2,028,700 Net income ($187,700) (110 %) $0 0% 5 3. Program Impact The Living City vision is to improve the quality of life on earth by helping create sustainable communities that are healthy, vibrant and viable. Progress towards that vision has to be measurable and contribute to long term market transformation. In 2005, actual outcomes from programs, including green building commitments and registrations, energy, greenhouse gas emissions and water savings, will be monitored and reported. In addition, actual cost savings realized by participants in 2005 will be at least 5 times their cost of taking part in the programs. Measures of Success a) The impact of programs will be assessed, in part, based on actual savings achieved. b) Finally the impact of programs will be assessed in terms of their contribution to market transformation. Specific measures of market transformation will be developed during 2005. 4. Program Reach The Living City vision of improving the quality of life on Earth implies expanding the impact of its programs beyond the Toronto region. CTP aims to expand the geographic reach of programs to other urban centres in Ontario during 2005, while positioning for national expansion in future years. Measures of Success In support of geographic expansion: a) The proportion of results achieved will be significantly increased in geographic areas outside the Greater Toronto Area (GTA). 2004 2005 objectives GHG emissions reduction 2,600 tonnes 18,000 tonnes Electrical demand reduction 0.52 megawatts 3.4 megawatts Electricity consumption reduction 2,600,000 kWh 17,000,000kWh Gas savings 180,000 cubic metres 1,800,000 cubic metres Water savings Not available Not available Waste reduction none to be determined Green Buildings - committed - LEED registered 2 Nil 5 1 Cost savings as a multiple of program fees startup year 5.0 b) Finally the impact of programs will be assessed in terms of their contribution to market transformation. Specific measures of market transformation will be developed during 2005. 4. Program Reach The Living City vision of improving the quality of life on Earth implies expanding the impact of its programs beyond the Toronto region. CTP aims to expand the geographic reach of programs to other urban centres in Ontario during 2005, while positioning for national expansion in future years. Measures of Success In support of geographic expansion: a) The proportion of results achieved will be significantly increased in geographic areas outside the Greater Toronto Area (GTA). 6 Q�•eSt of Golden it, orseshoe Other>Regions ; :, of Ontario N-Other ?Parts..of Cana a„ % of Participating 2004 98% 2004 2% 2004 0% 2004 0% Sector's GHG Gas Emissions Reduction 2005 85% 2005 15% 2005 0% 2005 0% % of Participating 2004 99% 2004 1% 2004 0% 2004 0% Sector's Electrical Demand Reduction 2005 85% 2005 15% 2005 0% 2005 0% 6 b) at least one CTP program will be operational in another Ontario urban centre. c) memorandum of understanding with a major Canadian urban centre outside Ontario will be signed. 5. Program Scope The Living City vision aims to ultimately engage all sectors of business, government and communities, and to tackle multiple issues of sustainability. During 2005, the strategic focus will be on consolidating existing programs, and new sectors and issues will be addressed only on an opportunistic basis. . Measures of Success Sectors Served GTA Rest of Golden Horseshoe Other Regions of Ontario Other Parts of Canada 2004 2005 2004 2005 2004 2005 2004 2005 Mayors' Megawatt Challenge • • • • • Hospitals Greening Health Care • • • • • Schools Sustainable Schools • • Energy Efficiency • • Homes Home Energy Clinic • Alternative Energy • • Small /Medium Enterprises Mayors Green Building Challenge • Water Conservation • • Retail c) memorandum of understanding with a major Canadian urban centre outside Ontario will be signed. 5. Program Scope The Living City vision aims to ultimately engage all sectors of business, government and communities, and to tackle multiple issues of sustainability. During 2005, the strategic focus will be on consolidating existing programs, and new sectors and issues will be addressed only on an opportunistic basis. . Measures of Success Sectors Served Issues Addressed 2004 2005 :. 2004 . 2005 Municipalities • • Climate Change • • Hospitals • • Green Buildings • • Schools • • Energy Efficiency • • Homes • • Alternative Energy • • Small /Medium Enterprises • • Water Conservation • • Retail • • Waste Reduction • • Pollution Prevention • • 6. Program Participation A primary measure of program success is growth in participation, which creates the scale and impact for market transformation. In 2005, The Living City will engage more organizations in its programs, as well as targeting a high renewal rate for all established programs. 7 Measures of Success d) Renewal Rate: 80% for all established programs. e) Program Growth: Program 2004 2005 Mayors' Megawatt Challenge 12 municipalities 68 buildings 18 municipalities 200 buildings Greening Health Care 13 corporations 23 hospital sites 18 corporations 35 hospital sites Home Energy Clinic* 1 retailer 0 homeowners 1 retailer 1,000 homeowners Living City Centre 1 partner (Earth Rangers) 4 partners Sustainable Schools 1 school board 1 school 5 school boards 8 schools Champions of Sustainability Initiate program Develop and implement energy management plan Complete CMHC research Green Homes Market Initiate program OCETA 3 municipalities 5 corporations 6 municipalities 10 corporations Initiate program Solar Thermal * Outline concept Sustainable Community Development * Initiate program Complete Phases I and II and apply in one location Mayors' Green Building Challenge * 1 municipality 5 municipalities 8 buildings Greening Retail * Identify Concept Develop proposal and partners Green Buildings Partnership * 1 partnership 4 partnerships 3 municipalities and Province GTA MetroQuest * 1 municipality program under development 8 Strategies During 2005, six primary strategies will be followed in order to deliver on the CTP objectives: 1. Program Excellence 2. Financial Sustainability 3. Program Development 4. Marketing and Communications 5. Organizational Development 6. Expansion to Other Regions 1. Program Excellence The quality and effectiveness of CTP programming is central to the success of The Living City initiative. Participants access programs via websites, workshops and interaction with CTP staff and resources. Continued investment will be made in all facets of these interfaces: • Website development to make all sites robust, reliable, intuitive and responsive. Particular attention will be given to user interfaces and to architecting the systems for flexibility and scalability. • Workshop development including format, content and delivery to support effectiveness and scalability within and beyond the GTA. • ' ' Regular support for participants to create a robust and scalable methodology for technical support, problem - solving, data entry and error checking, and reminders /follow -ups for action. 2. Financial Sustainability Financial sustainability is critical in order for the CTP to become a significant force for achieving The Living City vision. Expanding revenue sources, coupled with improved financial management will allow the CTP to work towards financial sustainability. Revenue Sources: 1. Current: • Assessing and adjusting participation fees to ensure that they reflect the cost of delivery and the value obtained by participants. • Nurturing relationships with the federal and provincial governments as well as the private sector, including NRCan, Ministry of the Environment, Ministry of Energy, CMHC and The Home Depot 2. Future: • Establishing a comprehensive fund - raising strategy and plan incorporating public- and private- sector segmentation, business interests and messaging, with suitable marketing materials and communications. Appendix B provides a listing of prospective funding sources and their strategic interests in sustainability. Financial Management: • Instituting formal and regular budget reviews and reporting. • Implementing effective time- and cost - control procedures. 9 3. Program Development Appendix A presents the programs in effect at the end of 2004, and their objectives for 2005. In 2005, new programming will only be added to take advantage of compelling opportunities which may arise. The focus will be on the evolution of the established programs in terms of scope and recruiting new partners and participants, and on managing the development of the six emerging programs. The approach to program development will emphasize: • More structured decision - making process around the adoption of programs, including budgeting and potential for significant impact. • Well- focused research and alignment with The Living City objectives. • Identifying partnerships to assist with program development and delivery. 4. Expansion to Other Regions Expansion of the CTP to other regions in 2005 will focus on three areas: • Expanding the geographic reach of established programs (Mayors' Megawatt Challenge and Greening Health Care). • Establishing the Home Energy Clinic across the Toronto region, ready for expansion across Ontario in 2006. • Executing a memorandum of understanding to deliver one or more established programs in an urban centre elsewhere in Canada in 2006. 5. Marketing and Communications The planned growth and funding support for the CTP depend upon effective and regular communications. In 2005, significant improvement in frequency and quality of communications is planned, along with preparation for a strategic communications plan in the future. Key audiences for 2005 are current and potential funders, participating organizations and individual participants. The messaging and delivery methods for these groups are as follows: 10 Stakeholders Messaging Method Funding Organizations • regular, compelling information about The Living City and CTP progress and results • 3 issues of The Living City newsletter, hard copy and e-mail • 6 presentations at conferences and meetings • 2 "In Conversation with..." speaker series events • The Living City website • 1 independent survey of funder satisfaction • specific information about individual programs • 1 -2 newsletters for each program • Quarterly e- bulletins on program activities and results • website home pages Participating Organizations • information about The Living City and the CTP programs • The Living City newsletters, `In Conversation with..." and website home page • information about their own program • program newsletters • 1 -2 media releases for each program sector • Quarterly e- bulletins to executives and sector organizations on activities and results • continuous website home page updates • support for internal communication s • feedback • 1 satisfaction survey with decision - makers Individual Participants • progress and opportunities with their own programs • newsletters, in Conversation with..." and website home page • monthly technical support calls and hotline • feedback • evaluation survey and summary for each workshop 11 6. Organizational Development To effectively manage the development, delivery and funding of the growing CTP, a dedicated staff team is needed with effective access to other TRCA and outside resources. This team will be responsible for: • Overall management of the CTP • Program development and delivery • Fundraising • Marketing and communications • Financial management • Monitoring and reporting on results Staff should have opportunities to increase their skills. Training in technical areas such as Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED), energy management and waste management, as well as in business management and communication skills, are appropriate for the development of this team. In 2004 the CTP staff team consisted of five core staff: • Manager Strategic Development (50% of time) • Supervisor Living City Programs (100 %) • Coordinator Sustainable Living (100 %) • Database Analyst (75 %) The CTP also engaged a variety of other staff at the TRCA to a lesser degree: • Coordinator EMS (30 %) • Executive Assistant, Chair & CAO (10 %) • Manager of Kortright Centre (2 %) • Marketing Manager, Communications and Media (2 %) In addition, the CTP team retained a number of consultants in program development and implementation. The fluid team structure and approach used in 2004 was well suited to the early development stages of the CTP concept and development of programs. However, in 2005 the planned expansion of established programs and the number of new programs that are ready to be initiated, will require dedicated staff resources and a defined management structure. 12 To achieve the business plan objectives identified for 2005, the plan proposes to utilize staff resources in the following manner: Title % of Time Role and Comments Existing Staff Resources Manager Strategic Development 70% General management, fundraising, partnership development, new program development. 30% of time will continue to be spent on Conservation Foundation activities, decreasing to 0% by 2006 Supervisor Living City Programs 100% Supervision of programs including, Sustainable Schools, Living City Centre, Sustainable Community Development, Mayors' Green Building Challenge, Green Homes Markets, Green Building Partnership, GTA MetroQUEST, and OCETA. Responsibilities also include partnership development and fundraising Coordinator, Sustainable Living 100% Program research, general administration, budget tracking, program implementation and report writing, Database Analyst 100% Development and maintenance of program databases, QA and QC of all data and supervision of data input Environmental Management System Coordinator 100% Primary responsibility for development and implementation of Champions of Sustainability (replaces EMS), assist with program implementation (Mayors' Megawatt Challenge and Greening Health Care) and fundraising Manager Kortright Centre 15% CTP responsibilities include involvement in The Living City Centre retrofit, and Utility DSM Service, development and implementation of the Solar Thermal Program, and partnership development Executive Assistant to CAO 15% CTP responsibilities include coordination of meetings and workshops with clients, and confirmation of attendance. Proposed new Staff Communications and Marketing Specialist 70% Development and implementation of communications and marketing plan, coordination and participation in updates to web site. Position would be filled as funding permits earliest start would be spring Coordinator, Utility CDM Program 100% Coordinate delivery of community demand management services for local electrical distribution companies. Data Management Technician 75% Work with clients to facilitate data entry, perform data entry and data error checking, Admin Assistant 70% General administrative duties, minutes, filing, correspondence, set up meetings, Position would filled as funding permits earliest start would be March 13 In 2005 consideration will be given to determining the need for, and role of, an Executive Director for The Living City Centre and the Community Transformation Partnership. Tentatively, the 2005 budget includes an allocation of 6 months salary and benefits for an Executive Director. To follow is a proposed organizational structure for 2005 and 2006. New positions will be filled as revenue becomes available through expansion of existing programs and implementation of new programs. If revenue and program growth exceed expectations, then hiring of new positions will be accelerated. Other TRCA Program Staff s Alex Waters s Brian Dundas s Andrea Fennell i TRCA, CAO I Manager Community Transformation Partnership (existing position) Administrative Assistant (proposed position, 2005) Partners and Consultants s Enerlife s Ruth Victor s OCETA s etc Supervisor CTP Programs Green Buildings (existing position) Coordinator, Utility CDM Program (proposed position, 2005) Database Analyst (existing contract position) Data Management Technician (proposed position 2005) Supervisor CTP Programs Energy and Waste (future position, 2006) Communications and Marketing Specialist (proposed position, 2005) Program Researcher (existing position) Budget The detailed 2005 budget is presented in Appendix C, and summarized as follows: APPENDIX A - Programs 14 2004 2005 Budget Revenue 564,700 2,028,700 Operating Cost 750,400 2,028,700 Net Income (deficit) (187,300) 0 APPENDIX A - Programs 14 Community Transformation programs of The Living City are divided into two categories: 1. Established 2. Emerging Established programs are those already in progress with participants and funding. Emerging programs are still in development. The 14 programs in effect at the end of 2004, and the sustainability issues that each one addresses, are listed below along with 2005 objectives for each program. Climate Change Programs Green Buildings Energy Efficiency Alternative Energy Water Conservation Waste Reduction Pollution Prevention 1. Mayors' Megawatt Challenge • • 2. Greening Health Care • • • • 3. Home Energy Clinic • • 4. Living City Centre • 5. Sustainable Schools • 6. Champions of Sustainability • • • • 7. Green Homes Market • 8. OCETA • 9. Solar Thermal* • 10. Sustainable Community Development* • • • • • • 11. Mayors' Green Building Challenge* • 12. Greening Retail* • • • 13. Green Buildings Partnership* • 14. GTA Metro Quest* • • • • • • *Under Development 15 Established Programs 16 2004 2005 Mayors' Megawatt Challenge Participating Municipalities 12 18 Population Served 5,300,000 6,000,000 No. of Buildings 68 200 Funding Partners Federal Gov ($45,600) Participants ($45,600) Federal Gov ($45,600) Participants ($45,600) Energy Saved 2,600,000kWh est. 5,000,000kWh Gas Saved 180,000 m3 est. 400,000 m3 $ Saved $260,000 $500,000 GHG emissions saved 2,600 tonnes 5,000 tonnes Greening Health Care Participating Hospital Corps 13 18 Participating Hospital Sites 23 36 Electricity Saved Not available 12,000,000 kWh Gas Saved Not available 1,400,000 m3 $ Saved Not available $1,350,000 GHG emissions saved Not available 13,000 tonnes Home Energy Clinic Program Development initiate complete Program Implementation Toronto Region Funding Partners Home Depot (70,000) Federal Gov Utilities Registered Home Owners 0 1000 Living City Centre Concept Design complete Detailed Designs complete Funding Partners Toronto Toronto Peel York Durham Federal Provincial Private Sector Sustainable Schools Program Participants 1 School Board 1 School 5 School Boards 8 Schools Funding Partners Provincial School Boards Provincial Federal Utilities Champions of Sustainability Program Development Outline Concept complete energy mgmt plan Program Development Develop social indicators Program Development Complete re- branding of EMS and SMS as Champions of Sustainability Green Homes Market CMHC research initiate complete Program Implementation 1 pilot site Funding Partners Federal Federal Private sector OCETA Program Participants 3 municipalities 5 corporations 6 municipalities 10 corporations Funding Partners federal municipal Federal Municipal Provincial private sector 16 Emerging Programs *Complete Phases I and 11 in 2005 17 2004 2005 Solar Thermal Program Development Outline concept Initiate program Funding Partners Federal Utilities Private Sector Sustainable Community Development Program Development* Outline Concept Initiate program Funding Partners RAP RAP FCM Federal Provincial Mayors' Green Building Program Program Development Outline Concept Initiate program Program Participants 1 municipality 5 municipalities 8 buildings Funding Partners none Federal Municipal Green Buildings Partnership Program Development Develop Concept Outline program Program Partnerships 1 partnership 4 Partnerships Funding Partners None Complete funding strategy Greening Retail Program Development Identify Concept Outline program Program Participants 1 retailer Funding Partners Federal Provincial Private Sector MetroQuest Program Development Outline Concept Develop software Funding Partners RAP RAP FCM provincial *Complete Phases I and 11 in 2005 17 APPENDIX B - Funding Partners Existing and prospective funding partners are listed below, along with the sustainability issues of greatest concern to each of them. Funding Sources - Government aimate Change Energy Efficiency Green Buildings Alternative ner Energy Water Conservation Waste Reduction Pollution Prevention Federal Government x x x x . NRCan/OEE x x x x ► Environment x x x x x x ► CMHC x x x ► FCM (GMF) x x x x x x , GeoX Coalition x x Ontario Govemment x x ► Energy x x x x x x ► Environment x x x x x ► Health x x x x ► Education x x x x , Municipal Affairs x x x x Regional Government x x x x x . Toronto x x x x x x ► York x x x x x ► Durham x x x x x ► Peel x x x x x ► Halton x x x ► Simcoe x x x x x Funding Sources — Private Sector Climate Change Energy Efficency Green Buildings Adernatwe Energy Water Conservator Waste Reduction Pollution Prevention Utility Companies x x x x > Enbndge x x x x > Union x x x x > PowerStream x x x > Toronto Hydro x x x x > Enersource x > Other LDC's x Resource Sector x x x x x Developers /Builders x x Landbrds x x x Consulting Firms x x x x General Contractors x x Green Product Suppliers x x x x Retailers x x x Financial Sector x x x x Insurance Sector x x x Manufacturing Sector x x x Telecom Sector x LegaVAccounbng Firms x x x 18 APPENDIX C: Living City - Community Transformation Programs — Note In addition lo Ina proQeme Y.1® stove. them re other. underdevelopment that evil be brough11onvrd 00 details re evadable 19 zuu5 tsuagetea rroject btatement or rcevenue ana txpenaitures Mayors' Megawatt C11a6en0e (hearq Health Care Su14dnehb �oo1i Green liorre. Merkel Wily COM Serum OCETA fire Energy OEnlC Champions o1 SuHrnth4ty Mayors' 00088 Gie Bulking e SMMem ble Communities Development Metro Ol1EST Living My Report Card Mmagerrlyd Development and Conere.4ca4ons 2005 Total Budget 2001 PogeCled REVENUE Frow00 PrtCp88l. 73 000 205,000 30,000 0 0 0 0 0 14000 20,000 0 0 0 342,000 135,000 t80iW. 50.000 12,000 15.000 0 290.000 0 200,000 7000 25200 0 0 0 0 607,200 0 wllclpd/FCM 0 0 0 0 0 20,900 0 0 9800 10,000 75,000 0 0 123,700 27.500 ProNndr 40,000 59.500 24,500 0 0 0 40.000 0 14000 20.000 57,500 0 0 255.500 32200 Federal 100.000 35,000 46.300 20,000 0 140,000 130,000 25,000 16,800 20.000 7,500 23,300 0 564,000 166,700 Private Fundnp 0 0 0 0 0 30,000 53,600 8 .400 0 0 10,000 0 34,300 178.300 185,300 644oTolr 263 000 311,500 115 800 20 000 298.000 196.900 423.600 40 400 79.800 70 000 150 000 23 300 34.300 2.028.700 564.700 EXPENDITURES 00 000800 000 0 Satadee and Wages and Benefits 27,400 27.400 19.400 12.400 127.000 0 29.700 0 0 0 0 210.000 409,000 189200 Printing 1,000 1,000 1,000 200 5,000 1.000 0 0 1,000 0 0 5,000 15.200 3.400 Office 8lpplies 200 200 100 100 300 0 0 0 100 0 0 500 1,500 600 Mee0rgs and Function 1 000 1,000 2,000 0 10,000 0 0 0 3,000 0 0 3,000 20.000 4,300 Travel rd Cr 64000. 500 500 500 100 500 500 0 300 300 0 0 3,000 6.200 2,000 Contact Se.cee -Odor 177.000 216,300 69300 4.500 51,000 170,000 203,000 40.000 64.000 150.000 23,300 106,800 1,414,300 517200 Tdiuon rd 61141 Development 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8.000 8.000 3.200 Amode0arl Mr1EerNlp end ereevbtwn. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1,500 1,500 1,200 Caul., and Delivery end Postage 500 500 300 100 1,000 300 0 0 200 0 0 500 3.400 300 Telephone and Cee 300 300 200 100 300 100 0 100 100 0 0 1,200 2.700 900 IAaca6rreoue 0 0 0 0 38.000 0 0 0 0 0 0 36,000 25,100 Corrpufer Equipment rd Software 0 0 0 0 4,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 6.000 10,000 3,800 0144.70114 207,900 247.200 92.000 17,500 235,100 171,900 322,790 40 .400 04,600 66.700 150000 23.300 345.500 1,987,800 752.000 prol.ol surcharge (311.) 5.400 6.600 2.200 150 3 ,200 5 200 cao0 1,200 1.500 2,100 4.500 40,900 Tad E00e40dre0 213,300 253,800 95,000 17,650 235,300 177,190 331,500 41,600 66,300 70,800 154,500 2,028.700 BUM/AVIV Revenue Tad 263,000 311.500 115,600 20,000 295,000 19e.990 423,600 40,400 79.600 70 000 150,000 23200 34.390 2028,700 564,7080 Expenditure Told 207,900 247.200 92,600 17,500 235,100 171.900 322,700 40,400 64,600 68,700 150000 23,300 345,500 2,028,700 752,000 OVERALL NET 55,100 64,300 23,000 2,500 62 900 27,000 100.900 0 15.000 1,300 0 0 -311,200 0 - 197 .390 Note In addition lo Ina proQeme Y.1® stove. them re other. underdevelopment that evil be brough11onvrd 00 details re evadable 19 RES. #C4/05 - HUSKY /EARTH RANGERS ENVIRONMENTAL WEEKS PROGRAM AT ALBION HILLS FIELD CENTRE Report on Husky /Earth Rangers Environmental Weeks Program at Albion Hills Field Centre. Moved by: Seconded by: Rob Ford Bill O'Donnell THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) staff continue to work to ensure appropriate recognition of Husky /Earth Rangers as a valuable partner in environmental education, particularly to commemorate the upcoming 10th funding year, beginning September 2005. CARRIED BACKGROUND The Husky /Earth Rangers Environmental Weeks Program is a $98,000 annual sponsorship of education programs at the Albion Hills Field Centre supported by Husky Injection Molding Ltd. of Bolton and its partner, Earth Rangers. Split into two program groups, Husky /Earth Rangers Environmental Weeks provide a funded residential education opportunity to all grade six students of the Bolton /Caledon East area, referred to as the Bolton Charter Schools, as well as an Expansion Program which includes classes from five local Boards of Education (York Public, York Catholic, Toronto Catholic, Peel Public and Dufferin -Peel Catholic). Entering it's ninth year at Albion Hills Field Centre in September 2004, the Bolton Charter Program will provide 23 visits to 9 schools in the Bolton /Caledon East communities. The Expansion Program began in September 2003 and will provide 10 visits to 9 different schools with limited financial resources. RATIONALE The $98,000 donation for the 2004/05 Husky /Earth Rangers Environmental Weeks Program will sponsor a total of 33 visits for the Bolton Community and Expansion Program schools. As in previous years, each participating student is asked to make a financial contribution towards their visit to cover program expenditures beyond the sponsorship contribution, which for 2004/05 is $21.00 per student. Without the sponsorship, students would pay $120.00 for this opportunity. The student contribution is equalized across the entire program, based on an annual estimate of total attendance, so no student pays more or less than any other. Program Overview Each sponsored visit engages students in a 2.5 day comprehensive, fully participatory learning environment. Students participate in environmental studies, stewardship projects and conservation life -style activities such as the waste reduction program. All students are motivated to make choices that protect the environment and will communicate this through individual environmental pledges. Teachers are asked to measure the after -visit commitment to the pledges that the students have made. Earth Rangers, as a program partner, provides evening programming where the students learn how individual commitment can make a difference in our communities. In addition to the above, staff compile and share with local principals and Husky and Earth Rangers staff the annual record of achievement through a photo album, student letters and measured accomplishment results. 20 The Bolton Community Program The 2004/05 school year has grown to include the grade six students of Caledon East Public School in the Bolton Community Program. It was initially anticipated that this change would result in an additional two visits being required; however, through the planning and cooperation of the original eight charter schools, the increased number of students has been accommodated while maintaining last year's number of visits. This has been accomplished through the consolidation of class visits; that is, two small classes from a participating school sharing one sponsored visit. Summary of Bolton Charter Program: • 9 participating Bolton Community schools; • estimated 550 participating grade six students; • 23 sponsored visits; • $62,300 sponsorship allocation for 2004/05. The Expansion Program Last year's expansion of the Husky /Earth Rangers Environmental Weeks Program to invite underprivileged children from our surrounding communities was a tremendous success. The five participating Boards of Education who were invited to participate last year were anxiously anticipating word on this continued opportunity. A note from a Principal of a school who is taking part in'the Expansion Program this year, read: "The program department at Dufferin Peel has given us the exciting news that we have been designated as one of schools from our board to have this unique experience. Thank you for the wonderful opportunity." Summary of Expansion Program: • 5 participating Boards of Education: Toronto Catholic District School Board, York Region District School Board, Peel District School Board and Dufferin -Peel Catholic District School Board; • estimated 350 participating students; • 10 sponsored visits; • • $35,700 sponsorship allocation for 2004/05. FINANCIAL DETAILS Husky Injection Molding Ltd., as a leader in the Bolton community, has contributed to the success of environmental education programming at Albion Hills Field Centre since 1996 and has continued to expand it's support through additional funding on an annual basis. To date Husky funding has amounted to approximately $500,000 providing supported environmental education opportunities to over 3,000 students. The 2005/2006 school year will mark the 10th anniversary of the Husky /Earth Ranger Program. TRCA staff will continue to work to ensure appropriate recognition of this valuable partner in environmental education, particularly to commemorate the upcoming 10th funding year. Report prepared by: Renee Jarrett, extension 5315 For Information contact: Renee Jarrett, extension 5315 Date: February 22, 2005 21 RES. #C5/05 - ADOPTION OF DECLARATION OF A NON - DISCRIMINATION POLICY Approval to adopt the City of Toronto's Declaration of a Non - discrimination Policy. Moved by: Seconded by: Rob Ford Bill O'Donnell THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT the City of Toronto's Declaration of a Non - Discrimination Policy be adopted by Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA). CARRIED BACKGROUND Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) is applying for financial support through the City of Toronto's Access and Equity Grant Program to support training programs for volunteers and prospective employees who have been in Canada Tess than four years. This training will provide Ontario - specific information in selected environmental specializations (e.g. planning, geographic information systems, resource science, watershed management, etc.). The City of Toronto requires that all organizations and individuals adopt their "Declaration of Non - Discrimination" as a condition of receiving a grant or other support from the city. The declaration form must be formally adopted by the Authority and submitted with the grant application. TRCA's name and adoption of this declaration will be included in a public report to City Council. The declaration is as follows: "On behalf of and with the authority of the organization named below, I hereby declare that this organization adopts and upholds the City of Toronto's policy statement which prohibits discrimination and harassment and protects the right to be free of hate activity, based on age, ancestry, citizenship, creed (religion), colour, disability, ethnic origin, family status, gender identity, level of literacy, marital status, place of origin, membership in a union or staff association, political affiliation, race, receipt of public assistance, record of offenses, sex, sexual orientation, or any other personal characteristics by or within the organization." In the grant proposal submitted to the City of Toronto on January 21, 2005, it was stated that: "TRCA staff are recommending to the Authority Board that the City of Toronto's Declaration of a Non - Discrimination Policy be adopted. This matter will go before our Business Excellence Advisory Board March 4, 2005, and the full Authority Board March 11, 2005. Once adoption of this declaration is approved, our staff will forward you the signed declaration and the minutes from the March 11th Board meeting." 22 The declaration is consistent with the TRCA's current Human Resources policies including the Code of Conduct, Employment Equity Policy and the Harassment Policy. Report prepared by: Chris Benjamin, extension 5360 For Information contact: Chris Benjamin, extension 5360 Date: January 18, 2005 Attachments: 1 23 z 0 z_ 2 U ES 0 O T z OO 4i IQ^ OG O C.3 � w tL O Attachment 1 WREN Chief Administrator's Office Shirley Hoy Chief Adrunls:r live Officer Group/Individual Name: Stretegle & Corporate PolkyfNeatthy City Office City Hell 111` Floor, Cast rover 130 Queer. Street West —F rovo, ON, M5H 2.N2 Rosanna Scotts CI 'sob- Td: 416•392 -0591 Fax. 416.69f.3645 wrrro,tcrunto ry Declaration of a Non - Discrimination Policy The City of Toranln rerium-ts that all organizations and IndMViduels adopt this "Declaration of Non - Diwuriminaliori' at; a condition of receiving a grant or ether support from the City. This Declaration Form must be In:malty adored by the Board of Directors (attach minutes of meeting) and submitted with the -grant application The name of your organization and the fact that ycu have arlri1IIud ibis declaration will be included in a publ:c report to City Coun•al. Declaration: On behalf of and with the authority of the organization named below, I hereby declare that this organization adopts and upholds the City of Toronto's policy statorrrant which prohibits discrimination and harassment and protects tho right to be free of hate activity, based on age, ancestry. citizenship, creed (religion), colour, disability, ethnic origin, family status. gender Identity, level of literacy, marital status. place of origin, membership In a union or staff association, political affiliation, race, receipt of public assistance, record of offences, sex, sexual orientation or any other personal characteristics by or within the organization. NFirnn of Orij;,rii.iUwi: Corirplete Address: lel No. Postal Code. Fax No Signing Officer (Name ). Position: Signatun Sryr.ing Offiner Data Declaration approved by the Board of Directors: • (Attach minutes) In acdition to adopting tik Declaration, a I recipients of grants or othersuppors, are requ•od to develop a Policy on Anti- Racism, Access & Equity. and develop Acion Plums purt,uant lo the Cily of Toronto Grants Policy ;Clause 5 of Stra:ogle Pclidos and Prtcr;ies Cammillee Report b). This Daciaration is in keeping with Ihu City of Toronto H.rmar, Rights and Harassment Priliny It Praood.lres and Hata.Aclivity Policy Procedures ;Clause 2 cf Report 19 cf Corporate Services Committee adoptoo by City (towel on Deeemoer 18 and 17. 1998). A!ir :liLrngiral1,ina416- 333 -C•335 and 1T' 418 - 330 -0089 Type of Grant: ❑ Access and Equity ❑ Community Sertices C Homeless Initiatives U AIDS Provcntion ❑ Cultr.re ❑ Rocroatlon ❑ Breaking ;he Cycle of Vlolonoo ❑ Drug Abuse Prevention. ❑ Toronto Arlo Council C Currirrnz•cial Rerr'nrch ❑ Economic Development Secror Initiatives ❑ tnh'br Comniunity Fes ;vats and Spotlit Evanis ❑ Graffiti Transformation Date Entered: Date ND Scroll Sont: IFt D2:02) 1'1 24 Grant Recip ants 1Organizaaon; Februari 2002 RES. #C6 /05 - 2005 CORPORATE COMMUNICATIONS OBJECTIVES Approval of the 2005 corporate communications objectives. Moved by: Seconded by: Dick O'Brien Bill O'Donnell THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT the 2005 corporate communications objectives for Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) be approved. AMENDMENT RES. #C7 /05 Moved by: Seconded by: Dick O'Brien Bill O'Donnell THAT the following be inserted after the main motion: THAT a broader partnership base be pursued with more than one media outlet; THAT staff liaise with municipal media relations personnel on the potential for cross promotion opportunities and to further TRCA's connections with local media outlets; AND FURTHER THAT staff report back with an implementation plan, including measureables. THE AMENDMENT WAS CARRIED THE MAIN MOTION, AS AMENDED, WAS CARRIED RATIONALE The corporate communications objectives will establish the foundation for development of the 2005 communications plan. They were developed to help TRCA focus on some key messages for 2005 that will help support The Living City vision and communicate TRCA's messages more effectively and consistently. The initiatives are relevant to the various work that will be carried out across the various business units. Report prepared by: Deanne Rodrigue, extension 5359 For Information contact: Deanne Rodrigue, extension 5359 Catherine MacEwen, extension 5359 Date: February 11, 2005 Attachments: 1 25 Attachment 1 2005 CORPORATE COMMUNICATIONS OBJECTIVES High Level February 11, 2005 OBJECTIVE #1 Increase awareness of The Living City among all of our target audiences. Position the TRCA vision with our strategic partners as the ones who help make it happen. Initiatives 1. Produce The Living City two -page overview and key messaging document. Target Audience: donors, TRCA staff / volunteers, media, other stakeholders (i.e. community education groups, development groups) Due Date: February 16 2005 2. Get staff excited about The Living City. Meet with business unit managers and respective communications committee representatives to discuss 2005 corporate objectives and to get feedback on their priorities. Target Audience: staff Due Date: January 2005 (complete) 3. Develop and deliver a presentation on The Living City to business unit managers so they can present it to their staff. Release strategic plan. Discuss their contribution to the plan. Have business units identify the top five opportunities / challenges they may encounter when executing the strategic plan. Circulate feedback to all business managers. Target Audience: staff Due Date: March /April 2005 4. Restructure the Kortright Centre e- bulletin so it becomes a living city bulletin where all of TRCA's initiatives can be promoted. Target Audience: TRCA staff, community members, watershed coalitions /alliances, board members Due Date: March -May 2005 26 Brown and Cohen Support • Provide guidance on meeting structure. • Provide assistance with developing the presentation. 5. Produce and distribute The Living City press kit: • Two -page overview of The Living City; • Copies of media coverage to date; • Testimonials: The Living City expert i.e. Mark Cullen, one TRCA employee, TRCA volunteer, well -known industry person and one quote from media extracted from media coverage. • biographical (background) piece on TRCA / foundation. Target Audience: media Due Date: February 2005 6. Generate discussion about The Living City. Identify The Living City spokesperson and position him /her to speak on key living city messages. Identify TRCA spokespeople (experts to speak on key issues i.e. water quality / quantity, climate change). Obtain bio's for spokespeople. Target Audience: media Due Date: January - March, 2005 7. Build a strategy for long -term coverage of the city's environmental performance. One mechanism could be distribution of The Living City Outlook Quarterly. Each edition would provide an update on The Living City and would highlight one key success or initiative. Key successes could be: release of The Living City Report Card; The Living City Programs (i.e. Mayor's Megawatt Challenge, Mayor's Green Building Challenge); source protection; and, The Don River Retrospective. Seek out opportunities to involve key opinion leaders to build interest and support around The Living City (government, industry, politicians, media etc.). This could culminate in an event or meeting. Execute when we can show progress on our initiatives. Partner with a media outlet to cover stories (preferred outlet would be the Toronto Star). Target Audience: media, community members, TRCA stakeholders (alliances / coalitions etc.), political partners, business professionals, board members Due Date: spring /summer 2005 27 • Develop press kit material, distribute kit and conduct follow up • Provide media training to spokespeople. • Develop strategy around The Living City Outlook Quarterly. A publication like this could bridge the communications gap between TRCA's annual report and the local watershed newsletters. • Help secure a media partner. • Help enlist The Living City spokespeople to talk to media. 8. Identify two living city success stories e.g. Great Canadian Shoreline Cleanup, tree plantings, the city of rivers, etc., and tie into a fundraising campaign. Build publicity and pursue fundraising opportunities around it. 2004 Example: Foundation leveraged TRCA's Hurricane Hazel initiatives and media coverage to pursue fundraising opportunities. Target Audience: media, donors, community members Due Date: First success story in May 2005; second success story in September 2005 9. Partner with PowerStream to deliver a conference to support their Demand Side Management and Energy Conservation programs and TRCA's programs (i.e. energy conservation, The Living City Programs). Location: Kortright Centre. Target Audience: PowerStream customers including commercial businesses, institutions, architects, developers, consultants Due Date: Late April 2005 OBJECTIVE #2 • Develop media strategy around stories, distribute material and do follow up. • Write press release in cooperation with PowerStream, distribute and follow up for media to attend. Raise awareness of the human health and nature connection, thereby increasing interest and involvement in TRCA events and facilities. Key messages re: water quality and climate change. Initiatives 1. Develop a strategy to produce four seasonal recreation events. Example: water festival (or Enviro Picnics) in the spring; fishing in the summer; hiking in the fall; skiing and snowshoeing in the winter. Find synergies across TRCA programs to gain maximum impact of these events. Brand these events / activities so they become well -known annual events, thereby increasing attendance to facilities, increasing awareness of health / nature connection and increasing revenue. Messaging: focus on family health and wellness, and improving quality of life. Target audience: TRCA customers, community members Due Date: Spring 2005 28 Brown and Cohen Support • Develop media strategy to generate coverage in all media outlets. 2. Highlight the importance of water quality / quantity and health issues: Focus on educating our audiences to build awareness of key water quality / quantity issues. This will help our audiences better understand our initiatives when we roll them out. Paint the picture for our audience. What is the presence of water in our jurisdiction? How does it all connect? Where is the water coming from and where is it going? What is the community's role in water quality / quantity (sustainable communities message), and how do they impact water quality / quantity? Create web page on this issue. Use TRCA's polling tool to collect data on level of awareness. Determine other ways to disseminate this information. Highlight what TRCA is doing in the area of source protection as it supports provincial plans. Announce successful initiatives i.e. Duffins,/ Carruthers creek watersheds source protection activities. Identify TRCA expert to speak on this issue. Highlight that the great lakes are the indicator of water quality in the urban environment. Target Audience: community members, farmers, industry Due Date: Ongoing throughout the year 3. Work with the Don watershed group to promote The Don River Retrospective: a look at the past 25 years and what's in store for the future of the Don. Highlight the Lower Don Environmental Assessment and the work on the Mouth of the Don. This story could be a feature story in The Living City Outlook. Execute around Paddle the Don to maximize exposure. There may be a partnership opportunity with Pollution Probe (More information is required from Adele Freeman). Target Audience: Don River watershed residents, Toronto and region community members, Don watershed stakeholders, media Due Date: To be determined 29 • Research the topic of water quality / quantity. Talk to thought leaders and TRCA's partners (Conservation Ontario and conservation authorities). Brown & Cohen to research media coverage and Deanne Rodrigue to research stakeholder and TRCA material that may exist. Package the findings. • Identify key messaging around water quality / quantity and the benefits to quality of life. • Develop leading edge stories. • Develop media strategy, execute and conduct follow up 4. Highlight the importance of climate change and health issues: Focus on educating our audiences to build awareness of key water / climate change issues. This will help our audiences better understand our initiatives when we roll them out. Identify key messaging around climate change and the benefit to human health (i.e. addressing issues on a local level is the only way to respond to global climate change). Use some messaging from Hurricane Hazel material. Hold speakers series on climate change, the affects it will have on human health and what we can do to mitigate those affects. Feature high profile speakers: government, private sector. Identify expert (i.e. Jim Bruce). Target Audience: business executives, industry Due Date: ongoing throughout the year OBJECTIVE #3 • Research the topic of climate change. Talk to thought leaders and our partners. Brown and Cohen to research media coverage and Deanne Rodrigue to research stakeholder and TRCA material that may exist. Package the findings. • Identify key messaging around climate change and the benefits to quality of life. • Develop leading edge stories. Increase donor support for The Living City vision and provide support to the Conservation Foundation Corporate Cabinet to sell the vision. Initiatives 1. Provide the following tools to the foundation Corporate Cabinet to help them make their pitch: • Leave behind brochure in print and electronic format with map included. Messaging is focused on education, The Living City Centre and reforestation. • The Living City two -page overview. • TRCA generic brochure. • One minute video presentation to help sell The Living City vision. It would show people interacting with nature, kids involved in our programs etc.. Target Audience: potential donors Due Date: February / March 2005 2. Work with the foundation to plan and execute a successful Sauriol Dinner fundraiser and look at opportunities to cultivate donors around this event. Target Audience: donors Due Date: November 2005 30 Brown and Cohen Support • Develop media strategy for 2005 (based on foundation goals). • Develop and execute media strategy. 3. Develop a plan to leverage existing, and cultivate new, relationships with top donors. Build the communications arsenal by enlisting new fundraising volunteers. Plan and implement a networking / recruitment event (i.e. networking breakfast series or at the Sauriol Dinner). Target Audience: high level donors Due Date: April 2005 4. Work with the foundation on the planning and execution of their fundraising campaigns to ensure we are leveraging TRCA's initiatives around climate change and water quality / quantity. Target Audience: donors Due Date: Spring and Fall 2005 5. Take steps to build a ranking system to report back to donors and the broader public on where their money has gone; for example: '$$$$$' (where $ = 25% of donations went to support the initiative that is stated in The Living City Outlook or $$ = 50% of donations went to support a certain initiative, etc.). Target Audience: donors, public Due Date: Fall 2005 31 • Support the foundation with networking leads. COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE RES. #C8 /05 Moved by: Seconded by: Rob Ford Bill O'Donnell THAT the committee move into closed session to discuss item 7.5 and New Business item 9.2. ARISE AND REPORT RES. #C9 /05 Moved by: Seconded by: Bill O'Donnell Rob Ford THAT the committee arise and report from closed session. RES. #C10 /05 - CONFIDENTIAL ITEM 7.5 Moved by: Seconded by: Dick O'Brien Bill O'Donnell CARRIED CARRIED THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT confidential item 7.5 be approved. CARRIED SECTION IV - ITEMS FOR THE INFORMATION OF THE BOARD RES. #C11 /05 - 2004 HIGHLIGHTS AND 2005 NEW INITIATIVES FOR THE CONSERVATION PARKS AND THE KORTRIGHT CENTRE FOR CONSERVATION Presentation and report outlining 2004 highlights and 2005 initiatives for Conservation Parks /Kortright. Moved by: Seconded by: Rob Ford Bill O'Donnell IT IS RECOMMENDED THAT the update on the 2004 Highlights and New Initiatives for the Conservation Parks and the Kortright Centre for Conservation be received. CARRIED 32 BACKGROUND 2004 was a successful year for the Conservation Parks /Kortright section which exceeded net budget expectations by over $50,000, despite experiencing one of the coolest and dampest summers in recent years. The recreation component of this section is financed through revenue generation and fundraising /partnership efforts, and does not draw from the municipal levy. The 2004 highlights of projects /programs are as follows: 2004 Highlights Earth Rangers Sponsorship Earth Rangers sponsored 40 school groups to visit Kortright for a full day of programming. The classes were from performance plus schools in York Region that had participated in an environmental action project. The goal of the field trip was to give the students an appreciation of local habitats and their inhabitants, and the day included a visit to the Earth Rangers building to view the non - releasable animals and learn how a wildlife rehabilitation facility operates. Smog Summit A prelude to the main Smog Summit in Toronto, Kortright Centre partnered with York Region, the City of Vaughan and the Town of Markham to present an evening regional smog summit on the issues and solutions around smog in the Greater Toronto Area (GTA). The evening was opened by Mayor Michael Di Biase to a packed theatre of 125 participants and 15 vendors. Participants had an opportunity to engage speakers on variety of energy and greening issues as well as to take a tour of Kortright's unique renewable energy demonstrations and the new Earth Rangers' building. Maple Syrup Festival Enbridge Sponsorship The 2004 maple syrup program was the most successful one in recent years. The success of the program was in part due to a new partnership with Enbridge Consumers Gas. Enbridge became the new title sponsor of the event which allowed the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) to offer a number of new value added activities as part of the festival. As part of the 2005 program, a citizenship ceremony for new Canadians and their families will be held on March 31st, including a tour of the sugarbush and a pancake meal, to provide a uniquely canadian experience. Kids Get In Free Program TRCA's objective is to provide free general admission to all kids entering our parks, which is to be made possible through sponsorships & partnerships. Implementation of this initiative started in 2004 with free general admission for kids to Glen Haffy Conservation Area and the first weekend of the Maple Syrup Festival at Bruce's Mill Conservation Area and Kortright. This two year pilot project will be evaluated and expanded accordingly. Land Management Projects /Partnerships • Using Durham capital dollars, TRCA staff, in partnership with the Duffins Headwaters Stewardship Committee, installed a 30 vehicle parking area and trail head at Glen Major Walker Woods. The official opening will take place in spring, 2005. • TRCA partnered with the City of Pickering on a parking area and trail head at Seaton Trail. Work will continue in 2005 establishing naturalized areas, formal trail head and parking. 33 • David Ryan, Mayor of the City of Pickering, officially opened the trail head and boardwalk throughout Altona Forest in June 2004. Staff worked with the Altona Forest Stewardship committee and the community to complete the work. This project was funded through TD Canada Trust, Friends of the Environment. • TRCA staff and community volunteers completed the Trans Canada Trail Alignment, staircases, signage and naturalization efforts throughout the Claremont and North Greenwood properties. Mountain Biking and Adventure Races at Albion Hills Albion Hills Conservation Area has become known amongst mountain bikers as a premier place to ride in the GTA and has become one of the main revenue generating programs at the park. Partnering with Chico Racing, Albion Hills hosted 3 events with a total of 4,000 riders and has a Tuesday night race series with over 100 riders per night during the summer months. Partnering with Frontier Adventure Racing Inc, Albion Hills played host to a 40 km adventure race that had the participants cross country skiing, snowshoeing and mountain biking for approximately 6 hours. Albion Hills continues to have a strong relationship with the Caledon Hills Cycle Club. The club helps promote the park, sells site specific and Conservation Journeys passes for TRCA at their store, and assists with trail development. Children's Water Festival For the third year running, Heart Lake Conservation Area hosted the Peel Children's Water Festival. The festival raised the profile of the park and also raised awareness of water related issues for 5,000 grade 2 -5 students and several thousand members of the public. The festival initiated a new habitat restoration project, including planting of 4,000 wildflowers, 1200 shrubs and 7 large caliper trees. Bruce's Mill Conservation Area is in its seventh year as the host site for the York Children's Water Festival. Over 5,000 children attended, planting in excess of 3,000 pieces of plant material. Heart Lake Storm On June 14th, Heart Lake Conservation Area was ravaged by severe weather ( "micro burst "), damaging hydro lines, washroom buildings, picnic tables and destroying over 100 mature trees. The park had to be closed for next four days. Staff successfully made the park safe for the public to use again for that upcoming weekend. Caledon Canada Day Approximately 9,700 people enjoyed a day of family activities that included magicians, clowns, children's games and activities and live bands. The night was capped off by a fireworks display over Lake Albion. This is a partnership with the Caledon Canada Committee, a volunteer committee with local business support, the Town of Caledon, Bolton OPP staff and the Palgrave Rotary Club. 34 Enviro Picnic The Enviro Picnic is an end -of- school year celebration with a focus on the environment for grades one to four. Students are encouraged to participate in a wide range of activities allowing for observation of, and participation within, our natural environment. 6,000 children attended the program in 2004 at Boyd and Bruce's Mill conservation areas. The 2005 program will be expanded to include Heart Lake Conservation Area and will be held on June 7, 9 and 15, 2005. As the Conservation Parks /Kortright has developed an economically self- sustaining operation, the opportunity to grow the environmental components of the business has arisen. The following is an outline of such initiatives for 2005: 2005 Initiatives York Community Safety Village In partnership with the Community Safety Village of York Region, the York Region Community Safety Village at Bruce's Mill Conservation Area was constructed. Primary school students will be provided with a 70 minute program on fire and street safety at the village. TRCA will partner with the village to provide programming with emphasis on environmental education, safety and recreation programming. The facility is slated to open in April 2005. YMCA Partnership TRCA is pursuing a partnership with the YMCA to install a 20' x 40' swimming pool at Bruce's Mill Conservation Area. The YMCA will be running a day camp at the conservation area with approximately 100 kids per day attending, who will have exclusive use of the pool weekdays from 10 am to 1 pm. The general public will have access to the pool during the other operating hours. In addition, the YMCA will be running a day Camp at Petticoat Creek Conservation Area for approximately 200 kids per day. Mountain Biking In partnership with Chico Racing, Biking NXS and Lake Simcoe Region Conservation Authority, mountain bike races will be held at Durham Regional Forest, Glen Major and Walker Woods. The Epic 8 hr relay has been confirmed for September 24th and negotiations are currently underway with our partners for a spring event and an additional fall event. High Ropes Course The development of a high ropes challenge course is being pursued at Heart Lake Conservation Area. 'It will be a unique, first -rate eco- and adventure tourist attraction that will be the first of its kind in Peel Region. The project will consist of a canopy tour on an elevated suspension foot bridge strung from tree to tree. For the more adventurous types, there will be a high ropes challenge course strung between the sugar maples, which would promote team development and individual growth within participants of all ages and abilities. All elements will be designed to give the visitor an exciting and memorable experience and a new appreciation of trees and how humans interact with them. 35 Water Play Facility at Heart Lake Installation of a water play facility to replace the natural lake swimming area and allow for the continuation of the naturalization of Heart Lake waterfront and adjacent environs is being pursued. The water play facility will consist of a variety of features designed to stimulate and challenge children of all abilities, while providing a refreshing new activity at the conservation area. Taylor Pond Naturalization at Albion Hills Conservation Area The main objective of this project is to take this pond offline and re- naturalize the area. Technical survey data has been completed and the conceptual design is in place that will see a naturalized channel and the incorporation of various wetland features. When completed, this naturalized wetland will still provide both of the onsite field centres with a great place to conduct their student pond studies. Campground Enhancements This is a three -year capital project funded by the Region of Peel at Indian Line and Albion Hills campgrounds which is to be completed in 2005. The entire project includes installation of sewage hookups, upgrades to hydro service, expansion of laundry facilities, washroom renovations, road upgrades and landscaping. Albion Hills Campground will also be constructing several new cabins - a first for TRCA. These cabins will give the park the potential to offer new programs such as.ski and stay packages for cross country skiers. The cabins will provide lodging for those who would enjoy a year round rustic getaway close to the city. Glen Haffy Pond Dredging As a condition of the renewal of Glen Haffy's fishing license by the Ministry of Natural Resources (MNR) the two main fishing ponds must install a bottom draw system in the water outlet towers. In order to install this system the ponds need to be dredged. This process will improve the water quality within the ponds, will reduce the amount of weed growth and algae bloom and thereby improve the quality of fishing at Glen Haffy. The last time these ponds were dredged was 1975. Wetland Interpretation Enhancements 1. Ducks Unlimited Canada (DUC) and the MNR Kortright Partnership - the Kortright Centre has partnered with DUC and MNR in their "Healthy Wetlands, Healthy Communities" program to enhance the wetland interpretation infrastructure at Kortright. This program will allow Kortright to improve the existing wetland infrastructure and interpretation elements at the existing marsh in the Humber Valley, as well as create new wetland habitat and associated interpretation infrastructure on the table lands. 2. DUC and the Royal Bank of Canada (RBC) Sponsorship - RBC Financial Group, through the DUC "Adopt -A- Class" sponsorship program, has sponsored 62 inner city classes to visit Kortright for a wetland education program. These classes will be using the new wetland interpretation facilities provided by the "Healthy Wetlands, Healthy Communities" program. 36 Green Energy Fair The Green Energy Fair will be a weekend event consisting of workshops, tours, demonstrations, energy vendors, children's activities and guest speakers. The fair is designed to inspire, engage, entertain and challenge people to investigate more sustainable technologies and practices that can help the GTA become a more healthy and liveable community. With sponsorship interest from PowerStream and the Ministry of Energy, the fair is anticipated to attract 2,000 -5,000 visitors. New Enerqy Workshops Building on the success of the existing renewable energy workshops, Kortright's new home building programs will provide a more integrated and holistic approach to energy, water, resource and health issues and solutions in the home. These two new programs will demonstrate sustainable technologies and practices which will have positive impacts on the environment and health of people in their homes and communities. 1. Passive Solar & Green Building Workshop - participants will learn how to use the sun and innovation building techniques to reduce energy consumption by 65 %. The workshop will be held on June 4th and October 29th. 2. Strawbale Home Construction - participants will discover the warmth, durability and "natural beauty of a strawbale construction in this one -day workshop. The workshop will be held on June 5th and October 30th. Report prepared by: Derek Edwards, extension 5672 For Information contact: Derek Edwards, extension 5672 Date: February 23, 2005 RES. #C12/05 - FREEDOM OF INFORMATION AND PROTECTION OF PRIVACY 2004 Annual Report. Summary of 2004 Freedom of Information requests. Moved by: Seconded by: Rob Ford Bill O'Donnell IT IS RECOMMENDED THAT the report dated February 16, 2005, summarizing the 2004 requests for information under the Municipal Freedom of information and Protection of Privacy Act be received. CARRIED RATIONALE In 2004, Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) received 9 requests for information under the Municipal Freedom of information and Protection of Privacy Act. This is an average number of requests for TRCA. 37 Of the 9 requests, 2 were received late in 2004 and have been carried forward into 2005. For 2 requests, all information was disclosed. Two requests were withdrawn or abandoned. The remaining requests were disclosed in part. One request was appealed to the Information and privacy Commission /Ontario. After mediation, TRCA agreed to disclose some additional records but the Commission agreed with TRCA to exempt records which involved enforcement issues and solicitor /client privilege. The applicant failed to respond to the Commission's final mediation proposal and the file is closed. TRCA collected $502.20 in fees and waived approximately $19.00 in fees. Report prepared by: Jim Dillane, extension 6292 For Information contact: Jim Dillane, extension 6292 Date: February 16, 2005 RES. #C13/05 - ACCOUNTS RECEIVABLE STATUS REPORT February 15, 2005. Staff report on accounts receivables, as of February 15, 2005. Moved by: Seconded by: Rob Ford Bill O'Donnell IT IS RECOMMENDED THAT the Accounts Receivable Status Report, as of February 15, 2005, be received. CARRIED RATIONALE The schedule below summarizes the status of receivables, including aging and classification. The schedule excludes $16,572 in accumulated interest arrears on invoices outstanding for more than 30 days. 38 ACCOUNTS RECEIVABLE AGING, BY CATEGORY Excluding Municipal Leal and MNR Grant - As at February 15, 2005 39 CURRENT 31 TO 60 DAYS 61 TO 90 DAYS 90 PLUS DAYS TOTAL % SCHOOLS AND SCHOOL BOARDS 4,699. 8,244 9,187 3,094 25,224 3.6% GOVERNMENT 34,564 164,245 74,031 37,800 300,640 44.4% DEVELOPMENT SERVICES 15,000 6,650 2,000 90,700 114,350 16.4% CORPORATE, INDIVIDUAL AND COMMU GROU SNITM 89,986 93,082 7,945 57,896 248,909 35.6% TOTAL 144,249 272,221 93,163 189,490 699,123 100.0% % OF TOTAL 20.6% 39.0% 13.3% 27.1% 100.0% 39 Items in excess of $1,000.00 included in the 90- plus -days column, are as follows: CLIENT NAME AMOUNT $ ARREARS INTEREST $ AGE (DAYS) NOTES City of Toronto 36,796.55 n \a 350 Contract work for wetland construction. City's internal purchasing requirements have delayed approval. Staff has assured TRCA that invoice will paid. Arlington Middle Vice principal has confirmed payment School 2,966.80 135.52 107 will be forwarded. Fred Robbins 1,250.00 57.10 107 For cross country run at Albion Hills. J. A. Gibson P.S. 2,465.28 112.61 107 Delayed as the school is expecting the York Region School Board to-pay. Ministry of Natural Resources 1,927.00 118.25 144 Payment is expected shortly. Wild Water Kingdom 32,578.94 Note 90 Final tax instalment for 2004. WK W has asked for a deferral of payment. Interest charged as per lease agreement, generally at the end of June. Basciano Parkin Ltd. 2,000.00 186.89 208 Outstanding planning fees. Brutto Consulting 7,500.00 460.23 135 Outstanding planning fees. Ltd. 3,000.00 137.04 107 Weston Consulting 15,000.00 2,934.28 361 Outstanding planning fees. 15,000.00 2,408.12 317 Glen Pietrowski 10,000.00 772.83 172 Outstanding planning fees. Ron Witton 7,000.00 654.10 181 Outstanding planning fees. KLM Planning 2,000.00 286.78 277 Outstanding planning fees. 20,000.00 1,868.87 181 Robertson Gaze Associates Inc. 4,621.56 1,603.00 613 For planting materials. Company has advised that it is insolvent and cannot make payment. Account sent for collection. TOTALS 164,106.13 11,735.62 The amount due from Robertson Gaze Associates Inc. of $4,621.56 is very doubtful. The company has indicated, in writing, that it is insolvent and has discontinued operations. This account has been sent for collection. All other amounts listed above are considered collectible at this time. 40 Receivable balances, as reported on each of the previous reports to the advisory board, after 2000, are presented as follows: DATE Total $ 90 -Plus $ February 15, 2005 699,123 189,490 December 30, 2004 1,935,416 245,815 October 25, 2004 1,127,102 180,891 September 28, 2004 876,800 187,754 September 3, 2004 936,923 197,539 May 17, 2004 1,018,188 129,505 February 17, 2004 1,386,809 178,370 January 7, 2004 1,064,464 45,382 November 2, 2003 951,999 101,194 August 24, 2003 768,825 125,803 May 25, 2003 445,116 168,327 March 2, 2003 709,807 141,313 October 20, 2002 774,831 46,237 August 25, 2002 326,529 109,560 May 26, 2002 658,514 201,158 January 31, 2002 585,736 64,259 December 30, 2001 1,078,071 38,666 October 23, 2001 350,385 106,343 August 27, 2001 371,985 17,153 May 25, 2001 1,132,443 44,810 March 26, 2001 621,560 167,094 Report prepared by: Rocco Sgambelluri, extension 5232 For Information contact: Rocco Sgambelluri, extension 5232 Date: February 18, 2005 RES. #C14/05 - TORONTO WATERFRONT REVITALIZATION CORPORATION DELIVERY AGREEMENTS Status Update. To provide updated information on the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority Eligible Recipient Delivery Agreements for all Toronto Waterfront Revitalization Corporation projects. Moved by: Seconded by: Rob Ford Bill O'Donnell IT IS RECOMMENDED THAT the staff report on the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) Eligible Recipient Delivery Agreements be received. CARRIED 41 BACKGROUND On March 5, 2001, the three levels of government announced the commitment to the creation of a Toronto Waterfront Revitalization Corporation (TWRC) and the funding for priority capital projects totaling $300 million. TRCA is an Eligible Recipient for several TWRC funded projects described below, totalling $86,500,000. Port Union Waterfront Improvements Project On May 2, 2001, TRCA received approval under the Environmental Assessment Act. Further, on July 28, 2004, TRCA received approval under the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act. Outstanding approvals for this project include a Certificate of Approval from the Ministry of the Environment for the extension of the storm sewer at Port Union and approval under the Navigable Waters Protection Act for the Highland Creek Bridge. Phase I of the project was initiated in September 2002, involving the construction of a pedestrian node at the foot of Port Union Road, a 1.44 kilometre link to the waterfront trail, four armourstone headlands, six cobble beaches and a pedestrian bridge over Highland Creek. Phase II of the project includes the extension of the Waterfront Trail from Port Union Road to the Rouge River and is anticipated to start in 2006. The Delivery Agreement has been signed by TRCA for $16,000,000. Mimico Waterfront Linear Park Project On August 11, 2004, TRCA received approval under the Environmental Assessment Act. Further, on December 14, 2004, TRCA received approval under the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act. Outstanding approvals for this project include a Certificate of Approval from the Ministry of the Environment for the extension of the storm sewer at Superior Avenue, approval under the Fisheries Act and the Navigable Waters Protection Act. The main features of this project include the provision of a connection to Grand Harbour promenade, a cantilevered boardwalk, a multi -use trail adjacent to the boardwalk, creation of cobble beaches and partly sheltered embayment as well as terrestrial and aquatic habitat enhancements. It is expected that implementation of this project may begin as early as July 2005 following the acquisition of required properties. The Delivery Agreement has been signed by TRCA for $6,500,000. Western Beaches Watercourse Facility The City of Toronto, in co- operation with the federal and provincial governments, has lent its support to a bid to host the 2006 International Dragon Boat Federation Club Crew World Championships. TRCA as the Eligible Recipient of this project will provide overall coordination for the design, approval and implementation of a watercourse facility in the Western Beaches suitable to host this event. A series of environmental assessments are currently being undertaken for the project to proceed into implementation. A Delivery Agreement is currently being prepared by TWRC for a funding commitment of $23,000,000. 42 Tommy Thompson Park Master Plan Implementation On May 20, 2004, Human Resources and Skills Development Canada announced that $8,000,000 would be allocated to implement the Tommy Thompson Park Master Plan, achieving its goal of an "Urban Wilderness Park ". The Master Plan Development Project began in 2003 and has targeted a variety of public amenities, interpretive facilities and habitat enhancement activities. A Delivery Agreement is currently being prepared by TWRC for a funding commitment of $8,000,000. An Annual Expenditure and Work Plan has been prepared and submitted to TWRC that sets out the authorized activities for the project up to March 31, 2008 during each fiscal year. Naturalization and Flood Protection of the Don River On June 10, 2004, the three levels of government signed a Contribution Agreement with the TWRC that authorized an increase in study funding from $2,000,000 to $3,000,000 as part of the Delivery Agreement between the TWRC and'TRCA . This funding will be directed to complete two studies: i) Lower Don River West Remedial Flood Protection Project; and, ii) Don Mouth Naturalization and Port Lands Flood Protection Project. i) Lower Don River West Remedial Flood Protection Project The objective of this project is to remove the risk of flooding to 210 hectares of land in downtown Toronto, west of the lower Don River, up to the regulatory storm event. The draft Class EA was submitted for public review on January 18, 2005. The mandatory review period for the Class EA ended on Monday February 21, 2005. During the review period, two Part II Order Requests were submitted to the Minister of the Environment from Ontario Realty Corporation (ORC) tenants. Staff are working with TWRC, the City of Toronto and ORC to resolve this order. TWRC, ORC, City of Toronto and TRCA are working closely to resolve all issues raised in the two Part II Order Requests in an effort to have the Requests lifted voluntarily in order to avoid a Ministerial Review. A draft Canadian Environmental Assessment Act Screening Report is currently undergoing internal review and will be submitted to federal authorities shortly. The cost for conducting this EA is approximately $1,200,000. Final EA approvals are anticipated by May -June 2005. ii) Don Mouth Naturalization and Port Lands Flood Protection Project The objectives of this project are to naturalize up to 28 hectares of land surrounding the Keating Channel area and to remove the risk of flooding to 230 hectares of land in the Port Lands area, south and east of the lower Don River, up to the regulatory storm event. An Individual EA and a Canadian Environment Assessment Act Screening Report will be utilized to determine the best alternative to achieve these goals through an in depth technical and public evaluation process. A team led by Gartner Lee Ltd. commenced work on the development of an EA Terms of Reference (ToR), which is the first stage of the Individual EA process, in January 2005. It is anticipated that the ToR will require most of 2005 to complete. The Individual EA and Canadian Environmental Assessment Act Screening Report should be completed in Spring /Summer 2007. This EA process will cost approximately $1,800,000. 43 Lower Don River West Flood Protection Project Implementation - Component 1 It is anticipated that this project will involve the construction of the CN Kingston Line bridge extension, as defined by the Lower Don River West Remedial Flood Protection Project and the construction of a pedestrian tunnel under GO Transit's Bala Line that will connect the new West Don Lands community with the waterfront trail system. This component of the project will cost approximately $20,000,000 for the Kingston Bridge (including TRCA, CN, Hydro One and other agency costs). A budget has not yet been established for the Bala Line Pedestrian Tunnel. A Delivery Agreement is currently being drafted by TWRC. Report prepared by: Nancy Gaffney, extension 5313 and Ken Dion, extension 5230 For Information contact: Nancy Gaffney, extension 5313 and Ken Dion, extension 5230 Date: February 16, 2005 NEW BUSINESS RES. #C15 /05 - SPONSORSHIP OPPORTUNITIES Moved by: Seconded by: Rob Ford Bill O'Donnell THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT staff be directed to continue pursuing sponsorship opportunities with a wide range of corporations and organizations, including alcohol related corporations. RES. #C16 /05 - CONFIDENTIAL ITEM 9.2 Moved by: Seconded by: Dick O'Brien Bill O'Donnell CARRIED THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT confidential item 9.2 be approved. CARRIED 44 TERMINATION ON MOTION, the meeting terminated at 10:10 a.m., on Friday, March 4, 2005. i David Barrow Chair /ks Brian Denney Secretary- Treasurer c. THE TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY MEETING OF THE BUSINESS EXCELLENCE ADVISORY BOARD #2/05 April 15, 2005 The Business Excellence Advisory Board Meeting #2/05, was held in the South Theatre, Black Creek Pioneer Village, on Friday, April 15, 2005. The Chair David Barrow, called the meeting to order at 9:12 a.m. PRESENT Bas Balkissoon Member David Barrow Chair Rob Ford Member Peter Milczyn Member Dick O'Brien Chair, Authority Maja Prentice Vice Chair REGRETS Bill Fisch Bill O'Donnell Member RES. #C17/05 MINUTES Moved by: Seconded by: Dick O'Brien Bas Balkissoon THAT the Minutes of Meeting #2/05, held on March 4, 2005, be approved. CARRIED DELEGATIONS (a) A delegation by John Corbett of the Township of Uxbridge, speaking in regards to opposition to new trails from the parking lot at Glen Major. (b) A delegation by Michael Tucker, Chair, Glen Major and Walker Woods Trail Planning and Stewardship Committee in regards to Glen Major trails and parking. 46 RES. #C18/05 - Moved by: Seconded by: THAT above -noted DELEGATIONS Dick O'Brien Maja Prentice delegations (a) and (b) be heard and received; THAT the petition from neighbouring residents of Concession 7, Township of Uxbridge, be received; AND FURTHER THAT staff report back in 4 to 6 months on the project and give Mr. Corbett the option to make an additional delegation to Business Excellence Advisory Board at that time. CARRIED 47 Attachment 1 We, the undersigned, are all home - owners and year -round residents in the Residential Cluster of Glen Major. We depute our neighbour, Jonathan Corbett, to speak on our behalf before the TRCA Business Excellence Board on Friday, April 15th, 2005 regarding the following: In light of the fact that the car park is likely to attract more users, then it is prudent to review the impact of the car park itself prior to all plans being finalized and new trails being opened. Specifically, we petition the Board to delay the grading, marking and opening of the new trail for at least one year so that the Conservation Land Planning branch can properly assess the impact of the new car park on the Glen Major Residential Cluster. 1360 Concession 7 1340 Concession 7 1300 Concession 7 1280 Concession 7 1240 Concession 7 1220 Concession 7 1200 Concession 7 CaledAmtst\J abstain abstain 48 Juanita Wislesky Anne Briggs Denny Corbett Joyce Matheson Chris Bardecki Kasten Cherian Anne Genge PRESENTATIONS .(a) A presentation by Allister Byrne, Partner, Grant Thornton LLP in regards to item 7.8 - Audited Financial Statements - 2004. (b) A presentation by Jim Dillane, Director, Finance and Business Development, TRCA, in regards to items 7.9 - 2005 Operating and Capital Budget and 8.3 - 2004 Year End Financial Progress Report. RES. #C19 /05 - PRESENTATIONS Moved by: Seconded by: Bas Balkissoon Peter Milczyn THAT above -noted presentations (a) and (b) be heard and received. CARRIED SECTION I - ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY ACTION RES. #C20 /05 - GLEN MAJOR FOREST TRAIL HEAD /CAR PARK AND TRAIL CONNECTIONS Confirm direction to implement the approved Trail Plan for Glen Major Forest and Walker Woods. Moved by: Seconded by: Dick O'Brien Maja Prentice THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT staff continue to work with the Walker Woods and Glen Major Forest Community Trail Planning and Stewardship Committee to implement, maintain and monitor the approved Trail Plan. CARRIED BACKGROUND The Glen Major Forest Trail Head Site Plan was developed to implement the approved Duffins Creek Headwaters Management Plan (DCHMP) for the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) properties , which included the Trail Plan for Walker Woods and Glen Major Forest. The site plan details a thirty car gravel parking area, a trail head kiosk and sign, two trail connections to existing trails - one forty metres long and one five hundred metres long, 130 metres of page wire fencing around the parking area, and 1,365 native tree plantings and 840 native shrub plantings. 