HomeMy WebLinkAboutBusiness Excellence Advisory Board 2006erTHE TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY
MEETING OF THE BUSINESS EXCELLENCE ADVISORY BOARD #1/06
March 3, 2006
The Business Excellence Advisory Board Meeting #1/06, was held in the South Theatre,
Black Creek Pioneer Village, on Friday, March 3, 2006. 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
Andrew Schulz Member
ABSENT
Paul Ainslie Member
Bill Fisch Member
Peter Milczyn _ Member
Maja Prentice Vice Chair
RES. #C1 /06 - MINUTES
Moved by:
Seconded by:
Bill O'Donnell
Dick O'Brien
THAT the Minutes of Meeting #7/05, held on January 20, 2006, be approved.
CARRIED
PRESENTATIONS
(a) A presentation by Moranne Burnet, Project Planning Coordinator, Restoration Services,
TRCA, in regards to projects undertaken by the Environmental Engineering Project
Group.
1
RES. #C2 /06 - PRESENTATIONS
Moved by:
Seconded by:
Bill O'Donnell
Andrew Schulz
THAT above -noted presentation (a) be heard and received.
CARRIED
SECTION I - ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY ACTION
RES. #C3 /06 - GREATEST HITS IN 2006
Approval of list of strategic projects to be undertaken by each division in
2006.
Moved by: Bill O'Donnell
Seconded by: Andrew Schulz
THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT the report dated Feb. 15, 2006,
being the list of 2006 TRCA strategic iniatives, "TRCA's 2006 Greatest Hits ", be approved.
CARRIED
BACKGROUND
Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) Directors were tasked with identifying the
strategic priorities for their division for 2006 in the form of greatest hits outlined below. To
ensure alignment with the strategic direction of TRCA and its members, staff are seeking
approval of these initiatives.
CA O's Office
• Contributions from the federal and provincial governments for The Living City Centre.
• Major announcement for the 50th anniversary Annual Meeting in 2007.
• Research and development coordination.
• Project management for strategic corporate priorities.
• York Region Sustainability Plan.
• Conservation Ontario strategic direction.
• Increased public profile and strategic communications.
Ecology
• Complete guidelines and policy documents for Terrestrial Natural Heritage, Stream
crossing guidelines, and water budget - balance, sediment and erosion control.
• Sustainable Community Attributes - work with developers and municipalities to define what
sustainability looks like - in subdivision planning, redevelopment, on the lot and in the
house.
• Work with hospitals, retail, municipalities and school boards to identify energy efficiency
opportunities.
• Undertake several training activities to establish ourselves as science specialists.
• Seaton Community Sustainability Plan.
• MOU.
2
• Development of Clean Air Strategy.
Finance and Business Services
• Land Acquisition - acquire minimum 300 acres.
• Complete the multi -year plan for renovation of 5 Shoreham, and expansion of head office
functions to Boyd and PDP.
• Initiate the project for a new "Centre for Excellence in Conservation and Sustainability" to be
located adjacent to BCPV.
• Implement database management discipline and broaden access to GIS tools.
• Improve the budget process and update the business plan
Parks and Culture
• Implementation of Kids Free Program for Conservation Parks and Kortright addressing
social concerns regarding health and environmental awareness.
• Continue to lessen operational reliance on levy through partnerships and business growth,
at Black Creek Pioneer Village and elsewhere.
• TRCA to enjoy successful integration and management of Bathurst Glen Golf Course.
Planning and Development
• Prepare a draft Living City Policies for Watersheds (updating and consolidation of TRCA
development planning policy).
• Introduce a Development Approval Procedural Manual for public assistance (as part of our
streamlining and improved communications strategy).
• Contribute to defining /negotiating the Natural Heritage System for the Greater Golden
Horseshoe Growth Plan, through participation in CAMC, TNHS, Natural Spaces program
and the Growth Plan sub -area assessments.
• Complete the Generic Regulation registration requirements and work with municipalities to
implement the new regulation for planning purposes.
Restoration Services
• Completion of the Western Beaches Watercourse Facility.
• Completion of Restoration Services Centre.
• Completion of CN Bridge expansion for Lower Don Flood Control Project.
• Commencement of Mimico Apartment Strip.
• Commencement of TTP Master Plan implementation.
Watershed Management
• Completion of the Humber, Rouge and first cut of the Don Integrated Watershed Plan.
• Opening of Phase 1 of Port Union.
• New Terms of Reference for watershed councils.
• New arrangement in place for the Rouge Park and implementation plan for the Rouge.
• Establish source water protection committee and make substantial progress towards a
region -wide source water protection plan.
• Majority completion of the Remedial Action Plan (RAP) Progress Report and new RAP
targets defined.
• Continue growth of outreach and stewardship activities - Greenbelt and additional funding
from the Oak Ridges Moraine Foundation.
• Financial planning and accountability - new division business plan in place.
3
• Several EcoSchool designations.
Conservation Foundation
• Complete funding of Sustainable House competition and building.
• Launch a legacy campaign.
• Raise $1.5 million with the Corporate Cabinet.
Report prepared by: Kathy Stranks, extension 5264
For Information contact: Kathy Stranks, extension 5264
Date: February 15, 2006
RES. #C4/06 - AGREEMENT WITH ONTARIO REALTY CORPORATION
Operation and Development of Oak Ridges Corridor Park, Town of
Richmond Hill, Regional Municipality of York. Authorizes designated
officials to enter into an agreement for the operation and development of
Oak Ridges Corridor Park, Town of Richmond Hill, subject to terms and
conditions satisfactory to Toronto and Region Conservation Authority
staff and solicitors.
Moved by:
Seconded by:
Rob Ford
Andrew Schulz
THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT Toronto and Region
Conservation Authority (TRCA) enter into an agreement with Ontario Realty Corporation,
acting for the Province of Ontario, to operate and develop the Oak Ridges Corridor Park,
located in the Town of Richmond Hill, Regional Municipality of York;
THAT the agreement be based substantially on the principles set out in this
communication to the Business Excellence Advisory Board dated February 16, 2006;
THAT the final terms and conditions of the agreement be satisfactory to TRCA staff and
solicitors;
THAT staff be directed to advise the Chair of the Business Excellence Advisory Board of
the status of these negotiations;
AND FURTHER THAT the TRCA designated signing officers be authorized and directed to
take such action as is necessary to execute the agreement including obtaining all
necessary approvals and signing of documents
CARRIED
4
BACKGROUND
The Province of Ontario has designated about 1,000 acres of land in the north section of the
Town of Richmond Hill in the area of the community of Oak Ridges as a natural heritage park.
The lands are part of the Oak Ridges Moraine and the provincial Greenbelt designation.
Included in the proposed park is the existing Bathurst Glen Golf Course.
TRCA has been the project manager for planning and development of the park and has
coordinated the stakeholder consultation process that led to approval of the plan for the park,
including the major spine trail system.
TRCA is a signatory to a contribution agreement by which the existing land owners will
contribute about $3.5 million for creation of the spine trail system and restoration of the natural
heritage areas. TRCA is the designated agent for the province to direct the use of the funds for
development of the trail and restoration works.
TRCA has entered into a management agreement with Mattamy Homes, the owner of the
Bathurst Glen Golf Course, to manage and operate the golf course for the 2006 season. TRCA
has contracted with former employees of Bathurst Glen to assist in the operation of the golf
course for the 2006 season.
RATIONALE
It has been the intent of the province, as represented by the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and
Housing representative, to have TRCA manage the lands on behalf of the province.
Negotiations with Ontario Realty Corporation (ORC) representatives were initiated in
November, 2005. Only recently has ORC offered a draft agreement. The province expects to
complete the land exchange by March 31, 2006, subject to compliance with Environmental
Assessment Act requirements. To meet this deadline, the agreement with TRCA must be in
place. The agreement is subject to approval of cabinet.
Staff recommend that direction be given to enter into the agreement subject to terms and
conditions satisfactory to staff and TRCA's solicitor, Robert Rossow of Gardiner Roberts LLP.
The terms and conditions would entrench the following principles:
1. Development and operation of the park must be cost neutral to TRCA. All TRCA costs and
overhead must be fully covered.
2. TRCA will not be required to fund the park, although TRCA is the logical agency to facilitate
the partnerships necessary to achieve the park. Revenues from the golf course and other
sources must be available to pay for development and operation of the park.
3. TRCA will not be responsible for any environmental problems associated with the lands at
the time they come under management agreement.
4. Historic buildings on the lands will be the responsibility of the province on agreement that
the province fully fund the cost of maintaining such structures.
5. The initial term for the agreement will be 4 years, subject to renewal by mutual agreement,
with the ability to terminate in the event TRCA decides it is no longer viable to manage the
park on a cost neutral basis.
5
6. In any given year, net revenues from the golf course or other sources will be allocated first
to a contingency reserve to offset future situations when revenues are insufficient to operate
the park, second to address restoration or other capital deficiencies needed to implement
the park plan and third, to be used to acquire additional Oak Ridges Moraine, and /or
Greenbelt lands to expand the park.
7. The province must acknowledge that the terms and conditions of the contribution
agreement apply and further that the existing management agreement with Mattamy
Homes for the operation of the golf course must be respected.
In November of 2005, when the Authority directed staff to enter into the agreement with
Mattamy Homes for the operation of the golf course for the 2006 season, Resolution #A269/05
was approved at Authority Meeting #9/05, held on November 25, 2005 as follows (in part):
THAT the revenue generated from the operation of Bathurst Glen Golf Course and
Driving Range be used for land acquisition purposes;
Point number 6 addresses the foregoing resolution.
DETAILS OF WORK TO BE DONE
Staff will seek to negotiate an agreement that addresses the principles as outlined above. At
Authority Meeting #2/06, to be held on March 24, 2005, staff will report on the status of
negotiations.
Report prepared by: Jim Dillane, extension 6292
For Information contact: Jim Dillane, extension 6292; Ron Dewell, extension 5245
Date: February 16, 2006.
RES. #C5/06 - GLEN MAJOR FOREST TRAIL HEAD AND TRAIL CONNECTIONS
Report back on action taken and highlight 2006 trail planning and
development initiatives.
Moved by:
Seconded by:
Rob Ford
Andrew Schulz
THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT staff continue to work with the
Walker Woods and Glen Major Forest Trail Planning and Stewardship Committee to
implement, maintain and monitor the approved trail plan;
AND FURTHER THAT members of the committee and interested residents be advised of
this report.
CA- R-RtED
6
BACKGROUND
At Business Excellence Advisory Board Meeting #2/05, held on April 15, 2005, Mr. Jonathan
Corbett made a delegation expressing his concern over the location of a proposed trail on
Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) -owned land. The proposed trail extended
500 metres from the new trail head and car park, located off Concession 7 in the Township of
Uxbridge, to the existing trail network in the Glen Major Forest. In addition, plans provided a
200 metre buffer between the proposed trail and private property, as well as proposed native
tree and shrub plantings to screen use and improve the buffer.
At Authority Meeting #3/05, held on April 29, 2005, Resolution # A70/05 was approved as
follows:
THAT staff continue to work with the Walker Woods and Glen Major Forest Trail Planning
and Stewardship Committee to implement, maintain and monitor the approved Trail Plan.
Following the April Authority meeting, TRCA staff relocated the proposed trail an additional 100
metres further away from private property, which increased the buffer to 300 metres. The trail
was then constructed and 1,100 native trees and shrubs were planted to improve the trail
buffer by screening users. Staff also completed the following tasks:
• additional direction and private property signs were installed on the Glen Major trails
around the residential area;
• posting and notifications were installed at the trail head kiosks to educate trail users about
trespass issues; and,
• a trail monitoring program was established with the help of the trail planning and
stewardship committee.
By the end of 2005, the trail monitoring program identified one recorded occurrence between
trail users and private property owners. In the one instance, there was a lost cyclist on May 22,
2005, who ventured onto private property seeking directions.
For the last four months staff has been working with the Walker Woods and Glen Major Forest
Trail Planning and Stewardship Committee to plan out trail work in 2006 and complete a
Trillium Foundation funding application. The 2006 trail work program includes the planning and
development of a trail head off Brock Road, 5 kilometres of new multi -use trail development, 1
kilometre of trail closures and the restoration of 5 trail erosion sites.,
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 initiative also compliments A Watershed Plan
for Duffins Creek and Carruthers Creek, as well as the provincial Oak Ridges Moraine
Conservation Plan. Existing uses and future demands are addressed in the trail plan including
a managed, sustainable, balanced approach that ensures the protection and prosperity of the
natural system while providing enjoyable public use.
7
The trail plan has been approved and endorsed by the Duffins Creek Headwaters Management
Plan Advisory Committee, the Walker Woods and Glen Major Forest Trail Planning and
Stewardship Committee, the Authority, Region of Durham, Township 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 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 Forest trail activities for 2006 include:
• develop a trail head and car park off Brock Road in Uxbridge;
• close 1 kilometre of trail for restoration purposes;
• develop 5 kilometres of new multi -use trails to Zink the new trail head to existing trails;
• restore 5 trail erosion sites;
• plant 320 native trees and 190 native shrubs;
• host trail head official opening in the fall of 2006; and,
• members of the committee will be advised of this report as well as interested community
residents who appeared before the advisory board in 2005.
FINANCIAL DETAILS
Funding for this work has been identified in the 2006 preliminary capital budget.
Report prepared by: Mike Bender, extension 5287
For Information contact: Mike Bender, extension 5287
Date: February 08, 2006
RES. #C6/06 - PEST MANAGEMENT POLICY
Approval of Pest Management Policy.
Moved by:
Seconded by:
Rob Ford
Andrew Schulz
THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT the attached Pest Management
Policy, dated February, 2006 be approved;
THAT this policy replace the Policy for Pesticide Use dated May 22, 2003 approved at
Authority Meeting #7/03, Resolution #A193/02;
8
THAT the principles of Integrated Pest Management (IPM) be the basis of the Pest
Management Policy and that Toronto Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) obtain
Integrated Pest Management Accreditation.
CARRIED
BACKGROUND
The TRCA Policy for Pesticide Use dated May 22, 2003 has been reviewed and updated in
order to achieve alignment with the strategic direction in which our municipal partners are
moving in reducing pesticide use and to support The Living City vision by adopting Integrated
Pest Management principles.
Our municipal partners are moving toward implementing by -laws promoting integrated pest
management principles and pesticide use restrictions. These by -laws will restrict the use of
pesticides on public and private property but permit the use of pesticides for certain situations
such as addressing a health hazard or an infestation to property. These by -laws will also allow
the use of lower risk pest control products such as soap, mineral oil, silicon dioxide, bacillus
thurnigiensis, boric acid, ferric phosphate, acetic acid, pyethrins and sulphur.
Integrated Pest Management (IPM) is an approach to pest control, not an alternative pest
control method. It employs a variety of methods that minimize the potential for adverse effects
on the environment. IPM prevents pest problems by eliminating pest habitat, promoting
optimal soil conditions and healthy plants. IPM promotes the use of mechanical, physical and
biological controls. Chemical controls are used only as a last resort.
The basic principles of an IPM program are:
• prevention through planning and managing ecosystems to prevent organisms from
becoming pests;
• identifying potential pest problems;
• monitoring populations of pests and beneficial organisms, pest damage and environmental
conditions;
• determining when action needs to be taken;
• reducing pest populations to acceptable levels using strategies that may include a
combination of biological, physical, cultural, mechanical, behavioural and chemical
controls;
• selection of the least toxic alternative;
• evaluating the effectiveness of treatments.
Integrated Pest Management Accreditation recognizes companies, parks systems, golf
courses and their superintendents and other institutions who demonstrate the knowledge and
commitment to the principles of IPM through a process of accreditation, audit and professional
development. It is believed that this accreditation will set future industry standards on pesticide
use, reduction and reporting. 'Plant Health Care' strategies demonstrate a pro- active approach
in implementing the use of organics, steams and top- dressings.
9
The Integrated Pest Management - Plant Health Care Council of Ontario (IPM -PHC Council of
Ontario) was created with representation from:
Landscape Ontario
Professional Lawn Care Association
Parks and Recreation Ontario
Structural Pest Management Association
Environmental Coalition of Ontario
International Society of Arboriculture
Ontario Parks Association
Ontario Golf Superintendents of Ontario
Crop Life Canada
Ontario Vegetation Management Association
Sports Turf Association
Pest Management Council Canada
IPM -PHC Council is administered through Ridgetown College, University of Guelph.
This council has established the IPM Accreditation Program (IPMAP) with demonstrated
commitment to the principals, professional development, public education and stringent
auditing and reporting.
RATIONALE
Since 2002, TRCA has operated a Sustainability Management System (SMS) which sets
environmental, social and economic targets toward sustainable operations. Integrating an IPM
program into the Pest Management Policy will promote all the necessary techniques to
suppress pests effectively, economically and in an environmentally sound manner. It will also
address public concern of indiscriminate use of pesticides, promote professional development,
provide public education and reduce the risk of pesticides to our environment. Performance
will be monitored and reported alongside TRCA indicators of sustainability. Accreditation helps
reduce pesticide reliance through cultural practices that promote plant health, pest prevention,
use of reduced -risk products and the application of pesticides only when absolutely necessary.
Joint application of these programs will demonstrate industry leadership in protecting and
enhancing natural areas, reducing mown areas, conserving water and protecting water quality.
DETAILS OF WORK TO BE DONE
An internal group with expertise in Integrated Pest Management will be established to give
direction on TRCA's operating guidelines with respect to habitat regeneration, plant health,
naturalization initiatives, public education, water monitoring and minimizing pesticide use.
TRCA will obtain IPM Accreditation by completing the following steps:
Step #1 Registration - TRCA representatives demonstrate their knowledge of IPM by
successfully completing the IPM Accreditation Exam. This step registers TRCA and
identifies the TRCA representatives as the IPM Agents for TRCA. The fee is $200.
Step #2 Continuing Education Credits - After completing the Examination, IPM Agents must
obtain a minimum of eight Continuing Education credits each year. Credits are
earned through attending industry conferences, meetings and seminars.
10
Step #3 Desk Review Audit - An annual review is carried out to show compliance with
pesticide usage, pesticide reduction where appropriate, employee training and
management, customer education and marketing materials. The Audit Fee is $435
annually. When successfully completed, TRCA will become 'Accredited - Level I'.
Continued accreditation is granted if requirements of IPM are met annually.
Step #4 On -site Audit - At least once every three years, On -site Audits are carried out by a
Certified Environmental Auditor designated through the Canadian Environmental
Auditing Association. When the On -site Audit is satisfactory, TRCA will become
'Accredited -Level II' .
FINANCIAL DETAILS
Implementation costs of the Pest Management Policy and IPM Accreditation are within various
business unit operating, capital and special program budgets.
Report prepared by: Derek Edwards, extension 5672
For Information contact: Derek Edwards, extension 5672
Date:February 7, 2006
Attachments: 1
11
Attachment 1
k"ITORONTO AND REGION -Y-
onservation
for The Living City
PEST MANAGEMENT
POLICY
12
Revised February, 2006
POLICY FOR PEST MANAGEMENT
POLICY STATEMENT
The Toronto Region Conservation Authority's (TRCA) Policy for Pest Management is founded
on the principles and ideals, that govern its mission and The Living City Vision. Recognizing
both the ecological benefits and potential negative impacts of pesticides, TRCA commits itself
to use pesticides only after other methods of achieving our objectives have been assessed and
deemed either inappropriate or impractical. All forms of pest management activities will be
based on the principles of Integrated Pest Management (IPM). As such, a variety of
preventative and non - chemical pest management strategies are used or considered before
using the least toxic approved pesticide. TRCA standards of practice for pesticide application
will continue to meet or exceed municipal, provincial and federal requirements.
This policy governs pest management in the following situations:
• in- building or in- structure;
• kitchen /food operations;
• recreation and park systems;
• TRCA operated non -park land holdings or that which is undertaken by TRCA staff for
regeneration or ecological protection purposes on any lands, or in waters, either owned or
not owned by TRCA;
• on contract / /lease and easement land;
• in nursery/forestry operations;
• residential lease properties.
PURPOSE
The purpose of this policy is to adopt an integrated pest management approach to the
management of all pests in support of our Living City Vision. In adopting this policy the TRCA
seeks to minimize the use of pesticides on TRCA- managed property and all property on which
it perform or manages pest control, while employing other means to limit the injurious effects of
pests. Where pesticides are required, TRCA will ensure responsible use by adhering to
Integrated Pest Management (IPM) principles as follows:
• use and promote sound pest prevention planning approaches. This includes the use of
good Plant Health Care practices,
• use a system of expert identification of pests and natural enemies that may control them.
• use pest population monitoring methods and pest action thresholds.
• use a range of management options for a pest problem based on the following prioritized
list -that emphasizes pest prevention and non - chemical alternatives:
• Prevention practices
• Biological controls
• Chemical Controls
• use and promote best pest management practices by evaluating the relative merits of
various pest management options.
• ensure that all programs involving pest management treatments are reviewed annually to
institute any possible improvements in accordance with the TRCA's commitment to IPM.
• pesticide products are used as a last recourse.
• provide staff training and leadership in IPM.
13
• promote IPM with other government agencies, municipalities, environmental groups and
related industry associations in the region. Many pest problems extend far beyond TRCA
property and require a cooperative, regional approach to their management.
And furthermore, in accordance with the responsible use of pesticides, TRCA ensures that:
• pesticides are to be used for designated purposes only, or unless ordered to apply them
by a Medical Officer of Health or a mandated authority under the Noxious Weed Act.
• a request is submitted to Sustainability Management System (SMS) Coordinator outlining:
• IPM approach and alternatives to chemical control considered and the reasons for
or against their employment;
• a description of the use /project being undertaken.
• the SMS Coordinator reviews and gives recommendation.
• if it is assessed by the SMS Coordinator that pesticides are the only means of control,
approval is requested from the TRCA Chief Administrative Officer (CAO) or designates.
• all applications of pesticides must be performed by a trained and licensed exterminator.
• all uses of pesticide must conform to federal and provincial statues and the appropriate
municipal bylaws (if applicable).
• all pesticide and other significant pest control procedures will be documented and reported
to the SMS Coordinator for tracking. The accountable person will record:
• IPM approach and alternative to chemical control considered and reason for or
against their employment;
• a description of the use /project being undertaken;
• the date of application;
• the amount of pesticide used;
•• name of applicator;
• the type of pesticide used
• effectiveness of treatment.
• the SMS Coordinator will present to the Board an annual report detailing all pesticide and
other significant pest control procedures.
14
DEFINITIONS:
Approved Pesticide: a pesticide registered with the Pest Management Agency (PMRA) of
Health Canada.
Biological Controls: other organisms that prey specifically on a pest.
Chemical Controls: means pesticides that are chemical products.
Cultural Practices: methods of care for optimal growth and a suitable environment for plant
health.
Ecology: the study of an organism and its interaction with its environment.
Integrated Pest Management (IPM): a multi - disciplinary, ecological approach to the
management of pests based first on prevention and when needed, a control (biological,
cultural, physical or mechanical intervention), saving registered pesticide application as a last
resort.
Pest: an organism that causes damage, is a nuisance or interferes with the health,
environmental, functional or aesthetic objectives of mankind.
Pesticide: a substance that prevents, repels, alters or kills unwanted pests. Pesticides
include insecticides used against insects, herbicides to control weeds, rodenticides for rodent
control, fungicides for fungi and so on.
Pest Action Threshold: the number or density of a pest when management action should be
taken.
Physical Controls: machine trimming of weeds, mechanical traps or other devices like
weather stripping under a door to prevent access by a pets.
Plant Health Care: cultural practices designed to maximize the well being of turf or other
desired vegetation and minimize the change of infestation or damage by pests.
15
RES. #C7/06 - POLICY FOR MANAGING HAZARD TREES
Approval of the Policy for Managing Hazard Trees.
Moved by:
Seconded by:
Rob Ford
Andrew Schulz
THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT the Policy for Managing Hazard
Trees be approved;
AND FURTHER THAT the "Policy for Managing Hazard Trees" replace the Conservation
Ontario's generic Hazard Tree Evaluation and Abatement Guidelines adopted by Toronto
and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) in 2000.
CARRIED
RATIONALE
The Hazard Tree Evaluation and Abatement Guideline that has been in use by TRCA since
2000 was set out by Conservation Ontario as the minimum standard for conservation
authorities regarding hazard tree management. TRCA staff has reviewed this guideline and
developed enhanced policy and operating procedures to address safety issues regarding the
management of hazard trees on TRCA -owned land.
To complete this policy and Operational Procedures for Managing Hazard Trees, staff reviewed
a number of similar facilities' policies and guidelines including the following:
• Verdict of Coroner's Jury on the inquest into the death at Royal Botanical Gardens;
• Royal Botanical Gardens Hazard Tree Policy Draft;
• City of Toronto "Standardized Forestry Policies ";
• City of Mississauga "Tree Hazard Evaluation Form ";
• Conservation Ontario "Hazard Tree Evaluation and Abatement Policy ";
• Grand River Conservation Authority "Hazard Tree Policy and Action Strategy" ;
• "The US Parks Service Hazard Tree Guidelines ";
• City of St. John's policy on Hazardous Trees ";
• The Corporation of the District of North Vancouver policy on "Tree Work in the District ";
• Southern Urban Forestry Associates "Tree Hazard Inspections ";
• Cowichan Valley Regional District policy on "Hazardous Trees - Community Parks ";
• Queen's University Urban Forest Plan; and
• U.S. Forest Service "An Example Tactical Approach to Management of Trees in Recreation
Areas ".
The recommended policy and operational procedures have a number of significant changes
and improvements:
• establishes a clear chain of command with the lines of communication and reporting
structure specifically identified;
• defines different types of properties within TRCA ownership and identifies guidelines
geared to their use;
• provides inspection protocols;
• clearly outlines the hazard tree rating system and abatement strategy;
• provides standardized forms to record abatement strategy and record of work completed;
• provides Hazard Tree Evaluation Form and Inspection Form to ensure proper
documentation and follow up; and
16
• expands on and provides procedures 'specific to TRCA.
CONCLUSION
The recommended Policy For Managing Hazard Trees is outlined in Attachment 1 and the
Operational Procedures for Managing Hazard Trees is outlined in Attachment 2.
Report prepared by: Derek Edwards, extension 5672
For Information contact: Derek Edwards, extension 5672
Tom Hildebrand, extension 5379
Date: January 30, 2006
Attachments: 2
17
Attachment 1
POLICY FOR MANAGING HAZARD TREES
)C TORONTO AND REGION "Y,
onservation
for The Living City
TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY
POLICY FOR MANAGING HAZARD TREES ON TRCA PROPERTY
GENERAL POLICY
Extensive portions of TRCA properties contain trees as natural or landscape features. Often
trees are located near structures or in areas where public and staff are invited and could
present a danger. It is generally accepted that trees have a finite life span and a tree in
excellent condition has a potential to fail. However, a tree with a structural defect(s) at any age
increases the potential for failure.
IT IS THE POLICY OF THE TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY TO
MAINTAIN THE SAFETY OF ITS LANDS FOR STAFF AND THE PUBLIC FROM TREES THAT
POSE IMMINENT RISK.
TRCA reserves the right to shut down or close off an area due to unsafe conditions when such
a drastic measure needs to be taken. This may involve any one of the uses commonly found
on TRCA properties such as trails, picnic or parking areas. The area will re -open when risk to
staff and the public has been abated
The purpose of this policy is to outline a hazard tree program and sets the foundation for
business units of TRCA that are involved with managing hazard trees. The need for such a
program arises from the responsibility of TRCA to reasonably protect visitors, staff and
infrastructure from tree hazards and show a deliberate effort by TRCA to ensure the health and
safety of people on its properties.
There are four primary objectives to implementing this policy at TRCA:
1. That an inspection strategy be designed to ensure properties are routinely inspected
and problematic trees are dealt with in a timely manner;
2. To implement a hazard tree rating system so that protocols are established and
adhered to when dealing with hazard trees. This rating system will provide consistency
amongst TRCA staff when documenting assessments as well as quick establishment of
an action plan;
3. That an abatement plan be developed to address the result of the hazard tree
assessment;
4. To place the responsibility of managing and administering this policy with the TRCA
Forester, who will ensure that it is being adhered to as outlined.
19
Attachment 2
OPERATIONAL PROCEDURES FOR MANAGING HAZARD TREES
e
CTORONTO AND REGION " -
onservation
for The Living City
20
PART 1 - HAZARD TREE INSPECTION AND POLICY IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGY
Introduction
The basis of managing hazard trees is routine inspection of TRCA properties as defined in
these operational procedures. This allows hazard trees to be identified, trees at risk to be
assessed for increased hazard potential and non - hazardous trees to be inspected for future
risk potential.
Each time a property is inspected, the inspection shall be documented on a standard "Hazard
Tree Inspection Form" form, with information including the date, time, assessor's name and
any other relevant information. As required, additional documentation including a "Hazard Tree
Rating Form" and photographs should be attached to the "Hazard Tree Inspection Form"
record and filed according to TRCA's records retention policy. Digital photographs will be
stored on the hazard tree database.
The Restoration Services division will monitor and track hazard trees in conjunction with their
Managed Forest Tax Incentive Program commitments, and managed forest programs and
activities, on areas other than active -use conservation areas and their associated peripheral
properties. A digital hazard tree inventory, showing existing trees will be maintained by the
TRCA Forester. This inventory will house all relevant tree information, including abatements
and will be restricted to authorized TRCA staff under the direction of the Chief Administrative
Officer.
Area Superintendents will continue to ensure the monitoring of hazard trees within the
active -use parks and associated peripheral properties. The peripheral properties and
associated trails will be identified through geographic information systems and responsibilities
identified. Some of these responsibilities will require additional funding for increased record
keeping costs. Within three business days of their completion all "Hazard Tree Inspection
Forms" will be forwarded to the TRCA Forester, for inspection, prioritization and filing.
It will be the responsibility of the TRCA Forester to ensure the availability of staff for hazard tree
evaluations in passive -use conservation areas, resource management tracts, residential
properties and rented farm land. No trees will be removed from these areas without the
consent of the TRCA Forester. When many trees have been identified for abatement,
prioritizing of these works may be necessary. It will be the responsibility of the TRCA Forester
and Area Superintendents to prioritize these works under applicable budget restraints. If trees
cannot be removed, then the target areas must be closed to public use and staff access will be '
restricted until the hazards have been abated.
The TRCA Forester and Area Superintendents will organize outside quotations for
tree abatement whenever necessary.
TRCA properties will be mapped and identified digitally in GIS and be identified by their
respective designations. All formal trail systems will be identified on a comprehensive map
using geographic positioning system methods to identify each public trail.
21
Three -year budget forecasts, budget estimates, and up -to -date yearly expenditure tracking will
be the responsibility of the TRCA Forester.
The TRCA owns several different types of land. Each property has a different use, a different
set of targets and therefore, a different perspective of tree - related liability. Therefore, each
property should be inspected with a different specified frequency and thoroughness.
The types of properties within TRCA are as follows; active -use conservation areas, passive -use
areas /resource management tracts, residential properties, rented farm land, contract/lease and
easement land, limited -use open land, and management- agreement land.
INSPECTION AREAS
Active -Use Conservation Areas
Active -use conservation area is a broad term used to cover many of the lands owned by TRCA
which can have low to high volumes of people engaged in various activities for recreational,
educational, business or scientific purposes. For the purposes of the hazard tree program,
lands included in this group include; office environs, heritage sites, education /interpretative
facilities and field centres.
An active -use conservation area also refers to a gated, paid -use property designed for public
recreation. These properties possess some significant features to attract patrons including
water -based activities, overnight campsites, nature trails, picnic areas, sports fields and
playgrounds. Some of these properties receive significantly higher use during peak periods of
the season.
The fact that active -use conservation areas are subject to user fees increases the issue of
liability. TRCA conservation area are marketed as safe, enjoyable facilities. A catastrophic tree
event at one of these locations could generate significant legal ramifications in the event of
injury or property damage. Unlike a passive -use conservation area setting, these conservation
areas may see 24 -hour usage. Many campsites are situated in wooded areas, and trees are
generally incorporated into campsites to improve the natural aesthetics of the site, thus the
potential for tree risk is increased in these sites. However, inside active -use conservation areas
are sub -zones (high use and low use areas) which may not have the same frequency of
visitation or proximity to a target for extended periods of time. These areas may be divided
during assessments for prioritizing work action as outlined below.
Active -use conservation areas commonly have year -round or seasonal operations, with most
conservation areas requiring a mix of full -time and seasonal staff. It will be the responsibility of
area superintendents at these locations to ensure that high -use areas such as campsites,
picnic sites, stopping points on trails and parking Tots are inspected twice a year by a
competent assessor. One inspection will be carried out during leaf on and one during leaf off
season. Low -use areas within active -use conservation areas will be inspected annually. In
addition to yearly inspections, competent assessors will respond to requests from park visitors
fegarding potential hazard trees within three business days. It is also recommended that
inspections be carried out after a major weather disturbance in high -use areas to allow for
identification of sudden hazards. This inspection will be determined by supervisory staff at
22
these locations after weather information is reported by news broadcasts and /or a significant
change in weather conditions is witnessed. Each time one of the above - mentioned inspections
is conducted the assessor will document their findings on a "Hazard Tree Inspection Form"
provided to each facility. Once leaf on and leaf off inspections are completed and documented
on the log form, supervisors will submit logs to the TRCA Forester where they will be filed until
year -end. At year -end, inspection logs will be sent to central filing services. Intermittent
inspection logs and forms will be submitted to the Forester as they are completed.
Supervisory staff from TRCA Parks and Culture Division will ensure a response within five
business days by a competent assessor to a tree assessment request from a private land
owner who borders a TRCA active -use conservation area or associated peripheral property.
The assessor will complete a "Hazard Tree Evaluation Form" as well as documenting the
inspection on the "Hazard Tree Inspection Form ". The supervisor will follow up on the
recommendations of the inspection and take appropriate action as outlined in this document.
Passive -Use Conservation Areas /Resource Management Tracts (RMT)
Passive - use /conservation areas /RMTs are non -gated recreation areas designed for year- round,
passive, public use. There is no charge for using these areas (some may have voluntary
registration and /or donations), and there is rarely a defined service provided for the user.
These areas provide the public with quality open space for recreation. They usually include a
mix of open space, nature trails and passive recreational uses.
Liability related to tree failure is less likely in passive -use conservation areas than in an
active -use conservation area. While many of these areas see year -round usage, the potential
for tree - related mishap is reduced because the patrons have no permanence on the site. Also,
public presence, during periods of inclement weather is reduced, during which time tree failure
frequently occurs. However, the fact that these Areas openly offer the public recreation space
means that vigilance in removing tree hazards must be exercised.
Due to the casual usage of these areas and lack of designated services associated with the
complete property, inspection of the entire area may not be required. Hiking is often the
intended use on these properties and trails see transient use, meaning that the user passes
quickly through the area and the likelihood of a tree - related mishap is substantially reduced.
If the area has a signed trail system, they will be inspected every two years and documented
on a " "Hazard Tree Inspection Form — provided for the area. Completed logs will be submitted
to the TRCA Forester where they will be filed until year end. At year -end logs will be sent to
central filing services. It is important when inspecting trails to identify gathering points or
stopping points such as benches, vistas or parking areas. These areas possess a greater
potential for tree - related mishap. Any unsigned trails will be inspected as required.
Emergency contact numbers will be posted at designated access points to these areas and will
provide regular users and clubs with an opportunity to inform TRCA staff of hazards. Many of
the passive- use /conservation areas /RMTs that TRCA owns are already associated with
active -use conservation areas through the peripheral properties program. Supervisory staff
from these Active -Use Parks will continue to manage these properties for the hazard tree
program. Remaining properties will be managed by TRCA Restoration Services.
23
Residential Properties
The TRCA owns residential properties and rents to tenants under contracts handled by the
Conservation Lands & Property Services section. Conservation Lands & Property Services staff
of TRCA will accept an initial request for a hazard tree inspection and relay information to the
TRCA Forester. The Forester will ensure a response within five business days by a competent
assessor to investigate the request. The assessor will complete a "Hazard Tree Evaluation
Form" as well as document the inspection on a "Hazard Tree Inspection Form ". Completed
forms and logs will be returned to the Forester to determine an abatement plan. The Forester
will file these documents until year -end. At year -end forms and logs will be sent to central filing
services. Tenants do not have the authority to implement an abatement plan for the property
until inspected and approved by TRCA staff.
Rented Farm Land
The TRCA owns significant amounts of rural land that is rented for agricultural purposes. This is
not publicly used land but is used exclusively by the tenant. The nature of farm land is that it is
cleared of trees, so the most prevalent presence of hazard trees is at the edges, where fence
rows or adjacent forests are found.
Conservation Lands & Property Services staff of the TRCA will accept an initial request for a
hazard tree inspection and relay information to the TRCA Forester. The Forester will ensure a
response within five business days by a competent assessor to investigate the request. The
assessor will complete a "Hazard Tree Evaluation Form" as well as document inspection on a "
Hazard Tree Inspection Form ". Completed forms and logs will be returned to the Forester to
determine an abatement plan. The Forester will file these documents until year -end. At year
end, forms and logs will be sent to central filing services. Tenants do not have the authority to
implement an abatement plan for the property until inspected and approved by TRCA staff.
Contract /Lease and Easement Lands
This term refers to TRCA properties that have all, or portions, of the property under contract,
lease or easement agreement with an outside agency /business and excludes residential
properties and farm lands. These lands will be the responsibility of the outside
agency /business to manage for hazard trees according to TRCA's minimum standards policy.
Agreement holders do not have the authority to implement an abatement plan for the property
until approved by TRCA staff.
Located on TRCA properties are several large trail networks that provide recreational
opportunities to hikers, cyclists, runners, cross - country skiers, horseback riders, etc. These
trails are under "Trail Agreements" with other associations such as the Bruce Trail Association
and the Trans Canada Trail Foundation. The association, under agreement with the TRCA, will
be responsible to monitor and abate hazard trees according to our policy as a minimum
standard. Persons from these associations using tools for clearing hazard trees must follow
guidelines outlined in the Workplace Safety and Insurance Board, Ontario Health and Safety
Act.
24
Limited -Use Open Land
This term refers to land which is owned by the TRCA but has no identified recreational use. In
many cases, this land is held because of some environmental sensitivity. Flood plain land is
also included in this category.
Mostly, hazard trees on these lands are found adjacent to public or private areas. Residences,
roads, parking areas and trails may border these lands, and thus tree hazards must be
cleared. These properties will be inspected as deemed warranted.
Emergency contact numbers will be posted at designated access points to these properties
and will provide users and neighbours with an opportunity to inform TRCA staff of sudden
hazards.
The TRCA Forester will ensure a response within five business days by a competent assessor
to a hazard tree inspection request. The assessor will complete a "Hazard Tree Evaluation
Form" as well as a "Hazard Tree Inspection Form ". If the assessors are able to abate the
hazard at the time of the inspection, this must be documented. Completed forms and logs will
be returned to the Forester to determine an abatement plan. The Forester will file these
documents until year -end. At year end, forms and logs will be sent to central filing services.
Management Agreement Lands
The TRCA owns a significant amount of land which is under management agreement with other
parties, usually municipal or regional government. In this case the TRCA owns the land and
provides it for the use of the local community. The agency under management agreement with
the TRCA will be responsible to monitor and abate hazard trees in compliance with their
municipal policy.
INSPECTION PROTOCOL
While the areas of assessment may differ, the protocol for the assessment of each individual
tree remains the same. Each tree that has a target must receive a thorough inspection for
hazard potential. There are six 'zones of inspection' for assessing each tree for failure potential.
They are:
1. Zone 1 — this area is the stem and root zone 1.23m up the stem, and 1.23m out from the
stem. This crucial area absorbs most of the tree weight under compression, and
structural compromise in this area compromises the structure and safety of the entire
tree.
2. Zone 2 — is the main stem, from the point 1.23m up the stem, up to the main branch
union. Failure points are often found in this zone, but can often be corrected.
3. Zone 3 — is the primary root system extending to about half way out to the drip line.
4. Zone 4 — is the primary branches out to one third their length.
5. Zone 5 — is the is the remainder of the structural roots.
6. Zone 6 — is the remainder of the crown. This area is often crucial in determining the tree
condition.
25
Each of these areas must receive a thorough inspection. When failure potential is identified in
any of these areas, the tree should be rated according to the hazard tree rating system (see
below) to determine its exact hazard potential.
Careful inspection of the site is also important when inspecting a tree. Construction, or other
damage to the root system of the tree, can result in tree decline and thus cause the tree to
become hazardous over time.
PART 2 - HAZARD TREE RATING SYSTEM
The primary objectives of the hazard tree rating system are:
To determine whether trees which show some evidence of failure potential are actually
hazardous.
To prioritize which hazardous trees should receive attention.
To maintain a detailed record to justify tree pruning or removal.
The hazard tree rating system has been designed to accommodate the large number of trees
present on TRCA lands. A "Hazard Tree Evaluation Form" has been designed to document the
assessment of trees on TRCA property and to aid an assessor in determining the potential
hazard of a tree. This form will also help to standardize assessments amongst TRCA staff.
The hazard tree rating system has five sections. Each tree is rated according to the five
sections then the scores are totaled. The total determines whether the tree is hazardous or not.
However, if the assessor at any time feels that one factor makes the tree immediately
hazardous, this factor can override the system and the tree is marked for removal. The five
sections are discussed in detail below.
Section 1 - Species Rating
The species rating assesses the known hazard potential of a tree species. Each species of tree
has a different set of attributes that make it more or less likely to fail. Growth patterns, habitat,
hardness of wood, rate of growth and root type all contribute to the failure potential of a tree
species.
The hazard tree rating system rates tree species in one of three categories:
1. Low Failure Rate - this species is rarely known to fail under normal, acceptable
growing conditions. The structure, hardness of wood and branch scaffold of this
species is traditionally good.
2. Medium Failure Rate - this species has attributes that make it prone to failure under
certain conditions, but under normal conditions failure is rare. The structure,
hardness of wood and branch scaffold of this tree is average. The tree may be
prone to pathogens that reduce its structural integrity.
3. High Failure Rate - this species is known to fail frequently under normal conditions.
The structure, hardness of wood and branch scaffold of this species is poor, and it
is usually prone to one or more pathogens that reduce its structural integrity.
26
The following trees are regularly found on TRCA lands; the failure potential of each is indicated.
High Failure Rate Medium Failure Rate Low Failure Rate
Black Locust Ash Family American Beech
Manitoba Maple Basswood Cherry Family
Norway Maple Birch Family Crabapple /Apple
Poplar Family Walnut Family Hawthorne
Silver Maple Elm Oak Family
Tree of Heaven Fir Family Sugar Maple
Willow Family Hemlock Sycamore
Honey Locust White Cedar
Horsechestnut Ironwood
Larch
Pine Family
Red Maple
Tamarack
Tuliptree
Spruce Family
Section 2 - Size Rating
The size of the hazard plays an important role in prioritizing which hazards must be abated
first. Size rating can be assessed in one of two ways; the size of the defective part (ie: dead
branch, weak branch union) can be rated, or the entire tree can be rated. The size of the part
plays a significant role in how much potential damage tree failure can cause.
It must be noted that smaller -sized hazards have the ability to cause extensive damage or
injury. Thus, smaller hazards should not be overlooked. Common sense dictates that the larger
hazards must be given priority.
The hazard tree rating system rates size hazard in one of four categories:
1. Small Hazard - the tree or hazardous part is of a small size, 15cm or less in diameter.
2. Medium Hazard - the tree or hazardous part is of a large size, 15 -40cm in diameter.
3. Large Hazard - the tree or hazardous part is of a very large size, over 40cm or more in
diameter.
4. Whole Tree.
For the purposes of the TRCA hazard tree program, trees greater than 15cm in diameter at a
height of 1.23m up the stem will be the focus for assessment.
Section 3 - Target Rating
In order for a tree to be hazardous it must have a target. A tree in an out -of- the -way place, far
from any public activity, is not hazardous despite the fact that it might have failure potential.
27
Targets are judged according to usage. Some areas receive high usage, while others see only
occasional use. The hazard tree rating system rates hazard tree targets according to one of the
four following criteria:
1. Occasional Use - areas which are infrequently used. These areas include open fields,
trails and wooded areas.
2. Moderate Use - areas which receive active but not constant /regular use. These areas
include walkways, picnic areas, passive -use recreation areas, and infrequently used
driveways.
3. Frequent Use - areas which receive regular use. These areas include driveways, park
roads, sheds, outhouses, picnic shelters, parking areas, tent or seasonal campsites and
concessions. They also include phone lines, cable lines or secondary utility lines.
4. Constant Use - areas which are extensively used. These areas include residential
structures(houses, garages), municipal roads, community structures, permanent
campsites, etc. They also include primary utility conductors and distribution
conductors.
Identifying the target is important in identifying a hazard tree. The target often dictates the
urgency with which a hazard tree is dealt. Careful inspection of a site is necessary to determine
the exact target potential of a hazard tree. For example, if a tree has a structural defect and is
close to a trail (target) but has an extensive lean away from the trail, then its target potential is
low and it is not necessarily a hazard. Trees like this can be assessed to be beneficial as a
habitat tree or for interpretive value.
Section 4 - Tree Condition Rating
Tree condition is an important consideration when assessing a tree for hazard potential. A tree
in decline may not be immediately hazardous but it will become hazardous in the future if it
continues to decline. Rating the condition of the tree is especially important in flagging future
hazards. This also assists in predicting future tree work needs.
The hazard tree rating system rates condition in one of three categories:
1. Good Condition - the tree shows good, healthy growth and little or no evidence of
stress or decline.
.2. Average Condition - the tree is in average condition; it may show some evidence of
stress or decline, but not in a manner which threatens its survival.
3. Poor Condition - the tree is in decline; it shows small leaf size, reduced vigor, crown
dieback and /or other features indicating stress or decline.
The condition of the tree should be carefully noted when rating a hazard tree. This permits the
inspector to compare the tree condition from year to year and thus map decline.
28
Section 5 - Tree Structure Rating
Structure is perhaps the most important aspect of assessing the potential of a tree to fail. Trees
are massive, complex organisms, and any compromise in the structural integrity of the tree can
result in catastrophic failure. The list of possible structural defects that a tree can possess is
large but some of the more common defects have been listed below.
Weak Branch Unions
Wood Decay
Cankers
Growth Pattern
These are places where branches are not strongly
attached to the tree. Trees with a tendency to produce
upright branches, such as Elm and Silver Maple, often have
weak branch unions.
Wood decay, usually the result of some parasitic pathogen,
creates cavities which make the tree inherently unstable by
weakening its support structure.
A canker is a localized area on the stem or branch of the tree,
where the bark is sunken or missing. Cankers are caused by
some external pathogen, and there is always a likelihood of
branch failure at or near the canker.
Poor tree growth, such as a lean, branches which are larger
then the trunk, and crown deformity, can result in trees which
are unsafe.
In many cases one structural defect will not make the tree a hazard, but combinations of these
and other defects will give the tree the potential to fail. In some cases, one defect may make
the tree hazardous. For example, a perfectly healthy Red Oak with a major basal cavity (cavity
near the base of the trunk) is a hazard, despite its many other positive characteristics.
The hazard tree rating system rates tree structure in the following four categories:
1. Good Structure - the tree is structurally sound according to the accepted
standards of its species. There are no evident structural compromises.
2. Average Structure - the tree has acceptable structure. While there may be some
minor structural problems, they are do not warrant immediate concern.
3. Poor Structure - the tree has one or more structural defects that warrant
concern. Failure at one of these defects is possible.
4. Severe Structure - the tree has at least one major structural defect. This defect
has immediate failure potential. This one point may override all other factors and
result in immediate removal of the hazard.
Assessing the tree for structural defect is often the most difficult part of the inspection protocol.
To properly inspect a tree, a careful ground level inspection should be done. In some cases,
the assessor may request to have the crown inspected by a qualified tree - climber. Also, some
limited root excavation may be required to thoroughly assess root condition and defects. The
ground level inspection is sufficient in most cases, but further inspection may be required if the
ground level inspection raises additional concerns.
29
Rating Summary
The preceding five rating categories are designed to provide a standardized system for
assessing trees for hazard potential. In review, they are as follows:
Species Rating 1 -Low Failure Rate; 2- Medium Failure Rate; 3 -High
Failure Rate.
Size Rating 1 -Small Hazard; 2- Medium Hazard; 3 -Large Hazard.
Target Rating
Condition Rating
Structure Rating
1- Occasional Use; 2- Moderate Use; 3- Frequent
Use;4- Constant Use.
1 -Good Condition; 2- Moderate Condition; 3 -Poor
Condition.
1 -Good Structure; 2- Average Structure; 3 -Poor
Structure; 4- Severe Structure.
After rating each category, the categories are totaled and the total is the Hazard Tree Rating.
The rating is as follows:
16 -17 Tree is an extreme hazard and requires urgent abatement;
14 -15 Tree is hazardous and should be abated in a timely manner;
10 -13 A tree at risk; it should be monitored regularly for change;
<9 Tree is not hazardous.
As mentioned, if the assessor feels that one factor overrides all others, he /she can give the tree
a hazard rating of 'OV' (override), indicating it must be removed at the earliest possible
opportunity. Also, a dead tree should be given a rating of 'DEAD', and should be prioritized
accordingly.
PART 3 - ABATEMENT STRATEGY
A large part of this document has dealt with inspection and assessment, however, eliminating
the actual hazards is perhaps the most crucial part of hazard tree management. The hazard
tree rating system is designed to help prioritize work, so that tree hazards are removed in the
most efficient manner possible.
Hazards are prioritized according to the rating they receive under the hazard tree rating
system.
Abatement Methods
During the inspection procedure, the assessor must make a decision on the best way to abate
the hazard. There are three primary methods of abating a tree hazard:
30
1. Tree Removal - removal of the entire tree is a drastic step, but is often necessary
when a tree has serious structural defects. Dead trees also must be removed if
associated with a target.
2. Pruning / Selective Branch Removal - Branch removal is often all that is required
to abate a hazardous tree part.
3. Correction - there are several techniques which can be used to correct defects
in trees. Steel braces and /or cables are commonly installed to strengthen weak
branch unions. However, correction does not remove the hazard. Correction
activities can be undertaken to extend the safe life of a tree, but should be used
only when the tree has significant historic or landscape value. Installation of
correction devices should be followed by routine inspections to insure that the
devices are functioning correctly.
Preventative Hazard Management
An important part of a successful tree hazard abatement strategy is preventative hazard
management. In this case, small trees that show hazardous potential are removed before they
become large. This allows for easier, cost - effective hazard management. One of the problems
with this strategy is the negative public perception of removing small, healthy trees. It is difficult
to justify removing a young, vigorously growing tree for the sake of future cost savings.
Preventative hazard tree management is a more feasible strategy for such areas as active- and
passive -use conservation areas, where public concern is less likely. The long -term cost savings
of this strategy are considerable.
Displaying signs at trail heads or access points to TRCA properties outlining the risks
associated with being in areas that contain trees is a way to prepare visitors for the event of a
potential tree failure under any circumstance. As well, signs offer a contact number for visitors
to call if they see a potential hazard. Staff will then be able to respond to a situation before
there is injury or damage to property.
Planting native trees in the appropriate site - classification will help limit future hazards.
Marking Trees
When a tree has been assessed as a hazard, it must be marked for future abatement
procedures in accordance to policy standards. Because of the high -use nature of TRCA lands,
permanently marking a tree in a highly distinguishable manner can often cause contention with
the public. It is advisable that the tree not be marked until immediately before it is scheduled
for removal. In some cases, using nonpermanent methods such as flagging tape is preferable
to permanent methods such as paint. This allows the mark to be removed if other measures
such as moving the target can be implemented. Once a tree has been identified as a serious
hazard, the target area will remain closed until the hazard has been abated.
31
PART 4 - DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES
The TRCA Forester will be required to assure compliance with these policies and procedures,
including:
1. The implementation of a standardized database to track all trees assessed within this
policy, and the maintenance of these records.
2. To assess the competency of assessors, and to ensure they meet required standards of
knowledge to carry out tree assessments for TRCA.
3. To arrange for tree abatement, in cooperation with Area Superintendents, either
internally or by outside contractors.
4. To help arrange for quotations from outside contractors when deemed necessary.
5. To ensure that all contractors are working within safe working practices as set out by
the Workplace Safety and Insurance Board and Occupational Health and Safety Act.
6. To establish and manage the budgets necessary to comply with this policy, and
operational procedures.
7. To monitor all business units within the TRCA to ensure compliance with this policy.
8. To monitor compliance of this policy with agencies that are leasing, renting or
managing TRCA property, that do not have a management agreement.
9. To make available services, to clients, as required to comply with this policy.
32
DEFINITIONS
Hazard Tree
A hazard tree has a structural defect that may cause the tree or
portion of the tree to fail. A defective tree in the middle of the
woods or an open field, away from paths or public use areas
does not necessarily have to be considered a hazard.
Target The object, structure or person that potentially may be hit or
impacted by a falling tree or tree part.
Invitee The traditional visitor, employee, occupier or neighbour
associated with TRCA property.
Weather Disturbance
Infrastructure
Supervisory Staff
Competent Assessor
A significant or rapid change to the normal seasonal weather
pattern such as strong winds or ice storm that could negatively
impact tree structure.
The basic physical and organizational structures (e.g. buildings,
roads, utilities) owned or managed by TRCA.
A broad term meaning a person who has charge of a workplace
or authority over a worker.
A designated person who has been deemed qualified by the
TRCA Forester about hazard tree inspection and determined
capable to complete tree assessments according to TRCA
policies and procedures for managing hazard trees.
Removal To cut down.
33
)C TORONTO AND REGION—N.^
onserva Lion
for The Living City
HAZARD TREE INSPECTION FORM
TRCA Property: Assessor:
Zone: ❑ Active Use C.A. LI Passive Use /Res. Mgmt. Tract ❑ Trail ❑ Residential
❑ Rented Farm ❑ Limited Use Open Land ❑ Man. Agreement Land
Sub Zone:
Date:
Time:
Inspection Initiated by:
❑ TRCA
Name:
Address:
Telephone:
Reason:
❑ External
Action /Comments:
Supervisor's Signature: Date:
Copies to:
❑ Forester ❑ Manager
34
HAZARD TREE RATING FORM
TRCA Property: Assessor:
Zone: 0 Active Use C.A. ❑ Passive Use/Res. Mgmt.Tract ❑Trail ❑ Residential
0 Rented Farm ❑ Limited Use Open Land ❑Man. Agreement Land
Sub Zone:
Date: Time:
Species Rating
Species:
Size Rating
(Size of defective part)
1 - Small (< 6 ") 2 - Medium (6"-1 6") 3 - Large (>16') 4 - Whole Tree (Over ride to action)
Target Rating
Use under tree: ❑ pedestrian ❑ structures ❑ recreation ❑ parking ❑ utility
1 - Occasional Use 2- Moderate Use 3 - Frequent Use 4 - Constant Use
Can Target be Moved? Y N
Condition Rating
1 - Good Condition: Tree shows good, healthy growth
2 - Average Condition: Tree may show some signs of stress or decline
3 - Poor Condition: Tree is in decline
Structure Rating
1 - Good Structure: No evident structural compromises
2 - Average Structure: Tree has acceptable structure (some minor)
3 - Poor Structure: Has one or more structural defects
4 - Sever Structure: Has at least one major structural defect
1- Low Failure Risk
3- High Failure Risk
2- Medium Failure Risk
(Refer to species chart)
35
RES. #C8/06 -
Moved by:
Seconded by:
EMERGENCY OPERATIONS PLAN
Approval of the Emergency Operations Plan and designation of essential
staff.
Rob Ford
Andrew Schulz
THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT the Emergency Response Plan
be approved;
AND FURTHER THAT employees who are required to remain on the job during
emergencies be designated as "essential" staff who may be required to work beyond a 48
hour work week and will receive overtime payment as management employees.
CARRIED
BACKGROUND
Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) is committed to the provision of excellent
service to the public, especially in the areas of flood warning, education, recreation and
watershed planning, and to provide these services in the safest possible way.
TRCA has facility -based emergency plans and flood warning operational plans but no general
Emergency Response Plan for across the organization to address threats such as major power
failures or a pandemic.
The experience of the extended power outage in August, 2003 and the possibility of a
pandemic that could result in a 35% absenteeism rate among staff has motivated the
development of a general emergency plan, as outlined in Attachment 1.
FINANCIAL DETAILS
The implementation of this plan will require the purchase of protective gloves and hand
sanitizers for staff members where it is not reasonable for them to be able to wash their hands
frequently. The total cost is $5,000 and funds are identified in TRCA's preliminary budget.
Report prepared by: Catherine MacEwen, extension 5219
For Information contact: Catherine MacEwen, extension 5219
Date: February 14, 2006
Attachments: 1
36
Attachment 1
Toronto and Region Conservation Authority's Emergency Response Plan
TRCA staff will be creating a multi - phased approach, beginning with this employee
empowerment stage:
1. The Employee Tool Kit
• This outlines what employees should do during an emergency including how to
avoid contagious diseases and what to do if a pandemic occurs.
• In addition, employees will be given information on external services available in an
emergency situation.
2. Emergency Governance
• Roles and responsibilities of staff and the identification of essential staff (see below
for further details).
3. Communications
• Employee Info Line
• Employee calling tree
• Procedures to change the telecommunications system
• Public Safety Announcements (PSAs) and other public announcements
4. Use of TRCA Facilities and Fleet Services for Emergency Purposes
• Potential alternative uses for facilities and fleet vehicles.
5. Employee Training
• Launch of training for supervisors
• Orientation and follow up training
• Remote access to servers for employees working at home
6. Changes in Policies and Procedures
• Use of protective gloves and hand sanitizers; provide standby materials at each
work location
• Change in cleaning procedures
• Signage regarding hand washing procedures
Emergency Governance
During a TRCA jurisdiction -wide emergency such as a major power outage, a pandemic or
major flooding event, essential services and essential service staff members will be expected to
be available to manage the TRCA response to such an emergency.
37
Staff Designated as Essential
A. All members of Directors Committee are expected to report to work during an
emergency. If the emergency disallows any member of the committee to report to
work, that employee is expected to remain in contact throughout the emergency
period.
B. During any emergency, the Flood Duty Officer, Flood Warning Coordinator and the
support staff must remain in contact with the members of Directors Committee to
determine if the Flood Emergency protocols need to be activated.
C. Enforcement staff are expected to report to work or to remain in contact throughout the
emergency if unable to travel to their work location.
D. The Manager, Information Services /Information Technology (IS /IT), Manager, Marketing
and Communications , Senior Manager, Conservation Lands and Property Services,
Central Maintenance staff, managers of conservation parks (East, West and Central
Zones) and managers of the education field centres and Black Creek Pioneer Village
are all to report to their normal work locations or if unable to do so, remain in contact
throughout the emergency period.
E. The IT and telecommunications staff, including the IT Specialists, and Manager, Chair
and CAO's Office are expected to report to work or if unable to do so, to connect to the
network remotely and remain in contact throughout the emergency period.
In the initial stages of an emergency, some staff members will be asked to remain at work for
extended periods of time to allow for activities such as evacuations, reassignment of staff and
securing the safety of members of the public, school children, staff and volunteers.
38
RES. #C9/06 -
Moved by:
Seconded by:
EMPLOYEE PRACTICES
Hours of Work. Updated policy needed to reflect the new management
structure and changes in staggered hours.
Rob Ford
Andrew Schulz
THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT the establishment of staggered
working hours from a 7:00 a.m. earliest start time to a 6:00 p.m. latest finish time be
accepted as the 'window hours' of work.
AND FURTHER THAT the establishment of criteria for 35 or 40 hour work week and the
terms and condition of hours of work for designated staff be approved.
CARRIED
BACKGROUND
At Executive Committee Meeting #16/89, held on February 9, 1990, Resolution #290 was
adopted as follows:
WHEREAS, it is a goal of the Authority to meet the special needs of some members of staff in
their daily schedules, and to extend hours of service to the public when possible:
THAT, for Administrative Headquarters employees, "window hours" be established between 7:30
am. and 5:00 p.m., "core hours" between 8:30 am. and 4:30 p.m., subject to guidelines
prepared by the General Manager:
AND FURTHER THAT item (1) of Personnel Policy A -7, Hours of Work, be amended to read:
1. ADMINISTRATIVE HEADQUARTERS EMPLOYEES:
Minimum of 35 hours, Monday to Friday inclusive, and a one hour lunch.
The Hours of Work Policy has not been updated since the passing of this resolution. The
policy needs to be updated to reflect new categories of employees, new locations, the hours of
work and the fact that certain operations of Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA)
are on a 24 hour, 7 days per week basis.
RATIONALE
As TRCA is in service to the public 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, flexible hours of work are
required to ensure that the public is well served, staff is well supervised and the health and
safety of staff and volunteers is ensured.
TRCA has standard work weeks of 35 or 40 hours per week.
The determination of whether a staff member works 35 or 40 hours is based on the following
guidelines that will be administered by the Director and the Manager:
1. Equity among staff members in the same locations, who are performing similar functions.
2. Field employees may be required to work from more than one location and need travel time
built into their hours of work.
39
3. Overtime and time in lieu are available to employees working beyond their regular work
week for employees Range 7 and below. Supervisors and managers Range 8 and above
can receive time in lieu only.
4. It is recognized that various business units require different working hours. If an employee
moves to a new position, the 35 or 40 hour work week is not transferable.
5. All employees are entitled to a 15 minute break during the morning and afternoon periods
and a minimum of 30 minute meal break after 4 hours of work.
The procedures for implementation of the policy are outlined in Attachment 1.
FINANCIAL DETAILS
There is expected to be very limited financial impact.
Report prepared by: Catherine MacEwen, extension 5219
For Information contact: Catherine MacEwen, extension 5219
Date: February 10, 2006
Attachments: 1
40
Attachment 1
Procedures for Policy on Employee Practices - Hours of Work
Hours of Work By Employee Type
1. Administrative Office Employees - Full Time
Employees who are primarily information workers, professionals, education
administrators or managers in an office location work 35 hours a week. Some workers
who work 35 hours a week can also work during any of the 7 days per week period and
may work more than 7 hours per day, e.g. Education or Food Services staff.
2. Field Employees - Full Time
Field employees usually have more than one location of work and /or work in
monitoring, maintenance, construction, nursery, golf course or parks. These
employees work 40 hours per week during a 7 day period.
3. Parks and Maintenance
All Parks and Maintenance field staff in the Conservation Parks, Bathurst Glen Golf
Course and Property sections work 40 hours per week.
4. Field Employees - Part Time, Seasonal and Special Employment Contracts
For part time, seasonal, occasional employees who may work a variable work week of
25 hours or less per week, payment will be made based on the number of hours
worked. Education staff in residence receive room and board as part of the
compensation for non - standard hours of work.
5. Staggered Hours
The main switchboard hours are 8:30 am. to 4:30 p.m. with the core time for employees
to be at work being between 10:00 am. to 3:00 p.m..
For both the 35 and 40 hour work week situation, the employee's immediate supervisor
approves a regular work day start and finish time. From time to time, employees will be
expected to work outside of their regular work day.
For seasonal, part time and occasional employees and some full time employees with a 7 day
work week, when there are to be changes in shifts or in working hours, the supervisor should
give the employee at least 2 days notice in advance of that change.
41
SECTION IV - ITEMS FOR THE INFORMATION OF THE BOARD
RES. #C10/06 - GOOD NEWS STORIES
Accomplishments of January, 2006. Receipt of Good News Stories for
the month of January, 2006, from all sections of the Toronto and Region
Conservation Authority (TRCA).
Moved by:
Seconded by:
Bill O'Donnell
Dick O'Brien
IT IS RECOMMENDED THAT the report on "Good News Stories" for January, 2006, be
received.
CARRIED
BACKGROUND
As part of the restructuring of divisions at TRCA, a restructuring of the senior management
committees was undertaken. The newly created Management Team, made up of senior staff at
TRCA, meets monthly to discuss strategic initiatives and organizational development.
RATIONALE
At Management Team Meeting #1/06, held on January 26, 2006, staff began a process of
highlighting the key accomplishments of each of their sections from the past month. In
keeping with TRCA's objective of Business Excellence, these accomplishments will be brought
to each Business Excellence Advisory Board for the information of the members. The following
are the accomplishments cited at this meeting, and a brief description of each.
• Fisheries Management Plan for Duffins and Carruthers Creek - document published. The
plan enables the incorporation of fisheries concerns and management priorities into the
planning and permitting process. It provides background information on the state of the
aquatic ecosystem as well as management directions and targets.
• Greening Retail program - received funding from Environment Canada to begin.
• Sustainable Schools program - received funding from Ontario Power Authority, Natural
Resources Canada and PowerStream to begin. Some additional funding is pending.
• Restoration Services Centre and CN Bridge expansion - two major tenders released: one
for general contractors for the Restoration Services Centre for award at Authority Meeting
#2/06, to be held on March 24, 2006; a second for construction of CN's Kingston
Subdivision Bridge Extension, and for the excavation and construction of the Bala
Subdivision Pedestrian Underpass, respectively, for award by the Chair and CAO, as per
direction from the Authority. .
• One Tonne Challenge - $30,000 in funding confirmed from Environment Canada.
• Greenlands Acquisition Project for 2006 -2010 - latest report in a long series of multi -year
land acquisition and securement projects approved by TRCA, at Authority Meeting #9/05,
held on November 25, 2005 and published in January.
• Bathurst Glen Golf Course - agreement for TRCA to operate was signed.
• Oak Ridges Corridor Park - spine trail is under construction.
• Pickering Harbour Commission - signed a land exchange deal, as per Authority Resolution
#A278/05, involving TRCA's lot on Wharf Street on the east side of Frenchman's Bay, and a
parcel of PHC land located on the west side of Frenchman's Bay south of Sunrise Avenue.
42
• Source Protection Planning - conceptual water budget for TRCA's jurisdiction for SPP will
be completed.
• Watershed Planning Projects - received funding from Great Lakes Sustainability Fund for 3
projects: Social Marketing Study, Don Watershed Regeneration Priorities, Rouge
Watershed Plan Technical Transfer.
• Region of Peel Project - initiated $100,000 in work on habitat restoration, trails and a barn
project in Peel.
• Port Union Waterfront Improvement Project - TWRC is pursuing additional funding to
complete Phase II.
• Generic Regulation - meetings have gone really well with majority support among
municipalities, although some concerns have surfaced in Peel Region.
• Greater Toronto Airports Authority (GTAA) - completion of $500,000 GTAA Living City
Project - Etobicoke Creek Watershed final report and all associated studies.
Report prepared by: Kathy Stranks, extension 5264
For Information contact: Kathy Stranks, extension 5264
Date: February 15, 2006
RES. #C11/06 - ACCOUNTS RECEIVABLE
February 5, 2006. Staff report on accounts receivable, as of February 5,
2006.
Moved by:
Seconded by:
Bill O'Donnell
Dick O'Brien
IT IS RECOMMENDED THAT the Accounts Receivable status report, as of February 5,
2006 be received.
CARRIED
RATIONALE
The schedule below summarizes the status of receivables, including aging and classification.
The schedule excludes $21,503 in accumulated interest arrears on invoices outstanding for
more than 30 days.
43
ACCOUNTS RECEIVABLE AGING, BY CATEGORY
Excluding Municipal Levy and TWRC Funding- As at February 6, 2006)
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
1 TOTAL
%
SCHOOLS AND
SCHOOL
BOARDS
103,658
44,347
4,288
1,228
153,521
12.1%
GOVERNMENT
582,186
262,079
37
844,265
66.8%
DEVELOPMENT
SERVICES
925
2,430
5,150
52,150
60,655
4.8%
CORPORATE,
INDIVIDUAL AND
COMMUNITY
GROUPS
18,616
60,910
74,322
52,495
206,343
16.3%
TOTAL
705,385
369,766
83,760
105,873
1,264,784
100.0%
% OF TOTAL
55.8%
29.2%
6.6%
8.4%
100.0%
527
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
209
Interim property tax bill.
31,967.02
107
Final property tax bill
(16,674.01)
37
Credit for campground water use
Pride in Preston
Preston Lake management plan cost
Lake
1,000.00
45.68
98
recovery
Basciano Parkin Ltd.
2,000.00
614.69
563
Planning fees.
Brutto Consulting
7,500.00
2,017.38
490
Planning fees.
Ltd.
3,000.00
750.70
462
Planning fees.
Glen Pietrowski
10,000.00
2,880.18
527
Planning fees.
Ron Witton
7,000.00
2,016.12
536
Planning fees.
Rice Development
10,000.00
1,956.17
364
Planning fees.
Group
TOTALS
90,917.87
10,280.92
Note: Interest charged as per lease agreement
As previously reported to the board, uncollected amounts relating to planning fees occurred as
the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) transitioned to the new fee schedule
during 2004. As directed by the board, all of the planning fees items have been referred to
TRCA's solicitors to be pursued through litigation. The companies involved have received
letters from TRCA's solicitors, Gardiner Roberts LLP, demanding payment. Staff is also
pursuing individual meetings with these last few outstanding accounts to attempt to resolve
payment.
44
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.
The amount due from Wild Water Kingdom is deemed collectible, including interest at RBC
prime + 1%.
Receivable balances, as reported on each of the previous reports to the advisory board, after
2002, are presented as follows:
DATE
Total $
90 -Plus $
February 06, 2006
1,264,784
105,873
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: February 15, 2006
TERMINATION
ON MOTION, the meeting terminated at 10:05 a.m., on Friday, March 3, 2006.
David Barrow
Chair
/ks
45
Brian Denney
Secretary- Treasurer
ts.
1
THE TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY
MEETING OF THE BUSINESS EXCELLENCE ADVISORY BOARD #2/06
April 21, 2006
The Business Excellence Advisory Board Meeting #2/06, was held in the South Theatre,
Black Creek Pioneer Village, on Friday, April 21, 2006. The Chair David Barrow, called
the meeting to order at 9:13 a.m..
PRESENT
Paul Ainslie Member
David Barrow Chair
Bill Fisch Member
Rob Ford Member
Peter Milczyn Member
Dick O'Brien Chair, Authority
Bill O'Donnell Member
Maja Prentice Vice Chair
Andrew Schulz Member
RES. #C12/06 - MINUTES
Moved by:
Seconded by:
Bill O'Donnell
Rob Ford
THAT the Minutes of Meeting #1/06, held on March 2, 2006, be approved.
CARRIED
PRESENTATIONS
(a) A presentation by Jim Dillane, Director, Finance and Business Services, in regards to
item 7.1 - 2006 Operating and Capital Budget.
(b) A presentation by Allister Byrne, Partner, Grant Thornton, LLP, in regards to item 7.2 -
Audited Financial Statements - 2005.
46
RES. #C13 /06 - PRESENTATIONS
Moved by:
Seconded by:
Bill O'Donnell
Maja Prentice
THAT above -noted presentations (a) and (b) be heard and received.
SECTION I - ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY ACTION
RES. #C14 /06 - 2006 OPERATING AND CAPITAL BUDGET
2006 budget is recommended for approval.
Moved by:
Seconded by:
Bill O'Donnell
Maja Prentice
CARRIED
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 BE IT RESOLVED THAT, subject to such regulations under the CA Act as
may be approved by the Lieutenant- Governor -in- Council:
(1)
all participating municipalities be designated as benefiting for all projects included
in the 2006 Operating Budget;
(ii) Toronto and Region Conservation Authority's (TRCA) share of the cost of the
projects included in the 2006 Operating Budget shall be raised from all participating
municipalities as part of the General Levy;
(iii) the 2006 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 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 2006
Operating Budget, and to levy the said municipalities the amount of the Capital Levy
set forth in the 2006 Capital Budget;
THAT, subject to finalization of the participating municipalities' apportioned levy
amounts, the 2006- Operating and Capital Budget, and all projects therein, be adopted;
47
THAT staff be authorized to amend the 2006 Operating and Capital Budget to reflect
actual 2006 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 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
RATIONALE
Approval of the operating and - capital budgets each year is part of TRCA's financial
management and business planning process.
The 2006 Operating and Capital Budget, is submitted for consideration of the Authority. On
April 21, 2006, staff will make a presentation to the Business Excellence Advisory Board
explaining the major issues identified as part of the 2006 budget process.
Municipal Approval Status
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 2005, the Authority approved an operating levy increase guideline of 6 %, reflecting
the need to address salary and wage pressures, growth related service needs, increased utility
costs and other inflationary pressure, and directed staff to enter into negotiations with TRCA's
municipal funding partners.
The following summarizes the status of the discussions and submissions as of April 6, 2006:
City of Toronto
The capital and operating funding included in the TRCA budget has been approved by 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 the
region's Finance and Administration Committee. Council will consider the budget in mid - April.
48
Township ofAdjala- Tosorontio
The township has been advised of the TRCA's levy request. Approval of the TRCA levy is
anticipated.
Town of Mono
The town has been advised of the TRCA's preliminary levy request. Town Council approved a
resolution providing for the requested levy.
Provincial Legislation
By regulation, TRCA has provided written notice to its member municipalities of the date of the
meeting at which the Authority will consider the municipal levy. At the April 28, 2006, Authority
meeting, a recorded vote on the budget and the non - matching municipal levy is required. The
weighted voting procedure prescribed by regulation will be used. The provincial funding which
is matched with levy has not been confirmed but is unlikely to change in any material way.
OPERATING BUDGET HIGHLIGHTS
• Gross expenditures have increased by 10.9% over the 2005 budget reflecting inflationary
and salary/wage adjustments and response to growth in many activities (includes impact of
Oak Ridges Corridor Park which is fully funded; 7.4% without Oak Ridges Corridor Park).
• Revenues (excluding municipal levy and Ministry of Natural Resources (MNR) grant) have
grown by 14.4% (8.5% without Oak Ridges Corridor Park) reflecting anticipated
improvements to conservation parks, Black Creek Pioneer Village and Kortright Centre
attendance and revenues as well as additional funding for source water protection; growth
in development and planning services revenues projected at 18% continues as TRCA
responds to service level needs of the development sector and TRCA municipal partners.
