Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
Business Excellence Advisory Board 2007
THE TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY MEETING OF THE BUSINESS EXCELLENCE ADVISORY BOARD #1/07 March 2, 2007 The Business Excellence Advisory Board Meeting #1/07, was held in the South Theatre, Black Creek Pioneer Village , on Friday, March 2, 2007. The Chair David Barrow , called the meeting to order at 9:15 a.m. PRESENT Eve Adams David Barrow Rob Ford Peter Milczyn Ron Moeser Gerri Lynn O'Connor Gino Rosati ABSENT Paul Ainslie Bill Fisch Maja Prentice RES.#C1/07 - Moved by: Seconded by: MINUTES Rob Ford Peter Milczyn Member Chair Member Member Member Chair, Authority Member Vice Chair Member Member THAT the Minutes of Meeting #6/06, held on November 17, 2006 and Meeting #7/06, held on January 19, 2007, be approved. SECTION I - ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY ACTION RES. #C2 /07 - CARRIED REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL FOR LEASE AND DEVELOPMENT Northwest corner of Ebenezer Road and McVean Drive, City of Brampton CFN 38091. Results of the negotiations with Penguin Golf Associates 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. 1 Moved by: Seconded by: Gerri Lynn O'Connor Rob Ford THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT negotiations with Penguin Golf Associates be terminated and the deposit received from them be returned. CARRIED BACKGROUND The Claireville Conservation Area Management Plan, approved by Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) on February 28, 1997, identified parcels of land within Claireville Conservation Area, where opportunities may exist for TRCA to enter into long -term lease development arrangements with the private sector or others. The subject parcel is one of three areas within Claireville that was identified for intensive use and leasing opportunities. The potential development site is at the northwest corner of Ebenezer Road and McVean Drive, in the City of Brampton, Regional Municipality of Peel as shown on Attachment 1. The total area of the parcel is approximately 6.5 hectares (16 acres). In the spring of 2006 TRCA received 3 unsolicited offers to lease the subject property. To determine if there was any additional interest in the property and to set criteria to evaluate the potential uses, a Request for Proposal for lease and development of the subject lands was formally circulated by TRCA in June, 2006. The following proposals were received: Name Proposed Use Deposit Received Term Penguin Golf Associates Golf Practice Facility $10,000 15 years Dragon Fire Paintball Inc. Paintball Facility no 11.5 years Joseph Vento Golf Driving Range and Mini Putt Facility $10,000 20 years At Authority Meeting #7/06, held on September 29, 2006, Resolution #A196/06 was approved as follows: THAT staffbe 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 staffbe directed to return the other deposit received, and advise the other two parties that their proposals have not been selected at this time; THAT staff report to a future meeting of the Business Excellence Advisory Board on the results of the negotiations with Penguin Golf Associates; 2 AND FURTHER THAT staffbe directed to continue investigating highest and best use opportunities for this site. Staff entered into negotiations with Penguin Golf Associates for the subject property. Based on discussions at the September 16, 2006 Business Excellence Advisory Board meeting as well as discussions with Councillor John Sprovieri, Penguin Golf Associates was advised that it would be necessary to consider a lease term that is substantially less than the 15 year term outlined in their original proposal. Penguin Golf Associates is proposing an initial capital investment of almost $287,000. Based on their projected revenue and expenses for the site, Penguin Golf Associates has indicated that it will take them around 15 years to recover this capital investment. Penguin Golf Associates is willing to look at a much shorter term for the lease, however, they would require TRCA to reimburse them a portion of the value of their capital investment based on the term of the lease. Staff feel that the revised proposal for a shorter lease term is not acceptable and are recommending that negotiations be terminated and their deposit returned. DETAILS OF WORK TO BE DONE Continue to investigate highest and best use lease opportunities for the site. Report prepared by: Mike Fenning, extension 5223 For Information contact: Mike Fenning, extension 5223, Ron Dewell, extension 5245 Date: February 21, 2007 Attachments: 1 3 Attachment 1 REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL FOR LEASE AND DEVELOPMENT .Northereat c rn r at Ebenezer Road and rind Drive, City of ,A Brampton GEN lanni 4 RES. #C3/07 - SOCCER FIELDS - BRUCE'S MILL CONSERVATION AREA Town of Whitchurch- Stouffville, CFN 31698. Request from the Town of Whitchurch- Stouffville to extend the existing lease for soccer field located within the Bruce's Mill Conservation Area, south of Stouffville Sideroad, east of Warden Avenue, Rouge River watershed, in the Town of Whitchurch- Stouffville, Regional Municipality of York. Moved by: Seconded by: Ron Moeser Gerri Lynn O'Connor THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT WHEREAS the Town of Whitchurch - Stouffville has requested an additional extension to the lease for soccer fields within the Bruce's Mill Conservation Area, south of Stouffville Sideroad and east of Warden Avenue; THEREFORE LET IT BE RESOLVED THAT the existing lease be extended for an additional 2 year period; AND FURTHER THAT the appropriate Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) officials be authorized and directed to take whatever action is necessary to finalize the transaction, including the obtaining of any approvals and signing and execution of documents. CARRIED BACKGROUND At Authority Meeting #3/03, held on April 25, 2003, Resolution #A57/03 was approved as follows: THAT the request from the Town of Whitchurch- Stouffville to extend the existing lease for an additional 3 years for soccer fields within the Bruce's Mill Conservation Area, south of Stouffville Sideroad and east of Warden Avenue, be approved; AND FURTHER THAT the appropriate Authority officials be authorized and directed to take whatever action necessary to finalize the extension of the lease between the Town of Whitchurch- Stouffville and the TRCA, and give effect thereto, including the obtaining of any approvals and execution of documents. In 2001, TRCA entered into a lease for a three year period with the Town of Whitchurch- Stouffville for the use of a parcel of land in the Bruce's Mill Conservation Area for four mini - soccer fields. In 2003 the lease was extended for an additional 3 year period. Recently TRCA received a request from the Town of Whitchurch- Stouffville for an additional 3 year extension to the term of the lease. The master plan for Bruce's Mill Conservation Area was initiated in 2004 and it is anticipated that it will be completed later this year. The soccer fields are located in an area that is proposed to be a public use zone in the early stages of the master planning process. The public use management zone allows for recreational and educational uses, facilities or services and may accommodate low, moderate or high intensity public use. Specific uses that will be permitted in this public zone will be determined as the master plan is developed. Until the permitted uses 5 are determined, staff is recommending that the period of the extension be kept to a minimum. Two years should be sufficient time for the Town to find an alternative site should soccer not be a permitted use in Bruce's Mill. Town of Whitchurch- Stouffville staff is agreeable to a two year extension, however, they have indicated that the town would be interested in a long term lease. A map showing the lands subject to this proposal is attached. FINANCIAL DETAILS The lease rate for 2006 was $5,900. Staff are proposing a lease rate of $6,100 for the first year of the extension and $6,300 for the second year of the extension. Report prepared by: Mike Fenning, extension 5223 For Information contact: Mike Fenning, extension 5223, Ron