49 The DCHMP was initiated in September 1999, following the recommendation of the Authority. The DCHMP was prepared to protect, conserve and restore significant lands located on the Oak Ridges Moraine and within the Duffins Creek watershed. The management planning process was comprised of a series of phases, with each phase being tested and refined to form a solid foundation for the next one that followed. The plan includes a description and evaluation of the property based on relevant plans and policies, existing resource inventories and environmental conditions, site limitations and opportunities. The plan also identifies specific management zones for the site, which provides a framework for the types of activities that will be permitted on different parts of the properties. In addition, the plan establishes priorities for future initiatives, including the protection of natural features and habitat regeneration based on an ecosystem approach to management. There is also a detailed concept plan for the Goodwood, Secord and Clubine properties and a trail plan for Walker Woods and Glen Major Forest in the document. The Glen Major Forest property is 1,119 hectares in size and is connected to the 429 hectares Walker Woods property. As part of the development of the DCHMP, TRCA staff established a community advisory committee to provide input and direction for the plan. The advisory committee was comprised of: community groups and associations; municipal councillors; provincial and municipal agency staff; staff from the three local conservation authorities; and, other stakeholders. Public Consultation To facilitate a wide range of opportunities for input, many techniques.were used to generate a high level of awareness and public comment in the plan. The public consultation program included: • 5 meetings with interested organizations and groups in the community; • 2 public information sessions, 3 newsletters, 6 questionnaires and 6 mailings to the community to identify a broad range of potential needs and opportunities for the sites; and • 4 public meetings to present the background information, plan vision, proposed management zones, concept plans, trail plan and management recommendations. In general, the public response to the proposed management plan was very favorable. They found the vision, goal, objectives and management principles of the plan to be completely appropriate. The public preference was to keep as much of the planning area as natural as possible with the majority of response indicating that the lands should be managed with a balanced approach between appropriate public use and environmental protection and restoration. Finally, the public indicated that any alterations to the approved management plan must be subject to a public process. In all there were a total of six different questionnaire distributions, which occurred at public meetings and by committee member distribution. All questionnaires were mailed or deposited in mail boxes to property owners living adjacent to TRCA property. Some highlights of the results included: • 145 questionnaires completed; • 65% indicated Walker Woods and Glen Major Forest as their destination of choice; 50 • 36% chose walking and hiking as their most enjoyable recreational activity, 34% biking,12% cross - country skiing, 18% identified that other natural areas and beautiful vistas were a priority; • "People visit these properties to get close to nature and improve their well being. "; and, • trail users were looking for improved access, removal of barriers, a series of lookouts, nature interpretation, and a clean and green environment. At Authority Meeting #6/03, held on July 25, 2003, the Duffins Creek Headwaters Management Plan for TRCA properties was approved by Resolution #A158/03 as follows: THAT the Duffins Creek Headwaters Management Plan for TRCA Properties, dated June 2003, as attached, be approved; THAT staff circulate the Duffins Creek Headwaters Management Plan for TRCA Properties to the Ontario Heritage Foundation, the Township of Uxbridge, and the City of Pickering for endorsement; THAT staff send a letter of thanks to the members of the Duffins Creek Headwaters Advisory Committee for their dedicated assistance with the preparation of the Management Plan; THAT copies of the Duffins Creek Headwaters Management Plan for TRCA Properties be circulated to the members of the Advisory Committee, the Township of Uxbridge, the City of Pickering, and other appropriate agencies, groups and individuals; THAT staff work with the Township of Uxbridge staff to investigate options and develop a strategy to address limiting access on closed road allowances that are adjacent to TRCA owned land; THAT staff prepare a report in fall of 2003 on Stewardship Management Plan implementation and the potential for integration with the Watershed Plan for Duffins Creek and Carruthers Creek; AND FURTHER THAT staff be directed to utilize the Strategy for Public Use on Conservation Authority Lands (1995) when considering new public uses on the TRCA's Duffins Creek Headwater Properties. In addition, the DCHMP was endorsed by the Town of Uxbridge, City of Pickering, Region of Durham and the Ontario Heritage Foundation in 2003. The DCHMP recommended a trail head, including parking area, two trail connections to existing trails and native plantings at Concession 7 and the Uxbridge Pickering Townline for a number of reasons including: • to formalize safe and proper access at four main entrances into the 1,280 hectare TRCA property, which would help to disperse access and provide alternatives; • the location was currently being used as a desirable, unsafe, roadside access area; 51 • a strategically located trail head area having a 250 metre buffer to neighboring properties; and, • a location where a minimum of two existing trails were already established and well used, that could provide alternative access into the TRCA property. In addition to the trail head recommendation, the DCHMP recommended the establishment of a community stewardship committee to assist TRCA with plan implementation. With the help of the advisory committee, TRCA established the Walker Woods and Glen Major Forest Community Trail Planning and Stewardship Committee to focus on detailed planning, implementation and management. Mr. Michael Tucker was recommended as Chair of the new committee and he solicited seven volunteer trail captains, who resided in the community and who were dispersed around the entire TRCA property. Each trail captain was assigned an area of TRCA land that they would locally represent. The major functions of the trail captains include leading community trail planning and management activities, as well as community communications. In the fall of 2003, TRCA received $15,000 from the Ministry of Natural Resources as part of the Living Legacy Program to implement the trail head at Concession 7 and the Uxbridge /Pickering Townline. TRCA staff then worked with the Walker Woods and Glen Major Forest Community Trail Planning and Stewardship Committee to develop detailed construction plans for the trail head. The committee then organized a Glen Major community meeting on December 10, 2003 to present the detailed plans. Over 18 local residents were in attendance including the local Township of Uxbridge Councillor. Many constructive comments were submitted by the residents in attendance. TRCA staff then made a number of revisions to the trail head plans to incorporate the community comments including: • relocating parking area 50 metres further south away from residents and increasing the buffer to 300 metres; • relocating the new trail link that was closest to Glen Major residents 100 metres further away from its original location, increasing the buffer to 200 metres; • increased the native tree plantings by 700 units and native shrub plantings by 400 units to better screen the trail head from the Glen Major residents. The Walker Woods and Glen Major Forest Community Trail Planning and Stewardship Committee reviewed the revised plans in February 2004 and recommended implementation. In addition, TRCA circulated the revised plans to the community for information. Then TRCA circulated the detailed plans to the Town of Uxbridge for approval and granting permanent road access from Concession 7 into the parking area. The Town of Uxbridge approved the detailed plans on August 10, 2004. TRCA staff then completed an archeological survey of the site and clearance was received. Construction of the trail head began on October 1, 2004 and the following activities were completed by the end of 2004: • silt fencing installed; • parking area graded and surfaced with gravel; • trail links routed to existing trails; _ • trail head kiosk and sign installed; and, • trail head area closed pending construction completion in spring 2005. 52 Over the course of the winter TRCA staff received one formal written complaint regarding Glen Major trail users crossing over private property. The complainant suggested that the two trespassers originated from the new trails at the Glen Major trail head. Following a TRCA staff and Walker Woods and Glen Major Forest Trail Planning and Stewardship Committee investigation, it was determined that two cross - country skiers got lost on TRCA property behind the Glen Major Angling Club. Approximately 1.2 kilometres north and west of the Glen Major residential area and the new Glen Major trail head. Once lost, the skiers headed south for approximately 800 metres before they took off their skis. The two then walked roughly 600 metres towards the Glen Major residential cluster, where upon seeing Concession 7 through an opening crossed over private property to get to the road. Upon being notified of the trespass, TRCA staff formally apologized for any disturbance that the trail users caused. In addition, TRCA staff notified the trail planning and stewardship committee and also recorded the incident as part of the Walker Woods and Glen Major Forest trail monitoring program. TRCA staff also informed the complainant that the following action would be taken: • additional direction and private property signs would be installed on the Glen Major trails around the residential area; • TRCA would put up postings and notifications at the trail head kiosks to educate trail users about trespass issues; and, • the trespass incident would be formally recorded as part of the trail monitoring program and that the community trail planning and stewardship committee would be notified. TRCA staff and the committee estimate that approximately 340 trail users including cross - country skiers, snowshoers and hikers use the 97 kilometres of Walker Woods and Glen Major Forest trails per month in the winter. The Duffins Creek watershed map with the TRCA Walker Woods and Glen Major Forest properties identified is appended as Attachment 1. Detailed trail plans and orthographic maps will be made available at the meeting. RATIONALE The Walker Woods and Glen Major Forest Trail Plan should be implemented to protect the .environmental health of the forest and the safety and security of the surrounding community. The plan was developed with the support of a community advisory committee and a diverse and extensive public consultation program. The plan also compliments A Watershed Plan for Duffins Creek and Carruthers Creek, as well as the provincial Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan. In addition, the plan addresses existing uses and future demands on the property and it establishes a managed, sustainable, balanced approach that ensures the protection and prosperity of the natural system while providing enjoyable public use. 53 The plan has been approved and endorsed by the Duffins Creek Headwaters Management Plan Advisory Committee, the Walker Woods and Glen Major Forest Community Trail Planning and Stewardship Committee, the Authority, Region of Durham, Town of Uxbridge, City of Pickering and the Ontario Heritage Foundation. TRCA staff will also continue to work with the established Walker Woods and Glen Major Forest Community Trail Planning and Stewardship Committee to implement and monitor the detailed trail plan. Issues will be managed through education and stewardship practices that encourage open communication. Tools such as signs, notifications and temporary trail closures will be used as part of developing solutions to problem situations. In addition, permanent trail closures will be utilized if no long term solutions can be found. DETAILS OF WORK TO BE DONE The planned Glen Major trail head construction activities for spring 2005 include: • granular compaction of parking area; • fine site grading around parking area; • seeding and planting; • minor clearing and woodchip placement on two trail connections to existing trails; • page wire fence installation around parking area with stile access to trails; and, • trail head official opening June 11, 2005. FINANCIAL DETAILS Funding for this work has been identified in the 2005 capital budget. Report prepared by: Mike Bender, extension 5287 For Information contact: Mike Bender, extension 5287, Ron Dewell, extension 5245 Date: April 05, 2005 Attachments: 1 54 Attachment 1 LEGEND /A/ Lake Ontario Shoreline Municipal Boundary Roads A/ Watercourse M v anaPged by 7RCA TRCA Property [J Watershed Boundary 1 0 1 2 3 Kaorrwirs DUFFINS HEADWATERS MANAGEMENT PLAN FOR TRCA PROPERTIES Map 1 - DUFFINS CREEK WATERSHED Site Locations - Watershed Context tie,MUx onservatron 55 RES. #C21/05 - Moved by: Seconded by: CONSERVATION AUTHORITY FEE SCHEDULE FOR PLANNING SERVICES Amendments to category descriptions. Having tracked the use of the Conservation Authority Fee Schedule for Planning Services since its approval in November 2003, minor adjustments are required to the schedule and guidelines to improve understanding of the fee requirements and the method of applying the fee to certain site planning applications. Bas Balkissoon Peter Milczyn THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT the Conservation Authority Fee Schedule for Planning Services be amended as follows: • "Single Residential Site Plan (or comparable condominium application)" to be changed to "Single Residential Site Plan"; • "Subdivision (or comparable condominium application)" to be changed to "Subdivision or Multi -unit application"; • Guideline Note 4 regarding combined applications be removed from the schedule implementation guidelines; THAT staff inform all municipal partners and the development industry of these amendments to the schedule and continue to monitor the use of the schedule; AND FURTHER THAT staff report to the Business Excellence Advisory Board in September of 2005 with recommendations for an inflationary adjustment to the TRCA Fee Schedule for Planning Services to be effective January 1, 2006. CARRIED BACKGROUND At Authority at Meeting #8/03, held on October 31, 2003, Resolution #A227/03 approved the new Conservation Authority Fee Schedule For Planning Services which has been used by Development Services staff since December 1, 2003. A status report was prepared and submitted to the Business Excellence Advisory Board in January 2005 outlining the changes that have been made to the development review function associated with building staffing capacity, issuance of the new planning fee schedule, establishing an invoice /collection tracking system, improved communications with Urban Development Institute (UDI) and the development industry regarding the level of review service, the calibre of submissions, and creating ongoing communications with our municipal partners and Fisheries and Oceans Canada (DFO) regarding mutual streamlining efforts. Staff remain committed to monitoring how well the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority's (TRCA) streamlining strategy works on an ongoing basis. This report deals with required changes to the wording of the categories in the fee schedule to clarify TRCA's fee intention in two categories, residential site plan and subdivision, and other clarification as needed. 56 RATIONALE Proponents and staff are experiencing some confusion about the two following categories of application, and considerable overlap has occurred when applicants submit under residential site plan (minor or major), and subdivision (or comparable condominium application). Staff has had to deal with arguments over where certain multi -unit applications fall under these two categories. The original intention was to ensure that intensification projects and those where multiple units form the core of the development proposal are appropriately charged commensurate with the level of effort needed. In order to remove the ambiguity and misinterpretation of these two categories of application, staff recommends the following wording to separate those applications that deal with one residential property (whether minor or major in scale), and the subdivision or multi -unit type of application (the issue of condominium becomes irrelevant now). The changes are as follows: Residential Site Plan (or comparable condominium application) TO Single Residential Site Plan Subdivision (or comparable condominium application) TO Subdivision or Multi -Unit Application In addition, there has been confusion about the implementation guidelines - Notes 3 and 4. They indicate the following: (3) Only one set of fees apply when processing and reviewing a combined application (e.g. a subdivision /OPA/ZBA). The highest rate of fees applies. (4) Notwithstanding note #3, if an application is filed on a property more than 3 years after the initial application, separate fees will apply. It was staff's original intention to give some credit to combined applications if they came in together or within a few months, and minimal efforts were required to do the second application. Guideline 3 should still apply if applications come in together, and the higher fee will prevail. However, our experience is that secondary applications coming in 6 months later are requiring a separate effort and initiate a new review effort in almost all cases. Although many applicants are trying to take advantage of these savings, staff believe that a combined application must come in together as one review process, and that giving concessions for a second application does not work in practice as noted in Guideline 4. Staff recommend the removal of Guideline Note 4 within the fee schedule Implementation Guidelines. In the fall of 2005, TRCA will have had the Conservation Authority Fee Schedule for Planning Services in place for two years. Staff believe that minor adjustments for inflationary purposes should be implemented. Staff salary and benefit costs and overhead such as utilities have changed over the course of the last two years. A report will be coming forward in September of 2005 on the recommended inflationary cost adjustment for implementation in 2006. Lead time will be given to make the appropriate changes and to inform our municipal partners and the development community. Staff will establish the rate of inflationary cost adjustment through research into the Consumer Price Index and /or Construction Price Index, and other related factors. The fee schedule may also be amended to provide for annual inflationary rate changes. 57 The recommended amended version of the Conservation Authority Fee Schedule For Planning Services is attached. Report prepared by: Carolyn Woodland, extension 5214 For Information contact: Carolyn Woodland, extension 5214 Date: April 5, 2005 Attachments:1 58 Attachment 1 Conservation Authority Fee Schedule For Planning Services APPLICATION TYPE APPLICATION FEE Additional Clearance fee for Subdivision Phases CLEARANCE FEE Concept Development/ Property Enquiry $150 $250 with site visit Re- submission due to *incomplete submissions N/A *See Definitions Variances $250 N/A Consent/Severance / Land Division *minor $500 *major $1200 *minor *major N/A $600 Single Residential Site Plan *minor $350 *major $2000 *minor *major N/A $500 Non - Residential Site Plan *minor $750 *major - 25ha or less $7000 - greater than 25ha $10,000 *minor *major $1500 $1500 N/A Official Plan Amendment (OPA) *minor $750 *major $3000 • *minor *major N/A $1500 Zoning By -law Amendment/ Rezoning (ZBA/RZ) *minor $750 *major $3000 *minor *major N/A $1500 Subdivision or Multi -Unit Application *minor - 5ha or less $7500 *major - 25ha or less $15,000 - greater than 25ha $20,000 *minor *major $5500 $5500 $2500 Non - Municipal Driven Official Plan Amendments for urban expansion, golf courses or aggregate pits 25ha or less $5000 greater than 25ha $10,000 $5000 $5000 Other ADDlicable Fees Additional Site Visit $200 Additional Clearance fee for Subdivision Phases $1000 *Applicant Driven Formal Modification $500 Re- submission due to *incomplete submissions $2500 *See Definitions Rates Effective December 1, 2003 Categories Amended April 29, 2005 Rates to Change January 1, 2006 59 Conservation Authority Fee Schedule For Planning Services IMPLEMENTATION GUIDELINES Notes 1. The application fee will be paid at the time of filing an application to the municipality. The final clearance fee will be billed directly by the TRCA and paid prior to final clearance of an application. 2. Re- submissions fees will be billed directly by the TRCA and must be paid prior to final clearance of an application. 3. Only one set of fees apply when processing and reviewing a combined application (e.g. a subdivision /OPA/ZBA). The highest rate of fees applies. 4. The TRCA reserves the right to request additional fees should the review require a substantially greater level of effort. 5. Where a site visit and /or extended review is required for a Variance application, a clearance fee of $100 is applicable. 6. Subdivisions that have several phases, will be charged a separate clearance fee of $1000 at the time of clearing each phase. 7. All application fees (except Concept Development) include one initial site visit. A fee of $200 is applicable for each additional site visit requested. Definitions Minor - An application is determined to be "minor" where no technical studies are required, or only a scoped Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) is required. Minor Subdivision - A subdivision application is determined to be "minor" where no technical studies, or only a scoped Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) is required and where the site if 5ha or less. Major - An application is determined to be "major" where technical studies beyond a scoped Environmental Impact Statement (such as Stormwater Management or Geotechnical) are required. Incomplete Submissions - A submission for review is deemed to be "incomplete" where TRCA has provided a checklist of requirements, and the application has not met all requirements. Applicant driven formal modification - A fee for an "applicant driven formal modification" will be chaiged where plans are submitted for review after the application has received draft plan approval from the municipality. 60 RES. #C22/05 - OAK RIDGES CORRIDOR PARK MANAGEMENT PLAN Consultant selection to assist with the preparation of a management plan for the Oak Ridges Corridor Park in the Town of Richmond Hill. Moved by: Seconded by: Bas Balkissoon Peter Milczyn THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT staff report to Authority Meeting #3/05, to be held on April 29, 2005 with a recommendation to retain a consulting company to work with the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) and other stakeholders to prepare a management plan for the Oak Ridges Corridor Park. CARRIED BACKGROUND The Oak Ridges Corridor Park is an area approximately 400 ha (1,000 acres) generally located between Bathurst Street and Bayview Avenue, north of Jefferson Sideroad, and south of the community of Oak Ridges, in the Town of Richmond Hill. The Province of Ontario has requested that TRCA act as their agent in the development of a management plan for the property, recognizing TRCA's proven ability to work with public and private stakeholders to achieve ecological restoration objectives within its area of jurisdiction. Consequently, at Authority Meeting #1/05, held on February 25, 2005, Resolution #A6/05 was approved, in part, as follows: THAT staff be directed to finalize a management agreement with the Province of Ontario and to facilitate the implementation of an environmental management plan for the Oak Ridges Moraine Corridor within the Town of Richmond Hill;... ...AND FURTHER THAT staff report back to the Authority on the status of the development of the management plan and its implementation. The Province of Ontario has entered into a Land Exchange Agreement, dated July 5, 2004 with certain Richmond Hill landowners, which has transferred the Oak Ridges Corridor Park land into public ownership. TRCA and the province are currently negotiating an agreement which, when completed, will convey management of the property to TRCA. Furthermore, a collateral agreement is being drafted to facilitate the transfer of funding from the Richmond Hill landowners to TRCA to undertake the preparation of a management plan for the property including trails and initial restoration activities. It is the objective of the Richmond Hill landowners and the Province of Ontario that construction of a portion of the trail begin in the summer of 2005 so that it serves as an anchor for the park and that it represents an early, tangible symbol of the park's creation. Consequently, time is of the essence and staff wish to invite a group of pre - qualified consulting companies to submit proposals for the preparation of the management plan for the Oak Ridges Corridor Park. A Request for Proposal (RFP) Terms of Reference has been prepared and will be sent to the following companies: 61 1. MBTW Group 2. LandPlan Cooperative 3. ENVision - The Hough Group 4. PMA Landscape 5. EDA Collaborative 6. Schollen and Company Inc. 7. PMG Design Interested consultants will be invited to a site walk where questions about the property and the RFP can be answered. Submissions from prospective proponents will be accepted up to 4:00 p.m., on Friday, April 22, 2005. A report will be brought to the Authority at their meeting to be held on April 29, 2005 with a recommendation to retain a consulting company to work with TRCA and other stakeholders to prepare a management plan for the Oak Ridges Corridor Park. FINANCIAL DETAILS Funding will be provided by the Richmond Hill landowners to prepare the management plan, construct trails and initiate the recommended restoration works. Report prepared by: Gary Wilkins, extension 5211 For Information contact: Gary Wilkins, extension 5211 Date: April 4, 2005 RES. #C23/05 - PROPERTY TAXES ON NATURAL HERITAGE (CONSERVATION) LANDS Update on property tax exemption under the new Community Conservation Lands criteria, discussions with the Municipal Property Assessment Corporation and hiring of Altus Realty Tax Management Corporation. Moved by: Seconded by: Bas Balkissoon Peter Milczyn THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT the firm of Altus Realty Tax Management Corporation be engaged to assist Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) staff with: a review of all realty taxable TRCA holdings; negotiation with the Assessment Offices; and, any necessary assessment appeals at a cost not to exceed $12,000 plus applicable taxes and reasonable expenses; AND FURTHER THAT the Authority send a letter to the Province of Ontario expressing appreciation to the province for creating the new Community Conservation Lands category which will assist with protection of ecologically sensitive lands. CARRIED 62 BACKGROUND At Executive Committee Meeting #1/04, held on February 6, 2004, resolution #B15/04 was approved as follows: THAT the firm of Altus Realty Tax Management Corporation be engaged to assist Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) staff with: a review of all realty taxable TRCA holdings; negotiation with the Assessment Offices; and any necessary assessment appeals at a cost not to exceed $15,000 plus G.S.T. and reasonable expenses; AND FURTHER THAT staff be directed to contact the Municipal Property Assessment Corporation (MPAC) to express TRCA concerns about recurring overvaluation of TRCA properties and request MPAC to investigate other methods in determining current value assessment that would generate more accurate Fair Market Value for TRCA properties. At Authority Meeting #11/04, held on January 7, 2005, resolution #A325/04 was approved as follows: THAT the recommendation contained in the report on Property Taxes on Natural Heritage (Conservation) Lands referred from Authority Meeting #10/04, held on November 26, 2004, be withdrawn; AND FURTHER THAT a report on the impact of the new Community Conservation Lands criteria on Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) realty taxes be brought forward to Business Excellence Advisory Board Meeting #1/05, to be held on March 4, 2005. Community Conservation Lands Criteria On December 10, 2004, the Ontario government announced Ontario Regulation 388/04 under the Assessment Act which came into force on January 1, 2005 for the 2005 taxation year. This regulation expands the criteria for lands that are eligible to receive a property tax exemption under the Conservation Land Tax Incentive Program (CLTIP). These new eligible lands are known as Community Conservation Lands. Properties must meet one of the following 11 criteria to qualify as Community Conservation Lands: • natural heritage features or areas identified in the Provincial Policy Statement; • regionally significant Areas of Natural and Scientific Interest; • habitats of species of special concern; • species occurrences or ecological communities designated as S1 (extremely rare), S2 (very rare), or S3 (rare to uncommon) by the Ministry of Natural Resources' Natural Heritage Information Centre; • natural areas within the natural core area, natural linkage area or countryside designations in the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan; • natural heritage areas identified within a regional or watershed plan or strategy; • lands within a municipal official plan or zoning by -law designated as environmental protection or an equivalent designation; • lands located within a Featured Area (Signature Site) set out in the Land Use Strategy that contribute to natural heritage protection; • escarpment protection areas within the Niagara Escarpment Plan; 63 • areas identified under the Great Lakes Wetlands Conservation Action Plan; • areas within or adjacent to protected areas, such as provincial parks, that contribute to the natural heritage objectives of the protected area. To be eligible to receive an exemption under the new Community Conservation Lands classification it was necessary to file an application with the Ministry of Natural Resources (MNR) for each assessment roll number by February 28, 2005. In total TRCA submitted 328 applications requesting an exemption on 17,229 acres of land. We have not received any indication from MNR staff as to when they anticipate completing their review of the applications and providing confirmation of the property tax exemption. We understand that we will not be able to apply to have additional lands exempted until 2006 for the 2007 taxation year. The following chart illustrates the impact of this exemption subject to MNR review on the realty taxes paid by TRCA. Savings are estimated at about $260,000. LOCATION 2005 Potential Costs Without Tax Exemption 2005 Potential Costs With Tax Exemption Rental Properties $191,000 $191,000 Ontario Realty Corporation (ORC) Rentals 350,000 350,000 Canada Post 27,000 27,000 Wild Water Kingdom/Wildcare Leases 75,000 75,000 Claireville Equine Rental 2,000 2,000 Claireville Education Facility Lease 100 100 Non - Revenue Producing Lands 344,000 83,600 Conservation Areas /Field Centres /Kortright Centre 106,400 106,400 TOTAL $1,095,500 $835,100 Municipal Property Assessment Corporation Staff has met with MPAC regarding the chronic overvaluation of TRCA properties. In response to our concerns, MPAC has set up a team to deal specifically with conservation authority lands. MPAC staff are working with our tax consultant to resolve other outstanding TRCA assessment appeals such as the significantly high value placed on Heart Lake Conservation Area. Altus Realty Tax Management Corporation In 1998, quotations were obtained from three tax consultants to assist with: a review of all realty taxable TRCA holdings; negotiation with the Assessment Offices; and, any necessary assessment appeals. Yeoman & Associates Inc. was the successful firm and was contracted to undertake this work in May of 1998 (note that in April 2003, Yeoman & Associates Inc. merged with the Altus Group to become Altus Realty Tax Management Corporation (Altus)). While the focus of the initial phase of this project was to review all TRCA holdings to identify assessments that were unreasonable, there was some flexibility to undertake discussions with the various Assessment Offices to resolve any significant discrepancies in values. As a result of this review and discussions with the Assessment Offices, Altus achieved an initial reduction in 1998 taxes of approximately $70,000. 64 Through extensive negotiations with Assessment Offices in the Regions of York, Durham and Peel, on behalf of the TRCA, Altus was able to achieve for the years 1998 to 2000, reductions of taxes of approximately $85,000 per year on top of the approximate $70,000 achieved from the initial review in 1998. For 2001 and 2002, a total of 138 properties were appealed and Altus achieved a tax savings of approximately $253,100. For the 2003 taxation year a total of 81 properties were appealed and taxes were reduced by approximately $112,700. In 2004, 96 properties were appealed, with only few appeals being finalized to date. The savings for 2004 is presently at $28,800. Since a majority of the appeals were not finalized by the end of 2004, these properties are deemed to have been appealed for 2005. Therefore, it was only necessary to appeal 22 additional properties in 2005, most of which are related to the recently transferred ORC rentals. The following work will be undertaken by Altus in 2005: • Finalize 34 outstanding 2003 appeals and 67 outstanding 2004 appeals. • Identify, categorize and analyze existing TRCA holdings to determine if the assessments are reasonable. • File, negotiate and finalize 2005 assessment appeals. RATIONALE The knowledge gained and extensive database developed by the Altus of TRCA properties and their values during the 1998 -2004 appeals is considered essential in the review of the 2005 assessments. The historical TRCA property list on the existing Altus database will quantify historical assessments with new assessments tax class changes and identify percentage valuation change. Altus has demonstrated their ability and experience in dealing with assessment related matters. FINANCIAL DETAILS The upset limit of fees to Altus Realty Tax Management Corporation in 2005 is $12,000. Funding for this activity is provided in the 2005 operating budget. Staff will tender this work in 2006. Report prepared by: Mike Fenning, extension 5223 For Information contact: Ron Dewell, extension 5245, Mike Fenning, extension 5223 Date: March 17, 2005 RES. #C24/05 - YMCA OF GREATER TORONTO DAY CAMP AGREEMENT To enter into a ten year agreement with the YMCA of Greater Toronto to provide high quality experiential day camp programs and construct a 20' x 40' Class A swimming pool and adjacent concrete deck area at Bruce's Mill Conservation Area which will provide facilities for both YMCA day camps and the general public. Moved by: Seconded by: Bas Balkissoon Peter Milczyn 65 THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) and the YMCA of Greater Toronto (YMCA) enter into an agreement to provide high quality, experiential day camp programs for children and youth from the Greater Toronto Area (GTA) at Bruce's Mill Conservation Area; THAT the agreement be for a term of ten years and shall include construction of a 20' x 40' Class A swimming pool and adjacent concrete deck area; THAT TRCA staff be directed and authorized to negotiate and execute the agreement in a form and with terms and conditions satisfactory to TRCA staff and its solicitors; AND FURTHER THAT staff be directed to complete the tender process for construction of the swimming pool and deck area at Bruce's Mill Conservation Area in accordance with TRCA policies and make a recommendation for award of contract at Authority Meeting #3/05, to be held on April 29, 2005. CARRIED RATIONALE YMCA proposes to operate day camp programs at Bruce's Mill Conservation Area commencing the summer of 2005 if swimming facilities can be provided. YMCA is willing to invest a maximum of $90,000 toward the construction of a 20' x 40' class A swimming pool at Bruce's Mill. The pool will be for the exclusive use of YMCA day campers from 9:30 am to 3:00 pm, Monday to Friday, from July 4 to September 2, 2005. The swimming pool will be available for use by TRCA outside of the above hours. The intention is to continue these hours of use for the duration of the agreement. As part of the agreement TRCA will provide washroom and changing facilities, all safety equipment required for the operation of the pool and will be responsible for daily maintenance. TRCA will also provide dedicated use of Millview picnic area, use of sports fields and a dedicated space in the Beach Centre for use as an office, first aid station and equipment storage during day camp operating seasons. This agreement will remain in effect for 10 years in order to enable YMCA to recover their capital investment of $90,000. In order to complete the project, it is proposed that the completion of the agreement and the tender process proceed concurrently. The Authority will be asked to approve entering into the agreement at its meeting to be held on April 29th. At the same time, assuming an agreement with YMCA satisfactory to TRCA is achieved, staff will bring forward a recommendation for award of contract for construction of the pool and deck. FINANCIAL DETAILS YMCA will provide a capital investment of a maximum of $90,000 towards the construction of the 20' x 40' Class A swimming pool and adjacent concrete deck area and agrees to pay daily admission fees for each day camper. The estimated 2005 revenue TRCA will receive from the YMCA for 180 day campers per day at $2.25 per camper for a nine week period is $18,225. 66 TRCA has identified $73,000 in the 2005 Public Use Capital Budget as our contribution to the pool construction and retrofit of the Beach Centre which will include washroom and change room upgrades. Maintenance expenses of the swimming pool will be covered under the Bruce's Mill operating budget. Report prepared by: Derek Edwards, extension 5672 For Information contact: Derek Edwards, extension 5672 Date: March 24, 2005 RES. #C25/05 - 2005 -2007 LICENCE AGREEMENT WITH THE AQUATIC PARK SAILING CLUB As part of the ongoing management program at Tommy Thompson Park, staff have outlined the proposed 2005 -2007 license agreement with the Aquatic Park Sailing Club. Moved by: Seconded by: Bas Balkissoon Peter Milczyn THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT staff be directed to execute the 2005 -2007 licence agreement with the Aquatic Park Sailing Club; AND FURTHER THAT staff be authorized to take whatever action is required in connection with the Aquatic Park Sailing Club lease agreement at Tommy Thompson Park, including the execution of all necessary documentation required. CARRIED BACKGROUND The Aquatic Park Sailing Club (APSC) is a small community sailing club that has leased a portion of the waterlot and landbase at Tommy Thompson Park since 1976. Historically this lease was reviewed and executed by the Authority on an annual basis as a component of the Interim Management Program at Tommy Thompson Park. In 1997, the APSC requested that their license agreement be extended for a three year term with a set fee schedule for that time period. Staff was of the opinion that a multi -year lease would be appropriate, and developed a three year lease which was approved at Authority Meeting #2/99, held on February 26, 1999, where Resolution #A63/99 was approved as follows:. THAT staff be directed to execute the 1999 -2001 licence agreement with the Aquatic Park Sailing Club; AND FURTHER THAT staff be authorized to take whatever action is required in connection with the Aquatic Park Sailing Club lease agreement at Tommy Thompson Park, including the execution of appropriate documents. 67 The conversion of the annual licence agreement to a three year licence agreement has been beneficial to both the APSC and the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA). It has allowed both the APSC and TRCA staff the ability to forecast budgets and fee schedules more effectively. Further, the club has again committed to an annual contribution to the Tommy Thompson Park van shuttle service for the lease period. The club also assists staff with a variety of projects including; garbage clean -up, tree wrapping for protection against beaver damage, and have financially contributed to shoreline naturalization and enhancement activities around their club house. The conditions of the 2005 -2007 license will be the same as used in previous years. Vehicle parking on site and access during public hours will be limited to three (3) weekends in the Spring and three (3) weekends in the Fall for necessary preparatory work. During public hours outside the above, the Aquatic Park Sailing Club members must park their vehicles at the Leslie Street parking area. During non public hours (i.e. Monday to Friday), vehicular access to leased land will be granted to members of the Club upon proof of membership and key privileges. A fee schedule for the three year lease period has been established with an annual increase of $524.22, per year for 2005, 2006 and 2007 respectively. This annual rate of increase is based on previous negotiations with the club, TTP staff, TRCA Property/Asset Management staff and the City of Toronto Sailing Club fee schedule. The following is the proposed fee schedule: 2005 $8,497.18 ($524.22 or 6.57% increase from 2004) 2006 $9,021.40 ($524.22 or 6.17% increase from 2005) 2007 $9,545.62 ($524.22 or 5.81 % increase from 2006 - 19.725% from 2004) In addition to the annual lease payments, the APSC will continue to provide TRCA with an annual $2,500 contribution to help offset the costs of the van shuttle service, as well as contributing to additional projects as they arise. The Aquatic Park Sailing Club has agreed to the main terms and conditions of the 2005 -2007 licence agreement. RATIONALE As in 1999 and 2002, staff are of the opinion that a three year license agreement would be appropriate. The Tommy Thompson Park Master Plan has been approved and includes the APSC in its present form. The APSC appreciates the longer term commitment from the TRCA and a 3 year lease will allow the club the ability to forecast their budget and fee schedule more effectively. Further, the club has again committed to an annual contribution to the van shuttle service for the lease period, and the club members volunteer for a variety of work days, to improve Tommy Thompson Park. A three year term will also allow TRCA the ability to forecast revenue for Tommy Thompson Park and will reduce the administration associated with executing the lease on an annual basis. 68 FINANCIAL DETAILS Revenue generated from the lease agreement with the club will be used to defray park operating costs including staffing, monitoring and interpretive activities. The annual contribution of $2,500 by the club will be used to directly offset the cost of the park van shuttle service. Report prepared by: Tamara Chipperfield, extension 5248 For Information contact: Tamara Chipperfield, extension 5248 Date: March 30, 2005 RES. #C26 /05 - ABSENTEEISM RATES FOR 2004 Summary. Summary of the absenteeism rates for Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) staff for 2004. Moved by: Seconded by: Bas Balkissoon Peter Milczyn THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT the absenteeism summary for 2004 be received. AMENDMENT RES. #C27 /05 Moved by: Seconded by: Dick O'Brien Bas Balkissoon THAT the following be inserted after the main motion: AND FURTHER THAT the Chair of the Business Excellence Advisory Board send a congratulatory note to all staff, with an additional congratulations to the staff who were not absent due to illness at all during 2004. THE AMENDMENT WAS CARRIED THE MAIN MOTION, AS AMENDED, WAS CARRIED BACKGROUND Over the last several years, TRCA has experienced less than half the national average of days lost due to illness. The average Canadian worker is absent due to illness 8 to 9 days a year. Our numbers have remained relatively constant over the past three years. The weighted absenteeism averages for full time staff are: 69 2002 - 3.87 days 2003 - 3.73 days 2004 - 3.85 days TRCA had 107 employees, a third of our total full -time complement with no sick related absences at all. FINANCIAL IMPACTS There is an indirect productivity impact from the fact that TRCA employees are on the job 4.15 days more per year than other employees. Report prepared by: Catherine MacEwen, extension 5219 For Information contact: Catherine MacEwen, extension 5219 Date: March 24, 2005 RES. #C28/05 - Moved by: Seconded by: AUDITED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS - 2004 The 2004 audited financial statements are presented for the Business Excellence Advisory Board's approval and recommendation to the Authority. Maja Prentice Bas Balkissoon THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT the transfer of funds into and from reserves during 2004, as outlined in the schedule to the financial statements entitled "Continuity of Reserves ", be approved; AND FURTHER THAT the 2004 audited financial statements, as presented, be approved, signed by the Chair and Secretary- Treasurer of the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority, and distributed to each member municipality and the Minister of Natural Resources, in accordance with subsection 38 (3) of the Conservation Authorities Act. CARRIED BACKGROUND The financial statements of the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) for 2004 are presented for approval. The accounting firm of Grant Thornton LLP, has completed its audit and has included with the financial statements an unqualified auditor's report, dated March 18, 2005. The auditor has also prepared a report entitled "Audit Plan" , which will be provided to the members of the Business Excellence Advisory Board, also serving as the Authority's Audit Committee. Copies of the audit plan can be provided to any member of the Authority upon request. This report has evolved out of new auditing standards for auditor communication with those having oversight responsibility for financial statements. 70 The Audit Plan report: • assesses the responsibilities of management, Authority members and the auditor; • outlines the 2004 audit approach including discussion of audit risk, materiality and internal controls; • includes a copy of the engagement letter; and • includes a letter which attests to the auditors independence or objectivity with respect to this engagement. A representative from Grant Thornton LLP will be in attendance to present the auditor's report on the 2004 financial statements. Also on the agenda is the 2004 Year -End Financial Progress Report, wherein some of the more significant variances from budget are discussed. RATIONALE Deficit position: The TRCA achieved a surplus of $38,722 for the year, reducing the deficit as of December 31, 2004 to $436,673. The deficit is attributable solely to unfunded land acquisition costs over the last several years. The 2005 budget which identifies a capital surplus of $200,000 will continue the trend of deficit reduction. As noted on the statement of financial position (page 3 of the financial statements), TRCA cash flows are sufficient to ensure no borrowing is required to finance the deficit. Reserves: At Authority Meeting #9/03, held on November 28, 2003, Resolution #A254/03 in regards to reserves policy approved the establishment of a new operating contingency reserve. In 2003, the operating contingency reserve balance grew from $871,667 to $962,926, an improvement of $91,260. In 2004, following an excellent year for TRCA generated revenues (sales, admissions, fees, etc.) the operating contingency reserve grew to $1,816,380. While some of this growth was facilitated by curtailment and deferment of expenditures including gapping of positions, the majority of the increase occurred as a result of better than expected revenue, particularly with respect to planning fees in the Development Services section where the budget was exceeded by almost $565,000. In the 2003 reserves report to the Authority, staff had set a target of $2.5 million for operating reserves. This target was deemed sufficient to protect the TRCA from severe, prolonged impairment of revenue sources. As the revenue base continues to grow, staff will reassess the base amount required for operating contingency reserves. The Special Projects reserve has been increased by $348,386 to $1,164,053. This reserve is intended to cover the cost of the proposed nursery workshop and office within the Boyd complex. Funds are generated from a variety of planting, top soil placement and other projects undertaken by the Environmental Services section of TRCA. It is anticipated that an amount of about $2,000,000 will be required to complete the project. The "Continuity of Reserves" schedule on page 17 of the financial statement package, provides a summary of the status of reserves as of December 31, 2004. 71 Summary: Given the circumstances surrounding SARS and the drop in tourism related business which adversely affected campgrounds and Black Creek Pioneer Village in 2003, the recovery which has occurred in 2004 is remarkable. Key TRCA generated revenue sources exceeded the budget in 2004 and exceed the 2003 actuals by almost $2.5 million. As a result, the cumulative deficit was reduced by a modest amount, $38,722, and reserves were increased by a total of $1,254,824, as outlined on the "Continuity of Reserves" schedule to the financial statements. Report prepared by: Rocco Sgambelluri, extension 5232 For Information contact: Rocco Sgambelluri, extension 5232; Jim Dillane, extension 6292 Date: April 06, 2005 Attachments: 1 72 Attachment 1 Toronto and Region Conservation Authority Financial Statements December 31, 2004 Grant Thornton 73 Contents Pape Auditors' Report 1 Statement of Financial Activities and Deficit 2 Statement of Financial Position 3 Statement of Cash Flows 4 Notes to the Financial Statements 5 - 9 Schedule of Financial Activities — Watershed Management and Health M onito ring 10 Schedule of Financial Activities — Environmental Advi$ory Services 11 Schedule of Financial Activities — Watershed Stewardship 12 Schedule of Financial Activities — Conservation Land Management, Dovelopment and Acquisition 13' Schedule of Financial Activities — Conservation and Education Programming 14 Schedule of Financial Activities — Corporate Services 15 Schedule of Financial Activities — Vehicle and Equipment 16 Continuity of Reserves 17 G tint Thornton 74 Grant Thornton Grant Thornton LLP Chartcrod Accountants rtanagerne1t Cansumontst Auditors' Report To the h1embers of the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority We have audited the statement of financial position of the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority as at December 31, 2004 and the statements of financial activities and defidt and cash flows for the year then ended. I nlese tinancial statements em the responsibility of the Authority's management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on these finan :ia, statements based on our audit. We conducted our audit in accordance with Canadian generally accepted auditing standards_ Those standards require that we plan anc perform an audit to obtain reasonable assurance whether the financial statements are tree of material misstatement. An audit includes examining. on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the lirlant;ial statements_ An audit also includes assessing the accounting principles used and significant estimates• made by management: as well as evaluating the overall financial statement presentation.. In our opinion, these financial statements present fairly, in all material respects. the financial position of :fie Authority as at December 31, 2004 and the results of its operations and its cash flows for the year then ended in accordance with Canadian generally accepted accounting principles. The comparative figures for 2CO3 were derived from statements which were reported by another firm of chartered accountants. Markham, Canada March 18, 2005 Charleroi Accountants 15 AIIalatc Parkway :wd0 �t0 Waltham .Onl no �a 531 T (41UI 8b -uiUu F (905i 475-8006 E rd>:.JWran etonlrb rno oa W vriwm :C;rantitirirnlnn r.9 Canadian- Mamdcr d Gans Thornton hlematlons 75 1 Toronto and Region Conservation Authority Statement of Financial Activities and Deficit Year Ended December 31 Expenditures Watershed management and health monitonng Environmental advisory services Watershed stewardship Conservation land management, development and acquisition Conservation and education programming Corporate services Vehicle and equipment, net of usage charged Revenue Municipal Levies Other Government grants MNR transfer payments Provincial - other Federal Authority generated User fees, sales and admissions Contract services Interest income Proceeds from sale of properties The Conservation Foundation of Greater Toronto Donations and fundraising Facility and property rentals Canada Post Corporation agreement Toronto Waterfront Revitalization Corporation Sales and property tax refunds Sundry Increase in fund balance Appropriations (to) from reserves (Page 17) Deficit, beginning of year Deficit, end of year $ (375,395) $ 2004 Budget $ 8,241,500 2,797,100 8,381,800 19,017,500 13,355,600 4,633,800 56,427,300 26,081,800 3,076,100 845,800 1,919,550 1,122,250 10,405,800 .r 591,400 325,000 226,700 1,583,200 962,500 2,247,700 80,000 6,165,000 55,000 518.500 56.206.300 (221,000) 321,000 100,000 (475,395) 2004 Actual $ 7,082,978 2,836,953 6,464,585 11,161,540 12,884,394 4,307,348 (61,133) 44.676,665 20,475,804 397,280 845,753 1,596,211 1,372,434 10,611,086 946,146 356,051 122,850 1,621,604 1,121,284 2,139,246 28,116 3,529,545 261,875 544,926 45,970,211 1,293,546 (1 ,254,824) 38,722 (475,395) 2003 Actual $ 5,585,189 2,142,279 5,448,776 9,218,912 11,509,573 4,073,014 33.328 38,011,071 17,938,773 881,313 845,753 1,484,291 788,874 8,701,344 1,048,646 364,839 12,675 1,378,319 454,192 1,478,331 7,883 2,286,163 123,167 507.317 38.301.880 290,809 (15.743) 275,066 (750,461) (436,673) $ (475,395) See accompanying notes to the financial statements. Grant Thornton S 2 76 Toronto and Region Conservation Authority Statement of Financial Position December 31 2004 2003 Assets Cash and cash equivalents Marketable securities Accounts receivable (Note 3) Inventory Prepaid expenses $ 7,892,709 4,692,994 5,250,755 583,306 355.093 $ 18,774,857 $ 4,630,510 5,972,541 4,854,192 595,897 277.802 $ 16,330,942 Liabilities Accounts payable and accrued liabilities Deferred revenue Municipal levies Capital, special projects and other Vacation pay and sick leave entitlements Fund Balances Fleserves (Page 17) Deficit Amounts to be funded in future years $ 4,752,505 6,328,056 4,649,464 1.334214 17,064,229 3,481,515 (436.673) 3,044,842 (1.334.214) 1.710.268 $ 4,478,848 5,441,231 4,659,567 1 215.911 15,795,557 2,226,691 (475,395) 1,751,296 (1.215,911) 535,385 $ 18,774,857 $ 16,330,942 On behalf of the Authority Chair Secretary- Treasurer See accompanying notes to the financial statements. Grant Thornton S 3 77 Toronto and Region Conservation Authority Statement of Cash Flows Year Ended December 31 2004 2003 Increase (decrease) in cash and cash equivalents Operating Excess of revenue over expenditures Changos in non -cash working capital Accounts receivable Inventory Prepaids Accounts payable and accrued liabilities Deferred revenue Vacation pay and sick leave entitlements Investing Proceeds on maturities of marketable securities Purchase of marketable securities Financing Increase in amounts to be funded in future years Net increase (decrease) in cash and cash equivalents Cash and cash equivalents, beginning of year Cash and cash equivalents, end of year $ 1,293,546 $ 290,809 (396,563) (2,557,057) 12,591 (26,661) (77,291) (55,498) 273,657 1,681;051 876,712 240,971 118,303 125,459 2,100,955 (300,926) 3,274,166 1,496,394 (1,994,619) (3.522.543) 1,279,547 (2,026,149) (118,303) (212,592) 3,262,199 (2,539,667) 4.630510 7.170,177 $ 7,892,709 $ 4,630,510 See accompanying notes to the financial statements. Grant ThorntonS 78 4 Toronto and Region Conservation Authority Notes to the Financial Statements December 31, 2004 1. Nature of operations The Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (the "Authority ") is established under the Conservation Authorities Act of Ontario to further the conservation, restoration, development and management of natural resources, other than gas, oil, coal and minerals for the nine watersheds within its area of jurisdiction. The Authority's area of jurisdiction includes areas in the City of Toronto. the Regions of Durham, Peel and York, and the Township of Adlala•Tosorontio and Town of Mono. 2. Summary of significant accounting policies The financial statements of the Authority are prepared by management in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles for organizations operating in the local government sector as recommended by the Public Sector Accounting Board of The Canadian Institute of Chartered Accountants, Significant aspects of the accounting policies adopted by the Authority areas follows: Basis of accounting Revenue and expenditures are recorded on the accrual basis, whereby they are reflected in the accounts in the year in which they have been earned and incurred, respectively, whether or not such transactions have been settled by the receipt or payment of money. Cash and cash equivalents The Authority considers deposits in banks, certificates of deposit and short term investments with original maturities of 90 days or less as cash and cash equivalents. Capital expenditures Capital expenditures are reported on the statement of financial activities in the year Incurred. Reserves Reserves for future expenditures and contingencies are established as required at the discretion of the members of the Authority. Increases or decreases in these reserves are made by appropriations to or from operations. Government transfers Government transfers are recognized in the financial statements as revenue in the period in which events giving rise to the transfer occur, providing the transfers are authorized, any eligibility criteria have been met and reasonable estimates of the amounts can be made. Grant Thornton M 79 5 Toronto and Region Conservation Authority Notes to the Financial Statements December 31, 2004 2. Summary of significant accounting policies (continued) Deferred revenue The Authority receives certain amounts principally from other public sector bodies, the proceeds of which may only be used in the conduct of certain programs or completion of specific work. Further, cortain usor charges and fees are collected but for which the related services have yet to be performed. These amounts are recognized as revenue when the related expenditures are incurred or services porformod. Inventory Inventories of goods for rosalo are valued at the lower of cost and net realizable value. Nursery inventory is valued at the lower of cost and replacement value. Cost is determined on a first -in, first out basis. Use of estimates The preparation of financial statements requires management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities and disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities at the date of the financial statements and the reported amounts of revenue and expenditures during the year. Actual results could differ from those estimates. Vacation pay and sick leave entitlements Vacation credits earned but not taken are accrued as earned. 3. Accounts receivable Municipal levies Toronto Waterfront Revitalization Corporation City of Toronto Conservation Foundation of Greater Toronto Government of Canada Province of Ontario Interest receivable Trade and other Grant Thornton 80 2004 2003 $ 520,234 1,582,1 79 468,870 320,106 302,696 196,746 409,071 1 ,450,853 $ 226,215 1,981,207 135,780 71,006 209,878 412,490 352,555 1.465.061 $ 5,250,755 $ 4,854,192 6 Toronto and Region Conservation Authority Notes to the Financial Statements December 31. 2004 4. Trust funds The Authority administers funds on behalf of the Rouge Park Alliance amounting to $498,122 (2003 - $577,348). These funds are held in trust by the Authority for the benefit of others and therefore are not presented as part of the Authority's. financial position or financial activities. 5. Reserve funds held under provincial revenue- sharing policy Revenue generated from the sale of properties may be held in a reserve created under the Ministry of Natural Resources' policy for the disposition of Authority -owned properties. The Ministry reserves the right to direct the purpose to which the provincial share of funds may be applied or to request a refund. The proceeds on the sale of properties are attributed to the province and the member municipalities on the basis of their original contribution when the properties were acquired. The reserve balance must always be maintained in proportion to the original contribution by the province and tho Authority, represented by the member municipalities. The Authority is permitted to withdraw the municipal share of the reserve provided that the corresponding provincial share is either matched by other sources of funding or returned to the province. Interest at prevailing market rates must be imputed on the unspent balance (if any) of the reserve_ The changes of the reserve in 2004 and 2003 are based upon the following transactions recorded in operations: 2004 2003 Reserve balance, beginning of year $ $ 50,000 Net proceeds from sale of properties 118.500 12,675 118,500 62.675 Applications: Living City Centre at Kortright 50,000 Greenspace acquisition project 118,500 12.67 118,500 62,675 Reserve balance, end of year 6. Pension agreements The Authority makes contributions to the Ontano Municipal Employees Retirement System ( "OMERS "), which is a multi- emptoyer plan, on behalf of full -time members of staff and eligible ,part-time staff. The plan is a defined benefit pension plan, which specifies the amount of the retirement benefit to be received by the employees based on the length of service and rates of pay. The temporary contribution holiday which existed for all active employees and participating employers ended in 2003. This contribution holiday has caused the level of contributions for 2003 to be less than normally required. Contributions made by the Authority to OMERS for 2004 were $961,251 (2003 - $292,766). (Grant Thornton S 81 7 Toronto and Region Conservation Authority Notes to the Financial Statements December 31, 2004 7. Financial instruments The Authority's financial instruments include cash, marketable securities, accounts receivable, accounts payable and accrued liabilities, the sick leave benefit plan accrual, deferred revenue, security deposits and vacation pay. The fair values of cash, accounts receivable, accounts payable and accrued liabilities, deferred revenue and vacation pay approximate their carrying values because of their expected short term maturity and treatment on normal trade terms. The Authority's short term deposits as at December 31, 2004 consisted primarily of money market products. Further information on these investments is as set out below', Term to Maturity Less than one year Less than seven years Weighted Average Market Value Face Value Rate of Interest $ 2,597,744 $ 2.494,618 2.77% 2,541 ,688 2198,376 4.38% $ 5,139,432 $ 4,692,994 The sick leave entitlements liability is recorded at the amount required to settle this liability and is fully funded at the financial statement date. The ultimate date of settlement is not determined. No further benefits can be earned under this program as it was discontinued at December 31, 1980. 8. Contingent liabilities and commitments (a) Legal actions and claims: The Authority has received statements of claim as defendant under various legal actions resulting from its involvement in land purchases,_ fatalities, personal injuries and flooding on or adjacent to its properties. The Authority maintains insurance coverage against such risks and has notified Its insurers of the legal actions and claims. It is not possible at this time to determine the outcome of these claims and, therefore, no provision has been made in these financial statements. (b) As part of some agreements entered into by the Authority, sites purchased are required to be remediated. Any unpaid costs associated with these activities have not been reflected in these financial statements as any costs would be reimbursed through contributions as required under the agreements: Grant Thornton 82 8 Toronto and Region Conservation Authority Notes to the Financial Statements December 31, 2004 8. Contingent liabilities and commitments (continued) (c) The Authority has completed the acquisition of lands required to undertake various projects. One of the most significant of these projects is the Revised Project for the Etobicoko Motel Strip. Some of the properties required for this project were obtained through expropriation. Funding was obtained from the City of Etobicoke and the Municipality of Metropolitan Toronto (now collectively known as the City of Toronto) and the Province of Ontario. On October 4, 2004, a decision of the Ontario Municipal Board was delivered in one the expropriations. The amount awarded was between $7.2 and $9,1 million plus interest and costs. This decision has been appealed to the Divisional Court. No amount has been recorded in the financial statements pending the result of the appeal and the fact that both funding partners have committed to funding the total cost of the expropriations. 9. Budget figures - 2004 The 2004 budget figures included in these financial statements are those adopted by the Authority on April 25, 2004. The budget figures are unaudited. 10. Comparative figures Certain comparative figures have been reclassified to conform with the financial statement presentation adopted in the year. Grant Thornton g 83 9 Toronto and Region Conservation Authority Schedule of Financial Activities - Watershed Management and Health Monitoring Year Ended December 31 2004 Bud e Expenditures Watershed strategies $ 1,390,900 Resource inventory and environmental monitoring 1,064,200 Flood forecasting and warning 221,000 Floor control structures, operations and maintenance Capital and other projects•and studies Regional monitoring study and other monitoring projects Water management projects Lower Don flood control Terrestrial Natural Heritage study Floodplain mapping Groundwater strategies Revenue Municipal Levies Other Government grants MNR transfer payments Provincial - other Federal Authority generated Resource monitoring foes Contract services The Conservation Foundation of Greater Toronto Toronto Waterfront Revitalization Corporation Oonations.and fundraising Sundry 342.800 3:018,900 742,300 2,409, 400 700,000 188,000 635,300 547,60Q 8,241.500 5,866,800 69,800 549.900 173,750 93,750 110,200 190,000 700,000 400,000 59,300 8,21 3,500 2004 2003 Actual Actual $ 1,407,933 $ 1,532,293 Excess (deficiency) of revenue over expenditure $ (28,000) $ Grant Thornton St: 84 1,261,547 959,170 241,002 182,602 301,254 118,764 3,211,736 2,792,829 819,385 735,120 1,329,032 7$4,853 698,355 246,323 191,055 515,361 469,156 201,985 364,259 338.718 7,082,978 5,585,189 4,370,737 27,964 549,900 284,207 166,926 250,759 364,603 674,219 400,346 33,224 7,122,885 2,944,590 87,938 549,907 166,223. 334,167 33 221,815 586,909 265,036 432,346 166.068 5,755,032 39,907 $ 169,843 10 Toronto and Region Conservation Authority Schedule of Financial Activities — Environmental Advisory Services Year Ended December 31 2004 2004 2003 Budget Actual Actual Expenditures MunicipaVpublic plan input and review $ 1,170,850 $ 1,206,726 $ 914,051 Development plan input and review 1,626.250 1,630,227 1.228 228 2,797,100 2,836,953 Z142,279 Revenue Municipal Levies 723,800 723,800 947,807 Other 75,000 22,688 2,538 Government grants - MNR transfer payments 178,500 178,500 178,893 Provincial — other 15,000 39,516 20,020 Federal 40,000 27,763 12,587 Authority - generated Regulation administration fees 1,764,800 2,304,998 794,159 Th© Conservation Foundation of Greater Toronto 15.000 2, 797,100 3,297.265 1,971,004 Excess (deficiency) of revenue over expenditure $ - $ 450,312 $ (171„275) Grant Thornton 85 11 Toronto and Region Conservation Authority Schedule of Financial Activities - Watershed Stewardship Year Ended December 31 Expenditures Watorshod stewardship Capital and other projects and studios Erosion control and slope stabilization project Brickworks regeneration project Toronto Remedial Action Plan Peel Natural Heritage project York Natural Heritage project Durham Natural Heritage project Nursery rolocation Revenue Municipal Levies Other Government grants Provincial - other Federal Authority generated Contract services Tipping fees Interest The Conservation Foundation of Greater Toronto Donations and fundraising Sundry 2004 Budget S 1,604,100 2004 2003 Actual Actual g 1,873,306 $ 1,586,138 2,308,500 1,664,893 1,278,345 27,297 1,790,747 1,720,721 493,447 337,058 519,380 440,589 120,850 - 1.962 58,628 6,464,585 5,448,776 2,535, 900 892,400 715,900 125,000 200000 8 381 800 5,629,200 594,500 84,100 752,000 481,200 300,000 3,998,512 3,164.161 33,074 576,1.45 366,208 295,640 815,748 240,371 695,387 826,831 352,762 172,834 1,146 1,330 314,700 316,873 269,557 147 120,003 118665 6,699,713 5,665,681 126,100 8,281,800 Excess (deficiency) of revenue over expenditure $ (100,000) $ 235,128 $ 216,905 Grant Thornton 8 6 12 Toronto and Region Conservation Authority Schedule of Financial Activities - Conservation Land Management, Development and Acquisition Year Ended December 31 Expenditures Conservation land management Property services CA land management Rental properties Capital and other projects and studies Creonspace acquisition Rouge River Natural Areas Acquisition project Waterfront development Port Union development Mirnico Linear Park Etobicoke Motel Strip waterfront project Conservation area development LiVing City Centre at Koriright - infrastructure Peel campground Improvements Drinking water system upgrades Flack Creek Pioneer Village retrofit; attractions project Greater Toronto Region trail Revenue Municipal Levies Other Government grants Provincial - other Federal Authority - generated Rental properties Tipping fees !Merest Proceeds from sale of properties The Conservation Foundation of Greater Toronto Toronto Waterfront Revitalization Corporation Donations.and fundraising Canada Post Corporation agreement Sales and propertytax‘refunds Sundry Excess of revenue over expenditure Grant Thornton 4 2004 2004 Budget Actual $ 1,502,200 312,700 1.508, 600 3,323, 500 500.000 500,000 4,950,400 4,235,000 1,230,000 1,023,400 351,600 200,000 583.600 370,000 1,750, 000 19.017,500 $ 1,214,627 286,499 1.574.924 3,078,050 1,048,664 3,248 2,343,319 2,585,015 181,410 295,989 297,051 195,100 210,097 136,171 787,426 11.161,540 2003 Actual $ 1.199,569 481,245 991.887 2,672,701 370,020 321,956 2,406,098 1,009,954 170,236 626,843 310,740 62,697 436,136 165,985 662.318 3.228 9 218,912 6,780;600 4,410,460 4,441,850 2,307,500 282,283 190,952 1,261,700 484,050 700,970 5,000 16,595 46,100 2,247,700 2,139,246 1,478,331 128,300 63,238 339,484 5,299 17,152 226,700 122 i850 12,675 60,000 83,229 113,525 5,465,000 2,855,326 2,021,127 500,000 656,360 4,000 80,000 28,116 7,883 55,000 134,587 62,317 152,394 155,816 19.117.500 11,434,053 9.592.182 $ 100,000 $ 272,513 $ 373,270 87 13 Toronto and Region Conservation Authority Schedule of Financial Activities — Conservation and Education Programming Year Ended December 31 Expenditures Conservation land programming Conservation areas •$ Conservation/Heritage education programming Black Creek Pioneer Village Kortright Centre for Conservation Community Transformation Partnership Cansorvation Field Centres Education Outreach Conservation Education Management Marketing Revenue Municipal Levies Other Government grants Provincial — other Federal Authority - generated Conservation areas Black Creek Pioneer Village Kortright Centre Conservation Field Centres The Conservation Foundation of Greater Toronto Donations and fundraising Sundry 2004 Budge( 3,182,100 $ 5,099,500 1,342,300 1,007,600 1,783,100 364,900 328,700 247.400 13,355.600 3,139,000 29,300 335,000 231,500 2,824,600 2,908,400 1,098,100 1,340,600 1,018,500 62,500 308.100 13,295.600 2004 Actual 2003 Actual 3,149,153 $ 2,627,776 4,914,293 4.643,103 1,335,544 1,569,338 738,589 195,418 1,724,766 1,613,161 462,052 353,991 300,032 164,370 2594965 342.416 12,884,394 11,509,573 3,149,000 29,271 2,748,385 21,000 362,230 251,438 320,402 129,189 2,776,539 2,694,281 1,058,965 1,312, 207 823,899 64,578 190,948 12.782.320 2,654.291 2 386,312 997.336 1,356,895 393,328 17,699 49.328 11,005,201 Deficiency of revenue over expenditure $. (60,000) $ (102,074) $ (504,372) Grant Thornton & 88 14 Toronto and Region Conservation Authority Schedule of Financial Activities - Corporate Services Year Ended December 31 Expenditures Corporate management Office services Financial services Human resources Information technology Corporate communications Recoveries from Programs Capital and other projects and studies Administrative office Information Technology Acqultition project Revenue Municipal: Levies Other Government grants: MNR transfer payments Provincial - other Federal Authority- generated Interest Retail Sales The Conservation Foundation of Greater Toronto Sales and property tax rebate Sundry 2004 Budiet $ 973,200 886,100 768,700 366,100 532,400 717,300 (400,000) 3,843,800 475,000 315,000 4,633,800 3,942,400 117,400 50,000 325,000 41,000 25.000 4 500.800 2004 Actual $ 839,212 860,780 755,104 344,441 526,543 711,474 (474,220) 3,5563,334 Excess (deficiency) of revenue over expenditure $ (133,000) $ Grant Thornton M 89 2003 actual $ 795,249 669,972 629,904 337,421 422,015 456,484 (398,970) 2;912,075 424,067 781,525 319,947 379,414 4.307.348 4,073.014. 3,823, 275 2000 117,353 60,000 25,000 349,606 48,096 33,000 127,288 48357 4,633,975 3,691,980 2,740 116,953 50,000 26,460 346,357 60,850 17,440 4,312,780 326,627 $ 239,766 15 Toronto and Region Conservation Authority Schedule of Financial Activities — Vehicle and Equipment Year Ended December 31 Expenditures Operations Fuel, maintenance and repairs Other overhead Capital Purchase of equipment and machinery Purchase of vehicles Proceeds on disposals or trade -in Total expenditures Recovery of expenditures by charges based on usage Charge (credit) to expenditures Grant Thornton S 2004 Budoet 352,600 43,500 396,100 114,500 213,700 {36,100) 292,100 688,200 (688,200) 90 2004 Actual 2003 Actual $ $ 398,607 363.447 44.981 41.081 443,588 404,528 133,877 152,751 (47,529) 239.099 682,687 126,893 216,858 (22,378) 021,373 725,901 (743,820) (692,573) $ (61,133) $ 33,328 16 Toronto and Region Conservation Authority Continuity of Reserves Year Ended December 31, 2004 Balance Balance Beginning of year Apsmoriations End of Year Vehicle and oquipment $ 413,464 $ 61,133 $ 474,597 Tree donation program 34,634 (8,1.49) 26,485 Special projects 815,667 348,386 1,164,053 Operating contingency 962,926 8.454 1.816180 $ 2,226,691 $ 1,2554,824 $ 3.481,515 91 Grant Thornton S 17 RES. #C29/05 - 2005 OPERATING AND CAPITAL BUDGET 2005 Operating and Capital Budget, recommended for approval. Moved by: Seconded by: Maja Prentice Peter Milczyn THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT WHEREAS the Conservation Authorities Act (CA Act) provides that a conservation authority, in establishing its annual levy, shall have the power to determine the proportion of total benefit of any project afforded to all participating municipalities that is afforded to each of them; THEREFORE LET IT BE RESOLVED THAT, subject to such regulations under the CA Act as may be approved by the Lieutenant - Governor -in- Council: (i) all participating municipalities be designated as benefiting for all projects included in the 2005 Operating Budget; (ii) Toronto and Region Conservation Authority's (TRCA) share of the cost of the programs included in the 2005 Operating Budget shall be raised from all participating municipalities as part of the General Levy; (iii) the 2005 General Levy be apportioned to the participating municipalities in the proportion that the modified current value assessment of the whole is under the jurisdiction of the TRCA, unless otherwise provided in the levy or a project; (iv) the appropriate TRCA officials be directed to advise the participating municipalities, pursuant to the Conservation Authorities Act and the regulations made thereunder, to levy the said municipalities the amount of the General Levy set forth in the 2005 Operating Budget, and to levy the said municipalities the amount of the Capital Levy set forth in the 2005 Capital Budget and in the approved projects of the TRCA; THAT, subject to finalization of the participating municipalities' apportioned levy amounts, the 2005 Operating and Capital Budget, and all projects therein, be adopted; THAT staff be authorized to amend the 2005 Operating and Capital Budget to reflect actual 2005 provincial grant allocations in order to determine the amount of matching levy governed by regulation; THAT except where statutory or regulatory requirements provide otherwise, staff be authorized to enter into agreements with private sector or government agencies for the undertaking of projects which are of benefit to the TRCA and funded by a sponsor; AND FURTHER THAT, as required by Ontario Regulations 139/96 and 231/97, this recommendation and the accompanying budget document, including the schedule of matching and non - matching levies, be approved by recorded vote. CARRIED 92 RATIONALE Approval of the operating and capital budgets each year is part of the TRCA's financial management and business planning process. The 2005 Operating and Capital Budget is submitted for consideration of the Authority. On April 15, 2005, staff will make a presentation explaining the major issues identified as part of the 2005 budget process. The capital budget is being finalized. The capital budget will be available at the April 15th meeting and staff will provide a presentation explaining the various projects. Municipal Approval Status As the Members are aware, staff prepare preliminary estimates in the summer and fall of each year for submission to TRCA's municipal funding partners. Staff meet with municipal staff as required by the budget processes followed by each major participating municipality. Presentations are made to municipal finance staff and the Committees and Councils of the funding partners as required. In the fall of 2004, the Authority approved an operating levy increase guideline of 6 %, reflecting the need to address salary and wage pressures as well as increased utility costs and other inflationary pressure. In December of 2004, the Province of Ontario approved a regulation which created a new category of conservation lands which would be eligible for exemption from property taxes. Staff has submitted to the province applications for lands to be exempt. This exemption had the effect of changing the application of the municipal levy. Overall, the levy increase is 3.1%. The following summarizes the status of the discussions and submissions as of April 6, 2005: City of Toronto The capital and operating funding included in the TRCA budget has been approved by the City Council. Regional Municipality of Peel The capital and operating funding included in the TRCA budget has been approved by Regional Council. Regional Municipality of York The capital and operating funding included in the TRCA budget has been approved by Regional Council. Regional Municipality of Durham The capital and operating funding included in the TRCA budget has been approved by Regional Council. Township of Adjala - Tosorontio The Township has been advised of the TRCA's levy request. Staff has met with representatives of the township. Approval of the TRCA levy is anticipated. 93 Town of Mono The Town has been advised of the TRCA's levy request. In the past, the town has not requested a meeting with TRCA staff concerning the levy. Provincial Legislation By regulation, the TRCA has provided 30 days written notice to its member municipalities of the date of the meeting at which the Authority will approve the municipal levy. At the April 29, 2005, Authority meeting, a recorded vote on the budget recommendation including the non - matching municipal levy is required. The weighted voting procedure prescribed by regulation will be used. Summary Attached is a summary of the 2005 Operating Budget by major business unit. The 2005 Capital Budget summary will be available at the meeting. The provincial funding which is matched with levy has not been confirmed but is unlikely to change in any material way. Report prepared by: Jim Dillane, 416- 667 -6292 For Information contact: Jim Dillane, 416- 667 -6292, Rocco Sgambelluri, extension 5232 Date: April 12, 2005 Attachments: 1 94 Attachment 1 TORONTO AND REGION "1r- onservat:on for The Living City 2005 OPERATING AND CAPITAL BUDGET As submitted to the Business Excellence Advisory Board April 15, 2005 95 12- Apr -05 TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY 2005 Operating Budget Page 1 Gross Expenditures (Functional Unit) Page Reference Finance and Business Develooment Division Administration Page Rental Properties Page Central Services Page Property Sevices Page Black Creek Pioneer Village Page Food Services Page Vehicle & Equipment Reserve Page Watershed Management Division WM Divisional Management / EMS Development Services Watershed Strategies Resource Science Community Services Divisional Management Environmental Services Enforcement Conservation Areas Kortright Centre for Conservation Office of the CAO Conservation Field Centres Corporate Management Corporate Secretariat Human Resources Customer Services Communications Marketing Community Transformation Partnerships Page Page Page Page Page Page Page Page Page Page Page Page Page Page Page Page Page 2004 Bud e $ 2004 2005 ctual Budget $ $ Year Year over Year over Year 2005 over 2004 Change Chg. $ Chg. Notes Intro: all budgets affected by COLA and market adjustments. 