• Municipal levy increases by an average of 4.2 %; this is down from the 6% projection in the
preliminary estimates as a result of negotiations with municipal funding partners.
• Provincial MNR funding presumed to be flatlined at the 2005 level.
• Salary, wage and benefit costs represent about 67% of total expenditures;
• Projected staffing will increase from 478.4 full time equivalents (FTE's) in 2005 to 501.8
FTE's in 2006, an increase of 4.9% or 23.4 FTE's; about one third of the increase in staffing
relates to staff charged to new capital projects (i.e. Toronto Waterfront Revitalization
Corporation) and the most of the balance to the addition of staffing for the Oak Ridges
Corridor Park (to operate the Bathurst Glen Golf Course) which is fully funded.
• As explained to the board in the presentation of the 2006 preliminary estimates in
November, 2005, provision is included in the budget for 2% cost of living adjustment. Also,
the budget contains funding for the revisions to the salary /wage schedule approved in 2004
which was to be spread over 2 years. Unfortunately, 2006 budget requirements have
resulted in the finalization of the updated salary /wage schedule being further spread out
until April, 2007.
• The decision to enter into agreement with the province for the operation of the Oak Ridges
Corridor Park results in an increase in expenditures of $1,126,000 and an increase in
revenues of $1,251,000.
49
CAPITAL BUDGET HIGHLIGHTS
• The Restoration Services Centre building project approved by the Authority will begin in
2006. This project totals $2.8 million in 2006 of which $1.4 million will have been
accumulated from various Restoration services projects by December 31, 2006. Because
this project is scheduled for substantial completion in December, 2006, a deficit of $1.4
million will exist at the end of 2006. The deficit will be paid down by future revenues from
restoration services projects over the next 5 years.
• Projects for the Toronto Waterfront Revitalization Corporation (TWRC) continue to represent
a major share of the capital program totalling about $37 million.
• The Living City Centre project has received funding approvals from municipal partners; staff
is seeking provincial and federal partners.
• Provision is made for various land acquisition projects which together total almost $5.75
million. These are subject to availability of funding. Staff anticipate a surplus from land
sales sufficient to off set the 2005 deficit in the land acquisition reserve of about $158,000.
SUMMARY
The 2006 budget reflects the priorities and commitments identified to the board in the
preliminary estimates approved in the fall of 2005. Adjustments have been made to include
better operating revenue estimates as a result of the 2005 year end. Also, the operation of the
Bathurst Glen golf course as part of the Oak Ridges Corridor Park has been included in the
operating budget.
The preliminary capital estimates presented to the board in November, 2005 included only the
municipal share of the various projects. The capital budget now includes the total for all
projects. As noted, the decision by the Authority to proceed with Restoration Services Centre
project means that in 2006 the projected funding shortfall will result in a budget deficit of $1.25
million which will be funded over the next 5 years.
Report prepared by: Jim Dillane, 416- 667 -6292
For Information contact: Jim Dillane, 416 - 667 -6292, Rocco Sgambelluri, extension 5232
Date: April 10, 2006
Attachments: 1
50
Attachment 1
C TORONTO AND REGION
onservation
for The Living City
2006 OPERATING AND CAPITAL BUDGET
As submitted to the Business Excellence Advisory Board
April 21, 2006
51
TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY
2006 BUDGET
TABLE OF CONTENTS Pages
Section 1: Apportionment of Levy
2006 Apportionment of Levy - Summary - 1
2006 Apportionment of Levy - Matching /Non- Matching Format 2
Basis of Apportionment - Municipal Levy 2006 3 - 4
Section 2: Operating Budget
Operating Budget Summary 5 - 6
Full -Time Equivalents of Staffing 7
2006 Operating Budget - Detailed 8 - 26
Section 3: Capital Budget
Capital Budget Summary Levy 27
SECTION I
2006 APPORTIONMENT OF LEVY
53
TORONTO.AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY
APPORTIONMENT OF 2006 OPERATING'BUDGET LEVY
GENERAL PROGRAMS SUMMARY
. , ',2006 GENERAL LEVY - ----
LEVY
EXCLUDING 'TAX. I�
TAX'ADJ 'ADJUST .z
ADJALA - TOSORONTIO 75,1
DURHAM 301,790. .48;481
TORONTO 6529,952
MONO 819,
416 PEEL. • 1,089,034 79 579,
YORK ,1.,833;.46.1 " 54:;133
9,785-,807 182;193
LEVY ON HAND i;SPECIAL•
9,,755 ;807 182•,193
* excludes Rouge:Pa'rk levy
Page 1
2005 Operating
OPERATING Change
LEVY " - 06105
$ $
712 39 5;5%
332,500 17,771 5.3%
.6,334,480 195,472 3.1,E
876 ,(57) -6.5%
1009.,672 ' 58,941 5.3%
1, ,757,760 129,834 7'.4;%
,.9,536,000 402,000 4:25
,'9536,000 402,000 4.2%
Page 2
TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY
APPORTIONMENT OF 2006 LEVIES
MATCHING* AND NON - MATCHING FORMAT
* Based on preliminary estimates of provincial funding.
55
OPERATING LEVY
TOTAL
TOTAL
LEVY
MATCHING* NON - MATCHING
$
$
$-
$
ADJALA - TOSORONTIO
65
686
751
858
DURHAM
26,164
324,107
350,271
1,167,138
TORONTO
566,128
5,963,824
6,529,952
12,140, 406
MONO
71
748
819
937
PEEL
94,416
1,074,197
1,168,613
4,125,436
YORK
158,956
1,728,638
1,887,594
3,493,425
845,800
9,092,200
9,938,000
20, 928, 200
* Based on preliminary estimates of provincial funding.
55
THE TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY
BASIS OF APPORTIONMENT - MUNICIPAL LEVY - 2006
(BASED ON 2005 FOR 2006 MODIFIED CURRENT VALUE ASSESSMENT FIGURES)
MUNICIPALITY
Township of Adjala - Tosorontio
Durham, Regional Municipality of
City of Toronto
Town of Mono
Peel, Regional Municipality of
York, Regional Municipality of
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
As prodded by the Ministry of Natural Resources
CURRENT %OF CURRENT TOTAL
VALUE MUNICIP- VALUE POPULATION
ASSESSMENT ALITYIN ASSESSMENT
AUTHORITY IN WATERSHED
$(000's) $(000's)
1,064,705 4 42,588
20,531,037 17,104,139
370,089,414 100 370,089,414
928,787 5 46,439
143,540,327 61,721,729
113,539,474 103,912,622
649,693,744
8,175,058
10,165,728
2,190,251
20,531,037
42,314,303
93,684,523
7,541,501
143, 540, 327
6,035,374
36,862,321
22, 201,156
42, 001, 635
3,471,920
2,967,069
,113,539,474
56
Page 3
POPULATION
IN
AUTHORITY
9,734 389
181,539 151,881
2,101,563 2,101,563
6,255 313
966,467 430,389
626,828 564,722
552, 916, 931
3,892,386 3,249,257
86 7,030,550 79,019 67,956
95 9,657,441 84,798 80,558
19 416,148 17,722 3,367
17,104,139 181,539
151,881
63 26,658,011 333,596 210,165
33 30,915,893 581,160 191,783
55 4,147, 826 51,711 28,441
61,721,729 966,467 430,389
4 241,415 40,574 1,623
100 36,862,321 213,452 213,452
99 21,979,145 132,667 131,340
100 42,001,635 201,201 201,201
43 1,492,926 20,727 8,913
45 1,335,181 18,207 8,193
103,912,622 626,828 564,722
TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY
2006 LEVY APPORTIONMENT
MUNICIPALITY
Page 4
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
CITY OF TORONTO
TOWN OF MONO
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
17,104,139 3.09344% 3.05642%
370,089,414 66.93400% 67.73725%
46,439 0.00840% 0.00841%
61,721,729
103,912,622
552,916,931
57
11.16293% 10.94201%
18.79353% 18.24829%
100.00000% 100.00000%
SECTION 2
2006 OPERATING BUDGET
58
13:Apr-116
TORONTO AND REGION .CONSERVATION AUTHORITY
2006. Operating Bildgei,
Page 5
Grins Expenditures (by functional Unit)
andliusiness SeneaDIvIsion•
AdininiStration:
Rantallaroberties
Property:Sevices•
Vehicle & Equipment Reserve
Watershed Mana4emenf DIVislOn-
VVNI DiviaionalWanagement
Waterbed ,Strategies
ConservatienrPield
Ceres
„
Planning-8i Development DIvIalen
Development„ServiC as
enforcement
colOnv Division
EbOlOgy,
COmmUnitrTransfOrmation:.Partnersillps.
RestorationServIces-Divislon
Restoration. Services
Parks and Culture Division
parks,&CultUre-Droisional Management
C'Onseryalion.Areas:
KO fight Cent re for Lonserration
Oak Ridges Corridor Park
Black Creek Pioneer Village
F.Ood-Services
bffice Of the CAO
p'orporat anag errant
p*porate Secretariat
Human:Resources
Commuriications
Expenditure Total
Page 2005* 2005 2006 06/ 05 06/05 ..
'I:tolerance .13■111gei Acig_al "Didgel ii,Sitgi S'Ciig,- 2006 Mier A:15thartge
5 i:' 'Intro:, ill biulgeisOffecidd
by 'COLA ctir;liketedfu.sfineitii-
More .DoWnsviewOffice.costs, GIS staff, licences. Net of
Page 6 2106200 2,074 559 '2,208500 41B% 100 ,300fpidjacf.S0qtle6e,
Page 9, 1;804.,900 '1,127 ,083 '1,816,703 0(7,4. u,800 . .. ,
Page • 10 ' 1201;700 1,056;212 1248,200 3.9% 46,500 InSurenbe costs inOeise
Page 11 .66,100 134,295 .100.0% (66 ;100)No Btiat replacement 6.2006.
'5;1 80,900 5,292 ,149 :5273,400 1:8% 92,5013 '
Page 12 i76000 114,975
Page ' 13.. . f,,417p2 :1:;b84-!
.Page 14, 2262:.1130 20,76',921
3,856;802 3756',851.
.0.4g e • .16 - 'f,62710b '4448 052
Page
16 479 co 487',52 A'
-3,105,700 2,935 ,57&
427,800 1431.34 251,800 RAP,:M0J lirsigram,mana gement. expl lb ill y. budgeted.,
1;651100 A 6:'4% 231821313.0epor1Car# budgets ,up';iiSing.:-unsdent 'carrifOiward funding.
2346400 17,% 84 ,300,Lk,St. GeorgaD6rM42 ,being.ufilizedlOr.utrabookirigs.
• ,426100 14.8% 6.9300
081;903 92 242;600•Mqhi8pal Epito ASseateiienta cOritricts,highei.seli.fun'ded.
532;222 AA .ot „.
521333-Ligil:ProVisitiriiitefebsed:
3,402,100 9.5% 295;400
-Rage -17 ' 8123;935
Page 18. • 2;005?100 '671267
4,9E13,100 4,192,222
Page "191 ,847,;"013- '1,917 ,75i
Page :20 , 465,600 449,482
Page 21 .''',.597 860,815
Page '22: 1,,0,1;309. A• ,3§8:;7, 05
Page '23' - 18,312
Page -24. 4,1710013 :4,146,590
Page 25: 1090,333 051,145
113,627,500 10,630,079
-Page
Page
Page
Page
•.0813000
1',5115;000
E41-6,1013
2'23i;908
28:6% Ei52,,400.14ew,SourceP:roieefionPlanning•prog..annualizedi
.210% .:;(423,400)P.rogram. adjust sift fpated:Tunding. I evalS.
8:7% 432,000' •
sazjao
.1,250300
RoP
026,0013
4,228,200
, i ab :5ob
11,952,800
,
20:El% 3134;213dSeff-fundece-Asien;Beetle and.lnland F"ill programs higher.
721% 336,500 Transfe rs. in ,o'f. staff.from other.progra m •areas.
.-9,7% :(34720)Staff m oved.to.Div.. Management,
:-.1134,9130-E-nergy•kvorktilops ,expaiided; .tviarketing costs allocated.
. ,
'1,126000:New:program,
Marketing:staff,moved to Div. admin,.Utilities .& new Pavilion
1:3% 549130ioperationa..:
4.6% 80 ,206.Wedding.salisvprojacied higher.
12,5% 1,325100
26 410•,600 397,540
26 15,000 296,082
26. 429,900 422,138
.26' 697 50Ci 659621
1,858,000 1,775 881
4118;000
323,6180
475;700
1:8%
1:85s;
.10.734
,300 40:654
2198,600 .113,5%
*31455A0 30,579,909 34,090000 10.9%
7,400
• 5 ,soo
45800 yoluriteer,network prograrn expIicity. budgeted
PeclassiflUtion ,ofthirketing.castsIRC'A.50th Anniversary
264;600 .everite; recognition-v:34s.
343,600
.3,442100
Toronto and Region Conaerwition Authority
2006 Oaeraiiiii Budget
Page•6'
dedleg Sources
• regrarrkser fees:
Rental 'Properties
Elea Creek Pioneer:Village'
dod-SerViee6
Deve loprrnerit SerVii es
Restoration :Senrices
Coneenration'Areas •
1{ortrigrirCentre fOr Conservation
• Oak Ridgria ,CcirridorPark
Conservation 'F ield•Ceninas Summary
All..0ther PrOgrarii(clier fees'
eserIes
'FGt----1:,"iring Cit
FGT • Flowthrough
•ther-MUnidipai
rovincial
ederal
ohatiohs/Fundraising,
"rivet's
=.everSe'internallolaniinaterial Pliargailricluded iridsi
•ther
7"eve n ue:tota I
et^ExPeritlittires"
t Expehdltures funded
,
Prairintial'Trensfer Paymeiits.
unid!aI levy
• elicit / (Surplus)
2005
Budget
6.
.'2005 2006 06,/ 05 06 / 05
Etgaol, Budget %-Chg S Chg,-
6
2006cier2005 Char*,
:2,288400 :21187 ,925 , 2,249,400 ;1:7% : (39 ,0001Renta1 markei soften_
1,1328',900 Ii.769, 234 .1-,'..355.8013 7'.5% 135'500 More iilioal, Ooijrrri'_ and 'p'arkkrigia.reVenba
1,145 sOD" pos Dig, ''1:237 A0 813% 91;500-Kriota,vieddirrg;Selis.liiejePt•d,
2,229;503 -2281 883 ' 2527800 17.8% 397500Ienning fees rata' ktiStriierit.
'1,358,500, 1590,329 .1508,900 250,400 bland;Fill,i,eyenues-projectedAgher.
i2,976 1 oo 1,021,,o84 :3573',7013 3.2% .95 500'41amieSion'idg:(ars e6
. , ...
1;,080x0 , .1,025 594 -1,214 goo :i 2.4 % 133 700:11,diniSSI onlee6,raised and energy 0 ro grams,'expanded:
1:,251-1000 '1.251',000:NeV,;:brogiarri-..&5if,'9thirsfaees..
1,494,400 1,422 ,216 '1,606:700 7.5% 112,300.Lk,St. George- Donn #2 being utilized. far extra bookings.
408800. 438:505 424,000 3;9% ig2,000 . .. ,.... , . „ .
19670t,i, .151*4 K000 .-56:e% ,(111.',200)on 6 time .itame neLrepeated,
500400. 355791 800,000
237;700 523,926 283,100 i9.-1% 45400
' 1.504200 1 .170 . 783 '1.033200 23.604 379,1300 .Hidliai: DEiy,,S.enrie 66.,. Env., ASSe a srne nt 'funding,
1527'501Y 1584516 :_.2,-;3272013 52.3% 799,3013Sbi.iribP.rbiettionPliriilii19idgfamjhniigied.
1',1,10,600 754,367 '1:868.,400 ..3.51% :(42.200)..,
TundirilniiiiiliarigeS re: Community'Transformation
465,480. 534,576 687,700. 147.5% 222 ,300,R3 rtrierahipi.F0jects.
Funding trii:plian'griii 46: ‘Cciiiii-riinit i Transformation
.1 ,360400., . 809:493 691,:600 .-'49':% r (585 ,1400)Pra d nb'isbirit. iii6leati,
0041%600r (1,030;491)- (f,010,200) ' ' 27% 0,600),
21,073,900. 19,698202 :24;114;200 :.144% ' ' '3'040,300 '
10,361,000. ' 10,601,788 10783,000 3.9%; ' 402-000
845,500 845,753 545500
9536;000 9,5351:645 4.936..001
300390
'.-ReforrnatticlIo-Oonforrn td-:2006:nra4entation. -
4_2% 402 goo
Page 7
TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY
Full -time Equivalents of staffing in 2006 Final Budget
Seasonal, Part -time
FULL -TIME Contract TOTAL FTE's
2005 2006 2005 2006 2005 2006
Finance & Business Services 47.0 51.4 2.5 0.3 49.5 51.7
Watershed Management / Planning/ Urban 137.8 136.8 22.1 19.8 159.9 156.6
Ecology/ Restoration Services
Parks & Culture 70.7 67.3 88.9 105.1 159.6 172.4
Office of the CAO 15.0 17.5 15.0 17.5
Total operating 270.5 272.9 113.5 125.2 384.0 398.1
Capital 77.9 79.7 16.5 23.9 94.4 103.7
TOTAL STAFFING 348.4 352.7 130.0 149.1 478.4 501.8
61
TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY
2006 OPERATING BUDGET- FINAL
DIVISION:
ACTIVITY:
Finance and Business Services
Administration
Page 8
Expenditures:
Financial Services
Office Services
Information Technology
GIS
Project Surcharge
Environmental Management Systems
Expenditure Total
2005 2005 2006
Budget Actuals Budget % Chq. $ Chq.
$ $ $
795,600 781,638 791,200 -0.6% (4,400)
938,000 997,859 1,130,800 20.6% 192,800
474,800 431,684 520,200 9.6% 45,400
294,800 419,047 350,200 18.8% 55,400
(450,000) (593,266) (650,000) 44.4% (200,000)
55,000 37,597 66,100 20.2% 11,100
2,108,200
2,074,559 2,208,500 4.8%
Funding Sources:
Program /User fees 408,000 394,132 409,000 0.2%
Reserves 20,000 - 100.0%
CFGT - Living City
CFGT - Flowthrough
Municipal 12,702
Provincial 20,000 20,000 - 100.0% (20,000)
Federal
Donations /Fundraising
Private 48,502
100,300
1,000
(20,000)
Revenue Total
448,000 475,336 409,000 -8.7% (39,000)
Net Expenditures 1,660,200 1,599,223 1,799,500 8.4% 139,300
Comments:
Major 06 over 05 Changes (in addition to economic factors):
Office Services: Downsview office and utility costs annualized plus additional space rented
Info Technology: Increase in volume of software licenses plus annualization DB administrator position
GIS: Additional staff added to address workload, plus position reclassifications
Project Surcharge: Increase reflects project recoveries previously included in WM division.
62
TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY
2006 OPERATING BUDGET - FINAL
DIVISION:
Finance and Business Services Page 9
ACTIVITY: Rental Properties
2005 2005 2006
Budget Actualg Budget % Chg. $ Chg..
$ $ $
Expenditures:
Basic Rentals 662,200 705,974 651,200 -1.7% (11,000)
ORC Rentals 738,000 763,749 729,000 -1.2% (9,000)
Special Agreements 102,700 101,643 106,600 3.8% 3,900
Central Services - placed here for 2006 Final+ 302,000 355,717 329,900 9.2% 27,900
Expenditure Total
1,804,900 1,927,083 1,816,700 0.7% 11,800
Funding Sources:
Program /User fees 2,288,400 2,187,925 2,249,400 -1.7% (39,000)
Reserves
CFGT - Living City
CFGT - Flowthrough
Municipal
Provincial
Federal 5,000 5,000
Donations/Fundraising
Private 59,275
Revenue total 2,293,400 2,247,201 2,254,400 -1.7% (39,000)
Net Expenditures (488,500) (320,117) (437,700) -10.4% 50,800
Comments:
Major 06 over 05 Changes (in addition to economic factors):
Rentals: Property tax costs reduced.
ORC: cost constraint net of increased transfer to Rouge Park from program surplus.
63
TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY
2006 OPERATING BUDGET - FINAL
DIVISION:
ACTIVITY:
Finance and Business Services
Property & Taxes
Page 10
Expenditures:
Property Services
Taxes & Insurance
Conservation Land Planning
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 Actuals Budget % Chq. $ Chq.
$ $ $
697,700 625,205 717,100
434,000 462,440 453,000
70,000 68,566 78,100
2.8%
4.4%
11.6%
19,400
19,000
8,100
1,201,700 1,156,212 1,248,200 3.9% 46,500
60,000
85,000 220,187
145,000 220,187
60,000
- 100.0% (85,000)
60,000 -58.6% (85,000)
1,056,700 936,025 1,188,200 12.4% 131,500
Comments:
Major 06 over 05 Changes (in addition to economic factors):
Loss of property tax rebate revenue
Insurance costs increase.
64
TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY
2006 OPERATING BUDGET - FINAL
DIVISION: Finance and Business Services
ACTIVITY: Vehicle & Equipment
Page 11
2005 2005
Budget Actuals
2006
Budget
% Chq.
$ Chq.
$ $
penditures:
Fuel, Maintenance & Repairs 423,800 504,197
Vehicle Purchases - New
Vehicle Purchases - Replacement / 224,400 291,606
Equipment Purchases - New 5,000
Equipment Purchases - Replacement 181,600 202,892
Equipment Disposal Proceeds (33,000) (32,870)
Internal Recoveries (735,700) (831,530)
$
471,700
225,000
5,000
130,000
(53,000)
(778,700)
11.3%
-
0.3%
-28.4%
60.6%
5.8%
47,900
600
(51,600)
(20,000)
(43,000)
penditure Total 66,100 134,295
- .100.0%
(66,100)
unding Sources:
Program /User fees
ReseRes 66,100 134,295
CFGT - Living City
CFGT- Flowthrough
Municipal
Provincial
Federal
Donations /Fundraising
Private
-
- 100.0%
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
(66,100)
evenue Total 66,100 '134,295
- 100.0%
(66.100)
1 et Expenditures 0
-
Comments:
Major 06 over 05 Changes (in addition to economic factors):
Normal rate of replacements. No new boat as in 2005.
65
TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY
2006 OPERATING BUDGET - FINAL
DIVISION: Watershed Manageme Page 12
ACTIVITY: WM Divisional Management
2005 2005 2006
Budget Actuals Budget % Chq. $ Chq.
$ $ $
Expenditures:
Divisional Management 176,000 194,975 198,900 13.0% 22,900
Moved: Environmental Management Systems -
R.A.P. Administration 228,900 - 228,900
Expenditure Total _ 176,000 194,975 427,800 143.1% 251,800
Funding Sources:
Program /User fees 3,750 -
Reserves -
CFGT - Living City -
CFGT - Flowthrough -
Municipal 15,000 - 100.0% (15,000)
Provincial 5,625 131,150 - 131,150
Federal 5,625 129,850 - 129,850
Donations /Fundraising -
Private -
Revenue Total 15,000 15,000 261,000 1640.0% 246,000
Net Expenditures 161,000 179,975 166,800 3.6% 5,800
Comments:
Major 06 over 05 Changes (in addition to economic factors):
Divisional Adminstration: better reflects misc. costs of staff group working out of new Downsview Park office.
Remedial Action Plan Administration explicitly budgeted for first time. Covered by RAP MOU revenue.
66
TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY
2006 OPERATING BUDGET - FINAL
DIVISION: Watershed Management Page 13
ACTIVITY: Watershed Strategies
2005 2005 Diff. 2006
Budget Actuals Actuals Budget % Chg. $ Chg.
$ $ . $ $
penditures:
Don River 197,100 111,985 (85,115) 229,200 16.3% 32,100
Humber River 345,800 292,584 (53,216) 475,400 37.5% 129,600
Rouge River 400,000 400,000 400,000
Highland Creek 20,000 8,707 (11,293) 15,500 -22.5% (4,500)
Etobicoke - Mimico Creek 315,400 341,528 26,128 290,600 -7.9% (24,800)
Duffins Creek 213,600 239,261 25,661 239,400 12.1% 25,800
Oak Ridges Moraine 117,900 114,971 (2,929) 163,400 38.6% 45,500
Waterfront Strategy 61,100 57,748 (3,352) 64,800 6.1% 3,700
Portion funded from Capital (252,200) (181,830) 70,370 (226,400) -10.2% 25,800
penditure Total 1,418,700 1,384,955 (33,745) 1,651,900 16.4% 233,200
unding Sources
Program /User fees -
Reserves 20,000 - 20,000
CFGT - Living City 125,000 (125,000) 125,000
CFGT - Flowthrough 45,000 44,571 (429) - 100.0% (45,000)
Other - Municipal 866 866 -
Other - Provincial 70,000 51,125 (18,875) 46,250 -33.9% (23,750)
Other - Federal 70,000 51,904 (18,096) 46,250 -33.9% (23,750)
Other - Donations /Fundraising 400,000 400,000 400,000
Other - Private 267,200 37,631 (229,569) 172,000 -35.6% (95.200)
Revenue Total 977,200 586,096 (391,104) 809,500 - 17.2% (167,700)
Net Expenditures 441,500 798,859 357,359 842,400 90.8% 400,900
Comments:
Major 06 over 05 Changes (in addition to economic factors):
Don River. Report card reintroduced for 2006
Humber. Report card showing higher for 2006 because of underspending in 2005.
Etobicoke - Mimico: Lower report card expenditures in 2006
ORM Coalition: higher expenditures for 2006 because of underspending in 2005.
Less Federal /Provincial RAP MOU revenue, less report card related capital contributions.
No comparable CFGT flowthrough in 2006. 2005 Provincial & Federal corrected and restated.
67
TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY
2006 OPERATING BUDGET - FINAL
DIVISION: Watershed Management
ACTIVITY: Conservation Field Centres
Page 14
2005 2005 Diff. 2006
Budget Actuals Actuals Budget
% Chq.
$ Chq.
$ $ $ $
Expenditures:
Program Management 134,000 121,094 (12,906) 127,300
-5.0%
•(6,700)
Education Support Services 252,700 199,976 (52,724) 236,300
-6.5%
(16,400)
Albion Hills 670,300 636,373 (33,927) 702,500
4.8%
32,200
Claremont 600,300 568,945 (31,355) 628,100
4.6%
27,800
Lake St. George 604,800 650,532 45,732 652,200
7.8%
47,400
Expenditure Total 2,262,100. 2,176,921 (85,179) 2,346,400
3.7%
84,300
Funding Sources:
Program /User fees 1,494,400 1,422,216 (72,184) 1,606,700
7.5%
112,300
Reserves (2,000) 8,642 10,642 15,000
-850.0%
17,000
CFGT- Living City 250,000 250,000 . 250,000
CFGT- Flowthrough 116,500 111,500 (5,000) 128,000
9.9%
11,500
Municipal 16,000 13,250 (2,750) 31,500
96.9%
15,500
Provincial 1,250 1,250
-
Federal
-
Donations/Fundraising 10,400 320 (10,080) 1,000
-90.4%
(9,400)
Private 6,388 6,388
-
Revenue Total 1,885,300 1,813,566 (71,734) 2,032,200
7.8%
146,900
Net Expenditures 376,800 363,354 (13,446) 314,200
-16.6%
(62,600)
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 $30k
Claremont: Ed. Technician now shared here with LSG + utilities. Rev up $45k.
LSG: Dorm 1 opened for bookings. Rev up $55k
68
TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY
2006 OPERATING BUDGET - FINAL
DIVISION: Planning & Development Page 15
ACTIVITY: Development Services
2005 2005 Diff. 2006
Budget Actuals Actuals Budget % Chg. $ Chg.
$ $ $ $
Expenditures:
, Planning Services 680,100 682,232 2,132 721,500 6.1% 41,400
Regulation Services 594,300 577,116 (17,184) 653,900 10.0% 59,600
Solicitor /Realtor Enquiries 48,800 49,050 250 50,100 2.7% 1,300
Policy, Research and Special Projects 497,300 398,716 (98,584) 539,600 8.5% 42,300
Hearings 225,000 222,905 (2,095) 200,000 -11.1% (25,000)
Environmental Assessment 888,300 741,261 (147,039) 1,035,500 16.6% 147,200
Portion funded from Capital (306,500) (223,229) 83,271 (330,700) 7.9% (24,200)
Expenditure Total 2,627,300 2,448,052 (179,248) 2,869,900 9.2% 242,600
Funding Sources:
Program /User fees 2,229,500 2,281,063 51,563 2,627,000 17.8% 397,500
Reserves
CFGT - Living City
CFGT - Flowthrough
Municipal 930,300 793,104 (137,196) 1,244,000 33.7% 313,700
Provincial 23,900 (7,019) (30,919) - 100.0% (23,900)
Federal 46,900 7,150 (39,750) - 100.0% (46,900)
Donations /Fundraising
Private
Portion funded from Capital (306,500) (223,229) 83,271 (330,700) 7.9% (24,200)
Revenue Total 2,924,100 2,851,069 (73,031) 3,540,300 21.1% 616,200
Net Expenditures (296,800) (403,017) (106,217) (670,400) 126% (373,600)
Comments:
Major 06 over 05 Changes (in addition to economic factors):
Planning: mostly wage reclassifications
Regulations: mostly wage reclassifications
Solicitor.
Policy development: focus on implementation of Generic Regs. Mostly reclassification impact.
E.A.: $210 thousand for 2.5 more FTE's of staff. Lower costs in 06 for consultants and computer
equipment. Offset by additional revenues.
69
TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY
2006 OPERATING BUDGET - FINAL
DIVISION: Planning & Development Page 16
ACTIVITY: Enforcement
2005 2005 Diff. 2006
Budget Actuals Actuals Budget % Chg. $ Chg.
$ $ $ $
Expenditures:
Enforcement 454,400 445,232 (9,168) 482,200 6.1% 27,800
Legal 25,000 42,291 17,291 50,000 100.0% 25,000
Expenditure Total 479,400 487,524 8,124 532,200 11.0% 52,800
Funding Sources:
Program /User fees
Reserves
CFGT - Living City
CFGT - Flowthrough
Municipal
Provincial
Federal
Donations /Fundraising
Private
Revenue Total
Net Expenditures 479,400 487,524 8,124 532,200 11.0% 52,800
Comments:
Major 06 over 05 Changes (in addition to economic factors):
Legal costs provision increased
70
TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY
2006 OPERATING BUDGET - FINAL
DIVISION:- Ecology
Page 17
2005 2005 Diff. 2006
Budget Actuals Actuals Budget % Chg.
$ Chg.
$ $ $ $
Expenditures:
Program Management 292,700 266,668 (26,032) 317,300 8.4%
24,600
Archaeology moved to Restoration Services -
Sustainable Development Planning Review Services 23,200 -
23,200
Special Projects 100,000 233,828 133,828 201,600 101.6%
101,600
Natural Heritage Management 423,800 407,836 (15,964) 507,000 19.6%
83,200
Water Management 712,800 722,781 9,981 797,300 11.9%
84,500
Flood Forecasting & Waming 158,700 162,879 4,179 213,700 34.7%
55,000
Op. & Maintenance of Dams, Channels and Water
Control Structures 373,400 397,182 23,782 325,000 - 13.0%
(48,400)
Source Water Protection 916,300 1,129,761 213,461 _ 1,445,000 57.7%
528,700
Expenditure Total 2,977,700 3,320,935 343,235 3,830,100 28.6%
852,400
Funding Sources:
Program /User fees - -
Reserves -
CFGT - Living City 65,000 (65,000) 65,000
CFGT - Flowthrough -
Municipal 152,000 199,295 47,295 126,600 - 16.7%
(25,400)
Provincial 900,000 1,316,592 416,592 1,545,000 71.7%
645,000
Federal 25,000 1,133 (23,867) 25,000
Donations /Fundraising -
Private 4,344 4,344 -
'Revenue Total 1,142,000 1,521,364 379,364 1,761,600 54.3%
619,600
Net Expenditures 1,835,700 1,799,570 (36,130) 2,068,500 12.7%
.232,800
Comments:
Major 06 over 05 Changes (in addition to economic factors):
Program management: Director 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 retum from matemity leave
Archaeology: remainder of costs transferred out of Planning to this consolidated cost centre. No net impact.
Source Protection: program started in 2005, annualized to full year for 2006.
2005 Variance: staff do not expect any differences
71
TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY
2006 OPERATING BUDGET - FINAL
DIVISION:
Ecology Page 18
ACTIVITY: Community Transformation Partnerships
2005 2005 Diff. 2006
BUDGET Actuals Actuals BUDGET % CHG. $ CHG.
$ $ $ $
penditures:
Energy Projects
Development, Management & Communications 645,400 272,290 (373,110) 170,000 -73.7% (475,400)
Mayors' Megawatt Challenge 180,400 93,687 (86,713) 174,100 -3.5% (6,300)
Mayors' Green Building Challenge 49,100 8,935 (40,165) - 100.0% (49,100)
Greening Health Care 219,800 82,711 (137,089) 207,700 -5.5% (12,100)
Home Energy Clinic 293,000 42,983 (250,017) - 100.0% (293,000)
PowerStream Retationship 108,100 11,172 (96,928) 14,700 - 86.4% (93,400)
GTA Quest 150,000 (150,000) - 100.0% (150,000)
Greening Retail 1,320 1,320 162,900 162,900
Sustainable Schools 73,400 69,417 (3,983) 285,800 289.4% 212,400
All Others 40,400 54,080 13,680 22,500 -44.3% (17,900)
Sustainable Development Projects
Sustainable Communities - General 52,200
Sustainable Communities Charette 68,800 7,726 (61,074) 18,200 - 73.5% (50,600)
Greening the Urban Village, CMHC Proposal 5,100 2,427 (2,673) 21,900 329.4% 16,800
OCETA 171,900 156,507 (15,393) 185,400 7.9% 13,500
Sustainable House Design Comp 22,367 22,367 214,000 214,000
The Municipal Tool Kit 8,224 8,224 55,600 55,600
All Others 37,419 37,419
penditure Total 2,005,400 871,267 (1,134,133) 1,585,000 -21.0% (420,400)
unding Sources:
Program /User fees 38,991 38,991
Reserves
CFGT - Living City
CFGT - Flowthrough 64,400 194,648 130,248 22,500 -65.1% (41,900)
Municipal 186,700 138,500 (48,200) 250,100 34.0% 63,400
Provincial 255,500 11,100 (244,400) 222,000 - 13.1% (33,500)
Federal 540,600 168,853 (371,747) 351,200 -35.0% (189,400)
Donations /Fundraising 65,681 65,681 280,700 280,700
Private 958,200 79,180 (879,020) 458,500 -52.1% (499,700)
Revenue Total
2,005,400 696,953 (1,308,447) 1,585,000 -21.0% (420,400)
et Expenditures 174,314 174,314
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.
72
TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY
2006 OPERATING BUDGET - FINAL
DIVISION: Restoration Services Page 19
2005 2005 Diff. 2006
Budget Actuals Actuals Budget % Chq. $ Chq.
$ $ $ $
penditures:
Program Management 355,900 361,783 5,883 291,000 -18.2% (64,900)
Inland Fill Program 121,000 200,452 79,452 350,000 189.3% 229,000
Plant Propagation 423,100 558,373 135,273 429,900 1.6% 6,800
Planting and Special Projects 767,700 732,046 (35,654) 717,900 -6.5% (49,800)
Asian Longhomed Beetle 423,100 487,794 64,694 658,000 55.5% 234,900
Internal Recoveries (418,100) (518,784) (100,684) (429,900) 2.8% (11,800)
Environmental Management Systems - -
Archaeology 175,000 176,086 1,086 215,000 22.9% 40,000
1 penditure Total 1,847,700 1,997,752 150,052 2,231,900 20.8% 384,200
unding Sources:
Program /User fees 1,358,500 1,890,329 531,829 1,608,900 18.4% 250,400
Reserves 1,841 1,841 -
CFGT - Living City 200,000 (200,000) 200,000
CFGT- Flowthrough 11,800 52,384 40,584 10,000 -15.3% (1,800)
Municipal 304,200 5,725 (298,475) 326,000 7.2% 21,800
Provincial 61,500 89,377 27,877 185,800 202.1% 124,300
Federal 423,100 494,809 71,709 511,100 20.8% 88,000
Donations /Fundraising -
Private 50,000 109,355 59,355 61,100 22.2% 11,100
Internal Recoveries (735,100) (807,262) (72,162) (746,900) 1.6% (11,800)
evenue Total 1,674,000 1,836,556 162,556 2,156,000 28.8% 482,000
et Expenditures 173,700 161,195 (12,505) 75,900 -56.3% (97,800)
Comments:
Major 06 over 05 Changes (in addition to economic factors):
Additional Reforestation Implementation related to Asian Longhom Beetle , funded by MNR
Special projects: slightly fewer self - funded projects anticipated
Management: -$49k Geoenvironmental work /supervision /budget transfered to Ecology from Restoration Services,
Inland Fill: revenue and expenses up
Archaeology: all previously existing shared budgets consolidated here for 2006.
NOTES: 2005 VARIANCES
Plant sales and special projects produce a surplus
73
TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY
2006 OPERATING BUDGET - FINAL
DIVISION: Parks and Culture
GROUP:
ACTIVITY: Divisional Management
Page
20
2005 2005 Diff. 2006
BUDGET Actuals Actuals BUDGET
% CHG.
$ CHG.
$ $ $ $
Expenditures:
16.1%
-
-
1.3%
33,100
94,900
205,000
3,500
Divisional Management 206,000 184,225 (21,775) 239,100
Parks /Culture- Fundraising 94,900
Parks /Culture- Sales 205,000
Parks /Culture- Customer Service 259,600 265,257 5,657 263,100
465,600 449,482 (16,118) 802,100
72.3%
336,500
FUNDING SOURCES:
User fees: 28 28 15,000
Reserves
CFGT - Living City
CFGT - Flowthrough 57,600
Other - Municipal
Other- Provincial
Other - Federal
Other - Donations /Fundraising
Other - Private
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
15,000
57,600
28 28 72,600
-
72,600
NET EXPENDITURES 465,600 449,454 (16,146) 729,500
56.7%
263,900
Major 06 over 05 Changes (in addition to economic factors):
Sales wages and expenditures transfered from Kortright and CA's.
Customer Service wages and expenditures transferred from Corporate Communications.
Foundation revenue transfered from Kortright and CA's.
Admin. Asst. wages transferred to Black Creek and Corporate Communications.
74
TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY
2006 OPERATING BUDGET - FINAL
DIVISION:
Parks 8. Culture Division Page 21
ACTIVITY: Conservation Areas
2005 2005 Diff. 2006
Budget Actuals Actuals Budget %Chq. $Chg,
$ $ $ $
penditures:
General Operations 513,600 550,127 36,527 100,000 -80.5% (413,600)
West Zone
West Zone Administration 121,400 124,422 3,022 157,100 29.4% 35,700
Albion Hills 630,000 620,423 (9,577) 648,800 3.0% 18,800
Glen Haffy 221,700 193,030 (28,670) 185,600 -16.3% (36,100)
Indian Line 443,800 419,617 (24,183) 454,200 2.3% 10,400
Boyd 227,100 249,544 22,444 229,600 1.1% 2,500
Heart Lake 281,100 295,191 14,091 253,300 -9.9% (27,800)
East Zone
East Zone Administration
Bruce's Mill
Petticoat Creek
Land Management
East Zone:
West Zone:
Major Maintenance
104,900 91,359 (13,541) 153,800 46.6% 48,900
361,100 388,265 27,165 388,800 7.7% 27,700
346,400 451,614 105,214 359,400 3.8% 13,000
167,900 139,671 (28,229) 136,300 -18.8% (31,600)
153,200 145,764 (7,436) 158,100 3.2% 4,900
25,000 24,788 (212) 25,000
xpenditure Total 3,597,200 3,693,815 96,615 3,250,000 -9.7% (347,200)
unding Sources:
Authority Generated 2,978,100 3,021,054 42,954 3,073,700 3.2% 95,600
Reserves 5,000 (5,000) 5,000
CFGT - Living City
CFGT - Flowthrough 12,658 12,658
Municipal 7,000 7,000
Provincial
Federal 17,988 17,988
Donations /Fundraising 11,561 11,561
Private 39,593 39,593
avenue Total 2,983,100 3,109,853 126,753 3,078,700 3.2% 95,600
et Expenditures 614,100 583,961 (30,139) 17't,300 - 72.1% (442,800)
Comments:
Major 06 over 05 Changes (In addition to economic factors):
Revenue:
Cancel Enviro Picnic revenue at BM, HL, and BD.
Addition of revenue for Bruces Mill swimming program.
Heart Lake Dragon Boat program changed to outside provider reducing revenue to commission only.
Additional BM revenue for new programming for mountain biking and day camps.
Expenses:
Sales wages and expenses transfered to Division Admin.
Addition of budget for Bruces Mill swimming program.
HL Dragon Boat program changed to outside provider reducing expenses.
Vehicle and equipment rate increased by 5 %.
Delete Enviro Picnic program at BM, HL, and BD.
Reclassification of Zone Superintendents included in budget.
PC Asst. Superintendent wages changed from partial year to full year.
Removed Wages for nursery staff
Marketing wages transferred to Corporate Communicaton
Wages tranferred to Bathurst Glen Golf Course.
TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY
2006 OPERATING BUDGET - FINAL
DIVISION: Parks and Culture Page 22
GROUP:
ACTIVITY: Kortright Centre for Conservation
2005 2005 Diff. 2006
BUDGET Actuals Actuals BUDGET % CHG. $ CHG_.
$ $ $ $
Expenditures:
Administration 112,100 (112,100) 110,100 -1.8% (2,000)
Grounds 119,800 476,163 356,363 106,700 -10.9% (13,100)
Buildings 155,500 (155,500) 172,900 11.2% 17,400
General Programs 51,700 671,919 620,219 50,100 -3.1% (1,600)
Day Use 71,400 (71,400) 58,900 -17.5% (12,500)
Public Programs 34,800 (34,800) 42,300 21.6% 7,500
Education Programs 291,800 (291,800) 301,800 3.4% 10,000
Cafe 85,100 (85,100) 69,700 -18.1% (15,400)
Gift Shop 92,900 (92,900) 90,900 -2.2% (2,000)
Maple Syrup Program 233,400 220,653 (12,747) 245,900 5.4% 12,500
Energy Workshops 19,700 (19,700) 72,500 268.0% 52,800
All other Programs 33,100 (33,100) 47,100 42.3% 14,000
Marketing 37,300 - 37,300
Expenditure Total 1,301,300 1,368,735 67,435 1,406,200 8.1% 104,900
Funding Sources:
User fees by program Component:
User Fees 1,080,900 1,028,694 (52,206) 1,214,600 12.4% 133,700
Reserves
CFGT - .Living City 100,000 105,791 5,791 100,000
CFGT - Flowthrough 84,929 84,929
Municipal
Provincial
Federal 61 61
Donations /Fundraising 14,647 14,647
Private 46,601 46,601
Revenue Total 1,180,900 1,280,723 99,823 1,314,600 11.3% 133,700
Net Expenditures 120,400 88,013 (32,387) 91,600 -23.9% (28,800)
Comments:
Major 06 over 05 Changes (in addition to economic factors):
Sales wages tranferred to Division Admin.
Marketing wages transferred to Corporate Communication.
Addition of energy program salary expense and offsetting revenue.
Additional hydro expense due to switching to energy efficient Bullfrog power.
Additonal cleaning expnse due to new cleaning contract.
Foundation revenue transferred to Division Admin.
Additional revenue for energy programs and cafe.
76
TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY
2006 OPERATING BUDGET - FINAL
DIVISION: Parks and Culture Page 23
GROUP:
ACTIVITY:
2005 2005 Diff. 2006
BUDGET Actuals Actuals BUDGET % CHG. $ CHG.
$ $ $ $
ROSS EXPENDITURES:
Golf Course Operations 18,312 1,126,000 - 1,126,000
18,312 1,126,000 - 1,126,000
UNDING SOURCES:
User fees: 1,251,000 - 1,251,000
Reserves -
CFGT - Living City -
CFGT - Flowthrough -
Other - Municipal -
Other - Provincial -
Other - Federal -
Other - Donations /Fundraising -
Other - Private -
1,251,000 - 1,251,000
ET EXPENDITURES 18,312 (125,000) -
Major 06 over 05 Changes (in addition to economic factors):
Operation of Bathurst Glen Golf Course assummed by TRCA as part of new ORM Park in Richmond Hill.
77
TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY
2006 OPERATING BUDGET - FINAL
DIVISION: Parks and Culture
Page 24
ACTIVITY: Black Creek Pioneer Village
2005 2005 Diff. 2006
• Budget Actuals Actuals Budget
% Chq.
$ Chq.
$ $ $ $
penditures:
Program Management 233,200 222,579 (10,621) 229,100
-1.8%
(4,100)
Curatorial 311,000 347,381 36,381 311,900
0.3%
. 900
Photography 7,445 7,445
-
Interpretative Programming 1,301,400 1,290,474 (10,926) 1,366,700
5.0%
65,300
Special Events 46,700 77,244 30,544 34,700
-25.7%
(12,000)
Heritage Education 246,900 242,361 (4,539) 268,300
8.7%
21,400
Building Maintenance 1,048,900 1,057,973 9,073 1,120,400
•
6.8%
71,500
Admissions 144,100 147,647 3,547 151,700
5.3%
7,600
Giftshop 401,200 379,308 (21,892) 391,700 ,
-2.4%
(9,500)
Marketing and Sponsorships 439,700 376,178 (63,522) 353,500
-19.6%
(86,200)
penditure Total 4,173,100 4,148,590 (24,510) 4,228,000
1.3%
54,900
unding Sources:
Program /User fees 1,828,900 1,769,234 (59,666) 1,965,500
7.5%
136,600
Reserves
-
CFGT - Living City
-
CFGT - Flowthrough 23,237 23,237 50,000
-
50,000
Municipal
-
Provincial 197,000 198,250 1,250 197,000
Federal 6,844 6,844
-
Donations/Fundraising 55,000 42,367 (12,633) 6,000
-89.1%
(49,000)
Private
-
- evenue Total 2,080,900 2,039,932 (40,968) 2,218,500
6.6%
137,600
et Expenditures 2,092,200 2,108,658 16,458 2,009,500
-4.0%
(82,700)
Comments:
Major 06 over 05 Changes (in addition to economic factors):
Revenue: Admissions -$5k, Parking +$81k, Giftshop -$22k, Heritage Ed +$69k, Filming +$10
Marketing: transferred to Parks & Culture Divisional Administration
Building Maint: utilities & maint. costs up + new Pavilion operating costs
Interpretation: Sp. Events including $13.5 k added for entertainers at pavilion moved into base prog.
78
TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY
2006 OPERATING BUDGET - FINAL
DIVISION: Parks and Culture
ACTIVITY: Food Services
Page
25
2005 2005
Budget Actuals
Diff.
Actuals
2006
Budget
% Chg.
$ Chg.
$ $
Expenditures
Weddings: Sales Costs & Revenue 365,700 285,506
Corporate Events: Sales Costs /Revenue 467,600 391,909
Banquet Costs & Internal Functions 82,900 109,811
Visitor Services 174,100 157,602
Equipment 6,316
$
(80,194)
(75,691)
26,911
(16,498)
6,316
$
419,600
453,100
86,600
181,200
14.7%
-3.1%
4.5%
4.1%
53,900
(14,500)
3,700
7,100
Expenditure Total 1,090,300 951,145
(139,155)
1,140,500
4.6%
50,200
Funding Sources:
Program /User fees 1,145,900 905,047
Reserves 6,316
CFGT - Living City
CFGT - Flowthrough
Municipal
Provincial
Federal
Donations /Fundraising
Private
(240,853)
6,316
1,237,400
8.0%
91,500
Revenue Total 1,145,900 911,363
(234,537)
1,237,400
8.0%
91,500
Net Expenditures (55,600) 39,782
95,382
(96,900)
74.3%
(41,300)
Comments:
Major 06 over 05 Changes (in addition to economic factors):
Higher Wedding activity projected.
Corporate events to be delivered at lower cost.
79
TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY
2006 OPERATING BUDGET - FINAL
DIVISION: Office of the CAO
ACTIVITY: CAO Programs
Page
26
2005 2005 Diff.
Budget Actuals Actuals
2006
Budget
% Chq.
$ Chq.
$ $ $
Expenditures:
Corporate Management 410,600 397,540 (13,060)
Corporate Secretariat 315,000 296,082 (18,918)
Human Resources 429,900 422,138 (7,762)
Final 06 moved to Parks & Culture, Customer Services
Communications 697,500 659,621 (37,879)
$
418,000
320,600
475,700
982,300
1.8%
1.8%
10.7%
-
40.8%
18.5%
-
-58.2%
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
7,400
5,600
45,800
284,800
Expenditure Total 1,853,000 1,775,381 (77,619)
2,196,600
343,600
Funding Sources: '
funding fees 1,604 1,604
Reserves 107,600 (107,600)
CFGT - Living City
CFGT - Flowthrough
Municipal 321 321
Provincial (1,684) (1,684)
Federal
Donations /Fundraising
Private 158,438 158,438
45,000
15,000
5,000
7,400
(62,600)
15,000
5,000
7,400
Revenue Total 107,600 158,680 51,080
72,400
-32.7%
(35,200)
Net Expenditures 1,745,400 1,616,701 (128,699)
2,124,200
21.7%
378,800
Comments:
Major 06 over 05 Changes (in addition to economic factors):
Communications: Recognition ($20K) and 50th anniversary event costs ($35K) added.
Consolidation of marketing expenses with Parks and Culture ($180,000K)
Human Resources: Introduction of Volunteer Network Program ($20K)
80
SECTION 3
2006 CAPITAL BUDGET
81
IlitOnt(Vaiit.1,13egiort:-,ConsarvatloirAuthOilty
CAPITALSUMMARY
:2000 Budget.
:Rarja2 8
CAPITAL
Page 2005'
# -BUDGET
.2005'
Actuals
2006 ;06/.05 116 1 05
BUDGET; $ th"g:
Gioss,Expiuditures:
MQNITORING:AND,REPORTING. P00'31 845,300 f, 913,21: 8713100 3:88%
INATERSHED.PLANNING'
Peel Water Management. • ,IP,POZ
York Water-Mariag'ement' Page -33. ,
urharrf■,,IV,ater;Menagement• .Page.34 -
Water.Coat Centres . Page-35.
. „.
Cost's' Covered'bY WatermanagembritProgramS
loodplain Mapping Page-36
York/Peel/Durham/Toronto Groundwater Rage-37
Terrestrial Natural Heritage .Page 38
REGENERATION
Toronto Rernedial Action. Plan .Project
(RAP activity also shoWnWrider otherprojects)
Peel Natural Heritage. PtOject
York Natural Heritage, Project
Durham Natural Heritage Project
Valley 'and -Shereline Regeneration -PrOjects•
Other Erosion Control Projecta
ity,Of-TorontoiWaterfrontOroject
Region Of:Durharn WaterfrOnt PrOject
riaterfront ReVitrlization Corporation Projects
Humber ea y,',Stiords Waterfront Park
Quality Pro6rarn
'1;36,.100 599 24 f.. 862800
88:1!;6130' 636205 942 300- 6;98%
413000, 151308 .308500 .-38,33$
2330500. "1,534:668 213811500 ,.-10170%
(2 :185,500)' (1362,077) - ;(1;583,500)•. -„71.3:824/0
676,600 430;130 497,000 -26:54.%
631903 .443.,386 716,600 •3:40%
281.,200: 334,389 339;700 20110%
Page 39 -2461,900 1 ,862,457 .2,419,900 -1 7,1.%
(51d300) i(467,040) 200). 8 286A;
Page,40 1,001;800 781 -371. 1167,300 16.52!%
0a,ge 41 585,500 451,657 515,600 -8.52%
Page' 42. 124,800 99,993 i48900 45:7.9%
Pe 43, .2555,000 1,77194 ::2575,-;100 8.29%
Rage. 44, 26,000 -
Rage 45 "t,',2p8:030: 1:.:24e 363 4;858000 '402%
-sgage,46., 26700: 30;,9jZ 4,700 -.3286%
p 46.07' 'a429.1.,obP 14:,554:70e .22 po 14)2%
Page48 707',4130. 1,54267 583200. -.-21.,60%
.Ng6:49-
10,000
SUSTAINIRE. tOMMONItiES'. , ,
Stewardship Page 50 . 51,2600: 47.0329 5.71;20a 11 43%
EduCafiCri- P'age 51 1591O0: 1460 1,53,5 id
32500
'21:106:Over200$ Notes
(47-3,300).0,r,OjeCt'r'novi3Og. into-Aaite'r'phise:
61 300 PIartning/lntgration cfWd.T-t 6.06.
,2(176:100)Flood WOrkS;'porileriMOVe'dtrelOW:
..1249-,50P)OlaniiingAritigrat iorr,CfArd..:to- 06.
302,000
.(179,600)Sorn-eWaterahedSnearcomPletion.
84 ,700*ork:Ca rri 0:fOrWard into 2006.
58,500. §orrie additional. fuhding.
(42,00)-
'(42,900)-:
165,500,Funded .PerMita more restoration work.
(49,900)SlightlyJeSs funding in 2006.
24,600:1366;1e:work carried.ferWar'd into.2006.
220,100:,.§oMe sttes carried forward into.2006.
26 000 New fLinding.
5,68 ,301:1Orre sitea-:carried•fOrWard into 2006,
87,000 F-renChni_an!S.- bay ‘work f.eXpended
.1\4014VVeste'rkBeachkiWaterodure
:2;046 ;100 020,08:
(.1,54:.,200)EXPrepii`atior(ptaCesa..nof, complete.
(16,1:",l00)Rrogfarn:.Completed,
88:6013:Mbrainiark:O ii:HibhlaridvEtobieOke
'1$‘,604-.
Toronto and Region Conservation Authority
CAPITAL SUMMARY
2006: Budget
;Page 29
FLOOD PROTECTION
_owerDon"
Other Flood.Control Projects
INFRASTRUCTURE:,
Public:UsestrikaStructure
Other Fa(tlitieS;Retiorifs
Drinking atetjSystern.Upgrades
Living Cityentre. Design and Build:
\terserrRelocation-Piejdet
Oak RidgeSrybrarne2Cerridar Park
3CPV Retrofit and --Attractign. DaVelopment-
nformatithi Technology Project
AdminiatietiVe'Oftice
REGIONAL. OPEN: SPACE:
Watericiii00.en'Sjiaee
Ac,quisition1-.0ree‘nspace' Strategy
NeturalAreas:Protection '
"ERpenditure ;total,
Funding 'Sources:
Prograrii/Userfe'esr
Reserves
C:,Edt:=.:1,i■iing ;City
0,6-r Fibwithrough
Other::-Municipal Other4:Provinciaf
Jtfier4ederal
;Donations/Fundraising
3thar,i:Private;
_ease-Revenue
.land,Safe-Procee'ds
Transfers i3etioveen Projects
Revenue' toial
Net Expenditures.
. .
p‘rovincil:riansfer,Paymentt-
Vluni'cipal Levy
(Surplus)/Deficit
Page -2005- '2006 Budget
.BUD•GET Actuals. . %Chg. $-tligi Change
:Notes
.Page 52'
Page 53:
•En.v.Assess::done, implementation
3;939,000 1 ,046',965 14,522;500 .263.613% 10,5133,500 ,be.
509,0013 509000 :Additional funding:
Page 54.,. 372500 471,1,36 424,600 t13.99
pt§e'5,5,, 1i166,700, 457651 1,600.,700 39:1 '1%
Page: 56 824,600 892,5E8 242,900, -70:54%
page,' 57 '1'50000 68.,806 679,400 ,,,5471*;
pa6s 58, 800 000 211,207 1281;8206 :252.26%.-
,
52;1001nalLidee Humber Arboretbrn.stipport.
460,000 :,C.ieripgroUnd''work. carried into 2006..
(681',700)Albien 'water 'eystern-althost finished:
,"(B20,6130)Proceeding slowly.es„fUncling.parmits.
201E1',200:96110cii-ProjeCite.be ,done in ,2006,
.1'96,513' 143,944; ''1 :200,006 -7 '"IjAappgNe*tirail development Projeet. -
P, a g 6-60 . ''1,-007:100 1-,375,288 42:1--,300 ,-.t.9f9i:i, .1(97B,E100)Event. =pavilion :cpinPteted.
:page5,1 350,000 517834 *0,000 ::1-:'4.'296/0 - 50.1:00:..F.wlkts,-r*3d:raer AT Clui0meli.
'Ped62 - 806,006' 274,334' 890,000 ;30,00% 196,1300 -Wotk Catrie a zfonVa rek int itv 2006.-
'093 -4,440(000 .9404 2. 'spo,octi ,i3e7'4%; ti ariri M)1
',.,...,-,13—,,ess ,a et 1+tify.preject ed.
Page 63 .2;204700: 2 554 100 000 .131 :.32°,4 4,895,300,cit y; cif Tererito funding for acq
Page 63 '013,0130., 25610 .:.100 s,013% :600:0-00Aeis activity projscted.
52,948300 .39;290,925 86.427,900- 13;473.600
1:;0o
700;000; fO6s 'f..6f800 0i81200-'14ursery relocation 1'4611E6h:200a..
40,200 -
--99800: 45527.4 101.;91:10 .2.2,300
4 572,300 1 673 721 :.4;211riCItt ,;7,96% 1381-'2041ess:for projected
• • .
• -Less.fedandacq, & no Living City
2',404 200 667 203 565 000 , 70.80% .(1 ,034200),(enfre
.'99.E1,100, 355,365 431;000 • -56.132%
61,40,000, . 873,690 °Um, 235000%
.:icertmo: -1 6,4136 42Et :'391076',306 :57,09%
861:,13BS
8E000
1;2211,40d '1',035,323 6000130
i8,300)'. (487,040): ;.:(561.,200)" B2�%
'.35205,500- .21.202 ;579--,48 ;133;500' : 361%
67„1001No Living City Centre (uning for:2006.
1,2613,000 -bonation -re:land'acquisitjeri:
i 4 ,261 .3bo TVVR6‘.projects-at higher' level.
•
68000 Applied fo,.LiVing tjty,"CeniVe.
j621',400)Less and acq. activity projected:
(42,900)
12',926,13013-
17,742800: 12;08E1,346 18;294;400' 3 :i &146C0
174942600 12230650 17044,400 :064130)
(200;000) ;(147;312): 1250;000
TORONTO : R E GIONICO NS ERVATION, AUt1-10RITY
AP.PORTIONMEN",1" OF2006 etio6rreAPil-ALAN0 tilbJECT-LEVIEg
ADJALA "TOTAL
PROJECT 81: , LEVY
MUNICIPALITY.' RONT,10.' DURHAM, TORONTO •MONO-, .REEL. b
• 1 4.• A $ .$ $, $
GREENrA WO ACQ. :5.0.000. clPPc' 10A99
WATERFRONT REGENERATION
PROJECTS , : , : .. : : ,. ,. , : r.171-„0P : ; 1..,731J00 ; • ; : ; ;. ; ;. . ;• :: , ;.1,444:,00
T:W:R.O. PROJECTS
ETOB. MOTELSTRIP:
VALLEY-AND.SNORELINE
'REGENERATION. . . ,, ., . , . . , ,, „ „ „ . . . , . „ , ., .1',80.0•;000... , „. 113',000 ., , ., lotopp. :.,1,820.4100.
REMEDIAL ACTION PLANS 124:,000' ;1.71-4 ;306 834 000 355,090. •'. 3,027306
WATER
. ..... . .. . . ...,. ' . M., AN:'.A.' .,.G. . . E M. . E! . N.—., T .. -. . P..,R.... O'. J.' . .E...C. . T...S.... . 15, . 6, : .. .,,0, . 0, . 1-.
: :•:... ,:.- . ' , .. ' , '. . . ' '. :'. -: '. . .. '
3 , . 11, . : ?- . ). b- . .. , . ..- , . 8 P ..- . . P — O- P -:'-:."• ' - ''4• ' , 0-- 1 7. .0, 06
STEWARDSHIP/EDUCATION . ,Ubd Ai,bbd J'ii bno
i
FLOOD WARNING.t WORKS ....... ..60§fib.: • - --• 66 000 .. - ''• -(.3bb 24f
..,_ .., .,..... ....., .................... ... . ... .... i. ‘ , :, — -, . , ...... . .. . . . .. , ... , ...... ., .. ,..... ... .,.......... ....... -50P
• 50,000 70 000 . bti,009 1170b00
03 . F L 0 o D P L A I N MAPPING
. .
•N .. .
REGIONAL, MONITORING
•
D00,
.. , „ • . .. . . .... .. .. . .
235 boo 230 000 520 000
GROUNDWATER -STI4ATEGIS 1.000 125/•000 16 Olio 3750110
TERRESTRIAL 'NATURAL 'HERITAGE •;38,abo 79 000 , 50,603 10,06
. „. ... ..
PUEILICUSE, INFRASTRUCTURE . 23 60 . , , ,3;489 „ ,op;oop,
PYINP:CIIY.-PENTRE ... . . ... „ „. . „ .. .. ... . 34 000 34 000
OTHER PUBLIC USE RETRO .. .... . .. .. 0(I&0(10 905 000
DRINKING WATER UPGRADES
INFO: TECHNOLOGY-ACC,: 31 1231'.4 2.7.;7.35 34 44652 75174 400000 i:
intwokACILITIOFTIT-19FIT 15,407 34569 4.2 55815 9,960 50110110
i365■■ lib/El:00646T iiittiiVEIT 350'.13 ao
2006 TOTAL 93 8.5:8'121 .5.4a18,5138" 10 E8,1* 96 11'i.7211;800
2005 COMPARATIVES.
Page 30,
LEVI„ES • -TOTAL '
_ ..... -. .
ON .1...EW OTHER. TOTAL
,HArsib, 1311D.GET: F.UNDING-: COST
dii,tioo, 5550000 5,750.000
; ;717„800 .1'.2211.,000
•., • '36 ,997'•,600 -.la 997 600
. • •
275,600 276,600 . 276,600 653,200
.2,901.100
.04:400 :3;6•61:,706 40,800 ,710500.
1 077 300 2 114 300 .160 .',1300 2 ,312',300
. . • . . • ... •
6d;iei
• • • •.• • • . . . . . . . . „ 724,700
. .
194 600 436100 72900 509000
. .
262,000. 432,000 65,000 497,000
520,000 358;100 878,100
21.6 ,800 I ,6[16 1000 716600
. , .. ......
168000 171 ;700 339 700
24;600 324600_ . 100 ;000 424600
.9P j404[10 329..PCIP
. . 6.45700 .. 16004,00 .2818200 4218900
242;900 242;900 242,900
• • •: • • , • t • • t • • • . , • . ........
*OPP 400;000
190000 . thoAou 660,600
7t300 421,300 421 ,300
1-7044-40[1 :48133,500 65,177,900
bi 846,867. 5,937.254 1-18 4097:;823 '•i•',90;431- 11,704600
200 17',942,600. :352051500. 53.',148,300
TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY
2006 CAPITAL BUDGET
DIVISION: Watershed Management
GROUP: Capital
ACTIVITY: Regional Monitoring Program
Page 31
2005 2005 2006
BUDGET Actuals BUDGET % CHG. $ CHG.
$ $ $
GROSS EXPENDITURES:
Project Management 131,200 189,221 137,800 5.03% 6,600
Aquatic 252,300 362,897 331,900 31.55% 79,600
Terrestrial 76,400 78,473 76,400
Water Quality 94,700 77,942 92,200 -2.64% (2,500)
Flow & Precipitation 125,900 125,220 125,900
GIS & Database 47,700 51,855 14,000 - 70.65% (33,700)
Groundwater 67,100 5,505 41,600 - 38.00% (25,500)
West Nile Virus Monitoring 50,000 22,109 56,700 13.40% 6,700
Response Indicators 1,600 - 1,600
845,300 913,221 878,100 3.88% 32,800
FUNDING SOURCES:
Program /User fees
Reserves
CFGT - Living City
CFGT - Flowthrough -
Other - Municipal 259,000 269,632 248,000 -4.25% (11,000)
Other - Provincial 25,300 34,835 47,200 86.56% 21,900
Other - Federal 23,100 43,724 26,900 16.45% 3,800
Other - Donations /Fundraising -
Other - Private 27,000 27,000
Recoveries Internal Billings 9,000 9,000
307,400 348,190 358,100 16.49% 50,700
NET EXPENDITURES
NOTES: 2006 BUDGET
More emphasis on aquatic in 2006.
537,900 565,031 520,000 -3.33% (17,900)
85
TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY
2006 CAPITAL BUDGET
DIVISION: Watershed Management
GROUP: Capital
ACTIVITY: Peel Water Management
Page 32
2005 2005 2006
BUDGET Actuals BUDGET % CHG. $ CHG.
$ $ $
GROSS EXPENDITURES:
Planning & Integration 232,400 85,600 207,000 - 10.93% (25,400)
Water Budgets 50,900 42,598 22,100
Surface Flow Modelling 68,700 34,200 - 50.22% (34,500)
Groundwater Water Quality 74,800 56,168 17,400 - 76.74% (57,400)
Surface Water Quality 97,300 27,392 81,100
Aquatic Resource Study 200,600 116,227 83,900 - 58.18% (116,700)
Terrestrial natural Heritage Study 108,000 71,903 32,500 - 69.91% (75,500)
Other Component Studies 173,700 104,420 159,400 -8.23% (14,300)
Human Heritage 19,400 14,351 25,800 32.99% 6,400
Air Quality 8,000 5,157 2,900 - 63.75% (5,100)
Climate Change 10,500 5,500 - 47.62% (5,000)
Sustainable Communities 57,000 23,939 74,500 30.70% 17,500
Floodwaming, Dams Retrofit 134,800 51,485
Generic Template re: source protection 25,000 23,000 -8.00% (2,000)
Regulation Line mapping Update 75,000 93,500 24.67% 18,500
FUNDING SOURCES:
Program /User fees
Reserves
CFGT - Living City
CFGT - Flowthrough
Other - Municipal
Other - Provincial
Other - Federal
Other - Donations /Fundraising
Other - Private
NET EXPENDITURES
NOTES: 2006 BUDGET
Project in latter phase.
NOTES: 2005 VARIANCES
1,336,100 599,241 862,800 - 35.42% (473,300)
1,336,100 599,241 862,800 - 35.42% (473,300)
86
TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY
2006 CAPITAL BUDGET
DIVISION: Watershed Management
GROUP: Capital
ACTIVITY: York Water Management
Page 33
2005 2005 2006
BUDGET Actuals BUDGET % CHG. $ CHG.
$ $ $
GROSS EXPENDITURES:
Planning & Integration 289,700 401,284 409,200 41.25% 119,500
Water Budgets 69,600 57,152 22,100 - 68.25% (47,500)
Surface Flow Modelling 95,000 164,400 73.05% 69,400
Groundwater Water Quality 38,600 3,690 31,000 - 19.69% (7,600)
Surface Water Quality 201,700 38,394 155,700 - 22.81% (46,000)
Aquatic Resource Study 133,300 96,951 75,000 -43.74% _ (58,300)
Terrestrial natural Heritage Study 38,700 38,734 15,500 - 59.95% (23,200)
Flood Forecasting & Waming -
Human Heritage 50,000 50,000
Air Quality
Climate Change
Sustainable Communities 15,000 20,000 33.33% 5,000
FUNDING SOURCES:
Program /User fees
Reserves
CFGT - Living City
CFGT - Flowthrough
Other - Municipal
Other - Provincial
Other - Federal
Other - Donations /Fundraising
Other - Private
NET EXPENDITURES
881,600 636,205 942,900 6.95% 61,300
17,401
17,401
881,600 618,804 942,900 6.95% 61,300
NOTES: 2006 BUDGET
Planning & Integration work carried forward into 2006.
87
TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY
2006 CAPITAL BUDGET
DIVISION: Watershed Management
GROUP: Capital
ACTIVITY: Durham Water Management
Page 34
2005 2005 2006
BUDGET Actuals BUDGET % CHG. $ CHG.
$ $ $
GROSS EXPENDITURES:
Planning & Integration 152,000 50,330 70,100 - 53.88% (81,900)
Water Budgets 2,400 2,014 - 100.00% (2,400)
Surface Flow Modelling 31,500 54,286 50,000 58.73% 18,500
Groundwater Water Quality 27,400 27,400.
Surface Water Quality 25,000 28,700 14.80% 3,700
Aquatic Resource Study 1,400 78 1,400
Terrestrial natural Heritage Study -
Other Component Studies 50,000 50,000 56,000 12.00% 6,000
Human Heritage - -
Air Quality -
Climate Change -
Sustainable Communities -
Flood Waming Systems & Flood Control Capital 145,000 4,601 - 100.00% (145,000)
Regulation Line Mapping Update 50,000 0 75,000 50.00% 25,000
FUNDING SOURCES:
Program /User fees
Reserves
CFGT - Living City
CFGT - Flowthrough
Other - Municipal
Other - Provincial
Other - Federal
Other - Donations /Fundraising
Other - Private
NET EXPENDITURES
10,000
10,000
484,700 151,308 308,600 (0) (176,100)
NOTES: 2006 BUDGET
Flood warning and flood works items moved to own page for 2006.
88
[ROSS EXPENDITURES:
TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY
2006 CAPITAL BUDGET
DIVISION: Watershed Management
GROUP: Capital
ACTIVITY: Water Cost Centres
Page 35
2005 2005 2006
BUDGET Actuals BUDGET % CHG. $ CHG.
$ $ $
Planning & Integration 585,600 296,814 777,400 32.75% 191,800
Water Budgets 205,700 142,485 120,400 - 41.47% (85,300)
Surface Flow Modelling 130,900 111,059 175,000 33.69% 44,100
Groundwater Water Quality 101,400 98,164 51,300 -49.41% (50,100)
Surface Water Quality 406,100 234,634 325,000 - 19.97% (81,100)
Aquatic Resource Study 364,300 258,043 178,900 -50.89% (185,400)
Terrestrial natural Heritage Study 103,500 64,747 50,500 - 51.21% (53,000)
Other Component Studies 126,900 79,600 - 37.27% (47,300)
Human Heritage 109,900 182,397 100,500 -8.55% (9,400)
Air Quality 18,900 14,013 5,000 - 73.54% (13,900)
Climate Change 36,000 22,436 11,500 -68.06% (24,500)
Sustainable Communities 141,600 109,877 206,400 45.76% 64,800
Costs coeered by Water management Programs (2,185.500) (1,362,077) (1,883,500) - 13.82% 302,000
145,300 172,591 198,000 36.27% 52,700
FUNDING SOURCES:
Program /User fees
Reserves
CFGT - Li■ing City
CFGT - Flowthrough 12,500 12,500
Other - Municipal (18,929) 71,300 71,300
Other - Provincial 34,000 44,761 41,300 21.47% 7,300
Other - Federal 109,400 139,950 67,400 - 38.39% (42,000)
Other - Donations /Fundraising 1,887
Other - Private 1,900 4,922 5,500 189.47% 3,600
145,300 172,591 198,000 36.27% 52,700
ET EXPENDITURES (0)
OTES: 2006 BUDGET
Planning/ Intergration work carved forward to 2006.
89
TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY
2006 CAPITAL BUDGET
DIVISION: Watershed Management
GROUP: Capital
ACTIVITY: Terrestrial Natural Heritage
Page 36
2005 2005 2006
BUDGET Actuals BUDGET % CHG.
$ $
GROSS EXPENDITURES:
Project Terrestrial Natural Heritage 281,200 334,389 339,700 20.80%
Pickering Terrestrial Natural Heritage
281,200 334,389 339,700 20.80%
FUNDING SOURCES:
Program /User fees
Reserves -
CFGT - Living City 40,000 -
CFGT - Flowthrough 30,000 - 100.00%
Other - Municipal 75,000 105,639 107,600 43.47%
Other - Provincial 13,100 13,125 19,400 48.09%
Other - Federal 13,100 13,125 19,400 48.09%
Other - Donations /Fundraising
Other - Private 25,300 -
NET EXPENDITURES
NOTES: 2006 BUDGET
131,200 171,889 171,700 30.87%
150,000 162,500 168,000 12.00%
Some additional funding avaialble to support slightly expanded work plan.
90
TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY
2006 CAPITAL BUDGET
DIVISION: Watershed Management
GROUP: Capital
ACTIVITY: York/Peel /Durham /Toronto Groundwater
Page 37
GROSS EXPENDITURES:
Groundwater Studies
FUNDING SOURCES:
2005 2005 2006
BUDGET Actuals BUDGET % CHG. $ CHG.
$ $ $
631,900 443,386 716,600 13.40% 84,700
631,900 443,386 716,600 13.40% 84,700
Program /User fees
Reserves
CFGT - Living City
CFGT - Flowthrough -
Other - Municipal 100,000 105,102 125,000 25.00% 25,000
Other - Provincial -
Other - Federal
Other - Donations /Fundraising
Other - Private 5,000
NET EXPENDITURES
NOTES: 2006 BUDGET
Work carried forward into 2006.
100,000 110,102 125,000 25.00% 25,000
531,900 333,285 591,600 11.22% 59,700
91
TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY
2006 CAPITAL BUDGET
DIVISION: Watershed Management
GROUP: Capital
ACTIVITY: Floodplain Mapping
Page 38
2005 2005 2006
BUDGET Actuals BUDGET % CHG. $ CHG.