Dewell, extension 5245 Date: February 15, 2007 Attachments: 1 6 Attachment 1 7 rc RES. #C4/07 - BOLTON RESOURCE MANAGEMENT TRACT ADVISORY COMMITTEE Establishment of Bolton Resource Management Tract Advisory Committee. Moved by: Seconded by: Ron Moeser Gerri Lynn O'Connor THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT WHEREAS staff are developing a Bolton Resource Management Tract Management Plan; THEREFORE LET IT BE RESOLVED THAT staff be directed to establish an advisory committee, which would include members of the Humber Watershed Alliance, interested community groups, business representatives, community residents, agency staff, municipal elected officials and staff to assist with the development of the management plan and to facilitate the opportunity for public input; AND FURTHER THAT the management plan when complete be submitted to the board for approval. CARRIED BACKGROUND The Bolton Resource Management Tract (BRMT) is approximately 812 hectares of Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) land located along the Humber River valley in the Town of Caledon, Region of Peel. Given the assembly of TRCA lands in this area, the management plan will address all TRCA lands loosely bounded by Old Church Road in the north, King Street and Old King Road in the south, Highway 50 in the east and The Gore Road in the west. The Bolton Resource Management Tract consists of forest and successional forest areas, wetlands and meadows. It provides quality habitat in the Humber River watershed, as evidenced by the variety of flora and fauna species of regional concern found within the Bolton Resource Management Tract. The land occupied by the Bolton Resource Management Tract is subject to several provincial plans and policies, including the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan and the Greenbelt Plan. The Bolton Resource Management Tract also includes areas designated as Environmentally Significant Areas (ESAs) and Areas of Natural and Scientific Interest (ANSIs). The Bolton Resource Management Tract provides the opportunity for passive, year -round public use. The primary public use of the property is the Humber Valley Heritage Trail, a pedestrian -only trail. In addition, some agricultural land is leased. 8 RATIONALE It is an appropriate time to complete a management plan for the Bolton Resource Management Tract, as there is no current management plan for the property. In addition, with the projected population growth in the Town of Caledon and the Region of Peel, the Bolton Resource Management Tract will likely become an even more popular environmental and outdoor recreation centre, requiring a plan that can address future public use demands and enhanced environmental protection. Furthermore, it is necessary to prepare a comprehensive and integrated management plan for the property that can respond to the changes in the availability of public funds and evolving concepts in conservation and sustainability, and move TRCA towards its goal for The Living City - a vision for healthy communities based on a healthy ecosystem. The management plan for the Bolton Resource Management Tract will aim to address property management and public safety issues, respond to future demands and growth in the region, integrate and implement Humber River watershed management strategies, establish appropriate environmental protection and restoration techniques, receive public input regarding appropriate use, development and management of lands and create a sense of stewardship among users and adjacent land owners. The management plan will complement a number of TRCA initiatives, including: • The Living City vision; • Terrestrial Natural Heritage System Strategy; and, • Legacy: A Strategy for a Healthy Humber. The goal of the Bolton Resource Management Tract Management Plan process will be to protect, conserve and manage the property within an ecosystem framework, and in consultation with the community ensuring watershed health, public enjoyment and environmental sustainability. For the management plan process, staff will use the TRCA model for developing a management plan that has been successfully used at Claireville Conservation Area, Boyd North and Glassco Park, Cold Creek Conservation Area, Greenwood Conservation Area and Heart Lake Conservation Area. Staff recommends the establishment of an advisory committee to provide an integrated approach to the development of the management plan. The advisory committee will assist with determining management zones and management recommendations, and provide direction and comment on the public use development and restoration plans. 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 - Chair or designate; • Town of Caledon - elected officials or designates and staff; • Region of Peel - elected officials or designates and staff; • Caledon Cycling Club; • Caledon Environmental Advisory Committee; 9 • Humber River Watershed Alliance; • Humber Valley Heritage Trail Association; • Oak Ridges Moraine Land Trust; • Ontario Heritage Trust; • Save the Oak Ridges Moraine; • community residents; and • local business representatives. TRCA staff will attend advisory committee meetings to provide technical input and direction. DETAILS OF WORK TO BE DONE • Develop a project Terms of Reference, which will include the scope of work responsibilities and projected timelines, which will be submitted to the TRCA board. • Establish advisory committee. • Compile and synthesize all background material on the subject lands into a background report that will be distributed to the advisory committee. It is anticipated that the management plan will be completed by December 2007. FINANCIAL DETAILS Provision for the development of the Bolton Resource Management Tract Management Plan has been included in the 2007 Preliminary Capital Estimates under account 408 -51. Report prepared by: Deanna Cheriton, extension 5204 For Information contact: Deanna Cheriton, extension 5204; Mike Bender, extension 5287 Date: January 16, 2007 RES. #C5/07 - NASHVILLE RESOURCE MANAGEMENT TRACT ADVISORY COMMITTEE Establishment of Nashville Resource Management Tract Advisory Committee. Moved by: Seconded by: Gerri Lynn O'Connor Rob Ford THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT WHEREAS staff are developing the Nashville Resource Management Tract Management Plan; THEREFORE LET IT BE RESOLVED THAT staff be directed to establish an advisory committee, which would include members of the Humber Watershed Alliance, interested community groups, community residents, agency staff, municipal elected officials and staff, to assist with the development of the management plan and to facilitate the opportunity for public input; 10 AND FURTHER THAT the management plan when complete be submitted to the board for approval. CARRIED BACKGROUND The Nashville Resource Management Tract (NRMT) is a large Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) property (approximately 720 hectares in size) located in the Main Humber subwatershed of the Humber River watershed. It is situated south of King Road, north of Nashville Road, east of the Albion- Vaughan Townline and west of Highway 27. The NRMT is found within York Region; the majority of the property is located in the City of Vaughan and a small section is located in King Township. The NRMT is a diverse site containing many different habitat types such upland forests, bottomland forests, meadows, old fields and wetlands. The property supports a variety of wildlife, provides significant deer wintering yards and is an important migratory corridor. Because of its large size, as well as its current and future ecological value, the NRMT is an integral part of TRCA's natural heritage system. Currently, the NRMT has a limited formal trail system and only passive recreational uses are allowed on the property. However, there is an extensive informal trail system and a significant amount of unauthorized use which present a continuous challenge to TRCA's enforcement staff. RATIONALE A management plan for the property will provide an overall structure and direction to any future work. With the projected population growth in York Region, the NRMT will become an even more popular recreational destination and will face increasing pressures. The management plan will address a variety of issues within the NRMT including the: • protection of the natural heritage system; • selection of restoration and regeneration areas; • creation of public safety strategies; • development of edge management initiatives; • creation of a strategic trail plan; and • implementation of Humber River watershed strategies. Furthermore, the management plan will complement and forward the goals of a number of TRCA initiatives, including: • The Living City; • Terrestrial Natural Heritage System Strategy; and • Legacy: A Strategy for a Healthy Humber (1997). 