266,000 Downs■ew office lease annualized 307,600 ORC rentals program annualized (11,300) (300,500) Property taxes exempted, staff added 49,900 114,000 Cost of sales relating to higher revenue 66,100 782,600 8 1,787,200 1,668,207 2,053,200 14 9% 9 1,195,300 1,221,501 1,502,900 25 7% 10 313,300 353,423 302,000 -3 6% 11 1,502,200 1,359,816 1,201,700 -20 0% 12 4,123,200 4,035,693 4,173,100 1 2% 13 976,300 974,969 1,090,300 11 7% 26 (61,133) 66,100 - 9,897,500 9,552,477 10,389,300 5 0% 14 206,500 130,039 231,000 11 9% 15 1,927,000 1,893,879 2,933,800 52 2% 16 1,390,900 1,407,933 1,378,700 -0 9% 17 2.046,400 2.115,984 3,152,700 54 1% 18 206,000 19 1,604,100 1,873,306 1,672,700 4 3% 20 451,700 453,424 479,400 6 1% 21 3,494,800 3,437,652 3,597.200 2 9% 22 1,342,300 1,335,544 1,301,300 -3 1% 24,500 1,006,800 Enrtro Assessments and Policy work increased (12,200) 1,106,300 Introduction of Source Water protection program 206,000 New expenditure classification 68.600 27,700 102,400 (41,000) Reassignment of some staff 12,463.700 12,647,760 14,952,800 20 0% 2,489,100 23 2,111,800 2,044,906 2,262,100 24 443,500 413,059 410,600 24 323,200 296,114 315,000 24 366,100 344,441 429,900 24 247,400 259,965 259,600 24 717,300 711,474 697,500 24 Consolidated with Communications 25 1,007,600 738,589 2,005,400 5,216,900 4,808.547 6.380,100 Expenditure Total 27,578,100 27,008,784 31,722,200 7 1% 150,300 New programming -7 4% (32,900) Director moeed to Community Seruces -2.5% (8,200) 17.4% 63,800 Volunteer program added 4 9% 12,200 -2 8% (19,800) 99 0% 997,800 New programming 223% 1,163,200 15.0% 4,144,100 Page 2 Toronto and Region Conservation Authority 2005 Operating Budget - Final Funding Sources: Program/User fees. Rental Properties Black Creek Pioneer Village Food Services Development Services Environmental Services Conservation Areas Kortnght Centre for Conservation Conservation Field Centres Summary All Other Program/User fees Reserves CFGT - Living City CFGT - Flowthrough Other Municipal Provincial Federal Donations /Fundraising Private Adjust internal plant material charges in user fees Other Revenue total Net Expenditures Net Expenditures funded by: Provincial Transfer Payments Municipal Levy Deficit / (Surplus) 2004 Budget 2004 2005 Actual Budget % Chg. }CIA, $ $ 2,114,100 1,949,572 2,288,400 8 2% 174,300 1,858,200 1,717,793 1,828,900 -1 6% (29,300) 1,050,200 1,067,964 1,145, 900 9 1% 95,700 1,740,000 2,304,998 2,229,500 28 1% 489,500 1,098,200 1,913,729 1,183,500 85,300 2,824,600 2,776,539 2,978,100 5.4% 153,500 1,098,100 1,058,965 1,080,900 -1.6% (17,200) 1,340,600 1,312,189 1,494,400 11.5% 153,800 476,200 653,653 583,000 22.4% 193,000 (1,217,894) 196,700 1.9% 800,100 767,240 800,000 -0.0% 680.200 671,767 237,700 - 65.1% 409,500 (114,489) 1,604,200 291.7% 592,850 911,556 1,507,900 154.3% 664,650 1,105, 299 1,090,600 64.1% 462,500 461,051 465,400 0.6% 394,700 445,637 1,360,400 244 7% (317,000) (829,841) (735,100) 131.9% Change Notes ORC rentals programs annualized Filming budget reduced Volume increases. Fee budget reflective of 2004 actuals User fee increases Fee and wlume increases. 106,800 3,700 (100) (442,500) Community Transformation funding sources reclassified 1,194,700 New Dev.Services E.A. funding 915,050 New Source Water Protection program 425,950 Community Transformation Partnership 2,900 965,700 Community Transformation Partnership (418,100) Internal plant not budgeted in 04 17,480,700 16,955,728 21,340,400 22.1% 3,859,700 10,097.400 10,053,057 10.381.800 2 8% 284.400 845,800 845,753 845,800 9,251,600 9,249,315 9,536,000 3.1% 284,400 6% average increase less property tax credit 0 (42,011) (0) TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY APPORTIONMENT OF 2005 FINAL OPERATING BUDGET LEVIES 2005 GENERAL LEVY t> LEVY TOTAL EXCLUDING TAX GENERAL ROUGE TAX ADJ. ADJUST. LEVY PARK $ $ $ AWALA- TOSORONTIO 712 DURHAM 285,822 TORONTO 6,334,470 MONO 786 PEEL 1,023,245 YORK 1,706,494 LEVIES ON HAND / SPECIAL excludes Rouge Park levy 46,678 10 90 86,427 51,266 712 8 332,500 3,356 6,334,480 74,376 876 9 1,109,672 12,014 1,757,760 20,037 Page 3 2004 Operating OPERATING Change LEVY • 05/04 685 27 3.9% 9,351,529 184 , 4 71 9,536,000 109,800 288,372 44,128 15.3% 6,240,710 93,770 1.5% 765 111 14.5% 1,062,700 46,972 4.4% 1,658,368 99,392 6.0% 9,251,600 284,400 3.1% 9,351,529 184,4711 9,536,000 109,800 9,251,600 284,400 3.1% 98 Page 4 TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY APPORTIONMENT OF 2005 LEVIES MATCHING* AND NON - MATCHING FORMAT * Based on preliminary estimates of provincial funding. 99 OPERATING LEVY TOTAL — MATCHING* NON - MATCHING $ $ $ ADJALA - TOSORONTIO 64 648 712 DURHAM 25,851 306,649 332,500 TORONTO 572,922 5,761, 558 6,334,480 MONO 71 805 876 PEEL 92,548 1,017,124 1,109,672 YORK 154,344 1,603,416 1,757,760 845,800 8,690,200 9,536,000 * Based on preliminary estimates of provincial funding. 99 THE TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY BASIS OF APPORTIONMENT - MUNICIPAL LEVY - 2005 (BASED ON 2004 FOR 2005 MODIFIED CURRENT VALUE ASSESSMENT FIGURES *) MUNICIPALITY CURRENT VALUE ASSESSMENT %OF MUNICIP- ALITY IN AUTHORITY Township of Adjala - Tosorontio Durham, Regional Municipality of City of Toronto Town of Mono Peel, Regional Municipality of York, Regional Municipality of $(000's) 1,033, 534 19,908,777 367,686,396 912,803 138,872,933 108,263,954 636,678,397 ANALYSIS OF REGIONAL MUNICIPALITIES * Durham, Regional Municipality of Ajax, Town of Pickering, Town of Uxbridge Township Peel, Regional Municipality of Brampton, City Mississauga, City of Caledon, Town of York, Regional Municipality of Aurora, Town of Markham, Town of Richmond Hill, Town of Vaughan, Town of Whitchurch -Stouffville, Town of King Township 7,803,650 9,973,069 2,132, 057 19,908,777 39,884,211 91,710,206 7,278,516 138,872,933 5,697,806 35,200,675 21,231,922 39,841,676 3,358,117 2,933,758 108,263,954 ** As provided by the Ministry of Municipal Affairs. Based on 2001 Census data from Statistics Canada 100 CURRENT VALUE ASSESSMENT IN WATERSHED $(000's) TOTAL POPULATION Page 5 POPULATION IN AUTHORITY** 4 41,341 341 10,082 082 403 * 16,590,646 178,269 149,512 100 367,686,396 2,481,494 2,481,494 5 45,640 6,922 346 59,394,605 988,948 435,112 99,054,047 603,375 540,757 86 95 19 63 33 55 542,812,675 4,269,090 3,607,624 6,711,139 9,474,416 405,091 16, 590,646 25,127, 053 30, 264, 368 4,003,184 59, 394, 605 73,753 63,428 87,139 82,782 17,377 3,302 178,269 149,512 325,428 205,020 612,925 202,265 50,595 27,827 988,948 435,112 4 227,912 100 35,200,675 99 21,019,603 100 39,841,676 43 1,443, 990 45 1,320,191 40,167 1,607 208,615 208,615 132,030 130,710 182,022 182,022 22,008 9,463 18,533 8,340 99,054,047 603,375 540,757 THE TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY 2005 LEVY APPORTIONMENT MUNICIPALITY ADJALA - TOSORONTIO DURHAM, REGIONAL MUNICIPALITY OF Ajax Pickering Uxbridge CITY OF TORONTO TOWN OF MONO PEEL, REGIONAL MUNICIPALITY OF Brampton Mississauga Caledon YORK, REGIONAL MUNICIPALITY OF Aurora Markham Richmond Vaughan Whitchurch - Stouffville King 6,711,139 9,474,416 405,091 25,127, 053 30, 264, 368 4,003,184 227,912 35,200,675 21, 019,603 39,841, 676 1,443, 990 1,320,191 MODIFIED CURRENT VALUE ASSESSMENT IN WATERSHED $(000's) 41,341 16,590,646 367, 686, 396 45,640 59, 394, 605 2005 GENERAL LEVY PROPORTIONATE FACTOR Page 6 2004 GENERAL LEVY PROPORTIONATE FACTOR 0.00762% 3.05642% 67.73725% 0.00841 % 10.94201% 99,054,047 18.24829% 0.00752% 3.01505% 68.45022% 0.00839% 10.74822% 17.77060% 542,812,675 100.00000% 101 100.00000% Page 7 TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY Full -time Equivalents of staffing in 2005 Final Budget Seasonal, Part -time. FULL -TIME Contract TOTAL FTE's 2004 2005 2004 2005 2004 2005 Finance & Business Development 76.9 80.8 51.1 51.2 128.0 132.0 Watershed Management 109.5 140.9 59.3 49.4 168.8 190.4 Office of the CAO 44.5 51.4 10.1 10.3 54.6 61.7 Total operating 230.9 273.1 120.5 111.0 351.4 384.0 Capital * 69.1 77.9 24.9 16.5 94.0 94.4 TOTAL STAFFING 300.0 351.0 145.4 127.5 445.4 478.5 * 2005 capital staffing Is still In progress until detailed capital budget completed. 102 Toronto and Region Conservation Authority 2005 OPERATING BUDGET DIVISION: Finance and Business Development Page 8 ACTIVITY: Administration 2004 2004 2005 Budget Actuals Bud et %Chg. $ Chg. Expenditures: Financial Services 768,700 755,104 795,600 3.5% 26,900 Office Services 886,100 860,780 938,000 5.9% 51,900 Information Technology 309,600 252,803 474,800 53.4% 165,200 GIS 222,800 273,740 294,800 32.3% 72,000 Project Surcharge (400,000) (474,220) (450,000) 12.5% (50,000) Expenditure Total 1,787,200 1,668,207 2,053,200 14.9% 266,000 Funding Sources: Program /User fees 366,000 388,014 408,000 11.5% 42,000 Reserves 18,000 20,000 11.1% 2,000 CFGT - Living City CFGT - Flowthrough Municipal Provincial 50,000 30,000 20,000 - 60.0% (30,000) Federal Donations /Fundraising Private 4,799 Revenue Total Net Expenditures 434,000 422,813 , 448,000 3.2% 14,000 1,353,200 1,245,394 1,605,200 18.6% 252,000 Comments: Major 05 over 04 Changes (in addition to economic factors): Finance: Clerk converted from part-time to full -time Office Services: Records Assistant and Downsview office costs annualized Info Technology: Technician, Database Admin. postions annualized GIS: Higher volume /intemal charges. No provincial revenue in 2005. 103 Toronto and Region Conservation Authority 2005 OPERATING BUDGET DIVISION: Finance and Business Development Page 9 ACTIVITY: Rental Properties Expenditures: Basic Rentals ORC Rentals Special Agreements 2004 2004 2005 Budget Actuals Budget % Chg. $ Chg. 567,100 590,875 662,200 16.8% 95,100 517,500 543,471 738,000 42.6% 220,500 110,700 87,154 102,700 -7.2% (8,000) Expenditure Total 1,195,300 1,221,501 1,502,900 25.7% 307,600 Funding Sources: Program /User fees 2,114,100 1,949,572 2,288,400 8.2% 174,300 Reserves CFGT - Living City CFGT - Flowthrough Municipal 10,415 Provincial Federal 5,000 5,000 Donations /Fundraising Private Revenue total 2,119,100 1,959,987 2,293,400 8.2% 174,300 Net Expenditures (923,800) (738,486) (790,500) -14.4% 133,300 Comments: Major 05 over 04 Changes (in addition to economic factors): Rentals: Higher maintenance and property tax costs ORC: Annualization of newly transferred costs and revenues 104 TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY 2005 OPERATING BUDGET - FINAL DIVISION: Finance and Business Development ACTIVITY: Central Services Page 10 2004 2004 Budget Actuals 2005 Budget % Chg. $ Chg. Expenditures: Central Services 313,300 353,423 302,000 -3.6% (11,300) Expenditure Total 313,300 353,423 302,000 -3.6% (11,300) Funding Sources: Program /User fees Reserves CFGT - Living City CFGT - Flowthrough Municipal Federal Provincial Donations/Fundraising Private - - - - - - - - - ' Revenue Total - Net Expenditures 313,300 353,423 302,000 -3.6% (11,300) Comments: Major 05 over 04 Changes (in addition to economic factors): 105 Toronto and Region Conservation Authority 2005 OPERATING BUDGET DIVISION: Finance and Business Development Page 11 ACTIVITY: Property & Taxes 2004 2004 2005 Budget Actuals Budget % Chg. $ Chg. Expenditures: Property Services 582,000 535,054 697,700 19.9% 115,700 CLM (Taxes & Insurance) 822,400 728,538 434,000 -47.2% (388,400) Conservation Land Planning 97,800 96,225 70,000 - 28.4% (27,800) Expenditure Total 1,502,200 1,359,816 1,201,700 - 20.0% (300,500) Funding Sources: Program /User fees Resenes (875,291) CFGT - Living City 60,000 65,000 60,000 CFGT - Flowthrough Municipal Provincial 60,151 Federal Donations /Fundraising Private 55,000 134,587 85,000 54.5% 30,000 Revenue Total 115,000 (615,553) 145,000 26.1% 30,000 Net Expenditures 1,387,200 1,975,369 1,056,700 -23.8% (330,500) Comments: Major 05 over 04 Changes (in addition to economic factors): New Real Estate Coordinator and Senior Property Agent budgeted. Property taxes lower due to exemption. 2004 secondment costs not repeated in 2005. Conservation Land Planning moved from Resource Science to this program for 2005 budget. 106 Toronto and Region Conservation Authority 2005 OPERATING BUDGET DIVISION: Finance and Business Development Page 12 ACTIVITY: Black Creek Pioneer Village 2004 2004 2005 Budget Actuals Budget % Chg. $ Chg. penditures: Program Management 249,100 240,950 233,200 -6.4% (15,900) Curatorial 270,800 282,090 311,000 14.8% 40,200 Photography 354 Interpretative Programming 1,244,600 1,250,197 1,301,400 4.6% 56,800 Special Events 76,300 88,244 46,700 -38.8% (29,600) Heritage Education 246,000 235,286 246,900 0.4% 900 Building Maintenance 960,800 994,578 1,048,900 9.2% 88,100 Admissions 126,600 124,052 144,100 13.8% 17,500 Giftshop 411,600 389,499 401,200 -2.5% (10,400) Marketing and Sponsorships 537,400 430,442 439,700 -18.2% (97,700) penditure Total 4,123,200 4,035,693 4,173,100 1.2% 49,900 unding Sources: Program /User fees 1,858,200 1,717,793 1,828,900 -1.6% (29,300) Reserves - CFGT - Living City CFGT - Flowthrough 33,000 25,769 - 100.0% (33,000) Municipal Provincial 302,000 275,335 197,000 -34.8% (105,000) Federal 5,000 Donations /Fundraising 57,500 50,792 55,000 -4.3% (2,500) Private 23,271 evenue Total 2,250,700 2,097,959 2,080,900 -7.5% (169,800) et Expenditures 1,872,500 1,937,733 2,092,200 11.7% 219,700 Comments: Major 05 over 04 Changes (in addition to economic factors): Special Events: 2004 test Music Festival offerings budgeted differently in 2005. Special Provincially funded SARS promotion not repeated in 2005. 107 Toronto and Region Conservation Authority 2005 OPERATING BUDGET DIVISION: Finance and Business Development ACTIVITY: Food Services Page 13 2004 2004 Budget Actuals 2005 Budget % Chg. $ Chg. Expenditures: Weddings: Sales Costs & Revenue 300,600 277,467 Corporate Events: Sales Costs /Revenue 435,900 440,009 Banquet Costs & Internal Functions 73,300 100,370 Visitor Services 166,500 161,173 Equipment (4,050) 365,700 467,600 82,900 174,100 21.7% 7.3% 13.1% 4.6% 65,100 31,700 9,600 7,600 Expenditure Total 976,300 974,969 1,090,300 11.7% 114,000 Funding Sources: Program /User fees 1,050,200 1,067,964 Resendes (4,050) CFGT - Living City CFGT - Flowthrough Municipal Pro%incial Federal Donations /Fundraising Private 1,145,900 9.1% 95,700 Revenue Total 1,050,200 1,063,914 1,145,900 9.1% 95,700 Net Expenditures (73,900) (88,945) (55,600) -24.8% 18,300 Comments: Major 05 over 04 Changes (in addition to economic factors): Volume increase with associated costs projected. 108 Toronto and Region Conservation Authority 2005 OPERATING BUDGET DIVISION: Watershed Management Page 14 ACTIVITY: WM Divisional Management / EMS 2004 2004 2005 Budget Actuals Budget % Chg. $ Chg. Expenditures: Divisional Management 155,300 81,190 176,000 18.3% 28,400 Environmental Management System 51,200 48,849 55,000 5.5% 2,800 Expenditure Total 206,500 130,039 231,000 15.1% 31,200 Funding Sources: Program /User fees Reserves CFGT - Living City CFGT - Flowthrough Municipal Provincial Federal Donations /Fundraising Private 8,947 15,000 149 Revenue Total 9,097 15,000 Net Expenditures 206,500 120,942 216,000 15.1% 31,200 Comments: Major 05 over 04 Changes (in addition to economic factors): Admin. Assistant position restored in 2005 New revenue of $15K from RAP MOU in 2005 109 Toronto and Region Conservation Authority 2005 OPERATING BUDGET DIVISION: Watershed Management Page - 15 ACTIVITY: Development Services 2004 2004 2005 Budget Actuals Budget % Chg. $ Chg. Expenditures: Planning Services 655,000 803,235 680,300 3.9% 25,300 Regulation Services 612,300 726,606 594,300 -2.9% (18,000) Solicitor /Realtor Enquiries 46,400 46,707 48,800 5.2% 2,400 Policy, Research and Special Projef 267,200 86,059 497,100 86.0% 229,900 Hearings 175,000 231,272 225,000 28.6% 50,000 Environmental Assessment 171,100 888,300 419.2% 717,200 Expenditure Total 1,927,000 1,893,879 2,933,800 52.2% 1,006,800 Funding Sources: Program /User fees 1,740,000 2,304,998 2,229,500 28.1% 489,500 Reserves CFGT - Living City - CFGT - Flowthrough - Municipal 99,800 15,794 930,300 832.2% 830,500 Provincial 15,000 2,895 23,900 59.3% 8,900 Federal 40,000 27,763 46,900 17.3% 6,900 Donations /Fundraising Private - Revenue Total 1,894,800 2,351,450 3,230,600 70.5% 1,335,800 Net Expenditures 32,200 (457,571) (296,800) -1022% (329,000) Comments: Major 05 over 04 Changes (in addition to economic factors): Planning: annualize several 2004 partial year positions. New fee structure generating considerably higher revenues. Policy development and Environmental Assessment work considerably accelerated utilizing special additional funding. 110 Toronto and Region Conservation Authority 2005 OPERATING BUDGET DIVISION: Watershed Management Page 16 ACTIVITY: Watershed Strategies 2004 2004 2005 Budget Actuals Budget % Chq. $ Chq. Expenditures: Don River 211,800 181,067 197,100 -6.9% (14,700) Humber River 279,400 314,775 345,800 23.8% 66,400 Rouge River 400,000 400,000 400,000 Highland Creek 37,800 32,871 20,000 -47.1% (17,800) Etobicoke - Mimico Creek 269,300 327,523 315,400 17.1% 46,100 Duffins Creek 251,600 234,638 213,600 -15.1% (38,000) Oak Ridges Moraine 153,500 109,849 117,900 -23.2% (35,600) Waterfront Strategy 61,100 - 61,100 For RAP MOU actuals 0 Portion funded from Capital (212,500) (192,790) (292,200) 37.5% (79,700) Expenditure Total 1,390,900 1,407,933 1,378,700 -0.9% (12,200) Funding Sources: Program /User fees Reserves - CFGT - Living City 125,000 125,000 125,000 CFGT - Flowthrough 86,490 45,000 - 45,000 Municipal 65,000 7,373 - 100.0% (65,000) Provincial 41,250 104,434 50,000 21.2% 8,750 Federal 41,250 73,678 50,000 21.2% 8,750 Donations /Fundraising 400,000 400,346 400,000 Private 59,300 27,649 267,200 350.6% 207,900 Revenue Total 731,800 824,971 937,200 28.1% 205,400 Net Expenditures 659,100 582,963 441,500 -33.0% (217,600) Comments: Major 05 over 04 Changes (in addition to economic factors): Portion of existing Waterfront staff budget here in 2005 to reflect similarity of work. Some reallocating of resources to priority areas. Additional revenue sources anticipated. ORM: self - funded CA Coalition activity restored to average level in 2005. 111 Toronto and Region Conservation Authority 2005 OPERATING BUDGET DIVISION: ACTIVITY: Watershed Management Resource Science Page 17 Ex penditures: Program Management Conservation Land Planning Archaeology Special Projects Natural Heritage Water Management Flood Forecasting & Waming Op. & Maintenance of Dams, Channels and Water Control Structures Source Water Protection Expenditure Total Funding Sources: Program /User fees Reserves CFGT - Living City CFGT - Flowthrough Municipal Provincial Federal Donations /Fundraising Private Revenue Total 2004 2004 2005 Budget Actuals Budget % Chg. $ Chg. 226,300 193,565 292,700 29.3% 66,400 Moved to Property & Taxes - 110,200 247,622 175,000 58.8% 64,800 100,000 112,353 100,000 359,200 379,466 423,800 18.0% 64,600 686,900 689,687 712,800 3.8% 25,900 221,000 154,025 158,700 -28.2% (62,300) 342,800 339,265 373,400 8.9% 30,600 916,300 - 916,300 2,046,400 2,115,984 3,152,700 54.1% 1,106,300 110,200 247,622 175,000 58.8% 64,800 65,000 60,000 65,000 25,000 5,766 152,000 508.0% 127,000 115,000 150,160 900,000 682.6% 785,000 25,000 17,252 25,000 361 340,200 481,161 1,317,000 287.1% 976,800 Net Expenditures 1,706,200 1,634,823 1,835,700 7.6% 129,500 Comments: Major 05 over 04 Changes (in addition to economic factors): New provinically funded Source Water Protection program commenced. Admin: New Director of Urban Ecology position annualized. Planning moved to Property & Taxes budget. Archaeology: self - funded program budgeted more completely. Natural Heritage: partial year Planning Ecologist charged here. Water Management: several 2004 positions annualized. Flood Waming: some outside technical services costs reduced. 112 TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY 2005 OPERATING BUDGET DIVISION: Community Services GROUP: ACTIVITY: Divisional Management Page 18 Expenditures: Community Services Management FUNDING SOURCES: User fees: Reserves CFGT - Living City CFGT - Flowthrough Other - Municipal Other - Provincial Other - Federal Other - Donations /Fundraising Other - Private NET EXPENDITURES 2004 2004 2005 BUDGET Actuals BUDGET % CHG. $ CHG. $ $ $ 206,000 206,000 206,000 206,000 206,000 - 206,000 Major 05 over 04 Changes (those in addition to economic factors): Director hired overseeing CA's, KCC and BCPV. Costs consolidated here. Partial year was in 2004 base under Corporate admin. Annualized and portion of CA's Admin moved here as well. 113 Toronto and Region Conservation Authority 2005 OPERATING BUDGET DIVISION: Watershed Management Page 19 ACTIVITY: Environmental Services 2004 2004 2005 Budget Actuals Budget % Chg. $ Chg. Expenditures: Program Management 272,100 436,167 476,900 75.3% 204,800 Plant Propagation 381,200 464,159 423,100 11.0% 41,900 Planting and Special Projects 533,900 947,350 767,700 43.8% 233,800 Asian Longhomed Beetle 416,900 496,281 423,100 1.5% 6,200 Internal Recoveries (470,651) (418,100) - (418,100) Expenditure Total Funding Sources: Program /User fees 1,098,200 1,913,729 1,183,500 7.8% 85,300 Reserves (308,300) CFGT - Living City 200,000 200,000 200,000 CFGT - Flowthrough 11,800 52,829 11,800 Municipal 185,400 (203,157) 304,200 64.1% 118,800 Provincial 39,600 223,122 61,500 55.3% 21,900 Federal 420,500 750,042 423,100 0.6% 2,600 Donations /Fundraising Private 50,000 - 50,000 Internal Recoveries (317,000) (829,841) (735,100) 131.9% (418,100) 1,604,100 1,873,306 1,672,700 4.3% 68,600 Revenue Total 1,638,500 1,798,424 1,499,000 -8.5% (139,500) Net Expenditures (34,400) 74,882 173,700 - 604.9% 208,100 Comments: Major 05 over 04 Changes (in addition to economic factors): Prog Management: Inland Fill and West Nile costs and revenue new to 2005 budget. Special projects: more self - funded projects anticipated Staff added to federally funded Asian Longhom Beetle Program Internal recoveries: 2005 budget better reflects actuals than 2004 budget. 114 Toronto and Region Conservation Authority 2005 OPERATING BUDGET DIVISION: Watershed Management ACTIVITY: Enforcement Page 20 2004 2004 Budget Actuals 2005 Budget 454,400 25,000 % Chg. $ Chg. Expenditures: Enforcement 431,700 424,915 Legal 20,000 28,509 5.0% 21,800 Expenditure Total 451,700 453,424 479,400 4.8% 21,800 Funding Sources: Program /User fees Reserves CFGT - Living City CFGT - Flowthrough Municipal Provincial Federal Donations /Fundraising Private Revenue Total Net Expenditures 451,700 453,424 479,400 4.8% 21,800 Comments: Major 05 over 04 Changes (in addition to economic factors): 115 Toronto and Region Conservation Authority 2005 OPERATING BUDGET DIVISION: ACTIVITY: Watershed Management Conservation Areas Page 21 Expenditures: General Operations West Zone West Zone Administration Albion Hills Glen Haffy Indian Line Boyd Heart Lake East Zone East Zone Administration Bruce's Mill Petticoat Creek Land Management East Zone: West Zone. Major Maintenance Expenditure Total Funding Sources: Authonty Generated Reserves CFGT - Living City CFGT - Flowthrough Municipal Provincial Federal Donations /Fundraising Private ;Revenue Total 2004 2004 2005 Budget Actuals Budget % Chg. $ Chg. $ $ $ 587,900 606,722 513,600 -12.6% (74,300) 121,000 577,800 222,800 427,400 209,500 268,800 93,900 332,200 340,800 123,634 598,133 181,049 374,628 208,779 267,603 93,812 337,360 358,434 121,400 630,000 221,700 443,800 227,100 281,100 0.3% 9.0% -0.5% 3 8% 8.4% 4.6% 104,900 11.7% 361,100 8.7% 346,400 1.6% 400 52,200 (1,100) 16,400 17,600 12,300 11,000 28,900 5,600 138,000 117,871 167,900 21.7% 29,900 149,700 147,617 153,200 2.3% 3,500 25,000 22,012 25,000 3,494,800 3,437,652 3,597,200 2.9% 102,400 2,824,600 2,776,539 2,978,100 5.4% 153,500 4,993 5,000 5,000 9,445 5,000 - 100.0% (5,000) 19,427 6,535 2,829,600 2,816,941 2,983,100 5.4% 153,500 Net Expenditures 665,200 620,711 614,100 -7.7% (51,100) Comments: Malor 05 over 04 Changes (those In addition to economic factors): Revenue: Increase General Operations Conservation Joumeys revenue in line with 2004 actua Increased AH Winter program revenue to reflect actuals. Addition of HL Enviro Picnic budget, new program to HL. Increased HL Day Use revenue in line with 2004 actuals. Additional BM revenue for new programming for mountain biking and day camps. Increased BM Day use revenue in line with 2004 actuals. Addition of PC snack bar budget. Expenses: Wage increases for incremental increases, COLA, reclassification and transfers. Vehicle and equipment rate increases. Increased AH winter expenses to reflect actuals. Addition of HL Enviro Picnic budget Addition of PC snack bar budget. Addition of Nursery staff to CA for hazard tree removal. 116 TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY 2005 OPERATING BUDGET DIVISION: GROUP: ACTIVITY: Watershed Management Kortright Centre for Conservation Page 22 2004 2004 2005 BUDGET Actuals BUDGET % CHG. $ CHG. $ $ $ Expenditures: Administration 118,500 101,051 112,100 -5.4% (6,400) Grounds 125,800 277,832 119,800 -4.8% (6,000) Buildings 164,300 132,574 155,500 -5.4% (8,800) General Programs 63,600 70,619 51,700 -18.7% (11,900) Day Use 38,550 14,847 71,400 85.2% 32,850 Public Programs 37,750 42,916 34,800 -7.8% (2,950) Education Programs 287,800 285,907 291,800 1.4% 4,000 Cafe 74,900 87,505 85,100 13.6% 10,200 Gift Shop 75,800 83,328 92,900 22.6% 17,100 Maple Syrup Program 233,600 232,364 233,400 -0.1% (200) All other Programs 121,700 6,600 52,800 -56.6% (68,900) Expenditure Total 1,342,300 1,335,544 1,301,300 -3.1% (41,000) Funding Sources: User fees by program Component: User Fees 1,098,100 1,058,965 1,080,900 -3.4% (36,800) Reserves CFGT - Living City 100,000 100,000 100,000 CFGT- Flowthrough 21,500 169,275 - 100.0% (21,500) Municipal Provincial 2,059 Federal Donations /Fundraising 2,775 Private Revenue Total 1,219,600 1,333,074 1,180,900 -3.2% (38,700) Net Expenditures 122,700 2,470 120,400 -1.9% (2,300) Comments: Major 05 over 04 Changes (those in addition to economic factors): Energy program Coordinator not filled, net of some seasonal staff backfilling. Lead Hand position moped to CA's. Energy Program revenue reduced to more modest target. Delete Foundation Endowment Interest Revenue. Reduced Foundation Transfer to actual. Labourer position transferred to East Zone. 117 Toronto and Region Conservation Authority 2005 OPERATING BUDGET DIVISION: Office of the CAO Page 23 ACTIVITY: Conservation Field Centres 2004 2004 2005 Budget Actuals Budget % Chg. $ Chg. Ex penditures: Program Management 111,100 111,826 134,000 20.6% 22,900 Education Support Services 217,600 213,206 252,700 16.1% 35,100 Albion Hills 649,600 595,854 670,300 3.2% 20,700 Claremont 517,200 512,201 600,300 16.1% 83,100 Lake St. George 616,300 611,820 604,800 -1.9% (11,500) Expenditure Total 2,111,800 2,044,906 2,262,100 7.1% 150,300 Funding Sources: Program /User fees 1,340,600 1,312,189 1,494,400 11.5% 153,800 Reserves 60,000 25,886 (2,000) - 103.3% (62,000) CFGT - Living City 200,000 200,000 250,000 25.0% 50,000 CFGT- Flowthrough 119,000 107,539 116,500 -2.1% (2,500) Municipal 10,000 25,000 16,000 60.0% 6,000 Provincial 1,250 - Federal 7,808 - Donations /Fundraising 5,000 150 10,400 108.0% 5,400 Private Revenue Total 1,734,600 1,679,822 1,885,300 8.7% 150,700 Net Expenditures 377,200 365,084 376,800 -0.1% (400) Comments: Major 05 over 04 Changes (in addition to economic factors): Partial year Admin. Assistant and Sales Assistant proposed New self funded prgrams: Investigating Living City Spaces, Education Volunteers Major Maintenance needs at Claremont. Some fees increased, Lake St. George Dormitory utilization increased 118 Toronto and Region Conservation Authority 2005 OPERATING BUDGET DIVISION: ACTIVITY: Office of the CAO CAO Programs Page 24 Expenditures: Corporate Management Corporate Secretariat Human Resources Customer Services Communications Marketing Expenditure Total Funding Sources: Program /User fees Reserves CFGT - Living City CFGT - Flowthrough Municipal Provincial Federal Donations /Fundraising Private Revenue Total 2004 2004 Budget Actuals 443,500 323,200 366,100 247,400 717,300 Consolidated with 2005 Budget 413,059 410,600 296,114 315,000 344,441 429,900 259,965 259,600 711,474 697,500 Communications 2,097,500 2,025,053 2,112,600 9,069 33,000 115,000 30,000 25,000 127,288 107,600 % Chg. $ Chg. -7.4% (32,900) -2.5% (8,200) 17.4% 63,800 4.9% 12,200 -2.8% (19,800) 0.7% 15,100 -6.4% (7,400) 115,000 224,357 107,600 -6.4% (7,400) Net Expenditures 1,982,500 1,800,696 2,005,000 1.1% 22,500 Comments: Major 05 over 04 Changes (in addition to economic factors): Corp Management: partial year new Director moved to Comunity Services budget. Human Resources: Volunteer Coordinator and HR clerk added net of Safety Officer vacancy Corp. Communications: some 2004 promotional initiatives not repeated in 2005. 119 TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY 2005 OPERATING BUDGET DIVISION: Office of the CAO Page 25 ACTIVITY: Community Transformation Partnerships (LCC at Kortright) 2004 2004 2005 BUDGET Actuals BUDGET % CHG. $ CHG. $ $ $ Expenditures: Development, Management & Communications 394,800 153,577 645,400 63.5% 250,600 Mayors' Megawatt Challenge 49,700 23,600 180,400 263.0% 130,700 Mayors' Green Building Challenge 49,100 - 49,100 Greening Health Care 152,400 55,670 219,800 44.2% 67,400 Home Energy Clinic 192,000 293,000 52.6% 101,000 Sustainable Communities Charette 40,000 68,800 72.0% 28,800 Greening the Urban Village, CMHC Proposal 28,700 5,100 -82.2% (23,600) Regional Clean Air Plan, (CAP Project) 40,000 - 100.0% (40,000) OCETA 10,000 171,900 1619.0% 161,900 GTA Quest 100,000 150,000 50.0% 50,000 Eneriife Projects 5,294 Sustainable Schools 73,400 73,400 All Others 500,448 148,500 - 148,500 Expenditure Total 1,007,600 738,589 2,005,400 99.0% 997,800 Funding Sources: Program /User fees Reserves CFGT - Living City 50,100 17,240 - 100.0% (50,100) CFGT - Flowthrough 494,900 187,420 64,400 -87.0% (430,500) Municipal 19,300 24,320 186,700 867.4% 167,400 Provincial 30,000 32,150 255,500 751.7% 225,500 Federal 132,900 179,329 540,600 306.8% 407,700 Donations /Fundraising 303 - Private 280,400 127,682 958,200 241.7% 677,800 Revenue Total 1,007,600 568,444 2,005,400 99.0% 997,800 706,870 Net Expenditures 170,145 Comments: Major 05 over 04 Changes (those in addition to economic factors): Expansion into Sustainable Schools programming (with offsetting revenue) Various fine - tuning of programs 120 TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY 2005 OPERATING BUDGET DIVISION: Finance and Business Development ACTIVITY: Vehicle & Equipment Page 26 2004 2004 2005 Budget Actuals Budget % Chg. $ Chg. Expenditures: Fuel, Maintenance & Repairs 396,100 443,588 423,800 7.0% Vehicle Purchases - New - Vehicle Purchases - Replacement 213,700 152,751 224,400 5.0% Equipment Purchases - New 4,500 9,334 5,000 11.1% Equipment Purchases - Replacement 110,000 124,543 181,600 65.1% Equipment Disposal Proceeds (36,100) (47,529) (33,000) -8.6% Internal Recoveries (688,200) (743,820) (735,700) 6.9% 27,700 10,700 500 71,600 3,100 (47,500) Expenditure Total (61,133) 66,100 - 66,100 Funding Sources: Program /User fees - Reserves (61,133) 66,100 - CFGT - Living City - CFGT - Flowthrough - Municipal - Prmincial - Federal - Donations/Fundraising - Private - 66,100 Revenue Total (61,133) 66,100 - 66,100 Net Expenditures 0 - Comments: Major 05 over 04 Changes (those in addition to economic factors): Normal rate of replacements plus replacement of boat used for fish program (electroshocking) for which the leaking problem has become beyond repair. 121 Toronto and Region Conservation Authority Page 1 2005 Final Capital Budget MONITORING AND REPORTING WATERSHED PLANNING Peel Water Management York Water Management Durham Water Management Water Cost Centres Costs covered by Water management Programs Floodplain Mapping York/Peel /Durham/Toronto Groundwater Terrestrial Natural Heritage REGENERATION Toronto Remedial Action Plan Project (RAP activity also shown under other projects) Peel Natural Heritage Project York Natural Heritage Project Durham Natural Herrtage Project Valley and Shoreline Regeneration Projects City of Toronto Waterfront Project Region Of Durham Waterfront Project Waterfront Revitilization Corporation Projects Humber Bay Shores Waterfront Park Lakefill Quality Program SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITIES Stewardship Education FLOOD PROTECTION Lower Don Env. Assessment INFRASTRUCTURE Public Use Infrastructure Other Facilities Retrofrts Drinking Water System Upgrades 2004 2004 2005 BUDGET Actuals BUDGET % Chg. $ $ $ 942,300 1,019,385 845,300 - 10.29% 1,320,600 719,761 1,322,700 0 16% 698,900 451,907 881,600 26.14% 389,900 149,573 484,700 24.31% 1,633,200 1,246,120 2,330,800 42.71% (1,633,200) (1,188,740) (2,185,500) 33.82% 849,500 590,146 676,500 - 20.36% 647,600 464,259 631,900 -2.42% 263,000 268,205 281,200 6.92% 2,535,900 1,790,747 2,346,900 -7.45% (589,200) (495,990) (518,300) - 12.03% 892,400 493,447 905,200 1.43% 715,900 519,380 586,700 - 18.05% 125,000 120,850 125,300 0.24% 2,308,500 1,664,893 2,655,000 15.01% 1,654,500 1,926,277 1,313,000 - 20.64% 167,600 307,069 267,700 59.73% 5,465,000 2,766,425 20,429,000 273.82% 1,023,400 295,989 707,400 -30.88% 128,300 78,282 10,000 -92.21% $ Chg. Budget Change Notes (97.000)Lower level of activity anticipated 2,100 182,700 Planning /Integration work accelerated 94,800 Channel design and other items added 697,600 Planning /Integration work accelerated (552,300) Some watersheds approaching (173,000)completion (15, 700) 18,200 (189,000)A few less regeneration projects 70,900 12,800 (129,200)A few less regeneration projects 300 346,500 (341, 500) 100,100 Western Beaches Watercourse and 14,964,000 Tommy Thompson work added (316,000)Lower level of activity anticipated (118,300)Program winding down 283,900 379,258 512,600 80.56% 228,700 More funding sources for projects 81,000 97,509 131,500 62.35% 50,500 700,000 698,355 3,939,000 462.71% 3,239,000 Work continues at higher level 351,600 259,155 372,500 5.94% 20,900 583,6C0 247,993 1,150,700 97.17% 370 , 000 136,171 824 , 600 122.86% Sizable project at Albion Hills 567,100 campground 454,600 Sizable orolert at Albion Hills The Living City Centre Design and Build Nursery Relocation Project BCPV Retrofit and Attraction Development Information Technology Project Administrative Office REGIONAL OPEN SPACE Waterfront Open Space Acquisition - Greenspace Strategy Natural Areas Protection Expenditure total Funding Sources: Program /User fees Reserves CFGT - Living City CFGT - Flowthrough Other - Municipal Other - Provincial Other - Federal Other - Donations /Fundraising Other - Private Lease Revenue Land Sale Proceeds Transfers between Projects Revenue total Net Expenditures Provincial Transfer Payments Municipal Levy (Surplus) / Deficit 2004 2004 2005 Budget BUDGET Actuals BUDGET % Chg. $$ Chg, Change $ $ $ Notes 200,000 195,100 1,500,000 650.00% 1,300,000 Assumes all partner approvals secured 200,000 1,962 800,000 300.00% 600,000 1,750,000 787,426 1,400,100 - 19.99% (349,900)in progress, work completed in 2005 315,000 319,947 350,000 11.11% 35,000 475,000 424,067 500,000 5.26% 25,000 3,000,000 500,000 500,000 31,690 4,440,000 1,048,664 2,204,700 3,248 500,000 48.00% 340.94% 1,440,000 Large acquisitions possible 1,704,700 Large acquisitions possible 28,849,200 17,818,533 52,722,800 82.75% 23,873,600 128,300 58,691 11,200 128,000 (36,930) 700,000 446.88% 572,000 Reserves to Nursery relocation project 102,900 182,596 99,600 -3.21% (3,300) 3,061,800 907,729 4,539,700 48.27% 1,477,900 More for Land Acquisition Assumes Living City Centre funding 1,359,300 686,607 2,404,200 76.87% 1,044,900 approved Assumes Living City Centre funding 643,800 291,775 998,100 55.03% 354,300 approved 500,000 749,463 840,000 68.00% 340,000 More for Land Acquisition 6,409,800 3,907,242 24,907,000 288.58% 18,497,200 TWRC 133,600 189,702 - 100.00% (133,600) 240,700 147,867 1•,221,400 407.44% 980,700 More Land acq proceeds anticipated (589,200) (495,990) (518,300) - 12.03% 70,900 12,119,000 6,588,752 35,202,900 190.5% 23,083,900 16, 730,200 11,229, 780 17, 519,900 4.7% 789,700 16,830,200 11,226,490 17,719,900 (100,000) 3,291 (200,000) 5.3% 889,700 PROJECT & MUNICIPALITY GREENSPACE LAND ACO. WATERFRONT REGENERATION PROJ. T.W.R.C. PROJECTS ETOB. MOTEL STRIP VALLEY AND SHORELINE REGENERATION REMEDIAL ACTION PLANS WATER MANAGEMENT PROJECTS STEWARDSHIP /EDUCATION FLOODPLAIN MAPPING REGIONAL MONITORING GROUNDWATER STRATEGIES TERRESTRIAL NATURAL HERITAGE PUBLIC USE INFRASTRUCTURE LIVING CITY CENTRE OTHER PUBLIC USE RETRO. DRINKING WATER UPGRADES INFO. TECHNOLOGY ACO. MAJOR FACILITIES RETROFIT BCPV DEVELOPMENT & RETROFIT 2005 TOTAL 2004 COMPARATIVES TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY APPORTIONMENT OF 2005 BUDGET CAPITAL AND PROJECT LEVIES ADJALA- TOSO- RONTIO DURHAM TORONTO MONO $ $ $ $ 50,000 93,900 1,193,000 1,800,000 110,000 1,592,000 242,500 30,000 142,000 50,000 110,500 25,000 19 7,641 169,343 23 9,347 207,143 27 10,697 38 15,282 237,081 338,687 350 000 TOTAL LEVY PEEL YORK INVOICED $ 50,000 LEVIES ON HAND Page 2 TOTAL LEVY OTHER TOTAL BUDGET FUNDING COST 600,000 763,000 226,000 75,000 230,000 110,000 75,000 21 27,355 26 33,461 815,000 29 42 $ $ 4,700 104,700 1,288,900 1,800,000 300,000 2,802,000 610,000 1,815,500 256,000 150,000 367,000 230,000 510,000 110,000 330,500 50,000 150,000 45,621 250,000 250,000 500,000 815,000 38,297 63,869 350,000 54,710 91,241 500,000 350,000 208,600 313,300 43,400 1,330,300 353,700 710,300 709,400 1,073,500 5,000 166,200 27,900 201,400 122,500 435,700 824,600 1,050,100 353,700 2,510,300 3,311,400 2,689,000 281,000 533,200 537,900 531,900 150,000 372,500 500,000 1,250,700 824,600 350,000 500,000 1,400,100 7,031,400 7,344,700 250,400 1,580,700 24,368,000 24,368,000 353,700 707,400 144,700 134,400 383,100 143,300 307,400 100,000 131,200 1,000,000 700,000 2,655,000 3,445,800 2,689,000 644,100 676,500 845,300 631,900 281,200 372,500 1,500,000 1,950,700 824,600 350,000 500,000 1 400 100 107 846 867 5 937 254 118 3 097 823 1.905 431 11 787 600 5,932,300 17719`900 35,047,500 _ 52.767 500 80 895 358 5 926 726 88 2,975,657 1 695 892 11,493 800 5,336,400 16,830,200 11 167 400 27 627 600 SECTION IV - ITEMS FOR THE INFORMATION OF THE BOARD RES. #C30/05 - 2005 -2006 PUBLIC USE INFRASTRUCTURE CAPITAL PROJECT Allocation of projects within the 2005 -2006 Public Use Infrastructure Capital Project. Moved by: Seconded by: Bas Balkissoon Peter Milczyn IT IS RECOMMENDED THAT the report on the 2005 -2006 Public Use Infrastructure Capital Project, dated January 20, 2005, be received. CARRIED BACKGROUND Conservation areas, Kortright and the field centres submitted prioritized lists of proposed projects for Public Use Infrastructure for 2005 and 2006. The criteria that is used to prioritize the funding for Public Use Infrastructure projects is: 1.1 Legislative or regulatory requirements 1.2 Safety of staff and visitors 2.1 Core business /sustainability 2.2 Environmental standards 2.3 Infrastructure /asset protection 3.1 Revenue generation 3.2 Visitor service and presentation The proposed projects were reviewed and the following projects lists were developed based on the criteria. Staff does have flexibility to make changes in project details if required. RATIONALE By investing in Toronto and Region Conservation Authority's (TRCA's) infrastructure, customer satisfaction is increased by meeting their service needs. Enhancement of infrastructure and assets also addresses safety concerns of staff and visitors, demonstrates environmental best practices and increases revenue generating opportunities. DETAILS OF WORK TO BE DONE Upon project approval, staff will be required to follow TRCA policies and procedures relating to the purchase of goods and services. FINANCIAL DETAILS Funding to undertake the Public Use Infrastructure Project is available in the 2005 budget subject to approval of the final budget. 125 PROPOSED 2005 PUBLIC USE INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECTS 126 DESCRIPTION I ESTIMATE Heart Lake Telephone System Upgrade upgrade internal telephone system to improve emergency communication 5,000 Petticoat Creek Pool Deck /Line Upgrades annual upgrades to pool deck, liner, and chlorination system 7,500 Claremont Field Centre Air Conditioning install air conditioning in dorms and office to increase summer business 21,600 Bruce's Mill Beach Centre Roof install steel roofing over shingles 30,000 Beach Centre Upgrades upgrades to washrooms and building to provide facilities for YMCA partnership 20,000 Underground Storage Tank (UST) removal of UST at beach centre to comply with regulations 8,000 Lake St. George Dormitory Windows replace 64 windows and frames in dorm 1 & 2 1 18,800 Kortright Glass House Repair repair to meet safety standards 20,000 Barn Roof Repair repair steel roofing on barn that houses the Canadian Peregrine Foundation 4,000 General Projects Group Barbecues install permanent barbecues at 12 picnic shelters 12,000 Picnic Tables frames and material for 200 picnic tables 35,000 CA Planning Conservation Area master plans 55,000 Contingency Fund 13,100 TOTAL 2005 250,000 126 PROPOSED 2006 PUBLIC USE INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECTS 127 DESCRIPTION 1 ESTIMATE Albion Hills Vinyl Chlorine Curtain (replace chlorine curtain in swimming area 1 7,000 Albion Hills Field Centre 134,000 Windows 'upgrade windows to high efficiency Heart Lake Dock Replacement (replace docks used for boat rental and fishing 1 5,000 Glen Haffy Workshop Eaves trough install eaves trough 1,000 Underground Hydro Cable upgrade existing hydro cable for hatchery 3,400 Petticoat Creek Pool Deck /Line Upgrades annual upgrades to pool deck, liner, and chlorination system 7,500 Pool Complex Roof install steel roofing over shingles 25,000 Washroom Building install steel roofing over shingles at Rogers Acres and Pleasant Point 15,000 Claremont Field Centre Chimney remove and replace degraded chimney 5,000 Windows replace windows and frames 13,500 Bruce's Mill Retaining Wall reinforce existing wall and building foundation 17,000 Underground Storage Tank removal of UST at workshop to comply with regulations 8,000 Boyd North Washroom Roof install steel roofing over existing shingles 7,000 South Washroom Roof install steel roofing over existing shingles 6,000 General Projects Picnic Tables frames and material for 200 picnic tables 35,000 CA Planning Conservation Area master plans 57,750 Contingency Fund 15,350 TOTAL 2006 262,500 127 DEFERRED PROJECTS 128 DESCRIPTION 1 ESTIMATE Albion Hills Garage doors replace garage doors at workshop and drive shed 4,300 Picnic Shelter Floor concrete 3 picnic shelter floors 6,00 Drive Shed Roof replace steel roof on drive shed 4,800 Albion Hills Field Centre Exterior Siding install vinyl siding and sofits 26,750 Retractable Wall repair track and connectors 4,000 Indian Line Campground Cement pool deck and walkway 10,000 Replace Pool Chlorination System replace chlorination system with more economical and environmentally friendly salt based system 5,000 Workshop Roof install steel on workshop roof 4,000 Heart Lake Picnic Shelter Floors concrete 3 picnic shelter floors 6,000 Road Resurfacing resurface road from Green Acres to Lakemount 45,000 Picnic Shelters install 2 picnic shelters in Lakemount picnic area 40,000 Lunchroom & Office Upgrades • install new entrance door, ceiling, furniture and air conditioning 6,000 Glen Natty Hatchery Back Up Generator replace current generator with automatic system 30,000 Washroom Building provide washroom facilities at Headwaters lower pond 3,500 Boat Replacement replace boats with flat bottom boats suitable for fly fishing - existing boats can be use at Heart Lake boat rentals 14,400 Headwater Entrance Road grade road and apply gravel 7,000 Petticoat Creek Pool Pump Automation upgrade with monitoring and energy saving components 40,000 Claremont Field Centre Carpet re- carpet hallways, rooms, and lounge 14,500 Washroom Upgrades upgrade 2 mud room washrooms and 3 intern washrooms 8,000 Boyd Workshop Septic System replace weeping bed 7,000 Washroom Facilities install washroom facilities in Pineridge picnic area 20,000 Bruce's Mill Workshop Roof install steel roofing 15,000 Picnic Shelter install picnic shelter for picnics, Maple Syrup programming, and special events 20,000 128 Lake St. George Kitchen Floor replace kitchen floor 2,500 Teachers' Washrooms renovate 4 teachers washrooms in dorms 14,000 Kortright Erosion control along the side of building 5,000 Picnic Shelter install two picnic shelters to increase picnic business and provide shelter for retrofit 40,000 Washroom Facilities provide washroom facilities in valley 20,000 Road Resurfacing resurface road from Earth Rangers to Kortright Centre 30,000 Report prepared by: Derek Edwards, extension 5672 For Information contact: Derek Edwards, extension 5672 Date: January 20, 2005 RES. #C31/05 - ACCOUNTS RECEIVABLE STATUS REPORT March 31, 2005. Staff report on accounts receivable, as of March 31, 2005 Moved by: Seconded by: Maja Prentice Bas Balkissoon IT IS RECOMMENDED THAT the Accounts Receivable Status Report, as of March 31, 2005, be received. CARRIED RATIONALE The schedule below summarizes the status of receivables, including aging and classification. The schedule excludes $16,241 in accumulated interest arrears on invoices outstanding for more than 30 days. 129 ACCOUNTS RECEIVABLE AGING, BY CATEGORY Excluding Municipal Levy and MNR Grant - As at March 31, 2005 • CURRENT 31 TO 60 DAYS 61 TO 90 DAYS 90 PLUS DAYS TOTAL % SCHOOLS AND SCHOOL BOARDS 43,272 27,758 17 6,436 77,483 9.2% GOVERNMENT 393,532 117,375 74,584 585,491 69.5% DEVELOPMENT SERVICES 3,150 44,350 94,550 142,050 16.9% CORPORATE, INDIVIDUAL AND COMMUNITY GROUPS 10,397 10,740 7,525 8,185 36,847 4.4% TOTAL 450,351 200,223 7,542 183,755 841,871 100.0% % OF TOTAL 53.5% 23.8% .9% 21.8% 100.0% 130 Items in excess of $1,000.00 included in the 90- plus -days column, are as follows: CLIENT NAME AMOUNT $ ARREARS INTEREST $ AGE (DAYS) NOTES City of Toronto 30,000.00 n \a 125 Contract E \C work at Van Dusen Bldv., Toronto. City of Vaughan 13,500.00 n \a 90 Archaeological investigation. City of Vaughan 5,000.00 n \a 90 Program contribution towards TRCA sustainability program (OCETA) for pollution prevention activities with industry in Vaughan. Fred Robbins 1,250.00 96.61 151 For cross country run at Albion Hills. St. Joseph School. 1,752.56 80.05 104 For Dickson Hill program at BCPV. Ministry of Natural 1,927.00 180.06 188 For function at Lake St. George. Resources Region of York 15,000.00 n \a 133 "YDSS" coordinator salary recovery. Richmond Hill 1,949.25 89.04 90 Supply of planting materials. Richmond Hill 2,846.25 130.00 90 Supply of planting materials. Basciano Parkin Ltd. 2,000.00 252.99 252 Planning fees. Brutto Consulting 7,500.00 579.63 179 Planning fees. Ltd. 3,000.00 231.86 151 Planning fees. Weston Consulting 15,000.00 3203.29 405 Planning fees. 15,000.00 2,934.28 361 Planning fees. Glen Pietrowski 10,000.00 1098.44 216 Planning fees. Ron Witton 7,000.00 768.91 225 Planning fees. KLM Planning 2,000.00 321.08 321 Planning fees. 20,000.00 2,196.90 225 Planning fees Robertson Gaze Associates Inc. 4,621.56 1,696.37 657 For planting materials. Company has advised that it is insolvent and cannot make payment. Account sent for collection. TOTALS 161,146.72 13,859.51 The amount due from Robertson Gaze Associates Inc. of $4,621.56 is very doubtful. The company has indicated, in writing, that it is insolvent and has discontinued operations. This account has been sent for collection. The Development Services accounts for planning fees are deemed to be collectible. Most of these accounts occurred as Toronto and Region Conservation Authority transitioned to the new fee schedule. Some smaller accounts have been written off in accordance with the policy. Collection of planning fees has improved and staff does not anticipate that this list of problem accounts will grow significantly. Staff believes that there is still some leverage available to deal with these outstanding accounts. All other amounts listed above are considered collectible at this time. 131 Receivable balances, as reported on each of the previous reports to the advisory board, after 2000, are presented as follows: DATE Total $ 90 -Plus $ March 31, 2005 841,871 183,755 February 15, 2005 699,123 189,490 December 30, 2004 1,935,416 245,815 October 25, 2004 1,127,102 180,891 September 28, 2004 876,800 187,754 September 3, 2004 936,923 197,539 May 17, 2004 1,018,188 129,505 February 17, 2004 1,386,809 178,370 January 7, 2004 1,064,464 45,382 November 2, 2003 951,999 101,194 August 24, 2003 768,825 125,803 May 25, 2003 445,116 168,327 March 2, 2003 709,807 141,313 October 20, 2002 774,831 46,237 August 25, 2002 326,529 109,560 May 26, 2002 658,514 201,158 January 31, 2002 585,736 64,259 December 30, 2001 1,078,071 38,666 October 23, 2001 350,385 106,343 August 27, 2001 371,985 17,153 May 25, 2001 1,132,443 44,810 March 26, 2001 621,560 167,094 Report prepared by: Rocco Sgambelluri, extension 5232 For Information contact: Rocco Sgambelluri, extension 5232 Date: April 6, 2005 RES. #C32/05 - 2004 YEAR END FINANCIAL PROGRESS REPORT Provides information on the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority's (TRCA) financial performance to December 31, 2004, in relation to the 2004 approved budget. Moved by: Seconded by: Bas Balkissoon Rob Ford IT IS RECOMMENDED THAT the Financial Progress Report dated December 31, 2004, be received. CARRIED 132 BACKGROUND As part of TRCA's financial management process, staff provide to the Business Excellence Advisory Board on a regular basis financial progress reports which compare actual financial performance to the annual budget. RATIONALE Attached is a high level summary of actual variances from budget as of December 31, 2004. The 2004 draft Audited Financial Statements are included on the agenda as a separate communication. Operating Variances: The 2004 actual operating results, as compared to the 2004 budget, produced a modest surplus of $42,011. On page one of the attachment are variances in terms of net expenditures. Of note are the following: • Black Creek Pioneer Village had a revenue shortfall of about $140,000 primarily due to Tess visitation and fewer film shoots than budgeted. This was offset partially by expenditure reductions of $87,500 and additional food services revenue of about $15,000 but still resulted in a net shortfall of about $50,000. • Environmental Services was overspent by $269,000 due to special projects which were fully funded by revenues; a number of positions were gapped. • Conservation Areas campgrounds and Kortright Centre for Conservation (KCC) had reduced revenues due to weather and for KCC the energy program, but were able to reduce expenditures to ensure net results were substantially on budget. • Finance and Business Development and Watershed Management administration costs were under budget due to gapping. • Development Services deferred some expenditures, about $33,000, and revenues exceeded budget by about $565,000 as the new planning fee schedule has been fully implemented. • Higher than anticipated maintenance costs for rental properties and lower rental revenues due to vacancies and a poor summer at Wild Water Kingdom were partially offset by successful property tax appeals and gapping in Property section. • Recoveries exceeded expenditures for the vehicle and equipment program. While the operating surplus was modest, 2004 was a very successful year financially enabling about $1.25 million to be transferred to reserves. Members will recall that staff were directed to increase reserve contributions to achieve a target of $2.5 million. Action taken in 2004 raises operating contingency reserves to about $1.8 million from $900,000 in 2003. Capital Variances: The 2004 capital budget called for a surplus of $100,000 to reduce the cumulative land acquisition deficit. The actual capital results were at the break even level. Significant variances are as follows: • Waterfront land acquisition was budgeted for $3 million but the major transaction did not occur; the balance of land securement totalling $1 million was achieved primarily because of $650,000 in donations under the ecological gifts of lands program. • Infrastructure projects were generally underspent; BCPV event pavilion expenditures delayed into 2005, drinking water system upgrades and campground improvements at Albion Hills, as well as nursery building were deferred to 2005. 133 • A significant number of environmental project initiatives within larger projects were deferred including Toronto Remedial Action Plan projects and Peel natural heritage projects. • Groundwater studies were carried into 2005 • Water Management Projects in Peel and York were unspent at year end because of stormwater works retrofit delays. • Erosion control projects particularly the Highland Creek weir project deferred by mutual agreement with the City of Toronto. • Humber Bay Shores (Etobicoke Motel Strip) delayed due to on -going litigation. • Toronto Waterfront Revitalization Corporation projects were carried forward to 2005 due to delays in finalization of delivery agreements. The attached report provides a summary of the capital project spending for the year. Report prepared by: Jim Dillane, 416 - 667 -6292 For Information contact: Jim Dillane, 416- 667 -6292, Rocco Sgambelluri, extension 5232 Date: April 05, 2004 Attachments: 2 134 12 -Apr -05 TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY 2004 Operating Budget Variances Page 1 Page Gross Expenditures (by functional Unit) Reference Finance and Business Development Division Ad ministration Rental Properties Central Services Property Sevices Black Creek Pioneer Village Food Services Vehicle & Equipment Reserve Watershed Management Division WM Divisional Management / EMS Devebpment Services Watershed Strategies Resource Science Community Services Divisional Management Environmental Services Enforcement Conservation Areas Kortrght Centre for Conservation Office of the CAO Conservation Field Centres Corporate Management Corporate Secretariat Human Resources Customer Services Communications Marketing Community Transformation Partnerships Page Page Page Page Page Page Page Page Page Page Page Page Page Page Page Page 2004 Budget 2004 Actual Diff. duals 8 1,787,200 1,668,207 (118,993) 9 1,195,300 1,221,501 26,201 10 313,300 353,423 40,123 11 1,502,200 1,359,816 (142,384) 12 4,123,200 4,035,693 (87,508) 13 976,300 974,969 (1,331) 26 (61,133) (61,133) 9,897,500 9,552,477 (345,023) 14 206,500 130,039 15 1,927,000 1,893,879 16 1,390,900 1,407,933 17 2,048,400 2,115,984 18 19 1,604,100 1,873,306 20 451,700 453,424 21 3,494,800 3,437,652 22 1,342,300 1,335,544 Page 23 Page 24 Page 24 Page 24 Page 24 Page 24 Page 24 Page 25 Variance Notes Gapping of positions, mostly in IT and additional overhead recoveries from projects Higher than budgeted maintenance needed for rental properties Planned program recoveries for services under budget Tax costs below budget due to successful appeals, some gapping Marketing expenditures constrained Some purchases deferrred. (76,461) Gapping of Director's position OMB Hearings and operations up but some policy (33,121) work deferred 17,033 69,584 Additional special projects 269.206 Additional special projects 1,724 (57.148) Glen Hefty, Indian Line costs constrained (6,756) 12,463,700 12,647,760 184,060 2,111,800 2,044,906 443,500 413,059 323,200 296,114 366,100 344,441 247,400 259,965 717,300 711,474 Consolidated with Communications 1,007,600 738,589 (66,894) Program development funding not secured (30,441) Gapping of Director position (27,086) Legal costs below budget (21,659) Employment recruitment costs less than estimate 12,565 (5,827) (269,011) Budgeted funding not obtained 5,216,900 4,808,547 (408,353) Expenditure Total 27,578,100 27,008,784 (589,318) I. ;uewyoe d Page 2 Toronto and Region Conservation Authority 2004 Operating Budget Variances Funding Sources: Program /User fees: Rental Properties Black Creek Pioneer Village Food Services Development Services Environmental Services Conservation Areas Kortright Centre for Conservation Conservation Field Centres Summary All Other Program/User fees Reserves CFGT - Living City CFGT - Fowthrough Other Municipal Provincial Federal Donations/Fund raising Private Reverse internal plant material charges included under user fees Other Revenue total Net Expenditures Net Expenditures funded by: Provincial Transfer Payments Municipal Levy Deficit / (Surplus) 2004 Budget 2004 Actual DIH. Actuals Notes 2,114,100 1,949,572 (164,528) 1,858,200 1,717,793 (140,407) 1,050,200 1,067,964 17,764 1,740,000 2,304,998 564,998 1,098,200 1,913,729 815,529 2,824,600 2,776,539 (48,061) 1,098,100 1,058,965 (39,135) 1,340,600 1,312,189 (28,411) 476,200 653,653 177,453 193,000 (1,217,894) (1,410,894) 800,100 767,240 (32,860) 680,200 671,767 (8,433) 409,500 (114,489) (523,989) 592,850 911,556 318,706 664,650 1,105,299 440,649 462,500 461,051 (1,449) 394,700 445,637 50,937 (317,000) (829,841) (512,841) 17,480,700 16,955,728 (524,972) 10,097,400 10,053,057 (44,3432 845,800 845,753 (47) 9,251,600 9,249,315 (2,285) (42,011) (42,011) WWK % rent below target and some residential vacancies. General attendance and education programs below target New fee structure very successful. Planting and Sp. Projects higher than budget. Weather & filming below expectation. Energy program revenue below targets Higher interest earnings & other. Surplus transferred to reserves Revenue reclassification. Sales Tax recoveries and Special projects ALHB program & sp. projects Revenue reclassification. 12- Apr -05 Toronto and Region Conservation Authority 2004 Capital Variances Page 3 Gross Expenditures: MONITORING AND REPORTING WATERSHED PLANNING Peel Water Management York Water Management Durham Water Management Water Cost Centres Costs covered by Water management Programs Floodplain Mapping York/Peel/Durham/Toronto Groundwater Terrestrial Natural Heritage REGENERATION Toronto Remedial Action Plan Project (RAP activity also shown under other projects) Peel Natural Heritage Project York Natural Heritage Project Durham Natural Heritage Project Valley and Shoreline Regeneration Projects City of Toronto Waterfront Project Region Of Durham Waterfront Project Waterfront Revitilization Corporation Projects Humber Bay Shores Waterfront Park Lakefill Quality Program Brickworks regeneration 2004 BUDGET 2004 Actuals 942,300 1,019,385 Diff. Actuals Variance Notes 77,085 Additional Special projects 1,320,600 719,761 (600,839) 698,900 451,907 (246,993) 389,900 149,573 (240,327) 1,633,200 1,246,120 (387,080) (1,633,200) (1,188,740) 444,460 849,500 590,146 (259,354) 647,600 464,259 (183,341) 263,000 268,205 5,205 2,535,900 1,790,747 (589,200) (495,990) 892,400 493,447 715,900 519,380 125,000 120,850 2,308,500 1,664,893 1,654,500 1,926,277 167,600 307,069 5,465,000 2,766,425 1,023,400 295,989 128,300 78,282 Rural water quality, Watershed planning/ integration. Stormwater retrofit delays Stormwater retrofits delayed Water Budget planning /integration and Stormwater retrofits delayed Aquatic and other studies moving slower Lower expenditures so less used. Delay on Etobicoke. Highland mapping projects Work carried into 2005 Stormwater Works Retrofits and various items (745,153) delayed 93,210 Highland floodmao delayed (398,953) Pond dredging and other items delayed (196,520) Tudor Valley & Milne Park work not finished (4,150) Highland Weirs delayed pending DFO /MNR (643,607) approvals 271777 Accelerated work at Humber Bay. Cell 1 Capping 139,469 More Duffins Marsh from MNR Living Legacy. OPG TWRC agreement finalized late, work carried into (2,698,575) 2005 (727,411) Expropriation hearings not finished (50,018) Program winding down Z ;uewy3efd Toronto and Region Conservation Authority Page 4 2004 Capital Variances SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITIES Stewardship Education FLOOD PROTECTION Lower Don Env. Assessment INFRASTRUCTURE Public Use Infrastructure Other Facilities Retrofits Drinking Water System Upgrades Living City Centre Design and Build Nursery Relocation Project BCPV Retrofit and Attraction Development Information Technology Project Administrative Office REGIONAL OPEN SPACE Waterfront Open Space Acquisition - Greenspace Strategy Natural Areas Protection 2004 BUDGET $ 2004 Actuals $ D iff. Actuals $ Variance Notes 283,900 379,258 95,358 Sp.Proiect funding for extra work 81,000 97,509 16,509 Sp.Project funding for extra work 700,000 • 698,355 351,600 583,600 370,000 200,000 200,000 1,750,000 315,000 475,000 3,000,000 500,000 500,000 (1,645) 259,155 (92,445) Some work deferred until 2005 247,993 (335,607) Albion Campground work carried into 2005 136,171 (233,829) Albion Hills work deferred to 2005 195,100 (4,900) 1,962 (198,038) New concept under development 787,426 (962,574) Work started late in year, continues in 2005 319,947 4,947 424,067 (50,933) Constrained because 2003 higher than budget 31,690 1,048,664 3,248 (2,968,310) Land acauisitiop activity highly variable. 548,664 (496,752) Expenditure total 28,849,200 17,818,533 (11,030,667) II II Toronto and Region Conservation Authority Page 5 2004 Capital Variances Funding Sources: Program /User fees Reserves CFGT - Living City CFGT - Flowthrough Other - Municipal Other - Provincial Other - Federal Other - Donations /Fundraising Other - Private Lease Revenue Land Sale Proceeds Transfers between Projects Revenue total Net Expenditures Provincial Transfer Payments Municipal Levy (Surplus) / Deficit 2004 BUDGET $ 2004 Actuals $ Diff. Actuals $ Variance Notes 128,300 58,691 (69,609) Lakefill program winding down. 128,000 (36,930) (164,930) Nursery relocation deferred 102,900 182,596 79,696 3,061,800 907,729 (2,154,071) 1,359,300 686,607 (672,693) 643,800 291,775 (352,025) 500,000 749,463 249,463 6,409,800 3,907,242 (2,502,558) 133,600 189,702 56,102 240,700 147,867 (92,833) (589,200) (495,990) 93,210 12,119,000 6,588,752 (5,530,248) 16,730,200 11,229,780 (5,500,420) 16,830,200 11,226,490 Various Durham Waterfront items Land Acg. funding not obtained Motel Strip delayed, Land Acq. funding not obtained RAP MOU and other items in Natural Heritages delayed TWRC funds: Port Union /Mimico /Don More used for Living City Centre pending resolution of other partner funding. (5,603,710) Lower utilization due to delays (100,000) 3,291 103,291 TERMINATION ON MOTION, the meeting terminated at 10:40 a.m., on Friday, April 15, 2005. David Barrow Chair /ks 140 Brian Denney Secretary- Treasurer THE TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY MEETING OF THE BUSINESS EXCELLENCE ADVISORY BOARD #3/05 June 10, 2005 The Business Excellence Advisory Board Meeting #3/05, was held in the South Theatre, Black Creek Pioneer Village, on Friday, June 10, 2005. The Chair David Barrow, called the meeting to order at 9:15 a.m. PRESENT David Barrow Chair Rob Ford Member Peter Milczyn Member Dick O'Brien Chair, Authority Bill O'Donnell Member REGRETS Bas Balkissoon Member Bill Fisch Member Maja Prentice Vice Chair RES. #33/05 - MINUTES Moved by: Rob Ford Seconded by: Dick O'Brien THAT the Minutes of Meeting #2/05, held on April 15, 2005, be approved. CARRIED PRESENTATIONS (a) A presentation by Ron Dewell, Manager, Property/Asset Management, TRCA, in regards to item 8.1 - Rental Property Portfolio - Rouge Park. RES. #C34 /05 - PRESENTATIONS Moved by: Bill O'Donnell Seconded by: Dick O'Brien 141 THAT above -noted presentation (a) be heard and received. CARRIED SECTION I - ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY ACTION RES. #C35/05 - BOAT CLUB LEASES - CITY OF TORONTO Renewal of leases for boat clubs located on Toronto and Region Conservation Authority -owned lands managed by the City of Toronto. Moved by: Seconded by: Bill O'Donnell Rob Ford THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT WHEREAS Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) is the owner of the property located in the City of Toronto which is being managed by the City of Toronto in accordance with the terms of an agreement dated June 14, 1961 and an agreement dated October 11, 1972; WHEREAS certain parcels of this property on the lower Humber River and the Lake Ontario waterfront are leased to various boat clubs; THEREFORE LET IT BE RESOLVED THAT approval be granted to enter into 20 -year Renewal Lease Agreements with the various boat clubs commencing August 1, 2005 on the basis as set out in Clause No. 1 contained in Report No. 7 of The Economic Development and Parks Committee, which was adopted without amendment, by the Council of the City of Toronto at its meeting held on September 22, 23, 24 and 25, 2003; THAT the terms and conditions of the Renewal Lease Agreements be satisfactory to TRCA staff and its solicitor; THAT the appropriate TRCA officials be authorized and directed to take whatever action may be required to give effect thereto, including the obtaining of any necessary approvals and execution of any documents; AND FURTHER THAT the City of Toronto staff be so advised. CARRIED BACKGROUND The Council of the City of Toronto at its meeting held on September 22, 23, 24 and 25, 2003 adopted Clause No. 1 contained in Report No. 7 of The Economic Development and Parks Committee, which is as follows: 142 It is recommended that: (1) as per Clause No. 2 of Report No. 7 of The Economic Development and Parks Committee, headed "Boat Club Leases - Rental Rate and Future Renewal (Various Wards) ", which was adopted by the Council of the City of Toronto at its meeting held on July 4, 5 and 6, 2000, approval be given to enter into 20 -year Renewal Lease Agreements with the various boat clubs across the Toronto waterfront as set out in Attachment 1 to this report, commencing on August 1, 2005, in accordance with the terms and conditions set out in the body of the report and acceptable in form and content to the Commissioner of Economic Development, Culture and Tourism and the City Solicitor; (2) the existing Metro Formula for boating facility leases for the period commencing August 1, 2005, be retained, and the individual charges increased to $3,000.00 per acre for the first year of the renewal lease term and then for the following years be increased by the rate of inflation as calculated by Statistics Canada using the CPI all items annual average indexes for the City of Toronto for the previous calendar year, compounded annually; (3) the existing 10 percent discount of the base rental rate for the clubs not having year round access as granted by the former Metropolitan Toronto Council, by the adoption of Clause No. 11 of Report No. 19 of The Metropolitan Executive Committee on September 9, 1980, be rescinded; (4) the City's Licence Agreements with the Outer Harbour Sailing Federation, Water Rats Sailing Club, Toronto Boardsailing Club and the Hanlan Boat Club be made conterminous and consistent with the City's other boat club leases, and that notice be provided that the City intends to phase in the Metro Formula rental rate to 100 percent for those clubs noted above that have been paying 75 percent of the rental rate, and that the City shall phase in the rate increases during the initial five -year period following establishment of full development infrastructure, and that the annual rental rate be graduated in 5 percent increments commencing on August 1 of the year that full infrastructure is completed; (5) the Commissioner of Economic Development, Culture and Tourism be directed to develop terms of reference for the development of a Recreational Boating Strategy for the City of Toronto, and that the Commissioner consider potential funding mechanisms and partnerships to fund this study and report thereon in the 2004 budget process; and (6) the appropriate City officials be authorized and directed to take the necessary action to give effect thereto. This City of Toronto resolution relates to 25 boat clubs managed by the city, of which 14 are located on TRCA -owned lands. All the boat clubs with the exception of the Toronto Humber Yacht Club are located on the Lake Ontario waterfront. The city also manages the lease with Hydrus Enterprises Inc. (Bluffers Park Marina) for use of TRCA -owned land at Bluffers Park. This lease ends in April of 2012 and therefore is not included in this renewal. 143 TRCA also leases TRCA -owned and managed lands at Tommy Thompson Park and Frenchman's Bay in the City of Pickering for boat club uses. The rental rates for these leases are based on the City of Toronto formula. The boat clubs on TRCA -owned lands included in this renewal are as follows: Boat Club Location Toronto Humber Yacht Club Lower Humber River Lakeshore Yacht Club Colonel Samuel Smith Park Mimico Cruising Club Humber Bay Park West Etobicoke Yacht Club Humber Bay Park West Humber College Sailing School Humber Bay Park West Ashbridges Bay Yacht Club Ashbridge's Bay Park Toronto Hydroplane Sailing Club Ashbridge's Bay Park Navy League of Canada Ashbridge's Bay Park Toronto Beaches Lions Club Ashbridge's Bay Park Highland Yacht Club Bluffers Park Bluffer's Park Yacht Club Bluffers Park Cathedral Bluffs Sailing Club Bluffers Park Scarborough Bluffs Sailing Club Bluffers Park West Rouge Canoe Club Rouge Beach Park The various leases for boating facilities across the waterfront help to provide an expanded range of affordable recreation opportunities on the water at no cost to the city. Currently, the boating facilities under lease with the city range from small community sailing clubs to long established clubs with significant permanent facilities. The clubs are all not - for - profit corporations. These facilities have helped to meet demand for sailing in a social context and are consistent with the desire of the city to provide diverse, locally responsive recreation opportunities, and to achieve the waterfront objectives of the TRCA. As part of the Toronto Waterfront Revitalization Corporation's (TWRC) initiatives, TRCA staff are participating on an agency group guiding preparation of a "Marine Strategy ". This strategy will address a range of issues related to boating and other water -based activities. The strategy will ensure that the marine opportunities are incorporated into the overall waterfront revitalization plan. The city has also sought the advice of TWRC on the Renewal Lease Agreements. DETAILS OF WORK TO BE DONE TRCA staff and its solicitor will work with the City of Toronto staff and the Council of Commodores to finalize the Renewal Lease Agreements. 144 FINANCIAL DETAILS In accordance with the terms and conditions of the management agreements with the City of Toronto, the City will be responsible for all expenses and will retain all revenues associated with these leases. Report prepared by: Mike Fenning, extension 5223 For Information contact: Ron Dewell, extension 5245, Mike Fenning, extension 5223 Date: May 25, 2005 RES. #C36 /05 - PURCHASING POLICY Recommends approval of revised Purchasing Policy. Moved by: Seconded by: Bill O'Donnell Peter Milczyn THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT the Purchasing Policy dated May, 2005, be approved; AND FURTHER THAT the "Policies and Procedures for Purchase of Goods and Services and Disposal of Equipment ", dated September, 1995, as amended, be rescinded. AMENDMENT RES. #C37 /05 Moved by: Seconded by: Bill O'Donnell Peter Milczyn THAT the following replace the first paragraph of the main motion: THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT the Purchasing Policy dated May, 2005, with the following amendments, be approved: • staff report to the Business Excellence Advisory Board semi - annually with a list of all Requests for Quotations and Requests for Proposals approved by the Chief Adminstrative Officer pursuant to Schedule 'A'; • Schedule 'A' be amended by adding as note 4 the following: "If the lowest bidder is not selected that a report be provided to the Executive Committee at the next available meeting for their information."; • Schedule 'A' be amended by changing approval limits of Acceptable Bid or Proposal to $25,000 - $200,000 Executive Committee and Up to $25,000 Chief Administrative Officer; • amending Section 1.7 by adding "an Authority Member" to paragraph 4; 145 THE AMENDMENT WAS CARRIED THE MAIN MOTION, AS AMENDED, WAS CARRIED RATIONALE The existing Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) purchasing policy (Policies and Procedures for Purchase of Goods and Services and Disposal of Equipment) was approved originally in 1985 and last updated in 1995. To complete the review and revision of the policy, staff has worked with a consultant, J. William Adams, who has extensive experience in the municipal sector including the Region of Peel and former City of Scarborough. Most recently, Mr. Adams assisted the City of Toronto in revising and updating its procurement policy and processes. Staff has used Mr. Adams' expertise to ensure that the proposed policy is consistent with procurement policies and practices used in the public sector generally and among Greater Toronto Area municipalities. The recommended Purchasing Policy differs significantly from the existing policy in that the procedural aspects of the existing policy will be included in a new document detailing purchasing procedures. The Authority is asked to approve the recommended policy and in so doing will direct the Chief Administrative Officer (CAO) to implement revised procedures which will not require Authority approval. Splitting of policy from procedures ensures that the Authority has appropriate responsibility to establish the principals and direction for procurement while delegating the implementation procedures to the CAO and staff. The recommended policy has a number of significant changes and improvements: • terminology is defined for greater clarity; • the objectives are detailed and advance the Business Excellence objective of TRCA; • processes and methods are detailed for greater clarity in the use of various procurement methods; • the role of the Tender Opening Sub - Committee is clarified, defined and delegated to senior staff (currently, the Tender Opening Sub - Committee must include a Member of the Authority); • tender /proposal irregularities are defined and the action to remedy each issue is set out; • policies for non - competitive (so- called "sole sourcing ") purchases are set out; • provision is made for cooperative purchasing arrangements and purchasing special services from colleges and universities; • sustainability requirements are set out; • projects in which TRCA sells its forest products or sells the right to place clean fill on its lands are included; • goods and services not included in the policy are detailed in schedule B; • consulting services are no longer segregated as a separate category for approval; • procedures are detailed to document compliance with the policy and ensure accountability; and, • a comprehensive review of the purchasing policy is required at least every five years. 146 Approval limits The recommended policy makes a number of changes to the existing limits where Authority, Executive Committee and CAO approval is required. These limits are recommended to expedite the work of TRCA while assuring accountability. The following summarizes the major shifts in limits: Existing Policy: • • purchases over $100,000 require Authority approval; • purchases over $25,000 but less than $100,000 require Executive Committee approval; • purchases over $10,000 but Tess than $25,000 require Executive Committee approval if other than lowest bid is recommended; • purchases over $10,000 but less than $25,000 require CAO /Director approval; and, • purchases under $10,000 require approval by staff as designated in the policy. Recommended Policy: • tenders /proposals over $200,000 require Authority approval; • tenders /proposals over $100,000 but Tess than $200,000 require Executive Committee approval; • quotations /proposals up to $100,000 require approval of CAO or designate; • non - competitive procurement: • over $200,000 requires Authority approval • $50,000 to $200,000 requires Executive Committee approval • less than $50,000 requires CAO or designate approval; • lowest bid not accepted: • over $200,000 requires Authority approval • $50,000 to $200,000 requires Executive Committee approval • less than $50,000 requires CAO or designate approval. CONCLUSION The recommended policy is outlined in Attachment 1. The revised procedures to accompany the recommended policy are being developed in consultation with operational staff and with assistance from the consultant. Report prepared by: Jim Dillane, extension 6292 For Information contact: Jim DiIlane, extension 6292 Rocco Sgambelluri, extension 5232 Date: June 1, 2005 Attachments: 1 147 Attachment 1 TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY PURCHASING POLICY DRAFT TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY PURCHASING POLICY For additional information or clarification of this policy, contact the Controller or the Director, Finance and Business Development. Draft May 17, 2005 148 TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY PURCHASING POLICY SECTION 1.0 PURCHASING POLICY 1.1 Definitions and Terms 1.2 Objectives 1.3 Authorization and Limits 1.4 Processes and Methods 1.5 Unsolicited Quotations or Proposals 1.6 Official Point of Contact 1.7 Public Openings 1.8 Tender /Proposal Irregularities 1.9 Mathematical Errors_ 1.10 Tied Bids 1.11 Evaluation of Proposals 1.12 Vendor Debriefings 1.13 Vendor Complaints 1.14 - Non - Competitive Procurement Process 1.15 Cooperative Purchasing 1.16 Vendor Sureties and Performance 1.17 Sustainability Requirements 1.18 Disposal of Goods 1.19 Disposal of Real Estate 1.20 Revenue from Use or Sale of Other Assets 1.21 Ethics 1.22 Review of Purchasing Policies and Implementation of Administrative Procedures APPENDICES TO THE PURCHASING POLICY Schedule 'A' Purchasing Methods, Limits and Authorities Schedule 'B' Goods and Services not subject this policy Schedule 'C' Additional purchasing policies adopted by the Authority from time to time 149 1.0 PURCHASING POLICY Inherent in the Administration Regulation made under the Conservation Authorities Act and more specifically the Rules of Conduct for the TRCA is the need for sound and effective purchasing policies for the expenditure of public funds. This policy establishes authorities, responsibilities, processes and methods to be used in the acquisition and disposal of goods and services. The policy shall be read in conjunction with any written administrative procedures and, upon adoption, shall replace any existing purchasing policy. The Purchasing Policy is consistent with TRCA's Living City Vision and advances TRCA's business excellence and sustainability objectives. Section 1.17 recognizes the importance of sustainability in the execution of purchasing decisions. 1.1 Definitions and Terms The words and phases listed hereunder when used in this policy or any purchasing procedures shall have the following meanings ascribed to them. AUTHORITY - The appointed Members of the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority. AUTHORIZED BUYER - Staff authorized by the Chief Administrative Officer /Secretary- Treasurer or designate to purchase goods and services pursuant to this policy. BID - An offer from a bidder in response to a call for quotations or tenders, which may be accepted or rejected. BIDDER - A vendor submitting an offer to the TRCA. BLANKET PURCHASE ORDER - A contract between the TRCA and a vendor to facilitate the delivery of repetitive use goods and services over a period of time. May also be referred to as a blanket or open order. The purchase order amount is deemed to be the total estimated cost for the contract term. COMMITMENT - A contractual obligation for the purchase of goods and services including the issuance of a purchase order/ blanket purchase order or the execution of any agreement evidencing the obligation. The commitment amount is deemed to be the total estimated cost for the contract term. MULTI -YEAR COMMITMENT - A maximum term of five years in respect of a commitment, beyond which Authority approval is required. CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER /SECRETARY- TREASURER OR DESIGNATE - For purposes of the policy, "Designate" refers to the individual to whom authority is delegated by the Chief Administrative Officer /Secretary- Treasurer. 