$ $ $
GROSS EXPENDITURES:
Project Management -
Humber Riker Flood Plain Mapping 59,800 65,789 44,000 - 26.42% (15,800)
Etobicoke- Mimico Flood Plain Mapping 86,300 43,871 62,400 - 27.69% (23,900)
Don River Flood Plain Mapping 52,400 21,654 77,100 47.14% 24,700
Duffins Creek Flood Plain Mapping 1,948 30,000 - 30,000
Rouge River Flood Plain Mapping 80,800 49,322 81,500 0.87% 700
Etobicoke Creek Hydrology 34,500 6,900 27,500 - 20.29% (7,000)
Carruthers Hydrology 12,263 20,000 - 20,000
Mimico Creek Hydrology 53,400 19,892 33,500 - 37.27% (19,900)
Highland Creek Flood Plain Mapping 62,800 26,132 36,700 - 41.56% (26,100)
Petticoat Creek Flood Plain Mapping 17,100 18,056 - 100.00% (17,100)
Mimico: Hydraulics /Floodline Update 75,000 51,736 43,300 -42.27% (31,700)
Frenchman: Hydraulics /Floodline 57,000 60,569 - 100.00% (57,000)
Frenchmans B: Hydrology Update 25,000 7,140 13,400 - 46.40% (11,600)
Carruthers Flood Plain Mapping Update 72,500 44,858 27,600 - 61.93% (44,900)
FUNDING SOURCES:
Program /User fees
Res ems
CFGT- Living City
CFGT - Flowthrough
Other - Municipal
Other - Provincial
Other - Federal
Other - Donations /Fundraising
Other - Private
NET EXPENDITURES
NOTES: 2006 BUDGET
676,600 430,130 497,000 - 26.54% (179,600)
143,300
101,150 65,000
1,400
- 54.64%
(78, 300)
143,300 102,550 65,000 - 54.64% (78,300)
533,300 327,580 432,000 - 18.99% (101,300)
Some watersheds completed or near completion.
92
' TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY
2006 CAPITAL BUDGET
DIVISION: Watershed Management
GROUP: Capital
ACTIVITY: Toronto Remedial Action Plan Project
Page 39
2005 2005 2006
BUDGET Actuals BUDGET % CHG. $ CHG.
$ $ $
GROSS EXPENDITURES:
Regeneration:
Humber 311,100 191,981 243,200 - 21.83% (67,900)
Etobicoke - Mimico Creek 65,000 61,314 125,000 92.31% 60,000
Highland Creek 101,500 78,141 47,700 - 53.00% (53,800)
Don 90,300 91,761 97,000 7.42% 6,700
Rouge 7,000 6,000 6,000 - 14.29% (1,000)
Waterfront 165,600 172,522 108,000 - 34.78% (57,600)
Greenroofs 86,800 95,416 56,800 - 34.56% (30,000)
BioRegional Seed Crops 8,000 8,000 8,000
Regional Monitoring 200,000 200,000 230,000 15.00% 30,000
Multi- Watershed: Various 140,000 78,707 144,000 2.86% 4,000
Multi: Terrestrial Natural Heritage 75,000 75,000 78,800 5.07% 3,800
Multi: Education 49,500 49,500 61,300 23.84% 11,800
Multi: Stewardship 57,500 57,500 101,000 75.65% 43,500
Water Management: Floodmap, Gro 243,300 192,040 252,400 3.74% 9,100
Water Management- all other 861,300 504,574 860,700 -0.07% (600)
Amounts combined under other proji (518,300) (467,040) (561,200) 8.28% (42,900)
1,943,600 1,395,417 1,858,700 -4.37% (84,900)
FUNDING SOURCES:
Program /User fees
Reserves
CFGT - Living City -
CFGT - Flowthrough 4,700 13,067 12,500 165.96% 7,800
Other - Municipal 114,000 64,638 238,000 108.77% 124,000
Other - Provincial 39,300 39,404 14,700 - 62.60% (24,600)
Other - Federal 109,600 72,331 33,500 - 69.43% (76,100)
Other - Donations /Fundraising 6,962
Other - Private 15,000 4,504 2,000 - 86.67% (13,000)
TBD1 -
TBD 2 -
(518,300) (467,040) (561,200) 8.28% (42,900)
(235,700) (266,133) (260,500) 10.52% (24,800)
NET EXPENDITURES 2,179,300 1,661,550 2,119,200 -2.76% (60,100)
NOTES: 2006 BUDGET
93
TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY
2006 CAPITAL BUDGET
DIVISION: Watershed Management
GROUP: Capital
ACTIVITY: Peel Natural Heritage Project
Page 40
2005 2005 2006.
BUDGET Actuals BUDGET % CHG. $ CHG.
$ $ $
GROSS EXPENDITURES:
Regeneration:
Humber 544,500 435,502 557,300 2.35% 12,800
Etobicoke Creek 242,300 136,825 322,000 32.89% 79,700
Mimico Creek 72,500 150,000 106.90% 77,500
BioRegional Seed Crops 16,000 16,000 20,000 25.00% 4,000
Multi- Watershed 86,500 193,045 98,000 13.29% 11,500
Education
Stewardship
FUNDING SOURCES:
40,000 20,000 - 50.00% (20,000)
1,001,800 781,371
16.52% 165,500
Program /User fees
Reserves
CFGT - Living City
CFGT - Flowthrough 14,200
Other - Municipal 35,000 40,000 25,000 - 28.57% (10,000)
Other - Provincial 9,000 5,000 3,000 - 66.67% (6,000)
Other - Federal 45,000 3,387 60,000 33.33% 15,000
Other - Donations /Fundraising 2,500 -
Other - Private 25,100 8,352 65,600 161.35% 40,500
NET EXPENDITURES
NOTES: 2006 BUDGET
114,100 73,440 153,600 34.62% 39,500
887,700 707,932 14.19% 126,000
Enhanced funding permits more restoration work in Peel portion of watersheds.
94
TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY
2006 CAPITAL BUDGET
DIVISION: Watershed Management
GROUP: Capital
ACTIVITY: York Natural Heritage Project
Page 41
2005 2005 2006
BUDGET Actuals BUDGET % CHG. $ CHG.
$ $ $
GROSS EXPENDITURES:
Regeneration:
Humber 160,500 145,015 129,900 - 19.07% ,(30,600)
Rouge 112,600 40,693 75,200 - 33.21% (37,400)
Don River 161,700 117,434 136,300 - 15.71% (25,400)
BioRegiortal Seed Crops 21,000 20,600 -1.90% (400)
Multi- Watershed 60,100 36,562 73,200 21.80% 13,100
Education 39,600 111,954 53,400 34.85% 13,800
Stewardship 20,000 15,000 - 25.00% (5,000)
585,500 451,657 535,600 -8.52% (49,900)
FUNDING. SOURCES:
Program /User fees 1,200 1,200
Reserves
CFGT - Living City -
CFGT- Flowthrough 22,100 36,564 12,800 - 42.08% (9,300)
Other - Municipal 81,000 9,974 51,000 - 37.04% (30,000)
Other - Provincial 5,000 2,000 2,000
Other- Federal 17,000 7,330 23,700 39.41% 6,700
Other - Donations /Fundraising
Other - Private 124,700 78,113 65,000 - 47.87% (59,700)
246,000 136,981 155,700 -36.71% (90,300)
NET EXPENDITURES 339,500 314,676. 379,900 11.90% 40,400
NOTES: 2006 BUDGET
More work in Duffin's, slightly Tess in other watersheds.
95
TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY
2006 CAPITAL BUDGET
DIVISION: Watershed Management
GROUP: Capital
ACTIVITY: Durham Natural Heritage Project
Page 42
2005 2005 2006
BUDGET Actuals BUDGET % CHG. $ CHG.
$ $ $
GROSS EXPENDITURES:
Regeneration:
Duffins: Fish Plan Implementation 15,000 20,026 38,000 153.33% 23,000
TNH Implementation 59,300 40,708 69,000 16.36% 9,700
Watershed Trail Planning 5,355 -
Watershed Trail Implementation 50,000 33,904 41,900 - 16.20% (8,100)
124,300 99,993 148,900 19.79% 24,600
FUNDING SOURCES:
Program /User fees
Reserves
CFGT - Living City
CFGT - Flowthrough
Other - Municipal
Other - Provincial
Other - Federal
Other - Donations /Fundraising
Other - Private 5,000 9,975 - 100.00% (5,000)
NET EXPENDITURES
NOTES: 2006 BUDGET
Some work carrried forward into 2006.
5,000 9,975 - 100.00% (5,000)
119,300 90,019 148,900 24.81% 29,600
96
TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY
2006 CAPITAL BUDGET
DIVISION: Watershed Management
GROUP: Capital
ACTIVITY: Valley and Shoreline Regeneration Projects
Page 43
2005 2005 2006
BUDGET Actuals BUDGET %CHG. $ CHG.
$ $ $
ROSS EXPENDITURES:
Project Planning & Design 125,000 171,130 166,700 33.36% 41,700
Guild Inn 150,000 12,058 100,000 - 33.33% (50,000)
Guildwood Parkway 100,000 28,093 321,900 221.90% 221,900
Fishleigh Drive 100,000 144,328 25,000 - 75.00% (75,000)
Springbank Ave. 9,000 • 860 8,100 - 10.00% (900)
Queen St. E. Apartments
Wicksteed Ave. 330,000 24,731 650,800 97.21% 320,800
Meadowcliffe Drive 20,000 3,597 . 70,000 250.00% 50,000
Highland Creek Weirs 259,200 11,842 251,100 -3.13% (8,100)
Monitoring & Maintenance: WF 396,100 552,985 320,000 - 19.21% (76,100)
Toronto Parks Sites 400,000 310,870 265,000 - 33.75% (135,000)
Toronto Islands - Gilbraltor Point 125,000 50,245 150,000 20.00% 25,000
16 -18 Hardwood Gate 7 -
18 Bitteroot
Reid Manor
Birkdale Ravine 344,303 105,000 105,000
30-48 Royal Rouge Trail 25,000 25,000
Manitoba Road 100,000 11,092 70,000 - 30.00% (30,000)
Access Rd & Sheppard Ave 90,000 8,915 - 100.00% (90,000)
Parkview Hill 5,000 3,880 - 100.00% (5,000)
Other
Colonel Danforth 121 -129 85,000 26,186 105,500 24.12% 20,500
345 Beechgrove 125,000 33,174 125,000
• 221 Martingrove Rd 100,000 33,398 116,000 16.00% 16,000
Don Mills York Mills Channel Repairs 56,800 - 100.00% (56,800)
Black Creek Channel Repair 2,400 - 100.00% (2,400)
Yonge St York Mills Channel Repair 44,800 - 100.00% (44,800)
Bluffers Park SW Hardpoint Repair 6,000 - 100.00% (6,000)
Marie Curtis Park Gabion Repair 6,400 - 100.00% (6,400)
51 Colonel Danforth Trail Gabion Replacement 19,300 - 100.00% (19,300)
2,655,000 1,771,694 2,875,100 8.29% 220,100
UNDING SOURCES:
Program /User fees
Reserves
CFGT - Living City
CFGT - Flowthrough
Other - Municipal 9000 226,174 8100 - 10.00% (900)
Other - Provincial 135700 94,754 - 100.00% (135,700)
Other - Federal 3779.34
Other - Donations /Fundraising
Other - Private 3,138
144,700 327,845 8,100 - 94.40% (136,600)
ET EXPENDITURES 2,510,300 1,443,850 2,867,000 14.21% 356,700
OTES: 2006 BUDGET
Some sites carted forward into 2006.
97
TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY
2006 CAPITAL BUDGET
DIVISION: Watershed Management
GROUP: Capital
ACTIVITY: Other Erosion Control Projects
Page 44
GROSS EXPENDITURES:
York Region Erosion Monitoring & Maintenance
Peel Region Erosion Monitoring & Maintenance
FUNDING SOURCES:
Program /User fees
Reserves
CFGT - Living City
CFGT - Flowthrough
Other - Municipal
Other - Provicial
Other - Federal
Other - Donations /Fundraising
Other - Private
\IET EXPENDITURES
NOTES: 2006 BUDGET
New funding from Regions.
2005 2005 2006
BUDGET Actuals BUDGET % CHG. $ CHG.
$ $ $
10,000 10,000
16,000 16,000
26,000 26,000
26,000 26,000
98
TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY
2006 CAPITAL BUDGET
DIVISION: Watershed Management
GROUP: Capital
ACTIVITY: City of Toronto Waterfront Project
Page 45
2005 2005 2006
BUDGET Actuals BUDGET % CHG. $ CHG.
$ $ $
GROSS EXPENDITURES:
Project Planning & Design 177,700 191,093 174,900 - 1.58% (2,800)
Humber Bay Shores 93,000 30,659 348,300 274.52% 255,300
Watershed Strategies 13,100 13,100
Ashbridge's Bay 115,000 149,477 225,000 95.65% 110,000
Environmental Monitoring 170,000 192,802 190,000 11.76% 20,000
Tommy Thompson - Int. Mgt. 140,000 159,393 145,000 3.57% 5,000
TTP - Cell 1 Capping 6,070 45,000 - 45,000
TTP - Park Development 62,323
Keating Channel Dredging 290,000 319,286 320,000 10.34% 30,000
East Point Park 10,000 2,789 80,000 700.00% 70,000
Waterfront G.I.S. 50,000 50,000 25,000 - 50.00% (25,000)
Arsenal Lands Park Development 80,000 47,799 290,000 262.50% 210,000
Toronto Bay
Other 132,300 33,995 - 100.00% (132,300)
Colonel Sam Smith Park 30,000 2,678 - 100.00% (30,000)
1,288,000 1,248,363 1,856,300 44.12% 568,300
FUNDING SOURCES:
Program /User fees 4,924
Reserves
CFGT - Living City
CFGT - Flowthrough 6,250
Other - Municipal 32,975 57,100 57,100
Other - Provincial 617
Other - Federal 29,074
Other - Donations /Fundraising -
Other - Private 95,000 139,357 495,000 421.05% 400,000
95,000 213,195 552,100 481.16% 457,100
NET EXPENDITURES 1,193,000 1,035,168 1,304,200 9.32% 111,200
NOTES: 2006 BUDGET
Some sites carried forward into 2006.
99
TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY
2006 CAPITAL BUDGET
DIVISION: Watershed Management
GROUP: Capital
ACTIVITY: Region Of Durham Waterfront Project
Page 46
2005 2005 2006
BUDGET Actuals BUDGET % CHG. $ CHG.
$ $ $
GROSS EXPENDITURES:
Frenchman's Bay 145,400 135,535 189,400 30.26% 44,000
Durham /Ajax Waterfront , 73,400 115,918 81,800 11.44% 8,400
Durham Waterfront Monitoring 10,000 14,420 15,000 50.00% 5,000,
Duffins /Pickering Trail 38,900 36,043 68,500 76.09% 29,600
267,700 301,917 354,700 32.50% 87,000
FUNDING SOURCES:
Program /User fees
Reserves
CFGT - Living City
CFGT - Flowthrough 35,800 50,677 55,200 54.19% 19,400
Other - Municipal 15,000 20,000 15,000
Other - Provincial 320
Other - Federal
Other - Donations /Fundraising -
Other- Private 79,600 111,085 95,500 19.97% 15,900
NET EXPENDITURES
NOTES: 2006 BUDGET
Frenchman's Bay work expanded.
130,400 182,082 165,700 27.07% 35,300
137,300 119,835 189,000 37.65% 51,700
100
TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY
2006 CAPITAL BUDGET
DIVISION: Watershed Management
GROUP: Capital
ACTIVITY: Waterfront Revitilization Corporation Projects
Page 47
2005 2005 2006
BUDGET Actuals BUDGET % CHG. $ CHG.
$ $ $
GROSS EXPENDITURES:
Port Union Waterfront Improvement Project 5,087,300 2,600,122 4,171,500 - 18.00% (915,800)
Mimico Waterfront Linear Park 4,294,400 3,115,822 2,093,000 - 51.26% (2,201,400)
Tommy Thompson Park Plan Implementation 1,927,600 342,974 2,552,200 32.40% 624,600
Western Beaches Watercourse Facility 9,119,700 8,535,881 13,658,400 49.77% 4,538,700
FUNDING SOURCES:
Program /User fees
Reserves
CFGT - Living City
CFGT - Flowthrough
Other - Municipal
Other - Provincial
Other - Federal
Other - Donations /Fundraising
Other - Private
20,429,000 14,594,798 22,475,100 10.02% 2,046,100
20,429,000 14,597,798 22,475,100 10.02% 2,046,100
20,429,000 14,597,798 22,475,100 10.02% 2,046,100
NET EXPENDITURES (3,000)
NOTES: 2006 BUDGET
Emphasis on Westem Beaches Watercourse in 2006.
101
TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY
2006 CAPITAL BUDGET
DIVISION: Watershed Management
GROUP: Capital
ACTIVITY: Humber Bay Shores Waterfront Park
Page 48
2005 2005 2006
BUDGET Actuals BUDGET % CHG. $ CHG.
$ $ $
GROSS EXPENDITURES:
Humber Bay Shores 707,400 154,267 553,200 - 21.80% (154,200)
707,400 154,267 553,200 - 21.80% (154,200)
FUNDING SOURCES:
Program /User fees
Reserves
CFGT - Living City
CFGT - Flowthrough
Other - Municipal -
Other - Provincial 353,700 77,133 276,600 - 21.80% (77,100)
Other - Federal -
Other - Donations /Fundraising
Other - Private
353,700 77,133 276,600 - 21.80% (77,100)
NET EXPENDITURES 353,700 77,133 276,600 - 21.80% (77,100)
NOTES: 2006 BUDGET
102
TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY
2006 CAPITAL BUDGET
DIVISION: Watershed Management
GROUP: Capital
ACTIVITY: Lakefill Quality Program
Page 49
GROSS EXPENDITURES:
Lakefill Quality Control Program
FUNDING SOURCES:
2005 2005 2006
BUDGET Actuals BUDGET % CHG. $ CHG.
$ $ $
10,000 11,487
10,000 11,487
- 100.00% (10,000)
- 100.00% (10,000)
Program /User fees 10,000 4,722 - 100.00% (10,000)
Reserves
CFGT - Living City
CFGT - Flowthrough
Other - Municipal
Other - Provicial
Other - Federal
Other - Donations /Fundraising
Other - Private
10,000 4,722 - 100.00% (10,000)
NET EXPENDITURES 6,765
NOTES: 2006 BUDGET
Program completed.
103
TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY
2006 CAPITAL BUDGET
DIVISION: Watershed Management
GROUP: Capital
ACTIVITY: Stewardship
Page 50
2005 2005 2006
BUDGET Actuals BUDGET . % CHG. $ CHG.
$ $ $
ROSS EXPENDITURES:
Regeneration:
Project Management -
Conservation Seminars 28,600 22,987 24,100 - 15.73% (4,500)
Healthy Yards 73,200 54,893 65,500 - 10.52% (7,700)
Duffins Stewardship 47,571 -
Stewardship Forum 1,700 3,836 3,100 82.35% 1,400
Stewardship Resource Centre 22,600 17,884 23,500 3.98% 900
Wetlands For Wildlife
Habitat For Wildlife 15,000 48,656 10,000 - 33.33% (5,000)
Community Environ. Stewardship Program 80,900 71,604 79,700 - 1.48% (1,200)
Multicultural Environ. Stewardship
Agricultural Non Point Source 15,900 57 13,100 - 17.61% (2,800)
Agricultural Environ. Stewardship 5,000 6,714 - 100.00% (5,000)
Rural Clean Water Program 112,800 75,847 97,900 - 13.21% (14,900)
Stewardship:Trillium- Highland 52,100 52,100
Private Land Stewardship 30,200 77,915 55,900 85.10% 25,700
Stewardship Management 8,800 11,514 9,000 2.27% 200
Durham Stewardship funding 30,000 35,000 45,000 50.00% 15,000
Peel Business Outreach 25,000 25,000 15,000 -40.00% (10,000)
Peel Stewardship funding 101,000 101,000 106,000 4.95% 5,000
Stewardship: York Funding
Markham Urban Ecological Backyard Naturalization 18,200 17,796 3,800 - 79.12% (14,400)
Centreville Creek Stewardship 78,800 53,000 - 32.74% (25,800)
Mallon Environmental Stewardship Program 62,100 100,400 61.67% 38,300
Rouge Park Watershed Stewardship Program 26,000 12,233 17,800 -31.54% (8,200)
Duffins Carruthers Community Stewardship 61,500 45,000 -26.83% (16,500)
Sustainable Communities 40,700 - 40,700
Stewardship: Other 134,781 -
Portion covered by transfers from funding sources (284,700) (286,958) (289,400) 1.65% (4,700)
512,600 478,329 571,200 11.43% 58,600
UNDING SOURCES:
Program/User fees
Reserves
CFGT - Living City
CFGT - Flowthrough 9,567 8,900 - 8,900
Other - Municipal 21,000 11,872 - 100.00% (21,000)
Other - Provincial 24,300 76,545 71,800 195.47% 47,500
Other - Federal 161,100 31,953 184,000 14.21% 22,900
Other - Donations /Fundraising 100 -
Other - Private 150,200 186,905 99,800 - 33.56% (50,400)
Other Internal
ET EXPENDITURES
OTES: 2006 BUDGET
356,600 316,943 364,500 2.22% 7,900
156,000 161,386 206,700 32.50% 50,700
104
TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY
2006 CAPITAL BUDGET
DIVISION: Watershed Management
GROUP: Capital ,
ACTIVITY: Education
Page 51
2005 2005 2006
BUDGET Actuals BUDGET % CHG. $ CHG.
$ $ $
GROSS EXPENDITURES:
Regeneration:
Project Management
Conservation Seminars -
Watershed on Wheels 94,800 90,667 108,400 14.35% 13,600
Aquatic Plants Program 49,000 48,383 35,600 - 27.35% (13,400)
Yellow Fish Road 50,900 31,510 38,800 . - 23.77% (12,100)
Peel Education funding 100,000 100,000 121,300 21.30% 21,300
Peel Children's Water Festival 40,000 40,000 -
EcoSchool Water Conservation Guide 18,900 18,900
Education: Future
Education: Future
Portion co\ered by transfers from funding sources (175,600) (135,600) (209,500) 19.31% (33,900)
159,100 134,960 153,500 -3.52% (5,600)
FUNDING SOURCES:
Program /User fees
Reserves
CFGT - Living City -
CFGT - Flowthrough 7,000 12,288 - 100.00% (7,000)
Other - Municipal -
Other - Provincial 19,800 10,731 16,100 - 18.69% (3,700)
Other - Federal 19,800 10,731 16,100 - 18.69% (3,700)
Other - Donations /Fundraising 350
Other - Private 12,500 1,175 - 100.00% (12,500)
59,100 35,276 32,200 - 45.52% (26,900)
NET EXPENDITURES 100,000 99,684 121,300 21.30% 21,300
NOTES: 2006 BUDGET
105
TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY
2006 CAPITAL BUDGET
DIVISION: Watershed Management
GROUP: Flood Control
ACTIVITY: Lower Don
Page 52
2005 2005 2006
BUDGET Actuals BUDGET %CHG. $ CHG.
$ $ $
ROSS EXPENDITURES:
Lower Don Env. Assessment 107,000 81,703 3,500 - 96.73% (103,500)
Lower Don Berm & Culvert Implementation 17,200 6,399 - 100.00% (17,200)
Don Mouth Naturalization & Port Lands Protection EA 801,600 321,433 1,000,900 24.86% 199,300
Bala Line Pedestrian Tunnel 13,200 19,918 - 100.00% (13,200)
Lower Don EA to Implementation 3,000,000 617,512 - 100.00% (3,000,000)
Lower Don Imp: Detail Design 13,489,700 - 13,489,700
Lower Don Imp: ORC /FPL Coordination 16,200 - 16,200
Lower Don Imp: TWRC /Park Coordination 12,200 12,200
UNDING SOURCES:
Program /User fees
Reserves
CFGT - Living City
CFGT - Flowthrough
Other - Municipal
Other - Provincial
Other - Federal
Other - Donations /Fundraising
Other - Private
ET EXPENDITURES
OTES: 2006 BUDGET
Env.Assess. complete, implementation begins.
3,939,000 1,046,965 14,522,500 268.68% 10,583,500
3,939,000 1,046,965 14, 522, 500 268.68% 10, 583, 500
3,939,000 1,046,965 14,522,500 268.68% 10,583,500
106
TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY
2006 CAPITAL BUDGET
DIVISION: Watershed Management
GROUP: Capital
ACTIVITY: Other Flood Control Projects
Page 53
2005 2005 2006
BUDGET Actuals BUDGET %CHG. $ CHG.
$ $ $
GROSS EXPENDITURES:
Flood Waming Equipment & Models 228,100 228,100
Flood Protection & Remedial Capital Works 165,500 165,500
Small Dams & Flood Control Facilities Capital Works 46,800 46,800
Large Dams Capital Works 134,200 134,200
Black Creek Channel Maintenance 118,000
WECI Water Control Structure Projects 145,800 145,800
Covered from other Capital Projects
FUNDING SOURCES:
(329,400) (329,400)
509,000 509,000
Program /User fees
Reserves
CFGT - Living City
CFGT - Flowthrough
Other - Municipal
Other - Provincial 72,900 72,900
Other - Federal
Other - Donations /Fundraising
Other - Private
NET EXPENDITURES
72,900 72,900
436,100 436,100
NOTES: 2006 BUDGET
Enough new funding secured to restore a detailed stand -alone budget page.
107
TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY
2006 CAPITAL BUDGET
DIVISION: Watershed Management
GROUP: Capital
ACTIVITY: Public Use Infrastructure
Page 54
2005 2005 2006
BUDGET Actuals BUDGET % CHG. $ CHG.
$. $ $
G ROSS EXPENDITURES:
Retrofits /Construction 309,600 397,610 148,500 - 52.03% (161,100)
CA Planning 55,400 73,526 68,200 23.10% 12,800
Oil Tank Removal 7,500 7,900 5.33% 400
Boyd Offfice Water Supply. 100,000 100,000
Humber Arboretum 100,000 100,000
Unassigned
372,500 471,136 424,600 13.99% 52,100
FUNDING SOURCES:
Program /User fees
Reserves 100,000 100,000
CFGT - Living City 200
CFGT - Flowthrough
Other - Municipal
Other - Provincial
Other - Federal
Other - Donations /Fundraising
Other - Private 123,107
TBD 1
TBD2
123,307 100,000 100,000
NET EXPENDITURES 372,500 347,828 324,600 - 12.86% (47,900)
NOTES: 2006 BUDGET
Reserve funded support for Humber Arboretum included for 2006.
108
TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY
2006 CAPITAL BUDGET
DIVISION: Watershed Management
GROUP: Capital
ACTIVITY: Other Facilities Retrofits
Page 55
GROSS EXPENDITURES:
Peel Campgrounds
Peel Washroom Upgrades
2005 2005 2006
BUDGET Actuals BUDGET % CHG. $ CHG.
$ $ $
783,800 170,228 1,083,600 38.25% 299,800
167,500 88,086 329,800 96.90% 162,300
Peel Conservation Land Planning 199,400 196,777 187,300 -6.07% (12,100)
Other 2,560
FUNDING SOURCES:
Program /User fees
Reserves
CFGT - Living City
CFGT - Flowthrough
Other - Municipal
Other - Provincial
Other - Federal
Other - Donations /Fundraising
Other - Private
1,150,700 457,651 1,600,700 39.11% 450,000
97
97
NET EXPENDITURES 1,150,700 457,554 1,600,700 39.11% 450,000
NOTES: 2006 BUDGET
Campground work carried into 2006 and extra washroom upgrades funding secured.
109
TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY
2006 CAPITAL BUDGET
DIVISION: Watershed Management
GROUP: Capital
ACTIVITY: Drinking Water System Upgrades
Page 56
2005 2005 2006
BUDGET Actuals BUDGET % CHG. $ CHG.
$ $ $
GROSS EXPENDITURES:
Water System Engineer Analysis 66,307 -
Peel water System Upgrades 766,800 455,609 242,900 - 68.32% (523,900)
York Drinking Water: Boyd 53,800 1,714 - 100.00% (53,800)
York Drinking Water: Bruce's Mill 4,000 - 100.00% (4,000)
York: Kortright Centre 28,728 -
Durham: Claremont 30,211
FUNDING SOURCES:
Program /User fees
Reserves
CFGT - Living City
CFGT - Flowthrough
Other - Municipal
Other - Provincial
Other - Federal
Other - Donations /Fundraising
Other - Private
824,600 582,569 242,900 - 70.54% (581,700)
2,145
2,145
NET EXPENDITURES 824,600 580,424 242,900 - 70.54% (581,700)
NOTES: 2006 BUDGET
Albion water system almost finished.
110
TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY
2006 CAPITAL BUDGET
DIVISION: Watershed Management
GROUP: Capital
ACTIVITY: Living City Centre Design and Build
Page 57
GROSS EXPENDITURES:
Kortright Retrofit
FUNDING SOURCES:
Program /User fees
Reserves
CFGT - Living City
CFGT - Flowthrough
Other - Municipal
Other - Provincial
Other - Federal
Other - Donations /Fundraising
Other - Private
Lease Revenue
NET EXPENDITURES
NOTES: 2006 BUDGET
2005 2005 2006
BUDGET Actuals BUDGET % CHG. $ CHG.
$ $ $
1,500,000 68,886 679,400 - 54.71% (820,600)
1,500,000 68,886 679,400 - 54.71% (820,600)
500,000
500,000
68,886
250,000 - 250,000
- 100.00% (500,000)
- 100.00% (500,000)
79,000 79,000
1,000,000 68,886 329,000 - 67.10% (671,000)
500,000 350,400 - 29.92% (149,600)
Proceeding slowly as funding permits.
111
TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY
2006 CAPITAL BUDGET
DIVISION: Watershed Management
GROUP: Capital
ACTIVITY: Nursery Relocation Project
Page 58
2005 2005 2006
BUDGET Actuals BUDGET % CHG. $ CHG.
$ $ $
GROSS EXPENDITURES:
Nursery Relocation 800,000 212,207 2,818,200 252.28% 2,018,200
800,000 212,207 2,818,200 252.28% 2,018,200
FUNDING SOURCES:
Program /User fees -
Reserves 700,000 103,755 1,418,200 102.60% 718,200
CFGT - Living City -
CFGT - Flowthrough
Other - Municipal 8,453
Other - Provincial
Other - Federal
Other - Donations /Fundraising
Other - Private
NET EXPENDITURES
NOTES: 2006 BUDGET
Bulk of project to be done in 2006.
700,000 112,207 1,418,200 102.60% 718,200
100,000 100,000 1,400,000 1300.00% 1,300,000
112
TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY
2006 CAPITAL BUDGET
DIVISION: Watershed Management
GROUP: Capital
ACTIVITY: Oak Ridges Moraine Corridor Park
Page 59
GROSS EXPENDITURES:
Park Management Plan
Terrestrial Field Inventories
Trail Construction
FUNDING SOURCES:
Program /User fees
Reserves
CFGT - Living City
CFGT - Flowthrough
Other - Municipal
Other - Provincial
Other - Federal
Other - Donations /Fundraising
Other - Private
TBD 1
TBD 2
NET EXPENDITURES
NOTES: 2006 BUDGET
New program for 2006
2005 2005 2006
BUDGET Actua Is BUDGET % CHG. $ CHG.
$ $
23,400
143,944 1,176, 600
23,400
1,176, 600
143,944 1,200,000 - 1,200,000
12,500
131,444 1,200,000
143,944 1,200,000
1,200,000
1,200,000
113
TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY
2006 CAPITAL BUDGET
DIVISION: Watershed Management
GROUP: Capital
ACTIVITY: BCPV Retrofit and Attraction Development
Page 60
GROSS EXPENDITURES:
BCPV Retrofit
BCPV Attraction development
FUNDING SOURCES:
Program /User fees
Reserves
CFGT - Living City
CFGT - Flowthrough
Other - Municipal
Other - Provincial
Other - Federal
Other - Donations /Fundraising
Other - Private
TBD 1
TBD 2
2005 2005 2006
BUDGET Actuals BUDGET % CHG. $ CHG.
$ $ $
988,800 276,455 421,300 - 57.39% (567,500)
411,300 1,098,803 - 100.00% (411,300)
1,400,100 1,375,258 421,300 -69.91% (978, 800)
46,436
46,436
NET EXPENDITURES 1,400,100 1,328,822 421,300 - 69.91% (978,800)
NOTES: 2006 BUDGET
Event• pavillion from 2005 finished.
114
TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY
2006 CAPITAL BUDGET
DIVISION: Finance and Business Development
GROUP: Capital
ACTIVITY: Information Technology Project
Page 61
GROSS EXPENDITURES:
R Project
FUNDING SOURCES:
Program /User fees
Reserves
CFGT - Living City
CFGT - Flowthrough
Other - Municipal
Other - Provincial
Other - Federal
Other - Donations /Fundraising
Other - Private
NET EXPENDITURES
NOTES: 2006 BUDGET
High demand for IT equipment.
2005 2005 2006
BUDGET Actuals BUDGET % CHG. $ CHG.
$ $ $
350,000 517,634 400,000 14.29% 50,000
350,000. 517,634 400,000 14.29% 50,000
350,000 517,634 400,000 14.29% 50,000
115
TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY
2006 CAPITAL BUDGET
DIVISION: Finance and Business Development
GROUP: Capital
ACTIVITY: Administrative Office
Page 62
GROSS EXPENDITURES:
Administrative Office
Biofilter Wall
Relocation To Boyd CFC
FUNDING SOURCES:
Program /User fees
Reserves
CFGT - Living City
CFGT - Flowthrough
Other - Municipal
Other - Provincial
Other - Federal
Other - Donations /Fundraising
Other - Private
2005 2005 2006
BUDGET Actuals BUDGET % CHG. $ CHG.
$ $ $
500,000 274,334 690,000 38.00% 190,000
500,000 274,334 690,000 38.00% 190,000
11,900
13,645
25,545
NET EXPENDITURES 500,000 248,789 690,000 38.00% 190,000
NOTES: 2006 BUDGET
Work carried forward into 2006.
116
Toronto and Region Conservation Authority
2006 CAPITAL BUDGET
DIVISION:
ACTIVITY:
Finance and Business Development
Land Acquisition
Page 63
GROSS EXPENDITURES:
Waterfront Open Space
Acquisition - Greenspace Strategy
Natural Areas Protection
FUNDING SOURCES:
Program /User fees
Reserves
CFGT - Living City
CFGT - Flowthrough
Other - Municipal
Other - Provincial
Other - Federal
Other - Donations /Fundraising
Other - Private
TBD 1
Land Sales proceeds
NET EXPENDITURES
NOTES: 2006 BUDGET
2005 2005 2006
Budget Actuals Budget % Chg. $ Chg.
$ $ $
4,440,000
2,204,700
500,000
646,142 500,000
2,122, 564 5,100, 000
256,910
- 88.74%
131.32%
- 100.00%
(3,940,000)
2,895,300
(500, 000)
7,144,700 3,025,617 5,600,000 - 21.62% (1,544,700)
312,660
3,720,000 628,106 2,950,000 - 20.70%
1,250,000 164,979 - 100.00%
(770, 000)
(1,250,000)
840,000 850,000 2,100,000 150.00% 1,260,000
1,221,400 1,035,323 600,000 - 50.88% (621,400)
7,031,400 2,991,068 5,650,000 - 19.65% (1,381,400)
113,300 34,549 (50,000) - 144.13% (163,300)
Waterfront: no acquisition comparable to 2005 budget.
Greenspace: has extra Toronto funding in 2006.
Natural Areas: no acquisitions comparable to 2005 projected.
117
RES. #C15 /06 -
Moved by:
Seconded by:
AUDITED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS - 2005
The 2005 audited financial statements are presented for the Business
Excellence Advisory Board's approval and recommendation to the
Authority.
Bill O'Donnell
Dick O'Brien
THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT the transfer of funds into and
from reserves during 2005, as outlined in the schedule to the financial statements entitled
"Continuity of Reserves ", be approved;
AND FURTHER THAT the 2005 audited financial statements, as presented, be approved,
signed by the Chair and Secretary- Treasurer of the Toronto and Region Conservation
Authority (TRCA), and distributed to each member municipality and the Minister of
Natural Resources, in accordance with subsection 38 (3) of the Conservation Authorities
Act.
AMENDMENT
RES. #C16 /06
Moved by:
Seconded by:
Maja Prentice
Dick O'Brien
THAT the following be added after the last paragraph of the main motion:
AND FURTHER THAT staff report back every 3 months, starting in September, on the
progress in implementing the 3 outstanding issues from last year's Management Letter,
until they are completed.
THE AMENDMENT WAS CARRIED
THE MAIN MOTION, AS AMENDED, WAS CARRIED
BACKGROUND
The financial statements of the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority for 2005 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 20,
2006. The audited financial statements are presented as Attachment 1 to the report.
The auditor has also prepared a report addressed to the Business Excellence Advisory Board,
which also serves as TRCA's audit committee, in accordance with the assurance
recommendations issued by the Canadian Institute of Chartered Accountants entitled
"Communications with Those Having Oversight Responsibility." In this report, the auditor
addresses matters about its responsibilities, significant accounting policies and other issues
which may be of interest to the board, such as the auditor's report on internal control findings.
Member's should refer to Attachment 2 for the complete report.
118
A representative from Grant Thornton LLP will be in attendance to present the auditor's report
on the 2005 financial statements.
Also on the agenda is the 2005 Year -End Financial Progress Report, wherein some of the more
significant variances from budget are discussed.
RATIONALE
Deficit position:
In 2005, expenditures exceeded revenues and reserve allocations by an amount of $153,077,
increasing the deficit as of December 31, 2005 to $589,750. Although the 2005 budget had
anticipated a $200,000 surplus, there were several significant negative variances which
impeded TRCA's ability to achieve the target. Most notably of these variances, as explained in
the year end financial progress report, include a shortfall of general Living City funding from
The Conservation Foundation of Greater Toronto ($444,000) and a shortfall of funding for the
Community Transformation Partnership projects ($174,000.) The overall impact was mitigated
by a surplus within the land acquisition accounts wherein surplus revenue of $278,800 was
generated to pay for lands which had been acquired in prior years. The unfunded amount
relating to past land acquisitions now sits at $157,916.
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 approved a
reserves policy including the establishment of a new operating contingency reserve. Since
then, the operating contingency reserve balance has grown from $871,667 to $1,816,380 at the
end of 2004 and down to $1,550,259 at the end of 2005. In 2005, the draw down of the
operating contingency reserve results from a transfer of $251,163 to the Special Projects
reserve. The Special Projects reserve was set up to fund the cost of the new Restoration
Services Centre within the Boyd complex. Funds are generated from a variety of planting, top
soil placement and other projects undertaken by the Restoration Services division of TRCA.
The transfer represents the amount generated for this purpose in 2004 and brings the balance
in the reserve to $1,311,462. The 2005 transfer amount has not been determined at this date. It
is anticipated that an amount of about $2,800,000 will be required to complete the project in
2006 or 2007, requiring several more years of revenue generation to completely finance the
project.
In the 2003 report to the Authority on reserves policy, a target of $2.5 million for operating
contingencies was set. This target was deemed sufficient to protect TRCA from severe,
prolonged impairment of revenue sources. As the revenue base continues to grow, staff will
reassess the base amount required for operating contingencies.
The "Continuity of Reserves" schedule on page 17 of the financial statement package, provides
a summary of reserves balances as of December 31, 2005.
119
Management Letter
Appendix B of Attachment 2, "Report to the Business Excellence Advisory Board," contains the
management letter, wherein the auditor highlights various internal control findings. There were
no new findings during the 2005 audit cycle. The auditor notes that while management has
addressed several items from the 2004 report, there still remain outstanding several
recommendations, including payroll exception reports, improved sales and admission system
and additional physical security of IT infrastructure. Management is in general agreement with
the recommendations and will seek to address them this year.
Report prepared by: Rocco Sgambelluri, extension 5232
For Information contact: Rocco Sgambelluri, extension 5232; Jim Dillane, extension 6292
Date: April 05, 2006
Attachments: 2
120
Attachment 1
Toronto and Region Conservation Authority
Financial Statements
December 31, 2005
Grant Thornton
121
Contents
Page
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
Monitoring 10
Schedule of Financial Activities — Environmental Advisory Services 11
Schedule of Financial Activities — Watershed Stewardship 12
Schedule of Financial Activities — Conservation Land Management,
Development 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
122
Grant Thornton
Grant Thornton LLP
Chartered Accountants
Management Consultants)
Auditors' Report
To the Members 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, 2005 and the statements -of financial activities
and deficit and cash flows for the year then ended. These financial statements are the
responsibility of the Authority's management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on
these financial statements based on our audit.
We conducted our audit in accordance with Canadian generally accepted auditing
standards. Those standards require that we plan and perform an audit to obtain reasonable
assurance whether the financial statements are free of material misstatement. An audit
includes examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in
the financial 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 the Authority as at December 31, 2005 and the results of its operations and its
cash flows for the year then ended in accordance with Canadian generally accepted
accounting principles.
Markham, Canada
March 20, 2006 - Chartered Accountants
15 Allstate Parkway
Suite 200
Markham, Ontario
L3R 5B4
T (416) 366 -0100
F (905) 475-8906
E Markham @GrantThornton.ca
W www.GrantThornton.ca
Canadian Member of Grant Thornton International
123
1
2
Toronto and Region Conservation Authority
Statement of Financial Activities and Deficit
Year Ended December 31
Expenditures
Watershed management and health
monitoring
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
Govemment 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
Excess of expenditures over revenue
Appropriations from (to) reserves (Page 17)
Deficit, beginning of year
Deficit, end of year
2005
Budget
(Note 9)
$ 12,820,000
3,868,000
9,356,200
38,447,400
15,220,600
4,932,200
66.100
84,710,500
27,478,800
5,658,200
845,800
3,932,100
2,108,700
11,115,700
374,600
360,000
1,221,400
1,137,300 ,
1,305,400
2,288,400
95,000
24,568,000
85,000
1,439.400
84.013,800
(696,700)
896.700
200,000
(436,673)
$ (236,673)
2005
Actual
$ 8,593,258
3,711,406
6,996,044
25,752,425
13,821,526
4,833,133
134,295
63,842,087
21,771,302
2,246,443
845,753
2,252,108
1,110,042
10,964,378
641,027
396,122
1,030, 523
1,454,127
1,433,404
2,256,811
36,164
15,707,086
220,187
1,068,685
63,434,162
(407,925)
254,848
(153,077)
(436,673)
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)
(436,673)
$ (589,750) $
See accompanying notes to the financial statements.
124
Toronto and Region Conservation Authority
Statement of Financial Position
December 31
2005
2004
Assets
Cash and cash equivalents
Marketable securities (Note 7)
Receivables (Note 3)
Inventory
Prepaids
$ 5,930,969
3,698,374
9,855,518
533,232
163.543
$ 7,892,709
4,692,994
5,250,755
583,306
355,093
$ 20,181,636 $ 18,774,857
Liabilities
Payables and accruals
Deferred revenue
Municipal levies
Capital, special projects and other
Vacation pay and sick leave entitlements
Fund Balances.
Reserves (Page 17)
. Deficit
Amounts to be funded in future years
$ 6,962,306
5,399,556
5,182,857
1,561,781
19.106.500
3,226,667
589 750)
2,636,917
1,561,781)
1.075.136
$ 4,752,505
6,328,056
4,649,454
1,334,214
17,064,229
3,481,515
(436,673)
3,044,842
(1,334,214)
1,710,268
$ 20,181,636 $ 18,774,857
Contingent liabilities and commitments (Note 8)
On behalf of the Authority
Chair
See accompanying notes to the financial statements.
125
Secretary- Treasurer
Toronto and Region Conservation Authority
Statement of Cash Flows
Year Ended December 31
2005
2004
Increase (decrease) in cash and cash equivalents
Operating
Excess of expenditures over revenue
Changes in non -cash working capital
Receivables
Inventory
Prepaids
Payables and accruals
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
(407,925) $ 1,293,546
(4,604,763)
50,074
191,550
2,209,801
(395,097)
227,567
2 728 793)
2,994,618
(1,999,998)
994,620
(396,563)
12,591
(77,291)
273,657
876,712
118,303
2,100,955
3,274,166
(1,994,619)
1,279,547
(227,567) (118,303)
(1,961,740) 3,262,199
7,892,709 4,630,510
5,930,969 $ 7,892,709
See accompanying notes to the financial statements.
126
Toronto and Region Conservation Authority
Notes to the Financial Statements
December 31, 2005
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 Adjala - Tosorontio and Town of Mono.
2. Summary of significant accounting policies
The financial statements of the Authority are prepared by management in accordance with Canadian
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 are as 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.
Revenue recognition
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, anyeligtb4lity criteria have been
met and reasonable estimates of the amounts can be made.
User charges and fees are recognized as revenue in the period in which the related services are
performed.
127
Toronto and Region Conservation Authority
Notes to the Financial Statements
December 31, 2005
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, certain user
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 performed.
Inventory
Inventories of goods for resale 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 and sick leave entitlements are accrued as earned.
3. Receivables
Municipal levies
Toronto Waterfront Revitalization Corporation
City of Toronto
Regional Municipality of York
Conservation Foundation of Greater Toronto
Government of Canada
Province of Ontario
Interest receivable
Trade and other
128
$
20052004
5,503,041
443,902
328,441
390,071
850,523
337,016
476,470
1.526.054
$ 9,855,518
$ 520,234
1,582,179
468,870
20,463
320,106
302,696
196,746
409,071
1.430.390
$ 5,250,755
Toronto and Region Conservation Authority
Notes to the Financial Statements
December 31, 2005
4. Trust funds
The Authority administers funds on behalf of the Rouge Park Alliance amounting to $353,832 (2004 -
$498,122). 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 the 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 2005 and 2004 are based upon the following transactions recorded in
operations:
Reserve balance, beginning of year
Net proceeds from sale of properties
Applications:
Greenspace acquisition project
Reserve balance, end of year
2005 2004
$ $-
1,030,523 118,500
(1,030,523) (118,500)
6. Pension agreements
The Authority makes contributions to the Ontario Municipal Employees Retirement System ( "OMERS "),
which is a multi - employer 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.
Contributions made by the Authority to OMERS for 2005 were $1,212,522 (2004 - $961,251).
7
129
Toronto and Region Conservation Authority
Notes to the Financial Statements
December 31, 2005
7. Financial instruments
The Authority's financial instruments include cash and cash equivalents, marketable securities,
receivables, payables and accruals, the sick leave benefit plan accrual, deferred revenue, security
deposits and vacation pay and sick leave entitlements.
The fair values of cash and cash equivalents, receivables, payables and accruals, 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, 2005 consisted primarily of money market
products. Further information on these investments is as set out below:
Weighted Average
Term to Maturity Market ValueFace ValueRate of Interest
Less than one year
Less than three years
$ 1,662,565$ 1,498,376
2.454,251 2,199,998
$ 4,116,816$ 3,698,374
4.10%
4.08%
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.
130
Toronto and Region Conservation Authority
Notes to the Financial Statements
December 31, 2005
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 Etobicoke 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 of the expropriations. The amount awarded was between
$7.2 and $9.1 million plus interest and costs. The appeal to the Divisional Court was heard in
December of 2005. The Authority is waiting for the decision of 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.
(d) Lease commitments
The Authority has entered into agreements to lease premises, equipment and vehicles for various
periods until 2009. Minimum lease payments in aggregate for each of the next four years are as
follows:
2006 $ 344,000
2007 316,000
2008 275,000
2009 133,000
9. Budget figures - 2005
The 2005 budget figures included in these financial statements are those adopted by the Authority on April
29, 2005. 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.
131
Toronto and Region Conservation Authority
Schedule of Financial Activities - Watershed Management and
Health Monitoring
Year Ended December 31
Expenditures
Watershed strategies
Resource inventory and environmental
monitoring
Flood forecasting and warning
Floor control structures, operations
and maintenance
Source Water Protection
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
Contract services
The Conservation Foundation of
Greater Toronto
Toronto Waterfront Revitalization
Corporation
Donations and fundraising
Sundry
2005
Budget
(Note 9)
$ 1,418,700
1,249,500
158,700
373,400
916,300
4,116,600
645,300
2,847,700
3,939,000
206,200
533,300
531,900
12,820,000
2005
Actual
$ 1,385,534
1,197,062
245,339
332,308
1,129,761
4,290,004
664,739
1,608,272
1,046,965
303,750
341,243
338,285
8.593.258
2004
Actual
$ 1,407,933
1,261,547
241,002
301,254
3,211,736
819,385
1,329,032
698,355
191,055
469,156
364,259
7,082,978
5,728,000 3,998,802 4,370,737
211,000 258,584 27,964
549,900 549,860 549,900
1,042,400 1,436,685 284,207
240,600 251,431 166,926
175,000 100,644 250,759
265,000 86,534 364,603
4,139,000 1,046,965 674,219
400,000 401,887 400,346
69,100 65,725 33,224
12,820,000 8,197,117 7,122,885
Excess of expenditures over revenue $ $ (396,141) $ 39,907
132
Toronto and Region Conservation Authority
Schedule of Financial Activities — Environmental Advisory Services
Year Ended December 31
Expenditures
Municipal /public plan input and review
Development plan input and review
Revenue
Municipal
Levies
Other
Government grants
MNR transfer payments
Provincial — other
Federal
Authority- generated
Regulation administration fees
Excess of revenue over expenditures
2005
Budget
(Note 9)
$ 1,298,050 $
2,569,950
3,868,000
$
458,900
930,300
178,500
23,900
46,900
2,229,500
3,868,000
2005
Actual
1,269,344
2,442,062
3.711.406
2004
Actual
$ 1,206,726
1,630,227
2,836,953
458,900 723,800
841,144 22,688
178,493 178,500
18,800 39,516
7,150 27,763
2,282,351
3.786.838
- $ 75,432
133
2,304,998
3,297,265
$ 460,312
Toronto and Region Conservation Authority
Schedule of Financial Activities - Watershed Stewardship
Year Ended December 31
Expenditures
Watershed stewardship
Capital and other projects and studies
Erosion control and slope
stabilization project
Toronto Remedial Action Plan
Peel Natural Heritage project
York Natural Heritage project
Durham Natural Heritage project
Nursery relocation
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
2005
Budget
(Note 9)
$ 1,727,700
2,655,000
2,461,900
1,001,800
585,500
124,300
800,000
9,356,200
6,364,800
543,200
245,500
594,700
199,600
300,000
238,600
169,800
8,656,200
2005
Actual
$ 1,821,665
Excess of expenditures over revenue $ (700,000) $
134
1,771,694
1,862,457
781,371
451,657
94,993
212,207
6.996.044
4,546,726
349,239
2004
Actual
$ 1,873,306
1,664,893
1,790,747
493,447
519,380
120,850
1,962
6,464,585
3,998,512
33,074
231,757 366,208
580,331 815,748
540,383 695,387
471,726 352,762
815 1,146
114,252
34,591
98,952
6.968.772
316,873
120,003
6,699,713
(27,272) $ 235,128
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
Greenspace acquisition
Rouge River Natural Areas
Acquisition project
Waterfront development
Port Union development
Mimico Linear Park
Tommy Thompson Park
2005
Budget
(Note 9)
$ 1,201,700
346,100
1,804,900
3,352,700
2,204,700
500,000
6,005,700
5,087,300
4,294,400
1,927,600
Westem Beaches Watercourse Facility 9,119,700
Etobicoke Motel Strip waterfront project 707,400
Conservation area development 372,500
Living City Centre at Kortright - infrastructure1,500,000
Peel campground improvements 1,150,700
Drinking water system upgrades 824,600
Black Creek Pioneer Village
retrofit / attractions project 1,400,100
Greater Toronto Region trail
ORM Park Development
Revenue
Municipal
Levies
Other
Govemment grants
Provincial - other
Federal
Authority- generated
Rental properties
Tipping fees
Interest
Proceeds from sale of properties
The Conservation Foundation of
Greater Toronto
Toronto Waterfront Revitalization
Corporation
Donations and fundraising
Canada Post Corporation agreement
Sales and property tax refunds
Sundry
38,447,400
7,159,500
3,735,000
2,103,700
505,000
2,288,400
10,000
1,221,400
95,800
20,429,000
840,000
95,000
85,000
79,600
38,647,400
Excess of revenue over expenditures $ 200,000
135
2005
Actual
$ 1,100,952
288,499
1,927,083
3,316,534
2,122,564
256,910
2,207,908
2,600,122
3,115,822
342,974
8,535,881
154,267
667,912
68,886
258,314
582,569
1,375,258
2,560
143,944
25.752.425
5,172,734
693,581
243,049
29,074
2,256,811
4,722
4,924
1,030,523
416,223
14,660,121
850,000
36,164
220,187
472,825
26.090.938
$ 338,513
2004
Actual
$ 1,214,627
288,499
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
4,410,480
282,283
484,050
16,595
2,139,246
63,238
5,299
122,850
83,229
2,855,326
656,360
28,116
134,587
152,394
11,434,053
$ 272,513
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
Conservation 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
Community Transformation
Partnership
The Conservation Foundation of
Greater Toronto
Donations and fundraising
Sundry
2005
Budget
(Note 9)
3,457,100 $
5,263,400
1,301,300
2,005,400
1,933,400
671,700
328,700
259,600
15,220.600
3,523,400
223,700
496,600
721,500
2,978,100
2,974,800
1,080,900
1,494,400
2005
Actual
2004
Actual
3,602,852 $ 3,149,153
5,026,405
1,368,735
822,457
1,866,651
566,150
303,019
265,257
13.821.526
3,528,400
90,872
4,914,293
1,335,544
_ 738,589
1,724,766
462,052
300,032
259,965
12,884,394
3,149,000
29,271
297,876 362,230
236,431 320,402
3,021,054
2,600,951
1,028,694
1,473,799
- 38,991
537,900
65,400
1,120,900
15,217,600
837,118
135,026
247,337
13.536.549
2,776,539
2,694,281
1,058,965
1,312,207
823,899
64,578
190 948
12, 782, 320
Excess of expenditures over revenue $ (3,000) $ (284,977) $ (102,074)
136
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
Acquisition project
Revenue
Municipal:
Levies
Other
Government grants
MNR transfer payments
Provincial - other
Federal
Authority- generated
Interest
Retail Sales
The Conservation Foundation of
Greater Toronto
Donation and fundraising
Sales and property tax rebate
Sundry
2005
Budget
(Note 9)
$ 901,600
938,000
795,600
429,900
769,600
697,500
(450,000)
4,082,200
500,000
350,000
4,932,200
4,244,200
15,000
117,400
20,000
360,000
48,000
4,804,600
2005
Actual
$ 922,444
997,859
781,638
422,138
850,731
659,621
(593,266)
4,041,165
2004
Actual
$ 839,212
860,780
755,104
344,441
526,543
711,474
(474220)
3,563,334
274,334 424,067
517,634
4.833.133
4,065,740
13,023
117,400
23,941
5,625
319,947
4,307,348
3,823,275
2,000
117,353
60,000
25,000
390,383 349,606
42,090 48,096
33,000
11,900
127,288
183,846 48,357
4,853,948 4,633,975
Excess of revenue over expenditures $ (127,600) $ 20,815 $ 326,627
137
Toronto and Region Conservation Authority
Schedule of Financial Activities — Vehicle and Equipment
Year Ended December 31
Expenditures
Operations
Fuel, maintenance and repairs
Other overhead
2005
Budget
(Note 9)
$ 378,200 $
45,600
423,800
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
186,600
224,400
(33,000)
378,000
801,800
(735,700)
2005
Actual
458,970
45,227
504.197
202,892
291,606
32 870)
461,628
965,825
831,530)
2004
Actual
$ 398,607
44,981
443,588
133,877
152,751
(47, 529)
239,099
682,687
(743,820)
Charge (credit) to expenditures $ 66,100 $ 134,295 $ (61,133)
138
Toronto and Region Conservation Authority
Continuity of Reserves
Year Ended December 31, 2005
Vehicle and equipment
Tree donation program
Special projects
Operating contingency
Balance
Beginning
of Year
$ 474,597
26,485
1,164,053
1.816.380
$ 3,481,515
Appropriations
Inter - reserve
Transfers
$ (134,295) $
(1,841)
(103,754) 251,163
14 958) (251,163)
$ (254,848) $
139
Balance
End of Year
$ 340,302
24,644
1,311,462
1,550,259
$ 3,226,667
Attachment 2
Toronto and Region Conservation Authority
Report to the Business Excellence Advisory Board
December 31, 2005
Grant Thornton r
140
Grant Thornton T
Grant Thornton LLP
Chartered Accountants
Management Consultants
March 27, 2006
To the Business Excellence Advisory Board
Toronto and Region Conservation Authority
Our audit of the financial statements of Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (the "
Authority ") for the year ended December 31, 2005 is now complete.
The report to the Board of Directors has been prepared in accordance with the assurance
recommendations issued by the Canadian Institute of Chartered Accountant (CICA) entitled "
Communications with Those Having Oversight Responsibility ". That standard recommends we
communicate with the Business Excellence Advisory Board (the "Board ") certain matters
regarding our responsibility as auditors, significant accounting policies and other matters which
may be of interest to the Committee.
We express our appreciation for the cooperation and assistance received from the management of
the Authority during the course of our audit.
Yours very truly,
Allister Byrne, F.C.A
Partner
15 Allstate Parkway
Suite 200
Markham, Ontano
L3R 5B4
T (416) 366 -0100
F (905) 475 -8906
E Markham @Grantmomton ca
W www GrantThomton.ca
Canadian Member of Grant Thornton International
141
Report to the Business Excellence Advisory Board
Audit Completion — Toronto and Region Conservation Authority
December 31, 2005
Contents
Introduction
Audit Scope and Responsibility
Responsibility of Management
Significant Matters to be Reported
Appendix A - Indepencence Letter
Appendix B - Management Letter
Appendix C - Adviser Alert
Appendix D - Exposure Draft on Segment Disclosure
1
2
3
4
Report to the Business Excellence Advisory Board
Audit Completion — Toronto and Region Conservation Authority
December 31, 2005
Introduction
1
This report summarizes those significant matters that we believe should be
brought to your attention. We emphasize that the audit and this report would not
necessarily identify all matters that may be of interest to the Board.
This report has been prepared solely for the purpose of assisting the Board in the
discharge of its responsibility and should not be used for any other purpose. We
disclaim any obligation to any other party that may rely upon this report.
Report to the Business Excellence Advisory Board
Audit Completion — Toronto and Region Conservation Authority
December 31, 2005
Audit Scope and Responsibility
2
Auditors' Report
We have completed our audit of the financial statements for the year ended
December 31, 2005 Subject to completion of discussions with the Board and the
approval of the financial statements by the Board, we anticipate being in a
position to sign the Auditors' Report appended to the draft financial statements.
Our Auditors' Report will be dated March 20, 2006.
Our audit of the financial statements was performed in accordance with
Canadian generally accepted auditing standards, and was performed to obtain
reasonable, rather than absolute, assurance whether the financial statements are
free of material misstatement. Our audit included assessing the risk that the
financial statements may contain material misstatements, examining, on a test
basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial
statements, assessing the accounting principles used and their application, and
assessing the significant estimates made by management.
Independence
As external auditors of the Authority, we are required to be independent in
accordance with the Canadian professional requirements. These standards
require that we disclose to the Board all relationships that, in our professional
judgement, may reasonably be thought to bear on independence. Our
independence letter, attached as Appendix A, confirms that we are objective with
respect to the Authority within the meaning of the Rules of Professional Conduct
of the Institute of Chartered Accountants of Ontario as of March 20, 2006.
We confirm that we are not presently aware of any relationship or non -audit
services that would impair our independence for purposes of expressing an
opinion on the financial statements.
Report to the Business Excellence Advisory Board
Audit Completion — Toronto and Region Conservation Authority
December 31, 2005
Responsibility of Management
3
Preparation of financial statements
The preparation of the financial statements, including the accompanying notes, is
the responsibility of management. This includes the preparation of the financial
statements in accordance with Canadian generally accepted accounting
principles.
Management is responsible for selecting the significant accounting policies used
in the preparation of the financial statements, and for applying judgement in
preparing accounting estimates contained in the financial statements, as well as
for preparing or obtaining documentation supporting amounts and disclosures in
the financial statements. In addition, management is responsible for assessing
the impact of any misstatements detected during the preparation and audit of the
financial statements, individually and in aggregate, on the fair presentation of
amounts and disclosures contained in the financial statements and determining if
such adjustments should be recorded.
Management's representations
The transactions and estimates reflected in the accounts and in the financial
statements are within the direct control of management. Accordingly, the
fairness of the representations made through the financial statements is an
implicit and integral part of management's responsibility.
Throughout the course of our audit, we obtain representations from management
in the form of answers to our audit enquiries. We also obtain a formal
representation letter from management at the conclusion of the audit.
Report to the Business Excellence Advisory Board
Audit Completion — Toronto and Region Conservation Authority
December 31, 2005
Significant Matters to be Reported
The Canadian Institute of Chartered Accountants has specified matters that
should be brought to the attention of the Board of Directors. The following
summarizes the matters to be communicated.
4
Significant accounting principles and polices.
Significant accounting principles and policies are disclosed in the notes to the
financial statements. Within the context of the audit, management has
represented to us that there have not been any material changes in the accounting
principles and policies during the year. We have not noted any changes.
We have not noted any significant unusual transactions.
Management's judgements and accounting estimates
Management has the responsibility for applying judgement in preparing the
accounting estimates and disclosures contained within the financial statements.
We have not noted any other particularly sensitive accounting estimates, which
we believe should be brought to the attention of the Board of Directors.
Materiality
Grant Thornton planned the audit with the objective of having reasonable
assurance of detecting misstatements that would be material to the financial
statements taken as a whole. As required by audit standards, materiality was
utilized during the conduct of the audit and the evaluation of any misstatements
identified.
The materiality level of $380,000 was used in the course of conducting our audit
procedures.
Misstatements and significant audit adjustments
Misstatements represent audit findings for which we do not agree with the
amount, classification, presentation or disclosure of items in the financial
statements.
A misstatement may arise from an error or from fraud and other irregularities.
An error refers to an unintentional misstatement in financial statements,
including an omission of amount or disclosure.
Report to the Business Excellence Advisory Board
Audit Completion — Toronto and Region Conservation Authority
December 31, 2005
5
Fraud and other irregularities refer to an intentional misstatement in financial
statements, including an omission of amount or disclosure, or to a misstatement
arising from theft of the entity's assets.
In conducting our procedures, we may identify misstatements that require
adjustments to the recorded amounts. These audit adjustments are discussed
with management, who in consultation with us, determine if an adjustment
should be recorded.
Management has represented to us that these misstatements, individually and in
the aggregate are, in their judgement, not material to the financial statements.
Subject to the consideration of the Board, we are willing to accept management's
opinion that there are no unrecorded misstatements, individually and in
aggregate, which would be significant to the financial statements.
Internal controls
The responsibility for the design and operation of an effective system of internal
controls which provides reasonable assurance that the accounting systems
provide timely, accurate and reliable financial information, as well as safeguard
the assets of the corporation, is the day to day responsibility of management.
As mentioned earlier, for purposes of the audit, Grant Thornton obtains a
sufficient understanding of the accounting systems and the system of internal
control. Those controls identified as key are tested as part of our audit work;
however, the audit is not designed to allow an opinion on the system of internal
control.
As a result of the audit testing, we detected some weaknesses in internal
controls. Specific and detailed communication regarding internal controls is
included in our management letter.
Illegal acts
Our inquiries of management and our testing of financial records did not reveal
any illegal or possible illegal acts. However, please be aware that improper
conduct is usually carefully and often elaborately concealed and therefore, the
probability of detecting such is not high. Management is also asked in the
formal letter of representations to disclose if they are aware of any illegal or
possible illegal acts.
Related party transactions
Testing of financial records and discussions with management did not reveal any
significant related party transactions not in the normal course of operations
involving significant judgments by management concerning their measurement
or disclosure in the financial statements.
147
Report to the Business Excellence Advisory Board
Audit Completion — Toronto and Region Conservation Authority
December 31, 2005
Consultation with other accountants
To our knowledge, management discussed no accounting or auditing matters
with other accountants.
6
Difficulties
We did not encounter any serious difficulties in the performance of the audit.
We received the full cooperation of management and employees of the Authority
and, to our knowledge, had complete access to the accounting records and other
documents that we needed in order to carry out our audit. We have had no
disagreements with management, and have resolved all auditing, accounting and
presentation issues to our satisfaction.
Other matters
We are not aware of any other matters that require the attention of the Board of
Directors before they approve the financial statements.
New accounting pronouncements
PS3150 — Tangible Capital Assets
Beginning in year 2009, it will become mandatory under PSAB for all public
sector entities to capitalize their tangible capital assets. A copy of our Adviser
Alert is included in Appendix C since this will involve a comprehensive change
in future financial reporting.
Exposure Draft — Segment Disclosures
There is an Exposure Draft on Segment Disclosure, a copy of which has been
included as well in Appendix D.
Report to the Business Excellence Advisory Board
Audit Completion — Toronto and Region Conservation Authority
December 31, 2005
Appendix A — Independence Letter
149
Grant Thornton T
Grant Thornton LLP
Chartered Accountants
Management Consultants
March 27, 2006
The Business Excellence Advisory Board
The Toronto and Region Conservation Authority
5 Shoreham Drive
Downsview, Ontario
M3N 1S4
Dear Board Members:
We have been engaged to audit the financial statements of Toronto and Region
Conservation Authority (the "Authority ") for the year ending December 31, 2005.
Canadian generally accepted auditing standards (GAAS) require that we communicate at
least annually with you regarding all relationships between the Authority and Grant
Thornton LLP that, in our professional judgement, may reasonably be thought to bear on
our independence.
In determining which relationships to report, these standard require us to consider
relevant rules and related interpretations prescribed by the appropriate provincial institute
and applicable legislation, covering such matters as:
(a) holding a financial interest, either directly or indirectly, in a client;
(b) holding a position, either directly or indirectly, that give the right or responsibility
to exert significant influence over the financial or accounting policies of a client;
(c) personal or business relationships of immediate family, close relatives, partners or
retired partners, either directly or indirectly, with a client;
(d) economic dependence on a client; and
(e) provision of services in addition to the audit engagement.
We have prepared the following comments to facilitate our discussion with you regarding
independence matters arising since February 25, 2005, the date of our last letter.
We were not engaged to provide any services in addition to the 2005 audit engagement
over the period from February 25, 2005 to the date of this letter.
15 Allstate Parkway
Suite 200
Markham, Ontano
L3R 5B4
T (416) 366 -0100
F (905) 475 -8906
E Markham @GrantThomton ca
W www GrantThomton ca
Canadian Member of Grant Thornton International
150
Grant Thornton
We are not aware of any relationships between the Authority and ourselves thatin our
professional judgement may reasonably be thought to bear on our independence that, have
occurred from February 25, 2005 to the date of this letter.
GAAS requires that we confirm our independence to the Audit Committee. However,
since the Rules of Professional Conduct of the Institute of Chartered Accountants of
Ontario deal with the concept of independence in terms of objectivity, our confirmation is
to be made in that context. Accordingly, we hereby confirm that we are objective with
respect to the Authority within the meaning of the rules of professional conduct of the
Institute of Chartered Accountants of Ontario as of the date of this letter.
This report is intended solely for the use of the Business Excellence Advisory Board,
management and others within the Authority and should not be used for any other
purposes.
We look forward to discussing with you the matters addressed in this letter as well as
other matters that may be of interest to you.
Yours very truly,
Allister Byrne, F.C.A.
Partner
J: \Data \Continuing Files \T\Toronto and Region Conservation Authonty \Correspondence \Fiscal 2005 \Independence letter
05 doc
151
Report to the Business Excellence Advisory Board
Audit Completion — Toronto and Region Conservation Authority
December 31, 2005
Appendix B — Management Letter
152
Grant Thornton
Grant Thornton LLP
Chartered Accountants
Management Consultants
March 27, 2006
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, 2005 Audit
Receiving observations and findings on your financial reporting processes and controls is one of the benefits
of an annual financial statement audit. Grant Thornton LLP ( "GT ") implemented new processes and
technology to address the changing standards of conducting a financial statement audit. This approach
includes an increased emphasis on intemal control. Our procedures identified a number of items that we
need to bring to your attention.
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 does not necessarily include all matters that may be identified
through a more extensive or special engagement.
The standards of the public accounting profession require us to report annually to you our findings on certain,
weaknesses and deficiencies in your internal controls.
We are pleased to report that appropriate action has been taken on the following of the recommendations
made last year:
1. Information Technology — improvement of access security to applications:
Password security to the accounting system has been enhanced by limiting the number of failed
attempts at four.
Payroll software now directs the users to change passwords every four months and permits only four
failed attempts. Moreover, the minimum length of the password has to been set at 6 characters.
Access by HR manager and assistant to the payroll software is now restricted to "viewer rights" only.
15 Allstate Parkway
Suite 200
Markham. Ontano
L3R 5B4
T (416) 366 -0100
F (905) 475-8906
E Markham @GrantThomton ca
W www.GrantThornton ca
Canadian Member of Grant Thornton International
153
Grant Thornton T
2. Journal entries — improvement in control
- A new system, using Lotus Notes, operational since October 2005, requires all journal
entries to be routed to the Controller for his final approval. In the Controller's absence,
the Director Finance and Business Services and Manager Budgeting and Financial
Services have the authority to approve them. The system has the ability to enable the
Controller to review all entries approved during his absence.
The following matters were raised in last year's management letter and we would like to
re- iterate them this year:
1. Payroll — independent review of the payroll run before it is sent to the bank
Staff, independent of payroll, are now checking the master -file input and the payroll run
before it is sent to bank. However, to further improve the internal control we recommend
that the payroll system generate exception reports which should also be reviewed.
2. Sales /admissions system — improvements to the billing system to ensure completeness and
cut -off of revenue
- The feasibility of implementing pre- numbered billing and "request -to- invoice" forms is
still outstanding.
3. Information technology — the following recommendations to improve physical security are
still under consideration by the management:
Development of an off -site operational site as part of a "disaster recovery plan.
Non -water fire suppression in the server room.
- Electronic door lock to the server room.
Audit efficiencies
We encourage management to complete as many of the working papers as possible prior to the
commencement of the audit, including a first draft of the financial statements. It will assist in
completing the audit in an efficient and timely manner.
This communication is prepared solely for the information of management to assist it in
discharging its responsibilities with respect to the financial statements and is not intended for any
other purpose. This communication is not to be provided to a third party without our prior
written consent. We accept no responsibility to a third party who relies on this communication.
154
Grant Thornton
Please thank all the staff for their cooperation during our audit. Should you wish to discuss any
of our comments, or if you require assistance in their implementation, please call me.
Yours very truly,
Allister Byrne, C.A.
Partner
cc: Brian Denney, Chief Administration Officer
Jim Dillane, Director Finance and Business Services
Rocco Sgambelluri, Controller
contJTRCA/cor05 /Mgnt letter 2005
155
Report to the Business Excellence Advisory Board
Audit Completion — Toronto and Region Conservation Authority
December 31, 2005
Appendix C — Adviser Alert
156
Adviser Alert: public sector 1
Adviser Alert: public sector - local governments
Amendment to Tangible Capital Assets
PS 3150
In March 2006, the Public Sector Accounting Board
released an exposure draft of CICA Public Sector
Accounting (`PSA ") Handbook Section, PS 3150 Tangible
Capital Assets, (exposure draft). The final PSA Handbook
Section is expected to be approved in June 2006.
Changes and proposed amendments
Applicability
The revised Section updates the standards on how to
account for and report tangible capital assets in
government Financial statements. The standard is
intended to apply to all levels of government, including
local governments their boards and commissions: such as
libraries. airports and transit who are excluded from the
current standard.
Change in basis of accounting for local governments
Currently, local government accounting standards are
based on a modified accrual method of accounting for
non - financial assets which do not require capital
expenditures to be recognized as an asset and amortized
over their expected useful lives. There are many benefits
associated with having all levels of government using the
same basis of accounting which is one of the driving
Factors For this change.
Timing
The revised Section is expected to apply to local
governments For fiscal years beginning on or after January
1, 2009, although eadier adoption is encouraged.
In the interim, a guideline PSG -7, Tangible Capital Assets
oFLocal governments, has been approved. This Guideline
requires local governments to disclose information in the
notes or schedules to the financial statements, as they
relate to tangible capital assets. It will apply to fiscal years
beginning on or after January 1, 2007, although earlier
adoption is encouraged.
What impact will the proposed changes have
on the financial reporting requirements of a
local government under the proposed PS 3150?
Grant Thornton
Tangible capital assets represent a significant investment for local
governments and information pertaining to these costs is vital for
stewardship, accountability, costing and developing asset
management plans including ongoing maintenance and
replacement requirements.
Current local government standards require tangible capital asset
acquisitions to be recorded as an expenditure on the statement of
operations. However, tangible capital assets do have a future
economic benefit. Therefore, the standard proposes that capital
expenditures be recognized as assets and amortized over their
expected useful lives resulting in consistency and comparability
amongst all levels ofgovernment.
In addition to applying the standard to local governments the
following proposed changes will apply to all levels of government:
157
(1) The definition of "cost" for tangible capital assets has
been revised, indicating that capital grants will no longer
be netted against the cost of a tangible capital asset.
(2) Tangible capital assets acquired in lieu of development
charges are to be recorded at fair value.
(3) Additional guidance on the commencement and
cessation of capitalizing carrying costs is provided, as
Follows
• Carrying costs can be capitalized during the
period in which the activities related to the
construction or development of the tangible
capital asset is undertaken
• Capitalization of carrying costs ceases, when
the tangible asset is ready for use which is
defined as substantial completion of
acquisition, construction or development of
the asset.
(4) Amortization of costs should reflect a systematic and
rational basis for allocating the cost oFa tangible capital
asset over its estimated useful life, and will be accounted
for as an expense on the statement of operations. The
proposed Section will eliminate the 40 -year limit on the
amortization period.
To adequately address the implications of these standards
local governments are encouraged to read the full text of
the proposed Section.
What does this announcement mean for a local
government?
Local governments do not currently have a generally
accepted definition of a tangible capital asset. Items
included in tangible capital assets vary from province to
province and among local governments within the same
province.