11 DETAILS OF WORK TO BE DONE The management plan will look at the property as a whole to determine the most appropriate activities for the site as well as locations for future work and public use. The first step will be the creation of a background report that will identify current land uses, policies, natural and cultural heritage resources and public uses. From that information, management zones will be developed that protect important areas and focus public use in less sensitive locations. The management plan will also contain management guidelines, including restoration areas and a trail plan, and an implementation strategy outlining preliminary costs. The NRMT management plan will follow the same TRCA model for development of management plans that has been successfully implemented at properties such as Boyd North and Glassco Park and Greenwood Conservation Area. The planning process will be undertaken in the three phases described below: Phase One • Complete a background report; • circulate a study newsletter; • establish an advisory committee and host meetings; • host a public information session. Phase Two • Develop a plan vision; • determine draft management zones; • integrate watershed management recommendations; • develop public use and site restoration concepts; • develop a draft trail plan; • host two advisory committee meetings; • circulate a study newsletter; • host a public information session. Phase Three • Finalize the trail plan; • finalize the management recommendations; • develop a plan implementation strategy and associated costs; • host two advisory committee meetings; • circulate a study newsletter; • host a public information session; • obtain partner and TRCA board endorsement. As part of the planning process, an advisory committee will be created to assist in determining the appropriate direction for the property. TRCA will invite representatives from the community, special interest groups and partners to sit on the committee for the duration of the project. The advisory committee members will play an integral role in developing goals and management recommendations for the NRMT. The following groups /organizations should be represented on the committee: 12 • City of Vaughan; • King Township; • York Region; • Humber Watershed Alliance; • local community; • local businesses; • special interest groups; • property users; • TRCA. The management plan is expected to be completed in early 2008 with implementation work beginning in the 2008 field season. FINANCIAL DETAILS Project funding is available in the 2007 Preliminary Operating and Capital Estimates in the Conservation Land Planning budget through account 408 -39. Report prepared by: Elyssa Elton, extension 5579 For Information contact: Elyssa Elton, extension 5579 or Mike Bender, extension 5287 Date: January 15, 2007 RES. #C6/07 - POLICY ON REPORTING SUSPECTED CHILD ABUSE AND NEGLECT Approval of the Policy on Reporting Suspected Child Abuse and Neglect. Moved by: Seconded by: Ron Moeser Eve Adams THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) Policy on Reporting Suspected Child Abuse and Neglect be approved. CARRIED BACKGROUND The Child Family Services Act (CFSA) states clearly that members of the public, including professionals who work with children and youth, have an obligation to report promptly to a Children's Aid Society if they suspect that a child or youth under the age of 16 is, or may be, in need of protection. Staff is proposing this new policy to ensure staff and volunteers know their obligations to report suspected abuse and neglect of children and their responsibilities when working with children and youth. 13 This was referred back from the Authority Board and we have acquired the expertise of Dr. Barbara Fallon of the Centre of Excellence for Child Welfare to ensure compliance. RATIONALE TRCA staff recommend approval of the Policy on Reporting Suspected Child Abuse and Neglect as outlined in Attachment 1 to ensure that staff and volunteers are aware of their responsibilities when working with children and youth and know their obligations to directly report suspected abuse and /or neglect of children and youth to the Children's Aid Society responsible for the area in which the suspected abuse and /or neglect took place. After reporting to the Children's Aid Society, TRCA staff and volunteers are to submit an incident report to the Chief Administrative Officer or Senior Manager, HR and Communications. Report prepared by: Victoria K'inniburgh, extension 5288 For Information contact: Catherine MacEwen, extension 5219 Date: February 16, 2007 Attachments: 1 14 Attachment 1 POLICY ON REPORTING SUSPECTED CHILD ABUSE AND NEGLECT TRCA provides education, outreach and recreation programs to many young people in a variety of settings and groups. TRCA is committed to supporting the Children's Aid Societies (CAS) in their protection of children and youth. Child maltreatment is defined as physically abusing a child or youth, sexually molesting a child or youth, failing to provide proper care or depriving a child or youth of support and affection. TRCA is committed to the prevention and reporting of all types of abuse and neglect of children and youth. This policy applies to all employees and volunteers of TRCA. Adherence to this policy is mandatory and all employees and volunteers are expected to be familiar with it. The signs and indicators of abuse and neglect may include but are not limited to the following. Physical Abuse of a Child Physical abuse is any harm to a child caused by an action or omission of action by the child's caregiver. Injuries may include: • bruises; • welts; • cuts; • fractures; • burns; or • internal injuries. Physical abuse can be one or two isolated incidents or can occur over a prolonged period of time. Sexual Abuse of a Child Sexual abuse is any sexual exploitation of a child by an older person where the child is being used for a sexual purpose. The Criminal Code of Canada identifies a number of types of sexual abuse, including, but not limited to: • sexual interference; • an invitation to sexually touch; • parent or guardian procuring sexual activity from a child; • householder permitting sexual activity • exposing genitals to a child; and • incest. The following are some examples of child sexual abuse: 1. Fondling /touching a child's genitals. 2. Having intercourse with a child. 3. Having oral sex with a child. 4. Having sex in front of a child. 5. Having a child touch another person's genitals. 6. Using a child in pornography. 7. Showing x -rated books or movies or magazines or websites to a child. 