150 CONTRACT - A binding agreement between two or more parties. CO- OPERATIVE PURCHASING - Purchasing under an arrangement with other public bodies for the purchase of goods and services on a cooperative or joint basis where there are economic advantages in doing so. DECENTRALIZED PURCHASING - The practice by which TRCA authorizes designated staff to be authorized buyers and to assume responsibility for the acquisition of goods and services as provided for in this policy and to be accountable for compliance with this policy. EMERGENCY - An event that, is determined to be a threat to health, safety and welfare of persons or property; requires the maintenance of essential service, protection and security of the TRCA interests or mitigation of a liability or prevent serious delays or further damage; and requires the immediate purchase and delivery of goods and services operating outside of the requirements of this policy. EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE - The committee appointed by the Authority to where powers are delegated. GOODS AND SERVICES - Labour, materials, products, equipment, supplies and services (including construction and any type of consulting or professional and technical services in relation to real property or personal property including but not limited to construction, architects, engineers, designers, surveyors, management and financial consultants, brokers, real estate appraisers, auditors, bankers and all other services, that are the subject of the contract. MONETARY REFERENCES - All references in this policy to dollar amounts are to Canadian dollars and shall be exclusive of taxes. PERSONAL PURCHASE - Goods or services requested by a member or any employee of the TRCA, the requirement for which is not for the TRCA purposes but is for the benefit and use of the person requesting the purchase. PUBLICLY ADVERTISED - Advertising in any publication of general circulation including the Internet. PROPOSAL - An offer from a vendor in response to a request for proposal, which may be subject to further negotiation. PURCHASE ORDER - A written or electronic request to purchase goods or services; or a written or electronic acceptance of an offer. ' PURCHASE REQUISITION OR REQUISITION - A request, in an approved form, to acquire goods or services. QUOTATION - An offer from a vendor to provide goods or services. 151 SURETY - A specified dollar amount in the form acceptable to the Director, Finance and Business Development of cash, certified cheque, bid bond, performance bond, labour and materials bond, letter of credit or any other approved form of collateral as deemed necessary. TENDER - A written offer in a specified form received from a vendor in response to an invitation to a public call for tenders. TRCA - Toronto and Region Conservation Authority. VENDOR - A supplier of goods and services Additional definitions as and when required will be included in the purchasing procedures. 1.2 Objectives To achieve its business excellence objective, TRCA supports fair, open, transparent, accountable, and efficient and effective procurement processes through the solicitation of multiple bids, proposals and direct negotiation. In the interpretation and application of this policy, regard shall be given to the following objectives: • To promote efficient and effective procurement processes and decisions and establish clear responsibility, accountability and authority for the processes and decisions in the purchase of goods and services. • To promote the most effective use of public funds and ensure the greatest value for the purchase of goods and services through the exercise of professional purchasing practices, free from influence and interference, and encourage where practical, standardization and open and competitive bidding. • To implement management and financial controls that meet the requirements of the TRCA and ensure accountability of those responsible for requisitioning and purchasing goods and services. • To allow purchasing decisions to be made as efficiently as possible through the delegation of authority and empowerment of staff while at all times having regard for the purchasing policy. • To adopt methods of acquisition and disposal that achieve the most competitive and responsive offers, terms and conditions wherever possible and promote procurement processes and decisions that are consistent with the Living City Objectives and TRCA objectives. • To promote acceptance of bids based on total acquisition and life cycle cost rather than the lowest bid received and encourage specifications, whenever possible, that are environmentally responsible and sustainable. 152 1.3 Authorization and Limits The Chief Administrative Officer /Secretary- Treasurer or designate is given the authority and responsibility to operate a decentralized purchasing program on behalf of the TRCA in accordance with the requirements of this policy and to act on behalf of the TRCA in entering into contracts with third parties for the purchase and disposal of all goods and services. The Chief Administrative Officer /Secretary- Treasurer or designate shall determine the form, content and use of forms, whether electronic or printed including requisitions, purchase orders, bid and contract documentation, bonds, letters of credit and other forms of guarantee or surety. The Chief Administrative Officer /Secretary- Treasurer or designate may delegate to Authorized Buyers, all or part of the authority to purchase goods and services in accordance with this policy. The Chief Administrative Officer /Secretary- Treasurer or designate shall maintain a list of designated employees and their respective authorities and limitations. Authorized Buyers shall be authorized to make an award arising from a request for quotations, tenders or proposals to the lowest bidder whose bid meets the specifications and requirement set out in the tender or quotation; for proposals, having completed the required evaluation, an award to the highest ranked proponent whose bid meets the requirements of the proposal call, including the evaluation criteria set out in the call; and for quotations, tenders and proposals, that there is no material, written objection. Where the recommended award is not from the lowest acceptable bidder or highest ranked proposal, the award must be approved in accordance with Schedule 'A'. Records and files of documents, transactions, authorizations, approvals and actions under this policy shall be kept and maintained according the TRCA records retention policy and subject to the requirements of the Municipal Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act. Authorities and responsibilities shall be applied and administered having regard to the provisions of any financial control policies or any other approval requirements. Where all the requirements of this policy have been met, the appropriate officials are authorized to execute formal contracts. The following Schedules, as may be amended by the Authority from time to time, are attached and give effect to this policy. • Schedule 'A' outlines the Limits and Authorization associated with each Purchasing Method; Acceptable Bids and Proposals; and Disposal of Goods. 153 • Schedule 'B' provides a listing of designated goods and services not subject to this policy or the issuance of a purchase order. • Schedule 'C' provides for the inclusion of any additional purchasing policies adopted by the Authority from time to time. In the case of purchases of goods or services having a value of less than $1,000 the requirements of this policy as to the method of purchase do not apply provided that such purchase is undertaken in compliance with any applicable purchasing procedures. In the case of revenue generating contracts the limits and authorities outlined in Schedule 'A' apply, except that the vendor offering the highest return shall be considered. 1.4 Processes and Methods Subject to the provisions and dollar limits of Schedule 'A', the following processes and methods of acquisition are to be used to give effect to the TRCA purchasing objectives: • A Request for Pre - qualification shall be used, and precede a Request for Tenders, Quotations or Proposals in order to identify and pre - select bidders, where it is deemed that the nature and complexity of the work involved warrants the time and effort required to pre - select the most experienced and qualified bidders. • A Request for Expressions of Interest shall be used to determine the interest of the market place to provide a scope of work or services contemplated to be procured by the TRCA. • A Request for Tenders shall be used to obtain offers from a vendor by way of a public tender call, to provide goods and services, whenever the requirements can be precisely defined and the expectation is that the lowest bid meeting the requirements specified in the request would be accepted, subject to any other provisions of this policy and the Tendering limits specified in Schedule 'A'. • A Request for Quotations shall be used to obtain offers from a vendor to provide goods and services, whenever the requirements can be precisely defined and the expectation is that the lowest bid meeting the requirements specified in the request would be accepted, subject to any other provisions of this policy and the Quotation limits specified in Schedule 'A'. • A Request for Proposals shall be used to obtain offers from a vendor to provide goods and services of a unique or complex nature where all or part of the requirements cannot be precisely defined and the expectation is that the proposal offered by the highest ranked proponent resulting from an evaluation and meeting the requirements specified in the request, including the evaluation criteria set out in the Request, would be accepted, subject to any other provisions of this policy and the Proposal limits specified in Schedule 'A'. • An Informal Request for Quotations shall be used to obtain offers from a vendor by means of telephone, fax, e-mail or other similar solicitation method to a minimum of three bidders, where possible, to obtain lowest cost, prompt service, procurement of goods and services expeditiously and cost effectively, subject to the informal quotation limits specified in Schedule 'A'. 154 1.5 Unsolicited Quotations or Proposals Consistent with the TRCA position to support effective, objective, fair, open, transparent, accountable, and efficient procurement processes through the solicitation of multiple bids, proposals and direct negotiation, the TRCA does not accept unsolicited, formal quotations or proposals. Any exception must be approved by the Authority. A report to the Authority shall include comments from the Chief Administrative Officer /Secretary- Treasurer or designate. 1.6 Official Point of Contact TRCA is committed to the highest standards of integrity with respect to the purchase of goods and services and managing the processes by which goods and services are acquired. An official point of contact shall be named by the vendor /proponent in response to Quotations, Tenders, and Proposals to respond to all communications to and from TRCA staff from the time of issuance, during the competitive process, and up to and including the announcement of award. TRCA shall name an official point of contact to whom the vendor shall direct all communications. TRCA and the vendor acknowledge and agree that the individual named as the "official point of contact" shall be the initial contact and may choose to redirect the communication to another individual. Any vendor found to be in breach of this section of the policy will be subject to disqualification from the request or a future request(s) at the discretion of the Authority. 1.7 Public Openings and Tender Opening Committee Any Requests for Tenders over $100,000 are to be opened by the Tender Opening Committee at the time and location specified in the Proposal Document. At its sole discretion, TRCA may decide that to publicly advertise Requests for Proposals because of their nature and complexity or because it is in the public interest. Requests for Proposals which are publicly advertised shall be received by the Tender Opening Committee at the time and location specified in the Proposal Document. This process shall apply to publicly advertised Requests for Pre - Qualification, Expressions of Interest and Quotations. Public advertising means advertisements in written or electronic media, trade publications, on the TRCA web site or other forms of advertising as determined by TRCA. The Tender Opening Committee shall be comprised of the Authorized Buyer, a representative of the Director of Finance and Business Development and a representative of the CAO's Office. All other solicitations are not opened in a public forum but the results will be available upon written request to the Authorized Buyer. 155 1.8 Tender /Proposal Irregularities The following irregularities contained in a Tender or publicly opened Proposal received by the TRCA shall result in the following actions to be taken by the Authorized Buyer: IRREGULARITY ACTION Late submission Automatic rejection and not opened or otherwise disclosed Insufficient or unacceptable surety Automatic rejection Submission not signed in ink or incomplete submission Automatic rejection unless, in the opinion of the Chief Administrative Officer /Secretary- Treasurer or his /her designate, the incomplete nature is trivial or insignificant Qualified submission (qualified or restricted by an attached statement, unless allowed for) Automatic rejection unless, in the opinion of the Chief Administrative Officer /Secretary- Treasurer or his /her designate, the qualification or restriction is trivial or insignificant Submission received on documents other than those provided by the TRCA or in a form unacceptable to the TRCA Automatic rejection unless, in the opinion of the Chief Administrative Officer /Secretary- Treasurer or his /her designate the matter is deemed to be minor Erasures, overwriting or strikeouts that are not initialed: • Uninitiated changes to submission that are minor (example: the vendor's address is amended by over - writing but not initialed) • Unit prices have been changed but not initialed and the contract totals are consistent with the price as amended • Unit prices have been changed but not initialed and the contract totals are not consistent with the price as amended Two (2) business days to initial /date Two (2) business days to initial /date Automatic rejection Minor Irregularities The Chief Administrative Officer /Secretary- Treasurer or his /her designate shall have the authority to waive irregularities deemed to be minor. In exercising judgment the Chief Administrative Officer /Secretary- Treasurer or his /her designate shall consider any advice provided by the TRCA legal counsel. See Schedule `A' for Limits and Authorities 1.9 Mathematical Errors Terms and conditions for unit price contracts shall include a statement indicating that where there is a discrepancy between the total price and the unit price, the unit price shall prevail. 156 During the bid evaluation process, where any discrepancy exists between the total price and the unit price, the unit price shall prevail and the total bid price shall be adjusted accordingly. 1.10 Tied Bids In order to minimize the risk of tied bids, request for Tenders, Quotations and Proposals should include such terms and conditions that promote best overall value and allow responses to be evaluated accordingly. This includes but not limited to such considerations as price (including discounts and prompt payment terms), quality, delivery (including response time), service, and past performance. If all the terms and conditions of the request have been met and the outcome of the evaluation still results in a tie, staff is authorized to conduct a lottery. In the case of two identical bids a coin toss will decide. In the case of more than two identical bids, a draw (lottery) will decide. The results of the lottery are to be recorded and witnessed by all parties present and the award shall be reported in accordance with the requirements of this policy. 1.11 Evaluation of proposals An Evaluation Committee shall be established for Requests for Proposals. The size of the Evaluation Committee shall be reflective of the complexity and dollar value of the assignment and must be have a minimum of two members. Committee members must have the relevant experience to evaluate proponents' submissions. The Evaluation Committee shall provide a written report summarizing the results of its review and rationale for its recommendations. All Requests for Proposals are to include clear specifications and evaluation criteria, terms and conditions that can be applied in a fair and consistent manner to all respondents. 1.12 Vendor Debriefings All vendors are entitled to a formal or informal debriefing, upon written request made to the Authorized Buyer, to obtain feedback on why their bid or proposal was not successful. 1.13 Vendor Complaints TRCA is committed to the highest standards of integrity with respect to dealing with vendor complaints. Complaints shall be handled with fairness and equity for all participants in a Tender, Quotation or Proposal call. All vendor complaints, whether addressed a member or the staff, are to be referred to the Chief Administrative Officer /Secretary- Treasurer or designate for resolution. Objections to a recommendation for award must be in writing. The Chief Administrative Officer /Secretary- Treasurer or designate shall review the objection and determine, with legal advice where necessary, whether the objection is material i.e. it is not frivolous or vexatious or solely related to a review of any listed irregularities as defined in this policy or is not non - responsive i.e. it is not deficient in meeting the requirements of the call. 157 Where the objection is determined not to be material, the making of the award shall proceed in accordance with this policy. Where the objection is determined to be material and cannot be resolved, the award shall be made by the TRCA in accordance with this policy. In such case, the Chief Administrative Officer /Secretary- Treasurer or designate shall report to the Executive Committee with respect to the recommendations for award. The Chief Administrative Officer /Secretary- Treasurer or designate shall inform the vendor of his /her right to make a deputation before the Board and shall advise the vendor who to contact at the TRCA for further information on the deputation process. Upon hearing the deputation and considering the staff report, the Executive Committee shall make a recommendation to the Authority with respect to the award. 1.14 Non - Competitive Procurement Process A non - competitive procurement process shall only be used if one or more of the following conditions apply and a process of negotiation is undertaken to obtain the best value in the circumstances for the TRCA. Authorized Buyers are authorized to enter into negotiations without formal competitive bids, under the following circumstances: 1. The goods and services are only available from one source or one supplier by reason of: • A statutory or market based monopoly • A fluctuating market prevents the TRCA from obtaining price protection or owing to market conditions, required goods or services are in short supply • Existence of exclusive rights (patent, copyright or licence) • Need for compatibility with goods and services previously acquired and there are no reasonable alternatives, substitutes or accommodations • Need to avoid violating warranties and guarantees where service is required 2. An attempt to purchase the required goods and services has been made in good faith using a competitive method and has failed to identify a successful supplier. 3. When the extension or reinstatement of an existing contract would prove most cost - effective or beneficial. The extension shall not exceed one year. 4. The goods and services are required as a result of an emergency, which would not reasonably permit the use of the other methods permitted. 5. The required goods and services are to be supplied by a particular vendor or supplier having special knowledge, skills, expertise or experience that cannot be provided by any other supplier. 6. Any other sole or single source purchase permitted under the provisions of this policy including those noted in Schedule 'B'. 158 1.15 Cooperative Purchasing The Chief Administrative Officer /Secretary- Treasurer or designate may enter into arrangements with other public bodies on a co- operative or joint venture basis where there are economic advantages and where the best interests of the TRCA would be served in so doing; providing that under such arrangements the method of acquisition used is a competitive method similar to that described in this policy; and the awarding and reporting of such contracts is in accordance with the authorization and limits set out in this policy. 1.16 Vendor Sureties and Performance TRCA reserves the right to request surety deposits and to determine the form and amount. The Chief Administrative Officer /Secretary- Treasurer or designate shall maintain records relating to vendor performance or non - performance. The information shall be used to supplement a pre - qualification process, to justify an award to other than the low bidder where it can be demonstrated that such records are part of the evaluation process and criteria or to ensure contract compliance 1.17 Sustainability Requirements In accordance with its mandate and vision, the TRCA employs leading edge "sustainability" standards in purchasing. The TRCA approach is two- pronged, involving mandated purchase of certified products where approved under the Sustainability Management System, and encouraging consideration of a product or company's environmental and /or sustainability performance in areas not prescribed under the first designation. As a minimum, Authorized Buyers must follow the Mandatory Green Product Procurement Listing for purchases of products contained in that listing, and for other products and services, other procurement related SMS policies including green energy, facility upgrades to meet LEED certification or other criteria, and green fleet policy. SMS procurement requirements must be met unless the expressed consent of the Chief Administrative Officer /Secretary- Treasurer or designate is obtained and rationale for variance is recorded. For products not included in the Mandatory Green Product Procurement Listing, purchasers must consider the following in their product purchases as per recommendations made in the GIPPER (Governments Incorporation Procurement Policies to Reduce Refuse) Guide to Environmental Purchasing: a. Limited packaging b. Recycled content c. Locally sourced d. Non -toxic e. Energy efficient f. Recyclable or reusable at end of life span g. Is the product really needed 159 In addition, the TRCA will consider corporate sustainability and evidence thereof in awarding consulting and other contracts. Authorized Buyers should consider any or all the following: a. Evidence of social performance, globally, nationally and locally b. Evidence of corporate environmental stewardship c. Evidence of proficiencies in delivering sustainable solutions d. Experience in delivering sustainable solutions 1.18 Disposal of Goods The Chief Administrative Officer /Secretary- Treasurer or designate is authorized to dispose of surplus or obsolete goods (except those goods covered by the TRCA De- accession Policy) by using them in other departments or, if no longer useful for TRCA purposes, arranging for their disposal in a cost effective and efficient manner and on such terms as are likely to achieve the highest net revenue or benefit or the reduction or avoidance of net cost from the disposition. The Chief Administrative Officer /Secretary- Treasurer or designate shall prescribe any forms and maintain records of such dispositions. All goods of the TRCA, that have become surplus to its needs are to be disposed of by public auction, trade -in, exchange, quotation or such other methods as may be approved by the Chief Administrative Officer /Secretary- Treasurer. The opportunity to purchase surplus goods may be given to other public agencies in such manner as may be prescribed by purchasing procedures. Authorization and limits shall be in accordance with Schedule 'A'. 1.19 Disposal of Real Property The TRCA purchasing policy does not apply to the disposal of real property. The TRCA policy and procedures governing the disposal of TRCA land and real property shall apply. 1.20 Revenue from Use or Sale of other Assets The TRCA purchasing policy applies to revenue generating contracts including but not limited to the use of TRCA land to deposit soil and the sale of TRCA timber rights and gravel deposits in which case the vendor whose bid or proposal meets terms and conditions and offers the highest dollar value will be selected. The purchasing objectives, processes, methods, authorities and limits outlined in this policy and Schedule 'A' apply. 1.21 Prohibitions and Ethics No personal purchases shall be made for any employee or Authority member unless specifically authorized by the Authority. No employee, or Authority member, shall purchase goods and services on behalf of the TRCA except as may be provided for in this policy. 160 No employee, or Authority member, shall be permitted to supply goods and services to the TRCA unless specifically authorized by the Authority. No employee, or Authority member, shall bid on the sale of goods except those disposed of by public auction. No requirement for goods or services shall be divided to avoid the requirements of this policy. Vendors retained to prepare specifications for goods or services shall not be permitted to respond to a request for quotations, tenders or proposals on those services. This does not preclude a vendor from providing other assistance to the TRCA by way of contract compliance or administration. TRCA Code of Conduct shall apply to this policy. 1.22 Review of Purchasing Policy and Implementation of Administrative Procedures The Chief Administrative Officer /Secretary- Treasurer or designate shall undertake a comprehensive review of this policy at least every five (5) years and report to the Authority accordingly. The Chief Administrative Officer /Secretary- Treasurer or designate shall prepare, maintain and approve administrative procedures to implement this policy. 161 SCHEDULE `A' PURCHASING METHODS, LIMITS AND AUTHORIZATION PURCHASING METHOD LIMITS AUTHORIZATION TO PROPOSAL Over $200,000 $50,000 - $200,000 Up to $50,000 AWARD Request for Tender - See 1.4 Over $200,000 Authority $100,000 - $200,000 Executive Committee Request for Quotation - See Up to $100,000 Chief Administrative Officer/ 1.4 Up to $10,000 Secretary- Treasurer or Informal Request for designate Quotation - See 1.4 Request for Proposal - See Over $200,000 Authority 1.4 $100,000 - $200,000 Executive Committee Up to $100,000 Chief Administrative Officer/ Secretary- Treasurer or designate No requirement for Up to $1,000 Chief Administrative Officer/ competition but best value to Secretary- Treasurer or be obtained - See 1.3 designate Non Competitive Authority Procurement (Sole source/ Over $200,000 Executive Committee Negotiation) - See 1.14 $50,000 - $200,000 Chief Administrative Officer/ Up to $50,000 Secretary- Treasurer or Note: In the case of an emergency over $50,000 the designate Chief Administrative Officer /Secretary- Treasurer is authorized to act immediately and report to the Executive Committee at the earliest opportunity ACCEPTABLE BID OR LIMITS AUTHORITIES PROPOSAL Over $200,000 $50,000 - $200,000 Up to $50,000 Authority Executive Committee Chief Administrative Officer/ Secretary- Treasurer or designate Lowest acceptable bid or highest ranked proposal not being accepted for any reasons other than those specified in 1.8 Over $200,000 $50,000 - $200,000 Up to $50,000 Authority Executive Committee Chief Administrative Officer/ Secretary- Treasurer or designate DISPOSAL OF GOODS LIMITS AUTHORITIES Value of items (estimated market value at time of disposal) Over $200,000 $50,000 - $200,000 Up to $50,000 Authority Executive Committee Chief Administrative Officer/ Secretary- Treasurer or designate 162 Notes and interpretations: 1. In accordance with Section 1.3 Authorization and Limits, the Chief Administrative Officer /Secretary- Treasurer or.designate shall maintain a list of designated employees and their respective authorities and limitations. 2. If the lowest acceptable bid as a result of a Request for Tender is Tess than $100,000, authorization for the award shall still be made by Executive Committee. 3. If the lowest acceptable bid as a result of a Request for Quotation is more than $100,000 authorization for award shall be made by Executive Committee. 163 SCHEDULE 'B' GOODS AND SERVICES NOT SUBJECT TO THIS POLICY The following items are not subject to this policy. Unless otherwise stated in this policy or any administrative procedures, a purchase order is not required to process payment. Sole source vendors are subject to the provisions of the purchasing policy and the issuance of a purchase order. The items listed here are subject to such other policies, procedures and approvals as TRCA requires. 1. Utilities Electricity Water and sewage charges Natural gas Basic telephone /data/internet/long distance service Basic television cable service 2. Training and Education Membership fees - Professional Associations Magazine and Periodical Subscriptions Training Registration (except where bulk training is arranged through a bidding process) Conferences and Seminars 3. Refundable employee expenses Meal allowances Travel and transportation expenses Promotional allowance Hotel accommodations Mileage 4. General Expenses Property Taxes Postage (Canada Post) Licenses, e.g. vehicles Charges to or from other government agencies including contracts with Federal, Provincial or Municipal governments Agencies, Boards, Commissions Grants to organizations Land purchases /expropriation Land registry fees Refunds Legal settlements Grievance payments Experts and witnesses for civil actions or administrative hearings Arbitrators and Mediators TRCA catered functions and accommodations 5. Petty cash replenishment 164 6. Payments to past and current employees All salaries, wages and benefits due to any person in the employ of the TRCA. All retirement allowances and other mandatory payments due to any person previously in the employ of the TRCA. 7. Government payments All accounts for fees and levies payable to the federal, provincial or other municipal government, or to any agency, board or commission thereof. 8. Debt All accounts for payments of principal or interest on debentures, loans or overdrafts, including foreign exchange in accordance with TRCA investment policy. 9. Pension deductions and contributions All accounts relating to employee pension deductions and employer pension contributions in respect of the salaries and wages to those persons who are paid by or employed by the TRCA, and which are payable in respect of any duly authorized registered pension plan on behalf of the respective employee. 10. Handmade products produced by TRCA employees for sale at TRCA gift shops . 11. Research and special projects undertaken by qualified Community College /University staff and /or students acting on behalf of their respective institution. 165 SCHEDULE `C' ADDITIONAL PURCHASING POLICIES ADOPTED BY THE AUTHORITY FROM TIME TO TIME POLICY DESCRIPTION DATE OF APPROVAL 166 RES. #C38/05 - OFFICE ACCOMMODATION Approval to Lease Additional Office Space from Park Downsview Park Inc.. Approval to enter into a lease of additional office space at 70 Canuck Avenue, Downsview Park, subject to terms and conditions satisfactory to the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority and its solicitors. Moved by: Seconded by: Bill O'Donnell Rob Ford THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) enter into a lease of additional office space at 70 Canuck Avenue, Downsview Park, subject to terms and conditions satisfactory to TRCA and its solicitors; AND FURTHER THAT staff be directed and authorized to take such action as is necessary to implement the lease including the signing of documents. CARRIED BACKGROUND At Authority Meeting #4/04, held on April 30, 2004, Resolution #A112/04 was approved as follows: THAT the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) enter into a lease with Parc Downsview Park Inc. (Downsview Park) and Her Majesty The Queen in Right of Canada Represented Herein By The Department of National Defence (DND), for office space located at 70 Canuck Avenue, City of Toronto; THAT the term of the lease be for 60 months (five years); THAT the payment be $8.50 per useable square foot for the first 12 months and $14.50 per useable square foot for the remaining 48 months, paid on a monthly basis inclusive of all real estate taxes, maintenance and utilities exclusive of hydro; THAT the agreement be subject to the other terms and conditions of the lease being satisfactory to the TRCA staff and solicitors; AND FURTHER THAT the appropriate TRCA officials be authorized and directed to execute all necessary documents. TRCA leases 10,000 square feet of office space from Parc Downsview Park Inc. (PDP) at 70 Canuck Avenue. Currently, about 48 staff occupy the entire 2nd floor (top floor) and the west half of the main floor at 70 Canuck Avenue. The terms of the lease provided the TRCA a first right of refusal / option on the east half of the main floor at 70 Canuck Avenue to allow for future growth. It is proposed to exercise TRCA's right to lease the remaining 4,800 square feet of useable space on the main floor. 167 The additional space is required to complete the relocation of staff from Head Office in order that the remaining space at Head Office can be used more effectively and organized to reflect the recent corporate restructuring. Staff would like to have the lease in place July 1, 2005. Terms of the proposed lease include: • the term for the additional lease will coincide with the end of the term for the current lease (July 11, 2009); • TRCA will have the ability to sub lease; • PDP will arrange for contracts to upgrade the additional space per the office layout and specifications provided by TRCA; • TRCA to front end the costs of the upgrades and recover this amount through the applicable rent reduction; and, • additional storage space will be available to TRCA in the basement. Staff anticipate that details of the lease, terms and conditions satisfactory to staff, will be available at Authority Meeting #5/05, to be held on June 24, 2005. Staff propose to advise the Authority of the recommended lease, terms and conditions at that time and confirm that staff have authority to implement the lease. Report prepared by: Ron Dewell, extension 5245 For Information contact:Ron Dewell , extension 5245 Date: May 18, 2005 RES. #C39/05 - STAFF ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE Division Names. Approval of division names under the approved organizational structure. Moved by: Seconded by: Bill O'Donnell Rob Ford THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT the division names contained in Toronto and Region Conservation Authority's (TRCA) staff organizational structure be approved. CARRIED BACKGROUND At Authority Meeting #10/04, held on November 26, 2004, Resolution #A316/04 was approved as follows: THAT three new Director level positions be established to provide leadership in the areas of Development Services, Ecology and Community Services to complement the existing positions of Director, Watershed Management, Director, Finance and Business Development and Executive Director, The Conservation Foundation of Greater Toronto. 168 Further, at Authority Meeting #2/05, held on March 11, 2005, Resolution #A32/05 was approved as follows: THAT the organization structure as adopted at Authority Meeting #10/04 be amended by deleting the position of Director, Community Services and replacing it by Director, Conservation Parks and Director, Restoration Projects. RATIONALE After the current organizational structure was approved, senior management consulted with staff on the division names to ensure that the names properly reflect the work being conducted within the division, and that are meaningful throughout the industry. As a result of this discussion, the following division names and Director titles are being recommended by staff: Proposed Ecology: Director - Deb Martin -Downs Finance and Business Services: Director - Jim Dillane Development Parks and Culture: Director - Derek Edwards Planning and Development: Director - Carolyn Woodland Restoration Services: Director - Nick Saccone Watershed Management: Director - Adele Freeman Current Ecology Finance and Business Conservation Parks Development Services Restoration Services Watershed Management The overall structure with the proposed names is outlined in Attachment 1. Report prepared by: Kathy Stranks, extension 5264 For Information contact: Brian Denney, 416- 667 -6290 Date: May 24, 2005 Attachments: 1 169 EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, CONSERVATION FOUNDATION David Love TRCA STAFF STRUCTURE Proposed - May 2005 Authority CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER Brian Denney DIRECTOR, WATERSHED MANAGEMENT Adele Freeman Watersheds / Waterfront Planning Rouge Park RAP CTC Source Protection Education Stewardship & Outreach Great Lakes DIRECTOR, FINANCE AND BUSINESS SERVICES Jim Dlliane Controller & Budgets Conservation Lands & Property Services Records Management & Office Services Information Technology & Systems /GIS Legal Services, Privacy & Compliance Monitoring DIRECTOR, PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT Carolyn Woodland Development Review & Regulatory Compliance Regional & Municipal Policy Enforcement Municipal Planning Liaison DIRECTOR, DIRECTOR, DIRECTOR, MANAGER, RESTORATION PARKS AND ECOLOGY HUMAN SERVICES CULTURE Deb RESOURCES Nick Saccone Derek Edwards Martin -Downs Catherine MacEwen Construction & Regeneration Plant Propogation Archaeology Sustainabillty Management System Brownfields Forest Mgt Near Urban Agriculture BCPV Water Management Conservation Parks Terrestrial & Aquatic Ecology Kortright J Marketing IMonitoring I Flood Warning TRCA Source Protection Project Management Green Technology, Energy Mgt & Programming Climate Change I & Air Quality Communications & Marketing HR & Safety IVolunteer Customer Service SUPERVISOR, BOARD MEMBER SERVICES Kathy Stranks Executive Administration Proposed 05/05 I. luewgo y RES. #C40/05 - 2005 CORPORATE COMMUNICATIONS PLAN Implementation Plan. Implementation plan and measureables for the 2005 corporate communications objectives. Moved by: Seconded by: Bill O'Donnell Rob Ford THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT the 2005 Corporate Communications Implementation Plan for Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) be approved. CARRIED BACKGROUND At Authority Meeting #2/05, held on March 11, 2005, Resolution #A44/05 was approved as follows: THAT the 2005 corporate communications objectives for Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) be approved; THAT a broader partnership base be pursued with more than one media outlet; THAT staff liaise with municipal media relations personnel on the potential for cross promotion opportunities and to further TRCA's connections with local media outlets; AND FURTHER THAT staff report back with an implementation plan, including measureables. RATIONALE The 2005 Corporate Communications Implementation Plan recommendations support the objectives outlined in the Communications Plan approved at the March 11, 2005 Authority meeting. The implementation plan outlines in detail the initiatives in 2005 to support The Living City strategic plan, the fundraising objectives of The Conservation Foundation of Greater Toronto, and the public education and advocacy of our programmes concerning Climate Change. One key change in our approach is the use of an external spokesperson, Mark Cullen, to increase our reach to people in the Toronto region. In addition, we will be seeking media partnerships in print, radio and tv and exploring joint messaging opportunities with our municipal partners. FINANCIAL DETAILS The financial impact is $44,413 for the additional costs of this implementation plan beyond the staff costs and that of TRCA's media consultant, Brown and Cohen. All costs are within various business units approved 2005 budgets. Report prepared by: Deanne Rodrigue, extension 5359 For Information contact: Deanne Rodrigue, extension 5359 Catherine MacEwen, extension 5219 Date: May 24, 2005 Attachments: 1 171 Attachment 1 2005 COMMUNICATIONS OBJECTIVES WORKPLAN 172 OBJECTIVE #1: Increase awareness of The Living City (The Living City) among all of our target audiences . Initiative Activity Due Date _ Budget 1. Produce The Living City two -page overview. Completed ' 1 -Feb $600 2. Meet with business unit managers and define business unit communication needs. Completed 1 -Feb Allocated Staff Time 3. Inform and inspire staff on The Living City with a presentation to be given by business unit managers to their staff. Tie into the release of the strategic plan if possible. Develop PowerPoint presentation 22 -Jul Allocated Staff Time Impact: staff fully understand The Living City vision and how their jobs support that vision, thereby obtaining greater buy in which will result in dissemination of a clear and concise message. Check for staff understanding at staff meetings. Produce strategic plan 1 -Sep $13,480 4. Restructure the Kortright Centre e- bulletin to become The Living City bulletin for fall launch. Develop and implement The Living City e- bulletin plan, and design new look 30 -Aug $1,200 Impact: increase subscriber base from 4,000 to 8,000 in first year. Our audience is more aware of TRCA projects that support our vision. Launch The Living City e- bulletin 5 -Sept Allocated Staff Time 5. Produce and distribute The Living City press kit - National Environmental week June 6 to 10 Compile copies of prominent media coverage 20 -May Allocated Staff Time Impact Media become aware of our vision and key newsworthy projects. Increased coverage on key TRCA initiatives and interviews with experts is realized. Focus on local media, radio and community news and dailies (Star and Globe) Obtain testimonials (Mark Cullen / TRCA staff /volunteer / industry expert / quote extracted from media coverage). Develop press kit, distribute & conduct followup. 3 -Jun $200 6. Generate discussion about The Living City. Identify The Living City spokesperson and position him /her to speak on key living city messages. Mark Cullen will sign Memorandum of Understanding May 31. Secure Mark Cullen as The Living City spokesperson 31 -May Allocated Staff Time 172 Impact Key TRCA experts are well positioned and ready to be called upon to speak about relevant issues such as climate change and water quality / quantity (source protection planning). Success measures include number of interviews and expert feedback on process. Develop The Living City messaging and positioning of Mark Cullen 1 -June Allocated Staff Time Identify other TRCA spokespeople for water quality / climate change and conduct media training 1 -Aug Allocated Staff Time 7. Build a strategy for long -term coverage of the Toronto region's environmental performance. Look at the concept of The Living City Outlook quarterly to support The Living City Report Card and attract frequent media stories. Develop project charter to define the mandate of project, describe approach and deliverables 31 -Aug Allocated Staff Time Impact Viability of producing The Living City Outlook is determined. The outlook would provide a medium to reach people who are interested in the environment, thereby increasing the profile of our programs /projects and gaining greater support. Research publications that may be accomplishing similar mandate, source media partnerships and opportunities to involve opinion leaders 28 -Oct Allocated Staff Time _ Develop project analysis / plan to determine if it is a viable project 30 -Nov Allocated staff Time 8. Identify two living city success stories e.g. Great Canadian Shoreline Cleanup, tree plantings, the city of rivers etc. and tie into a fundraising campaign. Build publicity and pursue fundraising opportunities around it. Develop story to support the Conservation Foundation's direct mail fundraising campaign 15 -Aug Allocated Staff Time Impact: Donations increase by 10% over fall 2004 campaign. Media coverage is received from story development and public service announcements (PSA's). Develop media strategy including media packages. Mark Cullen to endorse campaign with PSA's, conduct media followup 2 -Sep $1,750 Develop direct mail campaign, collateral and online elements 2 -Sep $1,000 Campaign launch (mail drop) 5 -Sep Allocated Staff Time 173 9. Partner with PowerStream to deliver a conference to support their Media relations 19 -Apr $800 Conservation Demand Side Budget 1. Develop a strategy to produce and brand four seasonal recreation events. Find synergies across TRCA programs to gain maximum impact of these events. Messaging: focus on family health and wellness, and improving quality of life. Plan and develop themes: fall theme: hiking winter theme: skiing / snowshoeing Management programs and TRCA's programs (i.e. energy conservation, Allocated Staff Time Impact increase attendance to facilities by 5 %; increase awareness of health / nature connection thereby increasing revenue. Explore partnership / sponsorship opportunities to help brand the event / activity and increase reach. Explore media partnerships. The Living City Programs). Location: Allocated Staff Time Develop, design and print promotional material and distribute with web site support. . Kortright Centre Completed. $6,000 Develop and distribute media package and conduct media follow- up Impact Leadership development of Printed material 19 -Apr $8,383 140 of PowerStream's customers (commercial business managers, facility managers, architects, developers, consultants) on energy conservation. PowerStream customers have adopted improved energy conservation approaches. Allocated Staff Time 174 OBJECTIVE #2: Raise awareness of the human health and nature connection, thereby increasing interest and involvement in TRCA events and facilities. Key messages re: water quality and climate change ' Initiative Activity Due Date Budget 1. Develop a strategy to produce and brand four seasonal recreation events. Find synergies across TRCA programs to gain maximum impact of these events. Messaging: focus on family health and wellness, and improving quality of life. Plan and develop themes: fall theme: hiking winter theme: skiing / snowshoeing ' 5 -Aug 7 -Oct Allocated Staff Time Impact increase attendance to facilities by 5 %; increase awareness of health / nature connection thereby increasing revenue. Explore partnership / sponsorship opportunities to help brand the event / activity and increase reach. Explore media partnerships. Fall: 5 -Aug Winter: 7 -Oct Allocated Staff Time Develop, design and print promotional material and distribute with web site support. . Fall: 19 -Sep Winter: 16 -Dec $6,000 Develop and distribute media package and conduct media follow- up Fall: 16 -Sept Winter: ' 13 -Dec $500 2. Educate our audiences on the importance of water quality /quantity as it relates to human health. Conduct research on water quality /quantity as it relates to human health. 29 -Jul Allocated Staff Time 174 Impact Increased awareness about water quality / quantity and the benefits/ impacts to human health among community members / farmers, thereby increasing response to other initiatives when we roll them out i.e. Healthy Yards Program, Rural Clean Water Program. Package our research findings, develop key messages. 16 -Sept Allocated Staff Time Develop communications around TRCA drinking water source protection plans and use TRCA experts with media. Poll TRCA website visitors; create content on web. Leverage opportunities with municipal partners / media contacts. 30 -Nov $1,000 3. Educate our audiences on the importance of climate change as it relates to human health. Conduct research on climate change as it relates to human health. 31 -Aug Allocated Staff Time Impact Increased awareness among business professionals and industry about key climate change issues and the impacts to human health, thereby increasing partnership potential / funding for our programs when rolled out. Package our research findings and develop key messages. Highlight TRCA's work to slow climate change 30 -Sept Allocated Staff Time Develop communications around climate change and use TRCA experts with media. Poll TRCA website visitors; create content on web. Leverage opportunities with municipal partners / media contacts 14 -Dec $1,000 4. Work with the Don watershed group to promote The Don River Retrospective: a look at the past 25 years and what's in store for the future of the Don. Launch Rouge Integrated Watershed Plan. Meet with Director, Watershed Management to determine status of partnership with Pollution Probe and scope of project 15 -Jun Allocated Staff Time Impact Increase awareness of TRCA efforts on the Don. Greater participation from community members and businesses, furthering our watershed goals. Determine what products will be developed for this initiative to highlight the Lower Don Environmental Assessment and the work on the Mouth of the Don. Develop media story; implement around an event to maximize media exposure tbd Allocated Staff Time 175 5. Launch Rouge Integrated Watershed Plan Design and produce watershed plan 15 -Sep Allocated Staff Time Impact: Increase awareness of Rouge watershed, furthering watershed goals. Develop and distribute media material, conduct followup 15 -Sep Allocated Staff Time 176 OBJECTIVE #3: Increase donor support for The Living City vision and provide support to Conservation Foundation Corporate Cabinet to sell the vision. Initiative Activity Due Date Budget 1. Provide the tools to the Conservation Foundation Corporate Cabinet to help them make their pitch. Produce The Living City two page overview. Completed. Feb Allocated Staff Time Impact: Corporate Cabinet is able to sell the vision more effectively. Greater donor support is realized. Measurement is cabinet satisfaction with brochure. Produce the TRCA generic brochure. Completed. Apr $2,000 Design and print a leave behind brochure which focusses on top fundraising priorities: education, reforestation and The Living City Centre 30 -June $2,000 Develop a one minute video presentation to help sell The Living City vision. Shows people interacting with nature and kids involved in our programs, etc. 29 -Jul $2,000 Develop media strategy for the foundation for the last 6 months of 2005 1 -Jul Allocated Staff Time 2. Work with the foundation to plan and execute a successful Sauriol Dinner fundraiser and look at opportunities to cultivate donors around this event. Maximize opportunities for promotion of the event via the web site. Encourage donors to give online 15 -Jul Allocated Staff Time Impact Money raised increases by 10% over last year. Craft a special invitation to the VIP reception which will be sent to high level prospective donors. Look for partnerships to raise the profile 16 -Sep $300 Develop, produce and distribute promotional material for the event 21 -Oct $2,000 176 177 Develop, produce and distribute media package and conduct media follow up 21 -Oct $200 3. Develop a plan to leverage existing and cultivate new relationships with top donors. Build the communications arsenal by enlisting new fundraising volunteers. Plan and implement a networking / recruitment event (ie. networking breakfast series). Source high profile participants for a recruitment event. Involve Mark Cullen in the event program 15 -July Allocated Staff Time Impact: achieve greater support and $ for the foundation. Develop and pitch the compelling story that will entice them to donate 15 -Aug Allocated Staff Time 4. Take steps to build a ranking system to report back to donors and the broader public on where their money is being spent. Introduce a new online tool that will measure campaign success and inspire greater giving 31 -Aug Allocated Staff Time Impact donors are able to see where their money is being spent. Total ; . $44,413.00 177 RES. #C41 /05 - RELIGIOUS OBSERVANCE POLICY Approval of policy on religious holidays to support diversity initiatives. Moved by: Seconded by: Rob Ford Bill O'Donnell THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) Religious Observance Policy be approved as follows: "When an employee requests time off during regular working hours to observe a holy day, TRCA will make reasonable efforts to accommodate the request by allowing up to 3 unpaid days off or use of lieu time or vacation equivalent." AMENDMENT RES. #C42 /05 Moved by: Seconded by: Rob Ford Bill O'Donnell THAT the policy cited in the main motion be amended to read: 'When an employee requests time off during regular working hours to observe a holy day, TRCA will make reasonable efforts to accommodate the request by allowing up to 3 unpaid days off per year or use of lieu time or vacation equivalent." THE AMENDMENT WAS CARRIED THE MAIN MOTION, AS AMENDED, WAS CARRIED BACKGROUND Under the Ontario Human Rights Code (hereafter "Code "), discrimination based on religion is against the law. Everyone should have access to the same opportunities and benefits and be treated with equal dignity and respect, regardless of their religion. At TRCA, we have an informal policy allowing people to take days off for religious purposes. Staff is proposing this new policy to ensure there is consistency in the application across TRCA. Religion includes the practices, beliefs and observances that are part of a faith or religion. It does not include personal moral, ethical or political views nor does it include religions that promote violence or hate towards others, or that violate Canadian criminal law. TRCA wishes to provide a workplace that is free from discrimination based on an employee's religion, therefore TRCA is proposing the following policy guidelines with respect to the accommodation of religious observances related to a persons creed. Procedures 1. Individuals who seek accommodation must speak with their immediate supervisor and provide details of the requirement of accommodation for religious observances. 178 2. Accommodation for time off for religious observances will be provided for a minimum of three religious days. Employees who require days off for religious observance may utilize vacation time / lieu time / unpaid days. 3. Each employee is required to provide one weeks notice to put their request in writing so that it may be reviewed and maintained in the employee file. 4. The employee must explain why the accommodation is required and must allow a reasonable time for reply by the supervisor. 5. Responses will be provided to the employee by the supervisor within 2 business days with an explanation of what measures of accommodation are required. For accommodations that are anticipated on a regular annual basis, two weeks notice to the supervisor is required. Requests related to the observance of religious practices will be granted. However, the employee making the request is expected to be flexible, realistic and prepared to consider alternatives. Successful working conditions and relationships depend on successful communication. Not only do employees need to stay aware of changes, procedures, policies and general information, employees also need to communicate ideas, suggestions, personal goals and problems as they affect their work and allow supervisors to accommodate properly. Supervisors will work with the employee to establish reasonable accommodation that is acceptable to both parties. Options like flex time could be adopted for prayers and fasting. Employees are encouraged to discuss with Human Resources if there are any issues or concerns. Other areas of potential accommodation include allowing the employee a private area for religious observance during the day, flexible department times during religious periods and alternative food arrangements for official TRCA events and meetings if available and reasonable. FINANCIAL DETAILS Since the policy relates to time off using vacation, lieu time or unpaid days, there are no financial impacts. Report prepared by: Catherine MacEwen, extension 5219 For Information contact: Catherine MacEwen, extension 5219 Date: May 24, 2005 RES. #C43/05 - SECONDMENT POLICY Approval of the Secondment Policy for Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) employees going to other organizations and for employees of other organizations coming to TRCA. 179 Moved by: Seconded by: Bill O'Donnell Rob Ford THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT the Secondment Policy be approved as follows: "Employees are encouraged to seek secondment opportunities in and outside of Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) as part of their professional development. Managers are encouraged to support such secondments when such a move contributes to the TRCA's greater good. That managers shall seek secondment arrangements with partners where external resources can be effectively seconded into TRCA on a temporary basis In the mutual best interests of both organizations ". CARRIED BACKGROUND TRCA with our partnership organizations have entered into secondment agreements with our respective staffs on an adhoc basis. These policies and procedures are proposed to ensure consistency and understanding on how a secondment agreement should proceed, what employees should expect and the benefits to both organizations and staff. The Secondment Procedures The secondment of staff into or out of Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) must be arranged for the greater good of the organization and our employees. The Secondment Policy addresses both the situation where an employee wishes to be seconded to another organization and the where TRCA wishes to second someone in or out of the organization. Scenario One The employee is with TRCA and is seconded either internally to another department or externally to another partnership organization. TRCA encourages the use of career development tools like secondments to increase our influence with partners, increase the competencies of our staff and meet the short term needs of the organization for a talent "injection" at critical times. The Procedures for Scenario One An employee can apply for a position in or outside of TRCA on a short term basis, usually 3 to 12 months. Any secondment request of greater than 12 months should be considered a permanent transfer and no buy back guarantee is needed. This application is between the employee and the hiring manager and is a confidential arrangement. When the applicant receives a genuine offer, the employee is to do the following: 1. Advise the hiring manager and his or her current manager that he or she is interested in another position and that the employee is requesting that the arrangement be a secondment. 180 2. The two managers discuss the option and both parties must agree to the secondment arrangements. If the current manager refuses the secondment, the employee is still free to accept the new position, however there is no guaranteed buy back to the original department. 3. For most secondments, the current (sending) manager would provide a guaranteed buy -back to the employee after the secondment has ended. The "guarantee" is qualified with two conditions: first that the job or job equivalent still exists and second the employee's performance on the job is satisfactory and not subject to disciplinary action. 4. The current (sending) manager is expected to replace the employee with a contract staff for the duration of the secondment. 5. The seconded employee remains an employee of TRCA and retains the rights and privileges of a TRCA employee including benefits, salary, vacation, the right to apply for other TRCA positions during the secondment, salary increases, etc.. 6. If during a secondment period, an employee accepts another position, the secondment will be reposted, however TRCA does not guarantee a replacement employee to complete the secondment arrangement. 7. During the secondment, the employee's salary and benefits remain as if they were an employee of TRCA. The only exception is when the hiring manager (receiving) in another organization is willing to provide a salary increment based on his or her organizational policies or if the employee is being seconded internally to a higher rated position. If the employee is seconded to a lower paying position, his or her salary remains at the current level until such time that the secondment ends. 8. To allow for planning of secondments, the employee should advise his or her immediate supervisor during the annual performance review that they are interested in a secondment and indicate his or her level of mobility. For example, if an employee is willing to accept a temporary position in the Greater Toronto Area only, in the Golden Horseshoe only, in all of Ontario or other specified locations, this should be identified on his or her performance review. 9. The returning seconded employee should be placed back into his or her original position or equivalent. If there is no formal buy back arrangement in place, or the position has disappeared, the manager will seek alternative positions for the employee or the employee may be laid off. 9. There is often a requirement for an "overlap" period between the time one employee leaves and another starts the position in a secondment arrangement. For exiting and entering employees, the standard overlap time is 2 weeks. For employees who are hired for a position and leave before the position is filled, he or she should be expected to return to the previous position to train the new employee. This agreement can be negotiated between the two managers. 181 10. All employees need to conform to the TRCA Code of Conduct, be covered by WSIB and comply with TRCA policies and procedures. Scenario Two The seconded employee is with another organization and his or her relationship with TRCA Is a temporary one (one year or less) and the employee keeps his or her status as an employee of the other (sending) organization. The Procedures for Scenario Two 1. A seconded employee from an outside organization working on TRCA property must be covered by WSIB, and have the necessary liability insurance of an outside contractor. 2. There needs to be a formal secondment arrangement, signed by both TRCA and the external organization. In most cases the seconded employee remains as an employee with the external organization and all costs including salary, benefits, vacation, travel and other disbursements are billed via an invoice to TRCA. 3. All seconded employees are expected to comply with the TRCA policies and procedures and Code of Conduct. If the external (sending) organization has similar policies and procedures, TRCA will need to be advised that there is compliance between the two organizations. 4. The seconded employee cannot be seconded for greater than 12 months. 5. The seconded employee can apply for positions in his or her organization during the secondment period. For Both Internal and External Secondment Arrangements The Procedures 1. Any secondment can be terminated within 2 weeks with the mutual agreement of both parties. 2. If a seconded employee accepts a permanent position in the new department or organization, he or she needs to advise the current (sending) manager of resignation of the current position and the accepting of the new position. 3. Secondment arrangements should be 12 months or less. If for extraordinary reasons, there is a need for the secondment to be greater than 12 months, the Executive Committee needs to approve the request. ' For secondments of 12 months or less, the approval of the Chief Administrative Officer is required. 4. Any special arrangements for an employee must be identified in the secondment arrangement including location of position, reporting structure and other terms and conditions of employment. 182 5. Recruitment for secondment positions should be posted, except in circumstances where that is not reasonable or recommended by the receiving and sending manager. FINANCIAL DETAILS The financial impacts of any secondment arrangement will be part of any TRCA budget forecast and does not represent any incremental cost amount beyond the project budgeted costs approved in the annual TRCA budget. Secondment expenses including salary and benefits will be part of the negotiated agreement and will vary on a case by case basis. It is anticipated that one or two TRCA employees per year will be involved in the secondment programme so the anticipated impact on TRCA will be minimal. Report prepared by: Catherine MacEwen, extension 5219 For Information contact: Catherine MacEwen, extension 5219 Date: May 24, 2005 RES.AEC44 /05 - POLICY FOR REHIRING RETIRED /FORMER EMPLOYEES Defining the limitations in rehiring former employees. Moved by: Seconded by: Dick O'Brien Rob Ford THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT the Rehiring of Retired Employee Policy be rescinded and the following substituted: "Retired employees cannot be rehired under contract within 12 months of their retirement date unless for extraordinary purposes and with the proper approvals. Former employees can be rehired as employees or contract staff within a year however not if the employee has received a severance package at the time of his or her departure. All contractual extensions of employment beyond the normal retirement date must be approved by the Chief Administrative Officer and the Executive Committee." CARRIED BACKGROUND From time to time, there may be a need to rehire a former or retired employee due to a short term skill shortage, the time to recruit replacement staff is lengthy or the position is being restructured in the future. The previous policy for the rehiring of retired employees was approved in 1988 as follows: Extension of employment beyond the normal retirement date must be approved by the Chief Administrative Officer /Secretary Treasurer and the Executive Committee on an annual basis. 183 The Procedures If a manager wants to hire a retired employee within 12 months of his or her retirement date as a contract employee, the request to hire must be approved by the Executive Committee before any offer can be made. The following terms need to be met in the request: 1. The rehire is not part of a "retirement" incentive. 2. The rehire is for temporary (less than 6 months) or part time work. 3. The rehire complies with OMERS and other benefit conditions. 4. The position is a "contract" position with no benefits except WSIB coverage and 4% vacation pay. When the former employee has resigned in the past, the rehiring does not require Executive Committee approval. When the former employee has received a severance package at the time of departure, he or she should not be rehired during the next 12 months. If the former employee has received a severance package within the last 12 months and has applied for a position, the former employee may be asked to reimburse part of that settlement as a term of future employment. No employee who has been terminated with cause should receive an offer of future employment and his or her records should state that the employee is not rehireable. FINANCIAL DETAILS There is expected to be very limited financial impacts and any such arrangements made would have to be under the annual budget funding umbrella. Report prepared by: Catherine MacEwen, extension 5219 For Information contact: Catherine MacEwen, extension 5219 Date: May 24, 2005 RES. #C45/05 - ACCOUNTS RECEIVABLE STATUS REPORT May 20, 2005. Staff report on accounts receivable, as of May 20, 2005. Moved by: Bill O'Donnell Seconded by: Peter Milczyn THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT the Accounts Receivable Status Report, as of May 20, 2005, be received; AND FURTHER THAT the amount due from Robertson Gaze Associates Inc. be written off. CARRIED RATIONALE The schedule below summarizes the status of receivables, including aging and classification. The schedule excludes $13,289 in accumulated interest arrears on invoices outstanding for more than 30 days. 184 ACCOUNTS RECEIVABLE AGING, BY CATEGORY Excluding Municipal Levy and MNR Grant - As at May 20, 2005 Items in excess of $1,000.00 included in the 90- plus -days column, are as follows: CLIENT NAME CURRENT 31 TO 60 DAYS 61 TO 90 DAYS 90 PLUS DAYS TOTAL % SCHOOLS AND SCHOOL BOARDS 110,033 16,130 156 576 126,895 18.9% GOVERNMENT 129,204 59,038 80,550 36,157 304,949 45.4% DEVELOPMENT SERVICES 2,500 - 750 83,650 86,900 12.9% CORPORATE, INDIVIDUAL AND COMMUNITY GROUPS 72,287 20,243 54,242 6,448 153,220 22.8% TOTAL 314,024 95,411 135,698 126,831 671,964 100.0% % OF TOTAL 46.7% 14.2% 20.2% 18.9% 100.0% 275 Items in excess of $1,000.00 included in the 90- plus -days column, are as follows: CLIENT NAME AMOUNT $ ARREARS INTEREST $ AGE (DAYS) NOTES City of Vaughan 15,300.00 n \a 140 Archaeological investigation. Fred Robbins 1,250.00 116.81 201 For cross country run at Albion Hills. Region of York 15,000.00 n \a 103 "YDSS" coordinator salary recovery. Richmond Hill 2,846.25 • 174.64 140 Supply of planting materials. Basciano Parkin Ltd. 2,000.00 321.08 302 Planning fees. Brutto Consulting 7,500.00 823.83 229 Planning fees. Ltd. 3,000.00 280.34 201 Planning fees. Glen Pietrowski 10,000.00 1,264.92 266 Planning fees. Ron Wilton 7,000.00 1,003.72 275 Planning fees. KLM Planning 2,000.00 391.24 371 Planning fees. 20,000.00 2,867.80 275 Planning fees Rice Development Group 20,000.00 913.57 103 Planning fees Robertson Gaze Associates Inc. 4,621.56 1,887.33 707 For planting materials. Company has advised that it is insolvent and cannot make payment. Account sent for collection. TOTALS 110,517.81 10,045.28 185 The amount due from Robertson Gaze Associates Inc., $4,621.56, is no longer considered collectible. The original invoice for plant material was dated June 13, 2003. In October 2003, the company advised that it was insolvent and was discontinuing operations. The account was sent for collection in October 2004. The collection agency advises that the likelihood of recovery is minimal and advises against any further action. The Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) Accounts Receivable policies require that write -offs be approved by the Executive Committee, but since the Business Excellence Advisory Board meeting is to be held one week after the June Executive Committee meeting, the write -off is being recommended to the Authority. The outstanding accounts for planning fees are deemed to be collectible. Most of these accounts occurred as the TRCA transitioned to the new fee schedule. Some smaller accounts have been written off in accordance with the policy. Collection of planning fees has improved and staff does not anticipate that this list of problem accounts will grow significantly. Staff believes that there is still some leverage available to deal with these outstanding accounts. In May, the two Weston Consulting invoices totaling $30,000 were paid. The amount from Rice Development Group, $20,000, is a recent addition to the 90 -day plus list. All other amounts listed above are considered collectible at this time. Receivable balances, as reported on each of the previous reports to the advisory board, after 2000, are presented as follows: DATE Total $ 90 -Plus $ May 20, 2005 671,964 126,831 March 31, 2005 841,871 183,755 February 15, 2005 699,123 189,490 December 30, 2004 1,935,416 245,815 October 25, 2004 1,127,102 180,891 September 28, 2004 876,800 187,754 September 3, 2004 936,923 197,539 May 17, 2004 1,018,188 129,505 February 17, 2004 1,386,809 178,370 January 7, 2004 1,064,464 45,382 November 2, 2003 951,999 101,194 August 24, 2003 768,825 125,803 May 25, 2003 445,116 168,327 March 2, 2003 709,807 141,313 October 20, 2002 774,831 46,237 August 25, 2002 326,529 109,560 May 26, 2002 658,514 201,158 January 31, 2002 585,736 64,259 December 30, 2001 1,078,071 38,666 October 23, 2001 350,385 106,343 August 27, 2001 371,985 17,153 May 25, 2001 1,132,443 44,810 March 26, 2001 621,560 167,094 186 Report prepared by: Rocco Sgambelluri, extension 5232 For Information contact: Rocco Sgambelluri, extension 5232 Date: May 24, 2005 RES. #C46/05 - WILD WATER KINGDOM Extension of Outstanding Rent Payment. Request from Wild Water Kingdom to extend to July 30, 2005, a portion of outstanding rent payment. Moved by: Seconded by: Bill O'Donnell Rob Ford THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT the request from Wild Water Kingdom that the outstanding rent and other payments be paid on the basis of $100,000 on or before June 30, 2005, and the balance including interest on or before July 30, 2005, be approved, subject to all other payments required by the lease being paid on the dates required. CARRIED RATIONALE Wild Water Kingdom has submitted the attached letter requesting that the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) extend the deadline for payment of the 2004 deferred rent and property taxes. TRCA is fully secured by the terms and conditions of the lease. Interest charges are applied and collected. Staff recommend approval of the request. Report prepared by: Jim Dillane, extension 6292 For Information contact: Jim Dillane, extension 6292 Date: June 09, 2005 Attachments: 1 187 Attachment 1 June 1, 2005 oK I N G D O M.. Via Facsimile — (416)661 -6898 Original by Mail Toronto and Region Conservation Authority 5 Shoreham Drive Downsview, Ontario M3N 1S4 Attention: James Dillane Dear Jim: It was indeed a pleasure to provide you and Ron with a tour of the Park on May 27, 2005. John and I were very happy to inform you of our exciting plans and to show you all the improvements that are taking place for this season. As you no doubt will appreciate, the capital expenditures that we have invested for the park are substantial and will cost about $350,000. Although the 2004 season was the worst year in the history of the park in terms of attendance, we felt a major investment to improve the park was necessary at this time to turn around th'e park's performance. As you know, in addition to major landscaping, repainting the buildings and facilities, replacing the concrete walkway at the entrance with interlocking brick, tiling the bathrooms and restaurants, we have also made our admission price all inclusive so that admission now includes all 'facilities as mini -golf, batting cages, bumper boats, rock climbing,-and ride on toys. We expect that this strategy will result in a significant increase in revenue and would be beneficial to the park and the Authority in the long run. This letter will confirm our request to extend the time for payment of the deferred percentage rent end property taxes which are due on June 30, 2005. We are in the process of being considered for a Line of Credit with the Bank of Montreal, but unfortunately this has not been approved as yet. At this time, we would Ilke to propose that we pay the Authority the sum of $100,000 on or before June 30, 2005. The balance of the outstanding amounts owing, together with interest at Prime + 1 %, will be paid to the Authority within 30 days of this interim payment. As always, we thank you for your consideration and cooperation In this matter. Yours very truly, Dr. Edward Slu Chon President Address: 7855 Finch Avenue West, Brampton Ontario LOT 3V7 Tel: (416) 369 -0123 or ( 905) 794 -0565 • Toll Free. 1 -866- 794 -9453 Fax: (905) 794 -1071 • Web Site: www.wildwaterkingdom.com- 188 SECTION IV - ITEMS FOR THE INFORMATION OF THE BOARD RES. #C47/05 - RENTAL PROPERTY PORTFOLIO - ROUGE PARK Status report on the rental portfolio on lands acquired from the Ontario Realty Corporation for Rouge Park purposes. Moved by: Seconded by: Bill O'Donnell Rob Ford IT IS RECOMMENDED THAT the report dated May 20, 2005 on the rental properties acquired from the Ontario Realty Corporation for Rouge Park purposes be received. CARRIED BACKGROUND On April 15, 1999, the province announced they would be transferring ownership of lands in the Little Rouge Corridor and Milne Park to the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) and the Town of Markham. While not included in the media package, it was also announced that all the Ontario Realty Corporation (ORC) lands within the Rouge Park south of Steeles Avenue, would also be transferred to the TRCA. In total, the province transferred 1,432 hectares (3,538 acres). The Town of Markham received 117 hectares (289 acres) and TRCA.received 1,315 hectares (3,249 acres). These lands contain 74 leases (54 residential, 9 farm units, 10 farmland and 1 commercial). The objective of the rental management program is to provide a long term income stream for Rouge Park purposes. To achieve a sustainable income stream, it is necessary to maintain all of the structures that will be retained in the long term in a good state of repair. Guardian Home Inspectors was retained in early 2005 to undertake inspection of the properties to assess the present condition and provide maintenance recommendations. The information provided from the inspection is being used to prepare a maintenance budget and to broadly categorize the condition of the structures as good, fair or poor. Buildings in good condition are structurally sound and only require regular maintenance. Buildings in fair condition are • structurally sound and along with regular maintenance would also require major maintenance such as roof repairs. The cost of this major maintenance would not exceed $20,000 per dwelling. Buildings in poor condition are not structurally sound or would require a substantial investment to make the property financially viable in the long term. Business cases will be prepared for each of the structures in poor condition to determine if they should be retained or demolished in the long term. Based on the inspections done by Guardian Home Inspectors, the following are the classifications of the structures: Structure Good Fair Poor Residential 17 28 9 Farm units(dwelling) 1 8 0 Farm Units (out buildings) 1 3 6 189 TRCA also engaged D. Bottero & Associates Limited to undertake a market value assessment of rental rates for each lease. The following is a summary of the results: • 2 leases above market rent - 2 residential; • 16 leases at market rent - 15 residential and 1 farm unit; • 14 leases slightly below market rent (within 10% of market rent)- 13 residential and 1 farm unit; and, • 29 leases below market rent - 21 residential, 1 commercial and 7 farm units. Rental rate increases for residential properties are set by the province on an annual basis. The rate for 2005 is 1.5 %. The only opportunity to increase the rental rates above the provincial guideline is when a tenant leaves or if capital improvements are undertaken on the property. When a tenant vacates the property, the rent can be increased to market. When capital improvements are undertaken, it is necessary to apply to the Ontario Rental Housing Tribunal and they set the amount of the increase. On the farm and commercial leases, TRCA was required by ORC to agree to limit the rental increases to 5% for 3 years (there is now Tess than 2 years left in this requirement). Based on this information the following is the projected net revenues for the rental portfolio. ORC RENTALS YEAR 2005 2006 2007 2008 START UP EXPENDITURES $47,200 TAXES $290,000 $220,000 $226,600 $233,400 INSURANCE $84,000 $86,500 $89,100 $91,800 MAJOR MAINTENANCE $100,500 $175,000 $175,000 $175,000 REGULAR MAINTENANCE $185,300 $190,900 $196,600 $202,500 RENTAL SERVICES AND ASSOCIATED ADMINISTRATION COSTS $83,000 $85,490 $88,050 $90,690 TOTAL EXPENDITURES $790,000 $757,890 $775,350 $793,390 TOTAL REVENUE $830,000 $854,900 $880,500 $906,900 NET REVENUE ($40,000) ($97,010) ($105,150) ($113,510) Notes: • START UP EXPENDITURES - Cost of the building inspections, market value assessment and the preparation and signing of new leases with all the existing tenants. • TAXES - We propose to make application on lands that are farm under the Farm Tax Incentive Program. Eligible farm lands are taxed at 25% of residential tax rate. This will result in a significant reduction in the 2006 taxes. • INSURANCE - The insurance premiums are based on 41 residential dwellings and 37 barns /sheds /garages /workshop being insured at replacement value and the remaining structures being insured for salvage value only. 190 • MAJOR MAINTENANCE - Major repairs such as septic, roof, chimney repairs, window replacement, electrical inspections, electrical upgrades and plumbing upgrades. • REGULAR MAINTENANCE - Service contracts, water testing, salt, permanganate, chimney cleaning and certification, carbon monoxide monitors, smoke detectors, septic tank pumping, maintenance staff and routine maintenance and inspections. • RENTAL SERVICES AND ASSOCIATED ADMINISTRATION COSTS - Costs incurred by TRCA for the administration of the rental portfolio ie. customer service, advertising, lease negotiations, preparation of lease documents and renewals, financial planning and budgeting, cost control, processing of rent increases, active pursuit of rent arrears, eviction and other enforcement proceedings, information management, recording and reporting, processing cheques and invoices, mailing and other associated staff time. FINANCIAL DETAILS Net revenues from the rental portfolio will be available to the Rouge Park Alliance to be used for Rouge Park purposes. DETAILS OF WORK TO BE DONE Staff haslprovided to the Rouge Park Alliance Finance Committee and the Rouge Park Alliance the foregoing information. Staff will report to the Finance Committee in the fall of 2005 on progress toward achieving the budgeted net revenue. Report prepared by: Mike Fenning, extension 5223 For Information contact: Ron Dewell, extension 5245, Mike Fenning, extension 5223 Date: May 20, 2005 RES. #C48/05 - RESTORATION SERVICES WORKSHOP Update on the new Restoration Services Workshop and office being designed by Montgomery Sisam Architects. Moved by: Seconded by: Bill O'Donnell Rob Ford IT IS RECOMMENDED THAT the update on the Montgomery Sisam Architects design of the new Restoration Services Workshop (formally Resource Management Services Workshop) and Office at Boyd North be received. CARRIED 191 BACKGROUND In 1995, the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) Conservation Services Nursery 10 -year Operating Plan identified inadequacies in the current workshop facility and ancillary buildings related to servicing Environmental Services Section /Resource Management Services program needs and growth projections for project implementation. Further program decision - making processes resulted in a hold being placed on all major maintenance and renovation to existing facilities in lieu of relocating and constructing a new facility that could service the needs of the Resource Management Services Group (former Conservation Services), for a planning horizon of 20 years. A review of the Nursery propagation and production facilities indicates that they are currently adequate, based on the propagation targets and production regimes as identified in the 2001 Business Plan for the Indigenous Plant Propagation Program. There is no proposal to move these functions of the Resource Management Services Group at this time. There may be a need for additional landbase for enhanced production capacity at some undetermined time in the future, however, any future changes or moves would require further definition of need based on verifiable and sustained market demand for nursery products. In early 2002, the need and rationale for relocation were presented to and supported by TRCA management staff. The proposed workshop relocation site is located northeast of the intersection of Islington Avenue and Rutherford Road (copies of a site map will be available at the meeting) in the City of Vaughan, in close proximity to the TRCA's Nursery, Boyd Office and The Living City Centre at Kortright, three key elements identified as part of The Living City Campus. The proposed building site is situated on a grassed meadow tableland located on the western crest of the East Humber Valley, surrounded by open woodlands, reforested farmland, constructed habitat wetlands and meadow. The proposed location for the new facility was selected based on its proximity to current nursery propagation and production base (Thompson property) located on a plateau in the East Humber River valley and its ability to be closely tied to the Restoration Services Division base at the Boyd Office. Further, the selected location affords the land area required to reconstruct and allow opportunity for expansion and growth, should the need arise, and is an allowable use under the landuse designations as set out in the Boyd North Management Plan. Subsequent to receiving support and identifying a suitable location, program staff contracted with Keewatin -Aski, an engineering design and development consulting group to undertake a relocation assessment and planning study, still at the conceptual level. Keewatin -Aski was hired in January 2002, and directed to review identified needs, site planning requirements, municipal zoning restrictions and site servicing options. In keeping with TRCA's vision for The Living City and Sustainable Communities objective, staff directed that the review entail the preparation of preliminary designs incorporating sustainable elements in any design proposals. Sustainable elements included are: • "green roof" feasibility; • wastewater treatment and "grey water" recycling opportunities; • stormwater recycling opportunities; • energy efficient design; and, • solar capability for heating augmentation. 