As a result of this standardvernment tangible capital
assets, such as roads, buildings, vehicles, equipment, land,
water, sewer and other utility systems,_ aircraft, computer
hardware and software, dams, canals and bridges, would
be recorded in a government's accounting system and
reported on the statement of financial position as a non-
financial asset
The transitional requirements of this standard require a
historical cost to be recorded at initial adoption. When
historical cost information is not available other methods
to estimate the cost and accumulated amortization will
need to be used These methods should be applied on a
consistent basis unless it can be demonstrated that a more
accurate estimate is appropriate for a particular type of
tangible capital asset.
Adviser Alert public si :clr r
Adequately preparing for the change is critical, the determination
of a historical cost on existing assets and maintaining the cost on
future tangible capital assets as required by PS 3150 may require
dedicated and significant resources. If a local government is not
prepared in time for the adoption of PS 3150, they may be subject
to a qualified auditor's report, for non - compliance with Generally
Accepted Accounting Principles. Local governments are
encouraged to review their municipal or local government act to
assess the implications of a qualified auditor's report.
In summary, PS 3150 Tarlgrble Capital Assets, requires significant
changes in accounting and reporting requirements for local
governments, their boards and commisions. We urge you to
review the proposed standards, take the opportunity to evaluate
your existing tangible capital assets and discuss your situation with
your Grant Thornton advisor.
Grant Thornton LLP is one of Canada's leading firms of
chartered accountants and management consultants. Our clients
look to us for results- driven advice to meet their needs For
assurance, tax, financial advisory, and management consulting
services. With a network of offices coast to coast and the global
resources of the Grant Thornton worldwide network, we are
where you do business. Our personal approach and practical,
relevant advice has been helping organizations reach their goals
for many years.
Visit our Website: www.Gran tThornton.ca
158
Report to the Business Excellence Advisory Board
Audit Completion - Toronto and Region Conservation Authority
December 31, 2005
Appendix D — Exposure Draft on Segment Disclosure
159
Section PS 2700
segment disclosures
TABLE OF CONTENTS Paragraph
Purpose and scope .01 -.06
Defining segments .07 -.14
Identifying segments .08 -.14
Attributing items to segments .15 -.21
Segment accounting policies .22 -.23
Changes in segments .24 -.25
Disclosure .26 -.33
Other disclosure matters .30 -.33
Transitional provisions .34
PURPOSE AND SCOPE
.01 This Section establishes standards on how to define and disclose segments in a
government's summary financial statements.
.02 These standards apply to the summary financial statements of federal, provincial,
territorial and local governments. Other government organizations that apply the
standards of the CICA Public Sector Accounting Handbook (CICA PSA Handbook) are
encouraged to provide the disclosures established in this Section when their
operations are diverse enough to warrant such disclosures.
.03 Summary financial statements provide aggregated information about government
and serve as a means by which a government demonstrates its accountability for the
financial affairs and resources entrusted to it. Generally, however, the activities of a
government are so broad and encompass so wide a range of different activities that it
is valuable to disclose selected disaggregated financial information about particular
segments of a government in the summary financial statements. _
.04 The guidance in this Section is intended to start with the summary financial
statements and separate out key financial information into segments in order to
provide relevant information for accountability and decision - making purposes, while
ensuring that the information is consistent with the summary statements.
.05 The objectives of disclosing information about segments are to:
(a) help users of the financial statements identify the resources allocated to
support the major activities of the government;
(b) help users of the financial statements make more informed judgments about
the government reporting entity and about its major activities;
(c) help users of financial statements better understand the manner in which the
organizations in government are organized and how the government
discharges its accountability obligations;
(d) enhance the transparency of financial reporting; and
(e) help users of the financial statements better understand the performance of
the segments and the government reporting entity.
. 06 Users of financial statements have a variety of needs that segment disclosures may
be useful in addressing. For example, segment disclosures may assist users in
assessing future net cash flows of the government.
DEFINING SEGMENTS
. 07 For the purposes of this Section, a segment is a distinguishable activity or group of
activities of a government for which it is appropriate to separately report financial
information to achieve the objectives of this Section as set out in paragraph PS
2700.05.
161
Identifying segments -
.08 Determining the activities that should be grouped as segments requires the
application of professional judgment. As a starting point, the major classifications of
activities used in creating, presenting or managing budget information may be
appropriate for identifying segments. Identifying segments in this manner often
reflects the existing accountability framework for government and the way in which
operations are managed. It also helps ensure that financial statement preparers are
able to provide the required information in a cost - effective and timely manner.
.09 In identifying segments, preparers of financial statements will consider the definition
of a segment and other factors, including:.
(a) the objectives of disclosing financial information by segment;
(b) the expectations of members of the community and their elected or appointed
representatives regarding the key activities and accountabilities of the '
government;
(c) the qualitative characteristics of financial reporting as set out in FINANCIAL
STATEMENT CONCEPTS — FEDERAL, PROVINCIAL & TERRITORIAL
GOVERNMENTS, Section PS 1000, and GENERAL OBJECTIVES OF FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS — LOCAL GOVERNMENTS, Section PS 1700;
(d) the homogeneous nature of the activities, service delivery, or recipients of the
services;
(e) whether the activities relate to the achievement of common outcomes or
services as reflected in government performance reports and plans;
(f) whether discrete financial information is reported or available; and
(g) the nature of the relationship between the government and its organizations
(within the reporting entity).
.10 There are different bases of segmentation that may be considered appropriate. The
government would choose the basis of segmentation that best addresses the factors
in paragraph PS 2700.09. Some examples of how financial information may be
aggregated and reported are:
(a) By major functional classifications of activities undertaken by the government,
such as health, education, defense, welfare, and major trading activities
undertaken by GBEs, such as utilities and insurance entities.
(b) By service line segments that are distinguished by outputs or achieving
particular operating objectives, such as police services and parks and
recreation. Government departments and agencies are often managed along
service lines because this reflects the way in which major outputs are
identified, their achievements monitored and their resource needs identified
and budgeted.
(c) By segments that reflect the different accountability and control relationships
between the government and various organizations within the reporting
entity, such as ministries, crown corporations, and the SUCH (schools,
universities, colleges and hospitals) sector.
162
.11 Governments sometimes provide supplementary disclosures at a broad level (for
example, operating, capital and other funds) or a detailed level (unaudited), or
provide audited financial statements of components of the government reporting
entity. In many cases, this supplementary disclosure does not meet the requirements
of this Section. In providing segment disclosures, what is important within the
summary financial statements is that the definition of a segment is met, the
objectives for segment disclosures are satisfied and an appropriate basis of
segmentation is chosen.
.12 In some cases, a government may report on the basis of more than one segment
structure, for example, by service segments and functional classifications. If the
achievement of a government's objectives is strongly affected both by the different
products and services it provides and by its different functional classifications,
reporting on the basis of both service segments and functional classifications may
provide useful information.
.13 Not every part of a government is necessarily a segment. For example, certain
activities may best be considered part of general government operations rather than
related to a specific segment.
.14 There may be a practical limit to the number of segments that a government
separately discloses, beyond which segment information may become overly
detailed. Although no precise limit has been determined, as the number of segments
identified increases, the government would consider whether a practical limit has
been reached in terms of the value of the information being disclosed compared to
the cost of compiling it.
ATTRIBUTING ITEMS TO SEGMENTS
.15 For each reportable segment, some items are directly attributable to a segment while
others will be allocated on a reasonable basis. Where an item can be allocated in
whole or in part to a segment on a reasonable basis, this would be done. The
government's financial reporting system would normally be the starting point for
identifying items that can be directly attributed or reasonably allocated to segments.
.16 In some cases, an item may have been allocated to segments for internal financial
reporting purposes on a basis that is understood by government management but
that is subjective or arbitrary. Such an allocation would not constitute a reasonable
basis of allocation under this Section. Conversely, a government may choose not to
allocate some items for internal financial reporting purposes even though a
reasonable basis for doing so exists. For the purposes of segment disclosures, such
items would be allocated.
.17 A detailed calculation made in applying a particular accounting policy at the
government -wide level would be allocated to segments if there is a reasonable basis
for doing so. Employee entitlement calculations, for example, are often made for a
government as a whole, but the government -wide figures may be allocated to
segments based on salary and demographic data for the segments.
.18 Some revenues and expenses may not be directly attributable or allocable on a
reasonable basis to individual segments because they support a wide range of service
delivery activities across a number of segments or relate to general ad-m+n-istfattofl
activities that are not identified as a separate segment. These unattributed or
unallocated revenues and expenses would be reported as unallocated amounts in
reconciling the segment disclosures to the government's summary financial
statements.
163
.19 Governments carry out their policies and deliver services through various
organizations, including government business enterprises and government business
partnerships, accounted for on a modified equity basis. Where the modified
equity- accounted net surplus / deficit can be directly attributed or reliably allocated
to a segment, this attribution or allocation would be done. Similarly, segment
revenue and segment expense would include the segment's share of revenue and
expense of a government partnership that is accounted for by proportionate
consolidation.
.20 When a government accounts for certain government organizations on a modified
equity basis in accordance with GOVERNMENT REPORTING ENTITY, paragraph PS
1300.47, if the ¶ modified equity- accounted net surplus / deficit can be directly
attributed or reliably allocated to a segment, this attribution or allocation would be
done.
.21 In accordance with BASIC PRINCIPLES OF CONSOLIDATION, Section PS 2500,
transactions and balances between controlled entities are eliminated when preparing
consolidated financial statements. However, for segment disclosures, segment
revenue and segment expense are determined before these eliminations. The only
exception occurs when transactions and balances are between entities within a single
segment. In this case, eliminating entries would be done before determining segment
amounts.
SEGMENT ACCOUNTING POLICIES
.22 • Segment information should be prepared in accordance with the accounting policies
adopted for preparing and presenting the summary financial statements of the
government. [APRIL 2007]
.23 For purposes of their financial reporting, government organizations base their
accounting policies on the standards of the CICA Handbook - Accounting or the CICA
PSA Handbook as directed in the Introduction to Public Sector Accounting Standards.
For purposes of segment reporting, all accounting policies, other than those for
government business enterprises, would be conformed to the accounting policies
adopted for preparing and presenting the summary financial statements of the
government. These would be the standards of the CICA PSA Handbook.
CHANGES IN SEGMENTS
.24 • If there is a change in segments, prior period segment data presented for
comparative purposes should be restated to reflect the newly reported segment(s)
un less the necessary financial data are not reasonably determinable. [APRIL 2007]
.25 Changes in segments may occur as a result of new organizations being included in
the government reporting entity and being allocated to segments. Changes may also
occur if a new segment is identified or as a result of a change in the basis of
segmentation. For example, a government may undertake significant new or
additional activities, or increase the extent to which an activity previously operating
as an internal support service provides services to external parties. When this occurs,
prior period comparative data would be restated, if practicable, to reflect the current
segment structure.
164
DISCLOSURE
.26 • Government summary financial statements should separately disclose the following
information, in notes or schedules, about each of a government's segments identified
in accordance with paragraph PS 2700.07:
(a) the basis for identifying segments, the nature of the segments and the
activities they encompass, and the method of significant allocations to
segments;
(b) segment expense by major object or category;
(c) segment revenue by source and type;
(d) the aggregate of the net surplus / deficit of government business enterprises
and government business partnerships accounted for under the modified
equity method for each segment, if applicable;
(e) the aggregate of the net surplus / deficit of government organizations
accounted for under the modified equity basis in accordance with the
transitional provisions of GOVERNMENT REPORTING ENTITY, paragraph PS
1300.47, for each segment, if applicable; and
a reconciliation between the information disclosed for segments and the
consolidated information in the summary financial statements. [APRIL 2007]
.27 In addition to these disclosures, governments are encouraged to provide other
segment information where useful to users of the financial statements. Examples of
other disclosures that may be desirable include separate disclosure of the total
carrying amount of assets by segment, separate disclosure of the total carrying
amount of liabilities by segment, separate disclosure of tangible capital assets by
segment, separate disclosure of additions to tangible capital assets by segment and
any other significant elements of the financial statements by segment.
.28 In providing segment disclosures, it is important that users be able to reconcile the
financial information provided to the government's summary financial statements.
Various presentations of the reconciliation are possible but, regardless of format,
segment revenues would be reconciled to government revenues and segment
expenses would be reconciled to government expenses.
.29 While a single aggregate amount is disclosed pursuant to the requirements of
paragraph PS 2700.26(d), each government business enterprise or government
business partnership is assessed individually to determine whether its operations are
to be included within a segment or segments.
(f)
Other disclosure matters
.30 • In measuring and reporting segment revenue from transactions with other
segments, inter- segment transfers should be measured on the basis that the
government used to price those transfers. The basis of pricing inter- segment
transfers and any change therein should be disclosed in the financial statements.
[APRIL 2007]
.31 A change in the method that a government uses to price inter - segment transfers is
not a change in accounting policy her which prior period segment data would be
restated.
165
.32 . Changes in accounting policies related specifically to segment reporting that have a
material effect on segment information should be disclosed. Prior period segment
information presented for comparative purposes should be restated unless the
necessary financial data are not reasonably determinable. Such disclosure should
include:
(a) a description of the nature of the change;
(b) the reasons for the change;
(c) the fact that comparative information has been restated or that the necessary
financial data are not reasonably determinable; and
(d) the financial effect of the change, if reasonably determinable. [APRIL 2007]
.33 Some changes in accounting policies relate specifically to segment reporting, for
example, a change in the basis for allocating revenues and expenses to segments.
Such changes can have a significant impact on the segment information reported,
but will not change aggregated financial information reported for the government. To
enable users to understand the changes and to assess trends, prior period segment
information that is included in the financial statements for comparative purposes
would be restated, when practicable, to reflect the new accounting policies.
TRANSITIONAL PROVISIONS
.34 This Section applies to fiscal years beginning on or after April 1, 2007. Earlier
adoption is encouraged.
166
RES. #C17/06 -
Moved by:
Seconded by:
WILD WATER KINGDOM LIMITED MULTIPURPOSE SPORTS DOME
Proposal from Wild Water Kingdom Limited to construct and operate a
multipurpose sports facility under the terms and conditions of the
existing lease.
Maja Prentice
Andrew Schulz
WHEREAS Wild Water Kingdom Limited leases certain lands being part of Lots 14 and 15,
Concession 9, in the City of Brampton, Regional Municipality of Peel, from the Toronto
and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA);
WHEREAS under the terms of the lease Wild Water Kingdom Limited is to provide TRCA
for its review and approval details and plans for new facilities and attractions they may
wish to construct;
AND WHEREAS TRCA is in receipt of a proposal from Wild Water Kingdom Limited to
construct and operate a multipurpose sports facility on the existing leased lands;
THEREFORE LET IT BE RESOLVED THAT THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE
AUTHORITY THAT approval be granted for Wild Water Kingdom to construct and operate
a multipurpose sports dome under the existing terms and conditions of the leased lands;
THAT the Friends of Claireville be advised of this proposal;
THAT Wild Water Kingdom obtain all required approvals from the City of Brampton and
the Region of Peel;
AND FURTHER THAT appropriate TRCA officials be directed and authorized to take such
action as is necessary to implement the proposal.
CARRIED
RATIONALE
Wild Water Kingdom Limited leases approximately 80 acres of TRCA -owned lands at Steeles
and Finch avenues adjacent to the Claireville reservoir. The lease is in good standing and Wild
Water Kingdom has successfully operated a water park at this location since 1989. Wild Water
Kingdom is required under the terms and conditions of the lease to obtain TRCA approval for
any major improvements to the facilities on the site.
Wild Water Kingdom has approached TRCA staff with a proposal for a multipurpose sports
dome adjacent to the existing parking lot on lands currently leased to Wild Water Kingdom for
picnics and group events. The proposal is attached as well as a drawing illustrating the
location of the proposed dome on the site.
Wild Water Kingdom Limited proposes to operate the dome from October to May each year
primarily to service soccer clubs and associations. The60,000 square feet (300 feet 200 ft x
60 ft high) air structure will be about 60,000 sq. ft. with a gravel base and an artificial playing
surface. The dome will be heated /inflated using natural gas. Attached to the dome will be a
2,100 sq. ft. club house building fully serviced by municipal sewer and water.
167
Wild Water Kingdom Limited is undertaking an inventory of trees to be removed and will
provide a planting scheme to compensate for trees that are removed. The proposed site of
the dome is outside the regulated area and will require no permits from TRCA. As the location
is adjacent to existing parking and will be used during the water park off season, there will be
no additional parking required. Wild Water Kingdom Limited will ensure storm water collection
is satisfactory to TRCA staff.
Staff has reviewed the proposal and recommends approval subject to Wild Water Kingdom
Limited presenting the proposal to the Friends of Claireville who will have an opportunity to
comment on the proposal prior to its consideration at the meeting of the Authority on April 28,
2006. Also, Wild Water Kingdom Limited will obtain all necessary approvals from the City of
Brampton and Region of Peel. Wild Water Kingdom Limited has had preliminary discussions
with the city.
FINANCIAL DETAILS
There will be no costs to TRCA for Wild Water Kingdom Limited to undertake-this proposal.
Revenues from the dome will contribute to Wild Water Kingdom Limited's gross revenues from
which TRCA receives a percentage and a base amount as annual rent.
Report prepared by: Jim Dillane, extension 6292
For Information contact: Jim Dillane, extension 6292; Ron Dewell, extension 5245
Date: March 28, 2006
Attachments: 2
168
Attachment 1
Development Proposal and
Business Plan for a
Multipurpose Sports Dome
Submitted by: WILD WATER KINGDOM
Date: March 29, 2006
INTRODUCTION
Wild Water Kingdom, Canada's Largest and Best Water- Themed Amusement Park, is pleased to
announce the development of an exciting, community based, multipurpose sports and recreational
facility, with a particular focus on Soccer. This facility is scheduled for completion in the Fall of 2006.
Soccer is the fastest growing team sport in Canada with approximately 1,000,000 registered players
nationwide. Ontario leads the way with over half a million registered players. With the recent
announcement by Maple Leaf Sport and Entertainment Ltd and Exhibition Place of the construction of a
$50 million world -class soccer stadium, it is obvious that the continued growth of soccer is assured.
With the growth of soccer as a franchise sport, more and more families are recognizing, the value of
playing the game, both economically and physically. Due to the climate in Canada, children are forced
to divide their soccer playing time into 2 major seasons; the outdoor summer season and the indoor
winter season. There is a huge population of soccer enthusiasts in the GTA that want to play extended
seasons of soccer, so long as a convenient and economical opportunity to play exists.
Indoor soccer offers an inexpensive alternative for families when compared to more traditional winter
sports, such as hockey. It is also becoming a more attractive option to individuals who have graduated
from youth leagues to adult leagues. This includes the huge baby boomer market that is anxious to
participate in an enjoyable and healthy activity.
Wild Water Kingdom, now celebrating it's 20th Anniversary as Canada's largest water - themed
amusement park, is proposing to construct a multipurpose Sports and Recreational Leisure Complex
consisting of a 60,000 square foot air structure, covering a state -of- the -art turf field. In addition to soccer,
a wide array of sports activities will be accommodated, including football, lacrosse, rugby, ultimate
Frisbee, educational sports camps and golf driving range.
Wild Water Kingdom, is recognized as one of the top 10 summer destinations in the GTA, hosting
thousands of families every year and employing over 400 people in its operating season. With its
abundant expertise, Wild Water Kingdom is confident that this new development will be a resounding
success for the community and surrounding areas.
DEVELOPMENT DETAIL
The 300 ft by 200 ft by 60 ft high air structure will be located adjacent to the main parking lot. The facility
will be insulated to provide an efficient but comfortable atmosphere.
Attached to the dome, will be a 2,100 square foot Club House. This building will consist of a reception
area, 3 change rooms, a snack bar /pro shop, office, storage and washrooms.
OPERATING SCHEDULE
The Wild Water Kingdom Sports Dome will operate each year from October to May. The facility will be
used primarily for Soccer Leagues. The peak hours for Youth Soccer programs are between 5:30 pm
and 9:00 pm Week days and from 7:30 am to 8:00 pm on Weekends.
Adult Soccer Leagues would operate from 9:30 pm to 1:00 am on Weekdays and from 8:30 pm to 1:00
am on Weekends.
The off -peak hours will be utilized by schools, day camps, daycares and adults involved in other sports
as described earlier, particularly as an indoor golf driving range. The facility will also be available for
corporate functions, conventions, trade shows and large community events.
170
MARKETING INITIATIVES AND BUSINESS DEVELOPMENT STRATEGY
INITIAL SURVEY
In the Fall of 2005, correspondence was sent to 8 Soccer Leagues located within a 20 minute drive to the
Wild Water Kingdom premises. This included Brampton Youth Soccer Club, Mississauga Youth Soccer Club,
North Mississauga Youth Soccer Club, Etobicoke Youth Soccer Club, Vaughn Youth Soccer Club,
Woodbridge Youth Soccer Club and The Toronto Youth Soccer Association. Every single Club
enthusiastically replied that a facility of this nature at this location would be highly desirable.
MARKETING CAMPAIGN
Utilizing the existing experienced Sales and Marketing Team Members at Wild Water Kingdom, we will begin
targeting this local sports and leisure market prior to season opening this Fall. As well, the Sports Dome will
be included in the current Wild Water Kingdom marketing and sales programs.
Free Coaching Clinics will also run prior to the high -peak season start. This will enable us to communicate
our expectations and demonstrate to coaches how their team members can benefit from a convenient and
economical local facility.
CAPITAL EXPENDITURE BUDGET
Based on an extensive analysis of current quotations from suppliers and contractors, we estimate the project
to cost between $1.8 M and $2M.
GROSS REVENUE PROJECTION
The rental cost of the fields will be competitive with those facilities currently operating in this business. With a
first -class facility, in an extremely convenient, accessible location, and a premier playing surface, there will
not be any significant competitive pressure from other indoor sports facilities.
A Projection of Total Gross Revenue for the first year of operation is estimated to be $800,000 to $1,000,000.
MANAGEMENT EXPERTISE
DR. EDWARD SIU CHONG
Dr. Chong has over 25 years experience as the CEO and Director of several companies involved in the
acquisition, financing, development, leasing, management and sale of a diverse real estate portfolio,
including recreational facilities. He has been the President and CEO of Wild Water Kingdom since 1989.
JOHN RANSOM
Mr. Ransom has over 20 years experience in the capacity of General Manager of 2 of Toronto's major
attractions: Wild Water Kingdom Limited and Medieval Times Dinner and Tournament Ltd.. As well, he is an
owner of the Cherry Hill Family Fun Centre in Newmarket which includes a 40,000 sq ft Soccer Dome that has
been successfully servicing Indoor Soccer Leagues and other sports activities in the York Region area.
CONCLUSION
The location of-Wild Water Kingdom, situated on over 100 acres of Toronto and Region Conservation Area, is
the ideal location for a community- oriented endeavor such as the multipurpose Sports Dome. Wild Water
Kingdom is confident that the development will be an overwhelming success and of great benefit to the
company, the TRCA, Region of Peel and GTA.
171
172
RES. #C18/06 -
Moved by:
Seconded by:
ONTARIO ECOSCHOOOLS
Memorandum of Understanding. Recommendation to enter into a
Memorandum of Understanding with York University and several
participating school boards to formalize the terms and conditions for the
governance, management and administration of the Ontario EcoSchools
program.
Maja Prentice
Andrew Schulz
WHEREAS York University coordinates an environmental and sustainability education
program entitled, Ontario EcoSchools;
WHEREAS the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA), the Durham District
School Board, the Halton Catholic District School Board, the Halton District School
Board, the Thames Valley District School Board, the Toronto District School Board, the
York Region District School Board, the Waterloo Region District School Board and other
organizations, supported York University in the development of Ontario EcoSchools;
WHEREAS TRCA, the seven, above -noted school boards and York University continue to
participate in the management and implementation of Ontario EcoSchools;
AND WHEREAS York University, TRCA and the seven, above -noted school boards wish to
formalize the terms and conditions of governance, management and administration of
Ontario EcoSchools;
THEREFORE LET IT BE RESOLVED THAT THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE
AUTHORITY THAT TRCA enter into a Memorandum of Understanding with York
University, the Durham District School Board, the Halton Catholic District School Board,
the Halton District School Board, the Thames Valley District School Board, the Toronto
District School Board, the York Region District School Board and the Waterloo Region
District School Board, for the governance, management and administration of Ontario
EcoSchools;
THAT TRCA have no obligation to fund the Ontario EcoSchools Program;
THAT the TRCA's Manager, Education Curriculum, or such position as TRCA may decide,
be named as the TRCA representative on the Ontario EcoSchools Steering Committee;
THAT TRCA communicate with other conservation authorities and Conservation Ontario
regarding Ontario EcoSchools;
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
173
BACKGROUND
The seven school boards that helped develop EcoSchools, in partnership with Toronto and
Region Conservation Authority, York University and others, have been collaborating on •
environmental education initiatives since 2000. The Ontario EcoSchools project began in 2002
with a grant from the Government of Canada's Climate Change Action Fund. The boards saw
the opportunity to teach about climate change as an effective means to deliver an integrated
curriculum and a way to support their energy conservation efforts to reduce utility costs. Best
practices from all the school boards, both in pedagogy and building operations, were
combined to create the guides and curriculum documents. Resource development was
completed in 2004. To date Ontario EcoSchools has received $400,000 for program and
professional development and outreach.
Ontario EcoSchools is an environmental, sustainability education program that addresses both
how the schools are run and what students learn. Ontario curriculum expectations that relate
to climate change have been identified and elementary and secondary teaching resources
have been developed for Grades 1 -12. Comprehensive guides to reduce energy use, minimize
solid waste production and design naturalized, environmentally friendly school grounds
provide opportunities for student and staff participation outside the classroom to reinforce
classroom learning.
Ontario EcoSchools is unique in its dual -focus approach. No other environmental,
sustainability education program actively involves both curriculum and facilities departments.
These two departments work together, using the EcoSchools program to develop a systematic
approach to improving environmental performance of school board facilities, including
reducing greenhouse gas emissions. Ontario EcoSchools is designed so that the program can
be replicated in all Ontario school boards. Each board decides how to make EcoSchools part
of the way it sees its mission and its commitment to future generations.
Who is using Ontario EcoSchools?
Eighteen school boards in Ontario are in various stages of implementing the EcoSchools
program. Toronto and Region Conservation Authority is the first, non - school board agency
that is actively implementing Ontario EcoSchools in its five education "school" facilities. By
June of this year, we expect that all five of the TRCA facilities will be certified Ontario
EcoSchools, either gold, silver or bronze status. Further reports will be presented to the
Sustainable Communities Board as the certification process of TRCA facilities for the 2005/06
school year concludes. TRCA is also leading the development of an Ontario EcoSchools
Water Conservation Guide and is actively promoting and integrating Ontario EcoSchools into
other education project initiatives.
174
Early Energy Conservation Results
Despite strained budgets and limited staffing, boards are beginning to address environmental
issues at a senior level. This has enormous potential to be an effective means to reduce energy
use and costs systematically and to teach about environmental issues. The Toronto District
School Board began system -wide implementation of the EcoSchools Energy Conservation
Standards in the 2003 -2004 school year. Comparing data from the prior school year, the board
saw an 8% decrease in electricity consumption. Board engineers had predicted a 2%
decrease as a result of lighting retrofits. They attribute the additional 6% decrease to a change
in building occupant behaviour, due at least in part to the EcoSchools program and
board -wide Energy Conservation Standards.
RATIONALE
Ontario EcoSchools has an informal steering committee of curriculum and facilities central staff
from 7 school boards, as well as representation from TRCA and York University. These
well- respected and well- connected steering committee members have helped to promote
Ontario EcoSchools through established education networks, addressing both curriculum and
facilities organizations. The steering committee has also provided for the management and
administration of the program.
The steering committee has identified the need to formalize its working relationship in the form
of a Memorandum of Understanding primarily to facilitate funding proposals developed for
Ontario EcoSchools; that is, there needs to be a formal governance, management and
administration structure articulated for the program in order to receive financial support. The
Memorandum of Understanding also serves to articulate and communicate the commitment
each participant has to the program and confirm individual and collective roles and
responsibilities. To this end, the Memorandum of Understanding serves as the vehicle to
formalize the working relationship that has been in place for Ontario EcoSchools and does not
impose any expansion to the role of TRCA or the other parties.
Ontario EcoSchools strategically aligns with the goals and priorities of The Living City and
allows TRCA to achieve many objectives within its education program. Therefore, staff
recommend that TRCA continue and formalize its involvement with Ontario EcoSchools
through the proposed Memorandum of Understanding.
PROVISIONS OF THE MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING (MOU)
Governance
The MOU provides that Ontario EcoSchools be governed by a steering committee, made up of
one representative from each of the parties, and meeting a minimum of four times per school
year. The steering committee will provide the overall direction for Ontario EcoSchools
including:
• developing resources and strategic plans to enable school boards, provincial ministries
and other organizations to develop sustainable conservation and education initiatives
through Ontario EcoSchools;
• maintaining a solid financial plan;
• reviewing periodically the resources for Ontario EcoSchools;
• providing data, which has been reviewed and approved, for reports to sponsors;
• working co- operatively with other conservation and educational initiatives that complement
Ontario EcoSchools;
175
• providing expertise and sharing experiences regarding curricular and operational matters
as they pertain to their respective organizations;
• monitoring and reporting the success of Ontario EcoSchools;
• assisting in gaining financial and in -kind resources for Ontario EcoSchools; and
• contributing in -kind resources.
The MOU also makes provision for the steering committee to establish working groups whose
membership may include experts or organizations that share the objectives of Ontario
EcoSchools. Further, the MOU makes provision for the addition of membership on the steering
committee, but limits membership to institutions that have implemented Ontario EcoSchools
and have created their own Energy Conservation or Waste Management guidelines, and are
interested in furthering the objectives of Ontario EcoSchools. These institutions must represent
a portfolio of similar educational (school) facilities.
Management and Administration
The MOU provides that:
• Each party devote such time, attention and ability as may be necessary to operate Ontario
EcoSchools.
• A project coordinator be responsible for the day -to -day management of Ontario
EcoSchools, working in consultation with each of the parties.
• York University be responsible for the financial accounting and administration for Ontario
EcoSchools including, but not limited to accounts payable /receivable and cash
management. All purchasing and disbursements are subject to York University's policies,
procedures, guidelines, rules and regulations.
• York University has the authority to contract with third parties in connection with Ontario
EcoSchools as directed by the steering committee.
• York University host the Ontario EcoSchools' website and provide an email address for
Ontario EcoSchools.
• York University provide office space for Ontario EcoSchools pursuant to a hosting
agreement.
• Toronto Region Conservation Authority communicate with other conservation authorities
regarding Ontario EcoSchools.
Other Provisions:
• Liability and indemnification is addressed, including that each party be liable for its own
costs and expenses in connection with Ontario EcoSchools and each party indemnify all
other parties.
• Intellectual property and confidential information is addressed including that each party
owns its own work products in connection with Ontario EcoSchools and each party
operates under prescribed confidentiality and disclosure criteria.
• The term of the MOU is set out as commencing from the date signed and continuing unless
terminated. Any party may terminate its involvement at any time upon thirty (30) days prior
written notice to the other parties.
Report prepared by: Renee Jarrett, extension 5315
For Information contact: Renee Jarrett, extension 5315
Date: March 27, 2006
176
RES. #C19/06 - MEMBERS PER DIEM, HONORARIUM AND TRAVEL EXPENSES
Changes to the per diem, honorarium and travel expenses for members
of the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority require approval of the
Ontario Municipal Board.
Moved by:
Seconded by:
Maja Prentice
Andrew Schulz
THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT subject to Ontario Municipal
Board (OMB) approval, members per diem and the Chair's honorarium be increased by
2% effective January 1, 2006;
THAT subject to OMB approval the rate for reimbursement of travel costs for the Chair
and members be the same as the rate approved for reimbursement of Toronto and
Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) employee travel costs, effective Januaryl, 2006;
■
AND FURTHER THAT TRCA officials be authorized and directed to make the necessary
application to the OMB.
CARRIED
RATIONALE
Section 37 of the Conservation Authorities Act provides that "no salaries, expenses or
allowances of any kind shall be paid to any of the members of the authority without the
approval of the Ontario Municipal Board ".
In 2005, the Authority approved a series of resolutions requesting the OMB to increase the per
diem and honorarium by the rate of inflation, grant TRCA authority to increase per diems and
honarium at the rate of inflation annually and approve the reimbursement of members for travel
costs at the same rate as TRCA employees. The OMB granted the request for inflationary
adjustment in 2005 but denied the request for TRCA to annually adjust the rates. The OMB
stated that TRCA must apply each year for adjustments.
The OMB also stated that it would approve only the provincial government rate for
reimbursement of travel on TRCA business. This is $0.3375 /kilometre versus $0.44 /kilometre
for TRCA employees. Staff has been advised that a number of conservation authorities are
able to reimburse at rates other than the provincial rate. The OMB will be so advised and
hopefully will agree to reimburse the members at the TRCA rate.
FINANCIAL DETAILS
As part of preliminary estimates approval, the Authority approved an increase of 2% cost of
living adjustment effective the first pay in April. Staff will seek OMB approval to increase per
diems and honorarium by 2% effective January 1, 2006. The impact will be marginal, Tess than
$1,200, and has been included in the 2006 Operating and Capital Budget.
Report prepared by: Jim Dillane, 416 - 667 -6292
For Information contact: Jim Dillane, 416 - 667 -6292
Date: March 31, 2006
177
RES. #C20/06 - ROUGE PARK ALLIANCE
Guidelines for Advocacy Funding. Responds to a request from the
Rouge Park Alliance for comment on a proposal to fund "advocacy ".
Moved by:
Seconded by:
Bill Fisch
Bill O'Donnell
THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT the Rouge Park Alliance be
advised that Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) is not prepared to fund
advocacy;
AND FURTHER THAT the Waterfront Regeneration Trust Corporation and TRCA's
member municipalities be advised of TRCA's position.
CARRIED
BACKGROUND
The Rouge Park Alliance has indicated that it wishes to engage in funding of "advocacy ".
"Advocacy" is not defined but generally refers to engaging groups or individuals to put forward
positions around a specific issue that support the objectives of Rouge Park. Funding would
support acquiring legal or expert help to enable a group to put forward a position of support
much the same as "intervener funding" does in some forms of tribunal.
TRCA is in receipt of a request from the Chair of the Rouge Park Alliance to comment on a
decision by the Rouge Park Alliance to use funding from the Waterfront Regeneration Trust
Corporation (the Trust) for "advocacy" funding. The Trust's funds are from an endowment
which in 2005 amounted to about $8.3 million, the principle amount of which was provided by
the Government of Canada in 1995 to be used to "fulfill the Federal Government's commitment
to support conservation of the Rouge Valley ".
TRCA receives funds from the Waterfront Regeneration Trust Corporation to be used for
projects for Rouge Park. Given the nature of the work being undertaken in Rouge Park, TRCA
and the Trust agreed that TRCA would contract with the Rouge Park Alliance for the various
projects and activities.
In 2004, the Ontario Realty Corporation conveyed to TRCA about 4,000 acres of land in Rouge
Park. These lands include a portfolio of about 77 rental properties which TRCA manages. Net
revenue from the rental portfolio is used for Rouge Park purposes as per the agreement with
the province.
TRCA receives funds from its participating municipalities for Rouge Park. The amount is based
on the TRCA modified current value assessment levy formula. In 2006, the amount will be
$114,400 (2005 - $109,800). The Town of Markham funds,$25,000 annually for Rouge Park
and Town Council has recently approved a resolution directing that these funds not be used for
advocacy. The Chair of the Rouge Park Alliance has advised by letter dated March 13, 2006,
that no funds from municipal contributions will be used for advocacy projects.
178
Further, TRCA acts as the financial manager for the Rouge Park Alliance under the terms and
conditions of the original memorandum of understanding which established the Alliance and
Rouge Park. TRCA maintains financial records, receives funds, disburses funds, provides
human resources and payroll services (Rouge Park staff are employees of TRCA) and enters
into contracts on behalf of the Alliance.
RATIONALE
Funds for Rouge Park other than the funds from the Trust can be used at the direction of the
Rouge Park Alliance for anything the Alliance determines will enhance, improve or manage
Rouge Park.
The Trust, as a charitable organization, conveys funds to TRCA which then contracts for work
to be done. The Rouge Park Alliance approves projects put forward by various organizations
for work in furtherance of Rouge Park objectives. Rouge Park staff are responsible for ensuring
that the projects are completed in accordance with required terms and conditions.
TRCA, as a registered charity, must ensure that the legal requirements for disbursement of
funds received from another charity are met.
In deciding to make funds from the Trust or TRCA available for "advocacy ", it is critical the
Rouge Park Alliance distinguish "advocacy" from "political activity ". "Advocacy" is
demonstrated support for a cause or particular point of view. Using funds from the Trust for
"political activity" may be prohibited.
The funds from the Trust must be disbursed in accordance with the Canada Revenue Agency
(CRA) requirements for funds disbursed by a registered charity. With respect to "advocacy ",
charities are restricted in engaging in political activities. CRA has written Policy Statement
CPS -022 on Political Activities (Sept. 2003). This policy states, in part:
A charity may not take part in an illegal activity or a partisan political activity. A partisan
political activity is one that involves direct or indirect support of, or opposition to, any
political party or candidate for public office.
When a political party or candidate for public office supports a policy that is also
supported by the charity, the charity is not prevented from promoting this policy.
However, a charity in this situation must not directly or indirectly support the political
party or candidate for public office. This means that a charity may make the public
aware of its position on an issue provided:
a. it does not explicitly connect its views to any political party or candidate for public
office.
b. the issue is connected to its purposes;
c. its views are based on "a well - reasoned position ", ("well- reasoned position" is
defined as "a position based on factual information that is methodically,
objectively, fully and fairly analysed" which presents /addresses "serious arguments
and relevant facts to the contrary];
d. public awareness campaigns do not become the charity's primary activity
179
Finally, a charity may provide information to its supporters or the public on how all the
Members of Parliament or the legislature of a province, territory or municipal council
voted on an issue connected with the charity's purpose. However, a charity must not
single out the voting pattern on an issue of any one elected representative or political
party.
The Policy Statement is lengthy and provides excellent guidance as to which activities would
be considered prohibited and allowed political activity. However, this is a complex issue
subject to considerable interpretation.
The need to assure that the guidelines are being met would be onerous and time consuming.
Further, a decision to support advocacy funding by TRCA would set a precedent leading to
requests for advocacy funding in TRCA's other watersheds. Having considered the complexity
of the guidelines for the use of advocacy funding, staff cannot recommend that TRCA provide
funds for this purpose.
Report prepared by: Jim Dillane, extension 6292
For Information contact: Jim Dillane, extension 6292;
Rocco Sgambelluri, extension 5232
Date: April 12, 2006
RES. #C21/06 -
Moved by:
Seconded by:
CITY OF TORONTO WATER/WASTEWATER RATE STRUCTURE
Request for Comment. The City of Toronto has invited Toronto and
Region Conservation Authority to comment on the proposed water /waste
water rate structure.
Maja Prentice
Andrew Schulz
THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT Toronto and Region
Conservation Authority (TRCA) reiterate its support for the City of Toronto's water and
waste water programs including the multi -year Wet Weather Flow Management Master
Plan;
THAT the City of Toronto be asked to recognize in its future funding plans for water
related works the capital needs of TRCA identified in the 2006 submission as being $41
million, 2006 -2015, the capital requirement for funding for land acquisition for source
water protection as being $2 million annually and future growth in operating
requirements, at least at the rate of inflation, all in support of the city's objectives to
implement the Wet Weather Flow Management Master Plan and the Remedial Action
Plan;
AND FURTHER THAT the City of Toronto be so advised.
CARRIED
180
BACKGROUND
In December, 2005, City of Toronto Council approved a 9% increase in water /waste water rates
effective January 1, 2006. The city referred the report on the rate structure 2007 -2015 to be
reviewed by the Policy and Finance Committee. Council also directed the Chief Financial
Officer and Deputy City Manager responsible for Toronto Water to review the water and waste
water rate structure, consult the major stakeholders and report to the Works Committee by
July, 2006.
City staff has asked TRCA as a major stakeholder to comment on the proposed rate structure.
TRCA is identified in the report as a major stakeholder because it receives about $6 million in
funding, $3 million for capital and $3 million for operating. Over the term of the capital
program, 2006 - 2015, TRCA is estimated to receive $36 million of the $6.4 billion the city
expects to spend for capital works (about half of one percent of total funding). This in effect
flatlines TRCA capital funding at the 2005 level over the next 10 years. The report does not
identify long term operating requirements.
The city report deals with a variety of issues: future capital needs, sources of revenue, potential
for debt financing, impact of new legislation, impact on commercial users of increases, need
for improved residential metering, etc.. The report also recommends that water /waste water
rate charges increase by 9% annually 2006 to 2012 and 6 %, 3% and 2% in the final three years.
This will bring city rates more closely in line with those of neighbouring jurisdictions and
provide the cash flow to fund needed capital improvements as well as covering operational
needs.
RATIONALE
TRCA works closely with Toronto Water in the delivery of projects and programs related to
water quality and water quantity in the City of Toronto. Erosion control works in the valley
system and the Toronto Remedial Action Plan are among the more significant capital
programs. TRCA supports the city's long term wet weather flow program and works with
Toronto Water to assist in a variety of other water related programs. In particular, Toronto
Water has had the foresight to recognize that quality and quantity of water available to the city
is significantly influenced by the watershed headwater areas beyond city boundaries. Support
by the city for TRCA's role in watershed management recognizes the importance of the water
ways that flow into Lake Ontario, the city's water source.
As noted, Toronto Water has identified a flatlined level of funding to TRCA for water related
programs and projects. This does not take into account TRCA's unmet funding requirements.
TRCA's 2006 capital budget submission to the city identifies $71.1 million for 2006 to 2015 in
total TRCA capital works of which about $41 million is related to and funded from water
revenues. Toronto Water has been made aware of these needs but has not recognized these
requirements in the report on future capital works to be funded by water rates. The $41 million
is a conservative estimate that may not recognize the full need for erosion control works as a
result of severe storms such as that of August 19, 2005.
181
TRCA is not in a position to comment on the rationale for the proposed rate structure.
However, TRCA has recognized for many years that "water" has to be priced to reflect its true
value to encourage users to practice appropriate conservation measures. Based on
comparisons with other jurisdictions and recognizing that under provincial legislation water
programs must be self supporting, Toronto Water has proposed to Council a water rate
structure that is designed to ensure there is sufficient revenue to pay for present and future
costs.
Because the focus of the Toronto Water report is to establish an effective funding program, it is
important to reflect the TRCA capital needs relating to erosion and remedial action plan works.
Nor is it clear from the report if future TRCA operating requirements funded from water rates
have been adequately addressed. The city has chosen to fund about 50% of operating costs
from water rates. Increases due to inflation at a minimum should be included.. Finally, the city
has funded source water protection land acquisition projects from the water rates ($2 million in
2005; $500,000 in 2006). This does not seem to be addressed in the water rate structure
report. The city should be asked to address this.
Report prepared by: Jim Dillane, 416 - 667 -6292
For Information contact: Jim Dillane, 416- 667 -6292
Date: April 11, 2006
SECTION IV - ITEMS FOR THE INFORMATION OF THE BOARD
RES. #C22/06 -
Moved by:
Seconded by:
2005 YEAR END FINANCIAL PROGRESS REPORT
Provides information on the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority's
(TRCA) financial performance to December 31, 2005, in relation to the
2005 approved budget.
Bill O'Donnell
Dick O'Brien
IT IS RECOMMENDED THAT the Financial Progress Report dated December 31, 2005, be
received.
CARRIED
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. This is the final progress report for 2005.
RATIONALE
Attached is a high level summary of actual variances from budget as of December 31, 2005.
The 2005 draft Audited Financial Statements are included on the agenda as a separate
communication.
182
Operating Variances:
The 2005 actual operating results, as compared to the 2005 budget, produced an operating
deficit of $300,390, as noted on Attachment 1. Of note are the following items:
• Rental property expenditures exceeded budget by $122,000 mostly as a result of
unanticipated maintenance expenditures including major roof repairs and oil tank removals.
The problem was compounded with a shortfall in rental revenue of about $100,000 as a
number of vacancies lasted longer than anticipated.
• Planning and Development Services OMB hearings and special EA projects came in under
budget by $179,000.
• Within the Ecology division, the over - expenditure of $343,000 resulted mainly within the
Source Protection Planning budget, which was established well before the provincial
funding commitments were announced. This program is fully funded by the Province.
• The Community Transformation Partnership budget under - expenditure of $1,183,000
reflects an ambitious work plan that was not achieved. Lack of funding resulted in a
shortfall of about $174,000.
• Food Services under - performed in the wedding and corporate functions section, resulting
in a $241,000 negative revenue variance, with a corresponding reduction in related costs of
about $139,000.
• Restoration Services revenue exceeded budget by $531,000 as a result of higher volumes
of in -land soil placement activity, tree planting contracts and other special projects.
• The general contribution from the Conservation Foundation of Greater Toronto was under
target by $444,000.
Capital Variances:
Capital revenues exceeded expenditures by an amount of $147,000 in 2005, as compared to a
budgeted surplus target of $200,000, as noted on Attachment 2. The major variances for the
year are highlighted below:
• As a result of land sale agreements, revenues exceeded expenditures within the
Greenspace Strategy project by an amount of $279,000. (This amount reduces the
cumulative deficit in the account to $158,000.)
• TWRC amenity projects were underspent by $5.8 million and the Lower Don EA by $2.9
million as a number of delays were encountered with respect to agreements and approvals.
However, TRCA was able to spend in excess of $15.6 million in various TWRC- sponsored
projects in the year.
• The Waterfront Open Space acquisition program was under target by $3.9 million due to
lack of funding.
• The Living City Centre Project has been delayed until federal and provincial funds are
secured.
• The Nursery Office and Workshop construction project, underspent by $588,000, has been
delayed until 2006.
• The Humber Bay Shores project budget, underspent by $553,000, was not spent as legal
proceedings with respect to expropriations have not yet concluded.
• Erosion control projects, particularly the Highland Creek weir project and Wicksteed
Avenue, were deferred.
a There were a number of other infrastructure and environmental projects that were not
undertaken in the year. Variances within the various capital funding sources reflect the
corresponding reductions in spending. In almost all instances funds that were not utilized
in the year will carry forward and used to 2006.
183
The attached report provides a summary of the capital project spending for the year.
Report prepared by: Rocco Sgambelluri, extension 5232
For Information contact: Jim Dillane, 416 - 667 -6292, Rocco Sgambelluri, extension 5232
Date: April 13, 2006
Attachments: 2
184
13,Apt-06
tORONtGAND REGION;CONSERVAt104AUTORITY
SIJMMARY OF ,O,PERAITING:BUIETVARiANCEAttitaMBtR31 ;2005
Page 1
GrossExpenditures (13rierfc1i.ei61 Unit)
Finance arid 8usineSsServibes Division'
kdministra,ti.on
Re ntall=irOperti es
PrOpertyZeviCee:..,
VehiCle,&Eqi-pinent,Reeepie
e
Watershed4.4anagerrierif
WM DiVisiorialMatiagernent:
Watershed Strategies
COnserVatiah;Field-CehtreS'
. .
Planniiii&beitelaimnerit
DeveloOrrient,.SerVices
Enforcernent,
Ecolomv DiviSron.
Ecology
ComMilnity"TransformatiOn. Partnerships
Restorallonlervices,Division
Restoration Services
Parks andtidtereTikrision
Rarks,Culture,DiVisiOnal Management
Conservation-Areas
Kortright Centre for COnservation
Oak Ridges.Corridar Park.
Black Creek-Pioneer Village
I:ood-Services,
office' of thet.ACi
Corporate'-,Managernent
Corporate' Secretariat
rluman-Resources
Communications,.
AtuaIS
$
:$
459
1 .97;OP
1
.'251700 1,156212
. „ _
:66.,100. 154295
• 5 ;.18IT,900,. ::.5 ;292 ,I49
1:4.975-
(10ol • '1 .,3.84:.955,'
.2262100.. ,2',1176.821.:
3856 ,900 a,756,851-.
:2827.800 2 ,03052 ,
413t524
,106700 ‘,2';935,57.6,
thier: 'dn'f4cr.;T:e'c his.0 -efts -by ;More oje,ct
a,641)surchate,, _
122;1 nt rk6e r-ePaircoit'S.‘
(4.&-.,..430‘Gp0.0,n4. ,
.86,195:„Mbre,VehiCie46biacernente' theh'bildgefedi.
1,11,249 •
,2',977,700:. '3841,955.
.2035460: 871:,287:
:4963,100: '4,192,202
!1',847,700. i;997752
18',975::Uritudgeted
33 745)Some Report Card ep delayed i"nto; 2606..
f5J79)Gepbing'iri DeValbOrna nt,
9a,9481.
(179;2.48)0M13tfea);in4s.",8,.-Spy-P,rbjectsr,dn'der.
13,1'24;Eirtra legal, axpenditures.
'071,124)
MereactiVity, on,self7funded-Source-ProteCtiOn
545,255'Planning. AleoiSp::Projeets. up
(1034 ,133)1Lowerei'penditures lowerfUnaing;
1790896)
,
150,052kigher volume Of 'Plant Sales.,& Projects.
4657,66b, 449,462,
3597260 ;3893815
1i;30:1300. 1868,788
18312
4,173000, 4,148,590
1:,090,300, 951 , 45
.06 ,118)Gapping.:
96815 .Creek:re:high usage
67 ,455:i\lewself-SUniJedMietland Interpretation program
18,312 ttl,nbutigeteri,new, program:
:(24,510)Markgfing coats constrained
i139,155)WeddinOi &Corp., Events _under target.
10 ,627 ,500: • 10,630,079
410600
• 4-29900
:697,500:
A,853 ;000:
39,540
26,062
422 jai
659,621
1;775,381,
. , . . .. , . . „ . . • _ .
,(18.,060)Meeting,costs lesT.than, budget.'
',06,919)Liability.,Inrsurance•exp,,:ibelmkiliudget...
. ...
• ..(7-7Z
, 6
(37;,879)Gapping.,
(77819).-.:
Expendiiurelotal .31,455,700 10,579;989: (875;711)
I. 1uaw43CUV
tORONTO ANtl:ROION c1;114$ERVATIOICAUTIONIY
SUMMARY OP:OP ERATI NG-0 Uti.GET VARIANCESAT:DECMBER3.1, 2005
PAge:LZ:
Funding SOUrces:
ProgrirnIlls,erfees:
Rental ProPertiee:
Black,Creetc PioreeViIIae
Food'Servid,ee:
Oeyellipment'Services
RestoratiorilSeiyiee
COnse,ni,ation Are.a'e
Kortright „Cehtie.for.00inservation.:
Oak Ridges'Oorridbr.,Rark
Con .eeri,atiOh:f ield:Celitree'Sufrmiry
All Other P.ii?g`rairiNer. fes
pOeriles:
Livin6 City!
CEGT.—Flovvihrbugh
Other
Provincial
ederal.
RonationeiFundreing
Private
Reverse internal 'plant material :charges included under
Other
Revenuelotal
Net Expenditure's
Net Expenditures-funded by:
Provincial-transfer Payments
Municipal Levy
Deficit /.(Surplus)
2005 ,
Bisdiet: Aetna'
Z288;400.
.826,300
1..,145 ;300:
4220,50'0.,
2 87:925.
"1,789 234
905)347).'
13513`500:
'2:;9715,110.0: .:3;,021.;054-
1.,084,9130 102094
.0,iff,,
Aetuals
$
Vatia'nce. Notes
(1O0.;475)M&e ,eetijei*eeti'ere'siti'er(*lieripet
pift‘Shb-p-belOW target
(240 653)Weddings & Corp' Events under target;
51 563 Hidh''yO;Ipm*:‘Of permit fees
:Higher : voitiene.,'bf...Flartf Sties; 8i, Project's,. rrtland
531,629j1.1je'ee..
42954 Petticoat Pool benefits frorri hot summer
(52 206jOift'Sh4.""and'Erier.gy:-01"0.4.1.iiiidert arg.et„
.434,.400 1.:4222:16' 84)Albion' & Clare-Mont; beIOW-target.
;,408',000; 438505
Usage rninimized cue-ta':8ther available revenue
196 700 151 094 (46:,666)e.ourc es..
000:,000. 355;;731 '. (444 209)Fu?dtng targt not achieved : •
700'. 523,928: 288 228 `..O.t.PreVeniie,:.act
. -
1)60420 1 i,170763 (433437)CTPunder&throughCFGT
1 527 900 1 684 616 „ .
156,716 More activity in Source Protection:Planning.
10600,. 754: 36 58 .;2 3) .07 110 r d'e? 8i_th`r h F GT.
465 40O • 534;576 63:,476:CoirmOriitt,ransfo.rrnatitin. planning .items:
‘1366,400, 809;:49$- ‘(550307)C1-0'..4n86r:8,,throtihc,E;GT;
,04t,60to) (1030:491) 11,109
„21073,9011 19,8911,202 (1i1,75,698)
'111,381;800, 10;681,788, 299,9811 ,
845-800 845753 „(47)
-9.536,000 „ 9.,535.;645 5)
300090. 300390
• Reforrnattedicitorife'rm: te.2005reseritatilen.
Ttiroptcr*id-.Re.giirri,COriSkryaIiOriAuthbrit.j
Sisiiini‘66,63itailtaINari,666‘eiiatOeceifibet.`31;2005
',CAPITAL
MONITORING AND:REPPRIING
WATERSI-IED PLANNING-
PeeMater:Mariagernent.
York Water Man'agenierit.
Durham WaterManagernent•
Water.Coat 'Centre's
Costs covered by Water. management PrOgrarns
FloodPlain Mapping
Yerk/Peel/DurhenilTorento Groundwater
Terrestrial. Natural Heritage
REGENERATION
Torento.RernedialAction .plan, project
(RAPIaCtivhy alaO uriderother PirijeCts)
Peet Natural Heritage Project
York Natural;HeritagePrOje.ct:
Durham Natural Heritage.Project
Valley and ShOrallne. Regeneration Projects
Other Eresion.Cbntrot ProjectS,
City of TerontoVaterfrent Freject:._,
Region df Durliarn Wateilront-R.roject
Waterfront ReVitilizatiOnsCorPoration.Projects
I-IUmber BaYSho're4Weterfro.nt „Perk
_akefiltr,Quality,1Program..
SIATAINABLE'COMMUNITI08:
,Si arcle hi
200q
BUDGET
Actuals
Aau6ls
. _
•at.rdnda
,
Noie§.
18451c3Q. 9.1-221" 1)iitiudgeted:STietial•Prejects'
1336:1-00 . 599241
0.3&;205.
,
48470a ;101-,308:
. .. ...
2330,800= . 1,534,06.
(2185,500) CI „362.,017)
676.;600, 430,130:
:631.900: 443 ,38,6":
7281'.,200. 334389.
;2461 90E
'(510„300):
. „
001„800
5500
124;300
•Z685000:
000,
":267 ;TOO
20429000
'707;400
0000
15.9AQ0:
7t1302-;.457._
451,65.T.
:77iB4
1.,Ne.:ASa
109098-
18-4)267.
ttAez
(7:659) Hqr--6110Wetersheci Plan-delayad
(245 395) ,IDO:*aerShed.Plan".'delayed
(323394. '..lbOcf;:,Cifintrill' Works deferred
"(796:132) 1DertAd-li.irriber Watershed Plan delayed
823423:
(248,470) Progreas-,s144eren:some watersheds
:::(188,51,4) $.erne.Von.Sulting;werk carnet. into'2006.
,,.53,189‘ /14606,ni Ofwork exceeds 05-kinding.
SoMe Water Management-delayed:
1138 ;190
(220 429 ..aorrieliuMber'naturalizatiory Profs.
. • ,41•0yd. 1 . •
t33 843) Some Rouge & Don sites delayed
,Mi.g:earried forward ;t� 2006.:
-delayed
.(39,634; ',Hilropel,SIEley :shores delayed:
3.42111 ;Uriti4dgated 815ecial Projects
-(:834:(2.02)2, .thaei:bilugetad:
5 PCirt'Unibei;ti TOrnny' Thompson SloWer.
(553;133) EiPrepriationeettleMent:Still in progress:
. .
130613 .(2.4,140),'
Toronto and, Region.ConseNatienAuthwity, •Page 4
Surnmary' Caiiital,VarianCes 41)ecembet,31,-4005:
-CAPITAL
FLOOD PROTECTION
_ower Don Env., Assessment
Other Flood Control Projects
INFRASTRUCTURE
Public Use Infrastructure
Other Facilitres,Retrofits'
Drinking.Water System.Upgrades
_ivrg -City; Centre Design and Build
Nursery Relocation Project
•
Oak Ridges Moraine Corridor, Park
BCPY Retrofit andAttractiorf DeVelopment.
nformationlichnology,' Project • •
Administrative Office
REMONALOPEN SPACE.,
V.VaterfrOnt OpaiiSpace
AcquiSition Oreenspace Strategy
Natural' Areas ;Protection
Expenditiffeidtaf'.
Funding:Sbur..ces:
Prograrn/User.fees
Reaarves,
CFG1:LiVing City
CFGT.:,,roWthrough,
Other
Other -ProVinOjel'
Other-. Federal
Other - bonatians/F.undraieing:
Othar ,Private _eae Revenue
And: Sale,Proceeds.
Transfersifeiweeri:Prcilecis
Rmienue:toial
Nei. Cxpendltures
ProVincii4,ranie r-,Paym nts
NAUniCip,I'Levr
2005 /005 DiL Variance
BLIDGET: Aeida Is Actimls Notes
;$
3 ,939.;000: • 1,046,965' (2892035)
r372:50ci
1,150;700:
:824,60o
,501:100:.
eoOott
1 AO cla
fa8ci;o00
5oCriood
444dOo
::80tu,O 00
External delays
47'036 98636 Oribudgate-d Eiruce's Mill pool.
;(6.194,33904449) CarnPgronf Improvements still in progresS.
562S9 ',(242031) Work .carries into 2006.'
. „.
68886 (1 431 114) Project being redrafted
212 ; tq, :(587;/98):. Project delayed to 2006:
458:;,..6:1:,
14,944 New :unbudgeted ;project.
1 „375;258 (24,842)
617 634. 1.676.34; Additional equipment acquisitions needed
,
'(225666)
27434. , Wiirk,deleYed” iiit62006.
546142 0:793858) „Ajewaocjuiiition:inibudgei:canceiled,
2 122,564 .@.2',135). Less acck than budget 286;91D :(243,090:
'Less acck than budgeL
52,948300 ••3371864 109,570,436):
100a
'70a.;bb0
•■7
447j:;tcf,
9f OD
'134&;CI
77s;000:
;221;,400'
(61fj; 380)
35205500
9646 Laketilprogram winding,Cown.
"."
103 756 (5E 245) Nursery ; relocation .diferred,
40,200 • .40,200
4504: 356,674 F:undingfortandacquiaition.
1';',673;72t• g85Ef5130).- ,Aax :acquisition:fmbudgei; cancelled:,
561,203 .( 1,836,997): ,,kax,acduiiitibnin;budget-'.cancalled.,
355 ;1■35. • 42 715) ,City .6entre.delayed:'
873,699, -33,69,9,
1E4486.52e 031390,42). TWRO.,projectS-belowtudget.
E8,886
035 r323 (1060.7). .(Lower.avdialbie funding:
.0E11:004 138`,1e
.21;289 510 (139,15;9E12) '
47;242,800z :12,088;346 15;654,454.
17:942,800 12235658 (5707142)
•
1200008). 52,688:
Lower,ufilitation due Fr) delays
RES. #C23/06 -
Moved by:
Seconded by:
ACCOUNTS RECEIVABLE
March 30, 2006. Staff report on accounts receivable, as of March 30,
2006.
Andrew Schulz
Maja Prentice
IT IS RECOMMENDED THAT the Accounts Receivable status report, as of March 30, 2006
be received.
CARRIED
RATIONALE
The schedule below summarizes the status of receivables, including aging and classification.
The schedule excludes $13,298 in accumulated interest arrears on invoices outstanding for
more than 30 days.
ACCOUNTS RECEIVABLE AGING, BY CATEGORY -
Excluding Municipal Levy and TWRC Funding- As at March 30, 2006
189
CURRENT
31 TO
60 DAYS
61 TO 90
DAYS
- 90 PLUS
DAYS
TOTAL
%
SCHOOLS AND
SCHOOL
BOARDS
53,201
25,182
15,330
17,700
111,413
8.9%
GOVERNMENT
508,060
439,206
8,428
955,694
76.3%
DEVELOPMENT
SERVICES
10,505
7,150
36,100
53,755
4.3%
CORPORATE,
INDIVIDUAL AND
COMMUNITY
GROUPS
35,136
24,104
481
72,293
132,014
10.5%
TOTAL
606,902
495,642
15,811
134,521
1,252,876
100.0%
% OF TOTAL
48.4%
39.6%
1.3%
10.7%
100.0%
189
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
262
Interim 2005 property tax bill.
31,967.02
160
Final 2005 property tax bill
(16,674.01)
90
Credit for campground water use
Holy Blossom
Temple
2,470.00
151.57
136
School visit. Invoice lost.
NEDCO
1,186.80
54.21
90
Function at KCC.
OISE (U of T)
3,025.00
185.64
136
Group visit to L. St. George FC.
3,025.00
185.64
136
Payment is expected by April 15.
TDSB
5,350.00
244.38
105
Mtce. work at Etobicoke FC.
Totten Sims Hubicki
Archaeological work re: Nobleton
Associates
12,358.50
758.37
123
Sewer project.
York University
3,554.46
162.37
90
Function at BCPV.
Securit Records Mgt
1,054.26
48.15
90
Dispute re: GST on TRCA invoice.
City of Toronto
2,969.45
n \a
123
Archaeological assessment.
4,850.00
n \a
97
Goose egg oiling program costs.
Basciano Parkin Ltd.
2,000.00
693.72
616
Planning fees.
Brutto Consulting
7,500.00
2,305.04
543
Planning fees.
Ltd.
3,000.00
864.06
515
Planning fees.
Glen Pietrowski
10,000.00
3,269.48
580
Planning fees.
G, S, &J DeRuyter
4,500.00
276.13
136
Planning fees.
TOTALS
117,261.34
9,198.76
Note: Interest charged as per lease agreement
As directed by the board, the planning fees items with the exception of DeRuyter, have been
referred to Toronto and Region Conservation Authority's (TRCA) solicitors to be pursued
through litigation. The companies involved have received letters from TRCA's solicitors,
Gardiner Roberts LLP, demanding payment. Since the report to the board dated February
5,2006, payment has been received from Ron Witton ($7,000) and Rice Development Group
($10,000.) Brutto has settled a number of accounts totalling $3,900. Brutto has submitted
documents disputing the $7,500 item which staff is reviewing. Staff has agreed to make a final
attempt to assist Brutto in collecting the $3,000 item from his clients failing which the matter will
go to small claims court.
Pietrowski has been served with notice and has asked for additional time to resolve the issue
with his clients. Staff has given notice in writing to him granting until May 30, 2006, after which
Gardiner Roberts has been instructed to take the matter to court. Gardiner Roberts has
initiated litigation against Basciano.
DeRuyter is an active file which has gone through several revisions resulting in the delay in
processing. The applicant has been advised that the approval will not be released until the
fees are paid.
Wild Water Kingdom has provided a cheque dated April 14, 2006, covering the net amount
owing. Interest will be collected.
190
The Totten Sims Hubicki item will be paid by the Region of York.
All other outstanding amounts are 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 $
March 30, 2006
1,252,876
134,521
February 05, 2006
1,264,876
105,873
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: April 5, 2006
RES. #C24/06 -
Moved by:
Seconded by:
GOOD NEWS STORIES
Accomplishments of February and March, 2006. Receipt of Good News
Stories for the months of February and March, 2006, from all sections of
the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA).
Maja Prentice
Peter Milczyn
IT IS RECOMMENDED THAT the report on "Good News Stories" for February and March,
2006, be received.
CARRIED
191
BACKGROUND
Management Team, a committee made up of senior staff at TRCA, meets monthly to discuss
strategic initiatives and organizational development.
RATIONALE
Staff began a process of highlighting the key accomplishments of each of their sections from
the past month at each Management Team meeting. In keeping with TRCA's objective of
Business Excellence, these accomplishments will be brought to each Business Excellence
Advisory Board for the information of the members. The following are the accomplishments
cited at the February and March meetings, and a brief description of each.
• Pine Valley Drive Link - Minister of the Environment removed the road option through Boyd
Conservation Area for the Pine Valley Drive link.
• Atlantic Salmon - Duffins Creek and Humber River selected as priority watersheds for
reintroduction of Atlantic Salmon.
• Solar Dealer programs - Big success at Kortright Centre for Conservation -.
• Stewardship Forum - Approximately 120 people attended the Stewardship Forum at
Kortright. Stress management hike was the highlight for participants.
• Sustainable House - $100,000 committed to the project, and Canadian Gypsum making an
in -kind donation towards construction of the house. House designs have been received
and are going through the selection process.
• Jane Finch Neighbourhood Development - TRCA is actively involved in the Community
Capacity Action Plan for the Black Creek West Community with Black Creek Pioneer Village
staff membership on the Economic Independence and Stability working committee. The
goal of this component of the action plan is to encourage and support the development of
a wide range of cultural, economic and personal assets that lend themselves to enterprise
and wealth creation. The priority objectives of this Jane /Finch initiative are to increase
youth employment /training, engage corporate sector resources for community action and
promote local hiring with the City of Toronto.
• Regional Biodiversity - Six swans seen flying over Kortright in February, and trumpeter
swans seen nesting in March.
• Strategic Plan - Moving Toward The Living City launched at TRCA's largest annual meeting
ever, with approximately 400 people in attendance to celebrate the 50th Annual Meeting
and TRCA's past accomplishments.
• Solar Power - Standard Offer contracts and metering has changed to allow small renewable
energy projects to sell clean power to the grid or reduce your metering.
• Municipal Tool Kit - Funding for Phase one is now complete. Sponsors to date include
Environment Canada, Ameresco Canada, BC Hydro, City of Calgary, Enbridge Gas and the
Cement Association. The Association of Municipalities in Ontario (AMO) is supporting
distribution and communications to Ontario municipalities.
• International Conferences - TRCA staff are presenting at 2 conferences on natural channel
design and permeable pavement.
• Growth Plan - Conservation Authorities involved in identifying the natural heritage system
for the Greater Golden Horseshoe.
• Funding for Training - $400,000 grant awarded to TRCA and the Volunteer Network to train
international planners and geoscientists.
192
• Bandit Wine - Partnership established with Three Thieves winery. Fifty cents of each Titre of
Bandit wine purchased from March 27 to April 23, 2006 will be donated to the wetland
project at Kortright.
• Don Park - Well into the design process and the consultants are on board.
Groundbreaking has taken place on the West Don Lands project and John Baird
announced further commitment from the federal government to the waterfront.
• Research - TRCA participated in JD Power Group annual survey of GTA homebuyers.
TRCA component was to determine attitudes toward sustainability practices and how this
affected people's decisions on home choice and location. Consultant is analyzing the
results and report is due in May. TRCA also launched a social marketing study aimed at
single family homeowners and big box store owners to determine their level of awareness
of stormwater management practices and sustainability programs. Information will be used
to help develop strategies for accelerating implementation of these projects.
• The Living City Curriculum - We've completed a successful training program with internal
education staff groups. Toronto Catholic District School Board has expressed interest in
systems thinking so TRCA has offered to host a summer institute for their - teachers on it.
• Bushnell - Received new binoculars for Investigating The Living City Spaces program and
they will repair any we already have.
• EcoSchools Program - Continues to build and is exploring partnership opportunities with
the Pembina Institute and others. TRCA's 5 education facilities are one month away from
being certified as EcoSchools.
• EcoLife - Replacing the Kortright Bulletin, Ecolife... the pulse on your living city launched
March 1, 2006. It is distributed to 5,300 subscribers and has been very well received in the
new format.
• Citizenship Ceremony - 36 citizens became Canadian citizens at the citizenship ceremony
held at the Kortright Centre.
• Generic Regulation - Updated regulation to TRCA's current Fill, Construction and Alteration
to Waterways Regulation, Ontario Regulation 158, was approved by the Authority and sent
to the Minister of Natural Resources for signing. Discussions of mapping updates are still
underway.
• Earth Rangers - The building at Kortright received Leadership in Energy and Design (LEED)
Gold certification.
• PowerStream - PowerStream new headquarters ground breaking ceremony took place
Friday, March 31, 2006. Designed to achieve a LEED gold rating.
• Building Trades Union Headquarters (2008 Weston @ 401) - Staff of TRCA and Enermodal
Engineering presented green building design strategies to their directors for consideration
in their new building plans. Directors of Building Trades now want to strive for LEED
Platinum.
• Fish Tumor Report - Staff presented finding's at conference in Columbus, Ohio. Incidents
and frequency of tumors were down in TRCA's jurisdiction over previous findings, and
lower than most other areas presented.
• Maple Syrup by Lantern Dinner - Almost $9,000 gross made in ticket sales for the sold out
event on March 25, 2006.
• GeoSmart Pilot Project - $580 000 approved for funding for a•web portal for online
mapping. Conservation Ontario to lead.
193
• Oak Ridges Moraine Foundation - $80,000 in funding approved by the Oak Ridges Moraine
Foundation for Eaton Hall Wetland and Forest Enhancement project at Seneca College.
Report prepared by: Kathy Stranks, extension 5264
For Information contact: Kathy Stranks, extension 5264
Date: April 4, 2006
RES. #C25/06 - 2005 MEDIA SUMMARY
Summary of 2005 media coverage for Toronto and Region Conservation
Authority.
Moved by:
Seconded by:
Maja Prentice
Peter Milczyn
IT IS RECOMMENDED THAT the summary of media coverage in 2005 for Toronto and
Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) be received.
CARRIED
BACKGROUND
At Business Excellence Advisory Board Meeting #1/06, the members requested an overview of
media coverage for TRCA. A summary of the media coverage in community newspapers,
major dailies and electronic media (TV /radio) over the last 3 years is included below. We also
receive some coverage in consumer magazines and some trade publications.
MEDIA SUMMARY (2003 - 2005
Month
2003
2004
2005
January
51
27
23
February
31
32
32
March
58
69
62
April
30
68
72
May
41
58
71
.June
44
50
68
July
24
58
54
August
24
25
68
September
41
51
63
October
54
222
66
November
41
19
49
December
43
7
45
TOTAL
482
686
673
194
VARIANCES
1. The spike in media coverage in October 2004 was a result of 173 media items covering the
50th commemoration of Hurricane Hazel. Without the Hurricane Hazel coverage total media
hits for that month is 32. Similarly, in September 2004, 17 of the 51 hits were Hurricane
Hazel coverage and in November 2004, 7 of the 19 were Hurricane Hazel hits.
2. In 2005, TRCA held 55 less events than 2004 (197 in 2004 and 142 in 2005). This reduced
the media listing coverage of events in 2005.
3. Bowden's (TRCA's media clipping service) stopped tracking ethnic media coverage in 2005
which marginally reduced the coverage captured in 2005.
4. August 2005 increase in coverage was primarily due to the major flood event.
SUMMARY
Considering the above variances, we have seen a significant increase in our media coverage
year over year since 2003. We have also seen an increase in the quality of coverage (e.g.
number of stories / articles have increased over listings). Early analysis of 2006 media
coverage is showing a significant increase in media hits over 2005.
A complete list of coverage is available upon request. Staff will provide the Business
Excellence Advisory Board with a summary of media coverage semi - annually.
Report prepared by: Deanne Rodrigue, extension 5359
For Information contact: Deanne Rodrigue, extension 5359
Date: March 03, 2006
RES. #C26/06 -
Moved by:
Seconded by:
2005 ABSENTEEISM SUMMARY
Summary of the absenteeism rates for Toronto and Region Conservation
Authority (TRCA) staff for 2005.
Maja Prentice
Peter Milczyn
IT IS RECOMMENDED THAT the 2005 Absenteeism Summary dated April 4, 2006, be
received.
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 9 to 10 days a year.
TRCA's numbers have remained relatively constant over the past two years. The weighted
absenteeism averages for full time staff are:
2004 - 3.85 days
2005 - 4.16 days
TRCA had 84 employees of full -time complement with no sick related absences at all.
195
FINANCIAL DETAILS
There is direct productivity impact from the fact that TRCA employees are on the job 4.84 days
more per year than other employees.
Report prepared by: Catherine MacEwen, extension 5219
For Information contact: Catherine MacEwen, extension 5219
Date: April 4, 2006
RES. #C27/06 - 50th ANNIVERSARY CELEBRATION
To be discussed at the Meeting.
Moved by:
Seconded by:
Dick O'Brien
Bill O'Donnell
THAT the discussion on the 50th anniversary celebration be received.
TERMINATION
ON MOTION, the meeting terminated at 10:43 a.m., on Friday, April 21, 2006.
David Barrow
Chair
/ks
196
CARRIED
Brian Denney
Secretary- Treasurer
c.
THE TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY
MEETING OF THE BUSINESS EXCELLENCE ADVISORY BOARD #3/06
June 16, 2006
The Business Excellence Advisory Board Meeting #3/06, was held in the South Theatre,
Black Creek Pioneer Village, on Friday, June 16, 2006. The Chair David Barrow, called
the meeting to order at 9:05 a.m..
PRESENT
David Barrow Chair
Bill Fisch Member
Rob Ford Member
Bill O'Donnell Member
Dick O'Brien Chair, Authority
Maja Prentice Member
Andrew Schulz Member
ABSENT
Paul Ainslie Member
Peter Milczyn Member
RES. #C28/06 - MINUTES
Moved by:
Seconded by:
Bill O'Donnell
Andrew Schulz
THAT the Minutes of Meeting #2/06, held on April 21, be approved.
CARRIED
PRESENTATIONS
(a) A presentation by Deanna Cheriton, Project Manager, Land Management, TRCA, in
regards to item 7.1 - Heart Lake Conservation Area Master Plan.
(b) A presentation by Brian Denney, CAO, TRCA, in regards to the 2007 capital budget.