15 Sexual Exploitation Sexual exploitation includes the act of taking advantage of the vulnerability of a child with whom there is a relationship of trust, for one's own pleasure or gain. Sexual exploitation includes any form of sexual contact or invitation for sexual contact with a child by an adult in a position of authority or power over the child whether or not there is consent from the child. Emotional Abuse of a Child Emotional abuse includes all acts of omission or commission which result in the absence of a nurturing environment for the child. It occurs when the caregiver continually treats the child in such a negative way that the child's concept of "self" is seriously impaired. Emotionally abusive behavior by the caregiver can include constant yelling; demeaning remarks; rejecting, ignoring or isolating the child; or terrorizing the child. Emotional abuse can be the most difficult to identify and prove. Neglect of a Child Most caregivers do not intend to neglect their children. It usually results from ignorance about appropriate care for children or an inability to plan ahead. Neglect occurs when a caregiver fails to provide basic needs such as adequate food, sleep, safety, supervision, clothing or medical treatment. OBLIGATIONS OF TRCA EMPLOYEES AND VOLUNTEERS When a person suspects on reasonable grounds that a child or youth is, or may be, in need of protection the person who makes the observation must promptly report this suspicion and the information upon which it is based to the CAS of the region in which the observation took place. After reporting to the CAS, TRCA staff and volunteers are to submit an incident report to the Chief Administrative Officer (CAO) or Senior Manager, HR and Communications. You do not need to be certain a child is, or may be, in need of protection to report your suspicion. " Reasonable grounds" refers to the concept that there is a risk that maltreatment might happen, given the information that an average person, given his or her training, background and experience, exercising normal and honest judgement, would need in order to make a decision to report. THE PROCEDURE 1. It is mandatory that all staff and volunteers report any suspicion of abuse and /or neglect of a child immediately to the Children's Aid Society of the region in which the observation took place. If the name of the appropriate CAS is not known, contact the Ontario Association of Children's Aid Societies for correct information. 2. After reporting to the CAS, TRCA staff and volunteers are to submit an incident report to the CAO or Senior Manager, HR and Communications. 3. A complaint need not be made by a child or youth in order to engage the investigation. 4. Staff and volunteers will be advised on this policy in the following ways: • The policy will be part of the orientation package for new employees /volunteers. • Management Team will be provided with a copy of the policy to distribute to their staff. 16 • The policy will be reviewed annually at all staff and safety meetings. • A notice on staff's obligation to report suspected child abuse and neglect to the CAS as well as Children's Aid Society contact information will be added to each employee's pay stub envelope. • A users email will be sent to staff giving them direction to review the policy located on the Personnel Manual along with Children's Aid Society contact information. • The policy will be posted on all bulletin boards along with TRCA's health and safety information. RESPONSIBILITIES 1. Employees and volunteers are to avoid physical contact with a child, except in the application of first aid and where necessary in other circumstances where safety warrants. In all cases, employees and volunteers will make an effort to always have another adult present. 2. Employees and volunteers are to avoid entering into any room with a child without another adult present. For example, a washroom, classroom, residential field centre bedroom. 3. Employees and volunteers are to avoid transporting a child in a TRCA or personal vehicle at all times. If there is no alternative and an emergency exists, every effort must be made to have two adults present. 4. All employees and volunteers working with or in close proximity to children must obtain a Vulnerable Sector Police Reference Check. Please see "Police Reference Check" policy in the Personnel Manual. 17 RES. #C7/07 - EMPLOYEE ENGAGEMENT SURVEY RESULTS To report the results of the 2006 Toronto and Region Conservation Authority Employee Engagement Survey and outline the planned actions to support our organizational effectiveness. Moved by: Seconded by: Gerri Lynn O'Connor Rob Ford THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT the results of the Employee Engagement Survey be received; AND FURTHER THAT the annual survey and action plans be endorsed as an organizational performance measure for Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA). CARRIED BACKGROUND In the fall of 2003, an employee engagement survey was conducted to establish a benchmark of employee engagement and identify the issues that face TRCA employees. In September 2006 a similar employee engagement survey was conducted. Response rate The response rate increased to 70% in 2006 from 49% in 2003. The use of an on -line survey assisted in this increase, although more work is needed in increasing the response rate among non -Lotus Notes (email) users. The survey results are based on a five -point scale and each response has been given a corresponding number for ease of analysis: "Agree" responses = 1 "Somewhat agree" responses = 2 "Neither agree nor disagree" responses = 3 "Somewhat disagree" responses = 4 "Disagree" responses = 5 For most responses, the best result is a 1 and the worst result is a 5. All results are averaged over all respondents. The composite engagement index is an average of six questions, including job satisfaction and meaningfulness. The composite engagement index for employee engagement increased a modest average of 1.84 versus 1.89 index in 2003. The composite measure is generally higher than similar scores in the private sector and indicate that TRCA employees are engaged intellectually and emotionally in the work that they do. The areas of greatest improvement since the 2003 survey include: • balancing work and personal life: 1.3 point improvement; • talent retention: 0.76 point improvement; • satisfaction with salary; 0.74 point improvement: and 18 • satisfaction with computer tools: 0.67 point improvement. Those considering leaving TRCA was down significantly in 2006 versus 2003: "At the present time are you seriously considering leaving TRCA in the next year ?" 2003 2006 Yes 23% 14.7% No 54% 56.8% Don't Know 23% 28.5% The survey consisted of both closed and open ended questions and the answers to these questions help form areas of concern. Areas of concern are: 1 benefits, especially for seasonal staff; 2. the 'GTA salary' effect where people were satisfied with their salary levels but still found the levels too low for the cost of living in the GTA; 3. staff want more money and more training for professional development, safety and acquisition of new skills; and 4. staff want more effective communication among groups within TRCA. DETAILS OF WORK TO BE DONE 1 Develop an all staff day to recognize our contributions and to discuss future opportunities. 2. Focus on staff development with courses, better performance management and expansion of the mentorship programme. 3. Roll out the skills inventory to identify specific skills and skill leaders in the organization. 4. Investigate benefit package alternatives. FINANCIAL DETAILS The costs of this programme are primarily the cost of the staff day, expected to be $5,000. Funds have been identified in the 2007 Preliminary Operating and Capital Estimates. Report prepared by: Catherine MacEwen, extension 5219 For Information contact: Catherine MacEwen, extension 5219 Date: February 8, 2007 RES. #C8/07 - OVERTIME POLICY Amendment. Amend the Overtime Policy for better management of time in lieu to limit liability, increase employee's work /life balance and comply with changes in employment law. Moved by: Seconded by: Ron Moeser Gerri Lynn O'Connor 19 THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT the amended Overtime Policy as set out in the report dated February 8, 2007, be approved. AMENDMENT RES. #C9/07 Moved by: Seconded by: Gerri Lynn O'Connor Rob Ford THAT the following be inserted after the main motion: AND FURTHER THAT in the event that costs are incurred by TRCA in the adminstration of the amended policy, that staff report back to the Business Excellence Advisory Board. THE AMENDMENT WAS CARRIED THE MAIN MOTION, AS AMENDED, WAS CARRIED BACKGROUND At Authority Meeting #9/04, held on October 29, 2004, Resolution #A290/04 was approved as follows: THAT the Overtime Policy be amended to allow for payment of overtime especially in peak work time or emergency situations for non - management staff. Overtime payments have been monitored monthly by a team of Directors to identify areas of concern. In addition, decisions made by the Labour Board of Ontario necessitate minor changes in the policy and procedures for overtime payment and time in lieu of overtime. Although no abuses have been