192 Preliminary designs were to accommodate program requirements and staff needs based on current staffing levels. These designs also incorporated improvements to address current facility standards with respect to provincial /federal building code requirements, municipal standards for'zoning restrictions and by -laws, and Occupational Health & Safety Act (OH &SA) health /hygiene requirements. The preliminary project budget was estimated at $2 million. At Authority Meeting #10/04, held on November 26, 2004, Resolution #A308/04 was approved as follows: THAT the contract for provision of architectural and engineering design services for the design and construction of the Resource Management Services Workshop and ancillary buildings be awarded to Montgomery Sisam Architects Inc., this being the proposal which met Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) specifications at the lowest cost, in the amount of $196,000 plus taxes where applicable; THAT staff be authorized and directed to take such action as may be necessary to implement the contract including the signing of documents; THAT staff be authorized to approve additional unspecified expenditures to a maximum of fifteen percent of the total design fees as a contingency allowance to Montgomery Sisam Architects Inc., if deemed necessary; AND FURTHER THAT staff continue to work cooperatively with the City of Vaughan to negotiate and confirm a partnership for the sharing of the site, infrastructure and facilities, including development and construction costs. The primary intent of this consulting assignment was to build on the preliminary assessments by Keewatin -Aski and to develop detailed designs, in consultation with TRCA staff, for the construction of a regeneration projects base of operations that is both sustainable and worthy of TRCA's current and future role in helping facilitate The Living City vision for the Toronto region. In addition, the consultant was to consider the future prospect or potential of creating additional office /work spaces within the building as part of the design of the new facility. The additional space would be used by both the Restoration Services and Parks and Culture Divisions staff for offices, storage and project implementation planning and staging purposes. The conceptual design prepared by Montgomery Sisam for the new workshop and office building responds to the TRCA vision for The Living City where "human settlement can flourish forever as part of nature's beauty and diversity ". The design process has been guided by the Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) principles and objectives, with a view to achieving a LEED building certification at the gold level, demonstrating the TRCA's commitment to environmental sustainability. The final LEED certification would be subject to availability of resources and determined in part by site constraints. 193 In concept, the building will be approximately 12,500 sq. ft. in area and will be positioned on the site to maximize the views over the valley and the nursery operations and providing strong visual connection to the works yard and at the same time helping screen the yard from the main entrance, clearly defining the yards zone separating work vehicular traffic from private vehicles. The building program is enclosed within a 2- storey envelope and includes an open concept office space with mezzanine, workshop and support spaces. As a LEED gold level candidate project the building incorporates a number of sustainable design strategies: • the site development includes only pervious surfaces; • irrigation free native species are used for landscaping; • the structure incorporates salvaged timber and bricks; • a ground source heat pump system to feed a radiant slab is used for cooling and heating; • only composting toilets and waterless urinals will be used; • a combination of optimum orientation, and upgraded insulation to eliminate the need for conventional air conditioning; • the building incorporates extensive glazing to provide natural light and ventilation; • the layout of the program respond to functional and sustainable strategies (the workshop helps shelter the work areas from the west orientation); • a generous overhang on the south elevation supported by a screen system provides shading to the south elevation while the truck port provides additional shading and protection; and, • limited glazing is provided on the west elevation to minimize heat gain. The office space is flexible and has been designed to accommodate approximately 35 people, and should it be required in the future, the mezzanine can be expanded to accommodate approximately an additional 20 people. DETAILS OF WORK TO BE DONE The conceptual design has been reviewed by staff and the senior management team of the TRCA, and direction has been given to the architect to proceed to detailed design and tender preparation. It is anticipated that TRCA will be prepared to go to tender for the construction of the new facility this fall, with occupancy slated for early summer of 2006. FINANCIAL DETAILS As part of the conceptual design, a costing exercise was undertaken by the architect and it is estimated that the new building will cost approximately $2,500,000 to construct, inclusive of final design. This estimate does not include the cost of office furniture. The increase of $400,000 from the preliminary estimate is reflective of the increased size (approximately 15 percent by area) of the building to accommodate future programming needs, and premiums associated with sustainable versus conventional building design and construction. 194 The construction of the new building will be funded from special project revenues and reserves, of which approximately $1,500,000 has already been accumulated. It is anticipated that an additional $500,000 will be raised from continuing revenue generating initiatives, i.e. primarily topsoil revenue projects, by the time the project is completed. The difference will be funded through TRCA operating contingency reserves, which will be reimbursed over a 3 year period subsequent to the completion of the project, from revenues raised in a manner similar to those already raised. TOTAL ESTIMATED COST FUNDING SOURCES Special Project reserve Special revenue projects, 2005 - 2006 TRCA operating contingency reserve Report prepared by: Nick Saccone, extension 5301 For Information contact: Nick Saccone, extension 5301 Date: May 17, 2005 RES. #C49/05 - Moved by: Seconded by: $2,500,000 $1,500,000 $ 500,000 $ 500,000 $2,500,000 AUDITORS' MANAGEMENT LETTER Report from Grant Thornton LLP on its internal control findings during the 2004 audit. Bill O'Donnell Rob Ford IT IS RECOMMENDED THAT the report from staff, dated May 26, 2005, together with Grant Thornton's report, dated May 25, 2005, on internal control findings be received. CARRIED BACKGROUND Attached is the report from Grant Thornton LLP, Toronto and Region Conservation Authority's external auditors, on its internal control findings and recommendations which have resulted from the 2004 audit. The report is indicative of an increased emphasis on internal controls by the auditing profession. Staff has responded to the findings and recommendations, with its comments included in the report. Management is appreciative of the recommendations and has taken or will take steps to address each of them to the extent possible. Report prepared by: Rocco Sgambelluri, extension 5232 For Information contact: Rocco Sgambelluri, extension 5232, Jim Dillane extension 6292 Date: May 26, 2005 195 Attachment 1 Grant Thornton a Greek Minton LLP Chartered Atoountente Management Caneultants May 25, 2005 The Business Excellence Advisory Board The Toronto and Region Conservation Authority 5 Shoreham Drive Downsview, Ontario M3N 1S4 Dear Board Members: Re: Internal Control Findings From the December 31, 2004 Audit Receiving observations and findings on your financial reporting processes and controls is one of the benefits of an annual financial statement audit. The new standards of the public accounting profession require us to report to you weaknesses and deficiencies in your internal controls. This year, Grant Thornton LLP has implemented new processes and technology to address the changing standard. This approach includes an increased emphasis on internal control. Our audit is planned and conducted to enable us to express an audit opinion on the annual financial statements. The matters dealt with in this letter came to our attention during the conduct of our normal examination, and as a result, this letter may not necessarily include all matters that might arise through a more extensive or special engagement. Information Technology - Physical Security Observation The servers are not adequately protected in terms of: - Physical security - anyone can gain access to the server rooms. - The rooms are not fireproof. - The rooms are not waterproof, and the servers are on the floor in the accounting department, making them vulnerable to even a small overflow / flood. 196 Recommendation With anyone able to gain access to the server, the risk of unauthorized access of the potential for business interruption is increased. It is recommended that all servers be kept in a secure room that has adequate fire and water proofing (such as a strong room). Management Response The construction of the TRCA building and its age means that we cannot make the rooms fireproof without great expense. Staff will investigate a non - water, fire suppression system for the server room. We are developing a disaster recovery plan which will include off -site operational alternatives. Backup media is stored in a fire rated safe and off -site. The server room and the telecom room will be retrofitted to minimize the flooding risk. There is no way to totally eliminate the water risk i.e., if the roof blew off, there is little we could do. The servers in the room adjacent to the accounting department will be raised off the floor. Staff have been instructed to keep doors locked at all times. An electronic door lock mechanism to the server room is being investigated. Information Technology - Passwords Observation Although the accounting system requires alphanumeric passwords, they only have to be changed every 3 months and the number of tries before lockout is not known. Payroll passwords were given to staff by payroll in 2001 and they have not been changed, nor is the user required to create unique passwords. Although the human resources staff do not use the payroll system, both the human resources manager and her assistant do in fact have access. Two accounting staff have administrator access to the accounting program - this should be restricted to IT personnel. Recommendation Management should formalize and communicate a policy that requires unique passwords for each user in order to properly authenticate each user and that all passwords be changed on a regular basis. Passwords for all operating system and application programs should require a minimum password length of 6 characters in order to prevent unauthorized access. It is further recommended that administrator access be restricted to IT personnel. Management Response Password security to the accounting system will be limited to four failed attempts. The payroll software password system is integrated with the Windows password authentication protocol, which as of May 2005 directs users to change passwords every four months and will permit only four failed attempts. Payroll passwords will be limited to a minimum of 6 characters in length. With regard to the accounting system, administrator status allows for the following functions: 197 Set up users, set up menu access, orderly system shut down, reboot, access to back up directory, access to root directory, delete print jobs, monitor system usage, purge data and year end procedures. Access to source code is denied to accounting staff, but will be provided to IT staff in the event the current service provider is unavailable. However, management is of the opinion that functions available to staff with administrator status are reasonable in the circumstances. Payroll Observation Although the payroll supervisor checks the payroll run after payroll clerk's input, there is no evidence of this check. There is no independent review of the payroll run before it is sent to the bank for payment. Currently, the payroll supervisor and clerk complete the payroll, and then the payroll supervisor checks the final run and sends it to the bank. Recommendation It is recommended that either the financial analyst/accountant or controller review the payroll run. Management Response Payroll supervisor reviews "input" consisting of new hires, rehires, pay modifications and other critical employee file changes as authorized by Human Resources for each pay period. The Payroll clerk is responsible for processing the changes, after which the input is reviewed by the supervisor for accuracy and completeness. A further control has been introduced recently whereby a staff independent of payroll will review system generated reports listing all critical master file changes ensuring that each modification has been properly authorized. Further, the task of analyzing the payroll clearing account is undertaken by a staff person independent of Payroll. Alternate staff has been designated to ensure the pay run is reviewed in a timelier manner. Sales / Admissions System Observation The CA's use billing records to record sales for admissions /facility use. These are pre- numbered but there does not appear to be any sequential control over them, either to ensure that all sales are recorded or that they are in the correct cut -off period. Recommendation Sales staff should record the billing record numbers on the weekly sales report, and the area supervisor / manager should ensure sequence intactness, both within the week, and from week to week. 198 Management Response Staff is currently investigating the feasibility of implementing pre - numbered billing and "request -to- invoice" forms. It is anticipated that sequence control can be automated, thereby increasing the efficiency of the procedure. Discrepancies, if any, would be investigated by accounting staff. Further, this new control will apply right across the organization, as the issues identified are not unique to the CA program. Sales / Admissions System Observation The accounting for functions revenues is not standardized for each site / type of event has its own • way of recording and reporting revenue. For example, some centres use Vision, whilst others use a manual system. Some areas deposit the money and send Finance the deposit slips, others send the cheques over. Recommendation We recommend that a simple, standardized system be implemented, which would not only improve control, but make it easier for review / oversight by management. Management Response Given the nature and scope of TRCA activities Vision, which is a booking and reservation management system, cannot accommodate all of our requirements. Management's main concern is that documentation may be lost in transit resulting in a client not being billed. This risk is mitigated in that most functions referred to in the recommendation are paid for in advance. Management is confident that a pre- numbered billing system as described earlier would ensure that every client is invoiced. Journal Entries Observation Currently, both the financial analyst/accountant and accounting clerk can post journal entries to the general ledger. Although they prepare a manual journal entry form, with supporting documentation, and this is authorized by the controller prior to posting, they can post entries without requesting such authorization. With the volume and various sources of transactions being recorded, this would likely not be detected in a timely manner by management. The manual journal entries are not pre - numbered, so there is no way of knowing that all journals have such a request, or that all approved journals were posted correctly. Recommendation If possible, the system should allow for the electronic authorization of journal entries. The financial analyst/accountant and accounting clerk would continue preparing journal entries based on requests from the various departments, in the accounting system. These would be saved in a batch, which would only be posted to the GL after review by the Controller, through the use of passwords to restrict access. 199 If the above is not possible, then the manual journal entry forms should be pre- numbered and a log maintained, cross referencing them to the electronic postings or the numbers should match what the system would generate. The log, (either a manual one, or preferably and electronic exception report) should be reviewed to ensure that all journal entries have been accounted for, that they are approved and posted, and their sequence is intact. Management Response The two staff assigned to processing adjustments to accounts by way of general journal entries are long term employees with extensive knowledge of TRCA operations and accounting procedures and guidelines. Staff have been directed to develop a corporate network application for capturing account adjustments. The recommendation will be considered in conjunction with the development of this application. It is management's responsibility to weigh the costs of implementing controls against the benefits that the controls will achieve. The purpose of this letter is to provide you with the information related to the identified risks so that you can make the necessary decisions. Often there are practical ways for organizations such as the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority to improve their financial reporting process. As your auditor and advisor, it would be a pleasure to discuss our findings with you and provide you with appropriate guidance to improve your controls. The-matters discussed herein are those that have been noted as of March 18, 2005, and we have not updated our procedures regarding these matters to the current date. In addition, this communication is prepared solely for the information of management and is not intended for any other purposes; we accept no responsibility to a third party who uses this communication. Thank you for the opportunity to contribute to the present and future success of the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority. " Yours truly, 7 Allister Byrne, FCA Partner 200 TERMINATION ON MOTION, the meeting terminated at 10:23 a.m., on Friday, June 10, 2005. David Barrow Chair /ks Brian Denney Secretary- Treasurer 4%. erTHE TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY MEETING OF THE BUSINESS EXCELLENCE ADVISORY BOARD #4/05 September 23, 2005 The Business Excellence Advisory Board Meeting #4/05, was held in the South Theatre, Black Creek Pioneer Village, on Friday, September 23, 2005. The Chair David Barrow, called the meeting to order at 9:22 a.m. PRESENT David Barrow Chair Rob Ford Member Dick O'Brien Chair, Authority Bill O'Donnell Member REGRETS Bas Balkissoon Member Bill Fisch Member Peter Milczyn Member Maja Prentice Vice Chair RES. #C50 /05 - MINUTES Moved by: Seconded by: Bill O'Donnell Dick O'Brien THAT the Minutes of Meeting #3/05, held on June 10, 2005, be approved. CARRIED SECTION I - ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY ACTION RES. #C51 /05 - FINANCIAL PROGRESS REPORT For the period ending August 31, 2005. Reports on operating and capital budget variances as of August 31, 2005 and projected to year end. Moved by: Seconded by: Bill O'Donnell Rob Ford THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT the Financial Progress Report for the period ending August 31, 2005, be received; 202 AND FURTHER THAT staff be directed to continue to monitor budget projections and report to the Business Excellence Advisory Board as necessary as to any action required. CARRIED RATIONALE The Financial Progress Report is one of the tools through which staff advise the Authority of the status of the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority's (TRCA) budget. This report covers the period ending August 31, 2005. Also attached are charts showing the total revenue by various functional areas. The revenues reported on the chart may not be exactly the same as in the attached summary sheet because the revenue report is as of September 4, 2005. The projected variance from 2005 net operating budget is negative $91,506. Given gross operating expenditures in the $30 million range, and projected revenues of about $10.5 million, this is a manageable potential deficit. Staff will continue to monitor programs and activities to ensure that a balanced budget is achieved. Of immediate concern is revenue of $800,000 in the 2005 budget to be funded from Conservation Foundation (CFGT) fund raising. Most of this has yet to be raised although a number of opportunities exist and are being actively pursued. The projected actual net operating deficit of $91,506 assumes that the fund - raising will be successful. The key variances identified in the August 31, 2005, analysis are: • less than budgeted special event revenue for weddings and corporate events at Black Creek Pioneer Village; the net effect of this is a shortfall of about $104,000. • rental properties have experienced higher than anticipated repair and maintenance costs of approximately $99,000. • conservation areas have projected revenue in excess of budget of about $68,000. • Kortright Centre has projected expenditures in excess of budget of about $93,000. • Restoration Services projects increased expenditures due to special projects for which additional funding is available. • community transformation partnerships shows expenditure reductions of about $884,109 because equivalent funding has not been achieved and projects will not proceed. • Planning and Development expenditures are projected to be about $132,000 lower because Ontario Municipal Board hearings have been delayed; planning fees are projected to be down by about $58,000. • there are a number of other variances of Tess than $50,000 across several programs. The 2005 capital budget projected a surplus of $200,000 to help offset the cumulative land acquisition deficit. The 2005 projected actual surplus for capital is $103,478. The capital budget will be subject to many changes as most expenditures occur later in the year. The key variances include: • delays in Toronto Waterfront Revitalization Corporation projects such as Tommy Thompson Park which is projected to total about $1.74 million underspent. • delays in approvals for various water management projects. • the Public Use Infrastructure project is projected to have gross expenditures exceeding budget of $220,000; however, additional revenues will reduce the overspending to net $71,000. This is due primarily to the new pool at Bruce's Mill. • The Living City Centre project is being redrafted. • project delays for the Nursery Relocation Project totalling $625,000. 203 • increased expenditures for information technology to meet new needs and to take advantage of favourable telecommunications pricing opportunity. Staff will continue to monitor these situations and report to the board at future meetings as needed. Report prepared by: Jim Dillane, extension 6292 For Information contact: Ralph Kofler, extension 5274 Date: September 8, 2005 Attachments: 2 204 Attachment 1 TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY OPERATING SUMMARY 2005 Variance Report: Actuals as of July 2005, Projected Actuals and Variance at December 31, 2005 Page 1 2005 2005 2005 Gross Expenditures (by functional Unit) Budget July Actual P. A. $ $ $ Finance and Business Services Division Administration Mental Properties /Central Services Property Services Vehicle & Equipment Reserve - net Watershed Management Division WM Divisional Management / EMS Watershed Strategies Conservation Field Centres Planning & Development Division evebpment Services Enforcement Ecology Division Resource Science Community Transformation Partnerships Restoration Services Division Environmental Services parks and Culture Division Parks & Culture Divisional Management Conservation Areas Vood rtnght Centre for Conservation Creek Pioneer Village Services Office of the CAO Corporate Management Corporate Secretariat Human Resources Customer Services Communications Budget vs. P. A. $ +1(- ) Variance Notes 2,053,200 1,592,592 2,012,978 (40,222)Info.Technology position gapping 1,502,900 415,080 1,601,900 99,000 Additional construction & maintenance costs 302,000 202,372 302,000 0 1,201,700 1,058,340 1,161,700 (40,000) Gapping 66,100 239,887 66,100 0 5,125,900 3,508,272 5,144,678 18,778 231,000 138,466 1,378,700 873,876 2,262,100 1,185,027 217,700 (13,300)Some EMS underspending 1,419,100 40,400 Extra ORM Alliance spending offset by revenue 2,239,336 (22,764)Gappmg in Prog Development 2,933,800 1,342,820 2,801,000 (132,800)0MB Hearings & Sp Projects under budget 479,400 283,405 504,400 25,000 Higher legal offset by underspending in DSS 3,152,700 1,681,047 3,152,700 0 2,005,400 375,4.83 1,161,291 (844,109)Smaller scale program due to lack of funding 1,672,700 1,369,306 1,898,714 226,014 Additional special projects 206,000 73,362 206,000 3,597,200 2,029,234 3,594,462 1,301,300 853,242 1,394,696 4,173,100 2,091,863 4,146,150 1,090,300 426,898 863,200 0 (2,738) 93,396 New self- funded Wetland Interpretation prog added (26,950) Marketing costs constrained (227,100)weddings & Corp Events bookings below target 24,483,700 12,724,028 23,598,749 (884,951) 410,600 230,126 402,200 315,000 191,417 315,500 429,900 293,914 455,200 259,600 157,598 256,700 697,500 362,645 697,500 2,112,600 1,235,699 2,127,100 14,500 (8,400) 500 25,300 Staff Development & meeting costs over budget (2,900) Oa Expenditure Total 31,722,200 17,467,999 30,870,527 (851,873) 205 Page 2 TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY OPERATING SUMMARY 2005 Variance Report: Actuals as of July 2005, Projected Actuals and Variance at December 31, 2005 unding Sources: rogram/User fees' Rental Properties Black Creek Pioneer Village Food Services Development Services Environmental Services Conservation Areas Kortright Centre for Conservation Conservation Field Centres Summary All Other Program/User fees eserves FGT - Living City FGT - Flowthroug h her Municipal rovincial deral onations/Fund raising rivate everse internal plant material charges included ther evenue total et Expenditures et Expenditures funded by': rovincial Transfer Payments unicipal Levy eficit / (Surplus) 2005 2005 2005 Budget July Actual P. A. $ $ $ 2,288,400 1,165,089 2,270,400 1,828,900 747,958 1,830,600 1,145,900 340,190 814,800 2,229,500 1,149,990 2,171,000 1,183,500 1,390,567 1,698,053 2,978,100 1,891,366 3,046,204 1,080,900 603,580 1,074,728 1,494,400 773,560 1,460,400 583,000 289,442 582,000 196,700 0 205,200 800,000 0 800,000 237,700 240,634 207,400 1,604,200 402,751 1,315,194 1,507,900 1,073,794 1,168,550 1,090,600 445,328 925,650 465,400 417,106 410,000 1,360,400 283,729 1,152,142 (735,100) (478,799) (735,100) 0 0 0 0 0 21,340,400 10,736,286 20,397,221 (943,179) Budget vs. P. A. Notes $ + /(- ) (18,000)Vacancy rate higher 1,700 (331 ,100) Weddings & Corp Events bookings below target (58,500)Planning fees down 514,553 Additional special projects 68,104 Swimming revenue at Petticoat Creek very good (6,172) (34,000)New Living City Spaces funded through other source (1,000) 8,500 0 (30,300) Community Transformation funding not secured (289,006)Community Transformation funding not secured (339,350)Community Transformation funding not secured (164,950)Community Transformation funding not secured (55,400)Sponsorships not secured (208,258)Community Transformation funding not secured 10,381,800 6,731,713 10,473,306 91,506 845,800 9,536,000 0 845,800 0 9,536,000 0 0 0 6.731,713 91,506 91,506 206 Toronto and Region Conservation Authority CAPITAL SUMMARY 2005 Variance Report: Actuals as of July 2005, Projected Actuals and Variance at December 31, 2005 Page 3 CAPITAL ross Expenditures: ONITORING AND REPORTING ATERSHED PLANNING eel Water Management ork Water Management urham Water Management ater Cost Centres osts covered by Water management Programs oodplain Mapping ork/Peel/Durham/Toronto Groundwater errestrial Natural Heritage EGENERATION oronto Remedial Action Plan Project (RAP activity also shown under other projects) eel Natural Heritage Project ork Natural Heritage Project urham Natural Heritage Project alley and Shoreline Regeneration Projects ity of Toronto Waterfront Project egbn Of Durham Waterfront Project aterfront Revitalization Corporation Projects umber Bay Shores Waterfront Park kefill Quality Program USTAINABLE COMMUNITIES ewardship ducation LOOD PROTECTION ower Don Env. Assessment 2005 BUDGET 2005 July Actual 2005 P_ A. Diff. P. Variance Notes 845,300 536,183 788,500 (56,800)Flow & precipitation monitoring delayed 1,336,100 103,982 1,180,900 881,600 8,488 666,800 484,700 119,050 385,900 2,330,800 628,756 1,893,600 (2,185,500) (114,238) (1,701,800) 676,600 90,019 644,750 631,900 124,376 631,900 281,200 152,814 303,750 2,461,900 536,709 2,372,250 (518,300) 0 (518,300) 1,001,800 456,858 701,400 585,500 255,002 504,347 124,300 49,115 111,792 (155,200)Humber Watershed Plan delayed (214,800)Don Watershed Plan delayed (98,800)Flood Control works deferred (437,200)Don & Humber Watershed Plan delayed 483,700 • (31,850) 0 22,550 (89,650) Project deferrals 0 (300,400)Some Humber naturalization projs delayed (81,153) • (12,508) 2,655,000 503,077 2,505,000 (150,000)Access Rd, Beechgrove delayed 1,288,000 589,363 1,226,700 267,700 182,738 269,039 20,429,000 1,440,177 18,687,900 707,400 138,187 707,400 10,000 9,598 9,600 (61,300)Constramt to cover 2004 overspending Also sp projects 1,339 (1,741,100)Tommy Thompson awaiting federal approvals 0 (400) 512,600 444,505 534,863 22,263 Unbudgeted specially funded items 159,100 190,871 172,302 13,202 Unbudgeted specially funded items 0 0 0 3,939,000 183,935 3,500,000 0 (439,000) External delays 207 Toronto and Region Conservation Authority CAPITAL SUMMARY 2005 Variance Report: Actuals as of July 2005, Projected Actuals and Variance at December 31, 2005 Page 4 CAPITAL INFRASTRUCTURE Public Use Infrastructure Other Facilities Retrofits Drinking Water System Upgrades Lining City Centre Design and Build Nursery Relocation Project BCPV Retrofit and Attraction Devebpment Information Technology Project Administrative Office REGIONAL OPEN SPACE Waterfront Open Space Acquisition - Greenspace Strategy Natural Areas Protection Expenditure total Funding Sources: Program/User fees Reserves CFGT - Living City CFGT - Flowthroug h Other - Municipal Other - Provincial Other - Federal Other - Donations/Fundraising Other - Private Lease Revenue Land Sale Proceeds Transfers between Projects Revenue total Net Expenditures Provincial Transfer Payments Municipal Levy (Surplus) / Deficit 2005 BUDGET 372,500 1,150,700 824,600 1,500,000 800,000 1,400,100 350,000 500,000 4,440,000 2,204,700 500,000 2005 July Actual 230,521 42,378 66,980 20,704 105,351 902,781 215,364 86,614 629,274 561,146 255,224 2005 P_ A. 592,500 1,150,700 824,600 25,000 175,000 1,400,100 470,000 500,000 4,440,000 2,204,700 500,000 Diff. P. Variance Notes 220,000 Unbudgeted Bruce's Mill pool and other items 0 0 (1,475,000)Project being redrafted (625,000)Project delayed 0 120,000 Additional IT / telephone equipment acquired 0 0 0 0 52,948,300 11,200 700,000 0 99,600 4,572,300 2,404,200 998,100 840,000 24,877,000 0 1,221,400 (518,300) 35,205,500 0 17,742,800 17,942,800 9,745,900 47,861,193 (5,087,107) 0 0 0 5,478 912,042 577,352 354,895 14,400 2,307,735 158,270 1,032,068 0 5,362,239 4,278 175,000 0 131,700 4,700,286 1,566,386 833,791 888,100 22,739,451 27,965 1,250,950 (518,300) 31,799,607 0 0 (6,922)Lakefill program winding down. (525,000)Nursery relocation deferred 0 32,100 127,986 funding for unbudgeted ORM Park (484,114)Living City Centre deferred (518,009)Living City Centre deferred 48,100 (2,137,549)TWRC projects projected below budget 27,965 29,550 0 (3,405,8931 0 0 4,383,662 16,061,586 (1,681,214) 0 16,165,064 (1,777,736)Lower utilization due to delays (200,000) 4,383,662 (103,478) 96,522. 208 Attachment 2 T.R.C.A. REVENUE REPORT DATA SHEET LOCATION: Black Creek Pioneer Village MONTH -END 2005 2005 2004 MONTH DATE rm TOTAL YTD BUDGET YTD TOTAL $ $ $ Apr 3 63,734 26,000 53,061 May 1 79,765 52,000 75,031 May 29 317,302 289,200 258,948 June 26 586,129 573,000 510,280 July 24 738,607 775,200 698,157 Sep 04 1,012,127 1,043,200 983,553 JAN. -MAR. APR. MAY JUNE JULY AUG. SEPT. OCT. NOV. DEC. Oct 2 Oct 30 Nov 26 Dec. 31 W z Z W > W I a 8 L i c 1 1200 1000 .00 600 400 200 0 Black Creek Pioneer Village May t May 2e Jun 20 July 24 S.p 04 Oct 2 Oct 30 Nov 20 Dec 21 MONTH ENDED Legend 2004 Actual 2005 Budget 2005 Actual T.R.C.A. REVENUE REPORT DATA SHEET LOCATION: Conservation Areas MONTH -END 2005 2005 2004 MONTH DATE YTD TOTAL YTD BUDGET YTD TOTAL $ $ $ JAN. -MAR. Apr 3 394,269 351,095 331,805 APR May 1 583,813 567,080 535,924 MAY May 29 893,016 921,146 870,537 JUNE June 26 1,296,935 1,308,089 1,236,221 JULY July 24 1,916,630 1,878,722 1,775,503 AUG. Sep 04 2,654,137 2,562,579 2,421,788 SEPT. Oct 2 OCT. Oct 30 NOV. Nov 26 DEC. Dec.31 Legend 2004 Actual 2005 Budget 2005 Actual T.R.C.A. REVENUE REPORT DATA SHEET LOCATION: Conservation Field Centres MONTH JAN. -MAR. APR. MAY JUNE JULY AUG. SEPT. OCT. NOV. DEC. MONTH -END 2005 2005 2004 DATE YTD TOTAL YTD BUDGET YTD TOTAL $ $ $ Apr 3 302,447 358,615 369,587 May 1 368,292 478,153 506,660 May 29 529,358 597,691 681,517 June 26 634,336 717,229 809,161 July 24 773,274 873,397 857,272 Sep 04 875,115 943,047 904,925 Oct 2 Oct 30 Nov 26 Dec. 31 a 8 a 1 1000 900 900 700 600 500 400 300 200 Conservation Field Centres Apr 3 May 1 May 29 June 29 July 24 Sip 04 MONTH ENDED Oct 2 0.430 Nov 29 de 31 Legend 2004 Actual 2005 Budget 2005 Actual T.R.C.A. REVENUE REPORT DATA SHEET LOCATION: MONTH JAN. -MAR. APR. MAY JUNE JULY AUG SEPT. OCT. NOV. DEC. Food Service MONTH -END 2005 DATE YTD TOTAL Apr 3 71,858 May 1 103,793 May 29 182,624 June 26 304,983 July 24 362,113 Sep 04 467,863 Oct 2 Oct 30 Nov 26 Dec. 31 Not yet available 2005 YTD BUDGET 76,300 104,400 196,400 344,100 444,700 560,100 2004 YTD TOTAL 89,863 138,093 237,378 365,347 433,559 602,617 Legend 2004 Actual 2005 Budget 2005 Actual T.R.C.A. REVENUE REPORT DATA SHEET LOCATION: Interest MONTH JAN.-MAR. APR. MAY JUNE JULY AUG. SEPT. OCT. NOV. DEC. MONTH -END 2005 2005 2004 DATE YTD TOTAL YTD BUDGET YTD TOTAL $ $ $ Apr 3 77,416 85,000 83,351 May 1 99,400 110,000 109,169 May 29 125,518 135,000 132,561 June 26 163,335 160,000 154,662 July 24 189,753 195,000 191,272 Sep 04 223,615 235,000 226,428 Oct 2 Oct 30 Nov 26 . Dec. 31 Legend 2004 Actual 2005 Budget 2005 Actual T.R.C.A. REVENUE REPORT DATA SHEET LOCATION: Kortright Centre MONTH JAN. -MAR APR. MAY JUNE JULY AUG. SEPT OCT. NOV. DEC. MONTH -END 2005 2005 2004 DATE YTD TOTAL YTD BUDGET YTD TOTAL $ $ $ Apr 3 331,560 372,960 365,993 May 1 391,488 510,960 501,415 May 29 480,768 576,969 566,191 June 26 571,851 661,824 649,461 July 24 608,546 721,452 707,975 Sep 04 698,185 759,181 744,999 Oct 2 Oct 30 Nov 26 Dec. 31 Legend 2004 Actual 2005 Budget 2005 Actual T.R.C.A. REVENUE REPORT DATA SHEET LOCATION: Development Services MONTH JAN. -MAR. APR. MAY JUNE JULY AUG. SEPT. OCT. NOV. DEC. MONTH -END 2005 2005 2004 DATE YTD TOTAL YTD BUDGET YTD TOTAL $ $ $ Apr 3 429,650 472,535 493,163 May 1 550,738 569,765 595,563 May 29 666,486 798,528 834,900 June 26 930,697 954,334 997,275 July 24 1,119,615 1,154,543 1,210,657 Sep 04 1,425,303 1,422,717 1,489,635 Oct 2 Oct 30 Nov 26 Dec. 31 1600 1400 1200 W1000 Z Is W L 600 600 {CO 200 Development Services Apr 3 May 1 May 26 Jun. 26 July 24 Sop 04 Oct 2 Oct 00 Nov 26 1244. 31 MONTH ENDED Legend 2004 Actual 2005 Budget 2005 Actual T.R.C.A. REVENUE REPORT DATA SHEET LOCATION: Rental /Leases (excludes ORC Lands budget for 2005 and Earth Rangers Lease) MONTH JAN. -MAR. APR. MAY JUNE JULY AUG. SEPT. OCT. NOV. DEC. MONTH -END 2005 2005 2004 DATE YTD TOTAL YTD BUDGET YTD TOTAL $ $ $ Apr 3 188,108 130,000 125,791 May 1 242,112 375,000 359,434 May 29 311,669 480,000 471,254 June 26 518,876 540,000 534,863 July 24 714,952 650,000 622,688 Sep 04 839,988 875,000 851,539 Oct 2 Oct 30 Nov 26 Dec. 31 Legend 2004 Actual 2005 Budget 2005 Actual COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE RES. #C52 /05 Moved by: Seconded by: Dick O'Brien Bill O'Donnell THAT the Committee move into closed session to discuss item 7.1 - City of Toronto Land Acquisition Source Water Protection Reserve. CARRIED ARISE AND REPORT RES. #C53 /05 Moved by: Seconded by: Bill O'Donnell Dick O'Brien. THAT the Committee arise and report from closed session. CARRIED RES. #C54 /05 - CITY OF TORONTO LAND ACQUISITION SOURCE WATER PROTECTION RESERVE Proposed Property Acquisition List. Submission to the City of Toronto of proposed properties for acquisition using the City of Toronto Source Water Protection Reserve. Moved by: Seconded by: Bill O'Donnell Rob Ford THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT the list of properties for acquisition using the City of Toronto Source Water Protection Reserve (Attachment 1) dated•August 24, 2005, be approved; AND FURTHER THAT Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) staff be authorized to amend the list as may be necessary subject to consultation with the City of Toronto and such approvals from the city as may be required. CARRIED BACKGROUND The City of Toronto Council in July of 2005 approved a report from the Policy and Finance Committee which created the Land Acquisition For Source Water Protection Reserve in accordance with Chapter 227 of the City of Toronto Municipal Code. The recommendation was from a Works Committee report dated June 14, 2005 from the General Manager, Toronto Water and the Chief Financial Officer. The following recommendations were approved by City Council: 217 (1) Municipal Code, Chapter 227 (Reserves and Reserve Funds) be amended by adding the "Land Acquisition for Source Water Protection Reserve" to Schedule 11 - Water /Wastewater Reserves; (2) the criteria set out in Attachment 1 to this report be adopted as the required criteria for the "Land Acquisition for Source Water Protection Reserve;" and (3) the appropriate city officials be authorized and directed to take the necessary action to give effect thereto, including the introduction of any necessary bills in Council. City Council at its meeting on November 30, December 1 and 2, 2004, amended and adopted Clause 38 of Policy and Finance Committee Report 9, and recommended that: (a) the Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer be directed to create within Schedule 11 (Water /Wastewater Reserves) a new reserve called the "Land Acquisition for Source Water Protection Reserve," for the purpose of providing funding for the acquisition of land to protect water sources to be controlled by Toronto Water; (b) a transfer of $2 million from the Wastewater Stabilization Reserve, Account No.XQ1004, to the "Land Acquisition for Source Water Protection Reserve" be approved; (c) in accordance with Chapter 227 of the City of Toronto Municipal Code - Article 11- Establishment of Reserves and Reserve Funds, the Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer and the Acting Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services be requested to report to the February 2005 meetings of the Works Committee and the Policy and Finance Committee, respectively, on setting out specific criteria for the Protection Reserve, including a contribution policy and a withdrawal policy; and (d) the appropriate city officials be authorized and directed to take the necessary action to give effect thereto, including the introduction of any necessary bills in Council. Acting on Council direction, the Deputy City Manager and Chief Financial Officer and the General Manager of Toronto Water, in consultation with Toronto and Region Conservation Authority officials have developed criteria for accessing the "Land Acquisition for Source Water Protection Reserve." The protection of Lake Ontario as the source of potable water for the City of Toronto, is a high priority of the city. It is recognized that protecting and improving the water quality of the various river systems and watersheds that flow into Lake Ontario through the Greater Toronto Area (GTA) is an important objective in source water protection. Currently the city is implementing the Council approved Wet Weather Flow Management Master Plan (WWFMMP) to help meet this objective. Another important tool to help meet this objective is the protection of the river systems and watersheds through acquisition of key parcels of land, as they become available. Typical benefits of land acquisition related to source protection are listed below: 218 Protection of the valley and stream corridor features and functions: • convey, and provide storage of storm water and melt water; • protect important areas for groundwater recharge and discharge; • allow nutrient and sediment transport (water quality); • maintain base flow; and • provide filtering of overland flows; and Protection of Head Water Areas: • protect important areas for groundwater recharge and discharge; • enhance water quality; • maintain base flow; and • protect headwater /lower order streams It is recommended that the rationale for establishing the account and for approving funding requests for the use of the Land Acquisition for Source Water Protection Reserve must satisfy the policies and criteria as identified in Attachment 1 (Schedule 11). This includes at least one of the following criteria: (1) Lands, where city staff are of the opinion that they need to be acquired due to their unique environmental characteristics as significant water resources features, such as: flood plains, stream and valley corridors, natural features contiguous to stream and valley corridors, wetlands, critical fish habitat, significant vegetation /forest cover, hydrological sensitive recharge /discharge areas, identified by the relevant source documents listed in Attachment 1. (2) Lands, where rehabilitation, regeneration and /or treatment works are planned for source water protection, consistent with the City of Toronto Wet Weather Flow Management Master Plan or other relevant source water protection initiatives. RATIONALE TRCA staff have prepared a list of properties which would be eligible for funding from the City Source Water Protection Reserve. The list is based on the criteria set out in the Council report. The list includes properties for which purchase and sale agreements are in hand or where negotiations are at a stage that a purchase and sale agreement is likely. The list is submitted as a confidential report because it includes values for properties which are still being negotiated. In terms of process, TRCA submitted the list of properties to city Finance and Toronto Water staff. They recommended the list to the Works Committee for approval. Works Committee has recommended the list to Planning and Finance Committee. Council approval would enable TRCA staff to proceed to conclude purchase and sale agreements for these lands. City staff would be consulted prior to finalization of each purchase and sale agreement to ensure that TRCA has protected the city's interests. 219 Staff anticipate that the list will be updated as acquisitions proceed and additional acquisitions become available. A report to city Works Committee will be required to approve the updated list. City staff will be consulted as updates to the list are made. All purchases must meet the established criteria. FINANCIAL DETAILS As a general guideline, lands acquired outside of the City of Toronto boundary will be purchased using up to a maximum of 50% funding from the City of Toronto Source Protection Reserve. TRCA will be responsible for obtaining matching funding from other municipalities, the province or other sources. Where the city agrees to acquire lands within the City of Toronto boundaries, lands will be purchased using up to 100% funding from the City of Toronto Source Water Protection Reserve. There is very little opportunity to secure matching funding within the city although every effort will be made to secure such support. Operating costs associated with lands acquired outside the City of Toronto will be the responsibility of TRCA. TRCA may have such lands operated under management agreements with the municipality within which the lands are located. There will be no operating budget impact for the city except to the extent that the city shares in the current value assessment based operating funding of TRCA. Operating cost of lands inside the city, will be turned over to the city for management under the terms of the existing management agreement with TRCA. Report prepared by: Jim Dillane, extension 6292 For Information contact: Ron Dewell, extension 5245; Jim Dillane, extension 6292 Date: August 24, 2005 Attachments: CONFIDENTIAL RES. #C55/05 - PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO CONSERVATION AUTHORITIES ACT Summarizes Toronto and Region Conservation Authority's (TRCA) response to proposed amendments to the Conservation Authorities Act (CA Act). Moved by: Seconded by: Rob Ford Bill O'Donnell THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT the response to the proposed changes to the Conservation Authorities Act as set out in the report dated September 7, 2005, be endorsed and forwarded to the Ministry of Natural Resources and Conservation Ontario. CARRIED 220 BACKGROUND In late June, TRCA received from the Ministry of Natural Resources a memorandum outlining a list of proposed amendments to the Conservation Authorities Act (Attachment 1). Staff has reviewed these proposals and has prepared the following comments on the proposed amendments. RATIONALE Attachment 2 is the list of comments from TRCA staff relating to the proposed amendments. Staff consulted with one of the TRCA solicitors, Jonathan Wigley of Baker MacKenzie LLP, who has been involved extensively in application of the CA Act and its regulations. The first item deals with "quorum" at TRCA meetings. The current provision is that one third of the members must be in attendance for meetings of the Authority. The proposed change means that quorum will be one half of the members. This is consistent with existing municipal legislation. The last amendment noted in Attachment 2 will allow CA's to market water power. Most of the items described involve technical changes to subsection 28 to ensure consistency between the Provincial Policy Statement, the CA Act and the Generic Regulation. Several key changes include the ability to regulate wetlands, shorelines, unstable soils and bedrock and will enable the TRCA to formally regulate the headwater areas and middle reaches of our watersheds. The timeframe for prosecuting violations under subsection 28 (1) has changed from 6 months to 2 years from the date the offense was committed. TRCA's solicitor and staff have also noted opportunities for future amendments that would assist in the prosecution of violations and ensure site rehabilitation. Report prepared by: Jim Dillane, extension 6292 For Information contact: Jim Dillane, extension 6292 Carolyn Woodland, extension 5214 Date: July 13, 2005 Attachments: 2 221 Attachment 1 Ministry of Natural Resources Natural Resource Management Division Lands and Waters Branch P.O. Box 7000, 300 Water Street Peterborough, ON K9J 8M5 Telephone. (705) 755 -1278 Fax: (705}755 -1267 June 24, 2005 MEMORANDUM TO: Ministere des Richesses naturelles Division de la gestion des richesses naturelles Direction des terres et eaux C.P. 7000, 300, rue Water Peterborough (Ontano) K9J SM5 Telephone. (705) 755 -1278 Telecopie: (705) 755 -1267 Don Pearson General Manager Conservation Ontario SUBJECT: CA ACT AMENDMENTS - STATUS REPORT MNR is moving forward on several fronts in an attempt to amend the CA Act. Ontario Firstly, there is an existing piece of draft legislation pending (a Good Government Bill) that includes an amendment to Section 28(16) to change the time frame for prosecuting violations under subsection 28(1) from six months to two years. Secondly, there is a series of amendments that you have reviewed a number of months ago of a technical or administrative nature related to Sections 16 and 28. These will move forward separately. Thirdly, there is a proposed amendment to Section 35 related to the selling of waterpower energy which we hope to include in a Ministry of Energy Bill on Energy Conservation. Lastly, there are a number of Section 28 amendments needed to bring consistency between the Provincial Policy Statement, the CA Act and the Generic Regulation which clarify terminology such as "hazard lands" and "shoreline areas ". Our hope remains that these will be accommodated as part of other legislative amendments. We are still awaiting confirmation that a timely vehicle will be available to move this forward. I have attached our list of amendments in chart form for your review and comment. The majority of these listings have been to you before, while others we think may be new submissions. In order to be sure, we are showing all items on the chart. Rob Messervey, Manager Water Resources Section Attachment 222 + r....4%,--4 a :: 11 # i4`� + 9. .,GUrrat►t.B Islat i 0 �5 ,. „, -” x= : ' ' # a� .': °p �p4sedChailbe'sx ' o , *7f:°'5,:4 ° ". ` a . p lalti>:�n9 ua e.VereldJ{ X 0 p b • bsed Chaff . e o-,.f + " 4 ;.1 oliciy R�tibrale /.. , � � �:, t c aA' „.�xStakeloldet Poaitloir M` ,., P :: Conservation AUthOrlt/es Act L, _ _ . #a ' ; ' � . `_f - . ' < •`� _ NSF Quorum 16(2) At any meeting of an authority, a quorum consists of one -third of the members appointed by the participating municipalities, except where there are fewer than six such members, in which case Iwo such members constitute a quorum. Amend the section by striking the words "one- third” and substituting the words "one -half' and striking the word "Iwo" and substituting "three" after the words "in which case" near the end of the sentence. This amendment redefines a quorum at any meeting of an authority to consist of one -half of members appointed by participating municipalities except where fewer than six members, in which case three such members constitute a quorum. The Ministry, in consultation with Conservation Ontario and In response to concerns raised by individual Conservation Authorities, is recommending that Quorums for regular Conservation Authority meetings be consistent with current procedures and practices administered at munidpal council meetings. Increasing the quorums from one -third to one -half and increasing the minimum number from two to Three members where there are fewer than six members will achieve this consistency. Regulations by authority re area under its jurisdiction 28(1) (a) restricting and regulation the use of water in or from rivers, streams, Inland lakes, ponds, wetlands and natural or artificially constructed depressions in rivers or streams. Amend the section by adding the words "Great Lakes - St. Lawrence River System," after the words "in or from rivers, streams, ". The amendment will explicitly enable the authority to make regulations along shorelines of the Great Lakes — St. Lawrence River System. The proposed change involves a minor technical change that is housekeeping in nature and will clarify legal ambiguities and update the Act consistent with the wording and intent of the natural hazards component of the Provincial Policy Statement under the Planning Act Conservation Ontario staff has been consulted and is supportive of the proposed amendment. Minister's approval of development regulations 28(5) The Minister shall not approve a regulation made under clause (1)(c) unless the regulation applies only to areas that are, (a) adjacent or dose to the shoreline of the Great Lakes — St. Lawrence River System or to inland lakes that may be affected by flooding, erosion or dynamic beach hazards. _ Amending the section by striking the words 'that may be affected by flooding, erosion or dynamic beach hazards" and adding the words " Including hazardous lands" at the end of the clause. The amendment explicitly identifies "hazardous lands" along shorelines of the Great Lakes — St. Lawrence River System. The proposed change Involves a minor technical - change that Is housekeeping in nature and will clarify legal ambiguities and update the Act consistent with the wording and intent of the natural hazards component of the Provincial Policy Statement under the Planning Act Conservation Ontario staff has been consulted and is supportive of the proposed amendment. Leg relation `...it1,5-4-t 'f. - J..e.i.... 4,21'...i....;.4., ;-.f:..,,. ,'0...01,i3stapemetl.Changla41.:` /1-1-4.<.FP+Ni470.. "?...;:::k ;-"*" ..,lalrl:Cariguage#ersion7-5.f„t,-.1:k.',4:-..**..Polloy .. • , r , 1 h. .k • .,,■,1 ' 7. Of Otopotdd Change ')..7.4:,21e, Rationale 14';',4M;;•47.,'.: ';'"-.i;j" K.....1; tr• 31..a.‘,.. .'14,:::: 'I- k-,.1-iAStakeholder,Positletts,;-",v,f::;.`t ... . , , . , ' .. .. , ' • ' ... . • .', '-', -,-- ' • i 'i -,':-' . • -. . • .._ „ ' Contervation Authorities Act . 4. ' !-' • . P . -., .• :: , I : --. ' , : 1 - : ' • :r1-1. .! '.. ,4. •: IS' ..rr' d ''' 4 I • ' -, ' . - --- , . . , Minister's approval of development regulations 28(5) The Minister shall not approve a regulation made under clause (1)(c) unless the regulation applies only to areas that are, (b) river or stream valleys. Amending the section by adding the words "including hazardous lands at the end of the clause. The amendment explicitly identifies ''hazardous lands" along river and stream valleys ' The proposed change involves a minor technical change that Is housekeeping in nature and will clarify legal ambiguities and update the Act consistent with the wording and intent of the natural hazards component of the Provincial Policy Statement under the Planning Act. Conservation Ontario staff has been consulted and is supportive of the proposed amendment. Minister's approval of development regulations 28(5) The Minister shall not approve a regulation made under dause (1)(c) unless the regulation applies only to areas that are, (c) hazardous lands. Amending the section by striking the words "hazardous lands" and substituting "other hazardous lands and hazardous sites" - The amendment explicitly addresses 'other hazardous lands' that by their nature are outside of apparent river and stream valleys, as well as, explicitly identifies 'hazardous sites' which by definition includes areas affected by unstable soils or unstable bedrock. The proposed change involves a minor technical change that is housekeeping In nature and will clarify legal ambiguities and update the Act consistent with the wording and intent of the natural hazards component of the Provincial Policy Statement under the Planning Act. Conservation Ontario staff has been consulted and is supportive of the proposed amendment. Transition 28(8) Subject to subsection (9), if a regulation made by the Lieutenant Governor in Council under subsection (6), subsectioh (7) does not apply to a regulation that was previously made by an authority under subsection (1) until tvvo years after the regulation made by the Lieutenant Govemor in Council comes into force. / Amend the section by striking the words "two years" and substituting "five years" and adding in an additional sentence at the end "and any existing mapping scheduled to that regulation shall remain in effect until such time as it has been updated and approved by the Minister". The amendment provides five years rather than the existing two years for Conservation Authorities to bring their regulations and all supporting mapping into conformity with the Generic Regulation. The Act currently provides for the Lieutenant Govemor in Council to develop a Generic Regulation that all Conservation Authorities would adopt within two years of approval. Any change in the criteria for mapping will necessitate new mapping before the generic regulation would become valid It Is not possible update all of the mapping for 38 conservation authorities within two years of the Generic Regulation being approved by the Lieutenant Governor In Council. A period of five years is more appropriate. The amendment further clarifies that existing mapping remain in force and t t CU rrontLegleiat101tt : . ;;, .d p J':Piiopgaed- hangest�ii p , `PR:;! :- 'H ;.' - -r q.pIalLanguadVersdn , "• is - fp`o• oiled Chili'.c '` ,�' . it%s' ;POII Ratitttate'l1ifs" le • .+< Stakgh Id‘rP s ,w . ,. Conservation Authorities Act !'= , :' P -:N ,17,-'-' 7 ."„ 1'`'r i ;:, Y „ . applicable until such time as the mapping has been updated in accordance with the Generic Regulation and approved by the Minister. Conservation Ontario and the watershed municipalities that ere represented on the Conservation Authorities' Board of Directors have been consulted and are supportive of the proposed amendment. Offence: contravening regulation 28(16) Every person who contravenes a regulation made under subsection (1) is guilty of an offence and on conviction is liable 10 a fine of not more than $10,000 or to a term of imprisonment of not more than three months. (Thl94tneridiiient:ilait of,GG bill) Add a subsection to Section 28 to state. "A proceeding with respect to an offence under subsection 28(1) shall not be commenced more than two years after the offence was, or is alleged to have been committed." . The amendment extends the time period to prosecute offences under subsection 28(1) from six months to two years. In the absence of a time limitation to enforce violations under the Conservation Authorities Acl, the six -month Limitation periods provided for under the Provincial Offences Act is applied. The amendment will allow Conservation Authorities to discover, investigate and if necessary, prosecute Regulation violations under Section 28(16), for up to two (2) years from the dale of the violation The amendment will bring limitations under the Conservation Aulhonties Act in line with other Provincial legislation such as the Public Lends Act (2 years; sec. 70(2)), and Lakes and Rivers Improvement Act (5 years; sec. 28(5)). Conservation Ontario and the watershed municipalities that are represented on the Conservation Authorities' Board of Directors have been consulted and are supportive of the proposed amendment. ;,',4`„*444..CurrentlieglilatkiWar ■'-34:4,:it;Pia:.4*4.: '',' It. wAVi.fPropoted Chanties,*2-tt-- TIg.iP442:.:074:4 K5i-$1q41.... 01 .-5,4,44-;.1.-P,Ialti,Latigtiage'Vercilon- a.:7 ,, 40f Rfoliibs"ed'ehabgeitP5Jf.‘-', ,1-'—'77-, ..-4,..y.1:ii -Policy Ratioliale /*'-c.---- .,.`--*e."A.."4,2'41."":Stakeholder PatiltIcin' 1-.'-.F-41.;"''''-f.1,0,..-3?. , ,-7, , ' •' 1,-•-e: ':■ s"-•:-:'r: r:••142: ...zf., • , -• j -..7 , • .-..,-- ' , I' ,:' ' !•-,-,.1.2, T ; ;;-,-', • . 7 , • ■ .. - . ' . - Conservation Authorities Act !,.'- , ' --. --L. si- - i(a:Vyvt- '?:, Zsilf :=-" P..j--:',:", ., '...?.; r '' ' r, ...:,- ';:i'' . -, •;."..' ""•■••..-1, -0- • _ . , . , . . Orders 28(17)(b) In addition to any other remedy or penalty provided by law, the court, upon making a conviction under subsection (16), may order the person convicted to, (b) rehabilitate any watercourse or wetland In the manner and within the time the court orders. Amending the section by adding the words "or shoreline" after the word "watercourse". The amendment explicitly includes shoreline areas regulated under the Act enabling the courts to order remedies for violations. The proposed change Involves a minor !ethnical change that is housekeeping In nature and will clarify legal ambiguities and update the Act consistent with the wording and intent of the natural hazards component of the Provincial Policy Statement under the Planning Act. Conservation Ontario staff has been consulted and Is supportive of the proposed amendment. Non-compliance with order 28(18) If a person does not comply with an order made under subsection (17), the authority having jurisdiction may, In the case of a development, have It removed and, in the case of a watercourse or wetland, have it rehabilitated. Amend the section by adding the words "or shoreline" after the word "watercourse" The amendment explidtty Includes shoreline areas regulated under the Act enabling the courts to Order removal of non-compliant development as well as rehabilitation of the shoreline area. The proposed change involves a minor technical change that Is housekeeping In nature and will clarify legal ambiguities and update the Act consistent with the wording and intent of the natural hazards component of the Provincial Policy Statement under the Planning Act. Conservation Ontario staff has been consulted and is supportive of the proposed amendment. Definitions 28(25) In this section, "hazardous lands' means land that could be unsafe for development because of naturally occurring processes associated with flooding, erosion, dynamic beaches or unstable soil or bedrock. Amending the definition of hazardous land In the section by striking out the word "hazardous land" and inserting "hazardous lands", and by adding ", or" after the word erosion, and by striking the words "or unstable soil or bedrock" at the end. The amendment corrects and explicitly defines "hazardous lands'. The proposed change involves a minor technical change that is housekeeping in nature and will darity legal ambiguities and update the Act consistent with the wording and intent of the natural hazards component of the Provinc.lal Policy Statement under the Planning Act Conservation Ontario staff has been consulted and Is supportive of the proposed amendment. ;'' Curriht�;L•eglslatioti -b' 4• " • 'u, �t �,s s :. :, °< , r ;n ; «, sue '`` - " . PropgsetfChahtida , 3,,k., ,w <.; 3 < M`t '� .mss : r Plalh Lahguide, ton Vera ,� 4... _. Of Prd + need C aii a d'r '' s; "e a _, F�"� � ;PoOay,R�ttbnale /, . i •s . w'� � -4�'■ $}akbtibldee P4f3itioii� , �' `- rR 4 Cons. Authorities _' . _ ; ' : { ; -e. %; �' _- • ,. s _ • • Definitions 28(25) In This section, Amending the section by adding a definition for hazardous sites by adding the wording — hazardous sites" means land that could be unsafe for development because of naturally occurring processes associated with unstable soil or unstable bedrock ". The amendment correctly includes and explicitly defines 'hazardous sites'. The proposed change Involves a minor technical change that is housekeeping In nature and will dariy legal ambiguities and update the Act consistent with the wording and intent of the natural hazards component of the Provincial Policy Statement under the Planning Act. Conservation Ontario staff has been consulted and is supportive of the proposed amendment. Definitions 28(25) In this section, wetland" means land that, (a) is seasonally or permanently covered by shallow water or has a water table close to or at its surface, (b) directly contributes to the hydrological function of a watershed through connection with a surface watercourse, (c) has hydric soils, the formation of which has been caused by the presence of abundant water, and (d) has vegetation dominated by hydrophylic plants or water tolerant plants, the dominance of which has been favoured by the presence of abundant water. Amending the definition of wetland by deleting subsection (b) in its entirety, amending the numbering for subsection (c) and (d) to subsection (b) and (c) respectively, and striking the word "and" at the end of ' subsection (a) and (b) and substituting the word "or" at the end of each subsection. The amendment corrects and explicitly defines "wetlands'. The proposed change involves a minor technical change that is housekeeping In nature and will clarify legal ambiguities and update the Act consistent with the wording and Intent of the Provindal Policy Statement under the Planning Act. Conservation Ontario has been consulted and is supportive of the proposed amendment. 1CUrreitt LegtelatIotIA4,1+ _ ..'„,-;,..i.. , ,, , 4, ItoposOtiphangeii.k., -.0-..., . . `$ritg....'A .1.4‘fa'14."-''$ft,;44/( l'..- .2:-.4- .. ,1,.., .1- II elalttl:aribUage VersiOn"at ,,,.. - =:-Itiwr, '-',. 0 f Proposed Change iige ',-.- , Ifr?-5,.';',:,, .1- - P':37.i ' 19en:4,-EtiallrlyTatibnale 1; - , ...-..-4 t.' ,-,.k.'!'•ciStakehold et Positions • • ,;....','.',LOZTt, .Vc - ...r;.g.1.; ':,-. • .1 .--, ', - _' _, „- - , • - . Conservation Authorities Act - - ' , • , „- : •• - — • - - '' • ' : . -:-. '• , _ -:- .' _ • -.', , ,F I . „., •,. .,• .1. • -- - ■ • • - l' ,. --r. •••■' i 1 '' 1 .ir., ,. ..1-:.,2'' - j.. , : ;--: - ,. •-• _ - ,- - .., _ • , , . , • - • Restriction on sale 35(2) Despite subsection (1), the authority shall not market or sell water power created upon the lands vested in it. Repeal and delete subsection (2) in its entirety. Removal of the existing subsection enables authorities to develop and sell waterpower energy at their existing dams. The govemment has recently announced policy decisions intended to remove barriers to alternative energy development. Some conservation authorities have already developed some small-hydro waterpower potential at their existing dams (e.g., Fanshawe Dam operated by the Upper Thames River Conservation Authority). Repealing thls subsection, consistent with government direction, would remove potential barriers thereby clearly promoting the development of small- hydro waterpower opportunities at dams owned and operated by Conservation Authonties Conservation Ontario has been consulted and Is supportive of the proposed amendment. Attachment 2 PROPOSED CA ACT AMENDMENTS REVIEW COMMENTS September, 2005 PROPOSED CA ACT CHANGES SUMMARY OF COMMENTS Quorum 16(2) At any meeting of an authority, a quorum consists of one -half of the members appointed by the participating municipalities, except where there are fewer than six such members, in which case three such members constitute a quorum. The intention is to bring the quorum provisions in line with those of the Municipal Act. Regulations 28(1)(a) restricting and regulation the use of water in or from rivers, streams, Great -Lakes - St. Lawrence River System, inland lakes ponds, wetlands and natural or artificially constructed depressions in rivers or streams. Staff concurs with circulation comments; minor technical change, clarify legal ambiguities and update the Act consistent with Natural Hazards wording of the Provincial Policy Statement (PPS); also consistency with the implementation of the Generic Regulation - Ontario Regulation 97/04 28(5) The Minister shall not approve a regulation made under clause (1)c) unless the regulation applies only to areas that are, (a) adjacent or close to the shoreline of the Great -Lakes - St. Lawrence system or to inland lakes including hazardous lands. Staff concurs with circulation comments; minor technical change, clarify legal ambiguities and update the Act consistent with Natural Hazards wording of the Provincial Policy Statement (PPS); will ensure consistency with the implementation of the Generic Regulation - Ontario Regulation 97/04 28(5) The Minister shall not approve a regulation made under clause (1)c) unless the regulation applies only to areas that are, (b) river or stream valleys including hazardous lands. Staff concurs with circulation comments; minor technical change, clarify legal ambiguities and update the Act consistent with Natural Hazards wording of the Provincial Policy Statement (PPS); will ensure consistency with the implementation of the Generic Regulation - Ontario Regulation 97/04 229 28 (5) The Minister shall not approve This amendment explicitly addresses "other a regulation under clause (1)c) hazardous lands" that by their nature are outside of unless the regulation applies only to an apparent river and stream valleys and identifies " areas that are, hazardous sites" which by definition includes unstable soils and unstable bedrock. It brings c) other hazardous lands and geotechnical element into the CA permitting process hazardous sites as well, which is not recognized in the Building Code based upon current wording (match between CA Act and the Building Code being pursued through the Generic Reg. Peer Review Committee /Conservation Ontario and the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing). Staff concurs with circulation comments; minor technical change, clarify legal ambiguities and update the Act consistent with Natural Hazards wording of the Provincial Policy Statement (PPS); will ensure consistency with the implementation of the Generic Regulation - Ontario Regulation 97/04 Transition Staff supports amendment to extend the time frame 28(8) Subject to subsection (9), if a from the current 2 years to 5 years for conservation regulation made by the Lieutenant authorities to bring existing regulations into Governor in Council under subsection (6), subsection (7) does not apply to a regulation that was conformity with the Generic Regulation. Also confirms that existing mapping remains in force previously made by an authority until updated mapping in accordance with the under subsection (1) until five years Generic Regulation has been approved by the after the regulation made by the Minister. Lieutenant Governor in Council comes into force and any existing mapping scheduled to that regulation shall remain in effect until such time as it has been updated and approved by the Minister. 230 Offense - contravening regulation 28(16) Every person who contravenes a regulation made under subsection (1) is guilty of an offense and on conviction is liable to a fine of not more than $10,000 or to a term of imprisonment of not more than three months. Add section: A proceeding with respect to an offense under subsection 28(1) shall not be commenced more than two years after the offense was, or is alleged to have been committed. Staff recommend that fines be increased significantly to reflect monetary penalties and the associated legislative structure surrounding the imposition of such penalties to be in line with other compatible environmental legislation. Further that consideration be given to: • a minimum fine component commensurate with a revised penalty section and associated structure of monetary penalties. • in addition to any fine imposed by the court that the court have leave via the legislation to impose other penalties that would: (a) neutralize any monetary benefit from the commission of an offense, (b) impose such other penalties and sanctions that may result in part with the redirection of monies to CA's as compensation to remedy, avoid or remediate damages done or to advocate or implement proper environmental management practice in line with CA policy and objectives. The new section is an improvement as it has gone from 6 months to 2 years. 231 Orders 28(17)(b) In addition to any other remedy or penalty provided by law, the court, upon making a conviction under subsection (16), may order the person convicted to, (b) rehabilitate any watercourse or shoreline or wetland in the manner and within the time the court orders. Staff concurs with circulation comments; minor technical change, clarify legal ambiguities and update the Act consistent with Natural Hazards wording of the Provincial Policy Statement (PPS); also ensures consistency with the implementation of the Generic Regulation - Ontario Regulation 97/04 Staff note that shoreline has been added to the wording to facilitate rehabilitation works in this area of concern. However, the Act is still deficient in the lack of wording to allow for rehabilitation orders for " development" 28(17)(a) issues like features affected by filling or the remnant condition of a site after the removal of an illegal structure. We can get removal but no order for restoration this equals erosion of the affected site either in the long or short term subject to site conditions. TRCA's solicitor, Jonathan Wigley, suggests that the removal section needs to be expanded to add the ability of the court to deal with the restoration and rehabilitation of the land once the development has been removed. Right now it only says 'removal'. For example, plantings, slope stabilization etc. No use leaving a raw slope without any way to stabilize it for example. Might add to "(a) and restore and rehabilitate the lands in question" and add another subsection dealing with the courts ability to "order such other terms and conditions for the due carrying out of such removal, restoration and rehabilitation ". 232 Non - compliance with order Staff concur with circulation comments; minor technical change, clarify legal ambiguities and 28(18) If a person does not comply update the Act consistent with Natural Hazards with an order made under wording of the Provincial Policy Statement (PPS); subsection (17), the authority having also ensures consistency with the implementation of jurisdiction may, in the case of a development, have it removed and in the case of a watercourse or the Generic Regulation - Ontario Regulation 97/04 As noted in 28(17) same sort of wording is needed in shoreline or wetland, have it 28(18): "removed and the lands in question restored rehabilitated. and rehabilitated" The Province needs to consider the method of cost recovery which is poor to ineffective in the CA Act section 28(19). Other legislation's such as OWRA section 88 - 88(2) provides for cost recovery through the Municipal Act Section (a) and the costs go to the offenders tax bill, (also EPA section 35). Definitions This corrects and explicitly defines hazardous lands. Staff concurs with circulation comments; minor 28(25) In this section, technical change, clarify legal ambiguities and update the Act consistent with Natural Hazards "hazardous lands" means land that wording of the Provincial Policy Statement (PPS); could be unsafe for development also ensures consistency with the implementation of because of naturally occurring processes associated with flooding, erosion or dynamic beaches. the Generic Regulation - Ontario Regulation 97/04 Add a definition This amendment correctly includes and explicitly defines hazardous sites. 