197
RES. #C29 /06 - PRESENTATIONS
Moved by:
Seconded by:
Dick O'Brien
Maja Prentice
THAT above -noted presentation (a) be heard and received.
RES. #C30 /06 - 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. #C31 /06 - HEART LAKE CONSERVATION AREA MASTER PLAN
Endorse the Heart Lake Conservation Area Master Plan.
Moved by:
Seconded by:
Dick O'Brien
Maja Prentice
CARRIED
CARRIED
THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT the Heart Lake Conservation
Area Master Plan, dated June 1, 2006, be approved;
AND FURTHER THAT funding for the implementation of the plan be included in the
Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) capital budget plan for Peel Region,
2007 -2011.
CARRIED
BACKGROUND
At Authority Meeting #8/03, held on October 31, 2003, the initiation of a master plan for the
Heart Lake Conservation Area (HLCA) was approved. Resolution #A229/03 was adopted as
follows:
THAT staff be authorized to develop a Heart Lake Conservation Area Master Plan;
THAT an Advisory Committee be established, which would include membeis of the
Etobicoke and Mimico Creek Coalition, interested community groups, business
representatives, community residents, agency staff, municipal staff and area councillors
to assist with the development of the Master Plan and to facilitate the opportunity for
public input;
AND FURTHER THAT the final Master Plan be brought to the Authority for approval.
198
The Heart Lake Conservation Area Master Plan was developed to protect, conserve and restore
the valuable ecological features and functions of the site, while guiding the current and
potential future public uses of the area. The master planning process occurred in several
phases which consisted, among other actions, of compiling background materials and
research, holding public information and consultation sessions, holding advisory committee
meetings, developing a vision, goal and objectives, developing management
recommendations, and developing trail and public use plans. The master plan itself includes a
description and evaluation of the property based on relevant plans and policies, existing
resource inventories and environmental conditions, site limitations and opportunities.
Additionally, the plan identifies specific management zones for the site, which delineate and
guide the types and levels of appropriate activities. The plan also makes recommendations for
future initiatives, including the protection of natural features and habitat regeneration based on
an ecosystem approach to planning and management. Finally, detailed plans for trails and
public use were completed.
At the beginning of the master plan process, TRCA established an advisory committee
consisting of representatives from the community and stakeholder groups. Members from the
following groups participated:
• Region of Peel;
• City of Brampton;
• Town of Caledon;
• Etobicoke- Mimico Watersheds Coalition;
• Ministry of Natural Resources;
• Brampton Environmental Community Advisory Panel;
• Peel District School Board;
• York University;
• Scouts Canada;
• Friends of Heart Lake;
• Caledon Cycling Club;
• Local residents; and
• TRCA staff.
The advisory committee assisted TRCA staff to finalize the project terms of reference; establish
the vision, goals and objectives; determine management zones and management
recommendations; and develop the trail and public use plans. The committee also provided
technical input and assisted with the public consultation program regarding the master plan.
The public consultation program included:
• four public meetings to present the background information, plan vision, proposed
management zones, concept plans, trail plan, public use plan and management
recommendations;
• information sessions, newsletters, questionnaires and mailings to the community to
describe the project and invite public input; and
• meetings with interested organizations and groups in the community.
199
Plan Vision, Goals, Objectives and Management Principles
The vision statement, goals, objectives and management principles were developed by the
advisory committee to be consistent with Greening Our Watersheds: Revitalization Strategies for
Etobicoke and Mimico Creeks (2002).
The vision for the HLCA Master Plan reflects the essence of conservation planning values and
sets a definite direction for the future management of HLCA. The vision of HLCA is as follows:
The Heart Lake Conservation Area is regarded as a significant conservation park that
forms a key environmental, cultural and social component of an established urban
community in The Living City. The park, which will be used for nature -based recreation
and as a living classroom, will be managed with a stewardship approach that allows
natural communities to prosper.
Plan Description
The HLCA Master Plan was based on the management zoning approach that TRCA has used
since 1997, starting with the Claireville Conservation Area Management Plan. The master plan
was developed using an ecosystem approach which identified and ranked the natural and
cultural heritage resources for the entire property. All of the resource information was
integrated to define the management zones and determine their boundaries and potential for
public use.
The seven management zones defined for HLCA include Nature Reserve, Natural Environment,
Primary Restoration, Secondary Restoration, Operations, Public Use, and Public Use - Lease.
Approximately 78 per cent (132 hectares) of the property has been designated as Nature
Reserve, Natural Environment, Primary Restoration and Secondary Restoration Zones.
Permitted resource uses in these zones will range from no formal active use to low intensity
trail and nature appreciation uses. The final routing of all trails will be field checked to ensure
environmental suitability. The designated Public Use zones were established to provide safe
public access, parking where appropriate, staging areas and trail head information as well as
picnic areas. The Public Use - Lease zones encompass areas with residences that TRCA
leases and will not be accessible to the general public.
Through research, analysis and consultation, detailed management recommendations, a
public use and recreation plan, and a trail plan were developed. These are included in the
master plan.
Key features of the public use and recreation plan include:
• public use will be concentrated in the southern portion of the park;
• a new water play facility, including a pavillion and splash pad, will replace swimming in
Heart Lake;
• a new administrative and operations building that will incorporate all- season office space
for Camp Ogada will be built;
• a skills development area, including a ropes course, will be constructed;
• the boathouse will be improved and relocated to the main beach area;
• the gatehouse and front gates will be moved further into the park along the entrance road;
and
• Camp Ogada will be relocated into the public use area of the park.
200
Key features of the trail plan include:
• the Peel Trail will be the main north /south trail connection that will Zink the Brampton and
Caledon trail systems;
• the Rayner Trail will be a universal access trail;
• the Heart Lake Trail circles the TRCA portion of Heart Lake;
• excess trails will be closed;
• directional and interpretive signage will be posted; and
• two primary trail heads will be installed.
At the final meeting of the HLCA Master Plan Advisory Committee, held on June 8, 2006, the
committee recommended that the master plan be sent to TRCA for approval. Copies of the
master plan and maps of the management zones and public use plan are enclosed with the
agenda.
RATIONALE
A master plan for HLCA was needed for the following reasons:
• The Twenty -Year Management Plan for the Heart Lake Conservation Area, 1981 -2001 has
not been updated;
• with the projected population growth in the City of Brampton and the Region of Peel, HLCA
will likely become an even more popular environmental, outdoor recreation and tourism
centre, requiring a plan that can address future public use demands and enhanced
environmental protection; and
• to be able to respond to the changes in the availability of public funds and evolving
concepts in conservation and sustainability, and
• to move TRCA towards its goal for The Living City - a vision for healthy communities based
on a healthy ecosystem.
TRCA staff have led the development of the master plan with the advisory committee providing
input and direction into the vision, goals, objectives, management principles, management
zones, management recommendations, public use and recreation plan and trail plan. The
advisory committee fully supports the master plan, and in particular the recommendation for
the creation of a community stewardship committee to be involved in the implementation of the
plan.
The proposed master plan recommendations have been integrated within Greening Our
Watersheds: Revitalization Strategies for Etobicoke and Mimico Creeks and are consistent with
TRCA's Valley and Stream Corridor Management Program, the Strategy for Public Use of
Conservation Authority Lands, the Terrestrial Natural Heritage System Strategy, as well as The
Living City vision.
Individuals who have responded at the public meetings, through letters and questionnaires,
also support the proposed master plan in order to protect the significant greenspace and only
allow appropriate active. use of the property. Any alterations to the plan must be subject to a
public process.
201
The proposed seven management zones outlined in the master plan are intended to preserve,
protect and enhance the natural, cultural and heritage resources of the area, while directing the
kinds of compatible and appropriate uses that may occur within them. The master plan also
recommends the establishment of a community stewardship committee to undertake
implementation actions with TRCA support.
The HLCA Master Plan will guide HLCA for the next 25 years, with regular reviews and updates
every five to seven years. Through diligent implementation of this plan, HLCA will be further
enhanced as a valuable environmental, recreational and educational resource for residents of
the Toronto region.
DETAILS OF WORK TO BE DONE
• TRCA staff to publish the master plan by the end of Summer 2006. TRCA will send copies
of the master plan, along with a thank you letter, to members of the advisory committee.
• TRCA will establish a stewardship committee to assist with the implementation of the
master plan, future planning and specific actions to achieve the objectives of the plan,
including the trail plan.
• TRCA and the stewardship committee will utilize the master plan to assist with private land
stewardship, and to respond to land use planning documents.
• TRCA will investigate opportunities for property acquisition as outlined in the plan.
• TRCA will send copies of the master plan to the Region of Peel, City of Brampton and Town
of Caledon for endorsement and request the document be used in the land use planning
and other watershed management decisions.
FINANCIAL DETAILS
Master plan implementation details will begin to be developed in 2006 and capital budgets will
be prepared and submitted for some initial works starting in 2007.
Report prepared by: Deanna Cheriton, extension 5204
For Information contact: Deanna Cheriton, extension 5204
Mike Bender, extension 5287, or Chandra Sharma, extension 5237
Date: May 30, 2006
RES. #C32/06 -
Moved by:
Seconded by:
PALGRAVE FOREST AND WILDLIFE AREA TRAIL PLAN
Commencing the Palgrave Forest and Wildlife Area Trail Plan process.
Rob Ford
Maja Prentice
202
THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT the Palgrave Forest and Wildlife
Area Trail Plan Advisory Committee, which would include members of the Humber
Watershed Alliance, interested community groups, community residents, agency staff,
municipal staff and area councillors, be established to assist with the development of the
Palgrave Forest and Wildlife Area Trail Plan and to facilitate the opportunity for public
input;
AND FURTHER THAT staff report to the board on the completed trail plan at the earliest
opportunity.
CARRIED
BACKGROUND
Palgrave Forest and Wildlife Area is the 306 hectare Toronto and Region Conservation
Authority (TRCA) property located south of Finnerty Sideroad, north of Patterson Sideroad,
west of Highway 50 and east of Humber Station Road in the Town of Caledon. Palgrave Forest
and Wildlife Area is in the Main - Upper Branch subwatershed of the Humber River. Palgrave
Forest and Wildlife Area supports a diversity of primarily forest vegetation communities, and
flora and fauna species of regional concern. These are associated with the high - quality forests
and forested wetlands found at the site.
Palgrave Forest and Wildlife Area is a passive -use non -gated resource management tract
designed for year round, public use. There is no charge for using this area which includes a
mix of open space, multiuse trails and passive recreational uses. There is an active forest
management program at Palgrave Forest and Wildlife Area. These factors and its location on
the Oak Ridges Moraine and beyond urban development contribute to its good terrestrial
natural heritage scores.
The land occupied by Palgrave Forest and Wildlife Area is subject to several provincial plans
and policies, including the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan and the Greenbelt Plan.
Palgrave Forest and Wildlife Area also includes small areas designated as an Environmentally
Significant Area (provincial designation) and a Regionally Significant Area (Region of Peel
designation). In addition, the entire Palgrave Forest and Wildlife Area property is an Area of
Natural or Scientific Interest.
At Humber Watershed Alliance Meeting #2/06, the following resolution was approved:
THAT Richard Whitehead be appointed to the Palgrave Conservation Area Trail Plan
Advisory Committee representing the Humber Watershed Alliance;
THAT the Save The Oak Ridges Moraine (STORM) community organization be invited to
participate on the Palgrave Conservation Area Trail Plan Advisory Committee;
AND FURTHER THAT an additional bullet point be included indicating that the trail plan
will help to meet the objectives of the Oak Ridges Moraine protection area.
Richard Whitehead was appointed as the representative for the Humber Watershed Alliance on
the Palgrave Forest and Wildlife Area Trail Plan Advisory Committee.
203
RATIONALE
It is an appropriate time to complete a trail plan for Palgrave Forest and Wildlife Area because
of the growing community pressure for both pedestrian and cycling trails. In addition, this
location will act as a hub for many inter - regional trails, such as the Oak Ridges Trail and the
Bruce Trail. In addition, with the projected population growth in the Town of Caledon and the
Region of Peel, Palgrave Forest and Wildlife Area will become an even more popular
environmental and recreational centre, requiring a trail plan that can address future public use
demands and enhanced environmental protection. Furthermore, it is necessary to prepare a
comprehensive and integrated trail plan for the property that can respond to the changes in the
availability of public funds, evolving concepts in conservation, sustainability and advances in
ecosystem -based management.
The trail plan will complement a number of TRCA initiatives, including:
• TRCA's Vision - The Living City;
• TRCA's draft Terrestrial Natural Heritage System Strategy; and
• Implementation of Legacy: A Strategy for a Healthy Humber (1997).
A trail plan will help to:
• address property management and public safety issues;
• respond to future demands and growth in the region;
• integrate and implement Humber watershed management strategy objectives;
• support the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan;
• establish appropriate environmental protection and regeneration techniques;
• receive public input regarding appropriate use, development and management of trails;
• create a sense of stewardship among users and adjacent land owners.
The goal of the Palgrave Forest and Wildlife Area Trail Plan is to develop and manage a
network of trails at Palgrave Forest and Wildlife Area within an ecosystem framework and, in
consultation with the community, ensure watershed health, public enjoyment and
environmental sustainability.
For the trail plan process, staff will incorporate the TRCA model for developing management
plans that have been successfully implemented at Claireville, Boyd North and Glassco Park,
Cold Creek, and Heart Lake Conservation Area.
Staff is recommending the establishment of an advisory committee to provide an integrated
approach to the development of the trail plan. The committee will provide direction on, and
assist with the development of the trail routes, uses and management recommendations.
TRCA will select and invite agency and community representatives to be members of the
advisory committee for the duration of the project. Suggested advisory committee
representatives could include:
• TRCA staff;
• Bruce Trail Association;
• Caledon Countryside Alliance;
• Caledon Cycling Curb;
• Humber Valley Heritage Trail Association;
• Humber Watershed Alliance;
204
• Oak Ridges Moraine Land Trust;
• Oak Ridges Trail Association;
• Region of Peel - staff and councillor;
• Save the Oak Ridges Moraine;
• Chico Racing;
• Ontario Mountain Bike Association;
• Town of Caledon - staff and councillor; and
• Community residents.
DETAILS OF WORK TO BE DONE
• Establish an advisory committee.
• Develop alternative concepts for a trail plan.
• Prepare a final trail plan.
It is anticipated that the trail plan will be completed by October 2006 and implementation
commencing as early as November 2006.
FINANCIAL DETAILS
Provision for the development of the Palgrave Forest and Wildlife Area Trail Plan has been
included in TRCA's 2006 Peel Capital budget.
Report prepared by: Deanna Cheriton, extension 5204
For Information contact: Deanna Cheriton, extension 5204
Mike Bender, extension 5287
Date: May 22, 2006
RES. #C33/06 -
Moved by:
Seconded by:
CITY OF PICKERING
Master Management Agreement, CFN 24310. Entering into a
consolidated management agreement with the City of Pickering for park
and recreational uses of Toronto and Region Conservation Authority
lands in the City of Pickering, including the naming of certain lands for
public park purposes.
Rob Ford
Maja Prentice
THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT WHEREAS the City of Pickering
manages a number of parcels of Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA)
lands for park and recreation purposes under the terms of a number of existing
agreements;
WHEREAS the City of Pickering is desirous of consolidating these agreements into one
master management agreement and adding lands to this agreement;
205
AND WHEREAS the City of Pickering has enacted a by -law naming certain lands for
public park purposes;
THEREFORE LET IT BE RESOLVED THAT the existing management agreements with the
City of Pickering be consolidated into one master agreement with certain TRCA lands at
the mouth of the Rouge River, immediately west of the mouth of Duffins Creek, west of
Liverpool Road and on the west side Frenchman's Bay being added to the agreement;
THAT from time to time by mutual agreement, additional TRCA lands may be added to the
agreement;
THAT TRCA lands located south of Sunrise Avenue, east of West Shore Boulevard on the
west side of Frenchman's Bay be named "Rotary Frenchman's Bay West Park" as per City
of Pickering By -law No. 5859/01;
THAT TRCA lands located between the Lake Ontario shoreline and Park Crescent just
east of Petticoat Creek Conservation Area be named "Fairport Community Park" as per
City of Pickering By -law No. 5859/01;
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.
CARRIED
BACKGROUND
Over the years, TRCA has entered into various agreements with the City of Pickering for the
management of TRCA lands for park and recreational uses by the City of Pickering. Presently
Pickering manages TRCA lands at the entrance to Petticoat Creek Conservation Area (CA), a
trail connection through Petticoat Creek CA, lands in the Fairport Beach area and lands north
of the Frenchman's Bay Yacht Club property.
City of Pickering Council has enacted By -law No. 5800/01 authorizing the execution of the
management agreement with TRCA.
Specifically, the City of Pickering has requested that TRCA lands at the mouth of the Rouge
River, west of the mouth of Duffins Creek, west of Liverpool Road and on the west side on
Frenchman's Bay be added to the agreement. TRCA lands at the mouth of the Rouge River
and the mouth of the Duffins Creek are presently being used for waterfront trail connections.
TRCA lands on the west side of Liverpool Road have been incorporated into Pickering's
Millennium Project. The City of Pickering would also like to formalize these uses by adding the
lands to the agreement.
206
TRCA lands on the west side of Frenchman's Bay are presently managed by TRCA for passive
open space uses. As these lands also form part of the Mille_ nnium Project, the City of Pickering
is requesting that these lands be added to the agreement. The Rotary Club of Pickering, in
consultation with community groups in the vicinity of the park have made a request to the City
of Pickering Council that these lands be named to recognize the club's contribution and future
stewardship of this property. City of Pickering Council has enacted By -law No. 5859/01
approving naming these lands as "Rotary Frenchman's Bay West Park ". The same by -law also
named certain TRCA lands at the end of Park Crescent as "Fairport Community Park" in
recognition of their previous owners the Fairport Beach Community Association.
RATIONALE
The criteria for naming of TRCA assets are as follows:
• The name of a major individual or corporate /public sector organization, possibly a donor.
• The name of an individual prominent in the environmental or conservation community.
• A relevant historical name associated with the geographic area or community.
• The name of a strategic initiative, a citizen's group or other partnership of TRCA.
• Other names that may have significance for a specific site and area.
Naming of TRCA assets requires approval of the Authority. TRCA staff have reviewed the
request and the City of Pickering's By -law No. 5859/01 and believe it is in the best interests of
TRCA in granting the requests. Therefore, staff recommend that the name of the lands south of
Sunrise Avenue, east of West Shore Boulevard and west of Frenchman's Bay be "Rotary
Frenchman's Bay West Park" and the lands at the end of Park Crescent be "Fairport
Community Park ".
Staff also support the consolidation of our existing management agreements with the City of
Pickering into one master agreement and adding certain additional lands at this time with the
concurrence of City of Pickering senior staff.
FINANCIAL DETAILS
The City of Pickering will be responsible for all costs including taxes associated with the
management and operations of the lands presently under agreement and the lands to be
added to the agreement. TRCA retains the right to approve any park development proposed
by the city.
Report prepared by: Mike Fenning, extension 5223
For Information contact: Mike Fenning, extension 5223 or Larry Field, extension 5243
Date: June 02, 2006
Attachments: 1
mouth of Du fins :rock
proposed Rotary Beach
1htdterfront Park
Lake
Or tarn°
mouth of Rouge RIvef
t t tit OF PIeFC '
aster Manae�irient Agre n
F 24310
CITY CF, PIKER I NG MANAGEMENT AGREEMENT LANDS
awxara,ortctc-,
onservc tion sa ;s7 a v +; }Met,
Faa 7`h , t�s- nk (fty
Legend
i RZA Prof
TRCA kropert? Proposed To Be InU4ed'In NI2nagennort Agreement'.
TRC,, P >•cpert,r Under t',UN gement Agreement L1.01 Flckerlrg
1uewgoend
RES. #C34/06 -
Moved by:
Seconded by:
2006 FEE SCHEDULE
Revision. Revised 2006 fee schedule as a result of the reduction in the
Goods and Services Tax (GST) rate on July 1, 2006.
Rob Ford
Maja Prentice
THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT the 2006 Toronto and Region
Conservation Authority (TRCA) fee schedule be revised to incorporate the July 1, 2006
Goods and Services Tax (GST) rate reduction without reducing the existing tax - included
pricing.
CARRIED
BACKGROUND
As announced in the recent federal budget, the government will reduce the GST rate in Ontario
from 7% to 6% on July 1, 2006. A decision is required as to whether to maintain prices in those
instances where TRCA uses tax included pricing, generally for program and admission fees in
the public use facilities.
RATIONALE
The 2006 TRCA operating budget provides an amount of $17,258,000 in operating revenues.
Of this amount approximately $11 million is subject to GST. Tax included sales amount to
approximately $6.4 million, with the balance, $4.6 million, accounting for sales on a "taxes
extra" basis. Where existing practice is to add taxes to the advertised price, the GST rate will
be lowered to 6% and the savings will be passed on to TRCA clients. However, where the
practice has been to offer tax- included prices, it is recommended that the final price to the
customer not be lowered to reflect the reduced GST rate. In many instances, prices have been
chosen to minimize the amount of change that must be handled at gate houses and other
points of entry. For example, the current admission price to a conservation area is $5.00, taxes
included. The required price reduction to flow the GST savings to the customer is $0.05,
bringing the admission fee to $4.95. The additional handling of coin and resultant increase in
wait times for patrons cannot be justified by a marginal reduction in fees.
In 2006, it is projected that approximately $35,000 in additional revenue will be realized as a
result of not reducing tax included pricing to account for the GST rate reduction.
Report prepared by: Rocco Sgambelluri, extension 5232
For Information contact: Rocco Sgambelluri, extension 5232
Derek Edwards, extension 5672
Date: May 24, 2006
209
RES. #C35/06 -
Moved by:
Seconded by:
USE OF FLEET AND PERSONAL VEHICLES DURING A FLOOD
EMERGENCY
Access to fleet vehicles by Flood Warning staff and identification through
personal vehicles as Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA)
staff during a flood emergency.
Rob Ford
Maja Prentice
THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT Res. #B82 /98 in regards to
Changes to Personnel Policies #9, Travel Expenses; #10, Use of Authority Vehicles;
#10a, Use of Personal Vehicle for Authority Business, approved at Executive Committee
Meeting #4/98, held on June 12, 1998, be amended by the addition of the following:
"When a flood emergency has been declared, designated flood duty and other
essential staff shall have priority in the allocation of TRCA fleet vehicles, and for
the duration of the flood emergency, shall be a/ /owed to use the vehicles for
transport to and from their personal residence if necessary.
That designated flood duty and other essential staff who use their personal
vehicles in the performance of their duties during a declared flood emergency,
shall be entitled to affix appropriate TRCA identification to their personal vehicle to
enable them to carry out their emergency flood duties."
CARRIED
BACKGROUND
Flood emergencies may occur very quickly, and Flood Duty Officers and essential staff need
the flexilbility to use all TRCA assets to effectively manage the situation. The Fleet Vehicles are
all marked to allow members of other EMS services and members of the public to recognize
them as official TRCA staff.
In the event that members of staff must use their own vehicles for monitoring and other flood
warning activities, those staff members would be able to temporarily apply TRCA decals to
their vehicles to identify them as emergency staff to assist them in moving around the TRCA's
jurisdiction. In addition, fleet and staff vehicles will be equipped with other safety equipment
including orange emergency lights, lifejackets and pylons.
FINANCIAL DETAILS
The financial impacts are limited and are primarily due to the costs and inconvenience of'
non - emergency staff losing access to fleet vehicles during emergencies.
Report prepared by: Catherine MacEwen, extension 5219
For Information contact: Catherine MacEwen, extension 5219
Date: May 31, 2006
210
RES. #C36/06 -
Moved by:
Seconded by:
COMPUTER, COMPUTER NETWORK, ELECTRONIC DATA, EMAIL
AND INTERNET ACCESS POLICY
Approval of the computer, computer network, electronic data, e-mail and
internet access policy.
Dick O'Brien
Andrew Schulz
THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT the Computer, Computer
Network, Electronic Data, E -mail and Internet Access Policy dated March 31, 2005, be
approved.
CARRIED
RATIONALE
Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) requires an update to the policies which
guide and control the use of communications, computing and internet related technologies.
The updated policy will protect the organization and its staff, meet the demands of changing
threats and reduce corporate liability.
TRCA has over 300 computer users most of whom are connected though a Wide Area Network
(WAN) in 6 separate office locations. The WAN supports staff, by providing computer file
access and sharing, email and scheduling, internet access and software applications. These
systems are critical to the ongoing efficient operations of TRCA and its staff.
The use of these technologies has greatly increased the efficiency and sustainability of TRCA
operations, by improving communications, data sharing and reducing inter -office travel.
However, these technologies also expose both the organization and individual staff to
significant risk. Risks include; data loss, data security exposure, computer viruses, unsecured
network access, malicious software, hardware failure, corporate and personal liability.
The Computer, Computer Networks, Electronic Data, Email and Internet Access Policy, a copy
of which is attached, provides staff with the approved uses of computer related technology and
gives guidance to staff in following proper procedures to better protect TRCA investments in
data, and reduce risk. This policy is similar in nature to policies approved by many Canadian
municipalities and government organizations. This policy will be reviewed regularly and
updated when changes to technology and the environment of risk require it.
Report prepared by: Chris Gerstenkorn, extension 5347
For Information contact: Chris Gerstenkorn, extension 5347
Date: March 31, 2006
Attachments: 1
211
Attachment 1
lORONTO AND REGION:-
onserva ton
for The Living City
Toronto and Region Conservation Authority
Including The Conservation Foundation of Greater Toronto
Computer, Computer Networks, Electronic Data, Email and Internet Access Policy
212
Permitted Use of TRCA Computers, Computer Networks, Electronic Data and Internet
Access
The computers, computer networks, telephones and any other electronic equipment are the
property of the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) and may only be used for
legitimate TRCA business purposes. Occasional personal use of telephone, email and the
internet may occur when such use does not generate a direct cost to TRCA or impede job
performance. Users are provided access to telephones, computers and computer networks to
assist them in the performance of their jobs. All TRCA Employees have a responsibility to use
TRCA's telephone system, computer resources and the internet in a professional, lawful and
ethical manner. Abuse of telephony, computers, the computer network or the internet, may
result in disciplinary action, including possible termination, and civil and /or criminal liability. All
references to telephones, telephony, cell phones, computers, computer networks, computer
resources or equipment in this policy also includes any peripheral devices such as printers,
plotters, scanners, reproduction technologies, facsimile (fax), Personal Digital Assistants (PDA'
s), text messaging devices, wireless email devices (Blackberry's) and digital cameras.
Computer and Network Use Limitations
Responsibilities of the Employee. TRCA Employees are responsible for properly storing all
important computer related data to prevent the loss of such data in the eventuality of a failure
of computer hardware or software. Those employees which use laptop computers and /or other
portable data storage devices such as PDA's, Blackberry's and USB keys must ensure their
safety by storing these devices in a safe location both inside and outside of the office
environment. When not in use at the office these items must be stored out of plain sight in a
desk drawer or locked area. When out of the office, they must be stored in a safe location in
your home, not a vehicle. Normal business related data and documents should be stored on
the TRCA network in the employee's allocated network space or other approved network
locations. TRCA has back -up systems for each portion of the TRCA network and also server
and /or drive redundancy to minimize any data losses in the event of a serious failure. Data
which is not actively used (archival) and /or is too large to be reasonably stored on TRCA
network servers, can be stored locally on the employees hard disk. However, it is the
responsibility of the employee to back -up such data to a secure and tested archive storage
media such as CD /R, CD /RW, DVD or other approved media. Such archive media should be
properly labelled and stored in a safe place. Please remember, all computer hard disks fail! It is
only a matter of when they fail. Keep your data safe.
Prohibited Uses. No TRCA Employee may install any software or computer program on any
computer or computer network without prior permission from TRCA's IT staff. All software,
freeware, patches or other forms of software applications must be reviewed by the information
technology group for technical approval before downloading to reduce the risk of conflicts with
other standard software products, operating systems and LAN products. Authorized
applications should be installed by qualified IT personnel. TRCA's computer network may not
be used to disseminate, view or store commercial or personal advertisements, solicitations,
promotions, destructive code (e.g., viruses, self - replicating programs, etc.), political material,
pornographic text or images, or any other unauthorised materials. Employees may not use
TRCA's internet connection to download software (including screen savers, icons etc.), or file
sharing programs used to download software and or data. Additionally, you may not use the
213
computer network to display, store or send (by e-mail or any other form of electronic
communication such as bulletin boards, chat rooms, Usenet groups, etc.) material that is
fraudulent, harassing, embarrassing, sexually explicit, profane, obscene, intimidating,
defamatory or otherwise inappropriate or unlawful.
Illegal or Unlicensed Software TRCA Employees may not install or use any illegal or
unlicensed software on TRCA computers or TRCA networks. The use of illegal or unlicensed
software has very serious consequences to TRCA. The TRCA can be forced to remove all
existing licensed and legal software should the software vendor deem that TRCA is illegally
utilizing their products. The "Officers" of TRCA can be held legally and financially responsible
for such violations of software copyright.
Intellectual Property and Data Copyright. TRCA Employees may not store, use, copy or
disseminate any data including: images, spatial data, statistics, tables, music, video, published
text or any other form of electronic data which is not specifically licensed to TRCA or the
employee. TRCA Employees are responsible for complying with copyright law and all
applicable intellectual property licenses.
Data Use, Display, Dissemination and Storage. TRCA frequently creates and acquires a
variety of data products for use in its business activities. For example, GIS /spatial data,
Statistics Canada Census data, meteorological data, images, aerial photography, etc. are
created internally, purchased or acquired through partnerships. Access to non -TRCA data is
granted to TRCA through formal agreements signed by the officers of TRCA. These
agreements and the data sets they cover, may have many limitations as to how the data can
and cannot be used.
Internally created data may also have severe limitations as to who may use , view or get access
to it. TRCA data may be sensitive in nature and expose the environment or cultural resources
to serious risk.
In order to ensure compliance with any and all of the agreements TRCA has entered into, as
well as protect sensitive TRCA data, it is the responsibility of all TRCA staff to understand the
limitations of the data which they are using. In general, no data or representations of data
(maps, images, tables, documents etc.) are to be released to non -TRCA staff unless authorized
by those responsible for acquiring and managing the data. For example, no spatial data or
spatial data products, images, maps or resultant statistics may be provided to anyone outside
the TRCA without approval from senior GIS staff.
In order to ensure data integrity and consistency, all data used by TRCA staff must be utilized
and accessed from the network location from where the original data access was provided
unless approved by IT staff or those staff responsible for managing the data to be used. This
means that no data will be moved or copied to local drives for use. Updates to data happen
frequently without notice. Use of local copies of data introduces the serious risk that the data
being used is out of date, incorrect or misrepresented. Accuracy of information influences
T -RCA's ability to make sound decisions, and may result in damage to our corporate reputation.
214
Duty not to expose TRCA Computer Resources to Security Risks or Damage
Security Passwords. A computer username and password is intended for the exclusive use of
the person to whom it is issued. Sharing of usernames and passwords amongst staff is not
allowed. All responsibilities for any actions will be borne by the person to whom a username is
initially issued.
Non -TRCA personnel or Guest use of computers and network resources. TRCA staff will
not allow any use of any TRCA computer property including network access by non -TRCA staff
without prior approval by IT staff. Access to the internet or the TRCA network from a computer
which is not owned by TRCA must be approved by IT staff and will only be granted following a
thorough scan for viruses or other malware using TRCA's standard anti -virus software. TRCA
staff to whom a computer or computer equipment has been issued will not allow any access or
use of such property by non -TRCA staff including family or friends for any reason.
Accessing the Internet. To ensure security and avoid the spread of viruses, employees
accessing the internet through a computer attached to TRCA's network must do so through an
approved internet firewall or other security device. Bypassing TRCA's computer network
security by accessing the internet directly by modem or other means is strictly prohibited
unless specifically approved by TRCA IT staff. Exemptions to this policy include employees
who access the internet from remote locations or for emergency functions such as Flood
Warning activities.
Use of Non -TRCA Email accounts, Internet Email or Online Chat Services Employees may
not install or use on any TRCA computer or network any email service other than Lotus Notes
(or any future corporate email software standard). This also includes any internet email or
online chat services such as, but not limited to; MSN, Hotmail, Yahoo Mail, POPS Mail etc..
These services route email, attachments and other data through the internet and not through a
protected firewall. The use of these services can have serious impacts on TRCA computer
resources and networks.
Internet Web Surfing. Web sites and links on web sites have the ability to "push" data,
tracking programs and a variety of viruses ( "Trojan Horses ") to an employee's computer
without the knowledge of the user. This is done, for both legitimate marketing analysis and
business activities or very malicious intent. Regardless of the intent, these types of "Trojan
Horse" Viruses or "Spyware" can dramatically affect a user's computer and the software on
their computer from functioning properly. "Spyware" also has the ability to "publish" or push
data from an infected computer to the internet. This can have a serious impact on TRCA IT
security, and corporate confidentiality. It is the individual employee who is responsible for any
infection by Trojan Horse viruses, or the download of "Spyware ". The download of data
including icons, screensavers, games etc. and the clicking of advertisements, web banners or
the visiting of any websites that results in the infection of any TRCA computer equipment is the
responsibility of the user and can result in disciplinary action. If a user is not familiar with a
website or link on a web site they should refrain from visiting it.
Frivolous Use. Computer resources are not unlimited. Network bandwidth and storage
capacity have finite limits, and all employees connected to the network have a responsibility to
conserve these resources. As such, the employee must not deliberately perform acts that
waste computer resources or unfairly monopolize resources to the exclusion of others. These
acts include, but are not limited to, sending mass mailings or chain letters, printing excessive
number of copies, spending excessive amounts of time on the internet, engaging in online chat
groups, uploading or downloading large files, accessing streaming audio and /or video files, or
otherwise creating unnecessary Toads on network traffic, storage and back -up. It is the
responsibility of TRCA employees to adhere to email account size quotas and act on email
account quota threshold notifications by deleting unnecessary emails in "inbox" and all other
folders, or through archiving email correspondence in an approved fashion.
Virus detection. Files obtained from sources outside the company, including disks brought
from home, files downloaded from the internet, newsgroups, bulletin boards, or other online
services; files attached to e-mail, and files provided by customers or vendors, may contain
dangerous computer viruses that may damage the company's computer network. Users
should never download files from the internet, accept e-mail attachments from outsiders, or use
disks from non -TRCA sources, without first scanning the material with TRCA- approved virus
scanning software. If you suspect that a virus has been introduced into TRCA 's network, notify
TRCA IT staff immediately.
E -mail Guidelines. Broadcast e-mails include those sent internally to "users" or
departmental /divisional groupings established in this policy and maintained by the IS /IT
section. Broadcast e-mails will only be sent if it is of great importance or interest to the widest
number of employees within a distribution group. E -mail addresses of people or groups
outside TRCA will not be added to the distribution network for internal e-mail broadcasts. The
use of broadcast e-mails is restricted to: Official TRCA business relevant to broad audiences of
TRCA employees. Messages from the CAO's Office and other senior TRCA officials, other
employee bulletins. Broadcast e-mails can be sent advising of the posting of important
attachments such as reports and memorandums on the corporate bulletin board. Notices
pertaining to HR or payroll issues. The following are examples of prohibited uses of the
broadcast e-mail service: advertisements of events, services and entrepreneurial activities other
than those sanctioned and supported by TRCA; expression of personal opinions; distribution of
materials such as repetitive mass mailings, commercial advertising and chain messages. The
following groups for broadcast e-mails exist: ,Users, Head Office, Boyd Office, Downsview
Office, remote locations, CAO's Office, Watershed Management, Finance and Business
Services, Ecology, Parks and Culture, Planning and Development, Restoration Services and
Foundation.
Supervisors must advise IS /IT staff when individuals leave /join their division to ensure lists are
up -to -date.
Internal E -mail Guidelines. Passwords for e-mail accounts should be kept confidential. Do not
make a note of your password and store it near your computer. Do not give ANYONE your
password. Use caution in replying to messages. Ensure that when replying to an individual
person or to a group that the message is sent to the intended recipient(s). Make sure that any
message that you respond to was directed to you. You may not be the primary recipient. If you
have been blind- copied DO NOT reply to all recipients. Be aware that electronic mail could be
read by individuals other than the intended recipient. Do not print e-mail messages that are
confidential and then neglect to retrieve the printed copy in a timely manner. To make it easier
for recipients to deal with your message, mail should have a subject heading that reflects the
content of the message, but does not betray confidential information. Check e -mail daily. Be
mindful of system requirements. E -mail and attachments use disk space and network
resources and should be managed efficiently by deleting transitory information. Exercise
special care when sending e-mail to distribution lists; they can have an adverse effect on
system performance. DO NOT send email attachments larger than 2MB to large groups of
recipients without IT /IS approval. Be clear and concise. Read messages before sending them
to be sure they will not be misunderstood. Read all messages carefully before responding. Use
good grammar and utilize the spell check tool. Use CAPITALIZATION sparingly. Capitalization
can be used for emphasis on few words; however, capitalizing long portions of text may be
interpreted as "shouting" and be considered rude. Any action item (task or appointment) that
requires action within 48 hours should be followed up with verbal communication. Don't
continue to include everyone in the message if it has become a two -way conversation. Perform
maintenance on your mailbox by reviewing and archiving or deleting messages on a regular
basis. Should you mailbox become full it will no longer accept anymore messages. Those
messages will be lost and that is YOUR responsibility.
External E -mail Guidelines. Use signature blocks at the bottom of e-mail messages.
Signature blocks should include your name, phone and fax numbers, title, e-mail and TRCA
corporate website address and postal address. E -mail messages are not secure. Confidential
and sensitive information should never be sent using the e-mail. When sending e-mail, use
caution and ensure that the e-mail address you are using is correct. Users should only
subscribe to e-mail lists which relate specifically to their job responsibilities. If you receive mail
from a List Server DO NOT use the "Reply to all (sender and recipient)" feature.
Corporate Bulletin Board. This is a corporate resource accessible by all "users ", for the
purpose of posting official and unofficial material for users to access at their leisure. Postings
can only be made by "users ". Posted material will be cleaned out regularly by the administrator
of the corporate bulletin board. If a specific expiration date is relevant, note this in the subject
line ie. Subject: Cottage for Rent - Post until 9/31/03. If the e-mail is no longer relevant, please
advise the administrator, ie. Adopt a Cat - Notify for it's removal if the cat was adopted, When
replying to a bulletin board e-mail, reply to the sender rather than posting responses on the
bulletin board. The following are examples of acceptable postings to the corporate bulletin
board: ads for personal items; important reports and memorandums; items believed to be of
interest to a large number of users but not pertinent to the work of TRCA. ie. safety /security
notices not relevant to work of TRCA employees. Users can advise of the posting of such
documents via broadcast e-mail to the appropriate broadcast group. The following are
examples of prohibited uses of the corporate bulletin board: jokes or other e-mails intended
strictly as humour; chain messages; items intended to defame anyone or anything.
e -mail Content Guidelines. Clear language: As with any other communication vehicle,
messages broadcast by e-mail should be presented in clear language. It is important to take
into account how the audience receiving a message might interpret (or misinterpret) it. Style:
Sending a broadcast e-mail is similar to issuing a business communication on TRCA
letterhead. Even though computer -based communications tend to invite a somewhat more
conversational style than a printed business letter, many important e-mail messages are
printed and read on paper (often posted on bulletin boards for employees who do not use
e -mail regularly at work). Style note: Avoid using capital letters ( "all caps ") for headings, and
avoid using more than a single space between sentences. Subject line: Always provide a
subject line that summarizes the message. Keep the tone serious, avoiding cute, witty or
dramatic phrasing. Only in an emergency should the subject line include a notice indicating
urgency or high priority. Length: In general, keep e-mail messages brief and paragraphs short.
No Expectation of Privacy
Employees are provided access to telephones, computers, the computer network, the internet
and Lotus Notes email accounts to assist them in the performance of their jobs. Employees
should have no expectation of privacy in anything they create, store, send or receive using
TRCA's computer resources, with the exception of confidential information as deemed by the
CAO and /or Human Resources.
Inspection and monitoring of computer contents and activities. TRCA has the right to
monitor and log any and all aspects of its telephony and computer system including, but not
limited to; monitoring internet sites visited by employees, monitoring chat and newsgroups,
monitoring file downloads, and all communications sent and received by users. TRCA reserves
the right to, at anytime and without prior notice, inspect a user's computer or dedicated
network space for any material, data or software which TRCA deems in contravention of this
policy. TRCA can remove any such material or software at anytime without notice. TRCA can
install or employ any type of monitoring or system management software on an employee's
computer without notifying them. The removal or tampering of such system management or
monitoring software by any employee will result in serious disciplinary action.
TRCA will not monitor the content of electronic communications as a routine matter. However,
TRCA will monitor: in the process of the course of an investigation triggered by apparent
misconduct; in a case of apparent abandonment; as needed to protect health and safety; as
needed to- prevent interference with the business and legal obligations of TRCA; as needed to
locate substantive information required for TRCA business that is not readily available by other
means; or to respond to legal processes and fulfill its obligations to third parties. Individuals
needing to access the electronic communication of others, to use information gained from such
access, and /or to disclose information from such access must obtain approval for such activity
in advance. Approval for granting access to electronic communications must be formally
obtained from any two of the following; the Senior Manger, HR and Communications, a
Director or the Chief Administrative Officer. Both approvers must formally advise the IT staff
documenting the approval and the specific actions required. Matters of a legal nature which
may result in criminal proceedings must involve the proper legal authorities as part of the
approval process.
Waiver of privacy rights. Employees expressly waive any rights of privacy in anything they
create, store, send or receive using TRCA's computer equipment, email accounts or internet
access. Employees consent to allow TRCA personnel access to and review of all materials
created, stored, sent or received by employees through any TRCA network, email account or
internet connection.
Blocking web sites and email with inappropriate content. TRCA has the right to utilize
software that makes it possible to identify and block access to internet sites containing material
deemed inappropriate in the workplace. TRCA also has the right to block any email or other
electronic communication, both inbound and outbound which contains content, links or
references deemed inappropriate in the workplace.
Acknowledgement of Understanding
I have read and agree to comply with the terms of this policy governing the use of TRCA's
telephony and computer resources. I understand that violation of this policy may result in
disciplinary action, including possible termination and civil and criminal penalties.
Signature Date
Printed name
219
SECTION IV - ITEMS FOR THE INFORMATION OF THE BOARD
RES. #C37/06 -
Moved by:
Seconded by:
CREATION OF RESEARCH CIRCLES
Increase the knowledge of staff on environmental and socioeconomic
issues that affect our community.
Dick O'Brien
Bill O'Donnell
IT IS RECOMMENDED THAT the staff report on the Creation of Research Circles be
received.
CARRIED
BACKGROUND
Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) looks for innovative ways to develop staffs
understanding of new technologies, new ideas and new ways of doing things. The creation of
research circles will both create that understanding and will allow TRCA's leaders of the future
to pass on their learning to other TRCA staff.
In addition, TRCA is often asked to participate in community engagement, education and other
public foras including hearings where research from other disciplines is presented. To assist
staff in understanding the larger environmental picture in the Toronto region from many
perspectives including social, political, economic and health, TRCA is commencing a research
programme to investigate these issues in the Toronto region.
RATIONALE
This research programme is also part of TRCA's strategy of building a "learning organization ",
where individuals and groups acquire knowledge on behalf of the organization and then are
tasked to share that information among the staff, volunteers and other stakeholders. Each
participant would be given 5 days over a designated period of time to dedicate to conducting
this research in a small cross functional team or circle. Although each circle will be given a
general area of research, the team will be expected to craft the detailed proposal and an
outline of roles and responsibilities, timelines and deliverables.
The research will be initially divided into four circles:
A. Water Quality and Quantity.
B. How much nature is enough?
C. Market research on economics, social /political and business issues in the environment.
D. Technologies and new sustainable applications including waste management.
The Objectives of the Research
1. Better define TRCA's position in policies, Ontario Municipal Board hearings,
negotiations and discussions with community stakeholders and elected officials with a
clear knowledge of stakeholders' views and attitudes.
2. tncrease the knowledge of staff and volunteers and other TRCA participants in the core
areas of water quality and quantity.
220
3. Increase our ability to affect change in the community with more effective social
marketing and community engagement based on a greater understanding of the social
fabric of The Living City and the interdependency of social, political, environmental and
economic elements of society.
4. Increase the organizational knowledge of scientific thinking and practical applications of
new techniques and technologies to address the challenges of protecting and ensuring
clean air, clean water and human health.
Methodology
Conduct an external secondary literature search of information /data that is currently available.
Areas may include residents and businesses attitudes about sustainability, the salience of
environmental issues relative to other social issues and the activities of others in improving the
environment.
Sources could include seminar materials, media scans, internet searches, libraries, research
houses like Environics and Statistics Canada, and information from our municipal partners.
The Outcomes
The research will be compiled in a consistent report and entered into the Electronic Records
Management System for access by all staff with a short abstract available in TRCA's electronic
Bulletin Board. In addition, staff will be asked to present their findings at team meetings and all
staff lunch and learns in a knowledge transfer effort.
FINANCIAL DETAILS
The costs are primarily in staff time and will have no impact on budget levels.
Report prepared by: Catherine MacEwen, extension 5219
For Information contact: Catherine MacEwen, extension 5219
May 26, 2006
RES. #C38/06 - GOOD NEWS STORIES
Highlights of Toronto and Region Conservation Authority's Work. Receipt
of Good News Stories for the months of April and May, 2006, from all
sections of the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA).
Moved by:
Seconded by:
Dick O'Brien
Bill O'Donnell
IT IS RECOMMENDED THAT the report on "Good News Stories" for April and May, 2006,
be received.
CARRIED
BACKGROUND
Management Team, a committee made up of senior staff at TRCA, meets monthly to discuss
strategic initiatives and organizational development.
221
RATIONALE
Staff began a process of highlighting the key accomplishments of each of their sections from
the past month at each Management Team meeting. In keeping with TRCA's objective of
Business Excellence, these accomplishments will be brought to each Business Excellence
Advisory Board for the information of the members. The following are the accomplishments
cited at the April and May meetings, and a brief description of each.
• Mouth of the Don - Terms of Reference finalized for environment assessment and submitted
to the Ministry of the Environment for 90 day agency and public approval process.
• Budget - The Living City agenda advanced by the unanimous approval of the largest
budget in TRCA history - $100 million.
• Greenroofs - $10,000 from Orlando Corporation to assist with an economic analysis of
greenroofs.
• Sustainable House Design Competition - Competition was a great success. Winner being
announced on June 21, 2006.
• Environmental Volunteer Network - Manulife Financial commits $125,000 to promote the
Environmental Volunteer Network to outside organizations.
• Western Beaches Watercourse Facility - Western Beaches Watercourse Facility, which
protects 600 meters of precious shoreline, was completed under budget and ahead of
schedule.
• CN's Kingston Subdivision Bridge Extension - Broke ground on the bridge widening
project.
• Restoration Services Centre - Broke ground. The building has been designed to meet
Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) Gold standard.
• Maple Syrup Festival - Attendance of 46,000 at the Maple Syrup Festival was the best ever
and major sponsors are eager to sign on again next year.
• Loblaws - Transferring a provincially significant wetland in the Town of Ajax into TRCA
ownership.
• Greening Health Care and Sustainable Schools - $100,000 committed from Enbridge and
$62,000 committed from Ontario Power Authority (OPA) to expand the Greening Health
Care which already involves 23 hospitals. OPA circulated a flyer in local newspapers on
the Sustainable Schools and Greening Health Care programs.
• Bandit Wine - Program with the LCBO was launched.
• Highland Creek Watershed News - In partnership with the Scarborough Arts Council, more
than 60 environmentally themed, hand - crafted papier -mashe masks, created by 200
students from 6 Scarborough Schools under the guidance of local sculpter, Pamela
Schuler, were unveiled at the Scarborough Civic Centre on April 18.
• Tommy Thompson Park Bird Research Station - As of April 28, 638 birds banded at Tommy
Thompson Park Bird Research Station including a palm warbler, a TTPBRS first.
• Greenlands Acquisition Project for 2006 -2010 - Supported by Peel Region Council.
• Walleye - Adult walleye in spawning condition were found in the lower Don River adding to
evidence that they are spawning here. - Gord MacPherson
• Mason Homes - Approval was given to Mason Homes for an infill single family house in
North York. Approval was based on sustainable design elements, including the opportunity
to be used as a case study for the pending LEED for Homes rating system which is
scheduled for launch late 2007.
222
• Green Technologies Seminar - 130 people attended the seminar organized by TRCA's
Sustainable Technologies Evaluation Program and held on May 3, 2006, at Seneca
College's King Campus.
• Canadian Journal for Civil Engineering - TRCA accepted to write a paper related to
monitoring of the construction sediment control ponds.
• Children's Water Festivals - Over 5,000 children attended the York festival. Over 8,000
children expected to attend the Peel festival, with additional people attending on the public
day. Mark Cullen to broadcast his CFRB garden show from the Peel festival on the public
day.
• Oak Ridges Moraine Stewardship Projects - 2 stewardship projects were launched 1) the
Caring for the Moraine program for rural non -farm landowners and 2) the moraine
Environmental Enhancement program, which tops up grants for the existing Environmental
Farm Plan program from 50% to 90% for implementing beneficial management practices on
ORM farmlands. TRCA's first web - enabled relational database was developed for
stewardship data to be collected.
• International Association for Great Lakes Research 2006 Conference in Windsor, Ontario -
Integrated Rouge Watershed Plan was presented.
• Social Marketing Study - CMHC committed $9,000 towards the study, which brings the total
budget to about $85,000. The study is aimed at identifying implementation strategies for
sustainable lot level water management practices.
• Generic Regulation - TRCA's "Development, Interference with Wetlands and Alterations to
Waterways Regulation ", Ontario Regulation 166/06, approved by the Minister of Natural
Resources, effective May 8, 2006.
• Energy Programs - One page article in National Post on TRCA energy programs.
• Heart Lake Management Plan - Completed and printed.
• Paddle the Don - Approximately 200 paddlers; $26,000 raised to date, the largest
fundraising effort; Banrock Station hosted an event for the corporate participants.
Report prepared by: Kathy Stranks, extension 5264
For Information contact: Kathy Stranks, extension 5264
Date: May 26, 2006
RES. #C39/06 - ACCOUNTS RECEIVABLE
May 26, 2006. Staff report on accounts receivable, as of May 26, 2006.
Moved by:
Seconded by:
Dick O'Brien
Bill O'Donnell
IT IS RECOMMENDED THAT the Accounts Receivable status report, as of May 26, 2006
be received.
CARRIED
223
RATIONALE
The schedule below summarizes the status of receivables, including aging and classification.
The schedule excludes $8,408 in accumulated interest arrears on invoices outstanding for
more than 30 days.
ACCOUNTS RECEIVABLE AGING, BY CATEGORY
(Excluding Municipal Levy and TWRC Funding- As at May 26, 2006
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
68,947
40,064
1,633
1,348
111,992
11.3%
GOVERNMENT
269,156
404,747
72,705
8,428
755,036
76.3%
DEVELOPMENT
SERVICES
420.49
1,150
435
22,150
23,735
2.4%
CORPORATE,
INDIVIDUAL AND
COMMUNITY
GROUPS
44,587
46,467
6,356
1,020
98,430
10.0%
TOTAL
382,690
492,428
81,129
32,946
989,193
100.0%
% OF TOTAL
38.7%
49.8%
8.2%
3.3%
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
City of Toronto
2,969.45
n \a
123
Archaeological assessment.
Basciano Parkin Ltd.
2,000.00
775.14
673
Planning fees.
Brutto Consulting
Ltd.
7,500.00
2,601.40
600
Planning fees.
G, S, & J DeRuyter
4,500.00
420.49
193
Planning fees.
TOTALS
16,969.45
3,797.03
As directed by the Authority, the planning fee items with the exception of DeRuyter, have been
referred to Toronto and Region Conservation Authority's (TRCA) solicitors to be pursued
through litigation as necessary. The companies involved have received letters from TRCA's
solicitors, Gardiner Roberts LLP, demanding payment. Payment has been received from Ron
Witton ($7,000), Rice Development Group ($10,000.) and Glen Pietroski ($10,000).
Brutto has settled a number of accounts totalling $6,900. Brutto disputed the $7,500 item and
upon further review by staff, it has been determined that the $7,500 item was issued in error
and should be cancelled. TRCA solicitors, Gardiner Roberts, has initiated litigation against
Basciano.
224
DeRuyter is no longer an active file. The applicant has been advised that there will be no
further consideration and any approval will not be released until the fees with interest are paid.
With respect to the $2,969.45 item due from the City of Toronto, it was recently agreed that the
firm of Marshall Macklin Monaghan will make the payment to TRCA.
Receivable balances, as reported on each of the previous reports to the advisory board, after
2002, are presented as follows:
DATE
Total ($)
90 -Day Plus ($)
May 26, 2006
989,193
32,946
March 30, 2006
1,252,876
134,521
February 05, 2006
1,264,876
105,873
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: May 29, 2006
225
TERMINATION
ON MOTION, the meeting terminated at 10:32 a.m., on Friday, June 16, 2006.
David Barrow
Chair
/ks
226
Brian Denney
Secretary- Treasurer
ts.
THE TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY
MEETING OF THE BUSINESS EXCELLENCE ADVISORY BOARD #4/06
September 15, 2006
The Business Excellence Advisory Board Meeting #4/06, was held in the South Theatre,
Black Creek Pioneer Village, on Friday, September 15, 2006. The Chair David Barrow,
called the meeting to order at a.m..
PRESENT
David Barrow Chair
Bill Fisch Member
Rob Ford Member
Dick O'Brien Chair, Authority
Bill O'Donnell - Member
Andrew Schulz Member
ABSENT
Paul Ainslie Member
Peter Milczyn Member
Maja Prentice Vice Chair
RES. #C40 /06 - MINUTES
Moved by:
Seconded by:
Andrew Schulz
Bill O'Donnell
THAT the Minutes of Meeting #3/06, held on June 16, be approved.
DELEGATIONS
(a)
CARRIED
A delegation by Ms. Lois Griffin, Member, West Humber Subcommittee, in regards to
confidential item 7.4 - Request for Proposal for Lease and Development.
RES. #C41 /06 - DELEGATIONS
Moved by: Bill O'Donnell
Seconded by: Andrew Schulz
227
THAT above -noted delegation (a) be heard and received.
CORRESPONDENCE
(a)
CARRIED
A letter dated July 14, 2006, from Tome Kondinski, Planner, Ontario Municipal Board, in
regards to Request by Toronto and Region Conservation Authority for Per Diem
Allowances.
(b) A letter dated September 13, 2006, from Lois Griffin for John Willetts, Chair, West
Humber Subcommittee, in regards to confidential item 7.4 - Request for Proposal for
Lease and Development.
RES. #C42 /06 - CORRESPONDENCE
Moved by:
Seconded by:
Bill Fisch
Bill O'Donnell
THAT above -noted correspondence (a) be received.
CARRIED
RES. #C43 /06 - CORRESPONDENCE
Moved by:
Seconded by:
Bill O'Donnell
Andrew Schulz
THAT above -noted correspondence (b) be received.
CARRIED
228
CORRESPONDENCE (A)
Ontario
Municipal
Board
855 Bay St Suite 1500
Toronto, QN MSG 1E5
Tel (416) 326 -0800
Tort Free: 1- 866. 887 -9620
Fax (418320.5370
unrrw.arn .gov.an.c;,
Commission des
affaires municipales
de ('Ontario
655 rue Bay Bureau 1600
Toronto, ONhi5G 1E5
Tel (416) 326-6800
Sans,Frais: 1.868°887,8520
Tel6c (416) 326.5374
www.omb,cicv.on,Ca
VIA FACSIMILE $ XPRESSPOST
July, 14, 2006
Mr. James DiIlene, Director
Finance and Business Services
Toronto and Region Conservation Authority
5 Shoreham Drive
-Pownsview, Ontario M3N
Dear Mr. Dillane:
RE:
OMB Case No. F1060009
OMB File No. E060008
Authority-fa
Request byte Toronto and - Region Conservattoin
Pier Diem Allowances
Enclosed is a copy of the Ontario Municipal iQoard]s • Order to, grant approval for, the
following:
an increase in the Chair's honorarium and members'. =Per dieni ,by °2 %n
effective January f, 2006:
- the rate of reimbursement of ravel casts for the' Chairand members to be
the same as the rate approved, for relmbutser Gnt Of Toronto And-Region,
Conservation Authority employeetravel costs,eff ctive Jantialy 1, 005.
Yours truly,
#077"e 0411 DL;2 �
Tome Kondinski
'Planner
(416) 326 -6799
Tome.Kondinski @jus.gov.on.ca
,enclL
229
ISSUE DATE:
July 14, 2006
DECISION/ORDER 'NO:
2014
ti
Ontario
Ontario Municipal Board
Commission des affaires municipales de I'Ontarlo
F1060009
Toronto and Region Conservation Authority has made an ,application to the Ontario Municipal
Board under Section 37 of the Conservation Authorities- Act, _ R.S,O. 1990. c. C. 27, as
amended, for .an, Order to approve an increase in the Chair's honorarium and members' per
diem by 2°l effective January 10 2006 and to receive approval in the rate of reimbursement of
travel costs for the Chair and members to be the same as the rate approved for reimbursement
,of Tororltoand Region Conservation Authority employee travel costs effective January 1, 2006
O� i1:8,'�lle N* E0t?000$
B F O Ft E:
M.,HUBBARD.
CHAIR
Thursday;, the 13t day of
July, 2006
THE -BOARD- having received- a request 'from the Taronth and Region - Conservation
AuUprity to:
c- increase the Chales'honorgriunl ant members', per diem by 2% effective,January
1,,'2008 ;:.
receive:approyel in the rate of reimbursement 'of travel costs for the Chair and
members'to be the same as the-rate approved for Iei.mbursernent_of Tor into'arld
Region Con$orvattan Authority employee travel costs effective Januani 1;-2006;
230
2
FI060009
THE BOARD ORDERS that an increase in the Chair's honorarium and members' per
diem by 2% effective January 1, 2006 and that the rate of reimbursement. of travel costs
for the Chair and members to be the same as the rate approved for reimbursement of
Toronto and Region Conservation Authority employee travel costs effective January 1,
2006 pe approved,
231
seed` tARY
CORRESPONDENCE (B)
jjnber
7-rt_t_
.1? layer
September 13, 2006
Chair and Members of the Business-Excellence
Advisory Board
TRCA
5 Shoreham Drive
Toronto, ON
M3INI 1S4
Dear Chair and MerriberS:
HUMBER WATERSHED ALLIANCE
The'West Humber SubcOmmitteriOtthe HurnberWatershed AIITance paeSed the following
„
'motion at their meeting held oii-Septeirber12; 2096_
As amemt,ar Of the West Humbef,Subconphi1tee,1 have been;requested to bring this motion
to your attention and to appear g.1S 4-clelogettO to the tausfiless',E)cceilqnce Advisory Board on
September 15; MOO,
WHEREAS the West,Humber Subcommiftee-has!been,in the process of reViewing and revising
the Claireville Management Flan (1997);
WHEREAS the West Humber Subcommitteels svongty,itilavor ot designating the 6.5 hectare
lot Of land located or the north side 01 Hijiwitay1,011v10Yeart OriVe within Claireville
Conservation Area to Primary Restoration where OS cUrrently0eSignated as
Commercial/Offica Node;
WHEREAS the West 1-fun-113er StibcornMittee has been waiting forth° updated Terrestrial
Natural Heritage Strategy which" is rrriniihent,lo;cloSo:
THEREFORE, the West Humber Subcommittee requests that the:Business Excellence Advisory
Board not proceed with proposals fOr,OorrimerOfel/Offlo0 hOtle‘uSe of this pleoe of property.
YoUrs truly,
Lois Griffin
for John Willetis. chair
West Humber Subcommittee
5 SOoreham ['five, Clownsitiew;QN h9N:14
410;14.1-6600
232
SECTION I - ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY ACTION
RES. #C44/06 -
Moved by:
Seconded by:
SERENITY PARK CEMETERY CORPORATION
Height Restriction - Northeast Corner, Jane and Steeles, City of Vaughan,
Regional Municipality of York. Reporting on status of negotiations with
Serenity Park Cemetery Corporation regarding the height restriction on
lands at Steeles Avenue West and Jane Street.
Bill Fisch
Dick O'Brien
THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT staff be directed to discontinue
negotiations with Serenity Park Cemetery Corporation regarding height restrictions on
lands at the northeast corner of Jane Street and Steeles Avenue West.
CARRIED
BACKGROUND
At Authority Meeting #9/05, held on November 25, 2005, Resolution #A257/05 was approved
as follows:
THAT staff be authorized and directed to enter into discussions with representatives of
Serenity Park Cemetery Corporation with respect to Toronto and Region Conservation
Authority's (TRCA) requirement that any development of the site be no more than six
stories;
THAT staff be authorized to engage the services of a qualified real estate appraiser to
assist in the valuation of the Serenity Cemetery proposal;
AND FURTHER THAT staff report to the Authority on the results of these discussions at
the earliest opportunity.
RATIONALE
Staff has met with representatives of Serenity Park Cemetery Corporation on a number of
occasions to consider proposals for changing the height restriction on the site in return for
which Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) would receive compensation. As
these discussions were underway, the City of Vaughan was considering an official plan
amendment (OPA) which would effect the property at the north east corner of Jane Street and
Steeles Avenue West. The city has proposed that the existing six story height restriction be
maintained as part of the OPA.
Given the decision of the City of Vaughan, TRCA has advised the representative of Serenity
Park Cemetery Corporation that there is no point in continuing discussions. If circumstances
change and TRCA staff is again contacted by Serenity Park, staff will advise the Business
Excellence Advisory Board and seek direction.
Report prepared by: Jim Dillane, extension 6292
For Information contact: Jim Dillane, extension 6292, Ron Dewell, extension 5245
Date: September 6, 2006
233
RES. #C45/06 -
Moved by:
Seconded by:
PALAIS ROYALE - CITY OF TORONTO
Lease of Toronto and Region Conservation Authority -owned lands
managed by the City of Toronto for parking purposes in connection with
the Palais Royale.
Dick O'Brien
Bill Fisch
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
(herein "City") which is being managed by the City in accordance with the terms of an
agreement dated October 11, 1972;
WHEREAS the City has leased the building at 1601 Lakeshore Boulevard West to the
Palais Royale Corporation and additional parking is required in connection with this
lease;
THEREFORE LET IT BE RESOLVED THAT approval be granted to enter into a 20 -year
lease agreement commencing July 1, 2006 with Palais Royale Corporation, The Toronto
Parking Authority and the City of Toronto on the basis as set out in Clause No. 19
contained in Report No. 5 of the Policy and Finance Committee, which was adopted as
amended, by the Council of the City of Toronto at its meeting held on June 27, 28 and 29,
2006;
THAT the terms and conditions of the lease agreement be satisfactory to TRCA staff and
its solicitor;
THAT the site plan for the parking lot be subject to TRCA staff review and approval;
THAT an archaeological investigation is to be conducted before any site disturbance with
any mitigative measures required being carried out all at the expense of Palais Royale;
THAT Palais Royal be responsible fOr payment of all survey, legal and other costs
associated with completing this transaction;
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 be so advised.
CARRIED
BACKGROUND
Council of the City of Toronto at its meeting held on June 27, 28 and 29, 2006 amended Clause
No. 19 contained in Report No. 5 of the Policy and Finance Committee, as follows:
(1) to provide that the lease for the parking shall include a provision that if alternate,
equivalent parking for the Palais Royale becomes available prior to the expiry of the 20
year lease, then such parking may be substituted for the median parking;
234
(2) by deleting Recommendation (V) of the Policy and Finance Committee, and inserting
instead the following:
(3)
"(V)
Site Plan approval be applied to this project on this site, and that there be
a community consultation meeting to consult on the details of the Site
Plan; and";
by deleting from staff Recommendation (5) contained in the report (June 13, 2006) from
the General Manager, Parks, Forestry and Recreation, the words "and execute ", so that
Recommendation (5) now reads as follows:
"(5) authority be granted to the General Manager, Parks, Forestry and Recreation to
negotiate a twenty year lease commencing on July 1, 2006, with the Palais
Royale Corporation for the operation of the Palais Royale; with a minimum lease
fee of $25,000.00 in year one with an escalation of 2 per cent per year in the
remaining years or the percentage rent as indicated above; and with terms and
conditions similar to the existing lease and acceptable to the City Solicitor;"; and
(4) by adding the following:
"That Council adopt the following staff recommendations contained in the
Recommendations Section of the supplementary report (June 27, 2006) from the
General Manager, Parks, Forestry and Recreation:
'It is recommended that:
(1) the detailed design elements that need to be incorporated to reduce the
heat island effect and ensure a healthy tree canopy in the proposed
median parking lot be subject to approval by the General Manager, Parks,
Forestry and Recreation in consultation with the Toronto and Region
Conservation Authority, the Chief Planner and Executive Director, City
Planning, the Ward Councillor and the Tree Advocate; and
(2) the appropriate City officials be authorized and directed to take the
necessary action to give effect thereto, and that leave be granted for the
introduction of any necessary bills in Council to give effect thereto.' "
The Policy and Finance Committee recommends that:
(I)
City Council adopt the staff recommendations contained in the Recommendations
Section of the report (June 13, 2006) from the General Manager, Parks, Forestry and
Recreation;
(II) where there are changes in Budget approved items, that the affected Ward Councillor be
consulted;
235
(111) under the Western Waterfront review, this location be considered as a potential Gateway
initiative, and if possible, included in the on -going consultation process underway, being
considered through the Roundtable on a Beautiful City;
(IV) the Director, Waterfront Secretariat, be requested to report to the Policy and Finance
Committee on the civic engagement strategy with respect to the forthcoming Western
Beaches Strategy;
(V)
(VI)
Site Plan approval be applied to this project on this site and it be "bumped up ", and staff
be requested to report to the Toronto and East York Community Council on a civic
engagement strategy for this Site Plan approval; and
the local Councillor be requested to meet with the executives of the local ratepayers as
requested in the communication (June 14 2006) from Mr. Peter Elson and Mr. Craig
Peskett on behalf of the Ward 14 ARA.
Action taken by the Committee
The Policy and Finance Committee requested the General Manager, Parks, Forestry and
Recreation, in consultation with the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority and the Chief
Planner and Executive Director, City Planning, to submit a report directly to Council fof its
meeting to be held on June 27, 2006 on:
(1) design or re- design elements that need to be incorporated to reduce the heat island
effect and ensure a healthy tree canopy in the proposed park lot area and the rest of the
median; and
(2) increasing the tree canopy and health of the trees in the areas adjacent to the Palais
Royale.
The Policy and Finance Committee submits the report (June 13, 2006) from the General
Manager, Parks, Forestry and Recreation:
It is recommended that:
(1) subject to the approval of the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (the "TRCA ")
as owner of the land, authority be granted to the Toronto Parking Authority to construct a
parking facility in the centre median of Lakeshore Boulevard West to the north of the
Palais Royale and for the TPA to enter into a twenty year license agreement with the
Palais Royale Corporation for the operation and maintenance of the parking facility; with
the Palais Royale Corporation paying an annual License Fee of $49,000.00 commencing
on October 1, 2006 and expiring on September 30, 2026; and with terms and conditions
acceptable to the Toronto Parking Authority and the TRCA;
(2) City Council authorize the reallocation of funds within the Toronto Parking Authority's
2006 Approved Capital Budget, the expenditure of funds not to exceed $500,000.00,
including all applicable taxes and charges, from Project TPA 906711 Danforth Main Trent
Avenue - Variety Village to Project TPA 907012 Palais Royale;
236
(3)
authority be granted to the General Manager, Transportation Services to install a
mid -block pedestrian traffic control signal on the south branch of Lake Shore Boulevard
West in the vicinity of 1601 Lakeshore Boulevard West to allow safe pedestrian access to
the parking lot in the centre median;
(4) authority be granted to the General Manager, Parks, Forestry and Recreation to
terminate the existing lease between the City and Shoreline Entertainment Corporation;
(5)
authority be granted to the General Manager, Parks, Forestry and Recreation to
negotiate and execute a twenty year lease commencing on July 1, 2006, with the Palais
Royale Corporation for the operation of the Palais Royale; with a minimum lease fee of
$25,000.00 in year one with an escalation of 2 per cent per year in the remaining years
or the percentage rent as indicated above; and with terms and conditions similar to the
existing lease and acceptable to the City Solicitor; and
(6) the appropriate City Officials be authorized and directed to take the necessary action to
give effect thereto, and that leave be granted for the introduction of any necessary bills in
Council to give effect thereto.
The Palais Royale, located at 1601 Lakeshore Boulevard West on the Toronto waterfront, was
constructed in 1922. The Palais Royale has operated, for approximately the past three
decades, under a lease between the City and Palais Royale Ballroom Ltd.. On January 15,
2000, the lease with Palais Royale Ballroom Ltd. expired.
In December 1999, the City issued a Request For Proposal (RFP) for the lease of the site. The
RFP called for the facility to be operated as a venue for ballroom dancing, banquets, weddings
and other functions, or as an entertainment facility. In the RFP, significant emphasis was
placed on the need to restore and rehabilitate the Palais Royale, at no cost to the City.
Shoreline Entertainment Corporation was the successful proponent and entered into a
twenty -year lease with the City commencing December 2000. In July 2004, the Pegasus Group
Inc. assumed the existing lease by purchasing the shares of Shoreline Entertainment
Corporation. They are operating the Palais Royale under the corporate name "Palais Royale
Corporation ", and have recently entered into a new lease with the City.
Palais Royale Corporation is in the process of restoring the Palais Royale as a banquet hall
facility through an investment of approximately $3.5 million. However, the existing building has
no parking facilities and parking is clearly a necessity to make the Palais Royale a viable
business enterprise. In addition, this area is deficient in parking for use of the adjacent Western
Beaches parkland.
237
The original plan called for the development of a parking lot in the City -owned property to the
east of the Palais Royale. This area is heavily treed with aging mature willows and mixed
hardwood trees. TRCA staff have a major concern with the utilization of this area for parking.
This area provides critical habitat and functions as a stop over and resting area for migratory
birds. As such all remaining features and functions associated with the remaining limited
habitat along the waterfront should be maintained, enhanced and restored, not impacted and
damaged.
Two alternative options were reviewed, the first being the feasibility of providing on- street
parking on the south side of Lake Shore Boulevard West and the second was to consider the
construction of a surface parking lot on the median separating the eastbound and westbound
lanes of Lake Shore Boulevard West. On- street parking would generate significant safety and
capacity concerns. The use of the median is a far preferable alternate to TRCA staff than the
proposal to use the parkland to the east of the Palais Royale.
The lot will be constructed by the Toronto Parking Authority to their specifications and the
operator of the Palais Royale will pay for the full cost of the facility. TRCA will be working
closely with the Toronto Parking Authority and City staff to ensure the design meets
appropriate environmental standards.
As noted, the City of Toronto has given approval to enter into this lease.
Report prepared by: Mike Fenning, extension 5225
For Information contact: Mike Fenning, extension 5223, Ron Dewell, extension 5245
Date: August 17, 2006
Attachments: 1
238
a)
rLease of Toronto and Region Conservation Authority -owned lands
co managed by the City of Toronto for parking purposes in connection with
the Palais Royale.
C. RPARR tun,
LARESMORE BOULEVARD
Toronto , Ontario
CONSTRUCTOR OF SURFACE WWI(
At LAME SWORE' BOULEVARD NEST A
.00n+ CAST OF RNRKSIDE ORN[
CONCEPTUAL. Sal PLAN
QCL
SRM
ASSOCIATES
Toronto
Parking •
Authority
1.111r NV 4.
wte.70a
11500
t... to
!.►.
1113,1108
..+. CSP -1
RES. #C46/06 -
Moved by:
Seconded by:
UJA FEDERATION OF GREATER TORONTO AND 4600 BATHURST
STREET
Request to reconfigure a parking lot on lands owned by the Toronto and
Region Conservation Authority and leased to the UJA Federation of
Greater Toronto and 4600 Bathurst Street, City of Toronto (North York
Community Council), Don River watershed, CFN 29199.
Dick O'Brien
Bill Fisch
THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT WHEREAS the Toronto and
Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) is in receipt of a request from the UJA Federation
of Greater Toronto and 4600 Bathurst Street to reconfigure an existing parking lot located
on lands leased from TRCA located at 4600 Bathurst Street, City of Toronto (North York
Community Council);
AND WHEREAS it is in the opinion of TRCA that it is in the best interests of TRCA in
furthering its objectives, as set out in Section 20 of the Conservation Authorities Act, to
cooperate with UJA Federation of Greater Toronto and 4600 Bathurst Street in this
instance;
THAT Schedule A to the lease dated September 1, 1994 be amended as follows:
(1)Part 3 on a draft reference plan prepared by R. Avis Surveying Inc. under their Project
No. 2010 -1, being Part of Block A, Registered Plan 5374, City of Toronto (formerly City of
North York) containing 0.015 hectares (0.037 acres) more or less be released from the
lease; and
(2)Parts 2 and 4 on a draft reference plan prepared by R. Avis Surveying Inc. under their
Project No. 2010 -1, being Part of Block A, Registered Plan 5374, City of Toronto (formerly
City of North York) containing 0:015 hectares (0.037 acres) more or less be added to the
lease.
THAT the UJA Federation of Greater Toronto and 4600 Bathurst Street is to be
responsible for payment of all survey, legal and other costs associated with completing
this transaction;
THAT completion of this transaction is subject to any Planning Act approvals that may be
required;
THAT an archaeological investigation is to be conducted before any site disturbance with
any mitigative measures required being carried out all at the expense of UJA Federation
of Greater Toronto and 4600 Bathurst Street;
THAT a permit pursuant to Ontario Regulation 166/06 be obtained prior to the
commencement of construction;
240
THAT the said release of lease be subject to obtaining the approval of the Minister of
Natural Resources, in accordance with Section 21(2) of the Conservation Authorities Act,
R.S.O. 1990, Chapter C.27 as amended, if required;
AND FURTHER THAT the appropriate TRCA officials are 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.