identified, the use of overtime is positioned as a management tool for high workload or emergency times. In addition, changes in wording have been made to clarify the use of overtime, supervisor responsibility changes and on call staff overtime arrangements. All changes are highlighted in BOLD in Attachment 1. FINANCIAL DETAILS The amendments will not add any additional costs. Report prepared by: Catherine MacEwen, extension 5219 For Information contact: Catherine MacEwen, extension 5219 Date: February 8, 2007 Attachments: 1 20 Attachment 1 The Overtime and Time in Lieu of Overtime Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) overtime pay and time in lieu is a management tool to allow the flexibility to meet business requirements and provide some work /life balance for employees. All overtime must be agreed upon by both the employee and his or her supervisor. If a supervisor does not want an employee to work overtime, then he or she must order the employee not to do so and see that the employee complies. Definition Overtime is defined as the time worked in extraordinary situations to complete work that cannot be accomplished during the regularly scheduled work week. Vacation, sick time and statutory holidays not worked, are excluded from the total hours used to determine overtime payment or lieu time accumulated. The incidental expansion of the regular work period will not be considered overtime. For example working at lunch time or arriving early on occasion will not be considered overtime. No overtime will be paid or lieu time accumulated for working less than 15 minutes in excess of a regular working hours per day. Eligibility for Overtime and Lieu Time Technical and Administrative Staff Technical and administrative staff (Salary Ranges 1 to 7) are eligible to receive overtime payment or time in lieu for preauthorized work beyond their regular working hours. For example, an employee is regularly working 8 hours per day. One day in the week the employee has been asked to work 10 hours. Two of the hours would be overtime. Whether the employee receives payment for overtime or time in lieu is at the discretion of the employee. Functional, Project or People Leaders Functional or people leaders (Salary Ranges 8 to 15) are expected to manage their own time but can collect time in lieu in extraordinary circumstances when a leader would be required to work extended periods of time. In addition, for leaders who are designated as "essential" during a formally declared emergency, the option of being paid overtime is available. Employee Rights An employee can decline overtime. Employees should be given where possible, 48 hours notice of the need to work overtime. To facilitate the assignment of overtime, supervisors should post overtime requirements and seek those who wish to work overtime on a first come, first serve basis. Emergency Overtime During an emergency that has been declared by the Chief Administrative Officer or designate or by State of Emergency staff at the Federal, Provincial or Municipal levels, all essential staff required to work under emergency conditions are eligible for overtime payment or time in lieu of overtime worked. 21 The Procedures All overtime worked should be reported on the employee's timesheet. For employees eligible for overtime payment, a choice is given to them, whether or not they will receive payment or time in lieu. Technical and Administrative staff (Range 1 to 7) can chose between overtime payment, lieu time or a combination of both. Functional, Project or People Leaders (Salary Range 8 to 15) will only collect time in lieu except in State of Emergencies or CAO declared emergencies. When an employee has accrued time and leaves TRCA, the equivalent payout is giving to the exiting employee. The Calculation of Overtime Overtime begins after the employee has completed their regular work week, in most cases after 35 or 40 hours. The overtime worked from the end of the regular work week to 44 hours is 1.0 x the regular hourly rate and 1.5 x the regular hourly rate for hours in excess of 44 hours per week. Time in lieu can be used for personal time off for doctor's appointments and other non TRCA related activities. If an employee accrues 3 hours of time in lieu during a two week period and takes that time off during the same two week period, the lieu time does not need to be reported on the timesheet. On Call Employees "On Call" employees, who are not "on call" at the workplace, are eligible to collect overtime or time in lieu (for Technical and Administrative staff) or time in lieu (for Functional, project or people leaders) in the following circumstances: 1. They are reachable "on call" by pager, cell phone or on their home phone, and. 2. They are within one hour of the work site. Eligible Employee Group Eligible Time Employees in Salary Range 1 -7 2 hours per day on non scheduled work days and 8 hours straight time for on call during the week. For example, if the employee is on call for 7 days (24 hours a day) the overtime would be 6 hours for weekend time and 8 hours for the week day for a total of 14 hours. Employees in Salary Range 8+ 7 Hours per "on call" week to be taken as time in lieu. If an "on call" employee is called into work, they will receive a minimum of 4 hours overtime for employees in Range 1 to 7 and straight time for those employees in Salary 8 and above. 22 If an employee is on call but is not restricted in anyway from travel and can call in at his or her convenience, he or she will not be entitled to overtime. If the employee has the discretion to not come in as requested, then the employee will not be compensated for on call duties. For example, if an employee is on a list of potential employees who can come into work, but the work was not confirmed and /or the employee can choose not to come in, there will be no overtime or time in lieu. If an employee comes into work and is eventually sent home, he or she will receive a minimum of 4 hours. If an employee is asked to come in but given 24 hours notice that the event has been cancelled, no overtime nor time in lieu. Special Cases This policy may be precluded where an employee has agreed in advance to come into work with less than 24 hours notice or work split shifts or occasional non - scheduled times. For example, an employee may volunteer to work a weekend on the expectation that there will be good weather, but it rains and the employee does not report to work, with no compensation given. Restrictions in Overtime Hours worked in excess of 48 per week should only be experienced in rare situations or emergencies. In non emergency occasions, when employees are expected to work in excess of 48 hours per week for an extended period of time, approval must be given by the Ministry of Labour in advance of such an arrangement. See HR for the application process for extended work weeks. All time in lieu must be taken within 3 months of its accumulation. Time in lieu accumulated must not exceed 100 hours in the calendar year. If an employee has accumulated time in lieu and cannot, due to extraordinary circumstances, take their lieu time in the calendar year, the employee must receive CAO approval to carryover to the next calendar year and the carryover amount cannot exceed 35 hours. Statutory Holidays Supplementary and Salary Range 1 to 7 employees who work a statutory holiday will receive their regular wages plus 1.5 x wages for that day or time in lieu of overtime at the 1.5 level. Functional, Project or People Leaders (Salary Range 8 to 15) who work a statutory holiday will receive their regular wages plus 1.5 time in lieu Employee Travel The travel time that an employee experiences going from one work site to another as part of his or her day to day activities, can be included in the calculation of hours eligible for overtime but this does not include commuting time to and from home to their work site. Budgeting All overtime must be part of the manager's local budget and in event of a transfer to another group, the original manager must reimburse the employee of all overtime incurred by that employee while under his or her supervision. 