28 (25) In this section, Staff concurs with circulation comments; minor technical change, clarify legal ambiguities and "hazardous sites" means land that update the Act consistent with Natural Hazards could be unsafe for development wording of the Provincial Policy Statement (PPS); because of naturally occurring also ensures consistency with the implementation of processes associated with unstable soil or unstable bedrock. the Generic Regulation - Ontario Regulation 97/04 233 Definitions This amendment corrects and explicitly defines 28(25) In this section, wetlands; removes the clause requiring a connection with a surface watercourse. "wetland" means land that, a) is seasonally or permanently Staff concurs with circulation comments; minor technical change, clarify legal ambiguities and covered by shallow water or has a update the Act consistent with Natural Hazards water table close to or at its surface, b) has hydric soils, the formation of wording of the Provincial Policy Statement (PPS); also ensures consistency with the implementation of which has been caused b the presence of abundant water, or c) has vegetation dominated by the Generic Regulation - Ontario Regulation 97/04 This will also extend CA jurisdiction over such areas hydrophytic plants or water tolerant with relevant land forms within their geographical plants, the dominance of which has been favoured by the presence of abundant water. areas of jurisdiction. Restriction on sale This gives conservation authorities the ability to market water power. . REPEAL AND DELETE 35(2) Despite subsection (1), the authority shall not market or sell water power created upon the lands vested in it. 234 RES. #C56/05 - OAK-RIDGES MORAINE FOUNDATION FUNDING PROPOSAL FOR CONSERVATION PRIORITY AREAS 2 AND 11 Endorsement of a multi - partner funding proposal submitted to the Oak Ridges Moraine Foundation for stewardship activities in Conservation Priority Areas 2 (Humber River Headwaters) and 11 (Duffins Creek Headwaters). Moved by: Seconded by: Rob Ford Bill O'Donnell THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) enter into an agreement with the Oak Ridges Moraine Foundation as a partner in the Oak Ridges Moraine Wide Stewardship Initiative which will include land owner contact to increase public awareness, establish forest cover and riparian vegetation, and create wetlands in Conservation Priority Areas (CPA) 2 (Humber River Headwaters) and 11 (Duffins Creek Headwaters); THAT the agreement be on terms and conditions that are satisfactory to staff and TRCA solicitors; THAT the Chief Administrative Officer be authorized to appoint staff to participate in steering committees that will guide the implementation of proposed stewardship activities in CPA 2 and 11 with the support of an internal TRCA working group to reflect the business units required to support this proposal; THAT TRCA matching funding up to $536,168 as well as in -kind services and support valued at approximately $26,780, be approved; AND FURTHER THAT the appropriate TRCA staff be authorized and directed to execute all necessary documents to give effect thereto. CARRIED BACKGROUND At Authority Meeting #4/05, held on May 27, 2005, Resolution #A98/05 was approved as follows: WHEREAS The Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) has established a leadership role in the management of headwater streams on the Oak Ridges Moraine through the development of watershed plans, conservation land plans, the draft Terrestrial Natural Heritage System Strategy, and watershed regeneration and stewardship programs in the headwaters of the Humber River and the Duffins Creek; WHEREAS the Oak Ridges Moraine Foundation (ORMF) has requested TRCA to take the lead in developing and implementing a multi -year, multi - partner funding proposal for the headwaters of the Humber River and Duffins Creek; WHEREAS the majority of the lands identified within the Conservation Priority Areas (CPA) 2 and 11 fall within the jurisdiction of TRCA; 235 THEREFORE LET IT BE RESOLVED THAT, subject to satisfactory terms and conditions, TRCA accept the lead role for developing and overseeing the delivery of funding grants from the ORMF for CPA 2 and CPA 11; THAT staff be directed to meet with the partners identified by the ORMF to develop the funding proposals; AND FURTHER THAT staff bring forward recommendations to the Authority for the funding proposal at the earliest opportunity. TRCA staff assisted the Oak Ridges Moraine Foundation (ORMF), along with other Conservation Priority Area (CPA) partners, with a funding proposal submitted to the ORMF Board. Copies will be available at the meeting. The proposal titled the "Oak Ridges Moraine Wide Stewardship Initiative ", is a multi - partnership project to be implemented in CPA 2, 11 and 17. Refer to the attached map for locations. CPA 2 (Centreville Creek) is located in the upper Humber River in the Town of Caledon, while CPA 11 (Glen Major) is centered in the headwaters of Duffins Creek in the Township of Uxbridge. CPA 17 is located in the Ganaraska area. Activities associated with CPA 17 will be led by the Ganaraska Region Conservation Authority (GRCA). It was decided that a one year proposal rather than a multi -year proposal would be submitted at this time with the option of submitting additional funding proposals based on the outcome of the 2005/2006 request. The ORMF Board approved the funding proposal as submitted on August 25, 2005. Details of the proposal are outlined below. The Oak Ridges Moraine (ORM) Wide Stewardship Initiative focuses on the three key objectives of the ORMF Stewardship Strategy: • Raising landowner awareness and recognition; • Increasing the Oak Ridges Moraine's natural land cover; and • Protecting the Oak Ridges Moraine's water resources and systems. Roles and Responsibilities: To brand an ORM landowner contact program, it was recognized that it is imperative that there be a common ORM message between all three CPAs and that program delivery tools be consistent among the three areas. In order to assure this, elements of the proposal that will be applied moraine -wide will be led by staff of the ORMF. The Program Manager from the ORMF will be responsible for: • ensuring targets and deliverables are met by the partner agencies; • working with the Research Officer to monitor the status of the projects; and • administering of funds to each of the partners. The ORM Research Officer from the ORMF will be responsible for: • development and implementation of communication tools; • development and maintenance of a landowner database; • coordination and documentation of landowner contacts; • monitoring of project status and implementation by partners and reporting to the ORM Foundation; and 236 • overall coordination of all three pilot stewardship projects. TRCA, with assistance from the ORM Research Officer, will be primarily responsible for the following in both CPA 2 and 11: • working with the ORM Research Officer to coordinate meetings, workshops, etc.; • participate on the Steering Committee; • providing a location for the Steering Committee meetings; • proactive landowner contact within conservation priority areas as determined by the Steering Committee. Enhancing public awareness of Oak Ridges Moraine values will include individual landowner contact, workshops and participation in the creation of the landowner contact products with contributions from all project partners; and • On- the - ground projects (outlined below). In 2005/2006 the Steering Committee will: • identify focus areas for initial landowner contact using Ministry of Natural Resources Restoration Strategy Data as well as other mapping products and associated resource material, specific to this area; • develop, in more specific terms, the framework for initiating landowner contact within each of the focus area; • participate in the creation of landowner information packages specific to each focus area; • assist in the coordination of information inquiries as a result of the landowner contact; • coordinate and communicate progress of year one stewardship projects and requests to the partner agencies; • assist in the creation of the budget and timeline for future funding proposals to the ORMF; and • develop selection criteria to determine the appropriate stewardship projects, resulting from 2005/2006 landowner contact. Other Partners: CPA 2 (Humber): Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority Conservation Authority Halton Peel Woodlands and Wildlife Stewardship Council Conservation Authority Wetland Habitat Fund Council Oak Ridges Moraine Land Trust Land Trust Trout Unlimited Town of Caledon and Region of Peel Centre/ Ministry of Natural Resources Watershed Science Centre/ Ministry of Natural Resources Stewardship Oak Ridges Trail Association Centre for Land and Water Stewardship 237 CPA 11 (Duffins): Lake Simcoe Region Central Lake Ontario Durham Land Stewardship Oak Ridges Moraine Wetland Habitat Fund Watershed Science Centre for Land and Water Township of Uxbridge TRCA Deliverables: The following outlines the Oak Ridges Moraine Wide Stewardship Initiative deliverables in relation to the three key focus areas (raising landowner awareness and recognition, increasing the ORM's natural land cover, and protecting the ORM's water resources and systems). Raising Land Owner Awareness and Recognition • determine the highest priority areas to concentrate landowner contact efforts; • create a list of needs and /or issues specific to the CPA project areas that will be incorporated into the landowner contact activities; • create or modify existing landowner contact information (fact sheets, brochures, etc.) to be consistent with ORM general messaging that will be used in each of the Conservation Priority Areas; • contact approximately 200 private landowners in 2006 in conservation priority areas to promote the values of the ORM and determine if in- ground stewardship projects my be of interest to the landowner; • train staff in messaging and project delivery, and build capacity in other delivery organizations. Increase the ORM's Natural Land Cover While it was recognized in the proposal that many of the private land projects cannot be determined until the onset of a landowner contact program, the TRCA and the other CPA partners identified some expected Year 1 projects on public land that will help to contribute to meeting the objectives of the ORMF Stewardship Strategy. These projections were based on past project deliverables and what was believed could reasonably be accomplished in one year. Increasing natural cover will be achieved through both active and passive restoration techniques. Forest creation projects will increase the amount of natural land cover, while existing forest will be enhanced through improvements to patch size, shape and connectivity. A total of 36 ha of land will be reforested on TRCA land; half in the Humber watershed and half in the Duffins watershed. Natural succession will also play an integral part in helping to meet these targets. Improving Water Quality The ORMF's Stewardship Strategy states that over the next 3 -5 years it will fund projects that help to show significant progress in restoring riparian corridors and in creating and /or restoring wetlands in core, linkage and countryside areas on the ORM. To support this objective, the ORMF is also focusing its funding on major riparian and wetland projects in areas identified as high priority. Streams targeted for restoration include those that do not have at least 75% of their stream length with a 30 meter vegetated buffer. Two hectares of wetland and 230m of streamside vegetation will be established in each of the CPA 2 and CPA 11 in the spring of 2006. 238 FINANCIAL DETAILS The total project costs including all partners in three Conservation Priority Areas is $1,715,063. The ORMF is contributing $618,423 and the partners are contributing $789,717 in cash and $306,923 in -kind services and supplies. The total funding for TRCA from the Oak Ridges Moraine Foundation for one year in CPA 2 and 11 is $287,934. The distribution of that funding is as follows: CPA 2 - FUNDING APPROVED FOR TRCA DELIVERABLES Section TOTAL PROJECT COST ORMF Funding* . 'TRCA` "- PARTNER MATCH - CASH PARTNER MATCH - IN -KIND Landowner Contact $76,590 $23,800' : $37,500 $15,290 Increasing Natural Cover $296,435 $41,835 $252,500 $2,100 Improving Water Quality $192,432 $78,332 $112,000 $2,100 TOTAL $565,457 $143,967. $402,000 $19,490 CPA 11- FUNDING APPROVED FOR TRCA DELIVERABLES Section TOTAL PROJECT COST ;;ORMF ,`;;Funding to_ .. :TRCA PARTNER MATCH - CASH PARTNER MATCH - IN -KIND Landowner Contact $68,590 $23,800„ " $37,500 $7,290 Increasing Natural Cover $128,503 $41,83,5 $86,668 - Improving Water Quality $88,332 $78,332 '. $10,000 - TOTAL $285,425 •.$143,967 .. $134,168 $7,290 TRCA matching funds totalling up to $536,168 as well as in -kind services and support valued at approximately $26,780, are from confirmed 2005 funding sources. DETAILS OF WORK TO BE DONE • TRCA to enter into an agreement with the Oak Ridges Moraine Foundation as a partner of the Oak Ridges Moraine Wide Stewardship Initiative for CPA 2 and 11. • TRCA to appoint a staff representative, with the support of an internal TRCA working group to reflect the business units required to support this proposal, to participate in steering committees for each of CPA 2 and 11. 239 • Assess the success of the project at the conclusion of year one and determine if additional funding proposal will be submitted to the Oak Ridges Moraine Foundation. Report prepared by: Lisa Turnbull, extension 5325 For Information contact: Gary Wilkins, extension 5211 or Gary Bowen, extension 5385 Date: Sept 9, 2005 Attachments: 1 240 Attachment 1 7+ 241 RES. #C57/05 - CLAIREVILLE LEADERSHIP ADVENTURE CONSERVATION PARTNERSHIP Developing a Leadership Adventure Conservation partnership for recreational and educational uses at the Claireville Conservation Area. Moved by: Seconded by: Rob Ford Bill O'Donnell THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT staff be directed to work with interested groups and agencies to develop experiential learning opportunities through recreational programs at the Claireville Conservation Area and report progress to the Authority; AND FURTHER THAT staff report back to the Business Excellence Advisory Board on program details prior to implementation. CARRIED BACKGROUND The Claireville Conservation Area is an 848 hectare (2,100 acre) parcel of land owned by the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA). The area is located in the West Humber subwatershed of the Humber River watershed. It is primarily located in the City of Brampton. There is a large flood control dam and reservoir on the south end of the property which was built in 1964. It is also the location of the Indian Line Campground, Wild Water Kingdom, Etobicoke Field Centre, Claireville Equestrian Ranch, Yeoman Rugby Club and some agricultural land rentals. In 1990, most of the Claireville Conservation Area was closed to vehicular access by the public for financial reasons. A management plan was developed for Claireville in 1997. This plan outlines the appropriate uses for the property based on an ecosystem approach in which all elements of the ecosystem (the environment, society and economy) must be managed together and be respectful of each other. A Natural Area Enhancement Plan was completed in 2000 to guide the implementation of restoration activities. Over 80% of the property has been designated Nature Reserve, Natural Environment or Restoration zones to safeguard and enhance the form and function of the natural environment. TRCA, in conjunction with the Humber Watershed Alliance and other stakeholders, has been actively rehabilitating the natural features in Claireville since the completion of the management plan. The conservation area has outstanding recreation, tourism and education potential. A number of individuals and groups have expressed an interest in developing experiential learning opportunities through outdoor recreational activities on the property. The idea of creating a Claireville Leadership Adventure Conservation (CLAC) Partnership was proposed by staff from the City of Toronto Parks, Forestry and Recreation Department as an opportunity for external groups to develop, operate and generally benefit from each others strengths and recreation programs at the Claireville Conservation Area. The objective is to provide a coordinated approach amongst interested groups to use the conservation area, rather than on a first come first served basis where the first group to obtain a permit for their use prevented the use of the resource by other user groups. 242 The benefit of a partnership arrangement would be that the collective natural and recreational resources could be shared cooperatively between the groups. Cost sharing of some common needs such as toilets, parking and storage could also take place. This partnership would facilitate communication between the user groups to minimize any conflicts and maximize opportunities for cross promotion. The values of the groups involved in the CLAC would include respect for other user groups and the environment. Spin -offs from this partnership could include community economic development opportunities, outreach to the surrounding new immigrant and low income communities, and experiential learning opportunities for everyone and not just education for students. After a preliminary meeting with some interested groups and TRCA senior staff, it was decided that a larger meeting was necessary to determine who would be interested in joining a federation of partners to carry this concept forward. An initial meeting was held in August 2004 where 90 individuals from over 60 organizations, representing a wide variety of outdoor recreation organizations including canoeing, fishing, archery, orienteering, camping, municipal parks and recreation, scouts, etc. were invited. Twenty one individuals, representing external recreation providers, attended this initial meeting. Six meetings were held in total between August 2004 and April 2005. In addition, one special meeting was held in December 2005 to develop a mission statement for the'group. Below is the mission and values that a CLAC partnership would hope to achieve: Mission The Claireville Leadership Adventure Conservation (CLAC) is a partnership of organizations responsible for the development, operation and maintenance of equitable and accessible recreational activities. The programs will use experiential learning concepts with environmental management, good stewardship and community economic development principles. Values • Engage the surrounding resident and business communities as partners to develop equitable, accessible, and sustainable outdoor life skill activities for groups and individuals. Identify barriers to participation for individuals who have never participated in planned outdoor activities; • Use innovative approaches to overcome barriers and reach out to communities and individuals who are non - traditional participants in outdoor recreational activities. The CLAC partnership will develop sustainable lifelong wellness activities for all participants; • Support and improve the natural environment in Claireville while building skills, leadership and developing a conservation ethic in community participants. A draft business plan and terms of reference was developed. This plan outlined timelines and possible recreational uses at Claireville by the partners. At this time, the plan requires more detail and commitment related to finances. Both short term start up costs and long term operational and maintenance costs still need to be defined along with sources of funding to cover these costs. The plan will also require further details regarding implications to the TRCA if upgrades to safety, security and property maintenance measures are required as a result of the undertakings. 243 After much meaningful discussion with potential partners, five are still interested in moving forward in terms of developing and operating recreational uses at Claireville. The confederation of partners and associated management board will not proceed at this time. Instead, the TRCA will be working with the five individual groups to facilitate the development of cooperative additional recreational and educational programs at the Claireville Conservation Area. DETAILS OF WORK TO BE DONE a) Work with the Friends of Claireville to regenerate forests and wetlands, establish trails and prepare interpretive signs. Support Friends of Claireville events such as guided bird walks and tree planting events. The Ontario Trillium Foundation has committed $100,500, over three years, to the Friends of Claireville. b) Permit Scouts Canada to continue to use the site for a variety of scouting activities. Work with Scouts Canada to develop value added opportunities for participants. c) Permit the City of Toronto to continue to use Claireville for their annual summer camp programs. Work with City of Toronto Inner City Outtripping Centre to permit the use of the site for canoeing events, outdoor leadership training, wilderness first aid training and other associated activities. d) ' Work with City of Toronto staff, Ontario Ministry of Transportation and the International Mountain Biking Association to complete the 500m trail link between Claireville Conservation Area and the Toronto inter - regional trail system. e) Work with the City of Brampton to develop a plan for the future use of Claireville by Brampton Parks and Recreation programs. f) FutureWatch was initially interested in providing overnight camping experiences to survivors of domestic abuse in a semi - wilderness setting. They met with Indian Line Campground staff to see if an appropriate location could be found in the existing campground for this purpose. This would allow access to facilities and amenities like toilets and laundry. At this time, FutureWatch is looking for a more modern house -like retreat for their participants, although they hope to use the Claireville property for nature hikes and the healing process associated with being in nature. g) Work with the Ontario Recreational Canoeing Association to permit the use of Claireville for canoeing and kayaking workshops, training and events from time to time. h) Work with Canoe Ontario to permit the use of Claireville for canoe instruction, summer camp programming and races from time to time. i) Work with the Claireville Ranch to minimize user conflicts and encourage cross promotional opportunities with other user groups. 1) TRCA will purchase and install a dock in the reservoir to facilitate canoeing and fishing. 244 k) The Ministry of Natural Resources is not interested in developing an urban fishing program for Claireville, but will work with interested partners to improve the Claireville fishery and generally assist with the promotion of urban fishing. I) Staff to report back to the Business Excellence Advisory Board on program details, including financial implications, once developed, prior to proceeding with any project implementation. Report prepared by: Karen Sun, extension 5291 For Information contact: Karen Sun, extension 5291 Date: September 06, 2005 RES. #C58/05 - MEMBERS REMUNERATION Ontario Municipal Board Decision. Report on decision of the Ontario Municipal Board (OMB) on TRCA application for increases in Chair and member remuneration. Moved by: Seconded by: Rob Ford Bill O'Donnell THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT the travel costs of the Chair and Members be reimbursed at the rate of $0.3375 /kilometre effective July 1, 2005. CARRIED BACKGROUND At Authority Meeting #2/05, held March 11, 2005, the Authority approved Resolution #A46/05 which directed staff to seek approval of the OMB to increase the per diems and the Chair's honorarium. Further, the OMB was asked to consider allowing increases at the prevailing consumer price index in future years. On behalf of TRCA, the application to the OMB was submitted by Gardiner Roberts LLP in May. Documentation included the resolution of the Authority as well as copies of previous OMB orders. RATIONALE The OMB delivered their decision on August 24, 2005 approving the rates requested by TRCA: Effective January 1, 2005, the per diem allowance shall be $82.00 and the Chair's honorarium, $36,000. In a separate letter, the OMB advises that it will not grant multi -year approvals. Applications must be made on an annual basis. The OMB must also approve reimbursement of travel costs. The most recent approval was an order made in 1981. The OMB states that it will approve only the travel reimbursement rate applicable to Ontario government employees. This rate is $0.3375 /kilometre. 245 TRCA at one time reimbursed its staff and members at the provincial rate. However, in the late 1980's TRCA moved to use its participating municipalities travel cost reimbursement as a fairer comparable for establishing its mileage rate. Most recently, TRCA is using the CAA travel cost research to determine its rates. Because staff and members have always been reimbursed using the same rates, it was assumed that this was acceptable to the OMB. The OMB has now advised that the provincial rate must apply. Staff has advised the OMB that TRCA will do this effective July 1, 2005, so that there is no need to review reported travel costs and recalculate allowances. The new rate will apply when members are reimbursed at year end for the meetings attended since July 1st. Research on Allowances Paid by Other Special Purpose Bodies The Authority asked for a listing of allowances paid by other special purpose bodies. Attachment 1 is the summary of this research. Report prepared by: Jim Dillane, 416 - 667 -6292 For Information contact: Jim Dillane, 416- 667 -6292 Date: September 01, 2005 Attachments:1 246 Attachment 1 ALLOWANCES PAID TO MEMBERS of OTHER SPECIAL PURPOSE BODIES QUESTIONS Toronto Waterfront Revitalization Corporation TWRC Toronto Police Services Board York Region Police Services Board Ontario Realty Corporation (ORC) Do you pay the members of the Board of Directors or other governing body for their services ? If "YES " how much do you pay and on what basis? If there is more than one meeting held on a given day, do they receive the same amount of per diem ? Yes. - $ 500 per attended meeting. - $ 5,000 Lump Sum at the beginning of each fiscal year. Each meeting usually lasts 3 hours. If meetings continue all day (full day) their payment doubles. Yes. ( Partially) Provincial Appointees to the Board receive an annual remuneration of $ 8,791. Yes. ( Partially) The Municipal Citizen and 3 provincial appointees get a honorarium of $ 7,000 per year. Yes. Members ( Part -Time ) $150 Per Diem There is no remuneration for 1 member - Civil Servant. Yes. If the organization has a Chair of the Board, what is the Chairs remuneration ? The Chair receives a salary from the corporation. ( No info disclosed ) The Toronto Police Services Board is headed by a full time Chair. This position carries a salary of $ 90,963. Despite the increasing complexity of the position, the salary has not changed since 1987. No special remuneration. (Elected member) No Information provided from ORC contact person. Acting -Chair is a Civil Servant. Vice -Chair (Part-Time) is a Civil Servant, too. If the organization has municipal elected officials on its board, are these representatives treated - differently? No municipal officials elected in the board. The City of Toronto Councillors are not compensated for their work on the Board, rather this service is seen as part of their regular duties. Elected members - Regional Council Appointees do not get paid. 247 QUESTIONS Committee of Adjustment City of Toronto Exhibition Place Board City of Toronto Toronto Zoo City of Toronto Toronto Parking Authority Do you pay the members of the Board of Directors or other governing body for their services ? If "YES " how much do you pay and on what basis? If there is more than one meeting held on a given day, do they receive the same amount of per diem ? Yes . We pay the members of the Committee of Adjustment. $ 350 per attended public hearing. Yes, they receive the same amount. No . They work on a voluntary basis No. Yes (Partially) 4 members of the Board get paid. They receive annual compensation of $ 7, 537 . If the organization has a Chair of the Board, what is the Chair's remuneration ? The Chair receives an extra amount of $ 1, 000 per financial year. The Committee of Adjustment operates as four panels : Etobicoke, North York, Toronto East York and Scarborough. Each respective panel has a Chair. No Honorarium. President receives a gift after he finishes his term of appointment. Chairman is not paid. The Chair's remuneration is $ 10,767 per year. If the organization has municipal officials elected on its board, are these representatives treated differently? No municipal officials elected. Toronto City Council has appointed a Committee of Adjustment consisting of citizen members. No. The 6 City Councillors , members of Board are not paid to attend. The 2 City Councillors don't get paid. 248 QUESTIONS Alcohol and Gaming Commission of Ontario AGCO Liquor Control Board of Ontario LCBO Toronto Port Authority Greater Toronto Airports Authority Do you pay the members of the Board of Directors or other governing body for their services ? If "YES " how much do you pay and on what basis? If there is more than one meeting held on a given day, do they receive the same amount of per diem ? Yes. Members ( Part-Time) $ 200 Per Diem Yes. Vice - Chair (Part Time) $ 150 Per Diem Members (Part Time) $ 100 Per Diem N 0 I N F 0 R M A T- I 0 N P R 0 V I D E D Yes. Annual Retainer of $ 14,000. Meeting Fee: - in person $1,000 - by phone $ 750 If the organization has a Chair of the Board, what is the Chairs remuneration ? The Alcohol and Gaming Commission of Ontario is headed by a full time Chair. The Chair receives an annual salary of $129,558.42 The Chair is the chief executive of the board and devotes his or her full time to the work of the board. This position carries a salary in the range between $ 110,245 - $123,215. Chair receives $ 96,000. Committee Chair receives $ 3,000 to $ 7,500 annually. If the organization has municipal elected officials on its board, are these representatives treated differently? 249 RES. #C59/05 - INTERNATIONALLY TRAINED PROFESSIONALS Increasing Toronto and Region Conservation Authority's ability to assist internationally trained professionals to find employment opportunities in the environmental sector. Moved by: Rob Ford Seconded by: Bill O'Donnell THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) participate in a new internship program with other confirmed hosts - Terraprobe, Golder and the Region of Peel Planning Department under the auspices of Career Bridge for one year commencing January 2006; AND FURTHER THAT staff be directed to provide recruitment of two interns and training and documentation for the pilot host organizations and report its findings to the Business Excellence Advisory Board at the end of the one year pilot program, prior to any expansion or extension of the program. CARRIED BACKGROUND TRCA has developed an extensive program to increase the employability of internationally trained professionals in the environmental sector through several partnership arrangements with the Ontario Council of Agencies Serving Immigrants (OCASI), the Trillium Foundation and Career Bridge (a part of the Career Edge organization dedicated to finding internships for internationally trained professionals) by providing opportunities for volunteering or internships. In addition, TRCA has provided mentorship opportunities with leaders within our staff and internationally trained professionals. This new internship program is a public /private sector joint venture among host organizations to expand the network of opportunities for our internationally trained mentees, volunteers and interns at little incremental cost to TRCA. TRCA's role will be as pilot administrator in this joint venture pilot of TRCA, Career Bridge, Region of Peel Planning Department, Golder and Terraprobe. TRCA will provide recruitment services for the interns, train and coach the partnership hosts, and act as the common liaison with the host organizations and Career Bridge, including handling all invoicing. Each host organization will have an intern for a 4 month period of time at an expense of $14,940 per host per intern. TRCA will have the benefit of two interns for 4 months without the cost. The other hosts will pay TRCA's portion of the internship compensation. FINANCIAL IMPACTS The cost to TRCA of this program will be limited to the Human Resources, Diversity and Volunteer staff time. Report prepared by: Catherine MacEwen, extension 5219 For Information contact: Catherine MacEwen, extension 5219 Date: August 29, 2005 250 RES. #C60/05 - MENTORSHIP PROGRAM Progress Report and Expansion. Staff update on the Mentorship Program and request for approval of expansion of the program. Moved by: Seconded by: Rob Ford Bill O'Donnell THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) Mentorship Program be expanded from 12 to 24 mentors. CARRIED BACKGROUND The TRCA Mentorship Program is part of a broader TRCA effort to participate in meaningful engagement with Toronto's diverse communities as part of the work recently initiated by the Toronto Alliance formed out of recommendations in the Toronto Alliance report, Enough Talk. At Authority Meeting #8/0,4, held on September 24, 2004, Resolution #A251 /04 was approved as follows: THAT staff be authorized to participate in the Mentorship Program as outlined in the staff report. AND FURTHER THAT staff report back to the Business Excellence Advisory Board in 6 months on the progress of the Mentorship Program. Other initiatives include: Career Bridge internship program for new Canadians, Newcomer Opportunities for Work Experience (NOW) program, the World Education Service (WES) to certify non - Canadian academic credentials, the Multicultural Environmental Stewardship Program and the Environmental Volunteer Network (EVN). TRCA started an internal Mentorship Program in October 2004 with the intention of matching 6 TRCA staff with 6 internationally trained environmental professionals. However, due to the interest of staff in the program, 10 TRCA staff were matched with 10 mentees. Staff met with their mentees for 7 hours over a 4 month period, and in some cases continued the mentoring relationship for a longer period. A few of these continue to the present time. Staff have been offering guidance to mentees on how to find employment in their field of choice. In November, the Toronto Region Immigrant Employment Council (TRIEC) officially launched is Mentoring Partnership program in Toronto, and later in Peel and York regions. TRIEC invited TRCA to become a strategic partner in this initiative, with representation on its Steering Committee, and TRCA accepted. As part of this partnership, TRIEC has provided TRCA mentors and mentees with training and support in their mentoring relationships, and promoted TRCA's activities at events and through media. TRCA's participation in turn helps TRIEC work toward its goal of 1,000 mentor /mentee relationships by the end of 2005. In June 2005, TRCA began its second round of participation by creating 12 new mentee /mentor matches, which are currently ongoing. To date, 19 different TRCA staff have directly mentored 22 internationally trained professionals (3 staff have mentored two people). Several other staff have also been involved in meetings with mentees to lend support. 251 RATIONALE Eight of the 22 mentees have landed work in their field, one at TRCA; 2 have decided to return to school to upgrade and localize their skills; and several have reported additional benefits such as improved self- esteem, better connectedness to the environmental field, improved job search tools and a better overall job- searching strategy. Participation as a strategic partner on TRIEC's Mentoring Partnership has enhanced TRCA's credibility as an organization that is committed to diversity, and is willing to implement solutions to the challenges facing internationally trained environmental professionals. In the fall, TRCA will be profiled as an organization demonstrating 'Leadership and Excellence' on this issue, on the new www.hireimmigrants.ca web site that TRIEC launched in July 2005. TRCA's mentorship activities were also featured in the March edition of Business Edge Magazine. TRIEC's free training has also enhanced TRCA staff's cross - cultural awareness and overall competence in working with diverse communities and individuals. From a human resources perspective, TRCA is developing an important new source of environmental talent, and has already hired one participant. This talent pool will allow TRCA to diversify its work force in the long term. Due to the success of the program since October 2004, staff is recommending expansion of the program to 24 TRCA mentors, working with 24 to 30 mentees. FINANCIAL DETAILS Thanks to TRIEC's provision of training materials and evaluation, the only significant cost to TRCA associated with this program is the time committed by staff. Each mentor is asked to commit seven hours over a four month period; in many cases staff have given more than seven hours. Staff believe this to be a worthwhile investment given the impact of this program on the organization and community. Report prepared by: Chris Benjamin, extension 5360 For Information contact: Chris Benjamin, extension 5360 Catherine MacEwen, extension 5219 Date: August 10, 2005 RES. #C61/05 - Moved by: Seconded by: CELL PHONE, BLACKBERRY AND OTHER PERSONAL DIGITAL ASSISTANT DEVICES Use in vehicles when conducting Toronto and Region Conservation Authority business.. Health and safety issues of use of personal digital assistant devices by employees conducting Toronto and Region Conservation Authority business while driving. Rob Ford Bill O'Donnell 252 THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT employees be prohibited from using cell phones, Blackberries or similar personal digital assistant (PDA) devices when driving vehicles on Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) business. CARRIED BACKGROUND The New England Journal of Medicine study in 1997 concluded that the use of cell phones while driving increased the risk of having an accident by four times. Similar results were found in studies conducted in Australia (June 2005), New York (2001) and Virginia (2005) even when drivers were using handsfree options. As many as 40 countries including Australia, Austria, Belgium, Italy and Japan have banned the use of cell phones, and other countries have restricted the use of cell phones while driving. There is some indication that an employer that encourages the use of cell phones by employees driving on behalf of that employer may be sued for vicarious liability. The procedures supporting this policy would only allow employees to use a cell phone, Blackberry or other PDAs in their car or TRCA vehicle during TRCA business by: 1. Getting off the road in a safe area to park and answer or place the call. 2. Passing the cell phone to a passenger to answer, and not interfering with the driver's concentration on driving. Under no circumstance would an employee use a cell phone when the car is in motion, at a red light or stop sign, or in the situation where another person is holding the cell phone to the employee's ear while the employee is driving. This ban on cell phone use applies to anytime that an employee is in a TRCA vehicle. For personal vehicles, the employee cannot use a cell phone when en route to or from TRCA business related sites. Failure to comply by an employee can and will be subject to disciplinary action. Employees travelling to and from home in their personal cars, from their regular job location, is considered to be on their own personal time and not subject to the TRCA cell phone ban, however we encourage the safe use of cell phones at all times by TRCA employees. FINANCIAL DETAILS The financial impacts of this policy relate more to the managing of potential liability and not to any direct costs or savings of this initiative. Report prepared by: Catherine MacEwen, extension 5219 For Information contact: Catherine MacEwen, extension 5219 Date: August 12, 2005 253 RES. #C62/05 - PROCEDURES FOR CIRCULATION OF BOARD MINUTES Amendment to circulation procedures of minutes to the advisory boards. Moved by: Seconded by: Rob Ford Bill O'Donnell THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT the Business Excellence Advisory Board, Sustainable Communities Board and Watershed Management Advisory Board agendas include a summary of the previous meeting minutes rather than the complete minutes. CARRIED BACKGROUND At Executive Committee #5/05, held on July 8, 2005, Resolution #B90/05 was approved as follows: THAT the Executive Committee receive a summary of the minutes of the previous meeting with the agenda rather than the complete minutes; AND FURTHER THAT staff report to the Business Excellence Advisory Board on a policy for circulation of minutes for all board meetings. The circulation of a summary of minutes to the Executive Committee commenced at Meeting #6/05, held on August 5, 2005. RATIONALE This issue arose out of a concern by Executive Committee Members over the duplication of distribution of advisory board minutes as they are circulated with each Authority agenda at the end of the month, and then again with the agenda for the next meeting. To further Toronto and Region Conservation Authority's (TRCA) objective for Sustainable Communities, the Executive Committee requested the noted change in circulation of Executive Committee minutes, and requested this report on the other 3 advisory boards. In April 2004, distribution of agendas and minutes to staff was reduced by posting electronic copies of the documents on a directory accessible by all staff at Head Office, Black Creek Pioneer Village, Boyd and Downsview offices. One full copy of full Authority agenda packages is printed for each location, and staff are encouraged to print/copy only their reports and the index for the meetings. This change was documented as one of the measures of TRCA's effort to be Champions of Sustainability through our internal Sustainability Management System. Currently, the distribution of full agenda packages to members and staff, the average annual page count over the last 5 years and the resulting paper usage, is as follows: 254 Meeting Type Members Directors, Specialists & Extras Average Page Count (per yr.) Paper Usage (Dbl- sided) Executive Committee 9 16 812 10,150 Business Excellence Advisory Board 8* 16 145 1,740 Sustainable Communities Board 13* 16 138 2,001 Watershed Management Advisory Board 9* 16 280 3,500 TOTAL 39 64 1,375 17,391 ncludes Chair, Authority as Ex- Officio member of the advisory boards. As the staff full copies produced are the same as those for the members, they are included in the count as if a change was approved, this would be for these copies as well. With the proposed distribution, members and staff would keep a copy of the minutes they receive with the Authority agenda for the next meeting of each board. In the case where minutes are not available at time of distribution of the Authority agenda, a copy of the minutes will be included with the appropriate board agenda. Should an additional copy be required, all agendas and minutes are available on TRCA's website at www.trca.on.ca/corporate_info / and staff have additional access on the public directory previously noted. It is proposed that a summary of minutes be distributed with the agenda at approximately 1,400 double -sided pages for the distribution noted above. FINANCIAL DETAILS The cost of paper to TRCA is 0.84 cents /sheet and the toner cost is 1.4 cents /doube -sided sheet, resulting in an overall cost of 2.24 cents /sheet, plus applicable taxes. At an estimated reduction of 16,000 double -sided pages the savings would be $358.40, plus applicable taxes. Report prepared by: Kathy Stranks, extension 5264 For Information contact: Kathy Stranks, extension 5264 Date: August 30, 2005 RES. #C63/05 - BULLFROG POWER GREEN ELECTRICITY CONTRACT Seeks approval to enter into a green electricity contract with Bullfrog Power Inc. Moved by: Seconded by: Rob Ford Bill O'Donnell THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT approval be granted to enter into a contract for supply of "green" electricity with Bullfrog Power Inc.; 255 THAT the contract be in a form and on terms and conditions satisfactory to staff and Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) solicitors; AND FURTHER THAT staff be authorized and directed to take such action as is necessary to complete the contract including signing of documents. CARRIED RATIONALE Staff has met with representatives of Bullfrog Power Inc., a recently established green electricity supplier. Attached is a brief description of the company. Members are aware that TRCA has entered into a contract to secure from Ontario Power Generation (OPG) "green" electricity which is guaranteed 50% Ecologo based. The cost of this contract is about $17,000 annually and means that about 10% of the electricity used by TRCA is "green" energy. Staff advised the Authority at the time of the OPG contract (January 2004 commencement), that we would seek to increase the use of green electricity as opportunities arose. The Kortright Centre For Conservation (KCC) is the subject of a major needs study to determine the nature of required restoration as well as new facilities to be created. KCC is the central focus of The Living City Centre. One feature staff would like to be able to market is that KCC is supplied by 100% green electricity. Bullfrog Power is able to supply 100% green electricity and to do so directly. Also, Bullfrog is offering a number of significant marketing opportunities since TRCA would be among its very first corporate clients. On September 28, 2005, Bullfrog Power will be launching its green power initiative. As an initial client, TRCA will participate in this event and benefit from inclusion in Bullfrog marketing initiatives. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS Details of the contract need to be completed to the satisfaction of TRCA staff. Bullfrog has proposed a rate of 8.3 cents /kilowatt hour. This is a premium of about 3.5 cents /KwH which is comparable to the green electricity cost for OPG. KCC staff is assembling billing information which will determine the details of the contract. The estimate is that the additional premium for KCC to be 100% green powered will exceed not $15,000 annually. This would be an additional operating cost KCC would have to absorb. As part of The Living City Centre project, the potential to decrease electricity use and to produce electricity on site are being explored. It is hoped that these efforts will eventually offset the additional cost to use green electricity. Most important, the ability to engage in joint marketing with Bullfrog Power is a significant opportunity for TRCA and the Conservation Foundation. For Information contact: Jim Dillane, extension 6292 Date: September 22, 2005 Attachments: 1 256 Attachment 1 ence bullfrog power: clean, reliable electricity Bullfrog Powor is tho first 100% green electricity retailer in Ontario. Clean powor is hero. It's reliablo. And making the switch is simple! Bullfrog Powor is tho only electricity retailer in Ontario that buys power exclusively from wind and low-Impact hydro generators who meet or exceed the federal government's EcoLogo" standard for renewable electricity. We are committed to Increasing the amount of renewable power in Ontario, and we are working to develop new production facilities to meet the heads of bullfrogpowered'M customers. why go green? Electricity production is the largest industrial source of air pollution in our province - pollution that poses significant health risks to Onterians. Choosing green power is an easy way to do your part to create a healthier environment for future generations. When you sign up for Bullfrog Power, your electricity dollars will go to clean, renewable electricity producers who are displacing polluting and CO2- emitting electricity production on the grid. Regular Mix Buarrog Mix I ' Wind 1 <1% Codified Low - impact hydro 2% i _.r _� ; sr 37% _ 0% . Coal, Oil and Oaa s6% 0% Other hydro 24% 1 0% Other . <1% I 0% 257 does green electricity cost more? Yes, but only a little. Bullfrog Power costs 8.34 per kilowatt hour. For the average homeowner, that adds about Si a day to the electricity bill, or about the same cost as a bottle of water a day - a small price to pay to make a big differenco. Plus, some of this Increase may bo avoidod by taking a few simplo steps to conscrvo electrklty around the home. how does bullfrog power work? Buying clean electricity is easy! Whon you switch to Bullfrog Powor, you continuo to draw your power from Ontario's electricity grid in tho same way that you always have, but your dollars are directly supporting renewable power generation. No nuclear. No coal. All clean. who is Bullfrog Power? 100% Canadian owned and operated, Bullfrog Powor is a responsible corporation that donates 10% of Its profits to organizations that promote sustainability. All of our green power purchases are verified and audited annually by a leading national accounting firm. ready to switch? • Easy, fast. online signup • No special equipment or service calls are necessary • No change to the reliability of your electricity supply • No lock -in. You can switch back to your utility if you are ever unhappy with our service Choose to go green today) Sign up online for Bullfrog Power et www.builfrogpower.com buff PCAN IMAM.' ClCCTUICITT owe r SECTION IV - ITEMS FOR THE INFORMATION OF THE BOARD RES. #C64/05 - ACCOUNTS RECEIVABLE STATUS REPORT August 31, 2005. Staff report on accounts receivable, as of August 31, 2005. Moved by: Seconded by: Dick O'Brien Rob Ford IT IS RECOMMENDED THAT the Accounts Receivable Status Report, as of August 31, 2005, be received. CARRIED RATIONALE The schedule below summarizes the status of receivables, including aging and classification. The schedule excludes $16,391 in accumulated interest arrears on invoices outstanding for more than 30 days. ACCOUNTS RECEIVABLE AGING, BY CATEGORY (Excluding Municipal Levy and MNR Grant - As at August 31, 2005 1 258 CURRENT 31 TO 60 DAYS 61 TO 90 DAYS 90 PLUS DAYS TOTAL % SCHOOLS AND SCHOOL BOARDS 76,806 7,771 17,711 14,870 117,158 10.4% GOVERNMENT 407,549 135,068 99,081 552 642,250 57.0% DEVELOPMENT SERVICES 29,990 2,000 22,950 89,655 144,595 12.8% CORPORATE, INDIVIDUAL AND COMMUNITY GROUPS 107,980 58,552 55,490 993 223,015 19.8% TOTAL 622,325 203,391 195,232 106,070 1,127,018 100.0% % OF TOTAL 55.2% 18.1% 17.3% 9.4% 100.0% 1 258 Items in excess of $1,000.00 included in the 90- plus -days column are as follows • CLIENT NAME AMOUNT $ ARREARS INTEREST $ AGE (DAYS) NOTES Coledale P.S. 3,756.08 171.57 103 School group visit to Lake St. George 3,679.04 168.05 103 Education Field Centre Keele Street School 1,430.59 65.35 94 School group visit to BCPV St. Christopher 4,431.32 207.69 94 School group visit to Lake St. George Basciano Parkin Ltd. 2,000.00 427.11 405 Planning fees. Brutto Consulting 7,500.00 1,334.61 332 Planning fees. Ltd. 3,000.00 481.63 304 Planning fees. Glen Pietrowski 10,000.00 1,956.17 369 Planning fees. Ron Witton 7,000.00 1,369.32 378 Planning fees. KLM Planning 2,000.00 500.47 474 Planning fees. 12,500.00 2,445.20 378 Planning fees. Partial payment of $7,500. received. Rice Development 10,000.00 990.92 206 Planning fees. Partial payment of Group $10,000. received. Marshall Macklin 20,000.00 1,545.68 153 Planning fees. Monahan TOTALS 87,297.03 11,663.77 The outstanding accounts for planning fees are deemed to be collectible. Most of these accounts occurred as the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority transitioned to the new fee schedule during 2004. Some smaller accounts have been written off in accordance with the policy. Collection of planning fees has improved and staff does not anticipate that this list of problem accounts will grow significantly. Staff believes that there is still some leverage available to deal with these outstanding accounts. Since the last report there were two partial payments as noted above and one new account was added to the list - Marshall Macklin Monahan. The amounts outstanding from schools is normal for this time of year when schools are closed for the summer break. 259 Receivable balances, as reported on each of the previous reports to the advisory board, after 2002, are presented as follows: DATE Total $ 90 -Plus $ August 31, 2005 1,127,018 106,070 May 20, 2005 671,964 .126,831 March 31, 2005 841,871 183,755 February 15, 2005 699,123 189,490 December 30, 2004 1,935,416 245,815 October 25, 2004 1,127,102 180,891 September 28, 2004 876,800 187,754 September 3, 2004 936,923 197,539 May 17, 2004 1,018,188 129,505 February 17, 2004 1,386,809 178,370 January 7, 2004 1,064,464 45,382 November 2, 2003 951,999 101,194 August 24, 2003 768,825 125,803 May 25, 2003 445,116 168,327 March 2, 2003 709,807 141,313 Report prepared by: Rocco Sgambelluri, extension 5232 For Information contact: Rocco Sgambelluri, extension 5232 Date: September 6, 2005 TERMINATION ON MOTION, the meeting terminated at 10:25 a.m., on Friday, September 23, 2005. David Barrow Chair /ks 260 Brian Denney Secretary- Treasurer erTHE TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY MEETING OF THE BUSINESS EXCELLENCE ADVISORY BOARD #5/05 October 21, 2005 The Business Excellence Advisory Board Meeting #5/05, was held in the South Theatre, Black Creek Pioneer Village, on Friday, October 21, 2005. The Chair David Barrow, called the meeting to order at 9:10 a.m. PRESENT David Barrow Chair Rob Ford Member Dick O'Brien Chair, Authority Bill O'Donnell Member REGRETS . Bas Balkissoon Member Bill Fisch Member Peter Milczyn ",; Member Maja Prentice Vice Chair RES. #C65 /05 - MINUTES Moved by: Seconded by: Rob Ford Dick O'Brien THAT the Minutes of Meeting #4/05, held on September 23, 2005, be approved. CARRIED PRESENTATIONS (a) A presentation by Jim Dillane, Director, Finance and Business Services, in regards to item 7.1 - 2006 Preliminary Estimates, Operating and Capital. RES. #C66 /05 - PRESENTATIONS Moved by: Seconded by: Bill O'Donnell Dick O'Brien 261 THAT above -noted presentation (a) be heard and received. CARRIED SECTION I - ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY ACTION RES. #C67/05 - 2006 PRELIMINARY ESTIMATES, OPERATING AND CAPITAL Approval of the 2006 Preliminary Estimates, Operating and Capital. Moved by: Bill O'Donnell Seconded by: Dick O'Brien • THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT the 2006 Preliminary Estimates, Operating and Capital be approved; AND FURTHER THAT Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) staff and, as appropriate, the Chair of TRCA and the Chair of the Business Excellence Advisory Board, be directed to meet with TRCA funding partners to present the 2006 Preliminary Estimates, Operating and Capital. CARRIED RATIONALE As members are aware, approval of the 2006 Preliminary Estimates, Operating and Capital, is the first formal stage toward approval of the 2006 budget. Approval of the preliminary estimates means that staff will submit requests to the municipal funding partners for an average municipal operating levy increase of 6 %. Gross expenditures are estimated to grow at 5.3 %. This growth is primarily salary /wage /benefit related. OMERS pension premiums have increased. The Authority approved a revised salary plan which is being implemented over 3 years, of which 2006 is the second year. TRCA has added staff and support services to build capacity to deal with development and growth throughout the Toronto region. The impact of this is part of the increase. Also, there is general inflation in operations due to higher fuel and energy costs but this is modest in terms of the overall impact on gross expenditures. Non -levy revenues are projected to grow at 5.2 %. Significant increases are projected in operational areas, development fees and funding for environmental assessment reviews. In terms of Net Operating Expenditures (gross expenditures less operating revenue), the increase is 5.5 %. This is the portion of the operating budget funded from the Ministry of Natural Resources (MNR) transfer payments and municipal levy. Because it is assumed that the MNR transfer payment will be flat lined at the 2005 level, the increase in the municipal levy is projected at 6 %. 262 TRCA has submitted preliminary estimates to its municipal funding partners. The process begins in June and submissions are required by the various partners in July, August and September. Staff has met with staff of the Regions of Peel and York and the City of Toronto to present TRCA budget requirements. The Durham levy has been submitted as part of a package from the five conservation authorities to Durham region finance staff. Meetings will occur later this year. The apportionment of the municipal levy is based on modified current value assessment (CVA). The attachments include a breakdown of this apportionment. The capital estimates for the municipal partners are being finalized and will be faxed to members prior to the meeting. The final capital budget will include TWRC projects as well as funding from other sources and any carry forward of project funding from 2005. Staff will make a presentation to the board on the 2006 Preliminary Estimates, Operating and Capital on October 21, 2005. Report prepared by: Jim Dillane, extension 6292 For Information contact: Jim Dillane, extension 6292 Date: October 12, 2005 Attachments: 1 263 Attachment 1 0( TORONTO AND REGION --N. . i;IC onservation. for The Living City 2006 PRELIMINARY BUDGET 264 13- Oct -05 TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY 2006 Operating Budget - Preliminary for October 21/05 BEAB Page 1 Year Year - Page 2005 2005 2006 over Year over Year 2006 over 2005 Change Gross Expenditures (by functional Unit) Reference Budget P. Budget % Chq. $ Chq. Notes $ $ $ Intro: all budgets affected Finance and Business Services Division by COLA and market adjustments. Administration Page 8 2,053,200 2,012,978 2,382,400 16 0% 329,200 More Downsaew Office costs, GIS staff, licences Rental Properties Page 9 1502,900 1,601900 1542200 2 6% 39,300 Rouge Park transfer is higher Central Services Page 10 302,000 302,000 321,700 65% 19,700 PropertySevices Page 11 1,201,700 1,161,700 1230900 24% 28,300 Vehicle & Equipment Reserve Page 12 66,100 66,100 -100 0% (66,100)No Boat replacement in 2006 5,125,900 5,144,678 5,476,300 68% 350,400 Watershed Management Division WM Divisional Management / EMS Watershed Strategies Conservation Field Centres Planning & Development Division Development Services Enforcement Ecology Division R esource Science Community Transformation Partnerships Restoration Services Division Environmental Services Parks and Culture Division Parks & Culture Drviaonal Management Conservation Areas Kortright Centre for Conservation Black Creek Pioneer Village Food Services Office of the CAO Corporate Management Corporate Secretariat Human Resources Customer Services Communications Expenditure Total Page 13 Page 14 Page 15 Page 16 Page 17 Page 18 Page 19 Page 20 Page 21 Page 22 Page 23 Page 24 Page 25 231,000 217,700 1,418,700 1,459,100 2,262,100 2239,336 3,911,800 3,916,136 319,500 38 3% 88,500 RAP MOU Admin explicitly budgeted 1,541,000 8 6% 122,300 $125 less offset from planning/integration charges 2,338,900 3 4% 76,800 Lk St George Donn 1 being utilized 4,199,400 7 4% 287,600 2,933,800 2,801900 479,400 504,400 3,413,200 3,305,400 3,038,700 533,100 3,571,800 3 6% 104,900 More EA staff & costs 112% 53,700 Legal provision increased 4 6% 158,600 ES Geotech charged, Archaeology staff moved h 3,152,700 3,152,700 3,544,000 12 4% 391,300 from ES, 2 ecology analysts, maternity leaves bar 2,005,400 1,161,291 2,004,000 -01 % (1,400) 5,158,100 4,313,991 5,548,000 76% 389,900 1,672,700 1,898,714 1,736,100 3 8% 63,400 Asian Beetle program higher, with revenues 206,000 206,000 3,597,200 3,594,462 1,301,300 1,394,696 4,173,100 4,146,150 1,090,300 863200 10,367,900 10204,508 290,300 40 9% 84,300 Transfers of staff & annualization 3,467,700 -3 6% (129,500)Staf moved to Div Management 1,442,400 10 8% 141,100 Marketing costs moved here from CA's 4,286,800 2 7% 113,700 Utilities & new Pavilion operations 1,143,500 4 9% 53,200 More Wedding sales projected 10,630,700 2 5% 262,800 Page 26 410,600 402,200 418,000 1 8% 7,400 Page 26 315,000 315,500 328,600 4 3% 13,600 Page 26 429,900 455,200 450,700 4 8% 20,800 Page 26 259,600 256,700 261,600 0 8% 2,000 Page 26 697,500 697,500 752,100 7 8% 54,600 More recognion, 50th annmerary events 2,112,600 2,127,100 2,211,000 47% 98,400 31,762,200 30,910,527 33,373,300 5.1% 1,811,100 265 Page 2 Toronto and Region Conservation Authority 2006 Operating Budget - Preliminary for October 21/05 BEAB Funding Sources: Program/User fees: Rental Properties Black Creek Pioneer Village Food Services Development Services Environmental Services Conservabon Areas Kortright Centre for Conservation Conservation Field Centres Summary All Other Program/User fees Reserves CFGT - Living City CFGT- Flowthrough Other Municipal Provincial Federal Donations/Fund raising Private Reverse internal plant material charges included under user fees Revenue total Net Expenditures Net Expenditures funded by: Provincial Transfer Payments Municipal Levy Deficit / (Surplus) 2005 2005 2006 Change Budget P. Budget % Chg. $ Chg. Notes $ $ $ Intro: all budgets affected 2,288,400 2,270,400 2,314,200 1 1% 25,800 1,828,900 1,830,600 1,978,900 8 2% 150,000 More admissions and giftshop 1,145,900 814,800 1,237,900 8.0% 92,000 More Wedding sales projected 2,229,500 2,171,000 2,613,100 17.2% 383,600 More Planning fees 1,183,500 1,698,053 1,274,300 90,800 Inland Fill 2,978,100 3,046,204 3,222,100 8.2% 244,000 Admission fees increased 1,080,900 1,074,728 1,168,900 8.1% 88,000 Winter programs expanded 1,494,400 1,460,400 1,641,300 9 8% 146,900 Lk. St. George Dorm 1 being utilized 583,000 582,000 588,000 0.9% 5,000 196,700 205,200 3,000 - 98.5% (193,700)One time items not repeated 800,000 800,000 800,000 237,700 207,400 225,700 -5 0% (12,000) 1,604,200 1,315,194 1,760,700 9.8% 156,500 Higher Dev.Services E.A funding 1,527,900 1,188,550 1,442,900 -5.6% (85,000)WECI program reduced 1,110,600 945,650 1,107,000 -0.3% (3,600) 465,400 410,000 454,000 -2.4% (11,400) 1,360,400 1,152,142 1,339,300 -1.6% (21,100)$85 Property tax rebate no longer available (735,100) (735,100) (752,000) 2.3% (16,900) 21,380,400 20,437,221 22,419,300 4.9% 1,038,900 1.0,381,800 10,473,306 10,954,000 5.5% 572,200 845,800 845,800 845,800 9,536,000 9,536,000 10,108,200 6 0% 572,200 6.0% 91,506 6.0% II 266 TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY APPORTIONMENT OF 2006 OPERATING BUDGET LEVIES GENERAL PROGRAMS & CAPITAL PROJECTS SUMMARY 2006 GENERAL LEVY > LEVY TOTAL EXCLUDING TAX NON - REVENUE GENERAL ROUGE TAX ADJ. ADJUST. TAX ADJUST. LEVY PARK $ $ $ $ ADJALA - TOSORONTIO 764 764 9 DURHAM 306,984 10,532 36,146 353,662 3,6G1 TORONTO 6,642,350 10 6,642,360 77,910 MONO 833 90 923 10 PEEL 1,107,779 67,670 18,757 1,194,206 12,994 YORK 1,865,019 25,087 26,179 1,916,285 21,676 LEVIES ON HAND / SPECIAL * excludes Rouge Park levy Page 3 2005 Operating OPERATING Change LEVY* 06/05 $ $ 9,923,729 103,289 81,182 10,108,200 118,400 712 52 7.3% 332,500 21,162 6.4% 6,334,480 307,880 4.9% 876 47 5.4% 1,109,672 84,534 7.6% 1,757,760 158,525 9.0% 9,536,000 572,200 6.0% 9,923,729 103,289 81,182 10,108,200 116,400 9,536,000 572,200 6.0% 267 Page 4 • TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY APPORTIONMENT OF 2006 LEVIES MATCHING* AND NON - MATCHING FORMAT * Based on preliminary estimates of provincial funding. OPERATING LEVY TOTAL MATCHING* NON - MATCHING $ $ $ ADJALA - TOSORONTIO 65 699 ' 764 DURHAM 26,164 327,498 353,662 TORONTO 566,128 6,076,232 6,642,360 MONO 71 852 923 PEEL 94,416 1,099,790 1,194,206 YORK 158,956 1,757,329 1,916,285 845,800 9,262,400 10,108,200 * Based on preliminary estimates of provincial funding. THE TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY BASIS OF APPORTIONMENT - MUNICIPAL LEVY - 2006 (BASED ON 2005 FOR 2006 MODIFIED CURRENT VALUE ASSESSMENT FIGURES *) MUNICIPALITY Page 5 CURRENT %OF CURRENT TOTAL POPULATION VALUE MUNICIP- VALUE POPULATION IN ASSESSMENT ALITY IN ASSESSMENT AUTHORITY** AUTHORITY IN WATERSHED $(000's) $(000's) Township of Adjala - Tosorontio 1,064,705 4 42,588 10,082 403 Durham, Regional Municipality of 20,531,037 17,104,139 178,269 149,512 City of Toronto 370,089,414 100 370,089,414 2,481,494 2,481,494 Town of Mono 928,787 5 46,439 6,922 346 Peel, Regional Municipality of 143,540,327 61,721,729 988,948 435,112 York, Regional Municipality of 113,539,474 103,912,622 603,375 540,757 649,693,744 552,916,931 4,269,090 3,607,624 ANALYSIS OF REGIONAL MUNICIPALITIES * Durham, Regional Municipality of Ajax, Town of 8,175,058 86 7,030,550 73,753 63,428 Pickering, Town of 10,165,728 95 9,657,441 87,139 82,782 Uxbridge Township 2,190,251 19 416,148 17,377 3,302 20,531,037 17,104,139 178,269 149,512 Peel, Regional Municipality of Brampton, City 42,314,303 63 26,658,011 325,428 205,020 Mississauga, City of 93,684,523 33 30,915,893 612,925 202,265 Caledon, Town of 7,541,501 55 4,147,826 50,595 27,827 143,540,327 61,721,729 988,948 435,112 York, Regional Municipality of Aurora, Town of 6,035,374 4 241,415 40,167 1,607 Markham, Town of 36,862,321 100 36,862,321 208,615 208,615 Richmond Hill, Town of 22,201,156 99 21,979,145 132,030 130,710 Vaughan, Town of 42,001,635 100 42,001,635 182,022 182,022 Whitchurch - Stouffville, Town of 3,471,920 43 1,492,926 22,008 9,463 King Township 2,967,069 45 1,335,181 18,533 8,340 113,539,474 103,912,622 ** As provided by the Ministry of Municipal Affairs. * Based on 2001 Census data from Statistics Canada 269 603,375 540,757 THE TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY 2006 LEVY APPORTIONMENT MUNICIPALITY Page 6 MODIFIED 2006 GENERAL 2005 GENERAL CURRENT VALUE LEVY LEVY ASSESSMENT PROPORTIONATE PROPORTIONATE IN WATERSHED FACTOR FACTOR $(000's) ADJALA - TOSORONTIO 42,588 0.00770% 0.00762% DURHAM, REGIONAL MUNICIPALITY OF Ajax 7,030,550 Pickering 9,657,441 Uxbridge 416,148 17,104,139 3.09344% 3.05642% CITY OF TORONTO 370,089,414 66.93400% 67.73725% TOWN OF MONO 46,439 0.00840% 0.00841% PEEL, REGIONAL MUNICIPALITY OF Brampton 26,658,011 Mississauga 30,915,893 Caledon 4,147,826 YORK, REGIONAL MUNICIPALITY OF Aurora 241,415 Markham 36,862,321 Richmond 21,979,145 Vaughan 42,001,635 Whitchurch - Stouffville 1,492,926 King 1,335,181 61,721,729 11.16293% 10.94201% 103,912,622 18.79353% 18.24829% 552,916,931 100.00000% 100.00000% TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY FUNDING REQUESTS AS OF OCTOBER 14, 2005: 2006 CAPITAL AND PROJECT LEVIES FOR BUSINESS EXCELLENCE ADVISORY BOARD OF OCTOBER 21, 2005 ADJALA- TOTAL PROJECT & TOSO- LEVY TO BE MUNICIPALITY RONTIO DURHAM TORONTO MONO PEEL YORK INVOICED $ $ $ $ $ $ $ GREENSPACE LAND ACQUISITION 50,000 50,000 50,000 150,000 WATERFRONT REGENERATION PROJECTS 273,500 1,273,000 1,546,500 VALLEY AND SHORELINE REGENERATION 1,800,000 1,800,000 REMEDIAL ACTION PLANS 275,000 2,446,300 0 833,900 410,000 3,965,200 Deduct items shown under other projects (1,396,300) (75,000) (305,800) (1,777,100) WATER MANAGEMENT PROJECTS 473,500 0 421,300 605,000 1,499,800 FLOOD WORKS / WARNING SYSTEM 100,500 225,000 145,500 135,000 606,000 STEWARDSHIP / EDUCATION FLOODPLAIN MAPPING REGIONAL MONITORING GROUNDWATER STRATEGIES 140,500 159,000 283,200 155,800 738,500 150,000 105,000 75,000 150,000 480,000 70,000 230,000 0 315,000 310,000 925,000 125,000 125,000 0 125,000 150,000 525,000 TERRESTRIAL NATURAL HERITAGE 78,000 78,800 0 79,000 50,000 285,800 PUBLIC USE INFRASTRUCTURE 23 9,280 203,200 25 33,000 54,700 300,228 LIVING CITY CENTRE 24 9,523 2 26 33,000 42,573 OTHER PUBLIC USE RETRO. 42,800 0 905,000 947,800 INFO. TECHNOLOGY ACO. 31 12,374 270,900 34 44,000 73,000 400,339 MAJOR FACILITIES RETROFIT 39 15,467 338,700 42 55,000 91,200 500,448 BCPV DEVELOPMENT & RETROFIT 350,000 350,000 2006 TOTAL 117 1,351,944 6,732,100 127 3,322,900 1,878,900 13,286,088 11 2005 COMPARATIVES 107 846,867 5,937,254 118 3,097,823 1,905,431 11,787,600 271 TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY 2006 PRELIMINARY OPERATING BUDGET DIVISION: Finance and Business Services Page 8 ACTIVITY: Administration 2005 2005 2006 Budget P. A. Budget % Chg. $ Chg. Expenditures: Financial Services 795,600 805,978 823,500 3.5% 27,900 Office Services 938,000 938,000 1,094,800 16.7% 156,800 Information Technology 474,800 444,200 547,700 15.4% 72,900 GIS 294,800 274,800 366,400 24.3% 71,600 Project Surcharge (450,000) (450,000) (450,000) Expenditure Total 2,053,200 2,012,978 2,382,400 16.0% 329,200 Funding Sources: Program /User fees 408,000 407,000 413,000 1.2% 5,000 Reserves 20,000 20,000 - 100.0% (20,000) CFGT - Living City CFGT - Flowthrough Municipal 12,702 Provincial 20,000 20,000 - 100.0% (20,000) Federal Donations /Fundraising Private Revenue Total 448,000 459,702 413,000 -7.8% (35,000) Net Expenditures 1,605,200 1,553,276 1,969,400 22.7% 364,200 Comments: Major 06 over 05 Changes (in addition to economic factors): Finance. Office Services: Downsview office costs annualized plus additional space rented Info Technology. increase in volume of software licenses plus annualization Db administrator position GIS: 2 Technicians added to address workload, plus staff reclassifications 272 TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY 2006 PRELIMINARY OPERATING BUDGET DIVISION: ACTIVITY: Finance and Business Services Rental Properties Page 9 Expenditures: Basic Rentals ORC Rentals Special Agreements Expenditure Total Funding Sources: Program/User fees Reserves CFGT - Living City CFGT - Flowthrough Municipal Provincial Federal Donations /Fundraising Private Revenue total Net Expenditures 2005 2005 2006 Budget P. A. Budget % Chq. $ Chq. $ $ $ 662,200 738,000 102,700 762,200 738,000 101,700 671,100 768,400 102,700 1.3% 8,900 4.1% 30,400 1,502,900 1,601 ,900 1,542,200 2 6% 39,300 2,288,400 2,270,400 2,314,200 1.1% 25,800 5,000 5,000 5,000 2,293,400 2,275,400 2,319,200 1.1% 25,800 (790,500) (673,500) (777,000) -1.7% 13,500 Comments: Major 06 over 05 Changes (in addition to economic factors). Rentals: Higher maintenance and property tax costs 273 TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY 2006 PRELIMINARY OPERATING BUDGET DIVISION: Finance and Business Services Page 10 ACTIVITY: Central Services Expenditures: Central Services Expenditure Total Funding Sources: Program /User fees Reserves CFGT - Living City CFGT - Flowthrough Municipal Federal Provincial Donations /Fundraising Private Revenue Total Net Expenditures 2005 2005 2006 Budget P. A. Budget % Chg. $ Chg. $ 302,000 302,000 321,700 6.5% 19,700 302,000 302,000 321,700 6.5% 19,700 302,000 302,000 321,700 6.5% 19,700 Comments. Major 06 over 05 Changes (in addition to economic factors): 274 TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY 2006 PRELIMINARY OPERATING BUDGET DIVISION: Finance and Business Services Page 11 ACTIVITY: Property & Taxes Expenditures: Property Services Taxes & Insurance Conservation Land Planning Expenditure Total 2005 2005 2006 Budget P. A. Budget % Chq. ' $ Chq. 697,700 434,000 70,000 657,700 434,000 70,000 722,700 429,000 78,300 3 6% -1.2% 11.9% 25,000 (5,000) 8,300 1,201,700 1,161,700 1,230,000 2.4% 28,300 Funding Sources: Program/User fees Reserves CFGT - Living City 60,000 60,000 60,000 CFGT - Flowthrough Municipal Provincial Federal Donations /Fundraising Private 85,000 85,000 - 100.0% (85,000) Revenue Total 145,000 145,000 60,000 - 58.6% (85,000) Net Expenditures 1,056,700 1,016,700 1,170,000 10.7% 113,300 Comments: Major 06 over 05 Changes (in addition to economic factors)• Loss of property tax rebate revenue 275 TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY 2006 PRELIMINARY OPERATING BUDGET DIVISION: ACTIVITY: Finance and Business Services Vehicle & Eq uipment Page 12 Expenditures: Fuel, Maintenance & Repairs Vehicle Purchases - New Vehicle Purchases - Replacement Equipment Purchases - New Equipment Purchases - Replacement Equipment Disposal Proceeds Internal Recoveries Expenditure Total Funding Sources: Program /User fees Reserves CFGT - Living City CFGT - Flowthrough Municipal Provincial Federal Donations /Fundraising Private Revenue Total Net Expenditures 2005 Budget 2005 2006 P. A. Budget % Chq. $ Chg. 423,800 423,800 451,100 6.4% 27,300 224,400 5,000 181,600 (33,000) (735,700) 224,400 225,000 0.3% 600 5,000 5,000 181,600 130,000 -28.4% (51,600) (33,000) (53,000) 60.6% (20,000) (735,700) (758,100) 3.0% (22,400) 66,100 66,100 66,100 66,100 66,100 66,100 - 100.0% (66,100) - 100.0% (66,100) -100 0% (66,100) Comments: Major 06 over 05 Changes (in addition to economic factors): Normal rate of replacements. No new boat as in 2005. 276 TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY 2006 PRELIMINARY OPERATING BUDGET DIVISION: Watershed Management Page 13 ACTIVITY: WM Divisional Management / EMS 2005 2005 2006 Budget P. A. Budget % Chg. $ Chg. Expenditures: Divisional Management 176,000 167,700 189,100 7 4% 13,100 Environmental Management Systems 55,000 50,000 49,300 -10.4% (5,700) R.A.P. Administration 81,100 81,100 Expenditure Total Funding Sources: Program/User fees Reserves CFGT - Living City CFGT - Flowthrough Municipal 15,000 15,000 - 100.0% (15,000) Provincial 48,900 48,900 Federal 48,900 48,900 Donations /Fundraising Private 30,000 30,000 Revenue Total 15,000 15,000 127,800 752.0% 112,800 231,000 217,700 319,500 38.3% 88,500 Net Expenditures 216,000 202,700 191,700 -11.3% (24,300) Comments. Major 06 over 05 Changes (in addition to economic factors): Remedial Action Plan Administration explicitly budgeted for first time. Covered by RAP MOU revenue. 277 TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY 2006 PRELIMINARY OPERATING BUDGET DIVISION: Watershed Management Page 14 ACTIVITY: Watershed Strategies 2005 2005 2006 Budget P. A. Budget % Chg. $ Chg. Expenditures: Don River 197,100 187,100 195,800 -0.7% (1,300) Humber River 345,800 345,800 359,600 4.0% 13,800 • Rouge River 400,000 400,000 400,000 Highland Creek 20,000 20,000 17,500 -12.5% (2,500) Etobicoke - Mimico Creek 315,400 269,300 275,600 - 12.6% (39,800) Duffins Creek 213,600 213,600 224,900 5.3% 11,300 Oak Ridges Moraine 117,900 154,700 127,900 8.5% 10,000 Waterfront Strategy 61,100 61,100 64,700 5.9% 3,600 For RAP MOU actuals Portion funded from Capital (252,200) (192,500) (125,000) - 50.4% 127,200 Expenditure Total 1,418,700 1,459,100 1,541,000 8.6% 122,300 Funding Sources: Program/User fees Reserves CFGT - Living City 125,000 125,000 125,000 CFGT - Flowthrough 45,000 45,000 - 100.0% (45,000) Municipal - Provincial 70,000 70,000 46,200 -34.0% (23,800) Federal 70,000 70,000 46,300 - 33.9% (23,700) Donations /Fundraising 400,000 400,000 400,000 Private 267,200 267,200 308,000 15.3% 40,800 Revenue Total 977,200 977,200 925,500 -5.3% (51,700) Net Expenditures 441,500 481,900 615,500 39.4% 174,000 Comments: Major 06 over 05 Changes (in addition to economic factors): Etobicoke - Mimico: No report card expenfitures or related funding in 2006 Humber: Report card expenditures increased in 2006. Some reallocation of resources to priority areas Less Federal /Provincial RAP MOU revenue, less report card related capital contributions Correction of 2005 CFGT flowthrough. 278 TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY 2006 PRELIMINARY OPERATING BUDGET DIVISION: ACTIVITY: Watershed Management Conservation Field Centres Page 15 Expenditures: Program Management Education Support Services Albion Hills Claremont Lake St. George Expenditure Total Funding Sources: Program/User fees Reserves CFGT - Living City CFGT - Flowthrough Municipal Provincial Federal Donations /Fundraising Private Revenue Total 2005 Budget 2005 2006 P. A. Budget % Chq. $ Chq. 134,000 142,488 127,300 -5.0% (6,700) 252,700 221,830 221,700 - 12.3% (31,000) 670,300 668,850 706,900 5 5% 36,600 600,300 597,605 632,500 5.4% 32,200 604,800 608,563 650,500 7.6% 45,700 2,262,100 2,239,336 2,338,900 1,494,400 (2,000) 250,000 116,500 16,000 10,400 3.4% 76,800 1,460,400 1,641,300 9.8% 146,900 6,500 (2,000) 250,000 250,000 128,000 115,900 -0.5% (600) 14,500 31,500 96.9% 15,500 1,250 1,250 5,000 1,000 -90.4% (9,400) 1,885,300 1,866,900 2,037,700 8.1 % 152,400 Net Expenditures 376,800 372,436 301,200 -20.1% (75,600) Comments: Major 06 over 05 Changes (in addition to economic factors): Management / Support : P/T Admin. Assistant removed Education Support: new test program reduced plus gapping Albion: Education Technician to full year + utilities & maintenance. Rev. up $20k Claremont. Ed. Technician now shared here with LSG + utilities Rev up $31 k. LSG: Dorm 1 opened for bookings. Re■ 279 TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY 2006 PRELIMINARY OPERATING BUDGET DIVISION: Planning & Development Page 16 ACTIVITY: Development Services 2005 2005 2006 Budget P. A. Budget % Chq, $ Chg. Expenditures: Planning Services 680,100 660,100 747,400 9.9% 67,300 Regulation Services 594,300 594,300 679,500 14.3% 85,200 Solicitor /Realtor Enquiries 48,800 48,800 - 100.0% (48,800) Policy, Research and Special Projects 497,300 434,500 397,800 - 20.0% (99,500) Hearings 225,000 175,000 200,000 - 11.1% (25,000) Environmental Assessment 888,300 888,300 1,014,000 14.2% 125,700 Expenditure Total 2,933,800 2,801,000 3,038,700 3.6% 104,900 Funding Sources: Program/User fees 2,229,500 2,171,000 2,613,100 17.2% 383,600 Reserves CFGT - Living City CFGT - Flowthrough - Municipal 930,300 953,300 1,076,000 15.7% 145,700 Provincial 23,900 (5,700) - 100.0% (23,900) Federal 46,900 (5,700) 22,400 - 52.2% (24,500) Donations /Fundraising - Private Revenue Total 3,230,600 3,112,900 3,711,500 14.9% 480,900 Net Expenditures (296,800) (311,900) (672,800) 127% (376,000) Comments: Major 06 over 05 Changes (in addition to economic factors): Planning. net effect of staffing movement is addition of Planning technician. Revenue increased $376k Regulations. net effect of staffing movement seems to be addition of .5 Planning technician. Revenue unchanged Solicitor: staff and costs no longer showing under this program. Revenues remain. Policy development: more staff allocated here. Focus on Generic Regs. E.A.. Exp. up by $128k, revenue up by $119k. 280 TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY 2006 PRELIMINARY OPERATING BUDGET DIVISION: Planning & Development Page 17 ACTIVITY: Enforcement 2005 2005 2006 Budget P. A. Budget % Chq. $ Chq. Expenditures: Enforcement 454,400 454,400 483,100 6 3% 28,700 Legal 25,000 50,000 50,000 100.0% 25,000 Expenditure Total 479,400 504,400 533,100 11.2% 53,700 Funding Sources: Program/User fees Reserves CFGT - Living City CFGT - Flowthrough Municipal Provincial Federal Donations /Fundraising Private Revenue Total Net Expenditures 479,400 504,400 533,100 11.2% 53,700 Comments: Major 06 over 05 Changes (in addition to economic factors): Legal costs provision increased 281 TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY 2006 PRELIMINARY OPERATING BUDGET DIVISION: Ecology Page 18 ACTIVITY: Resource Science 2005 Budget 2005 2006 P. A. Budget % Chg. $ Chg. Expenditures: Program Management 292,700 292,700 367,500 25.6% 74,800 Archaeology. 175,000 175,000 211,800 21.0% 36,800 Special Projects 100,000 100,000 100,000 Natural Heritage 423,800 423,800 562,900 32.8% 139,100 Water Management 712,800 712,800 902,500 26.6% 189,700 Flood Forecasting & Warning 158,700 158,700 234,500 47.8% 75,800 Op. & Maintenance of Dams, Channels and Water Control Structures 373,400 373,400 342,800 -8 2% (30,600) Source Water Protection 916,300 916,300 822,000 -10 3% (94,300) Expenditure Total 3,152,700 3,152,700 3,544,000 12.4% 391,300 Funding Sources: Program /User fees 175,000 175,000 175,000 Reserves CFGT - Living City 65,000 65,000 65,000 CFGT - Flowthrough Municipal 152,000 152,000 25,000 -83.6% (127,000) Provincial 900,000 900,000 872,000 -3.1 % (28,000) Federal 25,000 25,000 25,000 Donations /Fundraising Private Revenue Total Net Expenditures 1,317,000 1,317,000 1,162,000 -11 8% (155,000) 1,835,700 1,835,700 2,382,000 29.8% 546,300 Comments: Major 06 over 05 Changes (in addition to economic factors): Program management: new Director and Assistant annualized Natural Heritage: 2.5 FTE's added related to Dev. Services Water Management: 40% of Geotech no longer to ES, adjustments to where staff charged re: capital and DSS projects. Flood. 2 staff return from maternity leave Archaeology: remainder of costs transferred out of Planning to this consolidated cost centre. No net impact. Source Protection. special Durham funded initiative not repeated in 2006. 