CARRIED
BACKGROUND
On September 1, 1994, the former City of North York entered into a 99 -year lease with the
United Jewish Welfare Fund of Toronto (now UJA Federation of Greater Toronto and 4600
Bathurst Street (UJA)) to resolve an existing encroachment of UJA's parking lot. On September
22, 1998, TRCA acquired a parcel of land from the City of North York which included the UJA
parking lot and assumed the existing lease with UJA.
The UJA property at 4588 and 4600 Bathurst Street is located entirely within the valley corridor
of the West Don River. In the 1970's TRCA undertook erosion and channel improvement works
on UJA property.
The facilities on the property are dated and inadequate for UJA's growing needs and
opportunities for program and service delivery. UJA is proposing to redevelop the site so the
facilities better meet their needs and has submitted an Official Plan Amendment and Re- Zoning
Application to the City of Toronto, recommended for approval at a September City Council
meeting. UJA will also be considering an opportunity to renaturalize portions of the site as part
of their upcoming Site Plan Application Review. As part of the redevelopment, UJA is
proposing to reconfigure the existing parking including the portion located on TRCA lands.
There will be no net increase in the size of the parking lot on TRCA lands nor any impacts to
significant vegetation.
Report prepared by: Mike Fenning, extension 5223
For Information contact: Mike Fenning, extension 5223, Ron Dewell, extension 5245
Date: August 24, 2006
Attachments: 1
241
Attachment 1
UJA FEDERATION OF GREATER TORONTO AND 4600 BATHURST
STREET
onserv/a n
for The Living City
LZ2ZITRCA LANDS
PERMANENTEASEMENT
\Si! i LAND -TO BE
��/I II REMOVED FROM LEASE
to :4 I , ® LANDS TO BE
�� �. /,,� ADDED TO LEASE
�y� s iy ��
242
COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE
RES. #C47 /06
Moved by:
Seconded by:
Bill O'Donnell
Andrew Schulz
THAT the committee move into closed session to discuss item 7.4 - Request for Proposal
for Lease and Development.
CARRIED
ARISE AND REPORT
RES. #C48 /06
Moved by:
Seconded by:
Dick O'Brien
Rob Ford
THAT the committee arise and report from closed session.
RES. #C49 /06 -
Moved by:
Seconded by:
CARRIED
REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL FOR LEASE AND DEVELOPMENT
Northwest corner of Ebenezer Road and McVean Drive, City of -
Brampton, CFN 38091. Results of the Request for Proposals for lease
and development of Toronto and Region Conservation Authority -owned
lands located at the northwest corner of Ebenezer Road and McVean
Drive, City of Brampton, Regional Municipality of Peel.
Bill O'Donnell
Dick O'Brien
THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT staff be directed to enter into
lease negotiations with Penguin Golf Associates for a 6.5 hectare (16 acre) parcel of
Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) lands located at the northwest corner
of Ebenezer Road and McVean Drive, in the City of Brampton, Regional Municipality of
Peel;
THAT staff be directed to return the other deposit received, and advise the other two
parties that their proposals have not been selected at this time;
AND FURTHER THAT staff report to a future meeting of the. Business Excellence Advisory
Board on the results of the negotiations with Penguin Golf Associates.
AMENDMENT
RES. #C50 /06
Moved by:
Seconded by:
Bill O'Donnell
Dick O'Brien
243
THAT the following be inserted after the main motion:
AND FURTHER THAT staff be directed to continue investigating highest and best use
opportunities for this site.
THE AMENDMENT WAS CARRIED
THE MAIN MOTION, AS AMENDED, WAS CARRIED
RES. #C51/06 -
Moved by:
Seconded by:
NAMING OF TRAIL SECTION IN BOYD CONSERVATION AREA
City of Vaughan, Regional Municipality of York. Request for naming of an
existing trail on Toronto and Region Conservation Authority -owned land
within Boyd Conservation Area in the City of Vaughan, The Regional
Municipality of York, as the Pierre and Janet Berton Trail.
Dick O'Brien
Bill O'Donnell
THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT an existing trail located on
Toronto and Region Conservation Authority -owned land in the Boyd Conservation Area,
as illustrated in Attachment 1, dated June, 2006, be named the "Pierre and Janet Berton
Trail ";
AND FURTHER THAT Friends of Boyd Park and the City of Vaughan be so advised.
CARRIED
BACKGROUND
Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) received a request in March 2005 from the
Friends of Boyd Park, a local community group, to formalize and name an existing trail in Boyd
Conservation Area in honour of Pierre and Janet Berton. The Friends of Boyd Park wished to
recognize the contribution the Bertons have made to the environmental and conservationist
movements. The Berton family often visited Boyd Conservation Area, and continues to be
strong supporters of its preservation as a conservation area.
The Berton family supports the establishment of such a trail. It is their hope that the trail will
commemorate their environmental legacy in the Kleinburg area and educate school children
about the environment through interpretive signage.
At Authority Meeting #9/03, held on November 28, 2003, the protocol for naming TRCA assets
was approved. According to the protocol, the naming of TRCA assets may contain any or all of
the following:
• The name of a major individual or corporate /public sector organization, possibly a donor.
• The name of an individual prominent in the environmental or conservation community.
• A relevant historical name associated with the geographic area or community.
• The name of a strategic initiative, a citizen's group or other partnership of TRCA.
• Other names that may have significance for a specific site and area.
244
Naming of TRCA assets requires approval of the Authority.
RATIONALE
TRCA staff representatives from Conservation Land Planning, Planning Ecology, Conservation
Parks and the Humber River Watershed teams reviewed alternative trail alignments in
consultation with the Friends of Boyd Park. The preferred alignment is illustrated on the
attached map dated June, 2006 and has the,support of TRCA staff and the Friends of Boyd
Park. TRCA's support for formalizing and naming this trail is based on the following:
• that the trail already exists as an informal, primitive, walking trail so the establishment of a
new trail is not required;
• that the trail remain a single use walking trail only;
• that the Friends of Boyd Park will confirm with the Berton family that the preferred
alignment meets their requirements;
• that the Friends of Boyd Park will assist TRCA in developing a trail management plan to
guide the maintenance of the trail, including the decommissioning of some trails, preparing
and installing interpretive signs, planting of trees and shrubs, and removing garbage;
• that the Friends of Boyd Park will assist with fundraising for the maintenance of the trail,
signs and other requirements, as determined; and
• that TRCA will monitor the site. Should new environmental or heritage information become
available that suggests the trail be closed or realigned, TRCA will proceed to do this in
consultation with the Friends of Boyd Park, the Berton family and the City of Vaughan.
Committee of the Whole at the City of Vaughan, on September 5, 2006, endorsed the formal
establishment of the trail route, as illustrated on the attached map, dated June, 2006, and that it
be named in honour of Pierre and Janet Berton. The item will be considered by Council on
September 11, 2006.
DETAILS OF WORK TO BE DONE
• TRCA and the Friends of Boyd Park to prepare a trail management plan for the Pierre and
Janet Berton Trail.
• The Friends of Boyd Park to initiate fundraising for the maintenance of the trail, signs and
other requirements.
• Formalize the trail, close excess trails and install interpretive signage.
• TRCA to continue to monitor the site for natural heritage and public use impacts.
It is anticipated that the trail will be formalized in October 2006.
FINANCIAL DETAILS
Provision for the recognition of the Pierre and Janet Berton Trail will be subject to the success
of Friends of Boyd Park raising funds from sources such as the TD Friends of the Environment
Fund, service clubs and other donations.
Report prepared by: Deanna Cheriton, extension 5204
For Information contact: Deanna Cheriton, extension 5204
Gary Wilkins, extension 5211
Date: July 10, 2006
Attachments: 1
245
Attachment 1
Wiinseei t i n
Mf TM Ih flq'
A^.ditVitt=�. mwrMP'.I 04.441- sttPAS Tx41 COMMA,' rt..trFow
vrxesed row
246
RES. #C52/06 -
Moved by:
Seconded by:
NAMING OF TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY
PROPERTY IN THE VILLAGE OF PALGRAVE
Town of Caledon, Region of Peel. Request for naming of Toronto and
Region Conservation Authority -owned land in the Town of Caledon,
Region of Peel, as Palgrave Mills Park.
Bill Fisch
Dick O'Brien
THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT four hectares of Toronto and
Region Conservation Authority -owned land in the Town of Caledon, as illustrated in
Attachment 1, dated August 2006, be named the "Palgrave Mills Park ";
AND FURTHER THAT the Town of Caledon be so advised.
CARRIED
BACKGROUND
Milling operations in Palgrave date back to the 1850's when the mill dam was built on the
Humber River to provide water power for a saw mill located on the site of the Palgrave Mills
property. The mill was a successful early village industry. Subsequently, shingle, flour and
grist mills occupied the site. The last mill was closed in 1968. Toronto and Region .
Conservation Area (TRCA) acquired the mill property in 1999.
Several years ago TRCA undertook the Palgrave Mill Pond Rehabilitation Project, in
collaboration with local community groups. This project resulted in the revitalization of the
former mill pond, and includes a natural stone fishway, enhanced parkland and trails,
interpretive signage, a historic display, and substantial riverbank and shoreline plantings.
At Authority Meeting #9/03, held on November 28, 2003, the protocol for naming TRCA assets
was approved. According to the protocol, the naming of TRCA assets may contain any or all of
the following:
• The name of a major individual or corporate /public sector organization, possibly a donor.
• The name of an individual prominent in the environmental or conservation community.
• A relevant historical name associated with the geographic area or community.
• The name of a strategic initiative, a citizen's group or other partnership of TRCA.
• Other names that may have significance for a specific site and area.
Naming of TRCA assets requires approval of the Authority. The naming of the Palgrave Mills
property as Palgrave Mills Park satisfies the criteria of "a relevant historical name associated
with the geographic area or community ".
RATIONALE
The Palgrave mills no longer exist, but their site and the associated mill pond remain a valued
historic, aesthetic and recreational amenity contributing to the cultural character and identity of
the village of Palgrave. TRCA's support for the naming of the park is based on the following:
• its relevance as a historic industry in the village of Palgrave;
• its recognition of the buildings which occupied the site; and
• its recognition of the human heritage as part of the Canadian Heritage River designation for
the Humber River watershed.
247
At the Town of Caledon Council meeting held on May 2, 2006, Resolution #W- 179 -2006 was
adopted as follows:
"BE /T RESOLVED THATCouncil for the Corporation of the Town of Caledon adopt
Planning and Development /Policy Section amended Report 2006 -30 re: Naming of Park
at Palgrave Mills Property;
AND THATCouncil support the Toronto Region Conservation Authority's naming of the
Palgrave Mills Properly as the "Palgrave Mills Park"."
DETAILS OF WORK TO BE DONE
Produce and install a property name and interpretive sign in the fall of 2006.
FINANCIAL DETAILS
Provision for the production of a sign for the Palgrave Mills Park has been included in TRCA's
2006 Capital Budget.
Report prepared by: Deanna Cheriton, extension 5204
For Information contact: Gary Wilkins, extension 5211
Date: August 22, 2006
Attachments: 1
248
Attachment 1
Legend
Watercou sas..
Palgrave t4tts Park
M1RCA Ptoperty
e Augusi,,2 6,
twat# 8j? itr gnaBai n 1
Itionnatlonle*
Crfhophoto $ fl 2
RES. #C53/06 -
Moved by:
Seconded by:
BLACK CREEK PIONEER VILLAGE
Deaccession of Artifacts. Deaccession of 331 artifacts that do not meet
Black Creek Pioneer Village (BCPV) Collection Policy criteria.
Dick O'Brien
Andrew Schulz
THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT staff be authorized to
deaccession 11 items that have been on long -term loan to other cultural institutions for
the past seven to twenty -five years;
THAT staff be authorized to deaccession 5 items to more appropriate institutions;
AND FURTHER THAT staff be authorized to deaccession by auction 315 items (principally
tools, furniture, and pictures (mainly stereographs (stereo- viewer cards))), with proceeds
directed to the care of the Black Creek Pioneer Village artifact collection.
CARRIED
BACKGROUND
At Authority Meeting #3101, held on April 27, 2001, Resolution #A53/01 was approved as
follows:
THAT the Black Creek Pioneer Village museum operating policies, specifically;
A) Statement of Purpose,
B) Collections Policy,
C) Research Policy,
and Schedule A, as appended, be approved.
The Collections Policy as attached in Schedule A, specifies the scope and extent of collections;
selection criteria for artifacts; the methods by which artifacts will be acquired, lent and
borrowed; and provides the authority to dispose of artifacts in accordance with ethical museum
practices. The Collection Policy enables BCPV to collect selectively and to deaccession where
deemed necessary. The policies and procedures for this deaccessioning are those followed
by professional museum associations' and peer institutions and direct that proceeds from the
sale of deaccessioned objects should be used in collections management (attached Schedule
A).
BCPV collections have been acquired since 1954 as BCPV has evolved. Lack of sufficient
storage space has been a major problem for more than three decades. The addition of the
storage facility in the Visitors' Centre in 1985 provided some badly needed 'clean' storage for
the most fragile artifacts, but did not relieve the severe need for storage for the majority of
collections, which are still housed in unheated barns and wet basements.
250
Since 1985, staff have severely limited active collecting. Staff efforts have been redirected to
assessment of the condition and scope of the current collection. Through this effort staff are
gradually identifying artifacts that clearly do not fit within the established criteria of the
Collection Policy. In these cases, deaccessioning according to accepted ethical museum
practices is considered the most effective use of limited resources, while at the same time
ensuring the reputation of the museum and the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority
(TRCA) are not harmed.
RATIONALE
Artifacts on Long -Term Loan to other Institutions:
BCPV has had eleven items out on continuous loan to three other cultural institutions for seven
to twenty -five years: two pieces of late 19th century clothing (camisole, trousers) to Muskoka
Heritage Place, Huntsville, since 1992 (fourteen years); three tools (broad -axe, carpenter's
adze, draw - knife), picture -frame and wooden rake, to Queen's York Rangers Regimental
Museum, Toronto, since 1999 (seven years); and three chairs and a table, to Joseph Schneider
Haus museum, Kitchener, since 1981 (twenty -five years). For this entire period, BCPV has
never had need to recall any of these items for its own use.
Requests have been received from each of these three institutions to transfer ownership from
BCPV to the body currently displaying and using those artifacts. Doing so would permanently
transfer ownership of these artifacts to more relevant institutions; weed from BCPV's own
collection artifacts that are not within its time period nor collections mandate; and free BCPV
staff from expending resources to inspect and inventory these artifacts continually, renew loan
agreements and manage the relevant records (an on -going task).
Artifacts in Storage Requested to be Deaccessioned to More Appropriate Institutions:
BCPV has received four requests (three solicited; one unsolicited) for the transfer of ownership
of five artifacts to more appropriate institutions: a chromolithograph of Queen Victoria, from the
Architectural Conservancy of Ontario, Port Hope Branch; a corporate seal press, for
embossing the corporate seal of the Township of Wilmot, from Castle Kilbride National Historic
Site, Baden, owned and operated•by the Corporation of the Township of Wilmot; a canopy
bedstead, from the Anglican rectory in Bond Head, from the Simcoe County Museum; and a
1909 gardening book and sled used in bob -sled races at High Park, from the City of Toronto
Culture Division, Museums and Heritage Services. In the twenty to thirty -eight years that these
items have been in the BCPV collection, none have ever been used.
BCPV staff recommend that these artifacts be transferred. In addition to the benefits previously
enumerated, doing so would also free up urgently needed storage space at BCPV.
Items to be Deaccessioned by Auction:
With the aid of experts in various disciplines, BCPV has been cataloguing and dating items in
storage with a view to identifying objects that clearly do not fit the collections mandate of
BCPV. This work has been greatly aided by the use of a computer, which has allowed BCPV to
create a database of its collection in order to identify duplicates, rate items by condition and
create a history of their use at BCPV since their acquisition. To date, this work has identified
315 items that clearly post -date the restoration period (1793 -1867) of BCPV or are duplicates in
poorer condition than other similar pieces in the collection:
251
ITEM
QUANTITY
ITEM DESCRIPTION
17
armament accessories (bullet moulds, gunpowder tins, shot -shell loaders): with the
aid of two members in the Canadian Guild of Arms Collectors, 17 armament
accessories have been identified for deaccessioning. Nine have been so listed
because they post -date the restoration period of BCPV (they date from the 1890s to
1920s); the other eight are included because they are duplicates of ones already in
the BCPV's collection and are in poor condition.
117
carpenter's woodworking planes: over the last nine years, BCPV staff have been
working with a volunteer and charter member of the Tool Group of Canada to
catalogue BCPV's tool collection. This work has resulted in the identification of 117
carpenter's planes that post -date the restoration period of BCPV or are duplicates of
planes already in the collection.
48
chairs: working with two experts in 19th century chairs (a professor at Seneca
College whose thesis was on the 19th century chair - making industry in Ontario and
a cabinetmaker and furniture restorer), staff have identified 48 chairs that are not
relevant to the collection at BCPV. Ten of these chairs were probably made in
Quebec (based on style and construction characteristics), and, therefore, are not
relevant to BCPV, which interprets life in 19th century Ontario; the rest post -date the
restoration period of BCPV or are duplicates of others in BCPV's collection and are
in poor condition. -
6
framed pictures: four of these pictures are commercially printed lithographs that
post -date 1892. The remaining two are commercial reproductions of still lifes.
2
horse -drawn vehicles: with the aid of an expert in 19th century horse -drawn vehicles,
staff have identified a cart and a racing sulky as post- dating the restoration date of
BCPV.
5
miscellaneous pieces of furniture (1 pair of cabinets, 2 chests, 2 clocks): in the
opinion of curatorial staff and experts consulted, all pieces except one of the two
clocks post -date the restoration period of BCPV. The remaining clock, although its
works are appropriate in time period for BCPV, has had its case repainted, thus
ruining its originality as an antique.
2
pianos: the two pianos recommended for deaccessioning are a Steinway grand
piano and a square grand piano. The Steinway post -dates the restoration date of
BCPV; moreover, it is too large for exhibit in any of the restored buildings. In the -
case of the square grand, BCPV already has four square grand pianos in its
collection.
118
stereographs (stereo- viewer cards). Stereographs (stereo- viewer cards) were
popular as a form of home entertainment from the mid -19th century to the advent of
radio. Over the years BCPV has acquired over three hundred of these cards. The
118 recommended for deaccessioning are principally views of the Boer War
(1899 -1902) and World War I (1914 -1919) or are views of religious sites in Palestine
taken in the early years of the 20th century. None of these are relevant for the
collection at BCPV.
None of these items have conditions attached that would {prohibit BCPV from deaccessioning
them.
252
FINANCIAL DETAILS
Staff recommend that these 315 pieces be deaccessioned by auction through auction firms.
Doing so, particularly in the case of the pianos, will free up urgently needed storage space.
Museums generally deaccession through auction, with all proceeds going back into the
collections area. This procedure ensures that there is no appearance of conflict of interest.
Consistent with BCPV's Collections Policy, all proceeds from deaccessioning these 315 items
will be applied towards collections care and restoration. One priority in this area is to use
funds raised to purchase supplies and equipment necessary to implement a disaster
preparedness plan for the artifact collection at BCPV, which is currently being prepared by
curatorial staff.
General auction house commission rates are 20% on the first $1,000 of each lot, 15% on the
balance between $1,001 and $3,000 of each lot and 10% on the balance over $3,000 of each
lot.
Report prepared by: Marty Brent, extension 5403
For Information contact: Marty Brent, extension 5403
Date: August 30, 2006
Attachments: 1
253
Attachment 1
SCHEDULE A
BLACK CREEK PIONEER VILLAGE MUSEUM STANDARDS
A) STATEMENT OF PURPOSE:
Black Creek Pioneer Village located in the City of Toronto and in the City of Vaughan,
Regional Municipality of York, is owned and operated by the Toronto and Region
Conservation Authority. Black Creek Pioneer Village has been created as a living history
museum for the purpose of preserving for present and future generations, the
contributions made by the mid - nineteenth century inhabitants of South Central Ontario
that have influenced the way of life in South Central Ontario and are an important part of
Canadian heritage. Black Creek Pioneer Village will collect, preserve, research, house,
exhibit, and interpret those objects that help to provide a graphic representation of early
Ontario life.
Black Creek Pioneer Village is an educational heritage institution illustrating through the
medium of its buildings, collections, information, interpreters, livestock, exhibitions and
landscape, life in a rural crossroads village in South Central Ontario in the third quarter
of the nineteenth century .
Black Creek Pioneer Village will create a vibrant, entertaining environment for the
preservation and presentation of Ontario history through a variety of activities,
demonstrations and interpretive techniques. Further, special programs and events will
be organized by the Village staff, and by special interest groups through and with the
approval of the Village staff, to supplement daily activities and involve the community in
the museum.
Black Creek Pioneer Village will, in all its programs, see itself as belonging to all, as a
benefit to all, and to be enjoyed by all, who are interested in mid - nineteenth century
Ontario social history.
This Statement of Purpose will be reviewed annually by staff and where necessary,
revisions will be recommended for approval of the Board of The Toronto and Region
Conservation Authority .
All other policies developed for the operation of Black Creek Pioneer Village will refer
back to the Statement of Purpose.
B) COLLECTIONS POLICY
1! Collections Development Policy:
The collection is the heart of Black Creek Pioneer Village. It is primarily through
the medium of its collection that visitors can appreciate the life -style of the
mid - nineteenth century Ontario rural village inhabitant.
254
1.1
Criteria for selection :
Following the guidelines specified in the Statement of Purpose, the collection at Black
Creek in general will be limited to those objects that have been made, sold, or imported
into south - central Ontario in the third quarter of the nineteenth century. In that the
Village interprets the life of people who brought family belongings with them when they
settled here, the articles collected may be older than the interpreted date.
It is also recognized that Black Creek Pioneer Village has two areas of outstanding
collections: nineteenth century lighting and toys. In the case of these two domains of
collecting, artifacts will be sought that may go beyond the dates of interpretation to
show social and /or technological development in these fields.
1.2 Authority to Acquire:
Acquisition of an artifact must be authorized by the Curator of Black Creek Pioneer
Village or his /her designate.
1.3 Method of Acquisition:
Items will be acquired into the collection through donation or purchase:
Donation: Gifts made to the collection can be accepted or rejected by the Curator or
his /her designate. Donors will be required to sign a Gift Form stipulating that the object
is an outright gift to Black Creek Pioneer Village and which reserves the right of final
disposition to the discretion of Black Creek. Offers that are subject to conditions will
require special consideration.
Purchase: All items purchased for the collection should be made in the name of Black
Creek Pioneer Village. The Toronto and Region Conservation Authority t and must be
authorized by the Curator of Black Creek or his /her designate.
1.4 Ethics of Acquisition:
The staff at Black Creek Pioneer Village will exercise due diligence in meeting
appropriate ethical standards in the acquisition of items for and the development of its
collection as outlined in the publications cited in Appendix A.1.
1.5 Legislative Requirements:
The collection development at Black Creek Pioneer Village will meet the legislative
requirements of the conventions cited in Appendix A.1 and the acts cited in Appendix
A.2.
1.6 Summary:
This policy affirms a commitment to excellence in developing collections at Black Creek
Pioneer Village.
255
2. Collections Management Policy:
2.1 Black Creek Pioneer Village will ensure appropriate procedures and
documentation for the acquisition and use of artifacts in its collection (see § 3 for
deaccessioning) .
2.1.1 Primary Documentation:
• signed donor and loan forms
• purchase orders and vendors' invoices for artifacts bought for the collection
• artifact collection data base, indexed to provide access to the collection
through multiple access points including, but not limited to:
• accession number
• source
• item number
• object classification
• current location
2.1.2 Secondary Documentation:
The documentation of collections is a significant means by which museums
demonstrate their public service activities; hence, all presentation and public
programming uses made of the collection will be documented.
2.1.3 Numbering System:
Each record in the data base will be linked to the relevant item through a unique
number derived according to the standard "three -part" numbering system
commonly used in museums. The artifact relating to this unique number will
itself bear that number, inscribed or fastened to the item, usually in a manner
that is removable without damage to the artifact; however, in the case of certain
high -risk items, that number may be permanently inscribed or fastened (e.g.,
fire - arms).
2.1.4 Documentation Back -Up:
A periodically updated back -up of the artifact collections data base will be kept
off -site at the head office of Black Creek Pioneer Village's governing authority,
The Toronto and Region Conservation Authority. This back -up will be kept in a
secure location at this site with other corporate records.
2.1.5 Documentation Currency:
All artifacts in the collection of Black Creek Pioneer Village will be registered and
catalogued by the approved museum method as soon as possible upon receipt
by the museum.
256
2.2 Loans:
Loans, incoming (i.e., Loans to Black Creek Pioneer Village): All loans must be properly
documented with signed legal loan forms stipulating the time span of the loan, a
description and condition report of the object(s), an evaluation from the owner. and
pertinent information about the owner. Loans of artifacts to Black Creek Pioneer Village
for special temporary exhibits will be accepted at the discretion of the Curator or his /her
designate. All other temporary loans will be discouraged and only accepted at the
discretion of the Curator or his /her designate.
The practice of "permanent loans" will be avoided.
Loans, outgoing (i.e. , Loans from Black Creek Pioneer Village) : Loans of artifacts from
Black Creek Pioneer Village can be made to other museums or responsible institutions
or organizations, provided that they guarantee a specified standard of security and
proper care. Outgoing loans must be authorized by the Curator or his /her designate
and properly documented with signed legal loan forms.
All incoming and outgoing loans must be properly insured.
2.3 Black Creek Pioneer Village will ensure appropriate procedures for the management of
its collection records by assigning the duties of a registrar to an appropriately trained
staff member and by providing adequate time, work space, and funding for collections
management activities.
2.4 Care and Handling of Artifacts:
Black Creek Pioneer Village believes that the preservation of its museum's collections is
the responsibility of all staff and all users. As such, the Village commits to conservation
standards in the labelling, care, and handling of artifacts so far as is reasonable.
2.5 Black Creek Pioneer Village will distinguish between artifacts in a research or study
collection, artifacts in an education or hands -on collection, and reproductions. This will
be done by an appropriata heading on the relevant artifact catalogue record.
2.6 Legislative Requirements:
The collection management at Black Creek Pioneer Village will meet the legislative
requirements of the federal and provincial acts cited in Appendix A.2. Staff members of
Black Creek will protect all confidential information about the source of material owned
by or lent to the museum, as well as information concerning the security arrangements
for its collection, or of private collections and locations visited during official duties.
3. Deaccessioning:
Deaccessioning is the formal process of removing an accessioned artifact from the
permanent collection.
3.1 Criteria for deaccessioning:
The following criteria will be used in determining whether an item should be
deaccessioned:
1. Relevance to the Collections Policy (see §1.1) ;
257
2. Completeness of the artifact;
3. Unwarranted duplication; however, care will be exercised that:
• items are truly duplicates,
• the cases where some duplication is warranted, that two or more incomplete
artifacts considered for deaccessioning would not provide sufficient parts for
a complete duplicate;
4. Damaged artifacts, where the cost to repair the damage is prohibitively
expensive;
5. Lack of documentation and provenance for the artifact;
6. Ethical issues related to ethnographic collections and human remains;
7. Space constraints based on limitations of storage.
3.2 Authority to Deaccession:
To be deaccessioned, a candidate list of items, with reasons and method of disposal,
will be submitted to and require:
• the recommendation of the Black Creek Pioneer Village Curator, Manager, and the
Director of Finance and Business Development of the Village's governing authority,
The Toronto and Region Conservation Authority;
• if approved at this management level, approval of the Public Use Advisory Board of
The Toronto and Region Conservation Authority, responsible for Black Creek
Pioneer Village;
• if authorized at the board level, approval at a meeting of the full Authority.
3.3 Method of Deaccessioning:
Once authorization to deaccession has been received, items will be disposed of by:
Sale at public auction: Subject to the following condition:
• The proceeds realized at public auction will be used exclusively for the development
or management of the Black Creek Pioneer Village collection as per Canadian
Museums Association Ethical Guidelines 1999, 'E.4.3, "Use of Funds Generated by
Disposals:'.
Transfer to a more appropriate public institution: In cases of transference of an artifact
to another public institution, Black Creek Pioneer Village will also transfer to that
institution a copy of all documentation relating to that artifact, except where transference
of that documentation contravenes legislation cited in Appendix A.2.
258
It is recognized that, as a living history museum, natural or accidental deterioration of
an artifact sometimes occurs to the point where it is worn out or broken beyond
practical repair. In such a state the artifact will have no value either as an object for safe
or for transferal to another institution. In such cases, the item will be deaccessioned by
destruction. Such disposal will require approval at the Curatorial level only; ,however,
the destruction will have to be photographed, documented, and signed off by the
Curator and Registrar and be kept as a permanent record. The , destruction will be
carried out in such a manner that any usable materials that make up the artifact can be
salvaged (e.g., wood from furniture kept for repairs to other pieces in the collection).
Members of Black Creek Pioneer Village staff or their immediate family members may
not purchase items deaccessioned by sale. "Immediate family" is defined as father,
mother, step- father, step- mother, foster parent, brother, sister, spouse (including
common law spouse), child (including child of common law spouse), stepchild, ward,
father -in -law, mother -in -law, or relative permanently residing with a Black Creek Pioneer
Village staff member.
3.4 Documentation of Deaccessioning:
• Reasons for deaccessioning to be documented at all times.
• All stages of the deaccessioning process up to and including ultimate disposal to be
documented in the Black Creek Pioneer Village artifact collections data base.
• All deaccessioned artifacts to be photographed prior to their being deaccessioned .
4. Staff Conduct:
In developing and managing the collection, Black Creek Pioneer Village staff will
conduct themselves in a professional and ethical manner. This behaviour includes, but
is not limited to:
• No person involved in the policy or management of Black Creek Pioneer Village or
in its employ may compete with the museum for objects or may take advantage of
privileged information received because of his or her position. Should a conflict of
interest develop between the needs of the individual and Black Creek, those of
Black Creek will prevail. Special care will be exercised concerning any offer of an
item, either for sale or as a tax- benefit gift, from members of Black Creek's
governing authority, members of its staff, or the families or close associates of the se
persons.
• No member of Black Creek Pioneer Village's staff directly involved in the
development or management of its collection should compete with the Village either
in the acquisition of objects or in any personal collecting activity.
• No member of Black Creek Pioneer Village's staff should participate for personal
gain in any dealing (buying or selling for profit) in cultural property.
• No member of Black Creek Pioneer Village's staff should accept any gift, hospitality
, or any form of reward from any dealer, auctioneer, or other person as an improper
inducement of soliciting favour or in respect of the purchase of museum items or
any other benefits.
• No member of Black Creek Pioneer Village's staff should accept any "special price"
or discount for personal purchases from any dealer with whom the individual or
Black Creek has a professional relationship.
259
• No person involved in the policy or management of Black Creek Pioneer Village or
in its employ should be permitted to appropriate items from the museum's
collection, even temporarily, to any personal collection or for personal use.
• Members of Black Creek Pioneer Village staff or their immediate family members
may not purchase items deaccessioned by sale (see § 3.4).
The Collections Policy will be reviewed annually by staff and where necessary I revisions shall
be recommended for approval of the Board of The Toronto and Region Conservation Authority.
260
Appendix
A.1 Conventions Governing Ethical Conduct Concerning Collections Development and
Management:
Canadian Museums Association and the Assembly of First Nations. Report of the Task
Force on Museums and First Peoples. Ottawa: Assembly of First Nations, Canadian
Museums Association, 1992.
United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization. UNESCO Convention
of the Means of Prohibiting and Preventing the Illicit Import, Export, and Transfer of
Ownership of Cultural Properly (14 November 1970).
UNIDROIT Convention on Stolen or Illegally Exported Cultural Objects (Rome, 24 June
1995) .
A.2 Acts Governing Legislative Requirements Concerning Collections Development and
Management:
A.2.1 Federal Legislation:
Cultural Property Export and Import Act (1974- 75- 76, c.50; R.S. 1985, c. C -51, s. 50 -s.
52, and related provisions).
The Firearms Act (Bill C -68) (1995. c.68; R.S. 1996 -97) (Canadian Criminal Code
84 -117).
A.2.2 Provincial Legislation:
Freedom of Information and Protection of Individual Privacy Act (1980 R.S.O.).
The Municipal Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act, (1989 R.S.O.).
261
RES. #C54 /06 -
Moved by:
Seconded by:
ADVISORY BOARDS
Terms of Reference. Review of Terms of Reference for the advisory
boards.
Bill O'Donnell
Rob Ford
THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT the terms of reference of the
Advisory Boards be reviewed by the respective Board and each Advisory Board advise of
changes they wish to make.
AMENDMENT
RES. #C55 /06
Moved by:
Seconded by:
Bill O'Donnell
Rob Ford
THAT the following replace the main motion:
THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT no changes be made to the
terms of reference of the Advisory Boards at this time.
THAT AMENDMENT WAS CARRIED
THE MAIN MOTION, AS AMENDED, WAS CARRIED
RATIONALE
The Chair of the Business Excellence Advisory Board (BEAB) asked staff to bring a report to
BEAB on the Terms of Reference for the advisory boards to determine if there is any
opportunity to transfer some of the responsibilities from BEAB to the other advisory boards for
a better distribution of workload. Staff concur that the timing is appropriate to review the terms
of reference as, they have been in effect for 3 years and should be reviewed prior to the new
board being appointed in 2007. Staff recommend that BEAB review the terms of reference and
make any recommendations to the Authority. If changes are approved, staff recommend they
be in affect for the first meeting of each advisory board in the 2007 meeting year. The current
terms of reference are in Attachment 1 for reference.
Report prepared by: Jim Dillane, 416- 667 -6292
For Information contact: Jim Dillane, 416 - 667 -6292; Kathy Stranks, ext 5264
Date: August 28, 2006
Attachments: 1
262
Attachment 1
Terms of Reference for the Business Excellence Advisory Board
(Adopted by Authority Resolution #A178/03, September 26, 2003
Amended by Authority Resolution #A370/04, January 28, 2005)
To initiate, study, report on and recommend a comprehensive program of internal
organizational development and corporate policies relating to essential services, land
management of TRCA lands and facilities and administrative management for the TRCA, the
outcomes of which will enable TRCA to meet the objectives of The Living City.
Without restricting the foregoing, the specific Terms of Reference shall include:
• Strategic and Business plans;
• Budget, guidelines and annual budget recommendations;
• Liaison with The Conservation Foundation of Greater Toronto and its fundraising initiatives;
• Banking, Audit and Legal services;
• Risk management;
• Business development and revenue generation;
• Governance and decision - making;
• Marketing, communications and fundraising;
• Financial procedures;
• Leases and other implementation tools for recreational and public use opportunities on
TRCA lands;
• Strategic partnerships and collaboration agreements;
• Business case and financial implications surrounding the implementation of projects,
programs and facilities;
• Management agreements for TRCA lands to be maintained by other agencies or enabling
TRCA to care for the lands of other owners;
• Implementation of education, recreation, and public use opportunities on TRCA lands,
including Black Creek Pioneer Village, conservation areas, education field centres and
management plans;
• TRCA policy documents relating to, but not limited to:
• Human Resources
• Information Systems Technology and Management
263
• Banking and Audit
• Risk Management
• Purchasing & Disposal of Equipment and Services
• Environmental Management Systems Targets
• Marketing /communications
• Land Management
• Education and Public Use Facilities;
• Serving as the TRCA Audit Committee in which role the board shall recommend the
appointment of auditors, ensure their independence, monitor the relationship with the
appointed auditors and ensure that recommendations of the auditors are acted upon by
management.
264
Terms of Reference for the Sustainable Communities Board
(As Adopted by Authority Resolution #A178/03, September 26, 2003)
To initiate, study, report on and recommend a comprehensive program of community outreach
and leadership development towards the sustainable communities objective of The Living City.
Without restricting the foregoing, the specific Terms of Reference shall include:
• Program and project development in the areas of sustainable urban development and
growth management;
• The development, testing, protection and enhancement of "green infrastructure" and
ecological design practices in city- building;
• Emerging issues, implementation approaches and roles to achieve sustainable
communities in the areas of energy, air, climate change, urban agriculture and
environmental /human health;
• Innovative pilot projects, program models and partnerships;
• Ecologically sound agricultural practices;
• Formal and non - formal learning programs to address sustainable living;
• New community outreach program models;
• Sustainability monitoring and reporting initiatives;
• Planning and development of The Living City Centre at Kortright;
• Best Practices and demonstration opportunities in any of the above.
265
Terms of Reference For The Watershed Management Advisory Board
(Adopted by Authority Resolution #A178/03, September 26, 2003)
To initiate, study, report and recommend a comprehensive program of watershed and
waterfront management for the region under the jurisdiction of the TRCA.
Without restricting the foregoing, the specific Terms of Reference shall include:
• Development and implementation of watershed management strategies and shoreline
management strategies, based on ecosystem planning approaches, which integrate
environment, society and economy and are widely supported by municipalities, landowners
and communities;
• Policy, program and project development in the areas of natural heritage management as
part of urban growth; protection and restoration of headwaters, marshes and other
terrestrial and aquatic systems;
• Research and monitoring to understand and track watershed health;
• Planning land acquisition including identification of critical properties for public ownership
to protect significant features and environmental functions;
• Inspire and support community involvement in all aspects'of environmental management
on a watershed basis;
• Location and phasing of remedial flood and erosion control projects and environmental
regeneration activities;
• Operation and maintenance of all TRCA water management structures;
• Development and operation of the flood warning and forecasting system;
• Planning and development of waterfront recreational projects and environmental
regeneration activities;
• Recommendation and administration of regulations for fill, construction and alteration to
waterways applicable to valley and waterfront lands, and the means of their enforcement;
• Watershed based source protection planning and implementation;
• Management of groundwater resource including it's interaction with surface water.
266
RES. #C56/06 -
Moved by:
Seconded by:
CONSERVATION AUTHORITIES ACT
Term of Appointment for Conservation Authority Members.
Recommendation to Conservation Ontario.
Bill Fisch
Dick O'Brien
THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT Toronto and Region
Conservation Authority (TRCA) recommend that Conservation Ontario request that the
Ministry of Natural Resources amend Section 14. (4) - Term, of the Conservation
Authorities Act to allow members to be appointed to conservation authorities for a
maximum four -year term at one time to be in line with Section 6 of Municipal Elections
Act;
THAT TRCA's participating member muncipalities be requested to make appointments for
a two -year term, or until their successor is appointed;
AND FURTHER THAT Conservation Ontario and the participating member municipalities
be so advised.
CARRIED
RATIONALE
Section 14. (4) of the Conservation Authorities Act reads "No member of an authority shall be
appointed to hold office for more than three years at any one time. ". Since the Municipal Act
has changed so that Council terms are 4 years rather than 3, Conservation Ontario has
requested all that conservation authorities provide their recommendations as to what changes,
if any, should be recommended to the Ministry of Natural Resources to bring the term of
appointment to conservation authorities more into alignment with the municipal,term.
For TRCA, the appointments made in recent years by the Regions of Peel, York and Durham,
and the Town of Mono/Township of Adjala - Tosorontio have been for 3 years, or until their
successor is appointed, and the City of Toronto has made appointments for 18 months, or until
their successor is appointed.
Staff is recommending that Section 14. (4) be amended to read "No member of an authority
shall be appointed to hold office for more than four years at any one time." to be in line with the
Municipal Elections Act. Further, staff is recommending that TRCA's participating member
municipalities be requested to make appointments for a two -year term to allow for flexibility in
appointment schedules and to provide the opportunity for more members of municipal council
to gain experience with TRCA.
Report prepared by: Kathy Stranks, extension 5264
For Information contact: Kathy Stranks, extension 5264
Date: August 30, 2006
267
RES. #C57/06 -
Moved by:
Seconded by:
LICENCE AGREEMENT WITH TRANSPORT CANADA
Entering into a licence agreement for a ten year term with Transport
Canada to facilitate the management of a 23 hectare property with a trail
system on federal Greenspace lands, located on the Oak Ridges
Moraine, south of Webb Road, east of Concession 2, Township of
Uxbridge, Regional Municipality of Durham.
Bill Fisch
Dick O'Brien
THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT the Toronto and Region
Conservation Authority (TRCA) enter into a licence agreement with Transport Canada for
management of a 23 hectare (56.8 acres) property with a publicly accessible trail system
on land owned by Transport Canada containing a 20 car gravel parking lot and a 2.2
kilometre loop trail system, with said land being Part of Lot 5, Concession 2, Township of
Uxbridge, Regional Municipality of Durham;
THAT the term of the licence agreement be ten years;
THAT the total payment to Transport Canada be $2.00, for the term of the agreement;
THAT the agreement be in terms and conditions satisfactory to TRCA staff and solicitors;
AND FURTHER THAT the appropriate TRCA officials be authorized and directed to
execute all necessary documentation required.
CARRIED
BACKGROUND
Transport Canada contacted TRCA staff in 2005 to investigate the possibility of entering into a
licence agreement on 23 hectares of federal Greenspace lands that are located on the Oak
Ridges Moraine in close proximity to the TRCA -owned Goodwood and Secord properties. The
main purpose of the agreement is' to have TRCA manage the property and trail system in order
to facilitate important linkages to the Oak Ridges Trail, TRCA and Township of Uxbridge trails.
Transport Canada identified that with TRCA expertise including property and trail management
experience, the establishment of a partnership agreement on the lands would benefit the
community and other regional trail users and establish a framework for future partnerships
involving Transport Canada lands.
In consultation with TRCA, Transport Canada has been developing a 20 car gravel parking lot
with a trail head and a 2.2 kilometre loop trail system on the property. The parking lot is
accessible off Concession 2, and the trail system will be linked at the southwest and southeast
corners of the property, along Webb Road to the Oak Ridges Trail and the TRCA -owned
Goodwood and Secord properties.
Following discussions with Transport Canada, TRCA staff contacted the Township of Uxbridge
and the Qak Ridges Trail Association (ORTA) to review the concept and identify any issues or
concerns. All parties concurred and supported the proposed agreement and identified that
they would work in partnership with TRCA to plan and develop the best trail connections from
the Transport Canada lands to the existing Uxbridge trail system.
268
A Plan illustrating the property location and trails is attached.
FINANCIAL DETAILS
We are developing a partnership with the ORTA whereby they will manage the trails and
subject property and therefore there will be minimal operating costs to TRCA.
Report prepared by: Mike Bender, extension 5287
For Information contact: Mike Bender, extension 5287, Ron Dewell, extension 5245
Date: September 13, 2006
Attachments: 1
269
Attachment 1
270
RES. #C58 /06 -
Moved by:
Seconded by:
ACCOUNTS RECEIVABLE
August 29, 2006. Staff report on accounts receivable, as of August 29,
2006.
Bill Fisch
Rob Ford
THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT the Accounts Receivable status
report, as of May 26, 2006 be received.
AMENDMENT
RES. #C59 /06
Moved by:
Seconded by:
Bill Fisch
Rob Ford
THAT the following be inserted after the main motion:
AND FURTHER THAT staff report back at the next meeting on the status of the DeRuyter
file, and if not resolved by that time, that the Business Excellence Advisory Board take
appropriate action to resolve the file.
THE AMENDMENT WAS CARRIED
THE MAIN MOTION, AS AMENDED, WAS CARRIED
RATIONALE
The schedule below summarizes the status of receivables, including aging and classification.
The schedule excludes $10,197 in accumulated interest arrears on invoices outstanding for
more than 30 days.
271
ACCOUNTS RECEIVABLE AGING, BY CATEGORY
(Excluding Municipal Levy and TWRC Funding- As at August 29, 2006
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
3,574
33,321
36,682
43,117
116,694
13.1%
GOVERNMENT
159,133
265,295
36,268
. 1,747
462,443
51.7%
DEVELOPMENT
SERVICES
325.02
17,250
285
13,900
31,435
3.5%
CORPORATE,
INDIVIDUAL AND
COMMUNITY
GROUPS
159,313
76,681
10,072
36,745
282,811
31.7%
TOTAL
322,020
392,547
83,307
95,509
893,383
100.0%
% OF TOTAL
36.1%
43.9%
9.3%
10.7%
' 100.0%
288
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
TDSB
14,124.00
645.16
106
Meals at the EOEC
TCDSB
7,804.38
356.49
93
Meals and accommodation at LSG
TCDSB
5,778.00
263.93
93
Meals and accommodation at LSG
TCDSB
7,115.50
325.02
93
Meals and accommodation at LSG
Orchard Park PS
5,182.24
236.71
93
Meals and accommodation at
Claremont FC
Humberside
Montessori School
2,407.50
109.96
98
Meals and accommodation at
Claremont FC
Wild Water Kingdom
34,077.13
Note
151
2006 interim realty taxes
Basciano Parkin Ltd.
2,000.00
901.91
768
Planning fees. .
G, S, & J DeRuyter
4,500.00
645.25
288
Planning fees.
TOTALS
82,988.75
3,484.43
Note: Interest is charged on late payments at the rate of 1% above prime rate, as per the lease
agreement.
Toronto and Region Conservation Authority solicitors, Gardiner Roberts, has initiated litigation
against Basciano. DeRuyter is no longer an active file. The applicant has been advised that
there will be no further consideration and any approval will not be released until the fees with
interest are paid.
As for the amounts due from schools and school boards, it is not unusual to see amounts in
the 90 -day plus Category at this time of year. It is expected that all of these amounts be
paid by the third week in September.
272
Receivable balances, as reported on each of the previous reports to the advisory board, after
2002, are presented as follows:
DATE
Total ($)
90 -Day Plus ($)
August 29, 2006
893,383
95,509
May 26, 2006
989,193
32,946
March 30, 2006
1,252,876
134,521
February 05, 2006
1,264,876
105,873
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: September 5, 2006
SECTION IV - ITEMS FOR THE INFORMATION OF THE BOARD
RES. #C60/06 -
Moved by:
Seconded by:
GOOD NEWS STORIES
Highlights of Toronto and Region Conservation Authority's Work. Receipt
of Good News Stories for the months of June, July and August, 2006,
from all sections of the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority
(TRCA).
Andrew Schulz
Rob Ford
IT IS RECOMMENDED THAT the report on "Good News Stories" for June, July and
August, 2006, be received.
CARRIED
273
BACKGROUND
Management Team, a committee made up of senior staff at TRCA, meets monthly to discuss
strategic initiatives and organizational development.
RATIONALE
Staff began a process of highlighting the key accomplishments of each of their sections from
the past month at each Management Team meeting. In keeping with TRCA's objective of
Business Excellence, these accomplishments will be brought to each Business Excellence
Advisory Board for the information of the members. The following are the accomplishments
cited at the June, July and August meetings, and a brief description of each.
• West Gormley OMB Decision - Ontario Municipal Board (OMB) decision recognized the
quality of the secondary plan by noting that "This document (the secondary plan) is
exemplary in its clarity, comprehensiveness, and its detail. It is hard to imagine how the
document could be improved. ".
• Wilder Property - Acquisition in process. Will be the highest valued property donation to
TRCA to date, at close to $1.4 million and almost 250 acres (17 acres at $400,000 and $1
million in stocks).
• CIBC Multicultural Day - BCPV was sold out on June 17th with approximately 1,400
people attending the CIBC function.
• Sustainable House - Winners of the Archetype Sustainable House Competition were
announced at a special summer solstice gala at the Design Exchange (DX) in Toronto. The
chosen design, named 'Building Blocks', will be built as a full scale demonstration model
for sustainable development at the Kortright Centre for Conservation in Vaughan. Ontario
home builders attending a recent TRCA led workshop reviewed the winning project. They
were impressed with the design and believe it is a house they can build. There is a
commitment of resources from the Greater Toronto Homebuilders to help build the
sustainable house.
• Kettle Lakes Nature Reserve - Spine Trail completed.
• Etobicoke /Mimico Watersheds - 60th anniversary event was a great success. Turning
Over a New Leaf: The Etobicoke and Mimico Creeks Watersheds Report Card 2006, was
launched.
• EcoSchools - TRCA's Claremont, Lake St. George and Albion Hills field centres, Kortright
Centre and Black Creek Pioneer Village successfully completed the year long process of
becoming Certified Ontario EcoSchools, demonstrating commitment and excellence in
energy conservation, waste reduction, ecological literacy and school ground greening.
TRCA facilities are the first non - school board facilities to achieve this designation. TRCA
participated in the development of the EcoSchools program and this June, formalized its
program management participation through the execution of a Memorandum of
Understanding with York University and seven boards of education.
• Lake St. George - A three year, $115,000 grant from the Ministry of Research and
Innovation for the development and implementation of "Research and Innovation Science
Camps ", for grades 7 -9 "at risk" students, was given to the Toronto District School Board, in
partnership with TRCA. The camps wUl start in 2007 at Lake St. George.
• Oak Ridges Moraine - Conservation Authorities Moraine Coalition, Oak Ridges Moraine
Foundation and TRCA released a tourism /promotional brochure for urban residents on the
Oak Ridges Moraine with the theme "Discover and Care for the Oak Ridges Moraine ".
• Multicultural Day - Event for TRCA staff had approximately 160 people attend.
274
• Block 12 - Agreement reached for edge management plan implementation which means
approximately $150,000 in funding to TRCA over the next 3 years, with more still up for
discussion.
• JD Power Survey Results - More responses from new homebuyers than anticipated.
Sustainable practices project survey ongoing, but have completed 5 research studies (20
people in each) with homeowners. Studies showed that people have a quick learning
curve and high excitement level for the material presented. Over half of the participants
signed up to participate in demonstration projects.
• Regional Biodiversity - Winter Wren spotted at Boyd Conservation Area. Trumpeter
Swans bred at Kortright. Completely unexpected records of singing black- throated blue
warbler, black- throated green warbler, wood thrushes and ovenbird were surveyed along
Mimico Creek, south of Bloor, but do not appear to be breeding. Virginia Rail breeding at
one of the Centennial Park wetlands - a reinstatement of the species as a breeding bird for
the Mimico watershed. The eastern screech -owls on Mimico Creek, just north of The
Queensway, successfully fledged young this summer.
• Restoration Activities - 2 acres of floodplain restored on Old King Road in Bolton. Two
other significant restoration projects underway in Goodwood and a swamp in the Humber,
among many others.
• Don Valley Brick Works - Evergreen Foundation received $15 million grant from the
federal government for the Brick Works project. Construction to begin in 2007. Approvals
have been provided for the enhancement of the Don Valley Brick Works and TRCA has
authorized the signingof a lease with the Evergreen Foundation, for the site to become a
destination of choice for residents and tourists.
• Bruce's Mill Conservation Area - The Rotary Club of Whitchurch Stouffville committed
$31,000 to TRCA for the construction of a new picnic shelter at Bruce's Mill Conservation
Area. Received an $8,000 grant from TD Canada Trust for implementation of our children's
"Knowing Nature Staying Safer" program.
• West Don River - All approvals (DFO, MNR and Transport Canada) were received for the
slope stabilization and channel realignment project on the West Don River below 220
Wicksteed Avenue, with work scheduled to commence in August 2006.
• Flood and Erosion Control - TRCA received approval for $486,500 in funding from the
Ministry of Natural Resources for flood and erosion control repairs and studies.
• Mimico Waterfront Linear Park - Implementation of Phase I started on July 10, 2006. The
groundbreaking event was held on July 24, 2006 and was well attended by all levels of
government, media and the public.
• Source Water Protection - Interim Watershed Characterization Report completed for
source protection planning for drinking water in our jurisdiction.
• Lower Don Environmental Assessment - Ministry approval has been granted to the Lower
Don EA process, commencing the indepth study of flood protection and naturalization at
this critical urban area for the revitalization of the Toronto waterfront.
• Tommy Thompson Park Master Plan - Canadian Environmental Assessment Act approval
has been granted to the Tommy Thompson master plan releasing federal funding for this
tri- lateral program of the Toronto Waterfront Revitalization Corporation.
• Mountain Bike Race Series - TRCA now hosts the two top bike races in North America.
Over 1,500 riders participated in a race this month at Albion Hills Conservation Area.
• Living City Campus - PowerStream has made a significant donation of $250,000 to the
Living City Campus at Kortright.
275
• Block 39 Sustainable Community Initiative - The 8 builders working on Block 39 have
committed in writing to the City of Vaughan to construct all 1,600 homes to meeting the
Energy Star for Homes certification. This is now the largest Energy Star project in progress
in Ontario.
• Mayor's Megawatt Challenge - Federation of Canadian Municipalities (FCM) has made a
significant commitment to the market transformation program in an effort to reduce
consumption among municipalities in Canada.
• Mink at Tommy Thompson Park - A mink was spotted in Tommy Thompson Park using
the newly constructed Cell 1.
• Professional Access and Integration Enhancement (PAIE) Program - Program
designed to find placement for internationally trained planners and geoscientists was
launched with Mike CoIle, Minister of Citizenship and Immigration, who represented the
funding ministry.
• Camp Villas OMB Decision - TRCA, with our municipal partners and local residents, were
successful in making our case before the OMB for the preservation of these lands, and the
appeal by the developer was dismissed. As a result of this decision, and TRCA's
negotiations through the associated subdivision process, the subject lands and the
adjacent valleylands that were also owned by the same landowner, are to be conveyed into
public ownership. In all, an area of approximately 35 acres of valleyland and contiguous
woodland, which is a part of a large forest and valleyland tract in this area, and which
contains significant and threatened plant and animal species will be gratuitously Conveyed
to TRCA.
Report prepared by: Kathy Stranks, extension 5264
For Information contact: Kathy Stranks, extension 5264
Date: July 3, 2006
RES. #C61/06 - AUDITOR'S MANAGEMENT LETTER
Update on Outstanding Items. Reporting on status of recommendations.
Moved by:
Seconded by:
Bill Fisch
Dick O'Brien
IT IS RECOMMENDED THAT the report dated August 31, 2006, on matters outstanding
with respect to the Auditor's management letter be received.
CARRIED
BACKGROUND
At Authority Meeting #3/06, held on April 28, 2006, Resolution #A75/06 was approved as
follows:
THAT the transfer of funds into and from reserves during 2005, as outlined in the
schedule to the financial statements entitled "Continuity of Reserves ", be approved;
276
THAT the 2005 audited financial statements, as presented, be approved, signed by the
Chair and Secretary- Treasurer of the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA),
and distributed to each member municipality and the Minister of Natural Resources, in
accordance with subsection 38 (3) of the Conservation Authorities Act;
AND FURTHER THAT staff report back every 3 months, starting in September, on the
progress in implementing the 3 outstanding issues from last years Management Letter,
until they are completed.
RATIONALE
Staff are reporting on progress in resolving the issues raised in the Auditor's Management
Letter.
1. Payroll system generate exception reports which should be reviewed:
• Exception reports being done and reviewed.
2. Feasibility of implementing pre- numbered billing and "request -to- invoice" forms:
• Staff has scoped out with a software consultant the requirements to achieve this. The
project has been prioritized and the plan is to implement by March, 2007.
3. Information Technology:
a) Development of an off site operational site as part of "disaster recovery plan ":
• A staff team has' been established to determine the most appropriate solution to "off
site" protection. An inventory of all hardware and software requirements is being
completed as the first step in what must be accommodated off site. The team will
make its final recommendations by November.
b) Non -water fire suppression in the server room:
• This relates to the "off site" service issue in 3(a). The nature of the building at 5
Shoreham Drive is such that non -water fire suppression in the server room is not
practical. The solution is to create off -site redundancy.
c) Electronic door lock to the•server room:
• This will be done when the main front door to 5 Shoreham Drive is replaced with an
automatic door that meets access requirements. The door will include a
computerized electronic lock system and the same system will be installed in the
server room. This project is scheduled for completion this fall. In the interim, the
server room door is kept locked and keys are available only to IT and senior staff.
The management letter also asked that working papers and draft financial statements be
available prior to commencement of the work of the audit team. Staff has adjusted the
schedule for the 2006 audit to accommodate this requirement.
Report prepared by: Jim Dillane, extension 6292
For Information contact: Jim Dillane, extension 6292
Rocco Sgambelluri, extension 5232
Date: August 31, 2006
277
RES. #C62/06 -
Moved by:
Seconded by:
SUMMARY OF REQUESTS FOR QUOTATIONS AND REQUESTS FOR
PROPOSALS
January 1, 2006 to June 30, 2006. Receipt of the 2006 mid -year summary
of procurements approved by the Chief Administrative Officer.
Bill Fisch
Rob Ford
IT IS RECOMMENDED THAT the summary of procurements approved by the Chief
Administrative Officer for the January 1, 2006 to June 30, 2006 period be received.
CARRIED
BACKGROUND
At Authority Meeting #5/05, held on June 24, 2005, Resolution #A124/05 approved the
Purchasing Policy, and resolved, in part, as follows:
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;
Pursuant to the resolution quoted above, the summary of Requests for Quotations and
Requests for Proposals from January 1, 2006 to June 30, 2006, is found in Attachmerits 1 and
2, respectively. The report includes approvals of $10,000 or greater, to the maximum allowable
limit under the policy. As permitted under the approved policy, the Chief Administrative Officer
has designated senior staff, generally including Director and Manager level positions, approval
authority for purchases up to $10,000.
Report prepared by: Kathy Stranks, extension 5264
For Information contact: Kathy Stranks, extension 5264
Date: July 12, 2006
Attachments: 1
278
Attachment 1
REQUESTS FOR QUOTATION
Sole Source (up to $50,000)
January 1, 2006 - June 30, 2006
Report Name
Awarded Bidder
Cost
($)
Plus Applicable
Taxes
The Living City Campus Master Plan Concept
Urban Strategies
Incorporated
$34,034.00
Lower Don River Projects
• Meeting Minute Takers for Technical Advisory
Committee Meetings
• Public Forums/Working Sessions
ERH Associates
Ehl Harrison Consulting
Inc.
$5,000.00- $10,000.00
$5,000.00- $10,000.00
Don Mouth Naturalization and Port Lands Flood
Protection Projects - Facilitator of Public Meetings
Nicole Swehurn
$35,040.00
Bala Pedestrian Underpass Component of Don
River Bridge and Related Works
Rogers Cable
$46,920.00
Highland Creek at Morningside Avenue Restoration
PARISH Geomorphic
Limited
$14,350.00
Centre of Excellence - Asset Review
CB Richard Ellis
- $23,000.00
REQUESTS FOR QUOTATION
Lowest Bid (up to $100,000)
January 1, 2006 - June 30, 2006
Report Name
Awarded Bidder
Cost
• ($)
Plus Applicable
Taxes
Acquisition of Vehicles
• One New 2006 Midsize SUV .
• Scarborough Nissan
$33,699.00
• One Utility Tractor
• Stewarts New Holland
$42,173.00
• One Loader/Tractor
• Nobleton Farm Service
$43,800.00
Award of Contract for Supply and Delivery of:
• Pile Top Soil
• Arnts Top Soil Ltd.
$57,280.00
• 3 to 5 Tonne Armour Stone
• J.C. Rock Ltd.
$16,485.00
• 25 -75 mm Cobble Stone
• Dufferin Aggregates
$93,000.00
Roof Repair - Former Ward Property, 2 Wynnview
B.W. Doucette
$9,440.00
Drive, Scarborough
Interior Painting of 5 Shoreham Drive, Downsview
Peter Painting Decorating
and Wallpapering
$20,600.00
279
Attachment 2
REQUESTS FOR PROPOSAL
Sole Source (up to $50,000)
January 1, 2006 - June 30, 2006
Report Name
Awarded Bidder
Cost
($)
Plus Applicable
Taxes •
Frenchman's Bay Watershed Stormwater
Management Master Plan
Gartner Lee Limited
$30,000.00
Source Water Protection, Watershed
Characterization and Conceptual Water Budget
Gartner Lee Limited
$36,000.00
Proposal to Develop a URF -Based Water Budget
for Carruthers Creek Watershed
Clanfica Inc.
$21,000.00
Water Budget Policy Paper and Rouge Watershed
Planning Study
Gartner Lee Limited
$12,000.00
Source Protection Contract
S.S. Papadopulos &
Associates, & Golder
Associates Ltd. .
$32,000.00
Port Union Waterfront Improvement Project -
Property Acquisition Services
Johnston Donald
Associates Inc.
Extension of contract
at $7,500.00
Total contract value is
$19,000.00
G. Ross Lord and Claireville Dams and Reservoirs
Cumming Cockburn
Limited
$40,000.00
REQUESTS FOR PROPOSAL
Competitive Bid (up to $100,000)
January 1, 2006 - June 30, 2006
Report Name
•
Awarded Bidder
Cost
($)
Plus Applicable
Taxes
Sustainable Practices Project
Freeman Associates
$72,229.00
Don Watershed Regeneration Priorities Plan
Water's Edge Ltd.
$17,062.50
280
NEW BUSINESS
RES. #C63 /06 -
Moved by:
Seconded by:
ACCOUNTS RECEIVABLES
Rob Ford
Bill O'Donnell
THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT staff report on the accounts
receivable policy and protocol for payment of all services to the Toronto and Region
Conservation Authority.
RES. #C64 /06 - ALBION HILLS WETLAND
Moved by:
Seconded by:
Dick O'Brien
Rob Ford
CARRIED
THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT the Albion Hills wetland be
named the Husky /Earth Rangers Wetland.
TERMINATION
CARRIED
ON MOTION, the meeting terminated at 10:35 a.m., on Friday, September 15, 2006.
David Barrow
Chair
/ks
281
Brian Denney
Secretary- Treasurer
THE TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY
MEETING OF THE BUSINESS EXCELLENCE ADVISORY BOARD #5/06
October 20, 2006
The Business Excellence Advisory Board Meeting #5/06, was held in the South Theatre,
Black Creek Pioneer Village, on Friday, October 20, 2006. The Chair David Barrow, called
the meeting to order at 9:07 a.m.
PRESENT
Paul Ainslie Member
David Barrow Chair
Bill Fisch Member
Rob Ford Member
Dick O'Brien Chair, Authority
Bill O'Donnell Member
Andrew Schulz Member
ABSENT
Peter Milczyn Member
Maja Prentice Member
RES. #C65/06 - MINUTES
Moved by: Bill O'Donnell
Seconded by: Andrew Schulz
THAT the Minutes of Meeting #5/06, held on September 15, 2006, be approved.
CARRIED
PRESENTATIONS
(a) A presentation by Jim Dillane, Director, Finance and Business Services, in regards to
item 7.1 - 2007 Preliminary Estimates - Operating and Capital Budget.
(b) A presentation by Gary Wilkins, Humber Watershed Specialist, in regards to item 7.3 -
Oak Ridges Corridor Park Management Plan.
282
RES. #C66 /06 - PRESENTATIONS
Moved by:
Seconded by:
Bill O'Donnell
Dick O'Brien
THAT above -noted presentation (a) be heard and received.
CARRIED
RES. #C67 /06 - PRESENTATIONS
Moved by:
Seconded by:
Bill Fisch
Paul Ainslie
THAT above -noted presentation (b) be heard and received.
CARRIED
SECTION I - ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY ACTION
RES. #C68 /06 - 2007 PRELIMINARY ESTIMATES, OPERATING AND CAPITAL
Approval of the 2007 Preliminary Estimates, Operating and Capital.
Moved by:
Seconded by:
Bill O'Donnell
Dick O'Brien
THE BOARD - RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT the 2007 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 2007 Preliminary
Estimates, Operating and Capital.
CARRIED
RATIONALE
As members are aware, approval of the 2007 Preliminary Estimates, Operating and Capital, is
the first formal stage toward approval of the 2007 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 4% over 2006.
Gross expenditures are estimated to grow at 3.7 %. This growth is primarily salary/wage /benefit
related. The Authority approved a revised salary plan which is being implemented over 3 years,
of which 2007 is the final year. 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.
283
Non -levy revenues are projected to grow at 3.7 %. Significant increases are projected in
operational areas, development fees and funding for environmental assessment reviews.
In terms of Net Operating Expenditures (gross expenditures Tess operating revenue), the
increase is 3.7 %. 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 2006 level, the increase in the municipal levy
is projected at 4 %.
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 Region 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 (using 2006 CVA figures to
correspond to submissions to participating municipalities).
The capital estimates for the municipal partners have been submitted and may change as
negotiations proceed. The table summarizing the municipal capital program will be faxed as
an added item before the meeting. The final capital budget will include Toronto Waterfront
Revitalization Corporation projects as well as funding from other sources and any carry forward
of project funding from 2006.
Staff will make a presentation to the board on the 2007 Preliminary Estimates, Operating and
Capital on October 20, 2006.
Report prepared by: Jim Dillane, 416 - 667 -6292
For Information contact: Jim Dillane, 416 - 667 -6292
Date: October 04, 2006
Attachments: 1
284
Attachment 1
?C
TORONTO AND REGION "Y
onserva ton
for The Living City
2007 PRELIMINARY OPERATING BUDGET
As submitted to the Business Excellence Advisory Board on October 20, 2006
285
TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY
2007 BUDGET
TABLE OF CONTENTS Pages
Section 1 Apportionment of Levy
2007 Apportionment of Levy - Summary 1
2007 Apportionment of Levy - Matching /Non- Matchirg Format 2
Basis of Apportionment - Municipal Levy 2007 3 - 4
Section 2 Operating Budget
Operating Budget Summary 5 - 6
Full -Time Equivalents of Staffing 7
2007 Operating Budget - Detailed 8 - 26
SECTION 1
2007 APPORTIONMENT OF LEVY
287
TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY
APPORTIONMENT OF 2007 PRELIMINARY OPERATING BUDGET LEVY
GENERAL PROGRAMS SUMMARY
< - - -- 2007 GENERAL LEVY - --
LEVY
EXCLUDING TAX
TAX ADJ. ADJUST.
$ $
ADJALA - TOSORONTIO 782
DURHAM 314,086 48,481
TORONTO 6,796,014
MONO 853
PEEL 1,133, 407 79,579
YORK 1,908,165 54,133
LEVY ON HAND / SPECIAL
* excludes Rouge Park levy
10,153, 307 182,193
9
10,153, 307 182,193
288
Page 1
2006 Operating
OPERATING Change
LEVY * 07/06
$ $ %
751 31 4.1%
350,271 12,296 3.5%
6,529,952 266,062 4.1%
819 34 4.2%
1,168,613 44,373 3.8%
1,887,594 74,704 4.0%
9,938,000 397,500 4.0%
9,938,000 397,500 4.0%
Page 2
TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY
APPORTIONMENT OF 2007 LEVIES
MATCHING* AND NON - MATCHING FORMAT
* Based on preliminary estimates of provincial funding.
289
OPERATING LEVY
MATCHING* NON- MATCHING
TOTAL
$
$
$
ADJALA - TOSORONTIO
65
717
782
DURHAM
26;164
336,403
362,567
TORONTO
566,128
6,229,886
6,796,014
MONO
71
782
853
PEEL
94,416
1,118,570
1,212,986
YORK
158,956
1,803,342
1,962,298
845,800
9,489,700
10,335,500
* Based on preliminary estimates of provincial funding.
289
THE TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY
BASIS OF APPORTIONMENT - MUNICIPAL LEVY - 2007
(BASED ON 2005 FOR 2006 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
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
As provided by the Ministry of Natural Resources
$(000's)
1,064,705
20,531,037
370,089,414
928,787
143,540,327
113,539,474
649,693,744
8,175,058
10,165,728
2,190,251
20,531,037
42,314,303
93,684,523
7,541,501
143,540,327
6,035,374
36,862,321
22, 201,156
42,001,635
3,471,920
2,967,069
113,539,474
290
4
r
100
5
*
CURRENT
VALUE
ASSESSMENT
IN WATERSHED
$ (000's)
TOTAL
POPULATION
Page 3
POPULATION
IN
AUTHORITY
42,588
17,104,139
370,089,414
46,439
61,721,729
103,912,622
9,734
181,539
2,101,563
6,255
966,467
626,828
389
151,881
2,101,563
313
430,389
' 564,722
552,916,931
3,892,386
3,249,257
86 7,030,550
95 9,657,441
19 416,148
17,104,139
79,019
84,798
17,722
67,956
80,558
3,367
181,539
151,881
63 26,658,011
33 30,915,893
55 4,147,826.
61,721,729
333,596
581,160
51,711
210,165
191,783
28,441
966,467
430,389
4 241,415
100 36,862,321
99 21,979,145
100 42,001,635
43 1,492,926
45 1,335,181
40,574
213,452
132,667
201,201
20,727
18,207
1,623
213,452
131,340
201,201
8,913
8,193
103,912,622
626,828
564,722
TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY
2007 LEVY APPORTIONMENT :
MUNICIPALITY
ADJ ALA -TOSOR ONTI O
DURHAM, REGIONAL MUNICIPALITY
Ajax
Pickering
Uxbridge
CITY OF TORONTO
TOWN OF MONO
PEEL, REGIONAL MUNICIPALITY OF
Brampton
Mississauga
Cale do n
YORK REGIONAL MUNICIPALITY OF
Aurora
Markham
Richmond
Vaughan
Whitchurch - Stout ville
IGng
*Same as 2006 pending updates
7,030,550
9,657,441
418,148
26, 658, 011
30, 915, 893
4,147,828
241,415
38, 882, 321
21,979,145
42,001,835
1,492,926
1,335,181
MODIFIED
CURRENT VALUE
ASSESSMENT
IN WATERSHED
$(000's)
42,588
17,104,139
370,089,414
48,439
61,721,729
103,912,622
552,916,931
291
2007 GENERAL
LEVY
PROPORTIONATE
FACTOR
Page 4
2006 GENERAL
LEVY
PROPORTIONATE
FACTOR
0.00770%
3.09344%
66.93400%
0.00840%
11.16293%
18.79353%
0_00770%
3.09344%
66.93400%
0.00840%
11.16293%
18.79353%
100.00000%
100.00000%
Page 5
TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUrMORR,
2007 Preliminary Operating Budget
Page 2006 * 2006
Gross Expenditures (by functional Unit) Reference Budget P.
$ $
Finance and Business Services Division
ministratbn
Rental Props rt e5
property Se',ces
u+e Kole &Equipment Resere
Watershed Management Division
VJM Diuiioral rver age me m
Natersned Strateges
Corse nation Fie p Qmres
Planning &Development Division
Deve bpme m Services
Errbrce me m
o . Dirision
°may
mmuni y Trartsbrrratbn Panne rsnips
atoration 9errices Division
5toratbn Se Mlces
ri s and Qlrture Division
rIa &CLnure Di siorar ru$rage mem
roe Raton Areas
rtrgm Centre br Consenatibn
k Ridges Corridor Park
ack peek PioneerViiage
9enrices
e of the m1 O
poste rugragement
porate Secretariat
unan Resources
Ce rti'catbn
perilhum Total
2007 071 06 071 06
Budget % Chtt. ;Chg., 2007 over 2006 mantle
$ nbfrv- ad nadgets a9Fcfed
by COLA and mantefadjasbnents.
Honer teecommunicatormcrarges, IRSuranae Cost
Page a 2,208,500 2,253,800 2,515,600 13.9% 307,100 aaaea,GISrecoaeries clomp n
Page a 1,816,700 1,794,650 1,719,300 -5.4% (97,400) property Tams clam n
Page 10 1,248,200 1,248,200 1,225,400 -1.8% (22, 800) Appeatsprocess red uces Property Taxes
Page 11 -
5,273,400 5,296,650 5,460,300 3.5% 186,900
Page
Page
Page
12 427,800 388,700
13 2,701,900 2,692,600
14 2,346,400 2,287,052
5,476,100 5,368,352
704,700 64.7% 276,900 PAP nnouaa ministration exparuea.Sen.turlaea.
2,518,800 -6.8% ( 183, 100) No spec key funded Report Card projects in2007.
2,429,700 3.6% 83,300
5,653,200 3.2% 177,100
Page t5 2,734,900 2,740,900
Page 1e 532,200 532,200
3,267,100 3,273,100
2,965,600
559,300
3,524,900
8.4% 230,700 2 FTes ponnirg stattassea.
5.1% 27,100
7.9% 257,800
Page 17 2,780,100 2,870,000
Page 18 1,585,000 1,248,574
4,365,100 4,118,574
2,945,200 5.9% 165,100 s Aa min perk, Maternity leave returns.
1,614,900 1.9% 29,900
4,560,100 4.5% 195,000
Page 19 2,231,900 2,601,900
Page 20 802,100 799,985
Page 21 3,250,000 3,160,022
Page 22 1,406,200 1,468,051
Page 23 1,126,000 1,131,019
Page 24 4,228,000 4,081,500
Page 25 1,140,500 1,009,100
11,952,800 11,649,677
New Nursery buitairg op. casts irlolu0irg 75 FTE Aa min
2,117,500 -5.1% (114,400) perk. Lower Asian torg torn Beene.
993,100
3,256,800
1,390,000
1,021,600
4,376,900
1,193,100
12,231,500
rabre rrarketirg /c tatbme r se (vice star asses .Stan
23.8% 191,000 trarmersin.
0.2% 6,800
-1.2% [ 16,200)
9.3 %' ( 104 ,400) Fine-tuning otcoststo run rew prcg ramming .
interpreters rem urea . stanto rnarlotirg. Maintenance
3.5% 148,900 costs up
4.6% 52,600 increases sits.
2.3% 278,700
Page 28 418,000 418,000 419,500 0.4% 1,500
Page 26 320,600 321,100. 341,700 6,6% 21,100
Page 26 475,700 476,200 551,200 15,9% 75,500 Tuitbn,Volumeer network up
• Page 2e 160,000 166,000 - 166,000 New program.serrturuea
2,196,600 2,309,900 2,509,300 14.2% 312,700
94,763,000 34,618,153 36,056,800 3.7% 1,293,800
Page 6
Toronto and Region Cause nation Authority
2007 Preliminary operating Budget
2006 = 2006 2007 071 06 071 06
Budget P. A. Budget % Cha. $ Chn. 2007 ober2006 Mange
$ $ $
Funding Sources:
Prcg ram/Use r tees:
RertaIProperties 2,249,400 2,225,400 2,131,000 -5.3% (118,400) sort re ntaimarket .
sack Cree k Pionee r Villsige 1,965,500 1,855,000 2,152,600 9.5% 187,100 Fee increases
Foal Services 1,237,400 1,091,200 1,313,500 6.1% 76,100 Increased sales.