23 RES. #C10/07 - EMPLOYEE HEALTH BENEFITS Award of contract to Sun Life Financial. Recommends the award of a contract for provision of employee health benefits to Sun Life Financial. Moved by: Seconded by: Ron Moeser Gino Rosati THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT a contract for the provision of health benefits and related services for Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) employees be awarded to Sun Life Financial, Sun Life being the proponent that best met TRCA and Conservation Ontario specifications; THAT a contract for Accidental Death and Dismemberment insurance be awarded to A/G /American Home, it being the proposal that best met TRCA and Conservation Ontario specifications; THAT the contracts be on terms and conditions satisfactory to TRCA staff and TRCA's health benefits advisers, Buffett Taylor Employee Benefit Consulting; AND FURTHER THAT TRCA officials be directed and authorized to take such action as is necessary to implement the contracts including signing and execution of documents. CARRIED BACKGROUND TRCA as a constituent member of Conservation Ontario participates in a cooperative insurance program available to all 36 conservation authorities. The Conservation Ontario Insurance Committee (COIL) has delegated authority to select both health benefits insurance and property insurance providers. TRCA's Director, Finance and Business Services, serves on the COIL along with representatives from other conservation authorities. COIL directed its health benefits insurance adviser, Buffett Taylor Employee Benefit Consulting, to undertake a call for proposals for provision of employee health benefits to Conservation Ontario member conservation authorities in the fall of 2006. This followed the renewal of health benefit plans with Conservation Ontario and TRCA's current provider, Manulife Financial, effective August 1, 2006. COIL was not satisfied with the terms of the renewal and advised Manulife that Conservation Ontario would be going to the market with a proposal call. With agreement of TRCA's Senior Manager, HR and Communications, TRCA submitted its employee health benefits requirements for the proposal call. TRCA is pooled with other conservation authorities in the provision of life insurance and long term disability (LTD) benefits. TRCA maintains its own dental and extended health care program but markets its program alongside the program used by other conservation authorities. RATIONALE At the direction COIL, Buffett Taylor invited 15 companies to submit proposals for all or part of the conservation authorities employee health benefit program. The results were as follows: 24 • Ace Una (quoted on AD &D only); • AIG /American Home - quoted partial (including AD &D); • Chubb Insurance (quoted on AD &D only); • Cooperator's - quoted partial; • Desjardins - quoted; • Empire Life - declined; • Equitable - declined; • Great West Life - quoted; • Green Shield - quoted partial; • Industrial Alliance - quoted; • Manulife (Incumbent) - quoted; • Medavie Blue Cross - quoted; • NexgenRx - quoted; • Standard Life - quoted; • Sun Life - quoted. Based on proposal content in terms of the specifications, adherence to plan design and the financial aspects of their proposals, COIL short- listed the proposals and interviewed the three proponents who best met the specifications. In depth interviews were conducted by the COIL and Buffett Taylor in January, 2007, with the three short- listed proponents. Each proponent was presented with a list of 18 questions to respond. The incumbent insurer, Manulife, provided a quotation in response to the marketing of the proposals which for TRCA represented a 6.5% increase over the cost of the program as renewed in August of 2006. The three short- listed proponents each provided comprehensive packages with premium reductions to the existing package of benefits ranging from 6.6 % to 13.2 %. In evaluating the three proponents, staff was seeking opportunities to enhance the existing benefit package while still achieving some savings. TRCA's benefit package has remained relatively unchanged in recent years due to budget restraints. Given the market interest in TRCA's employee benefit package, staff consider it timely to use some of the savings to bring the package more in line with those of its competitors. In particular, the following enhancements were evaluated: • change in drug coverage from two tiers to one tier, reimbursed at 100 %, with mandatory generic reimbursement based on plan 88 and with a dispensing fee cap of $5 per prescription; • drug coverage will include a prior authorization process; • increase vision care maximum from $150 to $300/24 months; • includes 1 eye exam per 24 months, up to $60 /eye exam; • increase the dental fee guide from current minus two years to current minus one year; • increase the dental maximum from $1250 for basic and current combined to $1500 per year combined. 25 Based on the proposals submitted and the in depth interviews with each team, COIL and TRCA agreed that the submission from Sun Life Financial would best meet the specifications at competitive cost. The interview team, consisting of COIL representatives, Buffett Taylor representatives and TRCA's Senior Manager, HR and Communications, was impressed with the Sun Life teams preparation and depth of understanding of the needs of conservation authorities. In particular, Sun Life demonstrated sophisticated product services such as secure access electronically to employee accounts which will enhance employee understanding of their benefits and tracking of claims. As optional coverage, Sun Life will offer an employee assistance plan (EAP) through its affiliate, Shepell.fgi at a rate of $3.22 per employee per month. Sun Life also offers a health care spending account. Finally, benefits to retired employees of TRCA with more than 10 years service who are between 55 and 65 years will available until age 65. TRCA has made no decision as to the use the EAP and health care spending accounts. Retirement benefits are offered with the employee paying the premium cost. Sun Life has agreed to guarantee rates for life insurance for 36 months, for LTD, 24 months and for health and dental for 15 months. TRCA uses a refund accounting basis for health and dental programs and Sun Life offers carrier expense charges that are less than or competitive with those of the current carrier. The attached table illustrates the proposal offered by Sun Life as compared to the current carrier, Manulife at the time of the August 1, 2006 renewal. Please note that Menulife's response to the proposal call included increases to the August 1 renewal rates identified in the table. In summary, TRCA can enhance its employee health and dental plan offering, and still achieve modest premium savings of 2.7 %. It is proposed that the new plan be implemented effective June 1, 2007. COIL also requested proposals for Accidental Death and Dismemberment (AD &D) coverage. This is a specialized type of insurance currently insured with RBC Insurance at a rate of $0.020 per $1,000 of benefit. TRCA's total annual premium in 2006 was $858. Three carriers submitted proposals which were very competitive: • Ace Ina at $0.019/$1,000 • A/G American Home at $0.018/$1,000 • Chubb Insurance at $0.018/$1,000 Based on the information submitted, A/G American Home is recommended as they have included in their coverage some additional benefits not available from Chubb. 