2005 Variance• staff do not expect any differences 282 TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY 2006 PRELIMINARY OPERATING BUDGET DIVISION: Ecology Page 19 ACTIVITY: Community Transformation Partnerships (LCC at Kortright) 2005 2005 2006 BUDGET P. A. BUDGET % CHG. $ CHG. $ $ $ Expenditures: Development, Management & Communications 645,400 400,450 557,500 - 13.6% (87,900) Mayors' Megawatt Challenge 180,400 80,000 150,000 -16.9% (30,400) Mayors' Green Building Challenge 49,100 32,500 75,200 53.2% 26,100 Greening Health Care 219,800 60,000 172,000 - 21.7% (47,800) Home Energy Clinic 293,000 30,000 106,000 - 63.8% (187,000) Sustainable Communities Charette 68,800 1,208 66,200 -3.8% (2,600) Greening the Urban Village, CMHC Proposal 5,100 3,000 2,600 -49.0% (2,500) Greening Retail 75,000 150,000 - 150,000 OCETA 171,900 136,000 230,000 33.8% 58,100 GTA Quest 150,000 15,000 200,000 33.3% 50,000 Enerlife Projects 20,000 - Sustainable Schools 73,400 100,000 130,000 77.1 % 56,600 All Others 148,500 208,133 164,500 10 8% 16,000 Expenditure Total 2,005,400 1,161,291 2,004,000 -0.1% (1,400) Funding Sources: Program/User fees Reserves CFGT - Living City - CFGT - Flowthrough 64,400 34,400 99,800 55.0% 35,400 Municipal 186,700 297,000 59.1% 110,300 Provincial 255,500 7,500 174,500 -31.7% (81,000) Federal 540,600 385,000 502,500 -7.0% (38,100) Donations /Fundraising - Private 958,200 682,273 930,200 -2.9% (28,000) Revenue Total 2,005,400 1,109,173 2,004,000 -0.1% (1,400) Net Expenditures 52,118 Comments: Major 06 over 05 Changes (in addition to economic factors): Staffing:Exec. Director, Marketing positions removed. Otherwise as above some programs out, new ones in. 283 TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY 2006 PRELIMINARY OPERATING BUDGET DIVISION: ACTIVITY: Restoration Services Page 20 Environmental Services 2005 2005 2006 Budget P. A. Budget % Chq. $ Chq. Expenditures: Program Management 476,900 571,300 488,900 2.5% 12,000 Plant Propagation 423,100 500,000 431,800 2.1 % 8,700 Planting and Special Projects 767,700 822,414 728,100 -5.2% (39,600) Asian Longhorned Beetle 423,100 423,100 522,300 23.4% 99,200 Internal Recoveries (418,100) (418,100) (435,000) 4.0% (16,900) Expenditure Total 1,672,700 1,898,714 1,736,100 3.8% 63,400 Funding Sources: Program/User fees 1,183,500 1,698,053 1,274,300 7.7% 90,800 Reserves CFGT - Living City 200,000 200,000 200,000 CFGT - Flowthrough 11,800 10,000 - 15.3% (1,800) Municipal 304,200 167,692 331,200 8.9% 27,000 Provincial 61,500 104,300 69.6% 42,800 Federal 423,100 465,100 456,900 8.0% 33,800 Donations /Fundraising Private 50,000 17,669 71,100 42.2% 21,100 Internal Recoveries (735,100) (735,100) (752,000) 2.3% (16,900) Revenue Total 1,499,000 1,813,414 1,695,800 13.1% 196,800 Net Expenditures 173,700 85,300 40,300 - 76.8% (133400) Comments. Major 06 over 05 Changes (in addition to economic factors): Additional Reforestation Implementation related to Asian Longhorn Beetle , funded by MNR Special projects: slightly fewerself- funded projects anticipated Management: -$49k Geoenvironmental work /supervision /budget transfered to Ecology from Restoration Services. Inland Fill: revenue and expenses up by $79k. NOTES: 2005 VARIANCES Plant sales and special projects produce a surplus 284 TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY 2006 PRELIMINARY OPERATING BUDGET DIVISION: Parks and Culture GROUP: ACTIVITY: Divisional Management Page 21 2005 2005 BUDGET P. A. 2006 BUDGET % CHG. $ CHG. $ $ Expenditures: $ Divisional Management 206,000 206,000 290,300 40 9% 84,300 206,000 206,000 290,300 40 9% 84,300 FUNDING SOURCES: User fees. Reserves CFGT - Living City CFGT - Flowthrough Other - Municipal Other - Provincial Other - Federal Other - Donations /Fundraising Other - Private - - - - - - - - - NET EXPENDITURES 206,000 206,000 290,300 40.9% 84,300 Major 06 over 05 Changes (in addition to economi Director & Division Admin. wages changed from partial year to full year. 285 TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY 2006 PRELIMINARY OPERATING BUDGET DIVISION: Parks & Culture Division Page 22 ACTIVITY: Conservation Areas Expenditures: General Operations 2005 2005 2006 Budget P.A. . Budget % Chq, $ Chg. $ $ $ 513,600 513,162 408,200 -20 5% (105,400) West Zone West Zone Administration 121,400 119,982 102,600 -15 5% (18,800) Albion Hills 630,000 619,276 611,800 -2.9% (18,200) Glen Hefty 221,700 222,311 211,300 -4 7% (10,400) Indian Line 443,800 434,145 457,800 3.2% 14,000 Boyd 227,100 231,506 232,200 2 2% 5,100 Heart Lake 281,100 262,583 255,600 -9.1 % (25,500) East Zone - East Zone Administration 104,900 104,141 92,700 -11 .6% (12,200) Bruce's Mill 361 ,1 00 361,420 391,200 8.3% 30,100 Petticoat Creek 346,400 375,391 363,800 5.0% 17,400 Land Management - East Zone. 167,900 169,857 156,000 -7 1% (1 1 ,900) West Zone. 153,200 155,688 159,500 4 1% 6,300 Major Maintenance 25,000 25,000 25,000 Expenditure Total 3,597,200 3,594,462 3,467,700 -3 6% (129,500) Funding Sources: Authority Generated 2,978,100 3,046,204 3,222,100 8 2% 244,000 Reserves 5,000 5,000 5,000 CFGT - Living City CFGT - Flowthrough Municipal Provincial Federal Donations /Fundraising Private Revenue Total 2,983,100 3,051,204 3,227,100 8 2% 244,000 Net Expenditures 614,100 543,258 240,600 -60.8% (373,500) Comments: Major 06 over 05 Changes (in addition to economic factors): Revenue. Delete Enviro Picnic program at Heart Lake. Reduced BD & BM Enviro Picnic revenue in line with actuals. Addition of revenue for Bruces Mill swimming program. Heart Lake Dragon Boat program changed to outside provider reducing revenu Additional BM revenue for new programming for mountain biking and day camps Expenses. HL Dragon Boat program changed to outside provider reducing e Wage increases for incremental increases, COLA, reclassification and transfers Vehicle and equipment rate increased by 5% Delete of Enviro Picnic program at Heart Lake Proposed reclassification of Zone Superintendents, Superintende PC Asst Superintendent wages changed from partial year to full j Removed Wages for nursery staff 286 TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY 2006 PRELIMINARY OPERATING BUDGET DIVISION: GROUP: ACTIVITY: Parks and Culture Kortright Centre for Conservation Page 23 2005 2005 2006 BUDGET P. A. BUDGET % CHG. $ CHG. $ $ $ Expenditures: Administration 112,100 98,645 89,400 -20.2% (22,700) Grounds 119,800 133,547 106,100 -11.4% (13,700) Buildings 155,500 146,044 148,900 -4.2% (6,600) General Programs 51,700 58,601 50,300 -2.7% (1,400) Day Use 71,400 54,769 58,600 -17.9% (12,800) Public Programs 34,800 36,549 28,600 -17.8% (6,200) Education Programs 291,800 301,357 302,000 3 5% 10,200 Cafe 85,100 86,162 69,900 - 17.9% (15,200) Gift Shop 92,900 88,209 91,000 -2.0% (1,900) Maple Syrup Program 233,400 240,241 246,400 5.6% 13,000 All other Programs 52,800 150,572 70,000 32.6% 17,200 Marketing 181,200 181,200 Expenditure Total 1,301,300 1,394,696 1,442,400 10.8% 141,100 Funding Sources: User fees by program Component: User Fees 1,080,900 1,074,728 1,168,900 8.1 % 88,000 Reserves CFGT - Living City 100,000 100,000 100,000 CFGT - Flowthrough Municipal Provincial Federal Donations /Fundraising Private 100,000 Revenue Total 1,180,900 1,274,728 1,268,900 7.5% 88,000 Net Expenditures 120,400 119,968 173,500 44.1% 53,100 Comments: Major 06 over 05 Changes (in addition to economic factors). Marketing costs explicitly budgeted here instead of under Conservaton Areas, Also enhanced. 287 TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY 2006 PRELIMINARY OPERATING BUDGET DIVISION: Parks and Culture Page 24 ACTIVITY: Black Creek Pioneer Village 2005 2005 2006 Budget P. A. Budget % Chg. $ Chg. Expenditures: Program Management 233,200 233,200 229,600 -1.5% (3,600) Curatorial 311,000 307,700 312,600 0.5% 1,600 Photography 6,500 - Interpretative Programming 1,301,400 1,301,400 1,326,300 1.9% 24,900 Special Events 46,700 46,700 33,200 - 28.9% (13,500) Heritage Education 246,900 246,900 268,600 8.8% 21,700 Building Maintenance 1,048,900 1,063,900 1,109,100 5.7% 60,200 Admissions 144,100 145,100 149,600 3.8% 5,500 Giftshop 401,200 390,000 414,300 3.3% 13,100 Marketing and Sponsorships 439,700 404,750 443,500 0.9% 3,800 Expenditure Total 4,173,100 4,146,150 4,286,800 2.7% 113,700 Funding Sources: Program /User fees Reserves CFGT - Living City , CFGT - Flowthrough Municipal Provincial Federal Donations /Fundraising Private Revenue Total 1,828,900 1,830,600 1,978,900 8.2% 150,000 197,000 195,500 197,000 55,000 5,000 53,000 -3.6% (2,000) 2,080,900 2,031,100 2,228,900 7.1% 148,000 Net Expenditures 2,092,200 2,115,050 2,057,900 -1.6% (34,300) Comments: Major 06 over 05 Changes (in addition to economic factors): Revenue: Admissions +$68k, Giftshop +32k, Heritage Ed = +$62k Marketing• portion of CS Division marketing charged here Building Maint. utilities & maint. costs up + new Pavilion operating costs Interpretation: $13.5 k added for entertainers at pavilion. Also Special Event moved into base prog. 288 TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY 2006 PRELIMINARY OPERATING BUDGET. DIVISION: Parks and Culture Page 25 ACTIVITY: Food Services Expenditures: Weddings: Sales Costs & Revenue Corporate Events: Sales Costs /Revenue Banquet Costs & Internal Functions Visitor Services Equipment 2005 2005 2006 Budget P. A. Budget % Chq. $ Chq. 365,700 467,600 82,900 174,100 258,000 362,000 90,000 153,200 419,600 455,400 86,600 181,900 14.7% -2.6% 4 5% 4.5% 53,900 (12,200) 3,700 7,800 Expenditure Total 1,090,300 863,200 1,143,500 4 9% 53,200 Funding Sources: Program/User fees Reserves CFGT - Living City CFGT - Flowthrough Municipal Provincial Federal Donations /Fundraising Private Revenue Total 1,145,900 814,800 1,237,900 8.0% 92,000 1,145,900 814,800 1,237,900 8.0% 92,000 Net Expenditures (55,600) 48,400 (94,400) 69.8% (38,800) Comments: Major 06 over 05 Changes (in addition to economic factors): Volume increase with associated costs projected. 289 TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY 2006 PRELIMINARY OPERATING BUDGET DIVISION: Office of the CAO Page 26 ACTIVITY: CAO Programs 2005 2005 2006 Budget P. A. Budget % Chg. $ Chg. Expenditures: Corporate Management 410,600 402,200 418,000 1 .8% 7,400 Corporate Secretariat 315,000 315,500 328,600 4.3% 13,600 Human Resources 429,900 455,200 450,700 4.8% 20,800 Customer Services 259,600 256,700 261,600 0.8% 2,000 Communications 697,500 697,500 752,100 7.8% 54,600 Expenditure Total Funding Sources: Program /User fees Reserves 107,600 107,600 - 100.0% (107,600) 2,112,600 2,127,100 2,211,000 4.7% 98,400 CFGT - Living City CFGT - Flowthrough Municipal Provincial Federal Donations /Fundraising Private Revenue Total Net Expenditures 107,600 107,600 - 100.0% (107,600) 2,005,000 2,019,500 2,21 1 ,000 10.3% 206,000 Comments: Major 06 over 05 Changes (in addition to economic factors): Communications: Recognition and 50th anniversary events costs increased by $28k. Also publicity contract higher. Human Resources: Corporate Secretariat: RES. #C68/05 - Moved by: Seconded by: THE EARTH RANGERS FOUNDATION LEASE WITH TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY Request for Lease Amendment, CFN 31514. The Earth Rangers Foundation has requested an amendment to the lease to extend the payment schedule. Dick O'Brien Bill O'Donnell THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT WHEREAS The Earth Rangers Foundation (Earth Rangers) entered into a lease of certain lands within the Kortright Centre for Conservation, City of Vaughan, with Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) for the construction and operation of a wildlife veterinary and rehabilitation centre; WHEREAS TRCA is in receipt of a request from The Earth Rangers Foundation for an extension to their lease payment; THEREFORE LET IT BE RESOLVED THAT TRCA grant an extension to their lease payment to January 2, 2013, subject to there being no defaults occurring through this period; THAT all reasonable costs related to the agreement be paid by Earth Rangers; AND FURTHER THAT the appropriate TRCA officials be authorized and directed to take whatever action may be required to give effect thereto, including the obtaining of necessary approvals and the execution of any documents and indemnities by The Earth Rangers Foundation. CARRIED BACKGROUND The Earth Rangers Foundation entered into a lease, dated August 1, 2001, of certain lands within the Kortright Centre for Conservation, City of Vaughan, for the construction and operation of a wildlife veterinary and rehabilitation centre. Construction of the Earth Rangers building has recently been completed, staff are in place and are beginning programming. The lease payments outlined in the original agreement are as follows: $50,000 on execution of the lease agreement - received; $350,000 by no later than July 31, 2003 - received; $400,000 by no later than July 31, 2004; $400,000 by no later than July 31, 2005; The $50,000 and $350,000 payments were received when due. The majority of the lease revenue has been committed to The Living City Centre at Kortright. Funds received from Earth Rangers are being used for the existing building assessment and preliminary design work, the costs of which are more than covered by the lease revenue collected to date. 291 In September of 2004, The Earth Rangers Foundation requested an amendment to the lease of land at Kortright to extend to January 31, 2005, provisions for lease payment. At Authority Meeting #9/04, held on October 29, 2004, Resolution #A245/04 was approved, in part, as follows: ...THEREFORE LET IT BE RESOLVED THAT TRCA grant a six month extension to their lease payment, to January 31, 2005, subject to there being no other defaults occurring through this period;... At Meeting #2/05, March 11, 2005, the Authority under Resolution #A34/05 approved the second amendment to the lease payment schedule. The second amendment would have the Earth Rangers pay $200,000 on or before July 31, 2005, and $600,000 on or before January 31, 2006. Earth Rangers is also required to pay interest on the outstanding balance, as well as reasonable costs, to amend the lease agreement. TRCA is in receipt of a request from Earth Rangers for a further extension to their lease payment. The proposed change would have Earth Rangers pay $100,000 on the 2nd day of each year from and including January 2, 2006 to and including January 2, 2013. Interest will be calculated from July 31, 2004 and shall be payable on each of the remaining payments. Earth Rangers will also be responsible for all reasonable costs, if any, to amend the lease agreement. Report prepared by: Ron Dewell, extension 5245 For Information contact: Jim Dillane, extension 6292 Ron Dewell, extension 5245 Date: October 03, 2005 RES. #C69/05 - Moved by: Seconded by: LAKE ST. GEORGE FIELD CENTRE Renewal of Partnership Agreement with the Toronto Catholic and York Region District School Boards. Request to enter into a renewed twenty year partnership agreement with the Toronto Catholic District School Board and the York Region District School Board at the Lake St. George Field Centre. Bill O'Donnell Rob Ford THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT the renewed partnership agreement with the Toronto Catholic District School Board and the York Region District School Board for the use of the Lake St. George Field Centre be approved for a further twenty years consisting of a ten year term with provisions for two further terms of five years each; 292 AND FURTHER THAT staff be authorized and directed to execute all necessary documentation required to give effect to the renewed partnership agreement. CARRIED BACKGROUND The Lake St. George property, situated on the Oak Ridges Moraine within the Town of Richmond Hill, is a 350 acre outdoor classroom of woodlands, wetlands, meadows and a kettle lake. It opened in 1979 under a partnership agreement with the Toronto District School Board (formally the six Metropolitan Toronto school boards), the Toronto Catholic District School Board (formally the Metropolitan Separate School Board) and the York Region District School Board (formally the York Region Board of Education). These three school boards initially came together with Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) under an agreement that saw the establishment of the Boyd Field Centre in 1974. In 1979, the Boyd agreement was rewritten to establish and include the Lake St. George Field Centre. This agreement was renewed in 1984 for a further 21 year period providing terms of 4 -6 years, with 2001 being the start of the final 4 year term and the agreement expiring in August 2005. There have been significant changes in the provisions of the agreement and in the operating practices over the years, the most significant being: • the 2001 withdrawal of the Toronto District School Board (TDSB), a major founding and operating partner, due to significant financial constraints experienced within the board; • the resulting reduction of field centre partnership sites, namely the closure of the Boyd Field Centre and the consolidation of the remaining partnership use by the Toronto Catholic District and York Region District School Boards (TCDSB and YRDSB) from two into one dormitory classroom at the Lake St. George Field Centre; • the discontinuation of teacher secondments from the partnership boards to the field centre; • a reduced level of involvement by the partnership boards, namely the absence of a formal program advisory committee; • the growth of TRCA weekend and summer programs as an integral component of a dynamic and sustainable operation. Following the TDSB withdrawal in 2001, the remaining partners committed to continue the agreement over the final four year term under interim, 3 -way partnership provisions. The intent was to implement a successful operational transition until a renewed agreement could be drafted. A renewed agreement was to reflect both the change over time and the future needs of the remaining partners. RATIONALE Outdoor environmental education has been an important component of TRCA's work for over forty years. In 2004, nearly 200,000 children and youth connected with The Living City through TRCA education programs. In today's increasingly urbanizing and complex world, this commitment to education as a vehicle to move towards a sustainable future is more important than ever. Many educators, teachers and parents share the belief that exploring the natural and human environments within their local and regional communities is not a privilege, but is a right, for all children who live in the Greater Toronto Area (GTA). 293 The York Region District School Board and the Toronto Catholic District School Board share in this commitment to outdoor education in spite of the economic challenges facing the public education system. The working relationship between TRCA and the boards has been excellent and continues to grow and foster expanded partnership and collaborative initiatives. The renewed partnership agreement at the Lake St. George Field Centre is one such example. Although there are more providers of outdoor educational experiences than there were in the 1970's and 1980's, both boards have expressed interest in continuing to partner with TRCA at Lake St. George for several reasons, including: • staff and program excellence and the provision of a full day and evening of programming; • TRCA facilities are located close to their communities, enhancing the relevancy, reducing bus costs and making it easier for the schools to provide overnight supervisory staff; • board expectations and requirements are known and respected; • schools have a history of attending these centres and have established loyalties; • parents are aware of and respect TRCA. To this end, TRCA staff and the two participating school boards began meeting regularly in May of 2004 to review the agreement. It was established that a renewal of the Lake St. George partnership agreement was of continued interest and benefit to each agency and discussions have progressed to the point where the provisions of a renewed partnership agreement for the use of the Lake St. George Field Centre by the Toronto Catholic District School Board and the York Region District School Board have been negotiated. PROVISIONS OF THE RENEWED PARTNERSHIP AGREEMENT The renewed agreement provides for the committed and shared use by the TCDSB and the YRDSB of 180 days (of the approximately 190 school days) comprised of Monday to Friday in each week from September 1st in any year to June 30th in the next year. This 'agreement time' consists of the exclusive and priority use of Dorm 2 Snively House which accommodates a maximum of 40 students per visit and the shared use of the Lake St. George property including Davies Dining Hall and all other program buildings. The agreement further encourages the use of and provides the mechanisms for the booking of Dorm 1 Bond House for groups greater than 40 students and /or for additional bookings by the boards. Provision for the use of the Lake St. George Field Centre by other Boards of Education and groups beyond the TCDSB and YRDSB agreement time is provided for. It is proposed that the term of the renewed partnership agreement be twenty years based on one term of ten years and the provision for two further terms of five years each. The renewed agreement outlines the responsibilities of the partners, in particular: • TRCA is responsible for the administration and operation of the field centre; • the teaching staff are employees of TRCA; • establishment of a Joint Management Committee made up of staff from TRCA, YRDSB and TCDSB for the purposes of reviewing programs, policies and financial recommendations. The renewed agreement also provides the following mutual beneficial opportunities to the partners: • provides opportunities for cross - promotion and marketing of TRCA education products, programs and services by the boards through their internal communications processes; 294 • provides opportunities for participating boards to assign teaching staff, at their cost, to the field centre for the purposes of professional development and for TRCA staff to participate in board activities; • provides opportunities for board endorsement and participation in TRCA fundraising initiatives; • recognizes and values that the two partner boards are also significant supporters of other TRCA educational and recreational facilities and programs and provides a 5% discount to the boards on the TRCA regular field centre program fees for bookings beyond their agreement time. FINANCIAL DETAILS Under the terms of the renewed agreement, the school boards are responsible for 100% of the operating costs associated with their agreement time use. Operating costs are recovered through two mechanisms: an annual contracted service recovery and daily program fees. The contracted service recovery consists of a portion of the TRCA teaching salaries, and the daily • program fee provides for a daily attendance of up to 40 students and teachers. A four year phasing schedule for both is established in the agreement, after which an annual inflationary adjustment of 0 % -3% is employed. A 2% capital improvement /major maintenance surcharge becomes effective in year four. In the event of cancellation and /or interruptions of bookings by the boards, the agreement includes financial provisions established as 50% of the daily program fee for each day lost plus 100% of the contracted service recovery. In the event of physical plant failures, the boards are not responsible for these payments. The new agreement also establishes a penalty clause for the cancellation of participation in the agreement, that being one full school year notice, served prior to March 1st of the preceding year. DETAILS OF WORK TO BE DONE Staff from each of the boards of education are currently reporting through their formal review and approvals process. It is anticipated that approvals from all parties will be formalized such that the renewed partnership agreement is executed within 2005. Report prepared by: Renee Jarrett, extension 5315 For Information contact: Renee Jarrett, extension 5315 Darryl Gray, 416 - 791 -0327 Date: October 3, 2005 295 RES. #C70/05 - Moved by: Seconded by: CLAREMONT CONSERVATION AREA Renewal of the Licence Agreement with the Durham District School Board, Toronto and Region Conservation Authority Agreement File No. 361 B. Request to renew the licence agreement with the Durham District School Board for the operation of the board- established day facility known as the Duffins Creek Environmental Education Centre as located within Toronto and Region Conservation Authority's Claremont Conservation Area. Bill O'Donnell Rob Ford THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT the licence agreement with the Durham District School Board for the operation of the Board - established Duffins Creek Environmental Education Centre as located within the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority's (TRCA) Claremont Conservation Area be renewed until December 31, 2009 based on the continued use by the School Board of their nonpermanent, portable structure; THAT the basic rent be established as $10,000 per licence year plus all applicable taxes effective January 2005 and increased by the Consumer Price Index (CPI) of the preceding year for each successive year of the term of the licence agreement; THAT staff be directed to continue to explore with the Durham District School Board, through the advisory committee established under the original agreement, the potential of the school board to construct permanent facilities; AND FURTHER THAT the appropriate TRCA officials be authorized and directed to take whatever action may be required to give effect thereto, including the obtaining of any necessary approvals and the execution of any documents. CARRIED BACKGROUND In 1989, the Durham District School Board (DDSB) requested permission to construct an outdoor education centre facility on TRCA -owned lands for the purpose of providing outdoor education programs to Durham board students. The school board indicated that their objective was to provide a facility to accommodate both residential and day programs; however, given the economic situation of the day, the board wished to proceed with a portable, day -use facility only within the first five year term of the lease. The Authority considered this use compatible with the Claremont Conservation Area (where TRCA owns and operates its own residential education field centre) and in July 1989, directed staff to prepare the necessary agreement document to allow for the construction of a portable structure by the school board. The term of this licence agreement was for five years with provision for renewal for a further 21 years based on receipt of plans for the development of permanent facilities. 296 DDSB has been unable to proceed with the construction of permanent facilities because of economic demands and constraints. At their request, in 1994 and in 1999 the Authority approved the renewal of the lease, for a further term of 5 years each, based on the continued use and operation by the board of their nonpermanent portable structure. The last term ended on August 31, 2004. - RATIONALE Staff from TRCA and DDSB formally meet on an annual basis to review the operation. The school board advised that they wish to renew the licence agreement for a further 5 years; however, their operation would again be dependent on the continued use of the portable structure. The portable facility is very well maintained and has been subject to regular improvements both inside and outside. The working relationship with the DDSB over the last sixteen years has also been excellent in both quality of programming and personnel. The centre is well attended by board students (just over 4,400 students attended in 2004) which greatly enhances the delivery of conservation education within the region. In addition, TRCA's working relationship with the DDSB extends beyond this licence agreement as the board is the primary user of TRCA's Claremont Field Centre which provides students with a residential education experience. TRCA staff do not hesitate recommending that the lease be renewed. PROVISIONS OF THE RENEWED LICENCE AGREEMENT Changes have been proposed within the licence agreement to address some operational questions that have arisen and to reflect current operating standards, including the following: • a change in the licence year from a school year to a calendar year to reflect current invoicing practices; • improved wording to reflect the excluded use areas within the Claremont Conservation Area (under lease by others or used by the TRCA Claremont Field Centre exclusively) as well as the shared use areas and the board's approximate 2.47 acres of exclusive use area; • updated indemnity and release provisions to reflect current TRCA standards; • improved wording outlining the approvals process for work carried out on the property by DDSB. In addition to the above changes, a revised rental formula has been proposed. Under the current licence agreement, the board pays a per diem rate based on the number of students per day and the number of days per year the board uses the area. The per diem rate is the rate set by TRCA for day camp use at a conservation area which is adjusted from time to time, and is currently set at $2.00 per child /student. Added to the per diem rate is 7% gst and a 15% administrative service charge. It is proposed that the licence agreement be simplified, effective for the 2005 licence year, by establishing a basic rent of $10,000 per year plus applicable taxes with no administrative service charge. The lease cost for the 2004 calendar year based on the per diem rate rental formula, amounting to approximately $10,000, including the 15% administrative service charge. Provision to increase the basic rent each year based on the Consumer Price Index of the preceding year is incorporated. 297 It should be noted that the board currently pays for its share of site services and partners with TRCA on joint development /maintenance projects and these provisions remain in the renewed licence agreement. Report prepared by: Renee Jarrett, extension 5315 For Information contact: Renee Jarrett, extension 5315 Darryl Gray, 416 - 791 -0327 Date: April 25, 2005 RES. #C71/05 - MEETING SCHEDULE 2006 -2007 To provide a schedule of meetings for the forthcoming Authority year, beginning February 24, 2006 and ending January 26, 2007. Moved by: Seconded by: Bill O'Donnell Rob Ford THAT the Schedule of Meetings 2006 -2007, dated October 3, 2005, be approved; THAT the Executive Committee be designated the powers of the Authority during the month of August, 2006, as defined in Section 2.10 of the Rules of Conduct; THAT this schedule be distributed at the earliest opportunity to Toronto and Region Conservation Authority's (TRCA) watershed municipalities; AND FURTHER THAT staff report to the Business Excellence Advisory Board on the feasibility of teleconferencing some TRCA board meetings. CARRIED RATIONALE Since almost all members of the TRCA sit on councils, boards or committees which usually meet on days other than Friday, the schedule has been arranged to accommodate all TRCA board meetings on Fridays. Authority meetings have been scheduled for the last Friday of the month, with exceptions in the months of March and December to accommodate conflicts and holidays. Executive Committee meetings have been scheduled for the first Friday of the month, with the exceptions of June, August, September, October and January to accommodate conflicts and holidays. An Authority meeting is not scheduled in the month of August due to the summer vacation season. To accommodate the large number of permit requests at this time, an Executive Committee meeting is scheduled. This meeting will be to primarily handle permits. Should an item requiring Authority approval need to be dealt with at this time, this is allowed for under Section 2.10 of the Authority's Rules of Conduct, should the Authority designate these powers: 298 2.10 to exercise such additional powers, excluding those powers set out in Clause (d) of Subsection (1) of Section 30 of the Act, as may be assigned to it by the Authority during the months of July and August provided that a report be given to the Authority at the first meeting of the Authority thereafter; Staff are recommending powers be so designated to the Executive Committee for August, 2005, with the required report being brought to the Authority at its meeting to be held on September 30, 2005. Staff are also recommending that the August Executive Committee meeting be conducted with the option of teleconferencing due to the lighter agenda, unless otherwise advised as a result of items scheduled. Staff will report back to the Business Excellence Advisory Board on options for teleconferencing additional meetings. At Authority Annual Meeting #1/02, held on January 25, 2002, Resolution #A6/02 was approved in part as follows: THAT the dates of future Annual Meetings be changed to accommodate the budget meeting schedule for our member municipalities, such that the Annual Meeting held following a municipal election be in January while the Annual Meetings in the interim two years between elections be moved to February; In accordance with Resolution #A6/02, the 2007 Annual Authority Meeting is to be held on Friday, January 26, 2007. As this is the 50th Anniversary of the TRCA, the date and time may change to accommodate the program, but members will be advised well in advance of the meeting. All meetings will be held at Black Creek Pioneer Village (BCPV), except for the December meetings which will be held in the Humber Room, Head Office, to accommodate the busy school booking season at BCPV. The Authority and Executive Committee meetings will be held at 10:00 a.m., with the exception of the Executive Committee meetings in March and January, which will be held at 10:30 a.m.. The Business Excellence Advisory Board (BEAB), Watershed Management Advisory Board (WMAB) and Sustainable Communities Board (SCB) meetings will be held at 9:00 a.m., 10:30 a.m. and 11:00 a.m. respectively. SCB meetings have been scheduled on the same day as most Executive Committee meetings and BEAB meetings have been scheduled on the same day as most WMAB meetings to streamline the meeting schedule. Report prepared by: Kathy Stranks, extension 5264 For Information contact: Kathy Stranks, extension 5264 Andrea Fennell, extension 5254 Date: October 3, 2005 Attachments: 1 299 Attachment 1 THE TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY MEETING SCHEDULE 2006-2007 - ::;ftpitt (MAY 2000,1; -'.,k' ''', 1-= " ' "DESCRIPTION Feb. 24 Executive #1/06 10:00 a.m. 10:00 a.m. Authority #2/06 Apr. 21 ANNUAL Authority #1/06 — ' - 'AAtit2006 ' ''''' ,k, ‘‘• — IN% — -:- ''''' 7 3 - DESCRIPTION Mar. 3 9:00 a.m. BEAB #1/06 Mar. 3 10:30 a.m. Executive #1/06 Mar. 24 10:00 a.m. Authority #2/06 APRIL 2'006:'':'r i'T -:-r 0'IME ', ' •=1' ' 'V: ' --' DESCRIPTION Apr. 7 10:00 a.m. Executive #2106 Apr. 7 11:00 a.m. SCB #1/06 Apr. 21 9:00 a.m. BEAB #2/06 Apr. 21 10:30 a.m. WMAB #1/06 Apr. 28 10:00 a.m. Authority #3/06 4 U Lif Mb Wc' '',:°.' ,.c. 1 8 ' ' DESCRIPTION May 5 10:00 a.m. Executive #3/06 May 26 10:00 a.m. Authority #4/06 4 U Lif Mb Wc' '',:°.' ,.c. '' 4i.. ' ' 7S VI IVIr" ''. " 4' .158tCRIP-rfOrsi June 9 10:00 a.m. Executive #4/06 June 9 11:00 a.m. SCB #2/06 June 16 9:00 a.m. BEAB #3/06 June 16 10:30 a.m. WMAB #2/06 June 23 10:00 a.m. Authority #5/06 4 U Lif Mb Wc' '',:°.' ,.c. '' 4i.. ' ' 7S VI IVIr" ''. " 4' :: : DESCRIPTION Jul. 7 10:00 a.m. Executive #5/06. Jul. 7 11:00 a.m. SCB #3/06 Jul. 14 10:30 a.m. WMAB #3/06 Jul. 28 10:00 a.m. Authority #6/06 . . ae!PGAPT2.,996 A,. ,:,frti, ,,,,O,,,,, ,.,:,i,, jfiv, tIllitE:....4: :,-;* * -i;-,,, - - DESCRIPTION • Aug. 11 10:00 a.m. Option for Teleconference Executive #6/06 SEPTP111300 490,A. :7:,„ ,A , , ,.,,, :P.__ „:„:,-„,. - ,k,„.., 4, „ :,.., DESCRIPTION Sept. 8 10:00 a.m. Executive #7/06 Sept. 15 9:00 a.m. BEAB #4106 Sept. 15 10:30 a.m. WMAB #4/06 Sept. 29 10:00 a.m. Authority #7106 300 OCTOBER 2006 TIME DESCRIPTION Oct. 13 10:00 a.m. Executive #8/06 Oct. 13 11:00 a.m. SCB #4/06 Oct.- 20 9:00 a.m. BEAB #5/06 Oct. 20 10:30 a.m. WMAB #5/06 Oct. 27 10:00 a.m. Authority #8/06 NOVEMBER 2006 TIME DESCRIPTION Nov. 3 10:00 a.m. Executive #9/06 Nov. 17 9:00 a.m. BEAB #6/06 Nov. 24 10:00 a.m. Authority #9/06 DECEMBER 2006 : = "' : ?. TIME S` `' DESCRIPTION Dec. 1 10:00 a.m. - Humber Room Executive #10/06 Dec. 1 11:00 a.m. - Humber Room SCB #5/06 Dec. 8 10:00 a.m. - Humber Room WMAB #6/06 JANUARY 2006 N::' � TIME,, • . . DESCRIPTION ,�. Jan. 5 10:00 a.m. Authority #10/06 Jan. 19 9:00 a.m. BEAB #7/06 Jan. 19 10:30 a.m. Executive #11/06 Jan. 26 10:30 a.m. Date & location may change ANNUAL Authority #1/07 Legend: Authority Executive Committee (Executive) Business Excellence Advisory Board (BEAB) Watershed Management and Business Development Advisory Board (WMAB) Sustainable Communities Board (SCB) • All meetings will be held in the South Theatre, Visitor's Centre, Black Creek Pioneer Village, 1000 Murray Ross Parkway, Downsview, Ontario, unless otherwise noted on the agenda. Authority and Executive meetings will be held at 10:00 a.m., with the exception of the Executive Committee meetings in March and January, which will be held at 10:30 a.m., unless otherwise noted on the agenda. BEAB, WMAB and SCB meetings will be held at 9:00, 10:30 & 11:00 a.m., respectively, unless otherwise noted on the agenda. For further information, please contact Kathy Stranks at 416- 661 -6600, extension 5264 or Andrea Fennell at extension 5254. 301 SECTION IV - ITEMS FOR THE INFORMATION OF THE BOARD RES. #C72/05 - Moved by: Seconded by: CELL PHONE AND "blackberry" USAGE Responds to a request from the Business Excellence Advisory Board for summary information on number of cell phones and blackberries in use. Rob Ford Bill O'Donnell THAT the report on use of cell phones and "blackberries" dated October 12, 2005, be received. CARRIED RATIONALE At the September meeting of the Business Excellence Advisory Board, staff was asked to report on the number of cell phones and blackberries in use and the associated costs. There are 220 cell phones in use and 8 blackberries. Cell phone use is costing an average of $11,600 per month (about $52.00 /phone /month). TRCA has secured favourable air time use agreements with Telus and Rogers (rates are the same as those available to the City of Toronto and the province). Use is monitored by supervisors who receive itemized copies of individual cell phone bills. CeII phones are used extensively in the conservation parks, education field centres and by staff involved in watershed field activities where regular land based phones are unavailable. All TRCA field staff have access to cell phones as a safety device when working in the field. At Black Creek Pioneer Village, for example, cleaning and maintenance staff use the Telus "mike" system to enable staff to respond to needs in any of the 50 historical buildings. Without the phones, staff had to be located and advised of the need for service which was time consuming and inefficient. Use of cell phones provides better customer /visitor services and ensures more effective supervision. There are 8 blackberries in use. Two units are assigned to IT staff to enable them to test this new technology and ensure compatibility with TRCA network systems. Each of the 8 blackberries costs an average of $160 per month. Staff continue to evaluate the utility of this technology. Report prepared by: Jim Dillane, 416- 667 -6292 For Information contact: Jim Dillane, 416- 667 -6292 Date: September 26, 2005 302 NEW BUSINESS RES. #C73/05 - Moved by: Seconded by: WINDFALL ECOLOGY CENTRE Lease of land at the Kortright Centre for Conservation. Bill O'Donnell - Rob Ford THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT staff be directed to proceed with a lease agreement with Windfall Ecology for space at the Kortright Centre for Conservation, at terms and conditions satisfactory to the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) staff and solicitors; THAT staff work together with Windfall Ecology to develop a Memorandum of Understanding detailing the integrated program partnerships between the organizations around sustainable technology development; AND FURTHER THAT the appropriate TRCA officials be authorized and directed to take whatever action may be required to give effect thereto, including the obtaining of necessary approvals and the execution of any documents. TERMINATION ON MOTION, the meeting terminated at 10:11 a.m., on Friday, October 21, 2005. David Barrow Chair /ks 303 CARRIED Brian Denney Secretary- Treasurer ts. THE TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY MEETING OF THE BUSINESS EXCELLENCE ADVISORY BOARD #6/05 November 18, 2005 The Business Excellence Advisory Board Meeting #6/05, was held in the South Theatre, Black Creek Pioneer Village, on Friday, November 18, 2005. The Chair David Barrow, called the meeting to order at 9:10 a.m. PRESENT David Barrow Chair Bill Fisch Member Rob Ford Member Dick O'Brien Chair, Authority Bill O'Donnell Member Maja Prentice Vice Chair REGRETS Bas Balkissoon Member Peter Milczyn Member RES. #C74/05 - MINUTES Moved by: Seconded by: Rob Ford Bill O'Donnell THAT Minutes of Meeting #5/05, held on October 21, 2005, be approved. CARRIED PRESENTATIONS (a) A presentation by Mr. Paul Speck, Vice President, Aon Reed Stenhouse, in regard s to Toronto and Region Conservation Authority's Risk Management Policy. (b) A presentation by Mr. Ron Dewell, Manager, Conservation Lands and Property, in regards to item 7.1 - Greenlands Acquisition Project for 2006 -2010. RES. #C75 /05 - PRESENTATIONS Moved by: Seconded by: Bill Fisch Bill O'Donnell THAT above -noted presentation (a) be heard and received. • RES. #C76 /05 - PRESENTATIONS Moved by: Seconded by: Maja Prentice Bill O'Donnell THAT above -noted presentation (b) be heard and received. SECTION I - ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY ACTION RES. #C77 /05 - Moved by: Seconded by: CARRIED CARRIED GREENLANDS ACQUISITION PROJECT FOR 2006 -2010 Recommends approval of the Greenlands Acquisition Project for 2006 -2010. Maja Prentice Bill O'Donnell THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT the Greenlands Acquisition Project for 2006 -2010 be approved; THAT the Minister of Natural Resources be requested to approve the project pursuant to section 24 of the Conservation Authorities Act; THAT the project be circulated to Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) participating municipalities, the Region of Peel, the Region of Durham, the Region of York, the City of Toronto, the Town of Mono and the Township of Adjala - Tosorontio as the basis for funding and land securement opportunities; THAT the project be circulated to the Credit Valley, Central Lake Ontario and Lake Simcoe and Region conservation authorities for their information and as the basis for any joint land securement opportunities which may arise; THAT staff be directed and authorized to seek funding for the project from the funding sources identified in the project; 305 AND FURTHER THAT appropriate TRCA officials be authorized and directed to take any necessary action to implement the project, including obtaining needed approvals and the signing and execution of any documents. CARRIED RATIONALE The Natural Heritage Lands Protection and Acquisition Project 2001 -2005 expires at the end of 2005. The Greenlands Acquisition Project for 2006 -2010 (document included with agenda package) is the latest in a long series of multi -year land acquisition and securement projects approved by TRCA. The Greenlands Acquisition Project 2006 -2010, when approved by the Minister of Natural Resources under section 24 of the Conservation Authorities Act, will be the legal mechanism used by TRCA to secure greenspace lands. The project will be circulated to TRCA's participating municipalities and form the basis for securement of lands in partnership with the City of Toronto and the regions. Each of these jurisdictions approaches funding of land acquisition somewhat differently and the project will position TRCA to work with each municipality in their own context. For example, the regions of Peel and York have established reserve funds to secure greenspace. The Region of Durham is in the process of doing so. The City of Toronto in 2005 has approved $2 million in funding for TRCA to purchase lands to protect source water. The project also serves as a vehicle to secure funding from other partners including the province, the federal government, local municipalities, foundations and private donors. The executive summary included in the report describes the nature of the project and key aspects of its implementation. Report prepared by: Jim Dillane, extension 6292 For Information contact: Ron Dewell, extension 5245; Mike Fenning, extension 5223 Date: November 2, 2005 RES. #C78/05 - Moved by: Seconded by: 2006 FEE SCHEDULE FOR PLANNING SERVICES AND PERMITTING Recommendations for an inflationary adjustment to the existing 2003 fee schedule for planning services and permitting. Bill O'Donnell Maja Prentice THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT the amended Fee Schedule for Planning Services and Permitting be approved, to be effective January 1, 2006; THAT staff inform all municipal partners and the development industry of the amendments to the fee schedule, to be effective January 1, 2006; 306 AND FURTHER THAT staff continue to monitor the fee implementation and collection process for 2006, as well as the ongoing cost implications of the current level of service demands for planning, ecology and enforcement. CARRIED BACKGROUND On November 1, 2003, the Business Excellence Advisory Board approved a new fee schedule for planning services and permitting, as well as established new procedures for fee collection and processing of applications in Planning and Development (previously Development Services Section). This report and recommendations were subsequently approved by the Authority at Meeting #8103, held on October 31, 2003 in Resolution #A227/03. An assessment report was also submitted at that time to the Business Excellence Advisory Board outlining changes to the development review function associated with building staff capacity, the rationale and issuance of a new planning fee schedule, establishing an invoice /collection tracking system, improved communications with Urban Development Institute (UDI) and the development industry regarding level of service, improving the calibre of submissions and creating ongoing communications with municipal partners and Fisheries and Oceans Canada (DFO) regarding streamlining efforts. The ongoing monitoring of the changes to the process continues and the implementation of the revised fee process has been successful. Several minor changes were made to the fee schedule and categories at the April 29, 2005 Authority meeting, Resolution #A71/05. This was done in order to clarify some categories of approval and avoid confusion for some proponents. The revenue from development applications has gone a long way over the last two years in providing a budget to build staffing capacity in planning, ecology and water management. Staff improvements have changed Toronto and Region Conservation Authority's (TRCA) level of service significantly. Whereas three years ago commenting review could be six months or more, today 80% of the commenting turnaround is within the target of 30 -45 days. In the City of Toronto, 90% of commenting requirements are within 15 -30 days. The odd slowdown is experienced at peak summer time review periods. The 2003 TRCA Administrative Fee Schedule for Planning Services has been in place now for two years. Staff believe that adjustments should be implemented to reflect a range of factors affecting an increasing cost of service. RATIONALE In assessing an appropriate fee rate increase, staff studied the Canadian statistics for the Consumer and Construction Price Indices and reviewed internal costs for staff salary adjustments, benefits and overhead costs. In addition, the increasing budget pressure points within -TRCA were identified in terms of increasing development review costs and lack of funding support. With the principle of development pays for development in mind, staff have reassessed the fee schedule. 307 Over the last two years the Consumer Price Index indicates an inflation rate between 2 and 3% per year, over the last two years. Review of the Construction Price Index includes for Metropolitan areas (Toronto) the following highlights: New housing price index Non - residential buildings New housing Apartment Buildings - 4.4% increase (June 2004 to June 2005) 3.0% increase for 2003 6.5% increase for 2004 - 4.6% increase for 2003 5.9% increase for 2004 - 3.8% increase for 2003 6.3% increase for 2004 The Statistics Canada schedules show a 6% increase in the Construction Price Index alone for 2004. An additional 4.4% (low end) is being shown for 2005 to June of this year. There are several critical pressure areas for increasing costs for the development review process including: • increased ground /surface water related technical review requirements for large scale projects; • increased legal costs associated with developer driven Ontario Municipal Board (OMB) hearings, and extensive negotiations; • increased enforcement demands to adequately cover the number of large developments in our jurisdiction, and increasing violation /hearing efforts and costs. Several municipalities have also adjusted their fee charges inclusive of the City of Vaughan and City of Toronto in February 2005. Planning applications at Vaughan increased 279% and Committee of Adjustment fees increased by 40.6 %. Based on the prior discussions of inflationary rates, staff recommend that in order to potentially cover the costs for the past two years and recoup increasing costs» for development review over the next 2 years, a 15% fee change be set for 2006. The proposed rate adjustment represents an average increase of 3.5 %. Although staff recommendation that this schedule be implemented for a two year period, these costs will be assessed on an annual basis to determine the level of service and cost demands. The general intent is that this fee schedule will remain the same until January, 2008. In reviewing performance of the fee schedule over the last two years, there are several adjustments that staff recommend to the categories for greater clarity and for improving the charges commensurate to the scale and level of technical effort for each planning and permitting approval. These refinements are identified as follows: • Residential permitting charges have stayed modest in change with increases in the order of $25 to $75. 308 • Municipal projects have been separated between those projects requiring an Environmental Assessment (EA) and those that do not require an EA. A separate Environmental Assessment fee schedule should be established to address the various levels and classes of EA review effort, and to separate charges between public agency /partner EA requirements, private sector EA's and EA reviews that do not require a conservation authority permit. • Utility companies should be broken down into two categories - (1) single residential connections and (2) development project -based connection fee charges. • Permits segregated into two categories based on our experience with the complexity of permit approvals in many large scale development projects. Standard project -based permits to stay the same with a 15% inflationary increase, while a new category of permit to be created for major projects such as new road crossings and channel modifications. • Permit Revisions and Renewals to be adjusted to reflect the extent of effort for each. • A new category of review is to be added to include review for regulatory and fisheries issues, where no permit is required. • An administration planning fee to be added for developer driven Block and Tertiary planning, and Master Environmental Servicing Plan (MESP) review. • The staff time commitment on submissions in field work for planning and technical staff is extensive and seriously affects the rate of plan review. Additional field visits for project teams to be charged as an extra effort if they exceed the initial site review. • All payments for Zoning By -law Amendments, Rezoning, Subdivision and Official Plan Amendment (OPA) Block Planning efforts must be paid within 30 days or interest will be charged. Too much staff effort is exerted on obtaining payments from applicants who demand fast -track review efforts and urgent staff field investigations /stakings. DETAILS OF WORK TO BE DONE Staff will inform municipal partners and the development industry of these changes in fee structure and procedures. Ongoing efforts will continue to improve the procedures in the following areas: • Staff are producing a permitting and planning procedures manual which will assist proponents with understanding the process around approval submissions. A draft version is being reviewed this fall. • An information /application flyer is being produced to assist municipal partners with their planning desk inquiries about TRCA applications. This form will also include the amended fee requirements. 309 • With the approval and implementation of the new Generic Regulation in May of 2006, TRCA reserves the right to adjust fees if implications of this regulation require changes. Report prepared by: Carolyn Woodland, extension 5214 For Information contact: Carolyn Woodland, extension 5214 Date: November 7, 2005 Attachments: 3 310 Attachment 1 TRCA Administrative Fee Schedule For Planning Services APPLICATION TYPE APPLICATION FEE CLEARANCE FEE Concept Development/ *Applicant Driven Formal Modification $175 Re- submission due to *incomplete submissions N/A Property Enquiry with one site visit $285 Variances $285 N/A Consent/Severance / *minor $575 *minor N/A Land Division *major $1,380 *major $600 Single Residential Site Plan *minor $400 *minor N/A *major $2,300 *major $500 Non - Residential Site Plan *minor $865 *minor N/A *major *major - 25ha or less $8,050 $1,725 - greater than 25ha $11,500 $1,725 Official Plan *minor $865 *minor N/A Amendment (OPA) *major $3,450 *major $1500 Zoning By -law *minor $865 *minor N/A Amendment/ *major $3,450 *major $1,725 Rezoning (ZBA/RZ) (see Note 1) Subdivision or Multi -Unit *minor Application (see Note 1) - 5ha or Tess $8,650 *minor $2,875 *major *major - 25ha or less $17,250 $6,325 - greater than 25ha $23,000 $6,325 Golf courses or Aggregate pits, 25ha or less $5,750 N/A Block and Tertiary Plans, greater than 25ha $11,500 N/A MESP review (see Note 1) Other Applicable Fees Additional Site Visit Charges (First site review is allowed as part of processing. Multiple field assessments, stakings and negotiations are charged separately.) up to 1/2 day $500 up to 1 day $1,000 including travel time Additional Clearance fee for Subdivision Phases $1,150 *Applicant Driven Formal Modification $500 Re- submission due to *incomplete submissions $2,500 *See Definitions Rates Effective January 1, 2 311 TRCA Administrative Fee Schedule For Planning Services IMPLEMENTATION GUIDELINES Notes 1. The application fee will be paid at the time of filing an application to the municipality. The final clearance fee will be billed directly by the TRCA and paid prior to final clearance of an application. All payments must be made within 30 days of TRCA notification in writing. Interest will be charged and accumulated beyond 30 days. 2. Re- submissions fees will be billed directly by the TRCA and must be paid prior to final clearance of an application. 3. Only one set of fees apply when processing and reviewing a combined application (e.g. a subdivision /OPA /ZBA). The highest rate of fees applies. 4. The TRCA reserves the right to request additional fees should the review require a substantially greater level of effort. 5. Where a site visit and /or extended review is required for a Variance application, a clearance fee of $100 is applicable. 6. Subdivisions that have several phases, will be charged a separate clearance fee of $1000 at the time of clearing each phase. 7. All application fees (except Concept Development) include one initial site visit. 8. TRCA reserves the right to adjust fees related to the new Generic Regulation based on approval in May 2006. Definitions Minor - An application is determined to be "minor" where no technical studies are required, or only a scoped Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) is required. Minor Subdivision - A subdivision application is determined to be "minor" where no technical studies, or only a scoped Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) is required and where the site if 5ha or less. Major - An application is determined to be "major" where technical studies beyond a scoped Environmental Impact Statement (such as Stormwater Management or Geotechnical) are required. Incomplete Submissions - A submission for review is deemed to be "incomplete" where TRCA has provided a checklist of requirements, and the application has not met all requirements. . Applicant driven formal modification - A fee for an "applicant driven formal modification" will be charged where plans are submitted for review after the application has received draft plan approval from the municipality. 312 Attachment 2 TRCA Administrative Fee Schedule For Fill, Construction and Alteration to Waterways Regulation Services (Ontario Regulation 158) ONTARIO REGULATION 158 PERMIT APPLICATIONS FEE Works on Personal Residential Property *minor $285 *major $575 Municipal Projects: • Regional /Local; NO EA required • Emergency Works $865 $2,800 Utilities • Single residential • Development project based $1,000 $2,300 Projects on Subdivision Lands, Commercial, Industrial and Institutional Properties, Resource -based Recreation and Other Projects Standard Protects Include: $3,220 per project $5,000 per project $1,725 per project • SWM ponds and associated outfalls • Other outfalls • Road Crossings Improvements • Grading • In- stream Works Major Projects: • New Road Crossings • Natural Channel Modifications Minor Improvements Permit Revisions Residential minor /major: 25% of current fee Others: 50% of current fee Permit Renewals 50% of current fee No permit required /regulatory and fisheries review & advice only $500 ONTARIO REGULATION 158 PROPERTY INFORMATION FEE Solicitor /Realtor /Property Inquiry $200 Municipal Building Permit Services -- Property Clearances (not regulated) $230 ' *See Definitions Rates Effective January 1, 2006 313 TRCA Administrative Fee Schedule For Fill, Construction and Alteration to Waterways Regulation Services (Ontario Regulation 158) IMPLEMENTATION GUIDELINES Notes 1. The permit fee will be paid at the time of filing an application to the TRCA. In the event that the permit fee is not paid at the time of filing an application, fees must be paid prior to issuing a permit. 2. The TRCA reserves the right to request additional fees should the review require a substantially greater level of effort. 3. All permits are issued for two years except for Subdivision projects which are issued for five years. 4. All permit renewals are issued for 1 year. 5. TRCA reserves the right to adjust fees related to the new Generic Regulation based on approval in May 2006. Definitions Personal Residential Property Minor - Applications on a personal residential property determined to be "minor" include ancillary structures such as decks, sheds, garages and pools; minor additions (less than 50% of the original ground floor area); and the placement of less than 30 cubic metres of fill. Major - Applications on a personal residential property determined to be "major" include major additions (greater than 50% of the original ground floor area), new structures or buildings; all works in the floodplain; and the placement of 30 cubic metres or more of fill. 314 Attachment 3 TRCA Administrative Fee Schedule For Environmental Assessment Review APPLICATION TYPE 1 FEE Municipal Environmental Assessment Projects (Regional /Local) EA Review - EA Schedule - A (minor review) - B (medium review) - C (major review) - Individual EA N/A EA review fees are incorporated into Municipal Funding Agreements (York, Peel, or Brampton) or levy. Negotiations with Markham and Mississauga are pending. Permit Application Review (Ontario Reg. 158) $2000 per regulated area Other Agency Environmental Assessment Project Review (Ontario Reg. 158 permit not required) See Specific Agency Class EA Schedules EA Review - EA Schedule - A (minor review) - B (medium review) - C (major review) - Individual EA - $500 $1,000 $2,500 minimum $5,000 (TBD through negotiation) Detailed Design Review $1500 per project area EA Property Inquiry $175 No permit required /regulatory & fisheries review and advice only $500 Private Environmental Assessment Project Review (Ontario Reg. 158 permit required) See Specific Private Agency Class EA Schedules EA Review - EA Schedule - A (minor review) - B (medium review) - C (major review) - Individual EA $500 $1,000 $2,500 $5,000 Permit Application Review (Ontario Reg. 158) $3,220 (per regulated area) $5,000 (per regulated area for major road crossings /natural channel modifications) Additional Site Visit Charges (First site review is allowed as part of processing. Multiple field assessments, stakings and negotiations are charged separately.) up to 1/2 day $500 up to 1 day $1,000 including travel time Rates Effective January 1, 2006 315 RES. #C79/05 - Moved by: Seconded by: 2006 FEE SCHEDULE Public Facilities and Programming. Changes to the 2005 Fee Schedule for the conservation areas, Black Creek Pioneer Village and the Kortright Centre for Conservation. Maja Prentice Bill Fisch THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT the 2006 Fee Schedule Public Facilities and Programming, including the proposed changes for the conservation areas, Black Creek Pioneer Village and the Kortright Centre for Conservation be approved, effective January 1, 2006; AND FURTHER THAT the vehicle admission fee at Petticoat Creek Conservation Area be changed to the per person general admission fee, in order to facilitate the implementation of our new "Kids Free" program. CARRIED RATIONALE Each year staff review the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) fee schedule to determine any changes. As a result,of this review, It is recommended that the following fee increases and changes be implemented January 1, 2006, in order to meet revenue targets, offset increasing expenses and meet objectives outlined in the relevant business plans. CONSERVATION AREAS AND KORTRIGHT GENERAL ADMISSION In 2004 the Authority approved changing the fee structure to the practice of adding GST and PST to most of our public facilities and programming fees. It is proposed that this practice be extended to include general admission fees for the conservation areas. A review was made of Halton Region, Grand River and Credit Valley conservation authorities admission fees (Attachment 1) and indicates TRCA will remain competitive with this increase. The general admission base fees plus applicable taxes have been set to an even number for ease in cash handling and to facilitate the timely processing of visitors. General admission fees at Kortright will not be increased at this time in order to remain competitive. The following items are also recommended for change: Free general admission- "Kids Free" program for conservation areas and Kortright is recommended to be implemented for children aged fifteen and under. By removing the financial barriers to entry for children, it is believed that more families with children will take the opportunity to visit. It is estimated that this program will increase attendance by 3% translating to approximately 7,500 adult admissions. The rationale for this decision is to fulfill the objectives set out in the conservation parks business plan and to assist in addressing two important social concerns: • A report dated October 2005 issued by the Ontario Medical Association found that obesity rates in children across Canada nearly doubled between 1981 and 1996. Additionally, a recent survey by Peel Health revealed that fewer than one in five students exercises outside of school hours and that one in ten do not get any exercise at all. By providing free access to the conservation areas, with their many physical recreational opportunities, TRCA hopes to encourage more physical activity and promote healthier living. 316 • Teaching children about the importance of the environment. Research shows that children retain 10% of what they read, 15% of what they hear, but 80% of what they do. It is in all of our best interests to foster in our children a love of nature and an appreciation for the value of their environment and its conservation. Making our parks more financially accessible will increase the number and frequency of visits by families and thereby increase their children's exposure both to local greenspaces and to the environment in general. The following fee changes are recommended to facilitate the "Kids Free" program: • general admission fees for adults and seniors increased by $0.75 at all conservation areas; • general admission fees at the Kortright Centre to remain the same for adults and the seniors' rate to be increased by $1.00, providing seamless general admission rates between the conservation areas and Kortright; • vehicle admission at Petticoat Creek Conservation Area to be eliminated and per person general admission fees implemented. Effective January 1, 2006, general admission fees for all conservation areas and the Kortright Centre for Conservation are recommended to be: Adults $5.00; Seniors $4.00; Children free. It is estimated that the "Kids Free" program collectively will increase net revenue by approximately $75,000. A review of Halton Region, Grand River and Credit Valley conservation authorities acmission fees (Attachment 1 - Conservation Area Admission Fee Comparison) indicates that TRCA will remain competitive with these proposed increases and the implementation of the "Kids Free" program. CAMPING FEES Camping fees to be increased by 5% to offset increasing utility expenditures including the transfer of Albion Hills from the on site water system to the municipal system. An industry comparison was conducted (Attachment 1- Camping Fee Comparison) and it was determined that TRCA will remain competitive with this increase. It is estimated that camping revenue will increase by approximately $37,500. PICNIC SITE FEES In an effort to serve our customers better, we are recommending streamlining our reservation process and consolidating our group picnic site fees. Currently we charge separately for the site permit, picnic shelter and barbecue. These offerings have been bundled and are reflected in a single per site fee. The criteria used to assess the fee at each site is based on site demand, maximum capacity, amenities, distance to recreational offerings and site attributes. Site fees will range from $64.20 to $481.50 resulting in an increased (or decreased) site fee according to the aforementioned categories in order to standardized the system for -price assessment. PETTICOAT CREEK POOL ADMISSION Pool admission fees at Petticoat Creek to be increased by 11% to offset increasing utility, chemical and maintenance expenditures. Hydro and water expenses for this 0.6 hectare pool have increased by 15% from 2003 to 2005. It is anticipated that these costs will rise an additional 8% in 2006. It is estimated that pool admission revenue will increase by $12,500. 317 BLACK CREEK PIONEER VILLAGE FEE It is recommended that in 2006, Black Creek Pioneer Village (BCPV) include GST in posted general admission and group prices to make it easier for customers to calculate the true cost of a visit. In 2005 the regular adult admission price was $11.00, not including GST. In 2006 the adult general admission price will be $12.00, including GST. All admission categories will undergo similar changes. In addition to simplifying admission pricing for customers, these changes will result in higher admission revenues generated per customer. The base adult admission price in 2006 will be $11.22 under this scenario, representing an increase of $0.22 per adult customer. This relatively small increase is not expected to dissuade people from attending and is therefore, not expected to have a negative impact on BCPV's attendance figures. Applying these increases for admissions and education fees, we can expect incremental revenue of $37,000. The 2006 pricing schedule maintains BCPV's position in the mid -range (Attachment 1- Black Creek Pioneer Village Admission Fee Comparison & Cultural Education Tour Fee Comparison) of admission prices charged to cultural /historic attractions in the Greater Toronto Area. The Royal Ontario Museum and the McMichael Canadian Art Collection currently each charge $15.00 for adults. The City of Toronto -owned and operated museums, including. Historic Fort York, charge $6.00. These offer significantly fewer facilities and less programming than BCPV. Casa Loma and the Hockey Hall of Fame currently charge $12.00 It is not proposed for BCPV to offer free admission to children in 2006, as is the case with the Kortright Centre and the conservation areas. Due to the higher children's admission price at BCPV and the high number of children who attend each year, the cost of free admission in terms of lost revenue, would be much greater for BCPV, and not justifiable. Fees for after -hour use and commercial photography at Black Creek Pioneer Village to be removed from the fee schedule, allowing these fees to be set independently, providing flexibility based on the marketplace and the requirements of the client. The fees for horse drawn wagon rides have been removed from the proposed fee schedule as this service is no longer provided by Black Creek Pioneer Village but is outsourced. KORTRIGHT CENTRE FEES The weekend and special events parking fee at Kortright Centre to be increased from $2.50 to $3.00. Education fees to be increased in September of 2006 by $0.33 per student to help offset increasing program delivery costs. Additional revenue realized would be approximately $3,250. SENIORS AGE CATEGORY /DISCOUNTED RATES In 2002 the Authority approved changing the "Seniors" age category to 60 from 65 years of age and reducing the group rate discount from 20% to 15% for Black Creek Pioneer Village. It is recommended that these changes be extended to the conservation areas and Kortright Centre for Conservation. Dropping the seniors age would make TRCA more consistent with the attractions industry and the 15% discounted rate would be in line with industry standards. The discount is offered on general admission to groups of twenty persons or more, exclusive of guided tours. 318 Changes from the 2005 Fee Schedule are highlighted in bold: Age categories 2005 Adult - any person from fifteen to sixty four. Child_ - any person from five to fourteen Senior - any person sixty -five years of age or over. (BCPV is defined as 60 years of age or older) Age categories 2006 (Proposed) Adult - any person from sixteen to fifty -nine Child - any person from five to fifteen Senior - any person sixty years of age or over. Proposed Changes to TRCA's 2005 Fee Schedule ITEM # ITEM DESCRIPTION PST 8% GST 7% 2006 BASE 2006 GROSS 2005 GROSS 1.0 For general admission at all conservation areas, per day; 1.1 for each adult from sixteen to fifty -nine years of age. 0.00 0.33 4.67 5.00 4.25 1.2 for each child from five to fifteen years of age. 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.25 1.3 for each child four years of age or under. 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.4 for each senior sixty years of age or over. 0.00 0.26 3.74 4.00 3.25 3.0 Vehicle admission to Petticoat Creek, has been changed to general admission, per person, per day. 9.0 For a permit to use a designated group campsite at Glen Haffy, Heart Lake, Bruce's Mill, Petticoat Creek and Boyd, subject to a limit of seven nights' use, per night; for a group of up to twenty persons; 9.1 for a group of up to twenty persons; per day, for each person five years of age or over. 0.00 6.54 93.46 100.00 96.30 9.2 for each additional person, in conjunction with a permit issued under item 9.1 0.00 0.21 3.04 3.25 3.21 11.0 For a permit to occupy an individual unserviced campsite, inclusive of general admission; 11.1 at Albion Hills, per night 0.00 1.65 23.10 24.75 23.54 11.2 at Albion Hills, per week 0.00 9.71 138.79 148.50 141.24 11.3 at Albion Hills, per month (28 days) 0.00 - 32.38 462.62 495.00 470.80 11.4 at Indian Line, per night 0.00 1.70 24.30 26.00 24.61 11.5 at Indian Line, per week 0.00 10.21 145.79 156.00 147.66 11.6 at Indian Line, per month (28 days) 0.00 34.02 485.98 520.00 492.20 11.7 -- on a holiday or other designated date, in .additional to the basic permit fee specified in item 11.1 or 11.4 0.00 0.15 2.10 2.25 - 2.14 12.0 For a permit to occupy an individual serviced campsite, with water and hydro hook -ups, inclusive of general admission 12.1 at Albion Hills, per night 0.00 1.85 26.40 28.25 26.75 12.2 at Albion Hills, per week 0.00 11.09 158.41 169.50 160.50 12.3 at Albion Hills per month (28 days) 0.00 36.96 528.04 565.00 535.00 12.4 at Albion Hills per season 0.00 129.21 1845.79 1975.00 1647.80 12.5 at Indian Line, per night 0.00 2.06 29.44 31.50 29.96 319 I ITEM # ITEM DESCRIPTION PST 8% GST 7% 2006 BASE 2006 GROSS 2005 GROSS 12.6 at Indian Line, per week 0.00 12.36 176.64 189.00 179.76 12.7 at Indian Line, per month (28 days) 0.00 41.22 588.78 630.00 599.20 12.8 at Indian Line, per season 0.00 164.86 2355.14 2520.00 2354.00 12.9 on a holiday or other designated date, in addition to the basic permit fee specified in item 12.1 or 12.5 0.00 0.15 2.10 2.25 - 2.14 13.0 For a permit to occupy an individual serviced campsite with water, 30 amp hydro service, and sewage hook -up inclusive of general admission; 13.1 at Indian Line, per night 0.00 2.21 31.54 33.75 32.10 13.2 at Indian Line, per week 0.00 13.25 189.25 202.50 192.60 13.3 at Indian Line, per month (28 days) 0.00 44.16 630.84 675.00 642.00 13.4 at Indian Line, per season 0.00 176.64 2523.36 2700.00 2514.50 13.5 on a holiday or other designated date, in addition to the basic permit fee specified in item 13.1 0.00 0.15 2.10 2.25 2.14 14.0 In addition to basic camping fees as specified in items 11.0, 12.0, 13.0; 14.1 for a permit to park an additional vehicle 0.57 0.50 7.18 8.25 8.05 -14.2 for a permit to park an additional vehicle per season 3.83 3.35 47:82 55.00 51.75 14.3 for each additional person occupying a campsite over and above the campgrounds specified site limit. 0.00 0.28 3.97 4.25 4.28 15.0 For a permit to occupy a group campsite at Albion Hills or Indian Line, inclusive of general admission; 15.1 for up to ten camping units at Albion Hills Pleasantview group campsite, for an adult group 0.00 15.70 224.30 240.00 230.05 15.2 for each additional camping unit at Albion Hills Pleasantview group campsite, in conjunction with a permit issued to an adult group under item 15.1 0.00 1.57 22.43 24.00 23.00 15.3 for up to ten camping units at Albion Hills Pleasantview group campsite, for a youth group 0.00 13.08 186.92 200.00 192.60 15.4 for each additional camping unit at Albion Hills Pleasantview group campsite, in conjunction with a permit issued to a youth group under item 15.3 0.00 1.31 18.69 20.00 19.26 15.5 for up to ten camping units at Albion Hills Meadowvale or Cedar Grove group campsite, for an adult group 0.00 13.08 186.92 200.00 192.60 15.6 for each additional camping -unit at Albion Hills Meadowvale or Cedar Grove group campsite, in conjunction with a permit issued to an'adult group under item 15.5 0.00 1.31 18.69 20.00 19.26 15.7 for up to ten camping units at Albion Hills Meadowvale or Cedar Grove group campsite, for a youth group 0.00 10.79 154.21 165.00 160.50 I 320 ITEM # ITEM DESCRIPTION PST 8% GST 7% 2006 BASE 2006 GROSS 2005 GROSS 15.8 for each additional camping unit at Albion Hills Meadowvale or Cedar Grove group campsite, in conjunction with a permit issued to a youth group under item 15.7 0.00 1.08 15.42 16.50 16.05 15.9 for up to ten camping units at Indian Line group campsite, for an adult group 0.00 13.08 186.92 200.00 192.60 15.10 for each additional camping unit at Indian Line group campsite in conjunction with a permit issued to adult group under item 15.9 0.00 1.31 18.69 20.00 19.26 15.11 for up to ten camping units at Indian Line group campsite, for a youth group 0.00 10.79 154.21 165.00 160.50 15.12 for each additional camping unit at Indian Line group campsite, in conjunction with a permit issued to a youth group under item 15.11 0.00 1.08 15.42 16.50 16.05 16.0 For a permit for the use of a group picnic site, exclusive of general admission; 0.00 4.20 to 31.50 60.00 to 450.00 64.20 to 481.50 64.20 to 283.55 17.0 For admission to the swimming area at Petticoat Creek, exclusive of general admission 17.1 per day, for each person five years of age or over 0.00 0.20 2.80 3.00 2.70 17.2 per day, for each child four years of age or under accompanying their family 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 17.3 per day, for each child four years of age or under as part of an organized group under supervision 0.00 0.20 2.80 3.00 2.70 17.4 for a book of ten pool passes 0.00 1.77 25.23 27.00 24.00 25.0 For a guided tour at Bruce's Mill during the maple syrup program, subject to a minimum group size of twenty persons. 0.00 0.39 5.61 6.00 5.89 27.0 For general admission to the Black Creek Pioneer Village, during the regular operating season, per day 27.1 for each adult from sixteen to fifty -nine years of age 0.00 0.78 11.22 12.00 11.77 27.2 for each child from five to fifteen years of age 0.00 0.52 7.48 8.00 7.49 27.3 for each child four years of age or under accompanying their family 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 27.4 for each senior sixty years of age or over 0.00 0.72 10.28 11.00 10.70 . 27.5 for each student sixteen years of age or over, with student identification 0.00 0.72 10.28 11.00 _ 10.70 27.6 for each student participating in a general tour program 0.00 0.52 7.48 8.00 7.49 27.7 for each student participating in a specially designated tour program subject to a minimum group size 0.00 0.59 _ 8.41 9.00 8.56 27.8 for each student participating in a designated activity program, subject to a minimum group size 0.00 0.72 10.28 11.00 10.70 ITEM # ITEM DESCRIPTION PST 8% GST 7% 2006 BASE 2006 GROSS 2005 GROSS 27.9 for each student participating in the Dickson Hill School program, per day, subject to a minimum group size of twenty persons 0.00 0.52 7.48 8.00 7.49 32.0 For a guided tour at Black Creek Pioneer Village, as part of a tour group with a reservation, including general admission 32.1 for each adult from sixteen to fifty -nine years of age 0.00 0.85 12.15 13.00 12.04 • 32.2 for each senior sixty years of age and over 0.00 0.78 11.22 12.00 10.97 33.0 For parking at the Kortright Centre for Conservation on weekends and special events. 0.21 0.18 2.61 3.00 2.50 34.0 For general admission at the Kortright Centre for Conservation; 34.1 for each adult from sixteen to fifty -nine years of age. 0.00 0.33 4.67 5.00 5.00 34.2 for each child from five to fifteen years of age. 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ' 3.00 34.3 for each child four years of age or under accompanying their family. 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 34.4 for each child four years of age or under visiting as part of an organized group under supervision. 0.00 0.16 2.34 2.50 2.25 34.5 for each senior sixty years of age or over. 0.00 0.26 3.74 4.00 3.00 34.6 for each student participating in a general tour program, subject to a minimum group size 0.00 0.44 6.31 6.75 6.42 34.7 for each student participating in a specially designed tour program, subject to a minimum group size 0.00 0.49 7.01 7.50 7.49 34.8 for each adult from sixteen to fifty -nine years of age participating in a specially designed tour program, subject to a minimum group size. 0.00 0.65 9.35 10.00 8.29 34.9 for each senior sixty years or over participating in a specially designed tour program, subject to a minimum group size. 0.00 0.44 6.31 6.75 6.42 D.1 . Fifteen percent (15 %) off regular per person admission fees, subject to a minimum group size of twenty persons, exclusive of guided tours. D.2 Fifty percent (50 %) off general admission fees for disabled persons and their attendants to a maximum ration of 1:1 Report prepared by: Derek Edwards, extension 5672 For information contact: Marty Brent, extension 4503 Martha Wilson, extension 5674 Date: October 26, 2005 Attachments: 2 322 Attachment 1 CONSERVATION AREA ADMISSION FEE COMPARISON TRCA Proposed Fees 2006 Credit Valley 2005 Halton Region 2005 Grand River 2005 C.A.'s KCC Leisure Time Camping Palgrave Hilton Falls Kelso Crawford Lake Mountsberg $6.00 Adult $5.00 $5.00 $4.25 $4.25 $4.25 $6.00 $4.50 $4.00 Child $0.00 $0.00 $2.50 $3.00 $3.00 $3.50 $3.25 $2.25 Senior $4.00 $4.00 $2.25 $3.50 $3.50 $5.00 $3.75 $4.00 CAMPING FEE COMPARISON Albion Hills Proposed Fees Indian Line Proposed Fees Grand River Conservation Authority 2005 Ontario Provincial Parks 2005 Glen Rouge Campground Toronto 2005 KOA Barrie 2005 Leisure Time Camping Palgrave Upper Canada Village 2005 2006 2006 $15.00 $6.00 $12.00 $15.00 2005 Unserviced $24.75 $26.00 $24.00 $21.75/ $22.00 $25.00/ $29.00 Campsite $11.00 $7.50 Senior 25.50/28.00 $12.00 28.00 $7.50 Serviced $28.25 $31.50 $28.00 $26.75/30.50 $30.00 $32.00/ $31.00 Campsite /33.00 60.00 Serviced n/a $33.75 $31.50 n/a n/a n/a n/a Campsite with Sewage Hook -up BLACK CREEK PIONEER VILLAGE ADMISSION FEE COMPARISON BCPV Proposed Fees 2006 McMichael Canadian Art Collection 2005 Historic Fort York 2005 Casa Loma 2005 Royal Ontario Museum 2005 Hockey Hall of Fame 2005 Toronto Zoo 2005 Upper Canada Village 2005 Adult $12.00 $15.00 $6.00 $12.00 $15.00 $12.00 $19.00 $16.95 Child $8.00 $12.00 $3.00 $6.75 $10.00 $8.00 $11.00 $7.50 Senior $11.00 $12.00 $3.25 $7.50 $12.00 $8.00 $13.00 $15.95 323 CULTURAL EDUCATION TOUR FEE COMPARISON BCPV Proposed Fee 2006 2 hrs. McMichael Gallery 2005 1.5 hrs. Casa Loma 2005 Toronto Zoo 2005 ROM 2005 General Program $8.00 $9.00 $9.75 $6.00/$8.00 $7.50 Specially Designed Program $9.00/11.00 n/a n/a $9.00 NATURE EDUCATION TOURS FEE COMPARISON KCC Proposed Fee 2006 2 hrs. Crawford Lake 2005 1.5 hrs. Mountsberg 2005 1.5 hrs Wye Marsh 2005 2.5 hrs. General Program $6.75 $6.50 $5.25 $6.00 Specially Designed Program $7.50 n/a $6.00 $8.00 324 Attachment 2 TRCA 2005 Fee Schedule Public Facilities and Programming Conservation Areas items 1 to 25 Black Creek Pioneer Village items 26 to 32 Kortright Centre for Conservation items 33 to 35 Miscellaneous item 36 Discounts items D1 to D2 The Authority on September 24, 2004 approved TRCA's 2005 Fee Schedule (Meeting #08/04 Res. #A250 /04). Most fees listed in this Schedule take effect January 1, 2005. Detail is provided as to actual base fees and related tax amounts. Additional copies of this Fee Schedule may be obtained from Watershed Management / conservation areas. This document may be found on -line as f: \fo \public \fees \fee05.wpd. Updated material may be distributed from time to time to include supplementary fees which are related to specific program activities or to reflect changes to the Schedule. Significant changes Please review this updated Fee Schedule. Note that several significant changes have been made as follows: • change of fee structure to reflect the addition of applicable GST to gate admission fees at Conservation Areas (item 1.0) • increase to day camper fees (item 10.0) • adjustment to pool admission (item 17.0) • increase to cross - country ski trail fees (item 20.0 & 21.0) • increase to rental of cross country ski equipment (Item 23.0) • increase to parking at Kortright Centre (item 33.0) 325 TRCA 2005 Fee Schedule - Definition of Terms 1 Age categories Four general age groups are used throughout the fee schedule as follows: Adult - any person from fifteen to sixty -four. Child - any person from five to fourteen. Child (pre - schoolers) - any person four years of age or under. Senior - any person sixty -five years of age or over. (B.C.P.V. is defined as 60 years of age or older) Some exceptions to this general categorization apply to specific fee schedule items and are detailed under those items. 