Doe bprnentServbes 2,627,000 2,627,000 2,757,000 4.9% 130,000 5% increase
Restoration se 'vices 1,608,900 2,062,600 1,525,300 (83,600) sp. Project revenue to 6Cobgy
Consenatbn Areas 3,073,700 2,855,029 3,198,100 4.0% 124,400 Fee increases
Kortrgrrt Centre tor Consenation 1,214,600 1,255,127 1,233,600 1.6% 19,000
Oak Rages Corritlor Park 1,251,000 1,212,208 1,286,000 2.8% 35,000
coraertation Fie* cemresSummary 1,606,700 1,557,470 1,684,900 4.9% 78,200
All Other Prog ram/Use rtees 424,000 423,718 489,000 15.3% 65,000
Resenes 85,000 80,000 90,200 6.1% 5,200
cr:5T. Livirg City 800,000 800,000 800,000
rFGT • Flavtnrougn 283,100 383,800 253,100 - 10.6% (30,000)
otrer ruunicipal 2,130,100 2,232,300 2,128,300 -0.1% (1,800)
Provide al 2,180,300 2,142,550 2,404,400 10.3% 224,100 ee rtiricarbn Prcg ram. RAP nnou
Federal 1,068,400 1,097,000 1,138,700 6.6% 70,300 RAP mu act min up
DoratiorrsiFuraraising 687,700 535,645 716,700 4.2% 29,000
Private 691,600 439,746 677,000 -2.1% (14,600)
Pete rse inters! plant mate ralcrargesinclused untie r use r*es (1,205,200) (1,232,700) (1,103,900) -8.4% 101,300
caner
Revenue total 23,979,200 23,643,093 24.875.500 3.7% 896,300
Net expenditures
10,783,800 10,975,061 11,181,300 3.7% 397.500
Net Expenditures funded by:
Provincal Trans* r Payments 845,800 845,800 845,800.
WunbipalLevy 9,938,000 9,938,000 10,335,500 4.0% 397,500
Deticitr (Surplus) 191,261
II
* Reformatted to conform to 2007 presentation.
Page
TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY
Full -time Equivalents of staffing in 2007 Preliminary Budge
Seasonal, Part -time
FULL -TIME Contract TOTAL FTE's
2006 2007 2006 2007 2006 2007
Finance & Business Services 51.4 50.6 0.3 1.0 51.7 51.7
Watershed Management / Planning /. 136.8 136.2 19.8 23.0 156.6 159.2
Ecology / Restoration Services
Parks and Culture 67.3 67.8 . 105.1 105.7 172.4 173.5
Office of the CAO 17.5 19.7 17.5 19.7
Total Operating 273.0 274.3 125.2 129.7 398.2 404.1
Capital 79.7 72.0 23.9 34.1 103.6 106.2
TOTAL STAFFING 352.7 346.4 149.1 163.8 501.8 510.2
294
TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY
2007 OPERATING BUDGET - PRELIMINARY
DIVISION:
Finance and Business Services Page 8
ACTIVITY:. Administration
2006 2006 2007
Budget P. A. Budget % Chg. $ Chg.
$ $ $
Expenditures:
Financial Services 791,200 802,600 817,000 3.3% 25,800
Office Services 1,130, 800 1,174, 700 1,198, 600 6.0% 67,800
Information Technology 520,200 520,200 638,800 22.8% 118,600
GIS 350,200 340,200 447,600 27.8% 97,400
Project Surcharge (650,000) (650,000) (650,000)
Environmental Management Systems 66,100 66,100 63,600 -3.8% (2,500)
Expenditure Total 2,208,500 2,253,800 2,515,600 13.9% 307,100
Funding Sources:
Program /User fees
Reserves
CFGT - Living City
CFGT - Flowthrough
Municipal
Provincial
Federal
Donations /Fundraising
Private
409,000
401,500 474,000
3,100
Revenue Total 409,000
Net Expenditures
404,600 474,000
15.9% 65,000
15.9% 65,000
1,799,500
1,849,200 2,041,600
13.5% 242,100
Comments:
Major 07 over 06 Changes (in addition to economic factors):
Info Technology: Increase in cost of internet, voice and data lines, volume + upgrades in capacity =
GIS increases due to lower program recoveries
Office services increase due to insurance budget, previously omitted in error = $36,000
Wage costs increases
NOTES: 2006 VARIANCES
Variance in Office Services mostly due to omission of insurance budget, $35,000
295
TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY
2007 OPERATING BUDGET - PRELIMINARY
DIVISION: Finance and Business Services
ACTIVITY_ Rental Properties
Page
9
2006 2006 2007
Budget P. A. Budget % Cha_
$ Chg_
$ $ $
Expenditures:
Basic Rentals 651,200 651,200 561,200 - 13.8%
ORC Rentals 729,000 706,950 711,000 -2.5%
Special Agreements 106,600 106,600 106,500 -0.1%
Central Services 329,900 329,900 340,600 3.2%
(90,000)
(18,000)
(100)
10,700
Expenditure Total 1,816,700 ' 1,794,650 1,719,300 - 5.496
(97,400)
Funding Sources:
Program/Userfees 2,249,400 2,225,400 2,131,000 -5.396
Reserves -
CFGT - Living City -
CFGT- Flowthrough -
Municipal -
Provircial -
Federal 5,000 5,000 - 100.0%
Donations /Fundraising -
Private -
(118,400)
(5,000)
Revenue total 2,254,400 2,230,400 2,131,000 -5.5%
(123,400)
Net Expenditures (437,700) (435,750) (411,700) -5.9%
26,000
Comments:
Major 07 over 06 Changes (in addition to economic factors):
Rentals: Property tax costs reduced.
ORC: cost constraint net of increased transfer to Rouge Park from program surplus.
296
TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY
2007 OPERATING BUDGET - PRELIMINARY
DIVISION: Finance and Business Services
ACTIVITY: Property & Taxes
Page
10
2006 2006 2007
Budget P. A. Budget
% Chq.
$ Chg.
$ $ $
Expenditures:
Property Services 717,100 717,100 752,900
Taxes & Insurance 453,000 453,000 387,000
Conservation Land Planning 78,100 78,100 85,500
5.0%
-14.6%
9.5%
35,800
(66,000)
7,400
Expenditure Total 1,248,200. 1,248,200 1,225,400
-1.8%
(22,800)
Funding Sources:
Program /User fees
Reserves
CFGT - Living City 60,000 60,000 60,000
CFGT - Flowthrough
Municipal
Provincial
Federal
Donations /Fundraising
Private 65,000
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Revenue Total 60,000 125,000 60,000
Net Expenditures 1,188,200 1,123,200 1,165,400
-1.9%
(22,800)
Comments:
Major 07 over 06 Changes (in addition to economic factors):
Less 80K for additional exemptions
NOTES: 2006 VARIANCES
Property Tax rebates obtained
297
TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY
2007 OPERATING BUDGET - PRELIMINARY
DIVISION: Finance and Business Services
ACTIVITY: Vehicle & Equipment
Page 11
2006 2006 2007
Budget P. A. Budget
% Chg.
$ Chq_
$ $ $
Expenditures:
FL I, Maintenance & Repairs 471,700 471,700 473,800
Vehicle Purchases - New
Vehicle Purchases - Replacement 225,000 225,000 225,000
Equipment Purchases - New 5,000 5,000 5,000
Equipment Purchases - Replacement 130,000 130,000 130,000
Equipment Disposal Proceeds (53,000) (53,000) (53,000)
. Internal Recmeries (778,700) (778,700) (780,800)
0.4%
0.3%
2,100
(2,100)
Expenditure Total
Funding Sources:
Program/User fees
Resenes
CFGT - Livirg City
CFGT- Fiowthrough
Municipal
Provincial
Federal
Donations/Fundraising
Private
Revenue Total
Net Expenditures
Comments:
Major 07 over 06 Changes (in addition to economic factors):
Normal rate of replacements. No new boat as in 2005.
298
TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY
2007 OPERATING BUDGET - PRELIMINARY
DIVISION: Watershed Managemen Page 12
ACTIVITY: WM Divisional Management
2006 2006 2007
Budget P. A. Budget % Chg. $ Chg.
$ $ $
Expenditures:
Divisional Management 198,900 198,900 204,700 2.9% 5,800
R.A.P. Administration 228,900 189,800 500,000 118.4% 271,100
Expenditure Total 427,800 388,700 704,700 64.7% 276,900
Funding Sources:
Program /User fees
Reserves
CFGT - Living City
CFGT - Flowthrough
Municipal
Provincial
Federal
Donations /Fundraising
Private
131,150 102,550 261,250 99.2% 130,100
129,850 109,750 261,250 101.2% 131,400
Revenue Total 261,000 212,300 522,500 100.2% 261,500
Net Expenditures 166,800 176,400 182,200 9.2% 15,400
Comments:
Major 07 over 06 Changes (in addition to economic facto
Divisional Adminstration: better reflects misc. costs of staff group working out of new
Downsview Park office.
Remedial Action Plan Administration self - funded Federal RAP MOU revenue.
NOTES: 2006 VARIANCES
Watershed Management administration accounts expected to be on budget.
R.A.P. Administration: Costs below budget for work deferred to 2007.
TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY
2007 OPERATING BUDGET - PRELIMINARY
DIVISION:
Watershed Management Page 13
ACTIVITY: Watershed Strategies
2008 2008 2007
Budget P. A. Budget % Chq_ $ Chg.
$ $ $
Expenditures:
Don Ritter 229,200 198,700 200,600 - 12.5% (28,600)
Humber River 475,400 394,200 360,900 -24.1% (114,500)
Rouge Riker 400,000 400,000 400,000
Highland Creek 15,500 9,600 11,800 - 23.9% (3,700)
Etobicolo - Mimico Creek 290,600 354,500 273,700 -5.8% (16,900)
Duffins Creek 239,400 220,200 215,800 -9.9% (23,600)
Oak Ridges Moraine 163,400 127,000 132,500 - 18.9% (30,900)
Waterfront Strategy 64,800 64,800 68,500 5.7% 3,700
CTC Source Water Protection Plan 1,050,000 1,050,000 975,000 -7.1% (75,000)
Portion funded from Capital (226,400) (126,400) (120,000) -47.0% 106,400
Expenditure Total
2,701,900 2,692,600 2,518,800 -6.8% (183,100)
Funding Sources:
Program /User fees
Reserves 20,000 20,000 - 100.0% (20,000)
CFGT - Living City 125,000 125,000 125,000
CFGT - Flowthrough 36,500
Other - Municipal 20,000 20,000
Other- Provincial 1,121,250 1,132,450 1,019,250 -9.1% (102,000)
Other - Federal 46,250 , 57,450 34,250 -25.9% (12,000)
Other - Donations/Fundraising 400,000 400,000 400,000
Other - Private 172,000 144,400 140,000 - 18.6% (32,000)
1,884,500 1,915,800 1,738,500 -7.7% (146,000)
817,400 776,800 780,300 -4.5% (37,100)
Revenue Total
Net Expenditures
Comments:
Major 07 over 08 Changes (in addition to economic factors):
Don Ri►,er, Humber, Etob - Mimico: No Report card exp. /rev in 07 , less RAP MOU funds allocated here
CTC Source Water Protection moved here for 2007+ because ron-TRCA portion furctions like a Strateg•
ORM Coalition: brought back to historical level after usirg up carryforward.
Less Federal /Provincial RAP MOU revenue, less report card related capital contributiors.
2008 Actuals:
Don Riker- deferral of Watershed Plan; Humber Riker and Highland Creek due primarily to constraints.
Duffins Creek due primarily to gapping; Etobicoke- Mimico Creek - 06 projected exp 06 budget by
$63900 due to special projects.
300
TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY
2007 OPERATING BUDGET - PRELIMINARY
DIVISION: Watershed Manage MI
ACTIVITY: Conservation Field Centres
Page 14
2006 2006 2007
Budget P. A. Budget % Chg.
$ Chg.
$ $ $
Expenditures:
Program Management 127,300 127,300 133,100 4.6%
5,800
Education Support Services 236,300 214,092 252,700 6.9%
16,400
Albion Hills 702,500 693,400 726,500 3.4%
24,000
Claremont 628,100 622,900 642,000 2.2%
13,900
Lake St. George 652,200 629,360 675,400 3.6%
23,200
Expenditure Total 2,346,400 2,287,052 2,429,700 3.6%
83,300
Funding Sources:
Program /User • fees 1,606,700 1,557,470 '1,684,900 4.9%
78,200
Reserves 15,000 10,000 10,000 -33.3%
(5,000)
CFGT - Living City 250,000 250,000 250,000
CFGT- Flowthrough 128,000 123,000 123,000 -3.9%
(5,000)
Municipal 31,500 31,500 31,500
Provincial -
Federal
Donations /Fundraisirg • 1,000 500 1,000
Private -
Revenue Total 2,032,200 1,9-72,470 2,100,400 3.4%
68,200
Net Expenditures 314.200 314.582 329,300 4.8%
15.100
Comments:
Major 07 over 06 Changes (in addition to economic factors):
Management / Support :
Education Support: some program deielopment restored.
Albion:
Claremont:
LSG:
2006 Actuals: Loss of summer business at Lake St. George offset by
constraints.
301
TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY
2007 OPERATING BUDGET - PRELIMINARY
DIVISION: Planning & Development Page 15
ACTIVITY_ Development Services
2006 2006 2007
Budget P. A. Budget % Chg. $ Chg.
$ $ $ •
Expenditures:
Plannirg Services 721,500 662,500 803,000 11.3% 81,500
Regulation Services 653,900 653,900 694,500 6.2% 40,600
Solicitor /Realtor Enquiries 50,100 50,100 51,600 3.0% 1,500
Policy, Research and Special Projects 539,600 524,600 397,700 -26.3% (141,900)
Hearings 200,000 280,000 200,000
Environmental Assessment 1,035,500 1,035,500 1,123,800 8.5% 88,300
Portion funded from Capital (465, 700) (465, 700) (305,000) -34.5% 160,700
Expenditure Total 2,734,900 2,740,900 2,965,600 8.4% 230,.700
Funding Sources:
Program/User fees 2,627,000 2,627,000 2, 757,000 4.9% 130,000
Reserves'
ese rtes ' -
CFGT - Living City -
CFGT- Flowthrough -
Municipal 1,244,000 1,244,000 1,158,400 -6.9% (85,600)
Provincial (5,700) -
Federal (5,700) -
Donations /Fundraising -
Private -
Portion funded from Capital (465,700) (465,700) (305,000) -34.5% 160,700
Revenue Total 3,405,300 3,393,900 3,610,400 6.0% 205,100
Net Expenditures (670,400)(653,000)(644,800) -4% 25,600
Comments:
Major 07 over 06 Changes (in addition to economic factors):
Plannirg: mostly wage reclassification
Regulation: mostly wage reclassification
Policy development: focrs on implementation of Generic Regs. Mostly reclassification impact.
E.A.: $210 thousand for 2.5 more FTE's of staff.
NOTES: 2006 VARIANCES
Legal fees over budget by $80K Printing over budget by $1K
Travel expenses over budget by $5K
Consultant savings of $15K
302
TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY
2007 OPERATING BUDGET - PRELIMINARY
DIVISION: Planning & Development
ACTIVITY: Enforcement
Page 16
2006 2006 2007
Budget P. A. Budget % Chg.
$ Chg.
$ $ $
Expenditures:
Enforcement 482,200 482,200 509,300 5.6%
Legal 50,000 50,000 50,000
27,100
Expenditure Total 532,200 532,200 559,300 5.1%
27,100
Funding Sources:
Program /User tees
Reserves ,
CFGT - Living City
CFGT - Flowthrough .
Municipal
Provincial
Federal
donations /Fundraising
Private
Revenue Total
Net Expenditures 532,200 532,200 559,300 5.1%
27,100
comments:
Major 07 over 06 Changes (in addition to economic factors):
TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY
2007 OPERATING BUDGET - PRELIMINARY •
DIVISION:
Ecology
Page 17
Expenditures:
Program Management
Archaeology moved to Restoration Services
Sustainable Development Planning Review Services
Special Projects
Natural Heritage Management
Water Resources
Flood Forecasting &Warning
Op. & Maintenance of Darns, 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
Net Expenditures
2006 2006 2007
Budget P. A. Budget % Chq_ $ Chg.
$ $ $
317,300 317,300 381,000 20.1% 63,700
24,400 5.2% 1,200
201,600 300,000 190,000 -5.8% (11,600)
507,000 507,000 519,600 2.5% 12,600
797,300 797,300 931,500 16.8% 134,200
213,700 213,700 210,300 -1.6% (3,400)
325,000 316,500 313,400 -3.6% (11,600)
395,000 395,000 375,000 -5.1% (20,000)
2,780,100 2,870,000 2,945,200 5.9% 165,100
65,000
65,000 65,000
126,600 300,000 189,000 49.3% 62,400
470,000 420,000 450,000 -4.3% (20,000)
25,000 25,000
686,600 785,000 729,000 6.2% 42,400
2,093,500 2,085,000 2,216,200 5.9% 122,700
Comments:
Major 07 over 06 Changes (in addition to economic factors):
New - Admin Clerk in Ecology50%= $27.5K
Increase of $7.1 K in non salary expenditures in Admin - eg travel
Increase of $131.5K in Eng - less capital funds and more work for development review
Increase of $ 24.6K in Geoenvironmental - less capital and more work for development review
Increase of $53.1 K in Terrestrial &Aquatic Ecology - less capital and more work for development review
Reduced expenditures of $15K in Flood Forecasting and OMNCS - reorganization of staffing
Reduced Special Project expenditures /revenues but self funded
Maintain same surplus as 2006 of $25K in Source Water Protection budget
NOTES: 2006 VARIANCES
Reduced expenditures of $8.5K in operations and maintenance of small dams and channels
304
TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY
2007 OPERATING BUDGET - PRELIMINARY
DIVISION:
Ecology Page 18
ACTIVITY: Community. Transformation Partnerships
L,
Expenditures:
2006 2006 2007
BUDGET P. A. BUDGET % CHG. $ CHG.
$ $ $
Energy Projects
Development, Management & Communications 170,000 113,208 215,800 26.9% 45,800
Mayors' Megawatt Challenge 174,100 103,147 174,400 0.2% 300
Mayors' Green Building Challenge
Greening Health Care 207,700 110,219 208,300 0.3% 600
Home Energy Clinic 4,105
PowerStream Relationship 14,700 1,200 15,300 4.1% 600
Sustainable House Demonstration 36,000 -
Greening Retail 162,900 31,503 163200 0.2% 300
Sustainable Schools 285,800 183,972 286,400 0.2% 600
All Others 22500 252,080 - 100.0% (22,500)
Sustainable Development Projects
Sustainable Communities - General 52,200 35,000 53,100
Sustainable Communities Charette 18,200 2,100 18,200
Greening the Urban Village, CMHC Proposal 21,900 9,900 22,300 1.8% 400
OCETA 185,400 163,140 185,900 0.3% 500
Sustainable House Design Comp 214,000 155,000 215,700 0.8% 1,700
The Municipal Tool Kit 55,600 48,000 56,300 1.3% 700
All Others
Expenditure Total 1,585,000 1,248,574 1,614,900 1.9% 29,900
Funding Sources:
Program/User fees
Reserves
CFGT - Living City
CFGT - Flowthrough
Municipal
Provincial
Federal
Donations /Fundraising
Private
Revenue Total
Net Expenditures
2,667
22,500 180,500 22,500
250,100 189,400 250,100
222,000 136,250 222,0.00
351,200 419,400 ' 351,200
280,700 103,145 310,600 10.7% 29,900
458,500 212,346 458,500
1,585,000 1,243,708 1,614,900 1.9% 29,900
4.867
Comments:
Major 07 over 06 Changes (in addition to economic factors):
Staffing: Partial year of Admin. Assistant added
Otherwise as above some programs out, new ones in
NOTES: 2006 VARIANCES
This group projects typically experiences differences in funding secured, timing and scope.
305
TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY
2007 OPERATING BUDGET - PRELIMINARY
DIVISION:
Restoration Services Page 19
Expenditures:
Program Management
Inland Fill Program
Plant Propagation
Planting and Special Projects
Asian Long horned Beetle
Internal Recoveries
Environmental Maragement Systems
Archaeology
2006 2006 2007
Budget • R A. Budget % Chg $ Chg.
$ •$ $
291,000 281,000 378,100 29.9% 87,100
350,000 250,000 262,000 - 25.1% (88,000)
429,900 600,000 481,900 12.1% 52,000
717,900 1,184,800 705,400 -1.7% (12,500)
658,000 511,100 517,000 -21.4% (141,000)
(429,900) (450,000) (481,900) 12.1% (52,000)
215,000 215,000 255,000 18.6% 40,000
Expenditure Total 2,231,900 2,801,900 2,117,500 -5.1% (114,400)
Funding Sources:
Program /User fees 1,608,900 2,062,600 1,525,300 -5.2% (83,600)
Reserves
CFGT - Living City 200,000 200,000 200,000
CFGT - Flowthrough 10,000 - 100.0% (10,000)
Municipal 472,900 459,300 479,300 1.4% 6,400
Provincial 38,900 88,900 128.5% 50,000
Federal 511,100 511,100 467,000 -8.6% (44,100)
Donations/Fundraising
Private
Internal Recoveries
Revenue Total
Net Expenditures
81,100 56,500 -7.5%
(4,600)
(748,900) (767,000) (798,900) 7.0% (52,000)
2,156,000 2,466,000 2,018,100 -6.4% (137,900)
75,900 135,900 99,400 31.0% 23,500
Comments:
Major 07 over 06 Changes (in addition to economic factors):
Restoration Services Centre - first yr budget ($ 78.8K) for this new facility
Plant Propagation - increased expend. & revenues but ret expend. remains the same
Forest Management - less revenues available, increased levy to maintain same prog. level as 2006
Asian Long Horned Beetle - reduced expend./reven s Reforestation Implementation at Elder Mills
Special projects: higher expend and revenues but self- funded projects
Inland Fill: revenue and expenses down but net remains the same
Archaeology: higher expend. and revenues, ret reduced by $10K
NOTES: 2006 VARIANCES
Inland Fill ret revenues to be $60K lower than budget due to delays by contractors on various sites
306
TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY
2007 OPERATING BUDGET - PRELIMINARY
•
DIVISION: Parks and Culture Page20
GROUP:
ACTIVITY: Divisional Management
2006 2008 2007
BUDGET P_ A. BUDGET % CHG_ $ CHG.
$ $ $
Expenditures:
Divisional Management 239,100 215,070 305,800 27.9% 66,700
Parks /Culture- Fundraising 94,900 97,045 161,200 69.9% 68,300
Parks /Culture - Sales 205,000 192,514 209,300 2.1% 4,300
Parks /Culture- Customer Service 263,100 295,356 316,800 20.4% 53,700
802,100 799,985 993,100 23.8% 191,000
FUNDING SOURCES:
User fees: 15,000 19,551 15,000
ReseRes -
CFGT - Living City -
CFGT - Flowthrough 57,600 15,000 57,600
Other - Municipal -
Other - Provincial -
Other - Federal -
Other - Donations /Fundraising -
Other - Private -
72,800 34,551 72,600
NET EXPENDITURES 729,500 765,434 920,500 26.2% 191,000
Major 07 over 06 Changes (in addition to economic
Additon of one full time customer service position
Transfer of 75% of Brad Clubines wages to Div. Admin. for project margement
Transfer Div. Admin. portion of Asst. Admin. Coordinator to Communications
Transfer of Events & Program Coordinator position from East Zone to Fundraising and Sponsors
NOTES: 2006 VARIANCES
Unrealized sponsorship revenue
307
TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY
2007 OPERATING BUDGET - PRELIMINARY
DIVISION: Parks & Culture Division Page 21
ACTIVITY: Conservation Areas
2006 2008 2007
Budget P. A. Budget % Chg. $ Chg.
$ $ $
Expenditures:
General Operations 100,000 108,049 100,000
West Zone
West Zone Administration 157,100 154,999 132,100 - 15.9% (25,000)
Albion Hills 648,800 636,622 665,500 2.6% 16, 700
Glen Haffy 185,600 177,190 189,900 2.3% 4,300
Indian Line 454,200 403,765 462,800 1.9% 8,600
Boyd 229,600 231,331 . 233,900 1.9% 4,300
Heart Lake 253,300 240,431 279,400 10.3% 26,100
Fast Zone
Fast Zone Administration 153,800 147,385 72,000 - 53.2% (81,800)
Bruce's Mill 388,800 395,734 428,400 10.2% 39,600
Petticoat Creek 359,400 349,228 373,400 3.9% 14,000
Land Management -
East Zone: 136,300 126,288 134,300 -1.5% (2,000)
West Zone: 158,100 164,000 160,100 1.3% 2,000
Major Maintenance 25,000 25,000 25,000
Expenditure Total 3,250,000 3,160,022 3,256,800 0.2% 6,800
Funding Sources:
Authority Generated 3,073,700 2,855,029 3,198,100 4.0% 124,400
Reserves 5,000 5,000 5,000
CFGT - Living City
CFGT- Flowthrough 8,300
Municipal
Provincial
Federal
Donations/Fundraising
Private
Revenue Total
Net Expenditures
3,078,700 2,868,329 3,203,100 4.0% 124,400
171.300 291.693
53.700 -68.7% (117.600)
Comments:
Major 07 over 06 Changes (in addition to economic factors):
Revenue:
Reduced Albion Hills.Skiirg revenue.
Increased Albion Hills camping revenue to reflect trailer rental and increased business.
Increased Petticoat Creek Swimming revenue to reflect fee increase of $0.50 per person.
Expenses:
Cancel D. Miller.wage transfer to Capital
Cancel K Draket partial year leave of absence reinstating his wage to full year
Addition of expense for water testing - lab analysis
VARIANCE COMMENTS:
AH Camping Revenue exceeded budget by 73,800, Gate Receipts under budget by $46,
HL Gate Receipts revenue under budget $35,000
PC Swimming and Day Camp revenue under budget by $56,900
BD unrealized Filming Revenue $14,000, Gate Receipts under budget target by $37,700,
BD LM insurance expense over budget by $12,441
EZ special programs under budget by $48,50010 ceipts under revenue by $28,700
TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY
2007 OPERATING BUDGET - PRELIMINARY
DIVISION: Parks and Culture Page 22
GROUP:
ACTIVITY: Kortrigtd Centre tor Conservation
2006 2006 2007
BUDGET P. A. BUDGET % CHG. $ CHG_
$ $ $
Expenditures:
Administration 110,100 107,718 106,600 -3.2% (3,500)
Grounds 108,700 110,124 108,600 1.8% 1,900
Buildirgs 172,900 165,675 167,200 -3.3% (5,700)
General Programs 50,100 51,670 50,300 0.4% 200
Day Use 58,900 59,527 60,200 2.2% 1,300
Public Programs 42,300 45,214 29,400 -30.5% (12,900)
Education Programs 301,800 319,556 309,700 '2.6% 7,900
Cafe • 69,700 83,044 62,400 - 10.5% (7,300)
Gift Shop 90,900 93,505 92,100 1.3% 1,200
Maple Syrup Program 245,900 264,419 242,400 -1.4% (3,500)
Energy Workshops 72,500 75,700 4.4% 3,200
All other Programs 47,100 137,183 48,100 2.1% 1,000
Marketing 37,300 30,416 37,300
Expenditure Total 1,406,200 1,468,061 1,390,000 -1.2% (16, 200)
Funding Sources:
User fees by program Component:
User Fees
Reserves
CFGT - Living City
CFGT- Flowthrough
Municipal
Provincial
Federal
Donations /Fundraising
Private
Revenue Total
Net Expenditures
1,214,600 1,255,127 1,233,600 1.6% 19,000
100,000
100,000 100,000
5,500
1,314,600 1,360,627 1,333,600 1.4% 19,000
91,600 107,424 56,400 -38.4% (35,200)
Comments:
Major 07 over 06 Changes (in addition to economic factors):
NOTES: 2006 VARIANCES
Additonal education supplementary wages
Additonal snack bar expenses
Additional maple syrup expenses
309
TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY
2007 OPERATING BUDGET - PRELIMINARY
DIVISION: Parks and Culture Page 23
GROUP:
ACTIVITY:
2006 2006 2007
BUDGET P_ A. BUDGET % CHG_ $ CHG_
$ $ $
GROSS EXPENDITURES:
Golf Course Operations 1,126,000 1,131,019 894,900 - 20.5% (231,100)
Fettle Lakes Park 126,700 - 126,700
1,126,000 1,131,019 1,021,600 -9.3% . (104,400)
FUNDING SOURCES:
User fees: 1,251,000 1,212,208 1,286,000 0.0279776 35,000
Reserves -
CFGT - Living City -
CFGT- Flowthrough -
Other - Municipal -
Other - Provincial -
Other - Federal • -
Other - Donations /Fundraising -
Other - Private -
1,251,000 1,212,208 1,286,000 2.8% 35,000
NET EXPENDITURES (125,000) (81,189) (264,400) 111.5% (139,400)
Major 07 over 06 Changes (in addition
Remme ore time expenses budgeted for the first year of TRCA assuming management of the
Golf Course.
Addition of budget for Kettle Lakes Park including ore FT position of Assistant Superintendent
NOTES: 2006 VARIANCES
Additional maintenance expenses
310
TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY
2007 OPERATING BUDGET - PRELIMINARY
DIVISION:
Parks and Culture Page 24
ACTIVITY: Black Creek Pioneer Village
Expenditures:
Program Management
Curatorial
Photog rap ly
2006 2006 2007
Budget P. A. Budget % hg- $ Chg.
$ $ . $
229,100 220,100 238,900 4.3% 9,800
311,900 311,100 336,400 7.9% 24,500
Interpretative Programming 1,366,700 1,337,700 1,399,300 2.4% 32,600
Special Events 34,700 78,700 78,000 124.8% 43,300
' Heritage Education 268,300 265,300 280,400 4.5% 12,100
Building Maintenance 1,120,400 1,005,200 1,137,300 1.5% 16,900
Admissiors 151,700 149,900 157,700 4.0% 6,000
Giftshop 391,700 385,000 403,600 3.0% 11,900
Marketing and Sporsorships 353,500 328,500 345,300 -2.3% (8,200)
Expenditure Total 4,228,000 4,081,500 4,376,900 3.5% 148,900
Funding Sources:
Program /User fees 1,965,500 1,855,000 2,152,600 9.5% 187,100
Rese Res
CFGT - Living City
_CFGT- Flowthrough 50,000 10,000 -80.0% (40,000)
Municipal
Provircial 197,000 197,000 197,000
Federal
Donations/Fundraising 6,000 32,000 5,100 - 15.0% (900)
Private 18,000 22,000 - 22,000
Revenue Total
2,218,500 2,102,000 2,386,700 7.6% 168,200
Net Expenditures 2,009,500 1,979,500 1,990,200 -1.0% (19,300)
Comments:
Major 07 over 06 Charges (in addition to economic factors):
Revenue: Admission fee increased. Sponsorship target via CFGT reduced to more, realistic level.
Marketing: more transferred to Parks & Culture Divisional Administration
Building Maint: utilities & maint. costs up
Special Events: Metis Festival more accurately budgeted.
06 Actuals: Below target attendance/revenue offset by various constraints
including $19,300 constrained from Major Maintenance.
311
TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY
2007 OPERATING BUDGET - PRELIMINARY
DIVISION: Parks and Culture
ACTIVITY: Food Services
Page 25
2006 2006 2007
Budget P. A. Budget
% Chg.
$ Chg_
$ $ $
Expenditures: .
Weddings: Sales Costs & Revenue 419,600 320,000 440,000
Corporate Bents: Sales costs /Rewnue 453,100 453,100 493,600
Banquet Costs & Interval Functions 86,600 70,000 89,100
Visitor Services 181,200 166,000 170,400
Equipment
4.9%
8.9%
2.9%
-6.0%
4.6%
6.1%
6.1%
20,400
40,500
2,500
(10,800)
Expenditure Total 1,140,500 1,009,100 1,193,100
52,600
Funding Sources:
Program/User fees 1,237,400 1,091,200 1,313,500
Rese ryes
CFGT- Living City
CFGT- Flowthrough
Municipal
Provincial
Federal
Do nat io rs /Fundraising
Private
76,100
Revenue Total 1,237,400 1,091,200 1,313,500
76,100
Net Expenditures (96,900) (82,100)(120,400)
24.3%
(23,500)
Comments:
Major 07 over 06 Changes (in addition to economic factors):
Higher Wedding / Corporate Bents activity projected.
For 06 actual:
lower Internal function usage - no recovery from Tennis Canada loss
lower weddings revenue than projected. Some pick -up for Fall 06
general attendance has affected HWH revenues -
$10,000 was added to HWH budget which was not achim.eable
312
TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY
2007 OPERATING BUDGET - PRELIMINARY
DIVISION: Office of the CAO Page 26
ACTIVITY: CAO Programs
2006 2006 2007
Budget P. A. Budget % Chg. $ Chg.
$ $ $
Expenditures:
Corporate Management 418,000 418,000 419,500 0.4% 1,500
Corporate Secretariat 320,600- 321,100 341,700 6.6% 21,100
Human Resources 475,700 476,200 551,200 15.9% 75,500
Communications 982,300 934,600 1,030,900 4.9% 48,600
MCI Certification 160,000 166,000 166,000
Expenditure Total 2,196,600 2,309,900 2,509,300 14.2% 312,700
Funding Sources:
Program /User fees
Reserves 45,000 45,000 75,200 67.1% 30,200
CFGT - Living City
CFGT - Flowthrough 15,000 15,000 40,000 166.7% 25,000
Municipal 5,000 5,000 - 100.0% (5,000)
Provincial 160,000 166,000 - 166,000
Federal -
Donations /Fundraising -
Private -
7,400 - 100.0% (7,400)
Revenue Total
72,400 225,000 281,200 288.4% 208,800
Net Expenditures 2,124,200 2,084,900 2,228,100 4.9% 103,900
Comments:
Major.07 over 06 Changes (in addition to economic
Communications: Recognition events reduced
More staff consolidated here from other programs
Human Resources: Volunteer Network Program annualized, Staff development i
MCI Certification: new Provincially funded program to give Canadian experience to new
Canadians with Enviro. degrees
2006 Projected Actuals: Gapping & reduced recognition events.
313
10/18/2006
CAPITAL PROJECTS
TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY
SUMMARY OF MUNICIPAL CAPITAL FUNDING: APPROVED 2006 AND REQUESTED 2007
Durham York Peel Toronto Approved
2006 2006 2006 2006 Totals
REGIONAL MONITORING PROJECT 55,000 230,000 235,000 230,000 750,000
Other Monitoring:Nat Channel,
Sust.Tech, Report Card 80,000 80,000 50,000 210,000
WATERSHED PLANNING
Water Management
Humber 90,200 128,000 106,400 324,600
Etob - Mimico 18,000 9,700 27,700
Don 168,600 84,000 252,600
Highland
Rouge 141,200 91,400 232,600
Duffins /Carruthers 50,000 50,000
Other 56,000 56,000
Regulation Line Mapping 50,000 100,000 75,000 40,000 265,000
Watershed Planning sub -total 156,000 500,000 221,000 331,500 1,208,500
Floodplain Mapping 50,000 . 50,000 70,000 65,000 235,000
York /Peel /Durham/Toronto Groundwater
Terrestrial Natural Heritage
125,000 125,000 125,000 125,000 500,000
39,000 50,000 79,000 78,800 246,800
REGENERATION
Natural Heritage Project / RAP
Humber 100,700 380,000 115,000 595,700
Etob - Mimico 305,000 105,000 410,000
Don 37,500 70,000 107,500
Highland
Rouge 49,500 6,000 55,500
Duffins /Carruthers 74,000 30,000 104,000
Waterfront 80,000 80,000
Other 50,000 149,000 30,000 229,000
Regeneration sub -total 124,000 217,700 834,000 406,000 1,581,700
Valley and Shoreline Regeneration
Projects
Other Erosion Control Projects
City of Toronto Waterfront Project
Region Of Durham Waterfront Project
Waterfront Revitilization Corporation
Projects
Humber Bay Shores Waterfront Park
Lakefill Quality Program
Durham York Peel Toronto Requested
2007 2007 2007 2007 Totals
69,000 265,000 265,000 265,000 864,000
48,500 33,500 34,000 54,500 170,500
45,000 71,500 35,500 152,000
25,000 25,000
69,000 135,300 204,300
86,000 • 58,000 144,000
50,000 50,000
50,000 135,000 145,500 100,000 430,500
65,000 45,000 40,000 25,000 175,000
165,000 380,000 282,000 353,800 1,180,800
30,000 50,000 50,000 50,000 180,000
100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 400,000
50,000 75,000 100,000 90,000 315,000
130,000 360,000 99,500 589,500
461,000 60,000 521,000
45,000 50,000 95,000
49,500 49,500
119,000 30,500 149,500
84,000 84,000
66,000 179,000 32,000 277,000
185,000 255,000 1,000,000 325,500 1,765,500
1,800,000 1,800,000
10,000 10,000 20,000
1,273,000 1,273,000
171,500 171,500
10,000 76,500 100,000
360,000
1,448,400
1,450,500
1,448,400
186,500
1,450,500
360,000
TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY
SUMMARY OF MUNICIPAL CAPITAL FUNDING: APPROVED 2006 AND REQUESTED 2007
Durham York Peel Toronto Approved Durham York Peel Toronto
CAPITAL PROJECTS 2006 2006 2006 2006 Totals 2007 2007 2007 2007 Totals
SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITIES
Stewardship 45,000 127,300 81,000 253,300 225,100 187,600 84,000 496,700
Education 75,000 155,300 230,300 80,000 188,300 268,300
Community Transformation / Sus.
Communities 10,000 127,000 82,700 219,700 78,000 210,000 117,900 405,900
FLOOD PROTECTION
Lower Don
Other Flood Control Projects 50,500 125,000 66,000 190,000 431,500 55,000 100,000 71,000 121,000 347,000
INFRASTRUCTURE
Public Use Infrastructure 9,280 54,700 33,000 203,200 300,180 9,300 56,400 33,000 200,800 299,500
Other Facilities Retrofits 720,000 720,000 550,000 531,000 1,081,000
Conservation Land Planning 185,000 185,000 90,000 135,000 250,000 475,000
Drinking Water System Upgrades
Living City Centre Design and Build 250,000 34,000 284,000. 9,523 250,000 34,000 206,100 499,623
Nursery Relocation Project
Oak Ridges Moraine Corridor Park
BCPV Retrofit 350,000 350,000 350,000 350,000
Information Technology Project 12,374 73,000 45,000 270,900 401,274 12,400 75,200 45,000 267,700 400,300
Administrative Office 15,467 91,200 56,000 338,700 501,367 15,500 94,000 56,000 334,700 500,200
REGIONAL OPEN SPACE
Land Acquisition 50,000 550,000 600,000 3,000 50,000 11,000 2,067,000 2,131,000
Expenditure total 853,121 1,993,900 3,126,000 6,500,100 12,473,121 1,437,323 2,811,200 3,336,000 7,991,200 15,575,723
Outside of Core Capital:
Environmental Assessments 200,000 200,000 200,000 200,000
Special Planting 50,000 50,000 50,000 50,000
RES. #C69/06 -
Moved by:
Seconded by:
FINANCIAL PROGRESS REPORT
For the period ending August 31, 2006. Report on operating and capital
budget variances as of August 31, 2006 and projected to year end.
Paul Ainslie
Bill Fisch
THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT the Financial Progress Report
for the period ending August 31, 2006, be received;
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, 2006.
The projected variance from the 2006 net operating budget is negative $191,000. This is 1.8%
of net expenditures identified in the 2006 budget and about 0.5% of gross expenditues. This is
a manageable potential deficit. Staff will continue to monitor programs and activities to
determine ways to reduce the deficit.
Of immediate concern is revenue of $800,000 in the 2006 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 $191,000 assumes that the fund - raising will be successful.
There are a number of variances reported across all programs but most are modest.
Revenues from conservation areas, Black Creek Pioneer Village and Kortright, were less than
budgeted due to lower than anticipated attendance. Weather and equipment breakdowns
contributed to this Toss of attendance. Adjustments to expenditures have been made but
collectively, net expenditures are projected to exceed budget by about $200,000.
The 2006 capital budget projected a deficit of $1,250,000 to cover the cost of the new.
restoration services building. Members will recall that during the 2006 budget approval
process staff advised that this will be paid down over several years from revenues from land fill
operations. The 2006 projected actual deficit for capital is $1,330,600. This is $80,600 more
than budget.
The capital budget will be subject to many changes as most expenditures occur later in the
year and would not have been booked as of August 31, 2006. In total, projected capital
expenditures will be $59,169,400 which is $7,258,500 less than budget.The key variances
include:
• delays in Toronto Waterfront Revitalization Corporation projects including the lower Don
which is projected to total about $6.3million underspent;
• delays in approvals for various water management projects;
316
• drinking water systems upgrade project is projected to have expenditures exceeding
budget of $150,000 due to unforeseen changes to the provincial regulations during the
course of the project which required more staff time for water testing, training and
monitoring;
• The Living City Centre project was delayed pending pursuit of provincial and federal
contributions as well as fund raising capacity;
• the Restoration Services Centre (nursery relocation project) is projected to be under budget
by $98,200; and
• increased expenditures for greenspace acquisition are fully offset by additional funding.
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: October 10, 2006
Attachments: 2
317
TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY
Operating Variance Re port as of Aug ust 31. 2006
2006 ? 2006 2006 Budget
ross Expenditures (by functional Unit) Budget Actual P. A_ vs. P. A.
$ $ $ $ +1(- )
Finance and Business Services Division
Ad m instratlon
Rental Propertes
Property Sevres
Vehicle & Equipment Reserve
Watershed Hananement Division
WM Dnrissiorlal Management
Watershed Strateges
Conservation Feld Centres
Planning & Development Division
Devebpment Services
Enforcement
Ecology Division
Ecology
Community Transformation Partrerships
Restoration Services Derision
Festoratbn Services
Parks and Culture Division
Parks & Culture Divisional Management
Conservation Areas
Kortrg ht Centre for Conservation
Oak Ridges Corridor Park
Black Creek Pioneer Village
Food rvices
Variance Notes
2,208,500 2,284,348 2,253,800 45,300 Clerical error record irg insurance budget.
1,816,700 1,248,461 1,794,650 (22,050)
1,248,200 1,421,108 1,248,200
227,512
5,273,400 5,181,429 5,296,650 23,250
427,800 1,331 388,700 (39,100) Some RAP MOU ad min work deferred.
2,701,900 576,275 2,692,600 (9,300)
2,346,400 1,443,468 2,287,052 (59,348)Summer bookings lost at Lake. St. George.
5,476,100 2,021,074 5,368,352 (107,748)
2,734,900 1,915,554 2,740,900 6,000
532,200 325,774 532,200
3,267,100 2,241,328 3,273,100 6,000
2,780,100 2,177,639 2,870,000
1585,000 639,750 1,248,574
4,365,100 2,817,389 4,118,574
89,900 Unbudgeted Sp. Projects up.
(336,426) Laver expend itures d ue to bwer f and irg
(246,526)
2,231,900 2,148,272 2,601,900
370,000 Hg her volume of pant sales & projects.
802,100 555,806 799,985 (2,115)
Atterdarce below target so expenses
3,250,000 2,416,370 3,160,022 (89,978)corstrained.
1,406,200 1,018,582 1,468,051 61,851 Maple Syrup program volume hg her.
1,126,000 861,397 1,131,019 5,019
4,228,000 2,475,831 4,081,500 ( 146,500) Oust constraints due to bwer attendance.
1,140,500 634,788 1,009,100 (131,400)Weddirgs & Corp. Events urder target.
11,952,800 7,962,773 11,649,677 (303,123)
Office of the CAO
Corporate Management 418,000 281,578 418,000
Corporate Secretarat 320,600 237,744 321,100 500
Human Resources 475,700 301,240 476,200 500
MCI Certificatbn 28,544 160,000 160,000 New unbudgeted program. Self- funded.
2,196,600 1,513,876 2,309,900 113,300
Expenditure Total 34,763,000 23,886.141 34,618,153 (144,847)
TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY
Operating Variance Re port as of Aug ust 31, 2006
Funding Sources:
°mg ram /User fees;
Rental Properties
Black Creek Pioneer Village
Food Services
Devebpment Services
Restoration Services
Conservation Areas
Kortrght Centre for Conservation
Oak Ridges Corridor Park
Conservatbn Feb Centres Summary
All Other Prcg ram /User fees
Reserves
CFGT- Loring City
CFGT- FbwthroLg h
Other Municipal
Provircel
Federal
5onatbrs/Fund raising
Private
Reverse internal plant material charges
ircluded under user fees
Other
Revenue total
Net Expenditures
Net Expenditures funded by:
Pr vircialTransferPayments
Municipal Levy
Deficit,/ (Surplus)
2006 * 2006
Budget Actual
$ $
2006 Budget
P. A. vs. P. A. Variance Notes
$ $ +!(- )
2,249,400 1,418,843 2,225,400
1,965,500 1,052,327 1,855,000
1,237,400 577,632 1,091,200
2,627,000 1,968,935 2,627,000
1,608,900 1,758,582 2,062,600
3,073,700 2,579,167 2,855,029
1,214,600 831,257 1,255,127
1,251,000 944,031 1,212,208
1,606,700 977,214 1,557,470
424,000 341,702 423,718
85,000 80,000
800,000 (20,000) 800,000
283,100 235,401 383,800
2,130,100 129,637 2,232,300
2,180,300 1,517253 2,142,550
1,068,400 482,305 1,097,000
687,700 44,681 535,645
691,600 845,164 439,746
(1,205,200) (49,887) (1,232,700)
(24,000) More rental vacancies than anticipated .
(110,500) Ad missions & Gift Shop below target.
(146,200)Weddirgs & Corp. Events under target.
Hg her volume of pfantsales & projects, Inland
453,700 Fill fees.
(218,671)Atterdarce bebwtargets.
40,527 Map syrup program exceeds budget.
(38,792) First year of prog ram. Target estimated .
(49,230) Sum me r bookings bstat Lake. St. George
(282)
(5,000)
100,700 CTP revenue funded throLg h CFGT.
102,200 Special Projects
(37,750)
28,600
(152,055) Comm unity Transformation Plannirg items.
(251,854) CTP under & throLg h CFGT,
(27,500)
23,979,200 15,634,246 23,643,093 (336,107)
10,783,800 8,251,895 10,975,061 191,261
845,800 -
9,938,000 -
• 845,800
9,938,000
191.261 191,261
-*Reformatted to conform to 2007 presentatbn.
Attachment 2
Toronto and Reg ion Conservation Authority
CAPITAL SUMMARY
Capital Budget Variance as of August 31, 2006
CAPITAL
Gross Expenditures:
MONITORING AND REPORTING
WATERSHED PLANNING
Peel Water Management
York Water Management
Durham Water Management
VVater Cost Centres
Costs covered by Water management Programs
Flood pain Mapping
York/Pee VD urhamfToronto Groundwater
Terrestral Natural Heritage
REGENERATION
Toronto Ftemed al Acton 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
Other Erosion Control Projects
City of Toronto Waterfront Project
Peg ion Of Durham Waterfront Project
Vaterfront Revitilrtion Corporation Projects
Humber Bay Shores Waterfront Park
Lakefill Quality Prog ram
SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITIES
Stewardship
5d ucation
2006
BUDGET
2006
Actuals
878,100 538,146
862,800
942,900
308,600
2,081,500
(1,883,500)
497,000
716,600
339,700
2,419,900
(561,200)
1,167,300
535,600
1.48,900
2,875,100
26,000
1,856,300
354,700
22,475,100
553,200
40,474
(12,633)
121,071
840,694
(341,401)
97,551
155,959
187,156
308,344
655,251
214,379
67,406
938,390
32,389
820,836
211,495
13,210,609
67,158
45
2006
P. A.
D iff_
P. A.
850,900 (27,200)
829,900
874,900
266,100
1,822,345
(1,500,345)
402,500
516,600
329,650 •
2,372,450
(561,200)
1,158,150
778,800
148,900
2,239,300
29,600
1,591,400
338,300
19,423,582
553,200
Variance
Notes
(32,900) Some work to be carred forward to 2007
(68,000) Some work to be carred forward to 2007
(42,500) Some work to be carred forward to 2007
(259,155) Some work to be carried forward to 2007
383,155 Some work to be carried forward to 2007
(94,500) De lays anticipated
(200,000) Delays anticipated
(10,050)
(47,450) Wate r Management component d e lays
(9,150)
243,200 Unbuigeted furdirg sources forextrawor
Approval Delays: Beectg rove, Col.
Danforth. Issues re: Guild Inn, HO hard
(635,800)creek.
3,600
(264,900) Shed ulirg delays for Arsenal lands work.
(16,400)Unbudgeted Special Projects
(3,051,518) Slower pace of work
Unbuigeted turtdirg sources for extra
571,200 183,051 655,100 83,900 work
153,500 48,294 174,500 21,000
320
Toronto and Region Conservation Authority
CAPITAL SUMMARY
Capital Budget Variance as of August 31, 2006
FLOOD PROTECTION
_ower Don
Other Fbod Control Projects
INFRASTRUCTURE
Public Use Infrastructure
Other Facilities Retrofits
Drinkirg Water System Upgrades
_wing City Centre Desg nand Build
Nursery Rebcatbn Project
'Oak Ridges Moraine Corridor Park
BCPV Retrofitartd Attraction Devebpment
nformation Techrobgy Project
Adminstratine Office
REGIONAL OPEN SPACE
JVaterfront Open Space
Acq uisftbn - Greenspace Strategy
Natural Areas Protection
Expenditure total
Funding Sources:
Prcg ram/User fees
Reserves
CFGT- Living City
CFGT- Fbwthrotg h
Other - Municipal
Other - Provincial
Other - Federal
Other - Donatbns/Furd raising
Other - Private
ease Revenue
.artd Sale Proceeds
transfers between Projects
Revenue total
Met Expenditures
'rovincbl Transfer Payments
urcipal Levy
(Surplus) 1 Deficit
2006
BUDGET
2006
Actuals
2006
P_ A.
DM.
P. A.
Variance
Notes
14,522,500 1,598,172 11,203,261 (3,319,239) Sbwe r pace of work •
509,000 69,870 374,000 (135,000) Some items to be carried into 2007
424,600
1,600,700
242,900
679,400
2,818,200
1,200,000
421,300
400,000
690,000
141 ,082 424,600
236,173 1,600,700
392,702 392,900
100,539 125,000
913,393 2,720,000
762,652 1,200,000
76,104 421,300
134,403 400,000
186,789 690,000
Add itbnal costs d ue to regulatory
150,000 charges.
(554,400) Project Delayed
(98,200) Construction under budget
500,000 47,834 100,000 (400,000)
5,100,000 118,006 6,223,000 1,123,000
66,427,900 23,162,385 59,169,393 (7,258,507)
0
1,200
1,518,200
101,900
4,211,100
565,000
431,000
2,100,000
676
(20,000)
409,738
276,143
33,634
39,060,300 12,621,854
106,000 84,054
600,000 1,611,118
(561,200)
48,133,500 15,017,219
4,000
2,800
1,441,800 (76,400)
1,765,300
4,596,600
669,725
508,325
1,170,000
32,625,347
102,800
340,000
(561,200)
42,662,697
1,663,400 Wilder lard Acquistbn
385,500 Wider lard Acqustion
104,725
77,325
(930,000) Flows throng h CFGT instead
1WRC projects proceed irg at sbwer
(6,434,953) pace.
(3,200)
Lard acq usitbns financed throLg h other
(260,000)sources.
(5,470,803)
(5,470,803)
18.294.400 8,145,166 16.506.696 (1.787.704)
17,044,400
15,176,100 (1,868,300) Lower util¢atbn due to delays
1.250.000
1,330,596 80596
321
RES. #C70J06 -
Moved by:
Seconded by:
OAK RIDGES CORRIDOR PARK MANAGEMENT PLAN
(Kettle Lakes Nature Reserve). Approval of the Oak Ridges Corridor Park
. Management Plan. Copies of the fully illustrated document will be
available atthe meeting.
Bill Fisch
Paul Ainslie
THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT the Oak Ridges Corridor Park
Management Plan, prepared by AMEC Earth and Environmental dated August 2006, be
approved;
THAT copies of the Oak Ridges Corridor Park Management Plan be sent to the members
of the Oak Ridges Corridor Park Management Plan Advisory Committee with a request
that the document be endorsed and they consider opportunities for providing multi -year
funding to support the implementation of the plan, and operation of the park;
THAT staff assist with the establishment of an Oak Ridges Corridor Park Advisory
Committee made up of interested citizens, interest groups and organizations, to help with
the implementation of the management plan;
THAT the province be requested to approve the official name of the park as "Kettle Lakes
Nature Reserve";
THAT approval be granted to enter into agreements with the Province of Ontario and the
current Oak Ridges Corridor Park land owners to maintain and protect the completed trail
on an interim basis and until the lands are conveyed to the Province of Ontario;
AND FURTHER THAT appropriate TRCA officials be authorized and directed to take such
action as is necessary to implement the agreements including obtaining any necessary
approvals and execution of documents.
AMENDMENT
RES. #C71 /06
Moved by:
Seconded by:
Bill Fisch
Paul Ainslie
THAT the fourth paragraph of the main motion be amended to read as follows:
THAT the province be requested to approve the official name of the park as "Kettle Lakes
Nature Reserve at Richmond Hill ";
THE AMENDMENT WAS CARRIED
THE MAIN MOTION, AS AMENDED, WAS CARRIED
322
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 (428 ha) of land in Richmond Hill would come into public
ownership (see Attachments 1 and 2). 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.
At Authority Meeting #4105, held on May 27, 2005, Resolution #A97/05 was approved as
follows:
THAT a contract for the preparation of the Oak Ridges Corridor Park Management Plan
be awarded to AMEC Earth and Environmental, at a total cost not to exceed $126,450,
plus applicable taxes, it being the proposal that best meets Toronto and Region
Conservation Authority (TRCA) specifications.
An advisory committee was established to oversee the work. Members included
representatives from Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA), Regional Municipality
of York, Town of Richmond Hill, Ministry of Natural Resources, Ontario Realty Corporation,
Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing, Oak Ridges Moraine Foundation, Oak Ridges Trail
Association, Richmond Hill Naturalists, Save the Oak Ridges Moraine, Jefferson Forest
Residents Association and Citizens Environment Watch.
Deliverables of the advisory committee 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 a primary east to west pedestrian trail, a financial assessment of the
Bathurst Glen Golf Course and most recently, the completion of the management plan of which
all the aforementioned work helped to shape.
MANAGEMENT PLAN
The Oak Ridges Corridor Park Management Plan was developed after considerable discussion
with representatives from government, non - government organizations (NGOs) and private
citizens. Three public meetings were held to invite comments from the general public. Input
was sought to identify goals and objectives for the park and information from earlier studies
was used to identify a habitat restoration plan and the trail master plan.
The managernent {plan includes details on the following:
• Existing Environments;
• Significant Features;
• Site Protection and Restoration;
• Trails;
323
• Education and Outreach;
• Monitoring and Review;
• Financial; and
• Recommendations and Implementation.
Short, medium and long term implementation priorities were detailed (including approximate
costs) on a yearly basis for the first five phases. A summary of these recommendations can be
found in Attachment 3.
VISION, GOALS AND OBJECTIVES
The following vision, goals and objectives were developed for the park as a result of an
interactive process between the consulting team, the advisory committee and the public.
Vision
The Oak Ridges Corridor Park will be a sanctuary for nature and an essential ecological
linkage on the Oak Ridges Moraine where visitors can learn about ecosystem features and
functions, wildlife and human influences, and enjoy activities that are compatible with the
natural and cultural values of the park.
Goals
1. To support the implementation of the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Act by contributing
to the protection, restoration and enhancement of the Moraine's ecological functions,
• protecting water quality and quantity, maintaining the integrity of the continuous natural
system and fostering partnerships for stewardship.
2. To address the challenge of sustaining a sanctuary for nature in an urban setting by
including public uses that provide opportunities for passive recreation, linkages to the Oak
Ridges Trail, and experiential learning, while protecting the environmental integrity of the
park.
Objectives
Natural heritage
• protect, restore and enhance the forests, kettle lakes and wetlands of the park as a
functioning natural heritage system including natural features and processes, wildlife
habitats, wildlife movement, and linkages to other natural systems on the Oak Ridges
Moraine and the watersheds of the Humber and Rouge Rivers.
Environmental sustainability
• design and manage the park and golf course as a showcase for sustainability such as "
green building" design, minimizing human footprint, restricting motorized vehicles,
recycling water, using renewable energy and no lighting.
• protect the park from negative external influences such as invasive species,
encroachments, pets, traffic and changes to the hydrology.
Cultural heritage
• give appropriate protection and recognition of the park's cultural heritage, both pre- and
post- European contact with First Nations.
324
Public use
• provide windows, not doors, for people to enjoy and learn about the sensitive natural
features of the park.
• incorporate a variety of year -round opportunities for trail use and other appropriate passive
recreation activities without compromising the environmental integrity of the park.
• design and manage the park to welcome and accommodate local residents, as well as
visitors from the region.
• organize public uses of the park in partnership with other recreation, interpretation and
education opportunities in the Town of Richmond Hill and the surrounding region.
Bathurst Glen Golf Course
• operate the existing golf course as an integral part of the park such that it functions as an
ecological corridor, provides wildlife habitats, maintains environmental integrity, acts as an
important community recreation facility and contributes financially to the operations of the
park.
Experiential learning
• provide pro- active and engaging interpretive programs to educate and promote the park's
natural and cultural heritage, emphasize the role of the Oak Ridges Moraine in
south - central Ontario, enhance users' experience, and foster community responsibility and
stewardship.
Equity
• include opportunities to share the benefits of the park with everyone, including people with
disabilities.
Stewardship
• encourage community stewardship of the park such as participation in clean -up and
restoration projects, and complementary management of neighbouring properties.
Financial sustainability
• establish financially sustaining partnerships with public agencies, businesses and
community groups to ensure effective implementation and operations of the park over the
long -term.
Monitoring
• collaborate with agencies, universities, NGOs and other institutions to ensure long -term
monitoring of the park's resources and environmental functions, and to provide guidance
for any changes to park policies and operations.
SPINE TRAIL
At Authority Meeting #9/05, held on November 25, 2005, amended Resolution #A267/05 was
approved as follows:
THAT the-spine trail alignment dated September 12, 2-045, as illustrated on Attachment 1,
be endorsed;
325
THAT a contract in a form satisfactory to TRCA staff and solicitors be awarded to
Con - Strada Construction for construction of the Oak Ridges Corridor Park spine trail
subject to execution of the Oak Ridges Corridor Park Developers' Contribution Collateral
Agreement by the Province of Ontario, TRCA and all parties, and the province providing
to TRCA all necessary funds for the work;
THAT staff be authorized to enter into agreements in a form satisfactory to TRCA staff and
solicitors with Mattamy Corporation and J. Falconi for the operation of the Bathurst Glen
Golf Course and Driving Range;
THAT the revenue generated from the operation of Bathurst Glen Golf Course and
Driving Range be used for land acquisition purposes of other significant environmental
properties on the Oak Ridges Moraine;
THAT staff report back to the March 2006 Business Excellence Advisory Board meeting
on an integrated pesticide management plan for operation of the golf course as it relates
to TRCA's Pesticide Policy, and the feasibility of both the elimination of pesticide use at
the golf course and removal of the fence surrounding the golf course;
THAT staff arrange for a presentation by a representative from Peel Village Golf Course
on the operation of an Audoban certified golf course;
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.
Construction of a primary east -west trail was partially completed in June 2006. The trail is
approximately five kilometers in length spanning from the east shore of Lake Wilcox to the
western boundary of the park at the Bathurst Glen Golf Course. The Yonge Street crossing will
be the final detail to be put in place before the trail is officially opened to the public. The trail
construction was a condition to be met before the land was transferred to the province. Five
trail head, fifteen distance and twelve to eighteen interpretive signs are proposed to be created
for the primary trail system.
Secondary trails are proposed (in total approximately 2.8 kilometers in length) which would Zink
the neighbouring communities to the primary trail. In addition, two lookouts are recommended
at Bond and Philip lakes respectively to provide viewing opportunities for visitors while
discouraging the creation of paths through these environmentally sensitive areas.
As part of developing the management plan for the property an invitation was made to the
advisory committee and the general public to suggest a name for the property that would
reflect the natural and cultural character of the site. It is recommended that the new name of
the property be "Kettle Lakes Nature Reserve ". This name captures the uniqueness of the post
glacial lakes and the natural environment management philosophy for the property.
326
Staff anticipated that the transfer of lands to the province would occur in the summer of 2006. It
now appears that this will not happen before March, 2007. Staff has met with representatives
of the province (Ontario Realty Corporation) and the landowners. There is agreement to
proceed with interim management of the lands and trail in accordance with the terms and
conditions of the contribution agreement signed by the province, TRCA and the landowners to
enable the trail construction to proceed. A separate agreement is needed for this interim
management to proceed. When the lands are transferred to the province, a lease will be
required between TRCA and the province to manage the lands and trail.
FINANCIAL DETAILS
TRCA staff will pursue funding from traditional and nontraditional sources for annual operation
costs associated with the Oak Ridges Corridor Park and to implement the management plan
recommendations. For example, TRCA has submitted a request to the Region of York for
funding for the park in 2007. Further discussions will be undertaken with the Town of Richmond
Hill to explore future funding opportunities.
TRCA staff has asked the province to provide interim funding for the operation of the trail until
such time as the lands are conveyed to the province. There will be a lease agreement with the
province which will include provision for funding for operation of the park when the lands are
transferred to the province.
Approximately two million dollars from developers is to be obtained over the next five to ten
years as building permits are issued in nearby development.
Some revenues may be available from the Bathurst Glen Golf Course. This needs to be
determined once the true operating costs of this facility are determined.
At the present time, the anticipated annual expenditures to operate the park are:
2007 $158,000
2008 $173,800
2009 $191,180
2010 $210,298
2011 $231,328
DETAILS OF WORK TO BE DONE
• Send report to partners and request their approval of the management plan.
• Request York Region, Town of Richmond Hill, the Oak Ridges Moraine Foundation and the
province to provide funding to implement the management plan.
• Establish an advisory committee to assist with the implementation of the management plan.
It is anticipated that this committee will meet one to two times annually to discuss and
provide input to TRCA, the province, Region of York and Town of Richmond Hill on
management actions and priorities.
327
• At the request of the Ontario Reality Corporation (ORC), provide ORC with a cost estimate
for perimeter fences, gates and signs to secure the site and prevent unauthorized vehicle
access. ORC staff agreed to investigate providing funding to TRCA for this immediate need.
Report prepared by: Gary Wilkins, extension 5325; Jim Dillane, extension 6292
For Information contact: Gary Wilkins, extension 5211; Jim Dillane, extension 6292
Date: October 10, 2006
Attachments: 3
328
Attachment 1
aa
Attachment 2
Proposed Public Lards
Attachment 3
Implementation Plan with Capital Cost Estimates
331
Accomplishments to Date
Phase 1
Administration
•Completed the management plan
•Reviewed site access details with EMS, Fire
Dept. and Police
• Create a park management advisory committee
(see 1 -5 year priorities below)
Heritage Buildings
•Preliminary assessment of current condition
• Remove collapsed veranda from Dynamo House
• Initiated lease arrangements for Gray Estate
• Further assessment of existing heritage
buildings and their restoration or securement
needs
Habitat Areas
Site Prep and Restoration
•Completed red oak node planting at interpretive
location east of Bathurst Glen Golf Course on
spine trail
• Site clean up
• Soil testing in agriculture areas
• Local seed and plant material to be acquired
• Fencing of boundaries adjacent to residential
areas and golf course
• Establish cover crops
• Site preparation (25.2 ha)
• Buffer planting (4.8 ha)
• Grassland seeding (25.3 ha)
• Check water table, wetland excavation and
seeding (0.9 ha)
• Develop a formal landscape plan for oak tree
planting at entrances
Trail Construction
• Completed 5 km multi -use spine trail
• Prepared one trail head sign -
•York Region to initiate stop Tight design at
Yonge Street
• Secondary trail construction and monitoring
• Install signage (5 trailhead, 15 distance and 12 -
18 interpretive)
• Install lit intersection across Yonge Street
Maintenance
Monitoring
•Completed salamanders, amphibian tunnels,
amphibian surveys, breeding birds, Ecological
Land Classification (ELC), invasive species and
road kill surveys
• Completed casual visitor surveillance along
spine trail
• Salamanders, amphibian tunnels, amphibian
surveys, breeding birds, Ecological Land
Classification (ELC), invasive species and road
kill surveys
• Site inspection at 6 -8 week intervals
• Annual site inspection (comprehensive
quantitative evaluation of site)
Estimated Cost
$1,300,000
$1,792,800
331
332
Phase 2
Phase 3
Administration
• Review tasks of the park management advisory
committee and subcommittees
• Review tasks of park management advisory
committee and subcommittees
Heritage Buildings
• Buffer planting (0.8 ha)
•Forest planting (25.2 ha)
•Wetland excavation and seeding (1.5 ha)
• Buffer planting (0.9 ha)
Habitat Areas
Site Prep and Restoration
• Cover crops (25.2 ha)
• Forest planting (61.2 ha)
• Buffer planting (5.4 ha)
• Grassland seeding (8.4 ha)
• Wetland excavation and seeding (4.5 ha)
• Forest planting (46 8 ha)
• Grassland seeding (3 6 ha)
• Wetland excavation and seeding (1 1 ha)
Trail Construction
• Secondary and tertiary trail construction
• Trail lookouts
• Close /decommission existing trails
• Rehabilitate cobblestone house
• Trail inspections at 6 -8 week intervals
• Annual trail inspection (comprehensive)
• Aftercare - weeding, mulching, staking and
replacement of dead material, mow grassland
every two years
Maintenance
• Touch up to spine trail maybe required
• Aftercare - weeding, mulching, staking and
replacement of dead plant material, mow
grassland (biannual)
Monitoring
• Salamanders and amphibian surveys
• Operational trail monitoring for environmental
damage
• Site inspections at 6 -8 week intervals
• Annual inspection (comprehensive)
• Salamanders, amphibian tunnels, amphibian
surveys, breeding birds, ELC, invasive species
and road kill surveys
• Operational trail monitoring for environmental
damage
Estimated Cost
$837,400
$325,100
332
Phase 4
Phase 5
Administration
• Review tasks of park management advisory
committee and subcommittees
• Review tasks of park management advisory
committee and subcommittees
Habitat Areas
Site Prep and Restoration
• Buffer planting (0.8 ha)
•Forest planting (25.2 ha)
•Wetland excavation and seeding (1.5 ha)
• Buffer planting (0.9 ha)
Trail Construction
Maintenance
•Aftercare - weeding, mulching, staking and
replacement of dead material, mow grassland
every two years
• Aftercare - weeding, mulching, staking and
replacement of dead material, mow grassland
every two years
Monitoring
•Salamanders and amphibian surveys
•Site inspections at 6 -8 week intervals
•Operational trail monitoring for environmental
damage and public use of trail (twice yearly)
• Site inspections at 6 -8 week intervals
• Annual site inspection (comprehensive)
• Salamanders, amphibian tunnels, amphibian
surveys, breeding birds, ELC, invasive species
and road kill surveys
• Operational trail monitoring for environmental
damage
Estimated Cost
$174,700
$39,000
332
Medium and Long Term Priorities (Beyond First 5 Phases)
333
Year 5 -10
>10 Years
Administration
The advisory committee will continue to assist
the park manager as follows-
• Assist with an environmental audit of the
golf course and review of the management
plan
• Review the development of trail guides
and maps
• Review the potential to manage
grasslands by burning
• Continue community contact and
education and outreach programs
• York Region to monitor wildlife mortality
within the park and regional road rights of
way
• Evaluate the potential for installing a large
culvert (3 -4m) connecting the west side of
Yonge Street to the wooded area between
Bond Lake and Bond Lake Bog
• Continue monitoring
• Develop forest management plan
• Develop lake management plan
• Review fiscal management
The advisory committee will continue to assist
the park manager as follows:
• Review long term pedestrian and wildlife
crossing options for Yonge Street
• Continue community contact and
education and outreach programs
• Continue monitoring and assessment of
restoration activities with subcommittee
involvement
• Review forest management plans and
rectify plantings where necessary
Habitat Areas
Site Prep and Restoration
Initial planning should be complete at this time
Thinning of conifers may be required to allow for
the introduction or self- seeding of deciduous
species among conifers
Maintenance
Undertake remedial plantings were necessary
Monitoring
Review trail usage and determine whether the
surface is appropriate for permitted activities and
whether secondary trails meet the community
expectations and conform to the original vision
statement
333
RES. #C72/06 - FORMER CANADA POST CORPORATION PROPERTY
City of Mississauga - Ontario Power Generation Lease. Proposal from
Ontario Power Generation for the renewal of the lease for 1352
Lakeshore Road East, City of Mississauga
Moved by:
Seconded by:
Paul Ainslie
Rob Ford
THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT Toronto and Region
Conservation Authority (TRCA) enter into an 11 -year extension to the lease dated the 31st
day of May, 1993, between TRCA and Ontario Power Generation (OPG) commencing
January 1, 2007;
THAT the agreement be based substantially on the principles set out in this staff report to
the Business Excellence Advisory Board dated September 29, 2006;
THAT the final terms and conditions of the agreement be satisfactory to TRCA staff and
solicitor;
THAT the lease be subject to the approval of the Minister of Natural Resources in
accordance with Section 21(2) of the Conservation Authorities Act, R.S.O. 1990, Chapter
C.27 as amended;
AND FURTHER THAT the appropriate TRCA officials be authorized and directed to take
such action as is necessary to implement the proposal, including the obtaining of
necessary approvals and the execution of any documents.
CARRIED
BACKGROUND
The subject TRCA holding consists of Part of Lot 5, Concession 3, SDS, City of Mississauga,
Regional Municipality of Peel, being part of a much larger area acquired from Canada Post on
October 30, 1992.
At the time of acquisition there was an existing lease with Ontario Power Generation (formerly
Ontario Hydro) for use of approximately 24,000 sq.ft of the office warehouse building situate at
the west entrance to the property from Lakeshore Road East for a training facility. A small area
of the building is leased at the nominal rent by C.O.P.S., a community youth group sponsored
by Peel Regional Police.
Since 1992, TRCA has had a lease with Ontario Power Generation. Currently, the tenant pays
for utilities, regular maintenance, taxes and rent of $90,000 per year. This lease expires on
December 31, 2006. TRCA has spent over $95,000 on the building in the past two years for
repairs to the building.
334
In 2004, OPG commissioned two studies to determine required repairs and upgrades to the
building. The OPG studies indicated that over the next five to ten year horizon the building
could require in excess of $2,000,000 in repairs and upgrades. TRCA has conducted an
independent review of the studies, as well as a review of requirements under the Ontario
Building Code and Ontario Fire Code with respect to this facility. TRCA's review of the OPG
reports confirmed that the repairs proposed are considered reasonable. These reports also
concluded that there is immediate work required including roof repair, boiler replacement, as
well as upgrades relating to the Ontario Fire Code for a total cost of approximately $560,000. If
these repairs are not done the building will no longer be useable.
Under the terms and conditions of the existing lease, TRCA is responsible for the cost of all
capital and structural repairs and replacements to the building. However, TRCA is only
responsible for the cost of these repairs up to an amount equal to the rent for the balance of
the term of the lease (currently $22,500). Unless OPG agrees to pay any excess in the repair
costs, TRCA is not obligated to make the repairs. If neither TRCA or OPG pay for these repairs,
OPG can terminate the lease on 30 days notice.
OPG Proposal
Staff has had ongoing discussion with OPG relating to the use of this facility. OPG has
expressed an interest in continuing to lease the facility and has made the following proposal to
TRCA:
Existing Lease
• OPG will continue with the existing lease (to December 31, 2006);
• TRCA will provide a rent abatement for the remaining amount of rent;
• OPG will install a temporary heating system at their expense;
• OPG will install a second floor fire escape at their expense (this is one of the Ontario Fire
Code upgrades).
One Year Extension
• TRCA will provide OPG with an one year extension to the lease (this will give OPG time to
conduct a leasing study to determine if it is feasible for OPG to continue to lease the
facility);
• the rent will be $1.00;
• OPG shall be responsible for all costs associated with the building including repairs and
maintenance, structural repairs, realty taxes, insurance (building and liability) and utilities;
10 Year Term
• OPG will have the right to lease the building for a 5 year term, commencing January 1,
2008 with an option to renew the lease for further 2 year and 3 year terms;
• the rent will be $1.00 for each year of the term;
• OPG shall be responsible for all costs associated with the building including repairs and
maintenance, structural repairs, realty taxes, insurance (building and liability) and utilities;
• OPG will undertake, in consultation with TRCA, a capital work program of not Tess that
$1.000,000 over the 10 year term
335
RATIONALE
The age, condition and layout of the building limit opportunities to find a compatible tenant.
Given the long- standing partnership that TRCA has shared with OPG for this location as well as
other projects, staff recommend the lease with OPG. At the end of the term of the lease the
improvements revert to TRCA.
FINANCIAL DETAILS
OPG will be responsible for all repairs and maintenance to the facility, including any structural
repairs, realty taxes, insurance and utilities. OPG will also commit to a capital work program for
the facility of not Tess than $1,000,000 over the ten year term. During this term, the rent shall be
$1.00. In 2006 a net rental income of $25,000 was budgeted for this facility. This proposal will
reduce the net rental income to $0 for up to the next 11 years.