26 FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS The recommended contracts including enhanced benefit coverage will have only modest implications for the 2007 budget, representing some savings in the range of $14,000. However, given that the incumbent carrier had indicated significant increases in their proposal, there is a measure of cost avoidance which has been achieved. Report prepared by: Jim Dillane, extension 6292 For Information contact: Jim Dillane, extension 6292 Date: February 21, 2007 Attachments: 1 27 Attachment 1 Toronto & Region Conservation Authority Revised Marketing Spreadsheet, including Sun Life Rates and Plan Design Changes Prepared January 31, 2007 Benefit Basic Life AD &D Long Term Disability Plan 2 Extended Health Care Subtotal EHC Dental Subtotal Dental Lives Volume 428 420 339 138 282 420 138 282 420 $43,453,000 $42,905,000 $1,143,424 S F S F Combined Monthly Premium Difference from Current Annual Pooled Premium Difference from Current Annual Experience Rated Premium Difference from Current Total Annual Premium Difference from Current Manulife, August 2006 Renewal Unit Rate Monthly Premium $0.151 $0.02 $6,561.40 $858.10 $1.24 $14,178.46 $31.80 $4,388.40 $115.21 $32,489.22 $36,877.62 $30.33 $4,185.54 $76.33 $21, 525.06 $25,710.60 $84,186 $259,176 $751,059 $1,010,234 Sun Life Quote Unit Rate Monthly Premium $0.124 $0.018 $5,388.17 $772.29 $0.98 $11,205.56 $29.57 $4,080.66 $107.15 $30,216.30 $34,296.96 $28.51 $3,934.38 $71.75 $20,233.50 $24,167.88 $75,831 - $8,355 $208,392 - $50,783 $701,578 - $49,481 $909,970 - $100,264 Change - 17.9% - 10.0% - 21.0% - 7.0% - 6.0% - 9.9% - 19.6% - 6.6% - 9.9% Sun Life, w/ Plan Changes Unit Monthly Rate Premium $0.124 $5,388.17 $0.018 $772.29 $0.98 $11,205.56 $34.32 $4,735.61 $124.35 $35,066.02 $39,801.62 $29.22 $4,032.74 $73.54 $20,739.34 $24,772.08 $81,940 - $2,246 $208, 392 - $50,783 $774, 884 $23, 826 $983,277 - $26,958 Change - 17.9% - 10.0% - 21.0% 7.9% - 3.7% - 2.7% - 19.6% 3.2% - 2.7% Notes: 1. Rates and premiums exclude applicable 8% RST. 2. Lives and volumes taken from August 2006 renewal report. 3. Current unit rates are based on August 1, 2006 renewal rates. 4. All quoted / current EHC rates include travel assistance and pooling charges. 5. AD &D benefit is currently with RBC Insurance. Sun Life column's assumes AD &D carrier change to American Home /AIG. 6. Sun Life w/ Plan Changes assumes: a. Change in drug coverage from two tiers to one tier, reimbursed at 100 %, mandatory generic, Plan 84 with a $5 dispensing fee cap ( +7.0 %) b. Includes PAP ( +0.25 %) c. Increases vision from $150 / 24 months to $300 / 24 months ( +7.8 %) d. Includes 1 eye exam per 24 months up to $60 per exam ( +1.0 %) e. Increase in dental maximum to $1,500 per calendar year, combined for basic & major services ( +2.5 %) 28 RES. #C11 /07 - MEMBERS REMUNERATION 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: Ron Moeser Gino Rosati 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 3% effective January 1, 2007; AND FURTHER THAT TRCA officials be authorized and directed to make the necessary application to the OMB. AMENDMENT #1 RES. #C12 /07 Moved by: Seconded by: Peter Milczyn Ron Moeser THAT the first paragraph of the main motion be amended to read: 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 the lower of the Statistics Canada CPI Toronto or 3 %, effective January 1, 2007; AMENDMENT #2 RES. #C13 /07 Moved by: Seconded by: Rob Ford Gerri Lynn O'Connor THAT the following be added after the first paragraph of the amended main motion: THAT TRCA staff request of the OMB that per diem for members participating in meetings by conference call be 50% of the regular per diem rate; AMENDMENT #1 WAS CARRIED AMENDMENT #2 WAS CARRIED THE MAIN MOTION, AS AMENDED, WAS 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 ". 29 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 honorarium 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 current per diem rate is $83.64. The new rate would be $86.15. The Vice Chair receives two times the regular per diem when acting in place of the Chair. If a citizen appointee is the Chair, the Chair receives an honorarium of $36,720 annually. This would increase to $37,822 if the OMB approves the 3% adjustment. If the Chair is an elected official, the Chair receives two times per diem for attendance at TRCA meetings and official functions. The OMB has agreed to reimburse the Chair and members for travel to TRCA meetings at the same rate established for TRCA employee travel reimbursement. FINANCIAL DETAILS As part of preliminary estimates approval, the Authority approved an increase of 3% cost of living adjustment effective the first pay in April. Staff will seek OMB approval to increase per diems and honorarium by 3% effective January 1, 2007. The impact will be marginal, less than $2,000, and has been included in the 2007 Preliminary Estimates, Operating and Capital approved by the Authority in November, 2006. Report prepared by: Jim Dillane, extension 6292 For Information contact: Jim Dillane, extension 6292 Date: February 13, 2007 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE RES. #C14 /07 Moved by: Seconded by: Gino Rosati Peter Milczyn THAT the committee move into closed session to discuss confidential item 7.10. ARISE FROM COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE RES. #C15 /07 Moved by: Seconded by: Peter Milczyn Eve Adams 30 CARRIED THAT the committee arise and report from closed session. CARRIED RES. #C16 /07 Moved by: Seconded by: Gerri Lynn O'Connor Gino Rosati THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT confidential item 7.10 be approved. CARRIED SECTION IV - ITEMS FOR THE INFORMATION OF THE BOARD RES. #C17 /07 - INTERNATIONAL JOINT COMMISSION WATER QUALITY BOARD Travel Expenses for TRCA Appointee. Report on reimbursement of travel expenses. Moved by: Seconded by: Ron Moeser Peter Milczyn IT IS RECOMMENDED THAT the report on reimbursement of expenses for Mr. J. Craig Mather to represent Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) on the International Joint Commission (IJC) Water Quality Board (WQB) be received. CARRIED BACKGROUND When Craig Mather was Chief Administrative Officer of TRCA, he was appointed as a Canadian Member on the IJC's Water Quality Board. In his capacity as board member, Mr. Mather brings the watershed message to the national and international stage, and attempts to influence how the IJC deals with the many issues facing the Great Lakes, including the Remedial Action Plans. It also provides an opportunity to profile the work of conservation authorities around the Great Lakes, hopefully enabling other sources of funding to be brought to conservation authorities. The term of appointment continued after Craig Mather's retirement into 2005, and given Mr. Mather's knowledge of the issues affecting the Great Lakes, it was decided that he would continue to represent TRCA. Members of the IJC's various boards and committees pay for their travel and related expenses and these costs are covered by their respective agency or organization. Brian Denney, Chief Administrative Officer, has approved reimbursement for these expenses. 31 Mr. Mather was reappointed until May 2007, and accordingly reimbursement for travel and expenses was again approved. With the new term of the Authority, staff are bringing this report to advise the members of this arrangement as it will continue until May. Mr. Mather may be reappointed at that time. FINANCIAL DETAILS The annual reimbursements were approximately $2,100 in 2005 to $830 in 2006. It is estimated that 2007 costs will be within this range. The Chief Administrative Officer has again approved a maximum annual expenditure of $3,000. The funds are available in the 2007 Preliminary Operating and Capital Estimates. Report prepared by: Kathy Stranks, extension 5264 For Information contact: Kathy Stranks, extension 5264 Date: February 19, 2007 RES. #C18/07 - GOOD NEWS STORIES Highlights of Toronto and Region Conservation Authority's Work. Receipt of Good News Stories for the months of December 2006 and January 2007, from all sections of Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA). Moved by: Seconded by: Ron Moeser Peter Milczyn IT IS RECOMMENDED THAT the report on "Good News Stories" for December 2006, and January 2007, be received. CARRIED BACKGROUND Management Team, a committee made up of senior staff at Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA), meets monthly to discuss strategic initiatives and organizational development. RATIONALE Key accomplishments of each TRCA section are highlighted 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 in December and January, and a brief description of each. • Jefferson Forest - Acquisition of 900 Stouffville Road property (25 acres of the Jefferson Forest), in the Town of Richmond Hill, complete. Made possible through funding donations from York Region, the Town of Richmond Hill, the Oak Ridges Moraine Foundation, the City of Toronto. and The Conservation Foundation of Greater Toronto, totaling $994,000. 