2 Annual Pass categories Two passes are offered at the Conservation Areas and Kortright Individual - any person over five years of age. Family - Maximum two adults, and two children from five to fourteen in one vehicle 3 Conservation Area The term Conservation Area applies to Albion Hills, Bruce's Mill, Boyd, Glen Flatly, Heart Lake and Petticoat Creek. Also included in this definition are the public campgrounds at Albion Hills and Indian Line. For the purposes of this fee schedule the definition does not include the Kortright Centre for Conservation or Black Creek Pioneer Village. 4 General admission General admission allows for basic access to a specified TRCA venue(s) during a designated operating period(s). Other fees may be charged in addition to, or in lieu of, general admission fees for certain facilities, programs or operating periods as identified in this fee schedule or under various operating policies. 5 Group Camper Applies to members of an organized group staying overnight at a Conservation Area by permit. 6 Day Camper Applies to members of day cares, day camps, schools or the like, who are visiting a Conservation Area during the regular operating day. 7 Operating policies This fee schedule is provided as a general summary of fees applied by the TRCA at its various operating venues. It does not provide, nor is it intended to provide, complete information as to the various regulations and operating policies in effect at theses venues which may relate to individual fee schedule items. Daily, seasonal and program operating schedules and minimum group size requirements are among these policies. 8 Discounts and premiums Any fee may be subject to a discount or premium at the discretion of the appropriate Manager. 9 Supplementary fees Not all fees are considered to be part of the TRCA's fee schedule as approved by the Authority. Some are set independently of that schedule. The sale of retail merchandise or the provision of incidental services represent the most common examples of such fees. 326 TRCA 2005 Fee Schedule - Contents after -hours use after -hours use Albion Hills farm angling fee annual pass annual pass annual pass barbecue / corn pot rental boat equipment rentals camping - day campers camping - group campers camping - group campsite camping - monthly site camping - group / Pleasantview camping - public camping camping - seasonal site camping - serviced site camping - supplementary fees camping - unserviced site canoe rentals commercial photography . commercial photography cross - country skiing - equipment rentals cross - country skiing - group rate cross - country skiing - trail fees / full -day cross - country skiing - trail fees / half -day cross - country skiing - seasonal pass day campers Dickson Hill School educational tours - BCPV activity program educational tours - BCPV tour program educational tours - general tours educational tours - specially designed tours fire permit fishing -Fly Fishers Club Membership fishing - public ponds fishing - pond rentals general admission - BCPV general admission general admission group discounts guided tour handicapped persons late permit maple syrup tours memberships memberships mountain biking parking parking parking BCPV Conservation Areas Albion Hills Glen Haffy /Heart Lake BCPV Conservation Areas Kortright Conservation Areas Conservation Areas Conservation Areas Conservation Areas Conservation Areas Albion Hills, Indian Line Albion Hills Albion Hills, Indian Line Albion Hills, Indian Line Albion Hills, Indian Line Albion Hills, Indian Line 29.0 see late permit (8.0) 36.0 5.0 28.0 4.0 35.0 16.10 7.0 10.0 9.0 9.0 11.3, 11.6, 12.3, 12.7, 13.3 14.0 11.0, 12.0,13.0 12.4, 12.8, 13.4 12.0, 13.0 15.0 fees for extra campers and parking for extra cars Albion Hills, Indian Line 11.0 Conservation Areas see boat equipment rentals (7.0) Conservation Areas, Kortright 19.0 BCPV 31.0 Albion Hills 23.0 Albion Hills 23.5, 23.6 Albion Hills 20.0 Albion Hills 21.0 Albion Hills 22.0 Conservation Areas see campers - day campers (10.0) BCPV BCPV BCPV Kortright Kortright Conservation Areas Glen Haffy Glen Haffy /Heart Lake Glen Haffy Headwaters Trout Ponds BCPV Conservation Areas Kortright BCPV, Kortright BCPV BCPV, Conservation Areas, Kortright Conservation Areas Bruce's Mill BCPV Kortright Albion Hills BCPV 27.10 27.8, 27.9 27.7 34.6 34.7 16.9 6.3 5.0 6.0 27.0 1.0 34.0 D.1 32.0 D.2 8.0 25.0 see annual pass (28.0) see annual pass (35.0) 24.0 26.0 Albion Hills, Indian Linesee camping, supp. fees (15.0) Kortright 33.0 327 pedal boat rentals picnics - additional picnickers picnics - picnic shelter picnics - picnic site picnics - picnic site - Mon -Sun picnics - picnic site - Mon -Sat picnics - picnic site - Sunday pool pass rowboat rentals skiing swimming - annual pass swimming - daily admission vehicle admission wagon /sleigh rides Conservation Areas Conservation Areas Conservation Areas Conservation Areas Albion Hills, Bruce's Mill, Glen Haffy Boyd, Heart Lake , Petticoat Creek Boyd, Heart Lake, Petticoat Creek Petticoat Creek see boat equipment rentals (7.0) 16.4 16.5 -16.8 16.0 16.3 16.1 16.2 17.0 Conservation Areas see boat equipment rentals (7.0) see cross country skiing (20.0, 21.0, 22.0, 23.0) Petticoat Creek Petticoat Creek Petticoat Creek BCPV 328 18.0 17.0 3.0 30.0 ITEM # ITEM DESCRIPTION PST 8% GST 7% 2005 BASE 2005 GROSS 1.0 For general admission at all conservation areas _ except Petticoat Creek, per day; 1.1 for each adult from fifteen to sixty -four years of age. 0.00 0.28 3.97 4.25 1.2 for each child from five to fourteen years of age. 0.00 0.15 2.10 2.25 1.3 for each child four years of age or under. 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.4 for each senior sixty- five-years of age or over. 0.00 0.21 3.04 3.25 2.0 For general admission at all conservation areas except Petticoat Creek, per day, on weekdays has been omitted. 3.0 For vehicle admission to Petticoat Creek, per day; 3.1 for vehicle carrying up to ten persons, per day. 0.00 0.65 9.35 10.00 . 3.2 on weekdays has been omitted. 3.3 for a vehicle carrying more than ten persons, per person. 0.00 0.13 1.87 2.00 4.0 For an annual pass valid ONLY for admission to the Conservation Area for which it is purchased; 4.1 for each person five years of age or over. 0.00 2.45 35.00 37.45 4.2 for a family of one or two adults and their children who are fourteen years of age or under. 0.00 4.55 65.00 69.55 5.0 For fish ng at Glen Haffy or Heart Lake: 5.1 per day, for each person fifteen years of age or over, exclusive of general admission 0.00 0.35 5.00 5.35 5.2 per day, for each person from five to fourteen years of age, exclusive of general admission. 0.00 0.18 2.50 2.68 5.3 per day, for each person four years of age or under, exclusive of general admission. 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 5.4 for each person fifteen years of age or over, in a group with a reservation, including angling fee and general admission, per day, subject to a minimum group size of 20 persons 0.00 0.49 7.00 7.49 _ 5.5 for each person five to fourteen years of age, in a group with a reservation, including angling fee and general admission, per day, subject to a minimum group size of 20 persons. 0.00 0.21 3.00 3.21 _ 6.0 For a permit for the use of a fishing pond at the Glen Haffy Headwaters Trout Ponds, including general admission and the use of row boats, per day; 329 ITEM # ITEM DESCRIPTION PST 8% GST 7% 2005 BASE 2005 GROSS 6.1 For up to 75 persons on Monday's excluding Statutory Holidays and 1 Sunday per month, date of which is to be determined by TRCA staff 0.00 52.50 750.00 802.50 6.2 For each additional 25 or fewer persons 0.00 14.00 200.00 214.00 6.3 for a membership to Glen Haffy fly Fisher's Club at Glen Haffy Headwaters Trout Ponds valid Tuesday to Sunday 0.00 28.00 400.00 428.00 7.0 For the rental of boating equipment where available, per hour 0.96 0.84 12.00 13.80 8.0 For a permit authorizing a special event extending past regular operating hours and up to midnight, exclusive of parking or general admission, per hour, subject to a three hour minimum. 0.00 3.50 50.00 53.50 9.0 For a permit to use a designated group campsite, subject to a limit of seven nights use, per night; for a group of up to twenty persons; 9.1 for a group of up to twenty persons; 0.00 6.30 90.00 96.30 9.2 for each additional person, in conjunction with a permit issued under item 9.1 0.00 0.21 3.00 ' 3.21 10.0 For each day camper, not overnight, per day, inclusive of general admission 0.00 0.15 2.10 2.25 11.0 For a permit to occupy an individual unserviced campsite, inclusive of general admission; 11.1 at Albion Hills, per night. 0.00 1.54 22.00 23.54 11.2 at Albion Hills, per week. 0.00 9.24 132.00 141.24 11.3 at Albion Hills, per month (28 days). 0.00 30.80 440.00 470.80 11.4 at Indian Line, per night. 0.00 1.61 23.00 24.61 11.5 at Indian Line, per week. 0.00 9.66 138.00 147.66 11.6 at Indian Line, per month (28 days). 0.00 32.20 460.00 492.20 11.7 on a holiday or other designated date, in addition to the basic permit fee specified in item 11.1 or 11.4 0.00 0.14 2.00 2.14 12.0 For a permit to occupy an individual serviced campsite, with water and hydro hook -ups, inclusive of general admission; 12.1 at Albion Hills, per night. 0.00 1.75 25.00 26.75 12.2 at Albion Hills, per week. 0.00 10.50 150.00 160.50 12.3 at Albion Hills, per month (28 days). 0.00 35.00 500.00 535.00 12.4 at Albion Hills, per season. 0.00 107.80 1540.00 1647.80 12.5 at Indian Line, per night. 0.00 1.96 28.00 29.96 12.6 at Indian Line, per week. 0.00 11.76 168.00 179.76 12.7 at Indian Line, per month (28 days). 0.00 39.20 560.00 599.20 12.8 at Indian Line, per season. - 0.00 154.00 2200.00 2354.00 12.9 on a holiday or other designated date, in addition to the basic permit fee specified in item 12.1 or 12.4 0.00 0.14 2.00 2.14 13.0 For a permit to occupy an individual services campsite with water, 30 amp hydro service, and sewage hook -up inclusive of general admission: 13.1 at Indian Line, per night. 0.00 2.10 30.00 32.10 13.2 at Indian Line, per week. 0.00 12.60 180.00 192.60 13.3 at Indian Line per month (28 days). 0.00 42.00 600.00 642.00 330 ITEM # ITEM DESCRIPTION PST 8% GST 7% 2005 BASE 2005 GROSS 13.4 at Indian Line, per season. 0.00 164.50 2350.00 2514.50 13.5 - on a holiday or other designated date, in addition to the basic permit fee specified in item 13.1 0.00 0.14 2.00 2.14 14.0 For a permit to occupy the Pleasantview Group campsite at Albion Hills, inclusive of general admission; 14.1 for up to ten camping units, for an adult group. 0.00 15.05 215.00 230.05 14.2 for each additional camping unit, in conjunction with a permit issued to an adult group under item 14.1 0.00 1.50 21.50 23.00 14.3 for up to ten camping units, for a youth group. 0.00 12.60 180.00 192.60 14.4 for each additional camping unit, in conjunction with a permit issued to a youth group under item 14.3 0.00 1.26 18.00 19.26 15.0 In addition to basic camping fees as specified in Items 11.0, 12.0 and 13.0; 15.1 for a permit to park an additional vehicle. 0.56 0.49 7.00 8.05 15.2 for a permit to park an additional vehicle, per season 3.60 3.15 45.00 51.75 15.3 for each additional person occupying a campsite over and above the campgrounds specified site limit. 0.00 0.28 4.00 4.28 16.0 For a permit for the use of a group picnic site at any conservation area, exclusive of vehicle or general admission; 16.1 for a group of up to 100 persons at Boyd, Heart Lake and Petticoat Creek Monday to Saturday. 0.00 5.25 75.00 80.25 16.2 for a group of up to 100 persons at Boyd, Heart Lake and Petticoat Creek on Sundays and Statutory Holidays. 0.00 7.00 100.00 107.00 16.3 for a group of up to 100 persons at Albion Hills, Bruce's Mill and Glen Haffy; Monday to Sunday 0.00 4.20 60.00 64.20 16.4 for each additional fifty or fewer persons, in conjunction with a permit issued under item 16.1, 16.2, or 16.3 0.00 1.75 25.00 26.75 16.5 for the use of a picnic shelter with electrical service, at Bruce's Mill, Albion Hills and Glen Haffy, in conjunction with a permit issued under item 16.1, 16.2, or 16.2 0.00 8.05 115.00 . 123.05 16.6 for use of picnic shelter without electrical service, at Bruce's Mill, Albion Hills and Glen Haffy, in conjunction with a permit issued under item 16.1, 16.2, or 16.3 0.00 6.65 95.00 101.65 331 ITEM # ITEM DESCRIPTION PST 8% GST 7% 2005 BASE 2005 GROSS 16.7 for the use of a picnic shelter with electrical service at Boyd, Petticoat Creek and Heart Lake, in conjunction with a permit issued under Item 16.2, 16 2, or 16.3 0.00 11.55 165.00 176.55 - 16.8 for the use of a picnic shelter without electrical service, at Boyd, Petticoat Creek and Heart Lake, in conjunction with a permit issued under item 16.1, 16.2, or 16.3. 0.00 10.15 145.00 155.15 16.9 for a permit for a fire in a designated ground fire pit, in addition to any fees paid under item 16.0 0.00 4.20 60.00 64.20 16.10 for the use of a portable barbecue unit or corn pot, in addition to any fees paid under item 16.0 3.20 2.80 40.00 46.00 17.0 For admission to the swimming area at Petticoat Creek, exclusive of vehicle or general admis.sion; - 17.1 per day, for each person five years of age or over. 0.00 0.18 2.52 2.70 17.2 each child under two years of age. 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 17.3 per day, for each child four years of age or under as part of an organized group under supervision. _ 0.00 0.18 2.52 2.70 17.4 for a book of ten pool passes. 0.00 1.57 22.43 24.00 18.0 Petticoat Creek Pool passes have been replaced by the Conservation Journeys program. 19.0 Commercial photography or filming fees for Conservation Areas and Kortright are outlined separately on a case by case basis according to Commercial Filming on TRCA Lands - Fee Guidelines 2003. 20.0 For the use of cross - country ski trails at Albion Hills, inclusive of general admission: 20.1 for each person fifteen years of age or over. 0.00 0.78 11.22 12.00 20.2 for each child five to fourteen years of age. 0.00 0.39 5 61 6.00 20.3 for each child four years of age or under. 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 20.4 for each senior sixty -five years of age or over. 0.00 0.59 8.41 9.00 20.5 for a family of one or two adults and their children who are fourteen years of age or under. 0.00 1.96 28.04 30.00 21.0 For the use of cross - country ski trails at Albion Hills, inclusive of general admission, after -1 p.m.; 21.1 for each person fifteen years of age or over. 0.00 0.65 9.35 10.00 21.2 for each child five to fourteen years of age. 0.00 0.26 3.74 4.00 21.3 for each child four years of age or under. 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 21.4 for each senior sixty -five years of age or over. 0.00 0.46 6.54 7.00 332 ITEM # ITEM DESCRIPTION PST 8% GST 7% 2005 BASE 2005 GROSS 21.5 for a family of one or two adults and their children who are fourteen years of age or under. 0.00. 1.57 22.43 24.00 22.0 Albion Hills Cross Country Ski passes have been replaced by the Conservation Journeys program. 23.0 For the rental of a cross - country ski equipment package consisting of skis, boots and poles: 23.1 for each person fifteen years of age or over, per day. 1.12 0.98 14.00 16.10 23.2 for each person fifteen years of age or over, per day, after 1:00 p.m. 0.80 0.70 10.00 11.50 23.3 for each child fourteen years of age or under, per day. 0.88 0.77 11.00 12.65 23.4 for each child fourteen years of age or under, per day, after 1:00 p.m. 0.68 0.59 8.50 9.77 23.5 for each person fifteen years of age or over, in a group with a reservation, including trail fees, per day, subject to a minimum group size. 1.20 1.05 15.00 17.25 23.6 for each person fourteen years of age or under, in a group with a reservation, including trail fees, per day, subject to a minimum group size. 0.80 0.70 10.00 11.50 24.0 For use of the mountain bike trails at Albion Hills per day, for each person, exclusive of general admission. 0.00 0.13 1.87 2.00 25.0 For a guided tour at Bruce's Mill during the maple syrup program, subject to minimum group size of twenty persons. 0.00 0.39 5.50 5.89 26.0 For parking at Black Creek Pioneer Village, per vehicle, per day, exclusive of general admission. 0.42 0.37 5.21 6.00 27.0 For general admission to Black Creek Pioneer Village, during the regular operating season, per day; 27.1 for each adult from fifteen to fifty -nine years of age. 0.00 0.77 11.00 11.77 27.2 for each child from five to fourteen years of age. 0.00 0.49 7.00 7.49 27.3 for each child four years of age or under accompanying their family. 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 27.4 for each child four years of age or under visiting as part of an organized group under supervision. 0.00 0.42 5.95 6.37 27.5 for each senior sixty years of age or over. 0.00 0.70 10.00 10.70 27.6 for each student fifteen years of age or over, with student identification. 0.00 0.70 10.00 10.70 27.7 for each student participating in a general tour program. 0.00 0.49 7.00 7.49 27.8 for each student participating in a specially designated tour program, • subject to a minimum group size. 0.00 0.56 8.00 8.56 333 ITEM # ITEM DESCRIPTION PST 8% GST 7% 2005 BASE 2005 GROSS 27.9 for each student participating in a designated activity program, subject to a minimum group size. 0.00 0.70 10.00 10.70 27.1.0 for each student participating in the Dickson's Hill School program, per day, subject to a minimum group size of twenty persons. 0.00 0.49 7.00 7.49 28.0 For an annual pass valid for general admission, inclusive of parking fees, for the Black Creek Pioneer Village; 28.1 for a family of one or two adults and their children who are fourteen years of age or under. 0.00 4.55 65.00 69.55 28.2 for each person five years of age or over. 0.00 2.45 35.00 37.45 29.0 For the after -hour use of Black Creek Pioneer Village Including staffing, commencing within one -half hour of normal closing time and subject to a three - and - one -half hour maximum; 29.1 for the use of the Village grounds only from May to September. 0.00 24.50 350.00 374.50 29.2 for the use of the Village grounds only from October to April. 0.00 31.50 450.00 " 481.50 29.3 including the use of three buildings. 0.00 90.65 1295.00 1385.65 29.4 including the use of four buildings. 0.00 111.65 1595.00 1706.65 29.5 including the use of six buildings. 0.00 132.65 1895.00 2027.65 29.6 including the use of eight buildings. 0.00 153.65 2195.00 2348.65 30.0 For a horse -drawn wagon or sleigh ride at the Black Creek Pioneer Village; 30.1 in conjunction with an after -hours function as identified in item 28.0, with completion of wagon rides within 90 minutes of regular closing time, per wagon. 0.00 12.25 175.00 187.25 30.2 items 29.2 and 29.3 subject to a late charge of $50.00 per half -hour per wagon; gross charges not to exceed a maximum of $500.00 0.00 3.27 46.73 50.00 30.3 in conjunction with an after hours function as identified in item 28.0 for rides scheduled more than 90 minutes after regular closing. 0.00 35.00 500.00 535.00 31.0 For commercial photography or filming in the Black Creek Pioneer Village, including supervision, minimum per hour; 31.1 for the use of grounds and environs, during the period from 8:30 a.m. until midnight. . 0.00 _ 8.18 116.82 125.00 31.2 for the use of grounds and environs, during the period from midnight until 8:30 a.m. 0.00 11.45 163.55 175.00 31.3 for the use of the interior of buildings, during the period from 8:30 a.m. until midnight. 0.00 9.81 140.19 150.00 31.4 for the use of the interior of buildings, during the period from midnight until 8:30 a.m. 0.00 11.45 163.55 175.00 334 ITEM # ITEM DESCRIPTION PST 8% GST 7% 2005 BASE 2005 GROSS 32.0 For a Guided Tour at Black Creek Pioneer Village, as part of a tour group with a reservation, including general admission; _32.1 for each adult from fifteen to fifty -nine years of age 0.00 0.79 11.25 12.04 32.2 for each senior sixty years of age and over. 0.00 0.72 10.25 10.97 33.0 For parking at the Kortright Centre for Conservation, per vehicle, per day, exclusive of general admission. 0.17 0.15 2.18 2.50 34.0 For general admission at the Kortright Centre for Conservation; 34.1 for each adult from fifteen to sixty -four years of age. 0.00 0.33 4.67 5.00 34.2 for each child from five to fourteen years of .age. 0.00 0.20 2.80 3.00 34.3 for each child four years of age or under accompanying their family. 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 34.4 for each child four years of age or under visiting as part of an organized group under supervision. 0.00 0.15 2.10 2.25 34.5 for each senior sixty -five years of age or over. 0.00 0.20 2.80 3.00 34.6 for each student participating in a general tour program, subject to a minimum group size. 0.00 0.42 6.00 6.42 34.7 for each student participating in a specially designed tour program, subject to a minimum group size. 0.00 0.49 7.00 7.49 34.8 for each adult from fifteen to sixty -four years of age participating in a specially designed tour program, subject to a minimum group size. 0.00 0.54 7.75 8.29 34.9 for each senior sixty -five years or over participating in a specially designed tour program, subject to a minimum group !size. 0.00 0.42 6.00 6.42 35.0 For an annual pass valid ONLY for admission to the Kortright Centre; 35.1 for each person five years of age or over 0.00 - 2.45 35.00 37.45 35.2 for a family of one or two adults and their children who are fourteen years of age or under. 0.00 4.55 65.00 69.55 36.0 For a farm tour at the Albion Hills Farm, for a group of up to forty persons; 36.1 for a half -day program. 0.00 6.54 93.46 100.00 36.2 for a full -day program. 0.00 13.08 186.92 200.00 D.1 At Black Creek Pioneer Village, fifteen percent (15 %) and the Kortright Centre, twenty percent (20 %) off regular per person admission fees, subject to a minimum group size of twenty persons, exclusive of guided tours. D.2 At Black Creek Pioneer Village fifty percent (50 %) off general admission fees for disabled persons and their attendants to a maximum ratio of 1:1. At Conservation Areas and the Kortright Centre attendants for disabled persons will not be subject to general admission fees. 335 RES. #C80/05 - Moved by: Seconded by: USE OF SECORD PROPERTY FOR AN ANGLING CLUB Call For Proposals. Request for Proposal for a long term lease of the Secord pond and associated buildings and lands for an angling club to provide recreational fishing opportunities and generate a long term revenue stream. Maja Prentice Bill Fisch THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT staff be authorized to issue a request for proposal to lease Secord pond, adjacent buildings and lands to interested parties for use as an angling club and related activities; AND FURTHER THAT staff report to the Executive Committee on the results of the request for proposal including the terms and conditions and anticipated long term revenues. CARRIED BACKGROUND. The Secord property was acquired by the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) in 1997. The property is located in the southwest portion of the Township of Uxbridge on the east side of Third Concession at Secord Road. It is legally described as Part of Lots 10 & 11, Concession 3, Township of Uxbridge, Regional Municipality of Durham, Province of Ontario. The property is in the headwaters of Duffins Creek on the Oak Ridges Moraine. West Duffins Creek flows through the property and was dammed circa 1920 to form a 6.54 hectare pond now known as Secord pond. Dr. Alan and Mrs. Ingeborg Secord purchased the property in 1948. The Secords utilized the guest cottage for cottage purposes until they designed and built the main house in the early 1970s. In 1997, TRCA acquired 93 hectares of the Secord property through purchase and donation from Mrs. Secord. A remaining 20 hectares section was later purchased from Mrs. Secord's estate. In 2005, a further 12 hectares was purchased from an adjoining land owner to add more habitat to the Secord Forest and Wildlife Area. Originally there were several buildings on site including a barn and farm house. In 2005, the farm house and barn, and other buildings that were deemed unsafe, were demolished, leaving the main house and cottage, which are adjacent to and south of the pond. The main house is a large two- bedroom bungalow measuring approximately 3,140 square feet and has a built -in two -car garage. The dwelling has a white brick exterior, asphalt shingle roof and mostly single -pane wood windows with aluminum storms. The dwelling has a masonry foundation but only a partial basement containing building services. 336 The accommodation provided by the main house includes a large L- shaped living room and dining room, a den with fieldstone fireplace and a beamed ceiling, two bedrooms, including a master bedroom with an en suite four -piece bathroom and built -in closets, an additional four -piece bathroom and a kitchen leading to an enclosed solarium. There is also a sauna room with shower off the kitchen area. The dwelling has electric heat and central air _ conditioning. While the house is considered structurally sound, maintenance has been poor in recent years and the dwelling needs a new roof, exterior and interior painting, and a general updating. The guest cottage was the original dwelling on the property and was used for cottage purposes until the main house was constructed. This building is a wood frame structure with a gross floor area of approximately 1,000 square feet. It has two bedrooms, a living room with sitting area, kitchen and four -piece bathroom. The structure has aluminum siding and asphalt shingle roof. There are aluminum windows with storms and screens. This dwelling is in fair condition only. It shows signs of some water damage from roof Teaks in one of the bathrooms. Heating is propane and there is no basement. Dr. Secord and his guests angled Brook Trout at Secord pond for several years on a sustainable basis. Angling_has not been allowed on the pond since TRCA came into possession of the property in 1997. Recent studies and reports by TRCA staff indicate that the pond continues to support a self- sustaining Brook Trout population. Bathymetry, dissolved oxygen, temperature and other data have been collected and this information will be shared with potential tenant. The Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan (ORMCP) designates this area as "Natural Core Area ". Discussions with the Township of Uxbridge, the Regional Municipality of Durham and TRCA staff indicate that the proposed use is consistent with and acceptable under the ORMCP. In addition to the ORMCP, three plans are in place that support the current proposal. A Watershed Plan for Duffins Creek and Carruthers Creek, the Duffins Creek Headwaters Management Plan for TRCA Properties, and the Fisheries Management Plan for Duffins Creek and Carruthers Creek. The use of Secord pond by an angling club would be consistent with the management objectives in each of these management plans. RATIONALE Secord pond is classified as a coldwater pond, supports a healthy population of Brook Trout, and the Ministry of Natural Resources has approved year -round fishing on the pond. Excellent fishing opportunities and extended access to the resource make this a very desirable property to the angling community. The main house is suitable for upgrading to a club house for any potential angling groups and the cottage could be upgraded for complementary uses. A former use of the cottage was as a clubhouse for angling friends of Dr. Secord. These factors, coupled with the exceptional surroundings and location on the Oak Ridges Moraine, angling - history of the area, and close proximity to Toronto and other Greater Toronto Area (GTA) communities make this an unrivalled angling opportunity in the GTA. Lease agreements have been in place for individual buildings on the property in the past. These agreements produced revenues of $28,416 per annum and were terminated in 2005. Staff believe a fishing club is a more suitable use. Revenues generated would be used for conservation land management and fisheries management in the Duffins Creek watershed. 337 While it is recognized that access to this angling resource will be lost for the term of the lease, the intent of this proposal is to raise significant revenues that will allow TRCA to improve the fishery in many other, publicly accessed locations throughout the Duffins Creek and Carruthers Creek watersheds. Significant improvements can be made in other TRCA -owned lands, such as Claremont, Greenwood and Goodwood, each of which are accessible to the public. Also, improvements to these areas will improve the fishery in lower, more populated portions of the watershed where angling pressures are higher. As a condition of any potential lease, the tenant will be require to maintain the fishery such that it is improved at the termination of the lease. Regarding other conditions of lease, the Oak Ridges Moraine Trail and Loop Trail, as well as a multi -use trail pass through the Secord property and encircle the pond. Public access to these trails and the current and proposed parking lots will be maintained for the duration of the lease. Consideration will have to be given, however, to diverting or limiting access to certain portions of the property in order to maintain exclusive access to the buildings and to limit potential unauthorized fishing at the pond. TRCA will also require that up to five days per year be assigned for TRCA use of the pond. These days will be used at the sole discretion of TRCA including outreach and .education activities. Potential activities include fishing demonstrations and fishing _ opportunities for youth at risk and persons with disabilities. FINANCIAL DETAILS Costs associated with the request for proposals will be minimal and are covered in operating budgets. Report prepared by: Brent Bullough, extension 5392 For Information contact: Gary Bowen, extension 5385 Ron Dewell, extension 5245 Date: October 26, 2005 Attachments:1 338 Attachment 1 339 RES. #C81/05 - TELECONFERENCING Amendment to Rules of Conduct. Options for teleconferencing Executive Committee and advisory board meetings. Moved by: Seconded by: Maja Prentice Bill Fisch THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT the Section VII - Calling of Meetings or Toronto and Region Conservation Authority's (TRCA) Rules of Conduct be amended to include Section 32.3 as follows: Teleconferencing shall be an option for Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) Executive Committee and advisory board meetings only when: quorum cannot otherwise be reached for a meeting in which no delegations, presentations or hearings are on the agenda; and for the summer Executive Committee meeting scheduled to deal with Section II items only. CARRIED RATIONALE Members of the Authority requested that staff look into the option of teleconferencing some TRCA meetings, specifically Executive Committee meetings when the agenda includes no hearings or delegations and when advisory board meetings include no presentations or delegations. When the agenda for a meeting contains no substantive items and /or there are no presentations, delegations or hearings, the meeting can be completed within a short time. Having members participate via teleconference would save travel time for members, reduce mileage costs to the TRCA and have the environmental benefits of reduced vehicle use. In 2003, staff contacted the 35 other conservation authorities (CAs) to determine if they had such a policy. Thirteen CAs responded. Only one authority has a policy that teleconferencing may be used for special meetings only by agreement of the board. The other CAs were interested in receiving a copy of TRCA's policy if developed. Shortly after this review, all TRCA board meetings were moved to the South Theatre at Black Creek Pioneer Village where options for teleconferencing are limited, but can be accommodated, so the matter was not pursued due to the limitation. Staff has reviewed the Conservation Authorities Act and TRCA's Rules of Conduct. Both are silent on the issue, so the Rules of Conduct state the Robert's Rules of Order be therefore followed. This document states that members be present for quorum and that the vote may be conducted viva voce (by the voice). Robert's Rules does not indicate whether or not they can be present by teleconference rather than in person. Staff and members recognize the importance of personal attendance at scheduled, public meetings of TRCA. Teleconferencing should only be an option in exceptional circumstances. As a result, staff is recommending that teleconferencing be used: • only when quorum cannot otherwise be reached for a meeting in which no delegations, hearings or presentations are on the agenda; and • for the summer Executive Committee meeting scheduled to deal with Section II items only. 340 At Authority Meeting #8/05, held on October 28, 2005, the TRCA Meeting Schedule 2006 -2007 was approved which identified the summer Executive Committee may be held by teleconference. Report prepared by: Kathy Stranks, extension 5264 For Information contact: Kathy Stranks, extension 5264 Date: November 8, 2005 RES. #C82/05 - OAK RIDGES CORRIDOR PARK MANAGEMENT PLAN Spine Trail Alignment. Endorsement of the spine trail alignment as part of the Phase 1 deliverables for the Oak Ridges Corridor Park Management Plan. Moved by: Seconded by: Bill Fisch Dick O'Brien THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT the spine trail alignment dated September 12, 2005, as illustrated on Attachment 1, be endorsed; AND FURTHER THAT the appropriate Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) officials be authorized and directed to take whatever action may be required to give effect hereto, including the obtaining of necessary approvals and the execution of any documents. CARRIED BACKGROUND On September 23, 2004, the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing announced that the Province of Ontario and certain owners of Oak Ridges Moraine lands in the Town of Richmond Hill had reached an agreement to exchange these owners' lands for provincially -owned lands in the City of Pickering. The purpose of the land exchange was to protect the last remaining natural corridor link between the eastern and western parts of the Oak Ridges Moraine in Richmond Hill. Under the agreement, 1,057 acres (423 ha) of land in Richmond Hill will come into public ownership. These lands are currently known as the Oak Ridges Corridor Park (the "Park "). The Park lands are generally located between Bathurst Street and Bayview Avenue, north of Jefferson Sideroad, and south of the community of Oak Ridges. Approximately 100 acres (40 ha) of the lands-make up the Bathurst Glen Golf Course abutting the westernmost boundary of the Park. The property is outlined in Attachment 2. 341 At the request of the province, TRCA is leading the development of a management plan for the Oak Ridges Corridor Park. An advisory committee has been established to oversee the work. Members include representatives from TRCA, York Region, Town of Richmond Hill, the Ministry of Natural Resources, the Ontario Realty Corporation, the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing, the Oak Ridges Moraine Foundation, the-Oak Ridges Trail Association, Richmond Hill Naturalists, Save the Oak Ridges Moraine, Jefferson Forest Residents Association and Citizens Environment Watch. To date, five advisory committee meetings and two public information meetings have been held. Deliverables to date include the preparation of a vision, goals and objectives for the Park, a background report on existing conditions, a confirmed alignment and construction drawings for the spine trail, and a draft financial assessment of the Bathurst Glen Golf Course. It is the objective of Richmond Hill landowners and the province that construction of a portion of the trail begin in 2005 so that it serves as an anchor for the Park and it represents an early, tangible symbol of the Park's creation. The present landowners are required to contribute $3.5 million as part of the land exchange. This money is to be used to construct the east -west spine trail and initiate habitat restoration works. Considerable effort has been made to locate the spine trail in areas that will not impact the sensitive habitats or detract from the ability of the land to function as a wildlife corridor. TRCA is in consultation with the Regional Municipality of York to provide safe pedestrian access across Yonge Street within the boundaries of the subject property. Because the property is in the middle of Richmond Hill and is soon to be completely surrounded by residential development, staff strongly believe that the spine trail is required and should be designed for multi -use including walkers and bicyclists. The design also accommodates maintenance vehicles and emergency services, when required. Secondary trails will be designed to favour walkers only. It will be impossible and inappropriate to restrict the public from the property. Providing a well -sited and properly constructed trail for the thousands of people that will visit the area will help prevent management problems. Most people will stay on a trail; thus, reducing unauthorized trail establishment that would be detrimental to sensitive habitats and the restoration of the site. Staff, the consulting team, and the majority of the advisory committee are satisfied that the spine trail alignment and construction standards are appropriate. However, two advisory committee members and some members of the public still express concerns that there should be no formal trails, that the spine trail is too wide (2.4 m), that the Yonge Street crossing is not in the best location and the trail is over - designed in terms of the subgrade foundation. DETAILS OF WORK TO BE DONE • Arrange for the landowners to begin the construction of the spine trail. The start date is governed by the execution of the collateral agreement between the province and the current landowners. The agreement facilitates the transfer of funding from the landowners to TRCA to pay for the work. 342 • Continue to work with the advisory committee and the public to finalize the remainder of the management plan. Report prepared by: Gary Wilkins, extension 5211 For Information contact: Gary Wilkins, extension 5211 Date: November 10, 2005 Attachments: 2 343 Attachment 1 344 Attachment 2 ; 345 }�1P,�ROCIMATE LOCATION OF • OAK - RIDGES MORAINE CORRIDOR LANC)S it ,•,'"-), ,P �� ':. foo, _ ,,;". ' i:',. °-- 1 .# ; ,,,. ' - f i 1 ~ Allill • - tit Aess ril -44100116 ' iy _ • •• .. a ,ifs ite:..orgo........"Asts ............ ell • ,' S1^ - ...-''-. ,,_ ., �. `r '� . ' • .. 345 RES. #C83/05 - HERITAGE DESIGNATION OF MCVEAN BARN SITE Approval to proceed with Heritage Designation of the McVean Barn site. Moved by: Seconded by: Maja Prentice Bill Fisch THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT the heritage designation of the McVean Barn Site, located in the Claireville Conservation Area, be supported; AND FURTHER THAT Brampton City Council be requested to pass a municipal by -law for this purpose. CARRIED BACKGROUND The McVean Barn site is an exceptionally significant property, associated with a very prominent early settler, Alexander McVean and his family. The McVean barn, the surrounding vegetation, archaeological potential, cultural landscapes and remains of buildings, in addition to the historical associations with the McVean family, lends this parcel of land considerable cultural heritage value. Heritage designation is warranted and strongly recommended. Heritage designation bestows formal public recognition on historic sites. It serves as formal, public recognition that a particular property has heritage value and is worthy of on -going care and protection. Designation identifies and describes the specific cultural heritage attributes that give a property its heritage significance. Heritage designation is a common practice in Ontario. Currently at least 6,000 properties are designated under Part IV of the Ontario Heritage Act. A heritage designation is enacted by City Council through the passing of a municipal by -law. Owners of designated heritage properties are eligible to receive a heritage designation plaque. They are also eligible for specific grants. The McVean barn site is listed on the Brampton Heritage Inventory, and is strongly recommended for heritage designation by city staff. The McVean barn designation is enthusiastically supported by the West Humber Sub - Committee. A motion of support was passed at their meeting on November 8, 2005. In addition, the Friends of Claireville have demonstrated their solid support for this property through ongoing volunteer efforts including upkeep of the area, repairs, research and other initiatives. Heritage designation helps to ensure that heritage features are maintained. Any alteration to a designated property that is likely to impact existing heritage attributes requires routine sign off from City Council through the Heritage Coordinator and the local Heritage Board. 346 At present, Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) has 5 designated buildings at Black Creek Pioneer Village (BCPV), plus others listed on heritage inventories. Repairs to these buildings has been done in consultation between BCPV staff and municipal heritage coordinators. BCPV has received grants of up to $5,000 per building to assist with repairs. BCPV staff will assist the Humber Watershed Specialist and Humber Project Manager with the heritage components of the McVean barn site. FINANCIAL DETAILS There are minimal financial implications at this time. A small amount of repair to secure the barn is required. Funding up to $5,000 is available from the City of Brampton once the building is designated. Report prepared by: Marty Brent, extension 5403 ' For Information contact: Marty Brent, extension 5403 Date: November 10, 2005 SECTION IV - ITEMS FOR THE INFORMATION OF THE BOARD RES. #C84/05 - ACCOUNTS RECEIVABLE October 27, 2005. Staff report on accounts receivable, as of October 27, 2005. Moved by: Seconded by: Maja Prentice Bill Fisch IT IS RECOMMENDED THAT the Accounts Receivable Status Report, as of October 27, 2005, be received. CARRIED RATIONALE The schedule below summarizes the status of receivables, including aging and classification. The schedule excludes $23,683. in accumulated interest arrears on invoices outstanding for more than 30 days. 347 ACCOUNTS RECEIVABLE AGING, BY CATEGORY Excluding Municipal Levy and MNR Grant - As at October 27, 2005 Items in excess of $1,000.00 included in the 90- plus -days column, are as follows: CLIENT NAME CURRENT 31 TO 60 DAYS 61 TO 90 DAYS 90 PLUS DAYS TOTAL % SCHOOLS AND SCHOOL BOARDS 74,958 16,668 232 35 91,893 13.0% GOVERNMENT 93,556 56,542 21,069 122,977 294,144 41.5% DEVELOPMENT SERVICES 28,286 5,130 2,100 74,655 110,171 15.5% CORPORATE, INDIVIDUAL AND COMMUNITY GROUPS 48,171 30,201 97,787 36,257 212,416 30.0% TOTAL 244,971 108,541 121,188 233,924 708,624 100.0% % OF TOTAL 34.6% 15.3% 17.1% 33.0% 100.0% 426 Items in excess of $1,000.00 included in the 90- plus -days column, are as follows: CLIENT NAME AMOUNT $ ARREARS INTEREST $ AGE (DAYS) NOTES Canadian Food 37,907.31 2,326.13 134 Payment expected by end of Nov. Inspection Agency 42,332.86 2,597.70 134 41,214.62 1,882.61 95 Wild Water Kingdom 35,124.86 Note 108 Interim property tax bill. Design Plan Ser. Inc. 20,000.00 1,227.27 123 Planning fees. (new) Basciano Parkin Ltd. 2,000.00 500.47 462 Planning fees. Brutto Consulting 7,500.00 1,467.13 389 Planning fees. Ltd. 3,000.00 586.86 361 Planning fees. Glen Pietrowski 10,000.00 2,317.54 426 Planning fees. Ron Witton 7,000.00 1,622.28 435 Planning fees. Rice Development 10,000.00 1,341.39 263 Planning fees. Group TOTALS 216,079.65 15,869.38 Note: Interest charged as per lease agreement The outstanding accounts for planning fees are deemed to be collectible. Most of these accounts occurred as the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority transitioned to the new fee schedule during 2004. Staff has recently met and successfully negotiated settlements with Marshall Macklin Monaghan and KLM Planning. Meetings will continue with the other developers on the list. Since the last report one new account has been added - Design Plan Services Inc.. 348 Collection of planning fees has improved since the new fee schedule was implemented two years ago and staff does not anticipate that the list of problem accounts will grow significantly. Staff believes that there is still some leverage available to deal with these outstanding accounts. Amounts due from Canadian Food Inspection Agency are expected by the end of November 2005, at which time staff anticipates that a new agreement will be in place. .The amount due from Wild Water Kingdom is also deemed collectible. Receivable balances, as reported on each of the previous reports to the advisory board, after 2002, are presented as follows: DATE Total $ 90 -Plus $ October 27, 2005 708,624 233,924 August 31, 2005 1,127,018 106,070 May 20, 2005 671,964 126,831 March 31, 2005 841,871 183,755 February 15, 2005 699,123 189,490 December 30, 2004 1,935,416 245,815 October 25, 2004 1,127,102 180,891 September 28, 2004 876,800 187,754 September 3, 2004 936,923 197,539 May 17, 2004 1,018,188 129,505 February 17, 2004 1,386,809 178,370 January 7, 2004 1,064,464 45,382 November 2, 2003 951,999 101,194 August 24, 2003 768,825 125,803 May 25, 2003 445,116 168,327 March 2, 2003 709,807 141,313 Report prepared by: Rocco Sgambelluri, extension 5232 For Information contact: Rocco Sgambelluri, extension 5232 Date: November 4, 2005 NEW BUSINESS RES. #C85/05 - COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE Moved by: Seconded by: Bill Fisch Bill O'Donnell THAT the committee move into closed session. CARRIED 349 ARISE AND REPORT RES. #C86/05 Moved by: Seconded by: Bill Fisch Bill O'Donnell THAT the committee arise and report from closed session. TERMINATION ON MOTION, the meeting terminated at 11:50 a.m., on Friday, November 18, 2005. David Barrow Chair /ks 350 CARRIED Brian Denney Secretary- Treasurer c. er THE TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY MEETING OF THE BUSINESS EXCELLENCE ADVISORY BOARD #7/05 January 20, 2006 The Business Excellence Advisory Board Meeting #7/05, was held in the South Theatre, Black Creek Pioneer Village, on Friday, January 20, 2006. The Chair David Barrow, called the meeting to order at 9:08 a.m. PRESENT David Barrow Chair Bill Fisch Member Rob Ford Member Dick O'Brien Chair, Authority Bill O'Donnell Member Maja Prentice Vice Chair ABSENT Bas Balkissoon Member Peter Milczyn Member RES. #C87 /05 - MINUTES Moved by: Seconded by: Bill O'Donnell Rob Ford THAT the Minutes of Meeting #6/05, held on November 18, 2005, be approved. CARRIED SECTION I - ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY ACTION RES. #C88 /05 - STRONGER CITY OF TORONTO FOR A STRONGER ONTARIO ACT, 2005 The intent of this report is to summarize the Stronger City of Toronto for a Stronger Ontario Act, 2005 and to provide Toronto and Region Conservation Authority's comments to the City of Toronto and the Province of Ontario. Moved by: Seconded by: Dick O'Brien Bill O'Donnell 351 WHEREAS the Stronger City of Toronto for a Stronger Ontario Act, 2005 is generally compatible with Toronto and Region Conservation Authority's (TRCA) vision for The Living City in that they both recognize the need to protect the environmental well being of the city and the health, safety and well -being of persons (City of Toronto Act, 2005, Part II, Section 8.(2).5 and 6); WHEREAS TRCA has some concern specific to the wording of the Act and lack of clarity in some areas related to conservation authority's areas of responsibility; THEREFORE LET IT BE RESOLVED THAT THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT TRCA staff be directed to advise the City of Toronto and the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing that the general directions of the Stronger City of Toronto for a Stronger Ontario Act, 2005, may have implications for implementation of TRCA's mandate; THAT TRCA request a meeting with the province and city to discuss the intention of specific sections of the Act, and the implications to TRCA, if any; THAT TRCA obtain legal advice to ensure that nothing in the Act undermines or confuses TRCA's mandate and areas of authority; THAT in considering new sources of funding for the City of Toronto, TRCA requests that the City of Toronto and the Province of Ontario consider establishing a range of financial incentives to support the City of Toronto and TRCA's environmental and public safety programs and policies; THAT in order to foster a culture of dynamic intergovernmental partnerships, as well as ongoing dialogue, between the city, the province and government agencies, the province specifically acknowledge TRCA's natural resource management and public safety mandate in the Act; AND FURTHER THAT the City of Toronto and Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing be advised of TRCA's comments and queries prior to the third and final reading of the Act at the Legislative Assembly. AMENDMENT RES. #C89/05 Moved by: Seconded by: Bill Fisch Dick O'Brien THAT the following be inserted before the last paragraph of the main motion: THAT any future changes to the Municipal Act be comparable and complementary to the proposed changes to the City of Toronto Act insofar as they relate to the powers and responsibilities governing the relationship of TRCA to its participating municipalities. 352 THE AMENDMENT WAS CARRIED THE MAIN MOTION, AS AMENDED, WAS CARRIED BACKGROUND On December 14, 2005, Bill 53, an "Act to revise the City of Toronto Acts, 1997 (Nos. 1 and 2), to amend certain public Acts in relation to municipal powers and to repeal certain private Acts relating to the City of Toronto" was introduced to the legislature by the provincial government. The Act is referred to as "Stronger City of Toronto for a Stronger Ontario Act, 2005" ( "City of Toronto Act ", 2005). Prior to the introduction of the new Act, the City of Toronto and the province appointed a joint task force to review the legislative framework that governs the City of Toronto, including the City of Toronto Act, the Municipal Act, 2001 and more than 350 private bills. The task force was responsible for exploring how to make Toronto more fiscally sustainable, autonomous and accountable. Consultation periods were held in May and June of 2005 and, subsequently, in November 2005 the task force released "Building a 21st Century City," their discussion paper on the new Act. SUMMARY OF THE CITY OF TORONTO ACT, 2005 1.Context The Act sets out a framework of broad powers for the city, which balances the interests of the province and the city, and which recognizes that the city must be able to do the following things in order to provide good government: 1. determine what is in the public interest for the city; 2. respond to the needs of the city; 3. determine the appropriate structure for governing the city; 4. ensure that the city is accountable to the public and that the process for making decisions is transparent; 5. determine the appropriate mechanisms for delivering municipal services in the city; 6. determine the appropriate levels of municipal spending and municipal taxation for the city; and 7. use fiscal tools to support the activities of the city. In short, the new Act represents an official recognition by the Province of Ontario that the City of Toronto requires a legislative framework within which it can develop into a strong, vibrant and sustainable city, capable of thriving in the global economy and exercising its powers in a responsible and accountable fashion. The intent of the City of Toronto Act, 2005 is to equip the City of Toronto, widely recognized as the economic engine of the Province of Ontario, with broad permissive governmental powers regarding planning, revenue generation and economic development, in order to more adequately support the needs of the city. According to "Building a 21st Century City" Report, the joint task force noted the need to effectively balance and give expression to three elements of good governance in the new City of Toronto Act, 2005: 353 1. Powers - Legislative and Financial 2. Accountability and Governance 3. Partnership TRCA staff review of the City of Toronto Act, 2005 follows these themes, and considers their importance for delivering The Living City objectives of Healthy Rivers and Shorelines, Regional Biodiversity, Sustainable Communities and Business Excellence. 2. Powers - Legislative and Financial Broad Permissive Powers The new City of Toronto Act, 2005 will enable the city to exercise broad permissive powers within its jurisdiction, subject only to exceptions in the provincial interest. Through these new governmental powers, the city will have the ability to pass by -laws on several issues, some of which include: public assets of the city; economic, social and environmental well -being of the city; financial management; and, governance structure of the city and its local boards. Furthermore, the city will also have power to: establish standards for new development, such as green roofs; to set architectural and urban design standards (including sustainable building standards limited to control over the exterior of buildings); and, to establish a design review panel similar to those found in New York City and Vancouver. Financial Management and Revenue Tools It is widely recognized that Toronto requires greater sources of revenue in order to meet its financial requirements and to pursue it's policy direction. Therefore, the Act provides the city with new tools for raising revenue and managing its financial and physical assets in order to improve the city's ability to shape development patterns, accommodate population growth and maintain essential social and physical infrastructure. These expanded financial and revenue tools are provided through: budgeting systems that continue to require the city to plan for a balanced budget; new debt, investment and cash management instruments; powers of taxation in order to permit the city to collect revenue through an area rate levy for services provided; and, the levying of fees and charges so that the city may be allowed to fund any type of capital work through the use of local improvement charges. The city is not permitted, however, to charge income, sales or gas taxes. 3. Accountability and Governance Through the city's new broad permissive powers comes an increase in the role and responsibility of the city. Therefore, a new model of governance is required in order to assist the city in the managing of its new powers. As a result, the city, through the new Act, now has flexibility to: adopt different governance models, including broad powers of delegation; the ability to determine it's own Council composition and ward boundaries; and, to implement a stronger Mayor system, whereby an Executive Committee is formed, chaired by the Mayor, that has specific and defined authority, with the mayor responsible for such issues as the long -term strategic plan and budget, and providing recommendation to Council for hiring the City Manager. 354 4. Partnership The new City of Toronto Act recognizes that the relationship between the province and the city should be supported through ongoing, reciprocal consultation when dealing with matters of common interest, and when matters may impact upon each other. Furthermore, the new Act formally recognizes Toronto's ability to act as a mature government and to enter into agreements with other governments, including the federal government. This structure of intergovernmental relations provides the city with the opportunity to foster strong consultative relationships with other government sectors on issues of common interest and concern. STAFF REVIEW OF CITY OF TORONTO ACT, 2005 TRCA, as a community -based environmental agency representing municipalities on a watershed basis, prepares and delivers programs for the management of the renewable natural resources within its watersheds, and assists with implementing the provincial interest in protecting natural resources and ensuring public safety. Therefore, TRCA offers the following recommendations to the City of Toronto and the province with respect to the Stronger City of Toronto for a Stronger Ontario Act, 2005. Section 75, Drainage and Flood Control states that the city may, "for the purpose of preventing damage to property in the city as a result of flooding, exercise its powers with respect to drainage and flood control in the city, in another municipality or in unorganized territory ". TRCA wishes to clarify this section through consultation and discussion with the city and province in order to determine how this corresponds with TRCA's flood control mandate and watershed planning responsibilities. Section 105(1) and (5), Site Alteration pertains to a city by -law that prohibits or regulates: (a) the placing or dumping of fill;(b) the removal of topsoil; or (c) the alteration of the grade of land. This section incorporates the city's existing Ravine By -law. Subsection (5) continues the provisions of the Ravine By -law which states that the by -law ceases to have effect if a regulation is made under Section 28 of the Conservation Authorities Act respecting the placing or dumping of fill, removal of topsoil or alteration of the grade of land in any area of the municipality. Staff support this section of the Act, which differentiates TRCA's regulatory powers from the new regulatory powers of the city. TRCA staff continue to work with the city's forestry staff to stream -line the processes for the general public, as the occasional overlap of these regulations tends to create confusion for those that must acquire separate permits, from the city and TRCA, to facilitate projects. Section 108, Construction of Green Roofs states that the city is authorized to pass a by -law requiring and governing the construction of green roofs if the provisions of the by -law do not conflict with the provisions of a regulation made under the Building Code Act, 1992. TRCA staff commend the province and the city for including this initiative. However,' staff recommend that the Act be amended to permit the city to pass a by -law requiring and governing the construction of "green technologies" in order to incorporate a broader range of initiatives that promote sustainable planning and design principles for development within the city. 355 Section 111, Land Use Planning - TRCA is generally in support of recent provincial initiatives on land use planning and Ontario Municipal Board (OMB) reform, introduced through Bill 51, and staff generally support the ways in which Bill 51 impacts the new City of Toronto Act. TRCA's official comments on Bill 51 are currently under review with Planning and Development staff and will be the subject of another staff report. Proposed Section, Urban Design Panel, the task force recommended a broadening of the city's powers and authority to set architectural and urban design standards, as well as, the ability to establish a design review panel similar to those found in other cities in North America. TRCA support these initiatives and powers given that the natural environment is adequately represented in the provision of integrated urban design standards, and that balanced professional perspectives are brought to the panel forum incorporating state -of- the -art urban ecology and ecological design within the professional milieu. An excellent example of this type of progressive urban design forum, incorporating environmental and economic sustainability experts, is found within the National Capital Commission in Ottawa. TRCA supports the inclusion of a section on Urban Design Panel in the Act. Section 114(5).2(iv) and (v) and Section 114(6) clarifies the city's ability to consider the character, scale, appearance and design features of buildings, and their sustainable design, when reviewing applications for Site Plan control, but only to the extent that it is a matter of exterior design. This is a new power never formerly recognized by the Planning Act. Staff suggest that the limitation to exterior design may be due to provisions under the Building Code Act. Staff recommend that they be directed to discuss with the city and the province the most appropriate legislative framework for ensuring that the City of Toronto, and all municipalities, have the authority to incorporate comprehensive sustainable building design, such as the Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) rating system, into the review of entire developments, and not limit this approval power solely to the exterior of the building. Section 114(10)(e), Site Plan Control states that as a condition of Site Plan approval the city may require the owner of the land to convey part of the land to the city for a public transit right -of -way. TRCA staff commend the city and the province on including this initiative to support the provincial interest in improving air quality. However, TRCA requests that another section be added to the Act which states that as a condition of Site Plan approval, the city may require the owner of the land to convey part of the land to the city for the purpose of preserving the features and functions of the natural heritage system and /or preventing natural hazards. Currently, such conveyances are usually obtained through the Official Plan Amendment, Re- zoning and Consent processes, but not through Site Plan process. Section 445, Agreement with Conservation Authority - this section mirrors an existing provision in the City of Toronto Act that enables the city to exempt from property taxation lands owned by TRCA and managed and controlled by the city under agreement with TRCA. It goes further to enable the city to set speed limits on roads within such lands. TRCA is satisfied that this section continues the existing ability of the city to exempt TRCA lands from property taxation. 356 CONCLUSIONS The detailed framework for broadening and enabling powers for the City of Toronto note that a strong Toronto must be an environmentally sustainable heart of a vibrant region, in addition to being economically strong, and socially and culturally vibrant. The city is provided with the legislative authority and some financial tools to fulfill its responsibilities and address the existing and future community needs - one of which is acting as a steward of the natural environment and the city's public assets. The growing demands of intensification will continue to require a focused effort to manage natural assets under the pressure of increased population and redevelopment. The City of Toronto and TRCA have a long history of stewarding the natural assets of the city together, and TRCA has a broader provincial mandate looking after the health of the watersheds beyond the city boundaries as well. The new City of Toronto Act and TRCA's vision for The Living City are compatible in that they both recognize the need to protect the environmental well being of the city and the health, safety and well being of its people. The Act may have implications for the implementation of the TRCA mandate. Therefore, in order to foster continued excellent partnerships between Toronto, the province and other government agencies, acknowledgment of TRCA's role in the natural heritage and public safety mandate need to be included in the new Act. TRCA also requests that the city and province consider establishing a range of financial incentives to generate revenue, supporting both the City of Toronto and TRCA's environmental and public safety programs and responsibilities. Report prepared by: Carolyn Woodland, extension 5214 For Information contact: Carolyn Woodland, extension 5214 Date: January 10, 2006 RES. #C90/05 - Moved by: Seconded by: . STATUTORY BORROWING RESOLUTION The Toronto and Region Conservation Authority's Rules of Conduct require annual approval of a resolution to provide for borrowing of funds, if necessary. Bill Fisch Maja Prentice THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) may borrow from the Royal Bank of Canada, or TRCA's member municipalities or other institutions as may be specifically approved by the Authority, up to the sum of TEN MILLION DOLLARS ($10,000,000) on the promissory note or notes of the TRCA until payment to TRCA of any grants and of sums to be paid to TRCA by participating municipalities designated as such under the Conservation Authorities Act, R.S.O. 1990, Chapter 27, at such rate of interest as the Minister of Natural Resources approves; 357 THAT the amount borrowed pursuant to this resolution, together with interest, be a charge upon the whole of the monies received or to be received by the TRCA by way of grants, etc., and when such monies are received, and of sums received or to be received by the TRCA from the participating municipalities, as and when such monies are received; THAT the Statutory Borrowing Resolution remain in effect until rescinded by the Authority; AND FURTHER THAT the signing officers of the TRCA are hereby authorized to take such action as may be necessary to give effect thereto. CARRIED BACKGROUND The TRCA's Rules of Conduct, Section XVIII, Banking and Borrowing, require that the borrowing of money by TRCA shall be authorized by a resolution of the Authority. RATIONALE The proposed borrowing resolution provides that the TRCA may borrow up to $10 million. This amount is necessary in the event that certain land acquisitions or other capital expenditures proceed prior to the actual receipt of funding from TRCA's funding partners. Currently, TRCA maintains a credit facility with the Royal Bank in the amount of one million dollars. This credit facility has not been used in recent years. Although the Authority has been asked annually to approve a borrowing resolution, there is, in fact, no requirement under the Conservation Authorities Act or the Authority's own Rules of Conduct for an annual approval of the borrowing resolution. It is recommended that proposed resolution will remain in effect until rescinded by the Authority. Staff will advise the board of any situation requiring significant or long -term borrowing. Report prepared by: Rocco Sgambelluri, extension 5232 For Information contact: Jim Dillane, 416- 667 -6292 or Rocco Sgambelluri, extension 5232 Date: January 4, 2006 RES. #C91/05 - APPOINTMENT OF AUDITORS The Conservation Authorities Act requires every conservation authority to undergo an audit of its accounts and transactions each year. Moved by: Seconded by: Rob Ford Maja Prentice THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE THAT Grant Thornton LLP be appointed auditors of the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) for the year 2006, in accordance with section 38 of the Conservation Authorities Act. CARRIED 358 BACKGROUND Section 38 of the Conservation Authorities Act reads as follows: 38. (1) Every authority shall cause its accounts and transactions to be audited annually by a person licensed under the Public Accountancy Act . R.S.O. 1990, c. C.27, s. 38 (1). (2) No person shall be appointed as auditor of an authority who is or during the preceding year was a member of the authority or who has or during the preceding year had any direct or indirect interest in any contract or any employment with the authority other than for services within his or her professional capacity. R.S.O. 1990, c. C.27, s. 38 (2). (3) RATIONALE Grant Thornton LLP was appointed TRCA auditor for 2004 and 2005 following a competition for audit services conducted in the summer of 2004. Although the contract period is for 5 years starting with 2004, the annual reappointment is subject to performance satisfactory to the TRCA. Staff is pleased to report that the 2004 audit was completed to its satisfaction and it anticipates similar performance for 2005. It is therefore recommending the reappointment of Grant Thornton LLP for the 2006 audit year. The audited 2005 financial statements will be presented for approval by the Authority at the April meeting. An authority shall, upon receipt of the auditors report of the examination of its accounts and transactions, forthwith forward a copy of the report to each participating municipality and to the Minister. R.S.O. 1990, c. C.27, s. 38 (3). Report prepared by: Rocco Sgambelluri, extension 5232 For Information contact: Rocco Sgambelluri, extension 5232 Date: January 5, 2006 RES. #C92 /05 - Moved by: Seconded by: ACCOUNTS RECEIVABLE December 30, 2005. Staff report on accounts receivable, as of December 30, 2005. Rob Ford Maja Prentice THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT the Accounts Receivable Status Report, as of December 30, 2005, be received. AMENDMENT RES. #C93 /05 Moved by: Seconded by: Rob Ford Maja Prentice 359 IN THAT the following be inserted after the main motion: THAT the 5 outstanding accounts for planning fees be taken to Small Claims Court; AND FURTHER THAT the clients be so advised. THE AMENDMENT WAS THE MAIN MOTION, AS AMENDED, WAS CARRIED CARRIED RATIONALE The schedule below summarizes the status of receivables, including aging and classification. The schedule excludes $15,185 in accumulated interest arrears on invoices outstanding for more than 30 days. ACCOUNTS RECE VABLE AGING, BY CATEGORY (Excluding Municipal Levy and TWRC Funding- As at December 30. 20051 Items in excess of $1,000.00 included in the 90- plus -days column, are as follows: CLIENT NAME CURRENT 31 TO 60 DAYS 61 TO 90 DAYS 90 PLUS DAYS TOTAL % SCHOOLS AND SCHOOL BOARDS 74,963 24,919 1,870 948 102,700 8.2% GOVERNMENT 614,629 216,571 0 1,092 832,292 66.3% DEVELOPMENT SERVICES 25,500 5,400 21,250 52,754 104,904 8.4% CORPORATE, INDIVIDUAL AND COMMUNITY GROUPS 47,762 91,348 33,755 41,569 214,434 17.1% TOTAL 762,854 338,238 56,875 96,363 1,254,330 100.0% % OF TOTAL 60.8% 27.0% 4.5% 7.7% 100.0% Items in excess of $1,000.00 included in the 90- plus -days column, are as follows: CLIENT NAME AMOUNT $ ARREARS INTEREST $ AGE (DAYS) NOTES Wild Water Kingdom 35,124.86 Note 172 Interim property tax bill. 533595 Ontario Ltd. 4,119.50 188.17 117 Archaeological services Basciano Parkin Ltd. 2,000.00 576.05 526 Planning fees. Brutto Consulting Ltd. 7,500.00 3,000.00 1,876.73 695.27 453 425 Planning fees. Planning fees. Glen Pietrowski 10,000.00 2,689.83 490 Planning fees. Ron Witton 7,000.00 1,882.88 499 Planning fees. Rice Development Group 10,000.00 1,702.46 327 Planning fees. TOTALS 78,744.36 8,611.39 Note: Interest charged as per lease agreement 360 The outstanding accounts for planning fees are deemed to be collectible. These accounts occurred as the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority transitioned to the new fee schedule during 2004. Staff are pursuing individual meetings with these last few outstanding accounts to attempt to resolve payment. Collection of planning fees has improved since the new fee schedule was implemented two years ago and staff do not anticipate that the list of problem accounts will grow significantly. Staff believe that there is still some leverage available to deal with these outstanding accounts. The amount due from Wild Water Kingdom is deemed collectible. Receivable balances, as reported on each of the previous reports to the advisory board, after 2002, are presented as follows: DATE Total $ 90 -Plus $ December 30, 2005 1,254,330 96,363 October 27, 2005 708,624 233,924 August 31, 2005 1,127,018 106,070 May 20, 2005 671,964 126,831 March 31, 2005 841,871 183,755 February 15, 2005 699,123 189,490 December 30, 2004 1,935,416 245,815 October 25, 2004 1,127,102 180,891 September 28, 2004 876,800 187,754 September 3, 2004 936,923 197,539 May 17, 2004 1,018,188 129,505 February 17, 2004 1,386,809 178,370 January 7, 2004 1,064,464 45,382 November 2, 2003 951,999 101,194 August 24, 2003 768,825 125,803 May 25, 2003 445,116 168,327 March 2, 2003 709,807 141,313 Report prepared by: Rocco Sgambelluri, extension 5232 For Information contact: Rocco Sgambelluri, extension 5232 Date: January 4, 2006 SECTION IV - RES. #C94/05 - ITEMS FOR THE INFORMATION OF THE BOARD 2005 REQUESTS FOR PROPOSALS AND QUOTATIONS Year End Summary. Receipt of the summary of Requests for Proposals and Requests for Quotations approved by the Chief Administrative Officer from June 25, 2005 to December 31, 2005. 361 Moved by: Seconded by: Bill Fisch Bill O'Donnell IT IS RECOMMENDED THAT the year end summary of Requests for Proposals and Requests for Quotations approved by the Chief Administrative Officer from June 25, 2005 to December 31, 2005, be received. CARRIED BACKGROUND At Authority Meeting #5/05, held on June 24, 2005, Resolution #A124/05 was approved as follows: THAT the Purchasing Policy dated May, 2005, with the following amendments, be approved; • staff report to the Business Excellence Advisory Board semi - annually with a list of all Requests for Quotations and Requests for Proposals approved by the Chief Administrative Officer pursuant to Schedule 'A'; • Schedule A' be amended by adding as note 4 the following: "/f the lowest bidder is not selected that a report be provided to the Executive Committee at the next available meeting for their information."; • Schedule 'A' be amended by changing approval limits of Acceptable Bid or Proposal to $25,000 - $200,000 Executive Committee and Up to $25,000 Chief Administrative Officer; • amending Section 1.7 by adding "an Authority Member" to paragraph 4; AND FURTHER THAT the "Policies and Procedures for Purchase of Goods and Services and Disposal of Equipment', dated September, 1995, as amended, be rescinded. Over the past six months, staff has been familiarizing itself with the new Purchasing Policy and developing the procedures for administering the policy. As permitted under the policy, the Chief Administrative Officer has now designated senior staff, generally including Director and Manager level positions, approval authority for purchases up to $10,000. Pursuant to the resolution quoted above, the summary of Requests for Quotations and Requests for Proposals from implementation of the new Purchasing Policy on June 25, 2005 until December 31, 2005, is found in Attachments 1 and 2, respectively. Given the volume of small amount transactions under $10,000, staff have limited the report to include items in excess of this threshhold. 362 Further, the new policy states that Requests for Tender over $200,000 require Authority approval and from $100,000 to $200,000 require Executive Committee approval. The terms "tender" and "quotation" are carefully defined in TRCA's Purchasing Policy. In the process of calling for competitive "quotations" for cleaning services and various waterfront projects listed in Attachment 1, the procedure for "tenders" was used. The Chief Administrative Officer approved the two "tenders" because they were less than $100,000. Note 2 of Schedule A of the policy requires that if the lowest acceptable bid as a result of a Request for Tender is less than $100,000, Executive Committee approval is still required. Had these competitive calls been correctly labelled as Requests for Quotation, there would have been no requirement for Executive Committee approval. Staff has been advised of proper purchasing procedures under these circumstances. For Information contact: Kathy Stranks, extension 5264; Jim Dillane 416- 667 -6292; Rocco Sgambelluri, extension 5232 Date: December 16, 2005 Attachments: 2 363 Attachment 1 REQUESTS FOR QUOTATION Lowest Bid (up to $100.000 Report Name Awarded Bidder Cost ($) Acquisition of Vehicles • Mini Passenger Van • Heavy Duty Cargo Van • Passenger Van • Cutaway ChassisNan Body • Two 4X4 Crew Cab trucks North York Chrysler Marvin Starr Pontiac Buick Cadillac GMC. Inc. Marvin Starr Pontiac Buick Cadillac GMC. Inc. Dixie Ford Sales Ltd. Parkway Honda 23,503.00 plus applicable taxes 25,387.00 plus applicable taxes 33,808.00 plus applicable taxes • 38,613.00 plus applicable taxes 69,498.00 plus applicable taxes Replacement of Production Copier Ikon Office Solutions 1,433, plus applicable taxes, for 36 months Event Pavilion • permanent equipment • portable equipment Christie Lites Christie Lites 24,337.60 plus applicable taxes 29,037.41 plus applicable taxes Offsite Records Storage Solution Securit Records Management 25,000 plus applicable taxes Boyd Office Municipal Water Service Avertex Utility Solutions Inc. 98,088.00 plus applicable taxes Cleaning Services for Head Office, Downsview Park Office, Boyd Office and Kortright Centre for Conservation MBM Cleaning Services 87,696.00 plus applicable taxes 364 Tender Opening Sub Committee Various Waterfront Projects, City of Toronto • Supply and delivery of cobble stone • Supply and delivery of armour stone • Supply and delivery of armour stone • Supply and delivery of boulders • Supply and delivery of boulders • Supply and delivery of boulders Dufferin Aggregates Rigbe's Quarry- Rigbe's Quarry J.C. Rock Ltd. Nelson Aggregate Co. Nelson Aggregate Co. REQUESTS FOR QUOTATION Sole Source (up to $50,000 25,620.00 plus applicable taxes 49,560.00 plus applicable taxes 72,000.00 plus applicable taxes 31,036.25 plus applicable taxes 32,578.00 plus applicable taxes 51,799.00 plus applicable taxes Report Name Awarded Bidder Cost ($) Don Mouth Naturalization and Port Lands Flood Protection Project Gartner Lee Limited 31,600.00 plus applicable taxes. 365 Attachment 2 REQUESTS FOR PROPOSAL Competitive Bid (up to $100,000 Report Name Awarded Bidder Cost ($) Consulting Services for Upper Mimico Creek Aquatic Restoration Project Geomorphic Solution 47,515.89 plus applicable taxes Consultant Services to Prepare Digital Floodline Mapping for the Rainbow Creek Subwatershed Acres International Limited 22,500.00 plus applicable taxes Carruther Creek Watershed Hydrology Update Philips Engineering Limited 24,000.00 plus applicable taxes Consultant Services to Prepare Digital Floodline Mapping for the Mimico Creek Watershed Greck and Associates Limited 42,100.00 plus applicable taxes The City of Toronto Valley and Shoreline Regeneration Project (2002 -2006) 121 - 129 Col. Danforth Trail Erosion Control Project Aquafor Beech Limited, in association with Terraprobe Limited and Schollen and Company Incorporated 19,921.00 plus applicable taxes The City of Toronto Valley and Shoreline Regeneration Project (2002 -2006) 221 Martin Grove Road Erosion Control Project Jacques Whitford Environment Limited 19,740.00 plus applicable taxes Heating Upgrade to Samuel Stong House Pete's General Contracting 37,800.00 plus applicable taxes Security Perimeter Fencing and Cantilevered Access Gate Installation - BCPV Bramalea Fence Ltd. 15,609.16 plus applicable taxes REQUESTS FOR PROPOSAL Sole Source (up to $50,000 Report Name Awarded Bidder Cost ($) Etobicoke and Mimico Creek Watersheds Report Card - 2006 Technical Background Report Kidd Consulting 9,186.92 plus applicable taxes 366 TERMINATION ON MOTION, the meeting terminated at 9:30 a.m., on Friday, January 20, 2006. David Barrow Chair /ks 367 Brian Denney Secretary- Treasurer