Report prepared by: Tom Campitelli, extension 5335 and Lori Colussi, extension 5303
For Information contact: Ron Dewell, extension 5245, Tom Campitelli, extension 5335
Lori Colussi, extension 5303
Date: September 29, 2006
RES. #C73 /06 -
Moved by:
Seconded by:
TELE- MOBILE COMPANY (TELUS MOBILITY) PROPOSAL - LAKE ST.
GEORGE
CFN 38134. Proposal to lease TRCA land at the northeast corner of
Bayview Avenue and Bethesda Sideroad, Town of Richmond Hill,
Regional Municipality of York to construct and operate a cell phone
antenna and associated equipment.
Dick O'Brien
Bill O'Donnell
THAT item 7.6 - Tele- mobile Company (Telus Mobility) Proposal - Lake St. George, be
deferred to Business Excellence Advisory Board #6/06, to be held on November 17,
2006, to allow staff to explore the possibility of another site on the Lake St. George
property and to discuss the option of a single pole with Tele- mobile Company.
CARRIED
RES. #C74 /06 -
Moved by:
Seconded by:
COLD CREEK CONSERVATION AREA
Management Agreement with the Township of King
CFN 38198. Approval to enter into a management agreement with the
Township of King for the management of Cold Creek Conservation Area.
Paul Ainslie
Rob Ford
336
WHEREAS the Township of King (King) has indicated their interest in assuming the
management of Cold Creek Conservation Area and directed township staff to negotiate
an agreement;
WHEREAS at Authority Meeting #6/06, held on July 28, 2006, Resolution #A159/06
directed Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) staff to negotiate a
management agreement with the Township of King for the management of Cold Creek
Conservation Area and report back on the terms and conditions;
THEREFORE LET IT BE RESOLVED THAT THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE
AUTHORITY THAT Toronto and Region Conservation Authority enter into a management
agreement with the Township of King for the management of Cold Creek Conservation
Area on the following basis:
• King will develop, maintain and use the lands in accordance with the Cold Creek
Conservation Area Master Plan, dated December 2002 at its cost and will comply with
all legislation and regulation;
• King will covenant and agree to indemnify and save harmless TRCA;
• King will be responsible for insurance, taxes and all costs associated with inspection
and management of the subject lands;
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.
AMENDMENT
RES. #C75/06
Moved by:
Seconded by:
Dick O'Brien
Rob Ford
THAT the following be inserted after the main motion:
THAT Linda Pabst be congratulated on her efforts towards the development of the
management agreement between TRCA and the Township of King;
AND FURTHER THAT staff make a presentation on the management agreement at
Authority Meeting #8/06, to be held on October 27, 2006.
THE AMENDMENT WAS CARRIED
TH-E MAIN MOTION, AS AMENDED, WAS CA-RR-I ED
337
BACKGROUND
At Authority Meeting #6/06, held on July 28, 2006, Resolution #A159/06 was approved as
follows:
WHEREAS the Township of King has indicated their interest in assuming the management of
Cold Creek Conservation Area and directed Township staff to negotiate an agreement;
THEREFORE LET IT BE RESOLVED THAT Toronto and Region Conservation Authority
(TRCA) staff be directed to enter into negotiations with King Township staff and report to the
September 15, 2006, Business Excellence Advisory Board on terms and conditions of an
agreement acceptable to TRCA for the management of Cold Creek Conservation Area.
Cold Creek Conservation Area consists of 190 hectares within the Humber River watershed.
The area is located on Concession Road 11, three kilometres north of the King Road midway
between the communities of Bolton and Nobleton, in the Township of King, Regional
Municipality of York.
Historically, the property was used for outdoor education and recreation programs and
included many facilities dedicated to the outdoor sports enthusiast. Cold Creek Conservation
Area was closed to formal public use in 1990 due to financial constraints resulting from the
decision to close the shooting range, and loss of associated revenues as well as other
corporate financial pressures. Cold Creek Conservation Area also contains a rental property.
TRCA will continue to be responsible for the rental property and will continue to collect the
rental revenue for TRCA purposes.
TRCA initiated the preparation of a comprehensive management plan for Cold Creek
Conservation Area in January 2002. This management plan includes a description and
evaluation of the property based on relevant plans and policies, landscape features and
functions, environmental constraints and opportunities.
Establishment of a community stewardship committee was recommended to assist with the
implementation of the management plan. Staff assisted with the establishment of the Cold
Creek Stewardship Committee in 2003. Members include local residents, groups and elected
representatives. This dedicated group has assisted with the establishment of a pedestrian trail,
hosted community awareness events, created a fact sheet for the property and assisted with
habitat restoration work over the last few years. The community together with King officials felt
the most effective way to implement the management plan was to take over the management
of the property through a partnership with TRCA. The stewardship committee is supportive of
King assuming the management responsibility for the property. As a result we are
recommending TRCA enter into a management agreement with King for the management of
the Cold Creek Conservation Area.
338
FINANCIAL DETAILS
The Township of King will be responsible for all costs including taxes associated with the
management and operations of the subject lands.
Report prepared by: Ron Dewell, extension 5245
For Information contact: Ron Dewell, extension 5245
Date: August 01, 2006
Attachments: 1
339
Attachment 1
340
NEW BUSINESS
RES. #C76/06 -
Moved by:
Seconded by:
TORONTO'S EXPO BID
Dick O'Brien
Bill O'Donnell
THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT staff report to the appropriate
meeting on Toronto's Expo bid.
TERMINATION
ON MOTION, the meeting terminated at 10:55 a.m., on Friday, October 20, 2006.
David Barrow
Chair
/ks
341
CARRIED
Brian Denney
Secretary- Treasurer
THE TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY
MEETING OF THE BUSINESS EXCELLENCE ADVISORY BOARD #6/06
November 17, 2006
The Business Excellence Advisory Board Meeting #6/06, was held in the South Theatre,
Black Creek Pioneer Village, on Friday, November 17, 2006. The Chair Dick O'Brien, called
the meeting to order at 9:24 a.m.
PRESENT
Paul Ainslie
Rob Ford
Peter Milczyn
Dick O'Brien
Bill O'Donnell
Andrew Schulz
ABSENT
David Barrow Chair
Bill Fisch Member
Maja Prentice Vice Chair
Member
Member
Member
Chair, Authority
Member
Member
RES. #C77 /06 - MINUTES
Moved by:
Seconded by:
Rob Ford
Paul Ainslie
THAT the Minutes of Meeting #5/06, held on October 20, 2006, be approved.
CARRIED
PRESENTATIONS
(a) Mr. Paul Speck, Vice President, Account Manager, Aon Reed Stenhouse Inc., in regards
to Toronto and Region Conservation Authority's Risk Management Program.
RES. #C78 /06 - PRESENTATIONS
Moved by:
Seconded by,:
Peter Milczyn
Paul Ainslie
342
THAT above -noted presentation (a) be heard and received.
CARRIED
CORRESPONDENCE
(a) A letter dated October 27, 2006 from Allister Byrne, Partner, Grant Thornton LLP, in
regards to a declaration of Grant Thornton's independent relationship to TRCA.
RES. #C79/06 - CORRESPONDENCE
Moved by:
Seconded by:
Bill O'Donnell
Paul Ainslie
THAT above -noted correspondence (a) be received.
CARRIED
343
CORRESPONDENCE 6.1
Grant Thornton LLP
Chartered Accountants
Management Consultants
October 27. 2006
The Business Excellence Advisory Board
The Toronto and Region Conservation Authority
5 Shoreham Drive
Downsvicw, Ontario
M3N 1S4
Dear Board Members:
Grant Thornton •
We have been engaged to audit the Financial statements of Toronto and Region Conservation
Authority (the "Authority ") for the year ending December 31. 2006.
Canadian generally accepted auditing standards (GAAS) require that we communicate at least
mutually with you regarding all relationships between the Authority and Grant Thornton 1.42 that, in
our professional judgement, may reasonably be thought to bear on our independence.
In determining which relationships to report. these standards require us w consider relevant rules
and related interpretations prescribed by the appropriate provincial institute and applicable
legislation, covering such matters as:
(a) holding a financial interest, either directly or indirectly. in a client,
(b) holding a position, either directly or indirectly, that give the right or responsibility to exert
significant influence over the financial or accounting policies of a client:
(c) personal or business relationships of immediate family, close relatives, partners or retired
partners. either directly Or indirectly, with a client;
(d) economic dependence on a client: and
(c) provision of services in addition to the audit engagement.
We have prepared the following comments to facilitate our discussion with you regarding
independence matters al icing since March 27. 2006. the clate of our last Icttcr.
We were not engaged to provide any services in addition to the 2006 audit engagement over the
period from March 27, 2006 to the date of this letter. other than the review of the operating
statement for Black Creek Pioneer Village.
15 Allstate Parkway
Suite WO
Markham, Ontario
Lan 594
T (416)366 -0I00
F (905) 475 -8906
E MarhhamOGrantThomlort ca
W TAW! GrantThwnlun_ca
Canad!an Member of Cram Thornton Ir*ernaMIonal
344
Grant Thornton M.
We are not aware of any relationships between the Authority and ourselves that in our professional
judgement may reasonably be thought to bear on our independence that, have occurred from March
27, 20116 to the date of this letter
GAAS requires that we confirm our independence to the Audit Committee However. since the
Rules of Professional Conduct of the institute of Chartered Accountants of Ontario deal with the
concept of independence in terms of objectivity, our confirmation is to be made in that context.
Accordingly. we hereby confirm that we are objective with respect to the Authority within the
meaning of the rules of professional conduct of the Institute of Chattered Accountants of Ontario as
of the date of this letter.
This repots is intended solely for the use of the Business Excellence Advisory Board, management
and others within the Authority and should not be used for any other purposes.
We look fotward to discussing with you the matters addressed in this letter as well as other matters
that may be of interest to you.
Yours very truly,
GRANT THORNTON LLP
Allister Byrne, F.C.A.
Partner
J:it7atatCotomning rittsi1Vtoronto and Region Consenmion Aulhority1CorrespondracrWisval 200iiitndependeitre kilos fib do:
345
SECTION I - ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY ACTION
RES. #C80 /06 -
Moved by:
Seconded by:
FEDERAL FISHERIES ACT
Fish Habitat Management Agreement (Level III) Renewal. Renewal of the
Level III agreement with the Department and Fisheries Oceans Canada.
Andrew Schulz
Rob Ford
THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT the Fisheries Act - Fish Habitat
Management Agreement (Level III) with the Department of Fisheries and Oceans Canada
(DFO) be renewed for a period of 5 years, commencing November, 2006;
THAT staff be directed to continue the development of submission protocols in concert with
DFO to improve the efficiency of the review and approvals process for client groups;
THAT staff be directed to prepare proposals for funding of various research, policy or
evaluation tools to assist in the delivery of both the DFO as well as Toronto and Region
Conservation Authority (TRCA) mandates in the waters of our jurisdiction;
AND FURTHER THAT appropriate TRCA staff be directed and authorized to take such action
as is necessary to implement the agreement, including signing of documents and obtaining
all necessary approvals.
AMENDMENT
RES. #C81 /06
Moved by:
Seconded by:
Bill O'Donnell
Peter Milczyn
THAT the following be inserted after the main motion:
AND FURTHER THAT appropriate TRCA staff be authorized to participate in a 2 year trial to
complete self assessments of TRCA projects.
THE AMENDMENT WAS CARRIED
THE MAIN MOTION, AS AMENDED, WAS CARRIED
346
BACKGROUND
DFO and Conservation Ontario (TRCA is a member) share a common concern for the
protection of watersheds, aquatic species and their habitats. They both accept and promote
the objective of net gain of habitat and the goals of habitat conservation, restoration,
development and no net loss as set out in Canada's Policy for the Management of Fish Habitat.
They desire to build and maintain a cordial and efficient professional working relationship with
each other, other agencies and groups and particularly the Ontario Ministry of Natural
Resources (OMNR) in aquatic systems management, and to also share responsibilities and
capabilities to manage and control developments which may harm these systems or alter fish
habitat. In 1998, a protocol for detailing the fish habitat referral process in Ontario was
developed between Conservation Ontario, DFO, Parks Canada and OMNR. The protocol
outlines the process for obtaining project approvals and permits under the Fisheries Act, and
the roles and responsibilities of the conservation authorities, OMNR, DFO and Parks Canada.
This protocol was updated in 2000 and 2001, and is again being reviewed by all participating
parties and will result in a revised referral document.
Since 1998, TRCA has been working under an agreement entitled The Canada - Toronto and
Region Conservation Authority Fish Habitat Management Agreement Respecting Worksharing
Arrangements for Initial Review Determinations, Mitigation Requirements and Compensation
Planning for the Purposes of Section 35 of the Fisheries Act. This agreement was renewed for
a five year term in 2000, and again in May 15, 2005 for a further year, as per Executive
Resolution #B58/06 as follows:
THAT the existing Fisheries Act - Fish Habitat Management Agreement (Level Ill) with
Fisheries and Oceans Canada (DFO) be renewed for the period of one year;
AND FURTHER THAT staff be directed and authorized to take such action as is necessary
to implement the agreement, including signing of documents.
Although staff initiated discussions with DFO in the spring with the intent of renewing the
agreement, a 6 -month extension to the agreement was requested while revisions /updates to
the agreement were being prepared by DFO.
The purpose of this agreement is to provide for a sharing of work obligations that arise in
reviewing plans and in providing fish habitat mitigation advice for developments that may harm
habitat pursuant to Section 35 of the Fisheries Act. These efforts will assist in conserving,
renewing and creating fish habitat in the watersheds administered by TRCA, to give effect to
the Fisheries Act, and to the conservation goals, policies and objectives of TRCA.
RATIONALE
Since the last agreement was formally signed, a number of modifications have been made to
the referral process and appendices to the agreement. Signatories on both sides have also
changed. TRCA staff met with senior staff of DFO to review the agreement and proposed
revisions to address current guidance and updated conditions. As well, staff discussed a
number of issues, including timing of reviews, duplication of effort, incorporation of the
Canadian Environmental Assessment Act review process, staff training and evaluation tools.
347
Over the years of the agreement, TRCA and DFO have engaged in ongoing dialogue about
improving our working relationship and avoiding areas of possible redundancy. TRCA and
DFO have also been in dialogue with our municipal partners, Conservation Ontario members,
and the Urban Development Institute (UDI) about developing approaches to improve the
review process and level of service in development review. TRCA continues to see the value in
undertaking the review of fish habitat during the plan review process. We have addressed
concerns for apparent duplication with review and timing of approvals once applications are
forwarded to DFO for authorization. We continue to work with DFO staff and clients to refine
internal submission protocols to provide clarity on requirements, to ensure a more efficient
approvals process and one that is seamless with the other plan review requirements.
DFO has contributed funding for a number of guidance documents currently under
development, such as the Erosion and Sediment Control Guidelines and Urban Stream
Crossing Guidelines. In addition, DFO supports the training and development of staff through
provision of referral and technical training at no charge other than staff time to TRCA.
However, through the development review process, staff has identified the need for additional
research, tools and policies to assist in the interpretation and evaluation of fish habitat,
potential for harmful effects and management of risks. Staff are continuing to seek
opportunities to partner and cost share the development of some of these research and
development tools, with DFO as well as other partners including other conservation authorities
and municipalities.
DETAILS OF WORK TO BE DONE
In view of these current discussions and referral process changes, TRCA staff would like to
renew the agreement with DFO for a period of five years. Staff requests that the Authority
provide authorization to enter into a five year extension of the existing agreement with Fisheries
and Oceans Canada, and to complete discussions on outstanding issues and internal
protocols to assist staff and clients in more efficient reviews and approvals.
Staff are also seeking direction from the board to prepare proposals for funding of various
research, policy or evaluation tools to assist in the delivery of both the Fisheries and Oceans
Canada as well as TRCA mandates in the waters of our jurisdiction. Where appropriate, we will
partner with other conservation authorities to enable more consistent understanding and
approaches across the Greater Toronto Area.
Report prepared by: Deborah Martin - Downs, extension 5706
For Information contact: Deborah Martin - Downs, Extension 5706
Date: October 30, 2006
RES. #C82/06 -
2007 FEE SCHEDULE
Public Facilities and Programming. Changes to the 2006 fee schedule for
the conservation areas, Black Creek Pioneer Village and the Kortright
Centre for Conservation.
348
Moved by:
Seconded by:
Andrew Schulz
Rob Ford
THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT the 2007 Fee Schedule Public
Facilities and Programming, including the proposed changes for the conservation areas,
Black Creek Pioneer Village (BCPV) and the Kortright Centre for Conservation be approved,
effective January 1, 2007.
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, 2007, in order to meet Parks and Culture
projected revenue targets for the 2007 budget.
CONSERVATION AREAS AND KORTRIGHT GENERAL ADMISSION
Effective January 1, 2007, due to the amenities, programmed activities and popularity of Albion
Hills Conservation Area, Boyd Conservation Area and the Kortright Centre for Conservation; a
higher admission fee is proposed. General admission fees for these locations are
recommended to be: Adults $6.00; Seniors $5.00; Children free.
A review of Halton Region, Grand River and Credit Valley conservation authorities admission
fees (Attachment 1 - Conservation Area Admission Fee Comparison) indicates that TRCA will
remain competitive with the proposed increases.
GLEN HAFFY TROUT PONDS AND FLY FISHER'S CLUB
The pond rental fee is proposed to be increased at Headwaters Trout Ponds to offset higher
operational and capital costs for this area. Pond rentals will be offered at Glen Haffy
Conservation Area including the use of the picnic shelter. The Fly Fishers Club membership
fee increase reflects facility improvements and the addition of one day per week to the
membership.
CAMPING FEES
Serviced site fees at Albion Hills Campground are recommended to increase to be aligned with
industry competitors. An industry comparison was conducted (Attachment 1- Camping Fee
Comparison) and it was determined that TRCA will remain competitive with this increase.
PETTICOAT CREEK POOL ADMISSION
Pool admission fees at Petticoat Creek to be increased to offset increasing utility, maintenance
and capital expenditures due to aging infrastructure.
CROSS COUNTRY SKI TRAIL FEES AND EQUIPMENT RENTAL
Cross country ski trail fees and equipment rental fees will be increased to offset increasing
program and equipment costs.
349
BLACK CREEK PIONEER VILLAGE FEE
The 2007 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 amenities and less programming than
BCPV. Casa Loma currently charges $12.00 and the Hockey Hall of Fame currently charges
$13.00
SITE SPECIFIC PASSES
The site specific passes for conservation areas will be replaced with Conservation Journeys
Memberships and Conservation Journeys Individual Memberships. The Conservation
Journeys Memberships provide better value providing a one year membership valid for general
admission to all TRCA conservation areas, Kortright Centre for Conservation and BCPV
including parking, discounts at retail outlets and ticketed events. The Conservation Journeys
Membership will provide privileges for four (4) individuals offering more flexibility to our
members.
Site specific passes will be available for Kortright Centre for Conservation and Black Creek
Pioneer Village due to specific client demand. These prices have been increased marginally to
reflect the increase in the admission fees at both locations.
Changes from the 2006 Fee Schedule are highlighted in bo ld and italic.
Proposed Changes to TRCA's 2006 Fee Schedule
ITEM
#
ITEM DESCRIPTION
PST
8%
GST
6%
2007
BASE
2007
GROSS
2006
GROSS
1.0 For general admission at conservation areas, per day;
1.1
for each adult from sixteen to fifty -nine
years of age at Heart Lake, Glen Haffy,
Bruce's Mill and Petticoat Creek.
0.00
0.28
4.72
5.00
5.00
1.2
for each adult from sixteen to fifty -nine
years of age at Boyd and Albion Hills.
0.00
0.34
5.66
6.00
5.00
1.3
for each senior sixty years of age or over
at Heart Lake, Glen Haffy, Bruce's Mill and
Petticoat Creek.
0.00
0.23
3.77
4.00
4.00
1.4
for each senior sixty years of age or over
at Boyd and Albion Hills.
0.00
0.29
4.71
5.00
4.00
2 0
Annual Passes for Conservation Areas have been replaced with Conservation Journeys
Memberships, as per item 32.0.
3.0
For fishing at Glen Haffy or Heart Lake;
3 4
for each person sixteen 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
0.43
7.07
7.50
7 49
350
ITEM
#
ITEM DESCRIPTION
PST
8%
GST
6%
2007
BASE
2007
GROSS
2006
GROSS
3.5
for each person five to fifteen 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
0.19
3.06
3.25
3.21
3.6
for the use of a fishing pond at Glen Haffy
Conservation Area for up to 75 persons
including general admission, angling fee,
and picnic shelter.
0.00
45.00
750.00
795.00
795.00
3.7
for each additional persons 25 or fewer in
conjunction with item 3.5.
0.00
12.00
200.00
212.00
212.00
4.0
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:
4.1
for up to 75 persons.
0.00
50.66
844.34
895.00
795.00
4.2
for each additional persons 25 or fewer.
0.00
13.87
231.13
245.00
212.00
4.3
for a membership to Glen Haffy Fly
Fisher's Club.
0.00
27.46
457.54
485.00
424.00
8.0
For each day camper, not overnight, per
day, inclusive of general admission.
0.00
0.13
2.12
2.25
2.23
10.0
For a permit to occupy an individual serviced campsite, with water and hydro hook -ups,
inclusive of general admission
10.1
at Albion Hills, per night
0.00
1.70
28.30
30.00
28.25
10.2
at Albion Hills, per week
0.00
10.19
169.81
180.00
169.50
10.3
at Albion Hills per month (28 days)
0.00
33.97
566.03
600.00
565.00
16.0
For admission to the swimming area at Petticoat Creek, exclusive of general admission
16.1
per day, for each person five years of age
or over
0.00
0.20
3.30
3.50
3.00
16.2
per day, for each child four years of age
or under accompanying their family
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
16.3
per day, for each child four years of age
or under as part of an organized group
under supervision
0.00
0.20
3.30
3.50
3.00
16.4
for a book of ten pool passes
0.00
1.79
29.71
31.50
27.00
19.0
For the use of cross - country trails Albion Hills, inclusive of General admission;
19.1
for each person from sixteen to fifty nine
years of age
0.00 0.80
13.20
14.00
12.00
19.2
for each child five to fifteen years of age
0.00 0.46
7.54
8.00
6.00
19.3
for each child four years of age or under.
0.00 0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
19.4
for each senior sixty years of age or over.
0.00 0.62
10.38
11.00
9.00
19.5
for a family of one or two adults and their
children who are fifteen years of age or
under.
0.00 1.99
33.01
35.00
30.00
20.0
For the use of cross - country ski trails at Albion Hills, inclusive of general admission, after 1 pm;
20.1
for each person from sixteen to fifty nine
years of age
0.00
0.68
11.32
12.00
10.00
20.2
for each child five to fifteen years of age
0.00
0.34
5.66
6.00
4.00
20.4
for each senior sixty years of age or over.
0.00
0.49
8.49
9.00
7.00
20.5
for a family of one or two adults and their
children who are fifteen years of age or
under.
0.00
1.65
27.35
29.00
24.00
351
ITEM
#
ITEM DESCRIPTION
PST
8%
GST
6%
2007
BASE
2007
GROSS
2006
GROS
22.0
For rental of a cross - country ski equipment package consisting of skis, boots and poles;
22.1
for each person sixteen years of age or
over, per day.
1.34
1.00
16.66
19.00
16.10
22.2
for each person sixteen years of age or
over, per day, after 1: p.m.
0.99
0.74
12.27
14.00
11.50
22.3
for each child fifteen years of age or
under, per day.
0.91
0.68
11.40
13.00
11.50
22.4
for each child fifteen years of age or
under, per day, after 1:00 p.m.
0.77
0.58
9.65
>1.00
9.77
22.5
for each person sixteen years of age or
over, in a group with a reservation,
including trail fees, per day, subject to a
minimum group size.
1.23
0.92
15.35
17.50
17.25
-
22.6
for each person fifteen years of age or
under, in a group with a reservation,
including trail fees, per day, subject to a
minimum group size.
0.84
0.63
10.53
12.00
11.50
26.0
For general
per da'
admission to the Black Creek Pioneer Village, during the regular operating season,
26.1
for each person from sixteen to fifty -nine
years of age
0.00
0.74
12.26
13.00
12.00
26.2
for each child from five to fifteen years of
age
0.00
0.51
8.49
9.00
8.00
26.3
for each child four years of age or under
accompanying their family
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
26.4
for each senior sixty years of age or over
0.00
0.68
11.32
12.00
11.00
26.5
for each student sixteen years of age or
over, with student identification
0.00
0.68
11.32
12.00
11.00
26.6
for each student participating in a general
tour program
0.00
0.51
8.49
9.00
8.00
26.7
for each student participating in a
specially designated tour program subject
to a minimum group size
0.00
0.57
9.43
10.00
9.00
26.8
for each student participating in a
designated activity program, subject to a
minimum group size
0.00
0.68
11.32
12.00
11.00
26.9
for each student participating in the
Dickson Hill School program, per day,
subject to a minimum group size of twenty
persons
0.00
0.51
8.49
9.00
8.00
27.0
For an site specific membership valid for general admission, inclusive of parking fees, for Black
Creek Pioneer Village;
27.1
for each individual.
0.00
2.83
47.17
50.00
37.10
27.2
for a family of one or two adults and their
children.
0.00
4.81
80.19
85.00
68.90
28.0
For a guided tour at Black Creek Pioneer Village, as part of a tour group with a reservation,
including general admission
28.1
for each person from sixteen to fifty -nine
years of age
0.00
0.79
13.21
14.00
13.00
28.2
for each senior sixty years of age and
over
0.00
0.74
12.26
13.00
12.00
352
ITEM
#
ITEM DESCRIPTION
PST
8%
GST
6%
2007
BASE
2007
GROSS
2006
GROSS
30.0
For general admission at the Kortright Centre for Conservation;
30.1
for each person from sixteen to fifty -nine
years of age.
0.00
0.34
5.66
6.00
5.00
30.5
for each senior sixty years of age or over.
0.00
0.29
4.71
5.00
4.00
31.0
For an site specific pass valid only for admission to the Kortright Centre for Conservation;
31.1
for each individual.
0.00
2.27
37.73
40.00
37.10
31.2
for a family of one or two adults and their
children.
0.00
3.97
66.03
75.00
68.90
32.0
Conservation Journeys Memberships valid for general admission to all Conservation Areas, .
Kortright Centre for Conservation and Black Creek Pioneer Village;
32.1
for an individual
0.00
3.68
61.32
65.00
63.60
32.2
for four individuals
0.00
7.08
117.92
125.00
106.00
Report prepared by: Derek Edwards, extension 5672
For information contact: Marty Brent, extension 5403
Martha Wilson, extension 5674
Date: October 27, 2006
Attachments: 2
353
Attachment 1
CONSERVATION AREA ADMISSION FEE COMPARISON
TRCA Proposed Fees
2007
Credit
Valley
2006
Halton Region
2006
Grand
River
2006
C.A.'s
KCC
Leisure
Time
Camping
Palgrave
2005
Hilton Falls
Kelso
Crawford
Lake
Mountsberg
$26.75/30.50/
33.00
Adult
$5.00/$6.00
$6.00
$4.25
$4.50/4.75
$4.50
$6.00
$5.50/5.00
$4.00
Child
$0.00
$0.00
$2.50
$3.00
$3.00/
3.25
$3.50
$3.50/4.00
$2.25
Senior
$4.00/$5.00
$5.00
$2.50
$3.50
$3.50/
3.75
$5.00
$3.50/4.00
$4.00
CAMPING FEE COMPARISON
Albion
Hills
Proposed
Fees
2007
Indian
Line
Proposed
Fees
2007
Grand River
Conservation
Authority
2006
Ontario
Provincial
Parks
2005
Glen Rouge
Campground
Toronto
2005
KOA
Barrie
2005
Leisure
Time
Camping
Palgrave
2005
Serviced
Campsite
$30.00
$31.50
$31.00
$26.75/30.50/
33.00
$30.00
$32.00
$31.00
CROSS COUNTRY SKIING FEE COMPARISON
Albion Hills
Proposed Fees
2007
Hardwood
Hills
2006
Mansfield
2006
Dagmar
2006
Horseshoe
2006
TRAIL FEES:
Toronto
Zoo
2006
Upper
Canada
Village
2006
Adult
13.00
$15.00
Adult
$14.00
$20.00
$14.50
$14.00
$17.00
Child
$8.00
$12.50
$8.00
$12.00
$14.00
Senior
$11.00
$17.50
$14.50
$12.00
$11.00
Family
$35.00
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
RENTALS:
Adult
$19.00
$25.00
$18.50
$25.00
$21.00
Child
$13.00
$20.00
$10.50
$25.00
$13.00
Senior
$19.00
$25.00
$18.50
$25.00
$21.00
BLACK CREEK PIONEER VILLAGE ADMISSION FEE COMPARISON
BCPV
Proposed
Fees
2007
McMichael
Canadian Art
Collection
2006
Historic
Fort
York
2006
Casa
Loma
2006
Royal
Ontario
Museum
2006
Hockey Hall
of Fame
2006
Toronto
Zoo
2006
Upper
Canada
Village
2006
Adult
13.00
$15.00
$6.00
$12.00
$15.00
$13.00
$19.00
$16.95
Child
9.00
$12.00
$3.00
$6.75
$10.00
$9.00
$11.00
$7.50
Senior
12.00
$12.00
$3.25
$7.50
$12.00
$9.00
$13.00
$15.95
354
CULTURAL EDUCATION TOUR FEE COMPARISON
BCPV Proposed
Fee 2007
2 hrs.
McMichael
Gallery
2005
1.5 hrs.
Casa Loma
2006
Toronto Zoo
2005
ROM
2005
General Program
9.00
$9.00
$9.75
$6.00/$8.00
$7.50
Specially
Designed Program
10.00
n/a
n/a
Free
$9.00
ANNUAL PASS COMPARISON
TRCA Proposed
Conservation
Journeys
Membership
Halton Region
Conservation
Authority
2006
Grand River
Conservation
Authority
2006
Credit Valley
Conservation
Authority
2006
Vehicle /Family
$125.00
$100.00
$110.00
$95.00
Individual
$65.00
$70.00
$45.00
$50.00
Child
Free
$70.00
$30.00
$50.00
355
Attachment 2
TRCA 2006 Fee Schedule Public Facilities and Programming
Conservation Areas items 1 to 24
Black Creek Pioneer Village items 25 to 28
Kortright Centre for Conservation items 29 to 31
Discounts items D1 to D2
The Authority on November 25, 2005 approved TRCA's 2006 Fee Schedule (Meeting #09/05. Most fees
listed in this Schedule take effect January 1, 2006.
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: \home \public \Conservation Parks
Marketing \FEES \Fee06
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:
• age categories for child and seniors have changed
• general admission fee for children five to fifteen years of age has been eliminated
• adult general admission fee at Conservation Areas has increased
• senior general admission fee at Conservation Areas and Kortright has increased
• vehicle admission at Petticoat Creek has been changed to per person general admission
• camping fees have increased
• group picnic site fee structure has been changed
• swimming fees at Petticoat Creek have increased
• maple syrup tour fee at Bruce's Mill has increased
• general admission fees at Black Creek Pioneer Village have increased
• guided tour fees at Black Creek Pioneer Village have increased
• parking fee at the Kortright Centre has increased
• after hours use, commercial photography and wagon rides for BCPV have been removed from the
fee schedule
356
TRCA 2006 Fee Schedule - Definition of Terms
1 Age categories
Four general age groups are used throughout the fee schedule as follows:
Adult - any person from sixteen to fifty -nine.
Child - any person from five to fifteen.
Child (pre - schoolers) - any person four years of age or under.
Senior - any person sixty years of age or over.
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 - for each individual.
Family - for a family of one or two adults and their children.
3 Conservation Area
The term Conservation Area applies to Albion Hills, Bruce's Mill, Boyd, Glen Haffy, 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 Genera/ 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.
357
TRCA 2006 Fee Schedule - Contents
after -hours use
angling fee
annual pass
annual pass
annual pass
barbecue / corn pot rental
boat 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
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 -
general admission
general admission
group discounts
guided tour
late permit
maple syrup tours
memberships
memberships
mountain biking
parking
parking
parking
picnics - additional picnickers
pool pass
skiing
special need persons
swimming - annual pass
swimming - daily admission
Conservation Areas
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
see late permit (6.0)
3.0
27.0
2.0
31.0
15.1
5.0
8.0
7.0
7.0
9.3, 9.6, 10.3, 10.7, 11.3
13.0
9.0, 10.0,11.0
10.4, 10.8, 11.4
10.0, 11.0
12.0
fees for extra campers and parking for extra cars
Albion Hills, Indian Line 9.0
Conservation Areas, Kortright, BCPV
Albion Hills
Albion Hills
Albion Hills
Albion Hills
Albion Hills
Conservation Areas
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
Conservation Areas
Bruce's Mill
BCPV
Kortright
Albion Hills
BCPV
18.0
22.0
22.5, 22.6
19.0
20.0
21.0
see campers - day campers (8.0
26.9
26.8
26.6, 26.7
30.6
30.7, 30.8, 30.9
15.2
4.3
3.0
4.0
26.0
1.0
30.0
D.1
28.0
6.0
24.0
see annual pass (27.0)
see annual pass (31.0)
23.0
25.0
Albion Hills, Indian Line see camping, supp. fees (120)
Kortright 29.0
Conservation Areas 14.0
Petticoat Creek 16.0
see cross country skiing (19.0, 20.0, 21.0, 220)
BCPV, Conservation Areas, Kortright D.2
Petticoat Creek 17.0
Petticoat Creek 16.0
358
ITEM
#
ITEM DESCRIPTION
PST
8%
GST
6%
2006
BASE
2006
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
0.28
4.72
5.00
1.2
for each child from five to fifteen years of
age.
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
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 years of age or over.
0.00
0.23
3.77
4.00
2.0
For an annual pass valid ONLY for admission to the Conservation Area for which it is
purchased;
2.1
for each individual.
0.00
2.10
35.00
37.10
2.2
for a family of one or two adults and their
children.
0.00
3.90
65.00
68.90
3.0
For fishing at Glen Haffy or Heart Lake:
3.1
per day, for each person sixteen years of
age or over, exclusive of general
admission
0.00
0.30
5.00
5.30
3.2
per day, for each person from five to
fifteen years of age, exclusive of general
admission.
• • 0.00
0.15
2.50
2.65
3.3
per day, for each person four years of age
or under, exclusive of general admission.
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
3.4
for each person sixteen 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
0.42
7.00
7.42
3.5
for each person five to fifteen 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
0.18
3.00
3.18
4.0
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;
4.1
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
45.00
750.00
795.00
4.2
For each additional 25 or fewer persons
0.00
12.00
200.00
212.00
4.3
for a membership to Glen Haffy Fly
Fisher's Club at Glen Haffy Headwaters
Trout Ponds valid Tuesday to Sunday
0.00
24.00
400.00
424.00
5.0
For the rental of a canoe, pedal boat, or rowboat
where available, per hour
0.96
0.72
12.00
13.68
6.0
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
3.00
50.00
53.00
359
ITEM
#
ITEM DESCRIPTION
PST
8%
GST
6%
2006
BASE
2006
GROSS
7.0
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;
7.1
for a group of up to twenty persons;
0.00
5.66
94.34
100.00
7.2
for each additional person, in conjunction
with a permit issued under item 7.1
0.00
0.18
3.07
3.25
8.0
For each day camper, not overnight, per day,
inclusive of general admission
0.00
0.13
2.10
2.23
9.0
For a permit to occupy an individual unserviced campsite, inclusive of general admission;
9.1
at Albion Hills, per night.
0.00
1.40
23.35
24.75
9.2
at Albion Hills, per week.
0.00
8.41
140.09
148.50
9.3
at Albion Hills, per month (28 days).
0.00
28.02
466.98
495.00
9.4
at Indian Line, per night.
0.00
1.47
24.53
26.00
9.5
at Indian Line, per week.
0.00
8.83
147.17
156.00
9.6
at Indian Line, per month (28 days).
0.00
29.43
490.57
520.00
9.7
on a holiday or other designated date, in
addition to the basic permit fee specified
in item 9.1 or 9.4
0.00
0.13
2.12
2.25
10.0
For a permit to occupy an individual serviced campsite, with water and hydro hook -ups,
inclusive of general admission;
10.1
at Albion Hills, per night.
0.00
1.60
26.65
28.25
10.2
at Albion Hills, per week.
0.00
9.59
159.91
169.50
10.3
at Albion Hills, per month (28 days).
0.00
31.98
533.02
565.00
10.4
at Albion Hills, per season.
0.00
111.79
1863.21
1975.00
10.5
at Indian Line, per night.
0.00
1.78
29.72
31.50
10.6
at Indian Line, per week.
0.00
10.70
178.30
189.00
10.7
at Indian Line, per month (28 days).
0.00
35.66
594.34
630.00
10.8
at Indian Line, per season.
0.00
142.64
2377.36
2520.00
10.9
on a holiday or other designated date, in
addition to the basic permit fee specified
in item 10.1 or 10.4
0.00
0.13
2.12
2.25
11.0
For a permit to occupy an individual services campsite with water, 30 amp hydro service, and
sewage hook -up inclusive of general admission:
11.1
at Indian Line, per night.
0.00
1.91
31.84
33.75
11.2
at Indian Line, per week.
0.00
11.46
191.04
202.50
11.3
at Indian Line per month (28 days).
0.00
38.21
636.79
675.00
11.4
at Indian Line, per season.
0.00
152.83
2547.17
2700.00
11.5
on a holiday or other designated date, in
addition to the basic permit fee specified
in item 11.1
0.00
0.13
2.12
2.25
12.0
In addition to basic camping fees as specified in Items 9.0, 10,0, and 11.0;
12.1
for a permit to park an additional vehicle.
0.58
0.43
7.24
8.25
12.2
for a permit to park an additional vehicle,
per season
3.86
2.89
48.25
55.00
12.3
for each additional person occupying a
campsite over and above the
campgrounds specified site limit.
0.00
0.24
4.01
4.25
360
ITEM
#
ITEM DESCRIPTION
PST
8%
GST
6%
2006
BASE
2006
GROSS
13.0
For a permit to occupy a group campsite at Albion Hills or Indian Line, inclusive of general
admission;
13.1
for up to ten camping units at Albion Hills
Pleasantview group campsite, for an adult
group
0.00
13.59
226.42
240.00
13.2
for each additional camping unit at Albion
Hills Pleasantview group campsite, in
conjunction with a permit issued to an
adult group under item 13.1
0.00
1.36
22.64
24.00
13.3
for up to ten camping units at Albion Hills
Pleasantview group campsite, for a youth
group
0.00
11.32
188.68
200.00
13.4
for each additional camping unit at Albion
Hills Pleasantview group campsite, in
conjunction with a permit issued to a
youth group under item 13.3
0.00
1.13
18.87
20.00
13.5
for up to ten camping units at Albion Hills
Meadowvale or Cedar Grove group
campsite, for an adult group
0.00
11.32
188.68
200.00
13.6
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 13.5
0.00
1.13
18.87
20.00
13.7
for up to ten camping units at Albion Hills
Meadowvale or Cedar Grove group
campsite, for a youth group
0.00
9.34
155.66
165.00
13.8
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 13.7
0.00
0.93
15.57
16.50
13.9
for up to ten camping units at Indian Line
group campsite, for an adult group
0.00
11.32
188.68
200.00
13.10
for each additional camping unit at Indian
Line group campsite in conjunction with a
permit issued to an adult group under
item 13.9
0.00
1.13
18.87
20.00
13.11
for up to ten camping units at Indian Line
group campsite, for a youth group
0.00
9.34
155.66
165.00
13.12
for each additional camping unit at Indian
Line group campsite, in conjunction with a
permit issued to a youth group under item
13.11
0.00
0.93
15.57
16.50
14.0
For a permit for use of a group picnic site, 0.00
exclusive of general admission;
3.63 to
27.25
60.57 to
454.25
64.20 to
. 481.50
15.0
In addition to a permit for the use of group picnic site as specified in item 14.0
15.1
for the use of a portable barbecue unit or
corn pot
3.23
2.42
40.35
46.00
361
ITEM
#
ITEM DESCRIPTION
PST
8%
GST
6%
2006
BASE
2006
GROSS
15.2
for a permit for a fire in a designated
ground fire pit
0.00
3.63
60.57
64.20
16.0
For admission to the swimming area at Petticoat Creek, exclusive of vehicle or general
admission;
16.1
per day, for each person five years of age
or over.
0.00
0.17
2.83
3.00
16.2
each child under two years of age.
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
16.3
per day, for each child four years of age
or under as part of an organized group
under supervision.
0.00
0.17
2.83
3.00
16.4
for a book of ten pool passes.
0.00
1.53
25.47
27.00
17.0
Petticoat Creek Pool passes have been replaced by the Conservation Journeys program.
18.0
Commercial photography or filming fees are set out independently on a case by case basis.
19.0
For the use of cross - country ski trails at Albion Hills, inclusive of general admission:
19.1
for each person sixteen to fifty -nine years
of age.
0.00
0.68
11.32
12.00
19.2
for each child five to fifteen years of age.
0.00
0.34
5.66
6.00
19.3
for each child four years of age or under.
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
19.4
for each senior sixty years of age or over.
0.00
0.51
8.49
9.00
19.5
for a family of one or two adults and their
children who are fifteen years of age or
under.
0.00
1.70
28.30
30.00
20.0
For the use of cross - country ski trails at Albion Hills, inclusive of general admission, after 1
P.m.;
20.1
for each person sixteen to fifty nine years
of age.
0.00
0.57
9.43
10.00
20.2
for each child five to fifteen years of age.
0.00
0.23
3.77
4.00
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 years of age or over.
0.00
0.40
6.60
7.00
20.5
for a family of one or two adults and their
children who are fifteen years of age or
under.
0.00
1.36
22.64
24.00
21.0
Albion Hills Cross Country Ski passes have been replaced by the Conservation Journeys
program.
22.0
For the rental of a cross - country ski equipment package consisting of skis, boots and poles:
22.1
for each person sixteen years of age or
over, per day.
1.13
0.85
14.12
16.10
22.2
for each person sixteen years of age or
over, per day, after 1:00 p.m.
0.81
0.60
10.09
11.50
22.3
for each child fifteen years of age or
under, per day.
0.81
0.60
10.09
11.50
22.4
for each child fifteen years of age or
under, per day, after 1:00 p.m.
0.69
0.51
8.57
9.77
22.5
for each person sixteen years of age or
over, in a group with a reservation,
including trail fees, per day, subject to a
minimum group size.
1.21
0.91
15.13
17.25
362
363
ITEM
#
ITEM DESCRIPTION
PST
8%
GST
6%
2006
BASE
2006
GROSS
22.6
for each person fifteen years of age or
under, in a group with a reservation,
including trail fees, per day, subject to a
minimum group size.
0.81
0.60
10.09
11.50
23.0
For use of the mountain bike trails at Albion Hills
per day, for each person, exclusive of general
admission.
0.00
0.11
1.89
2.00
24.0
For a guided tour at Bruce's Mill during the maple
syrup program, subject to minimum group size of
twenty persons.
0.00
0.34
5.66
6.00
25.0
For parking at Black Creek Pioneer Village, per
vehicle, per day, exclusive of general admission.
0.42
0.32
5.26
6.00
26.0
For general admission to Black Creek Pioneer Village, during the regular operating season, per
day;
26.1
for each adult from fifteen to fifty -nine
years of age.
0.00
0.68
11.32
12.00
26.2
for each child from five to fourteen years
of age.
0.00
0.45
7.55
8.00
26.3
for each child four years of age or under
accompanying their family.
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
26.4
for each senior sixty years of age or over.
0.00
0.62
10.38
11.00
26.5
for each student fifteen years of age or
over, with student identification.
0.00
0.62
10.38
11.00
26.6
for each student participating in a general
tour program.
0.00
0.45
7.55
8.00
26.7
for each student participating in a
specially designated tour program,
subject to a minimum group size.
0.00
0.51
8.49
9.00
26.8
for each student participating in a
designated activity program, subject to a
minimum group size.
0.00
0.62
10.38
11.00
26.9
for each student participating in the
Dickson's Hill School program, per day,
subject to a minimum group size of twenty
persons.
0.00
0.45
7.55
8.00
27.0
For an annual pass valid for general admission, inclusive of parking fees, for the Black Creek
Pioneer Village;
27.1
for each individual.
0.00
2.10
35.00
37.10
27.2
for a family on one or two adults and their
children.
0.00
3.90
65.00
68.90
28.0
For a Guided Tour at Black Creek Pioneer Village, as part of a tour group with a reservation,
including general admission;
28.1
for each adult from sixteen fifty -nine years
of age
0.00
0.74
12.26
13.00
28.2
for each senior sixty years of age and
over.
0.00
0.68
11.32
12.00
363
ITEM
#
ITEM DESCRIPTION
PST
8%
GST
6%
2006
BASE
2006
GROSS
29.0
For parking at the Kortright Centre for
Conservation, per vehicle, per day, exclusive of
general admission.
0.21
0.16
2.63
3.00
30.0
For general admission at the Kortright Centre for Conservation;
30.1
for each adult from sixteen to fifty -nine
years of age.
0.00
0.28
4.72
5.00
30.2
for each child from five to fifteen years of
age.
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
30.3
for each child four years of age or under
accompanying their family.
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
30.4
for each child four years of age or under
visiting as part of an organized group
under supervision.
0.00
0.14
2.36
2.50
30.5
for each senior sixty years of age or over.
0.00
0.23
3.77
4.00
30.6
for each student participating in a general
tour program, subject to a minimum
group size.
0.00
0.38
6.37
6.75
30.7
for each student participating in a
specially designed tour program, subject
to a minimum group size.
0.00
0.42
7.08
7.50
30.8
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
0.57
9.43
10.00
30.9
for each senior sixty years or over
participating in a specially designed tour
program, subject to a minimum group
size.
0.00
0.38
6.37
6.75
31.0
For an annual pass valid ONLY for admission to the Kortright Centre;
31.1
for each individual
0.00
2.10
35.00
37.10
31.2
for a family of one or two adults and their
children.
0.00
3.90
65.00
68.90
D.1
At Black Creek Pioneer Village and Kortright Centre, 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 special needs persons and their
attendants to a maximum ratio of 1:1.
364
RES. #C83/06 -
Moved by:
Seconded by:
ACCOUNTS RECEIVABLE POLICY
Staff report on Toronto and Region Conservation Authority's Accounts
Receivable policy and protocol for payment.
Andrew Schulz
Rob Ford
THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT Toronto and Region Conservation
Authority (TRCA) revise the Accounts Receivable policy as follows:
1. The Director, Finance and Business Services (Director), or designate, may extend credit
terms to customers in keeping with standard commercial practices;
2. Unless otherwise agreed to in writing, when credit has been extended payment is due 30
days from the date of invoice;
3. Amounts which remain unpaid for a period of 30 days or more will be subject to penalty
interest at a rate which is set by the Director to reflect market conditions and to ensure
the penalty is sufficiently onerous to encourage prompt payment of invoices and shall
advise the Business Excellence Advisory Board (BEAB) whenever there is a change in
the rate. Interest will be compounded at 30 day intervals;
4. Credit in excess of $1,000 may be granted on the approval of the Director or designate
subject to a formal credit application process in specified format. Credit checks may be
waived for long term clients with excellent payment histories, government and related
agencies, charitable and nonprofit organizations;
5. Terms for first time clients, excluding those noted in #4 above, will be minimum 50%
payment upon agreement to purchase, with the balance due on delivery;
6. The Director is authorized to suspend collection proceedings on amounts which do not
exceed $5,000, excluding finance charges;
7. Amounts in excess of $5,000 may be written off only on the recommendation of the BEAB
to the Executive Committee;
8. Staff will report annually to the BEAB on amounts not exceeding $5,000 written off in the
previous year.
CARRIED
BACKGROUND
At Authority Meeting #7/06, held on September 29, 2006, Resolution #A201/06 was approved
as follows:
THAT staff report on the accounts receivable policy and protocol for payment of all
services to-the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority
365
At Authority Meeting #5/91 held July 26, July 1991, the Authority adopted the following policy
with respect to the management of accounts receivable. The policy, including amendments
approved by the board in 1992 and 2004, is reproduced below:
1. All invoices issued after July 31, 1991 which remain unpaid for a period 30 days or more
shall be subject to a monthly 2% (26.82% annual rate) interest charge, effective the date
of the invoice; {Currently at 1.5% as per #2 below.}
2. The Director, Finance and Administration {currently Director, Finance and Business
Services} may amend the aforementioned interest rate, from time to time, in keeping
with market conditions and to ensure the penalty is sufficiently onerous to encourage
prompt payment of invoices; and shall advise the Executive Committee of the change.
3. Approval from the Director, Finance and Administration or his designate is required
before credit may be extended beyond a $1,000 limit, such requirement may be waived
for government and related agencies or charitable, not - for - profit organizations;
4. The Director, Finance and Administration is authorized to suspend collection
proceedings for the purpose of expediency for amounts owing which do not exceed
$2,500, including related finance charges;
5. The suspension of collection proceedings for amounts equal to or in excess of $2,500
shall require Executive Committee approval.
1992 Amendments:
The accounts receivable policy of the Authority is amended to ...
1. Impose overdue charges on all outstanding invoices, not just those issued after July 31,
1991;
2. Direct staff not to pursue the collection of interest charges where the amounts unpaid
are Tess than $100; and
3. Provide that prior to suspension of collection proceedings for amounts equal to or in
excess of $2,500, staff shall advise the Finance and Administration Advisory Board prior
to seeking approval of the executive Committee;
2004 Amendment:
AND FURTHER THAT the payment terms for individuals and businesses who are first
time customers be 50% payment up front, a credit application and check, and the
remaining payment as cash on delivery.
366
INTRODUCTION, SCOPE AND SUMMARY OF CURRENT PRACTICES
TRCA revenue from admissions, school and other program fees, retail sales, residential and
commercial property leases, nursery and tree planting programs, planning and permitting fees,
special contract work, and other forms of self - generated revenue amounted to approximately
$14.9 million in 2005. The 2006 budget has a provision for TRCA generated revenue which is
just over $17.3 million. Although exact figures are not readily available, a substantial portion of
this amount, exceeding several million dollars, is subject to credit terms. Since the risk of not
being able to collect amounts due is generally associated with these activities, the TRCA
accounts receivable policy is tailored to these revenue streams. Amounts invoiced under
various government grant programs, residential leases which are governed by legislation,
TRCA levy protocols and amounts due under special delivery contracts such as those signed
with the Toronto Waterfront Revitalization Corporation (TWRC) would not normally come under
the purview of the TRCA receivables policy.
As requested by the BEAB at meeting #4/06, held on September 15, 2006, this report
examines TRCA's customer billing, credit and collection practices. The following is a summary
of current guidelines and practices.
Special events, banquets and corporate functions
• Weddings, banquets, enhanced picnics, workshops, corporate and similar functions held at
various TRCA venues require full payment in advance, generally two weeks. Where
advance payments are based on estimates, the difference is either refunded to the
customer or invoiced, as required. Exceptions are rare and would include, for example,
dispensation from the policy for a client such as York University, which uses Black Creek
Pioneer Village (BCPV) facilities often and where the risk of non - payment is extremely low.
Programs for schoo /s and organized groups
• Conservation Field Centre (CFC) school programs - A $500 deposit is required eight weeks
before visit with the balance invoiced after visit. The deposit is forfeited if a cancellation
occurs within eight weeks of the visit.
• CFC community programs - A $500 deposit is required eight weeks prior to the date of the
visit, with the estimated balance due one week prior to visit. A final invoice or refund is
issued based on actual attendance and consumption. The $500 deposit is forfeited if a
cancellation occurs within eight weeks of the visit.
• CFC summer camps - The payment schedule based on the agreement, requiring payment
of estimated amount in full either one week prior to first or final visit. A final invoice or
refund is issued, based on actual attendance and consumption.
• CFC Other - The CFC program has multiple service arrangements (e.g. for the provision of
food services to the Toronto District School Board at the Etobicoke Outdoor Education
Centre) with payment schedules based on the agreement.
• Kortright Centre for Conservation (KCC)/ Bruce's Mill - Maple syrup education programs -
For both community and school groups a 50% deposit is required two weeks prior to the
visit and final payment is due upon arrival. Individual visitors pay admission at point of
entry.
367
• BCPV Dickson's Hill School program - A $500 non - refundable deposit is required at the
time of booking, with full payment due four weeks prior to visit. A three week cancellation
or reschedule notice period is granted before payment in full is forfeited by client.
• BCPV / KCC school group visits - A 50% deposit is required four weeks prior to the visit,
with balance due upon arrival or invoiced, if prearranged.
• Special programs (e.g., "Investigating The Living City Spaces ") - Payment in full is required
at the time of arrival or invoiced, if prearranged.
Conservation Area Programs
• Group picnic site fees - Payment in full, nonrefundable, is due at the time of the booking.
Re- scheduling is permitted two weeks prior to visit.
• Group picnic admission fees - These fees are due upon arrival.
• School and community groups (e.g., day -care, organized ski groups) - Fees are due upon
arrival.
• Long -term day camps - A payment schedule included in the agreement may require
payment on arrival, collected on a weekly or periodic basis or as otherwise stipulated in
agreement.
• Picnic partner commissions - Due two weeks after the event based on contracted amount
and terms.
• Vendor fees - Collected from client two weeks prior to the event.
• Camping - Generally due upon arrival or if booked on -line, payment is due at the time of
booking. Groups camps (20 or more campers) pay a deposit of $100 per night two weeks
prior to visit, with final payment due upon arrival.
• All other fees including general admission, parking, retail sales and equipment rentals are
not subject to terms.
Filming permits
• Filming permit fees, including damage deposits, are collected in advance, at the contracted
amount.
Industry standard commercial practices and contracts
• In certain cases, 30 days' credit is extended in keeping with industry practices, such as with
tour operators, nursery supply and install clients, commercial firewood clients, construction
contracts (often with a municipality), etc.. Payment terms are included in the contract for
the work.
368
Leases
• Residential rents, which are administered in accordance with lease agreements, are
generally required at the beginning of the month or period. Commercial and farm leases
specify payment terms, which may not necessarily require monthly payments or advance
payments.
Government agreements
• Amounts invoiced to other levels of government and public sector organizations generally
reflect approved grant proposal terms. There are also occasions where TRCA will enter
into a fee - for - service arrangement with public sector organizations. The risk of write -off is
very low and the only issue is collecting payments in a timely manner. As previously noted,
the work undertaken under agreement with TWRC is a primary example under this
category, as would be work undertaken on behalf of municipalities and the provincial
government from time to time. Although payment terms are negotiated, there occurs from
time to time unforeseen circumstances such as an additional approval that had not been
anticipated or other unforeseen circumstance that delays payment. And just as TRCA does
not customarily pay for work not yet performed, it is not generally possible to seek payment
in advance in these circumstances.
Planning and Development Division Fees
• Development applications which come to TRCA for review and processing fall within two
main categories:
• construction permitting and minor work clearances under the Ontario Regulation 166 \06
and;
• planning applications and Committee of Adjustment applications forwarded directly
from the municipalities.
• TRCA controls the collection of fees for its own permits and clearances. However in the
latter category, some municipalities collect fees on behalf of the conservation authority and
some do not. In these cases, TRCA must make arrangements with applicants to pay TRCA
directly at the time the application enters our review system.
• In dealing with planning applications, TRCA makes the following requests of municipalities
to assist in processing applications and the fee collection process:
• ensure that TRCA is included on the checklist determining a "complete application ";
• conduct an initial screening for TRCA's interests;
• inform the applicant of TRCA's interest, the need for consultation and fee payment;
• distribute application form and fee schedule as supplied to each municipality;
• where an agreement is in place, collect the fee on behalf of TRCA.
• TRCA's collection procedures for planning and development fees are as follows.
Permits under Ontario Regulation 166/06
Permitting Application Fee
• Permit fees must be paid at the time an application is submitted and according to the
approved fee schedule (2005).
369
• On occasion, adjustments to fee requirements may be necessary once the application has
received preliminary screening by staff. Fees must be paid before a comprehensive review
is initiated.
Minor Clearances, Concepts and Property Inquiries
• Fee payment is required before written response is provided. The fee schedule is
periodically updated.
Planning Applications
Consents and Committee of Adjustment Applications
• Although fees are required at the time of application, the fast -track nature of the process
does not always allow for collection of fees in advance.
• Payment can also be made mandatory as a condition of application approval where an
agreement with the municipality allows. Payments that have been conditioned must be paid
within 30 days of receiving TRCA comments.
Planning Applications
• TRCA will conduct an initial screening of the submission to determine the extent of work
and the applicable fee requirement under TRCA's 2005 schedule of fees, once the
application has been forwarded to TRCA for review.
• TRCA staff will notify the applicant of the fee requirement and terms and conditions, in
writing (with a sign back where required). Payment is due immediately in order to initiate
the review process.
• No comments will be provided on the application until applicable fees are paid. TRCA will
notify the municipality if fees are not paid and that the application is considered not
complete.
• When applicable, clearance fees must be paid to TRCA prior to release of final clearance
comments and release of conditions.
COMPONENTS OF TRCA A/R POLICY AND RECOMMENDED CHANGES TO EXISTING
POLICY:
Credit
The majority of customers to whom credit is extended are repeat and known to TRCA. Where
customers are new to TRCA and not in the public sector, procedures provide for a credit
application to be submitted and credit checks to be performed. A credit review not only looks
at the credit worthiness of the applicant through contact with the applicant's bank and other
references, but also confirms the principals and the legal form of the business. Individual
applicants under a residential lease are referred to Trans Union of Canada for a credit history.
Staff believes the $1,000 threshold which has been in effect for many years is appropriate.
370
Late payment interest charges
Currently TRCA imposes an interest penalty of 1.5% for each 30 -day period an invoice remains
outstanding, compounded. Between 2004 and October 2006, inclusive, TRCA has collected
about $5,400 in finance charges, $1,800 per year on average. TRCA, like many companies,
uses interest charges as a tool to induce and negotiate payment of the original invoice amount,
but is not always successful in collecting the penalty itself. Given the amount of effort required
and the potential for strained business relationships, staff are recommending that the proposed
modifications to the A/R Policy remain silent on the issue of enforcing payment of late payment
penalties and that staff be allowed to use discretion in its efforts to negotiate payment.
Write offs
Existing TRCA policy requires that amounts written off in excess of $2,500 may only occur after
seeking advice from BEAB and on the approval of the Executive Committee. This $2,500 cut off
limit has not changed since 1991. Staff is recommending that this policy component remain
intact, with a revised threshold limit of $5,000.
Staff maintains records of each amount written off, including the name of the individual or
business. Total write offs in recent years have been as follows:
2002 - $2,048 (5 items);
2003 - $861 (5 items);
2004 - $1,656 (4 items);
2005 - $9,253 (15 items, including the Robertson Gaze Associates amount of $4,621.56 on the
recommendation of the BEAB.)
2006 - $1,378 (2 items);
Given the scope of activities and volume of transactions the amounts involved are not
significant. This favourable performance is indicative that TRCA practices are working as
intended.
Reporting
Staff has reported to each board meeting since July 1991 on the status of receivables,
including aging, classification and a listing of individual creditors who owe TRCA in excess of
$1,000 for a period which exceeds 90 days. BEAB's active interest in the report has
contributed to TRCA's favourable results with respect to the management of receivables.
Recognizing TRCA's favourable performance in this area and the desire to use staff time more
efficiently, staff recommend that staff report annually to the BEAB on amounts written off by the
Director in the previous year, as opposed to reporting at each meeting.
Collection Agency
Under certain circumstances the use of collection agencies can be a valid option for collection.
Over the years TRCA staff has engaged the services of a collection agency, but never with
satisfactory results. This is mostly because the volume of business that can be referred is
minimal. At times, though, the issue is also that the business has closed its doors or the
individual can no longer be located.
371
PROPOSED REVISED A/R POLICY
Based on the foregoing analysis, staff are recommending the changes to the A/R policy as
proposed in the recommendation.
Summary
TRCA has had an excellent recovery rate on its accounts receivable. Write offs of uncollectible
amounts have not been significant in either absolute amounts or as a percentage of total
revenue. Staff continue to look for ways to stream line processes and to reduce the risk of
uncollectible accounts. In recent years, the use of debit and credit cards has become more
prevalent and has helped reduce the cost of handling cash and the need to extend credit. As
"self serve" options which can be provided through the internet and other e- commerce
solutions become more common place, the trend to lower costs and less risk will continue.
Report prepared by: Rocco Sgambelluri, extension 5232
For Information contact: Rocco Sgambelluri, extension 5232;
Jim Dillane, 416 - 667 -6292;
Date: November 3, 2006
RES. #C84/06 -
Moved by:
Seconded by:
MEETING SCHEDULE 2007 -2008
To provide a schedule of meetings for the forthcoming Authority year,
beginning February 23, 2007 and ending February 29, 2008.
Andrew Schulz
Rob Ford
THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT the Schedule of Meetings
2007 -2008, dated November 6, 2006, be approved;
THAT the Executive Committee be designated the powers of the Authority during the month
of August, 2007, as defined in Section 2.10 of the Rules of Conduct;
AND FURTHER THAT this schedule be distributed at the earliest opportunity to Toronto and
Region Conservation Authority's (TRCA) watershed municipalities.
CARRIED
RATIONALE
Since almost all members of 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 June and December to accommodate conflicts and holidays.
Executive Committee meetings have been scheduled for the first Friday of the month, with the
exceptions of April, August, October and January to accommodate conflicts and holidays
372
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:
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,
2007, with the required report being brought to the Authority at its meeting to be held on
September 28, 2007. 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.
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 he /d
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 2008 annual Authority meeting is to be held on
Friday, February 29, 2008. The 2006 meeting schedule was amended to move the 2007
annual meeting from January to February, 2007, to allow time for all citizen appointments to be
made. The City of Toronto has advised that they are considering holding a Council meeting in
early January following future municipal elections to deal with appointments to TRCA and other
agencies in time for our January annual meeting as per Resolution #A6/02 noted above.
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 meeting in March, 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 23, 2006
Attachments: 1
373
Attachment 1
THE TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY
MEETING SCHEDULE 2007 -2008
JANUARY 2007
TIME
DESCRIPTION
Feb. 23
10:30 a.m.
Location to be confirmed
ANNUAL Authority #1/07
MARCH 2007
TIME,
DESCRIPTION
Mar. 2
9:00 a.m.
BEAB #1/07
Mar. 2
10:30 a.m.
Executive #1/07
Mar. 30
10:00 a.m.
Authority #2/07
APRIL 2007
r TIME.
DESCRIPTION
Apr. 13
10:00 a.m.
Executive #2/07
Apr. 13
11:00 a.m.
SCB #1/07
Apr. 20
9:00 a.m.
BEAB #2/07
Apr. 20
10:30 a.m.
WMAB #1/07
Apr. 27
10:00 a.m.
Authority #3107
MAY 2007
TIME
DESCRIPTION
May 4
10:00 a.m.
Executive #3/07
May 25
10:00 a.m.
Authority #4/07
JUNE 2007
TIME
DESCRIPTION
June 1
10:00 a.m.
Executive #4/07
June 1
11:00 a.m.
SCB #2/07
June 8
9:00 a.m.
BEAB #3/07
June 8
10:30 a.m.
WMAB #2/07
June 22
10:00 a.m.
Authority #5/07
JULY 2007
TIME
DESCRIPTION
Jul. 6
10:00 a.m.
Executive #5/07
Jul. 13
10:30 a.m.
WMAB #3/07
Jul. 27
10:00 a.m.
Authority #6/07
AUGUST 2007
TIME
DESCRIPTION
Aug. 10
10:00 a.m.
Option for Teleconference
Executive #6/07
374
SEPTEMBER 2007
TIME
DESCRIPTION
Sept. 7
10:00 a.m.
Executive #7/07
Sept. 7
11:00 a.m.
SCB #3/07
Sept. 14
9:00 a.m.
BEAB #4/07
Sept. 14
10:30 a.m.
WMAB #4/07
Sept. 28
10:00 a.m.
Authority #7/07
OCTOBER 2007
TIME
DESCRIPTION
Oct. 12
10:00 a.m.
Executive #8/07
Oct. 19
9:00 a.m.
BEAB #5/07
Oct. 19
10:30 a.m.
WMAB #5/07
Oct. 26
10:00 a.m.
Authority #8/07
NOVEMBER 2007
TIME
DESCRIPTION
Nov. 2
10:00 a.m.
Executive #9/07
Nov. 2
11:00 a.m.
SCB #4/07
Nov. 30
10:00 a.m.
Authority #9/07
DECEMBER 2007
TIME
DESCRIPTION
Dec. 7
10:00 a.m. - Humber Room
Executive #10/07
Dec. 14
9:00 a.m. - Humber Room
BEAB #6/07
Dec. 14
10:00 a.m. - Humber Room
WMAB #6/07
JANUARY 2008
TIME
DESCRIPTION
Jan. 4
10:00 a.m.
Authority #10/07
Jan. 18
10:00 a.m.
Executive #11/07
Jan. 25
10:00 a.m.
Authority #11/07
FEBRUARY 2008
TIME
DESCRIPTION
Feb. 1
10:00 a.m.
Executive #12/07
Feb. 1
11:00 a.m.
SCB #5/07
Feb. 8
10:30 a.m.
WMAB #7/07
Feb. 29
10:30 a.m.
Location to be confirmed
ANNUAL Authority #1/08
375
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 meeting in March, 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.
376
RES. #C85 /06 -
Moved by:
Seconded by:
ACCOUNTS RECEIVABLE
October 24, 2006. Staff report on accounts receivable, as of October 24,
2006.
Paul Ainslie
Bill O'Donnell
THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT the Accounts Receivable status
report, as of October 24, 2006 be received.
AMENDMENT
RES. #C86 /06
Moved by:
Seconded by:
Rob Ford
Paul Ainslie
THAT the following be inserted after the main motion:
THAT the outstanding account for Basciano Parkin Ltd. be taken by TRCA staff to small
claims court;
AND FURTHER THAT the client 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 $7,968 in accumulated interest arrears on invoices outstanding for
more than 30 days.
377
ACCOUNTS RECEIVABLE AGING, BY CATEGORY
Excluding Municipal Levy and TWRC Funding- As at October 24. 2006
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
91,432
6,759
246
14,256
112,693
21.1%
GOVERNMENT
193,397
432
411.11
12,525
206,354
38.7%
DEVELOPMENT
SERVICES
865
97
Sale of plant material
13,185
14,050
2.6%
CORPORATE,
INDIVIDUAL AND
COMMUNITY
GROUPS
80,820
34,474
33,143
51,908
200,345
37 6%
TOTAL
366,514
41,665
33,389
91,874
533,442
100.0%
% OF TOTAL
68.7%
7.8%
6.3%
17.2%
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
Toronto District SB
14,124.00
645.16
103
Meal costs re Etobicoke FC at Albion
City of Miss.
9,000.00
411.11
97
Water Quality Monitoring Program
Ontario MNR
1,161.00
53.03
97
Sale of plant material
Wild Water Kingdom
34,077.13
Note
207
2006 Interim taxes
Natural Heritage
Institute
13,166.47
601.43
93
Special project recoveries
Basciano Parkin Ltd.
2,000.00
989.62
824
Planning fees.
G, S, & J DeRuyter
4,500.00
800.77
344
Planning fees.
TOTALS
78,028.60
3,501.12
Note: Interest is charged on late payments at the rate of 1% above prime, as per the lease
agreement.
Staff has consulted with TRCA solicitors, Gardiner Roberts, about small claims court litigation
against Basciano. On solicitors advice, no action is being taken. The applicant, DeRuyter, has
been contacted and continues to refuse to make payment on the grounds that the application
has been abandoned by the owner and, as agent, is no longer in a position to recover fees.
Given that the applicant has been in contact with Planning and Development staff about other
applications, staff is of the opinion that we can negotiate a settlement, which is preferable to
legal proceedings.
All other outstanding balances on this list are deemed collectible.
378
Receivable balances, as reported on each of the previous reports to the advisory board, after
2002, are presented as follows:
DATE
Total ($)
90 -Day Plus ($)
October 24, 2006
533,442
91,874
May 26, 2006
989,193
32,946
March 30, 2006
1,252,876
134,521
February 05, 2006
1,264,876
105,873
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: October 27, 2006
SECTION IV - ITEMS FOR THE INFORMATION OF THE BOARD
RES. #C87/06 -
Moved by:
Seconded by:
GOOD NEWS STORIES
Highlights of Toronto and Region Conservation Authority's Work. Receipt
of Good News Stories for the months of September and October, 2006,
from all sections of Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA).
Paul Ainslie
Bill O'Donnell
IT IS RECOMMENDED THAT the report on "Good News Stories" for September and October,
2006, be received.
379
BACKGROUND
Management Team, a committee made up of senior staff at TRCA, meets monthly to discuss
strategic initiatives and organizational development..
RATIONALE
Staff began a process of highlighting the key accomplishments of each of their sections from
the past month at each Management Team meeting. In keeping with TRCA's objective of
Business Excellence, these accomplishments will be brought to each Business Excellence
Advisory Board for the information of the members. The following are the accomplishments
cited at the September and October meetings, and a brief description of each.
• Energy Education Program - Approval of $130,000 from PowerStream to implement a pilot
Energy Education program in the 2006/2007 school year.
• Husky /Earth Rangers Sponsorship - Husky and Earth Rangers approved $98,000 for the
continuation of the Environmental Weeks Program at Albion Hills Field Centre in 2006/2007,
marking the start of its 11th year.
• Watershed Identifier - Toronto District School Board has incorporated the watershed as
part of each school's address for its 98 EcoSchools Certified schools.
• Rouge Watershed Plan - First draft complete using leading edge science.
• Port Union Waterfront Park - Phase I was officially opened to the public with a public open
house on September 24th and a ribbon - cutting ceremony on the new Highland Creek
pedestrian bridge on September 29th.
• Kettle Lakes Nature Reserve at Richmond Hill - Management plan completed.
• Don River Bridge - Bridge construction, as part of the Lower Don River West Remedial
Flood Protection Project, was halfway complete in September.
• Greening Retail - Environment Canada committed $25,000 to Greening Retail.
• Greening Health Care - All hospitals in the province have been invited to participate in the
Greening Health Care program.
• Villa Columbo - The retirement home in Kleinburg launched their combined heat and
emergency power facility, resulting in shift from 30% efficient to 85%
• Tommy Thompson Park - The park is already a banding hot -spot and an Important Bird
Area, and now it is part of the Canadian Migration Monitoring Network.
• Channel Catfish - Found in Toronto Bay. Improved conditions allowed them to return.
• Wilder Property - Acquisition of Wilder property, in the Township of Uxbridge, complete.
Made possible through the first major donation of stocks to purchase land from the Wilder's
and donations from Durham Region, the Oak Ridges Moraine Foundation, the City of
Toronto and The Conservation Foundation of Greater Toronto.
• Brampton Official Plan (OP) - Endorsed by Council. It's one of the most progressive OP's
in terms of environmental concerns being addressed. Still needs approval by the Region of
Peel.
• City of Brampton - The Works and Transportation department has allocated $500,000 over
5 years to undertake channel improvement and restoration work on watercourses within the
City of Brampton. TRCA is working with the city to undertake a comprehensive study to
identify feasibility and restoration priorities based on erosion, flooding, stormwater
management and habitat. This comprehensive approach will prevent band -aid projects
and also provide a list of priorities and associated costs for long term funding for
implementation The focus is on Etobicoke and Mimico creeks. Once completed, Brampton
would like to expand this approach to other watercourses.
380
• Mimico Creek - Secured $200,000 for a bridge over the Mimico Creek through an Ontario
Municipal Board decision on a development application.
• Sustainable Technologies Evaluation Program (STEP) - Additional $52,000 in Great Lakes
Sustainability Funds approved for STEP.
• Sustainable Practices - $10,000 approved from Town of Markham for Phase II of the
sustainable practices marketing project.
• Aggregate Pit Rehabilitation - Restoration of a former aggregate pit into the Wyndance Golf
Course is nearing completion.
• Mayor's Megawatt Challenge - Union Gas is supporting the Mayor's Megawatt Challenge
arena project by providing $30,000 in funding.
• Clean Water Act - Passed Third Reading on October 18, 2006.
Report prepared by: Kathy Stranks, extension 5264
For Information contact: Kathy Stranks, extension 5264
Date: November 6, 2006
RES. #C88/06 -
Moved by:
Seconded by:
ENERGY PLANNING
Toronto and Region Conservation Authority's Role
Item for Discussion.
Paul Ainslie
Bill O'Donnell
THAT the discussion on item 8.3 - Energy Planning be deferred.
TERMINATION
ON MOTION, the meeting terminated at 10:22 a.m., on Friday, October 17, 2006
Dick O'Brien
Chair
/ks
381
CARRIED
Brian Denney
Secretary- Treasurer
THE TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY
MEETING OF THE BUSINESS EXCELLENCE ADVISORY BOARD #7/06
January 19, 2007
The Business Excellence Advisory Board Meeting #7/06, was held in the South Theatre,
Black Creek Pioneer Village, on Friday, January 19, 2007. The Chair David Barrow, called
the meeting to order at 9:10 a.m..
PRESENT
David Barrow Chair
Jack Heath Member
Dick O'Brien Chair, Authority
Andrew Schulz Member
ABSENT
Paul Ainslie Member
Bill Fisch Member
Rob Ford Member
Peter Milczyn Member
Maja Prentice Vice Chair
Due to lack of quorum all items will go straight to the Authority for consideration at Authority
Meeting #11/06, to be held on Friday, January 26, 2007, including the following changes that
were discussed at the Business Excellence Advisory Board meeting.
7.6 PREVENTION OF SUSPECTED ABUSE OF CHILDREN UNDER TRCA CARE
POLICY
Members requested clarification on the policy in terms of what "under TRCA care"
encompasses. An amended staff report will be brought to the Authority clarifying the intent of
the policy.
382
TERMINATION
The meeting terminated at 9:50 a.m., on Friday, January 19, 2007
Dave Barrow
Chair
/ks
Brian Denney
Secretary- Treasurer