32 • Archetype Sustainable House - Royal Bank committed $75,000 over 3 years to the project. Further, at the Greater Toronto Homebuilders (GTHBA) Presidents Dinner, the new president announced working with TRCA and the Archetype Sustainable House Project is a priority for 2007. • Conceptual Water Budget - MNR accepted TRCA's conceptual water budget and agreed to fund the Tier 1 Water Budget Assessment ($75,000). • Sustainable Communities - Secured $30,000 and developed a strategy for accelerating approval process for innovative stormwater management and sustainable community designs. • GTA Erosion and Sediment Control Guideline for Urban Construction - New guideline is completed. • Ontario Climate Change and Clean Air Plan - TRCA invited to help Ministry of the Environment develop. • Toronto City Summit Alliance - February 27, 2007 set as the date for the next summit and includes environmental issues as a major focus. • Rouge Watershed Plan - Rouge Watershed Task Force completed their mandate and delivered their final draft watershed plan to TRCA. • Terrestrial Natural Heritage System Strategy - Unanimously approved by the Authority. • West Humber Naturalists' - Most bird species found in over 20 years during the West Humber Naturalists' annual Christmas bird count. • Real -time Gauging - TRCA automated Precipitation and Stream Gauge Network Pilot Project is now complete and fully operational. Uses state of the art technology to provide real -time access to stream levels and rainfall data for flood management and warning via the web. • An Inconvenient Truth - TRCA and the Canada Green Buidling Council Great Toronto Chapter have been given permission to distribute copies of Al Gore's An Inconvenient Truth. Paramount Pictures and Blockbuster Video have donated 60 copies of the film to the chapter and TRCA in an exclusive Canadian initiative. • Greening Retail - Environment Canada contributing $25,000 in support of Phase II. • Red - bellied Woodpeckers - First resident pair spotted at Heart Lake. Report prepared by: Kathy Stranks, extension 5264 For Information contact: Kathy Stranks, extension 5264 Date: February 19, 2007 RES. #C19/07 - CELL PHONE AND BLACKBERRY USAGE Annual Summary - 2006. Response to request from the Business Excellence Advisory Board for summary information on number of cell phones and Blackberries in use. Moved by: Seconded by: Eve Adams Ron Moeser 33 IT IS RECOMMENDED THAT the report on use of cell phones and Blackberries dated February 14, 2007, be received. CARRIED BACKGROUND At Business Excellence Advisory Board (BEAB) Meeting #5/05, held on September 23, 2005, staff was requested to report annually on the number of cell phones and Blackberries in use and the associated costs. As of December 31, 2006, there were 226 cell phones and 15 Blackberries in use. In 2005, when staff first reported on this issue, there were 220 cell phones and 8 Blackberries in use. The number of cell phones does fluctuate during the year with a somewhat higher number in use during the peak summer months. As expected, the use of Blackberries has increased. Cell phone and blackberry use is costing an average of $14,470 per month (about $64.00 /unit /month). Usage has increased by about 25% since 2005. This reflects the increased volume and scope of work being undertaken by Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) staff and the recognition that use of wireless technology improves efficiency and is required for employee and client safety. TRCA has secured favourable air time use agreements with Telus and Rogers (rates are the same as those available to the City of Toronto and the province). Use is monitored by supervisors who receive itemized copies of individual cell phone bills. Cell phones are used extensively in conservation parks, education field centres, restoration services and by staff involved in watershed field activities where regular land based phones are unavailable. All TRCA field staff have access to cell phones as a safety device when working in the field. At Black Creek Pioneer Village, for example, cleaning and maintenance staff use the Telus 'mike' system to enable staff to respond to needs in any of the 50 historical buildings. Without the phones, staff had to be located and advised of the need for service which was time consuming and inefficient. Use of cell phones provides better customer /visitor services and ensures more effective supervision. The "Mike" cell phones replaced the use of pagers with resulting cost offsets. There are 15 Blackberries in use. Average cost continues to be about $160 per month although the usage has increased. As this technology has evolved, the air time rates have become more competitive and the initial cost of equipment has come down. Report prepared by: Jim Dillane, extension 6292 For Information contact: Jim Dillane, extension 6292 Date: February 14, 2007 34 TERMINATION ON MOTION, the meeting terminated at 10:35 a.m., on Friday, March 2, 2007. David Barrow Chair /ks 35 Brian Denney Secretary- Treasurer THE TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY MEETING OF THE BUSINESS EXCELLENCE ADVISORY BOARD #2/07 April 13, 2007 The Business Excellence Advisory Board Meeting #2/07, was held in the South Theatre, Black Creek Pioneer Village, on Friday, April 13, 2007. The Chair Paul Ainslie, called the meeting to order at 9:14 a.m.. Due to lack of quorum all items will go straight to the Authority for consideration at Authority Meeting #3/07, to be held on Friday, April 27, 2007. No objections to the items on the agenda were raised by the members in attendance. PRESENT Paul Ainslie Vice Chair Peter Milczyn Member Gerri Lynn O'Connor Chair, Authority Gino Rosati Member ABSENT Eve Adams Member David Barrow Chair Bill Fisch Member Rob Ford Member Ron Moeser Member Maja Prentice Member A presentation by Jim Dillane, Director, Finance and Business Services, TRCA, was made as scheduled in regard to item 7.1 - 2007 Operating and Capital Budget. 36 THE TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY MEETING OF THE BUSINESS EXCELLENCE ADVISORY BOARD #3/07 April 27, 2007 The Business Excellence Advisory Board Meeting #3/07, was held in Players Lounge B, Tennis Canada, on Friday, April 27, 2007. The Chair David Barrow, called the meeting to order at 9:40 a.m.. PRESENT Eve Adams David Barrow Rob Ford Ron Moeser Gerri Lynn O'Connor ABSENT Paul Ainslie Bill Fisch Peter Milczyn Maja Prentice Gino Rosati RES.#C20/07 - Moved by: Seconded by: MINUTES Ron Moeser Eve Adams Member Chair Member Member Chair, Authority Vice Chair Member Member Member Member THAT the Minutes of meetings #1/07, held on March 2, 2007 and #2/07, held on April 13, 2007, be approved. CARRIED PRESENTATIONS (a) A presentation by Allister Byrne, Partner, Grant Thornton, LLP, in regard to item 7.1 - Audited Financial Statements - 2006. 37 RES. #C21 /07 - PRESENTATIONS Moved by: Seconded by: Rob Ford Ron Moeser THAT above -noted presentation (a) be heard and received. CARRIED SECTION I - ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY ACTION RES. #C22 /07 - AUDITED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS - 2006 The 2006 audited financial statements are presented for the Business Excellence Advisory Board's approval and recommendation to the Authority. Moved by: Seconded by: Rob Ford Ron Moeser THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT the transfer of funds into and from reserves during 2006, as outlined in the schedule to the financial statements entitled "Continuity of Reserves ", be approved; AND FURTHER THAT the 2006 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. CARRIED BACKGROUND The financial statements of Toronto and Region Conservation Authority for 2006 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 April 4, 2007. 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 serves as TRCA's audit committee, entitled "Communication of Audit Results." In this report, the auditor addresses audit results, reportable matters and technical accounting updates. Also included in this report are copies of the draft auditors' report, management representation letter, internal control letter, independence letter and an update of the latest accounting and auditing developments. Members should refer to Attachment 2 for the complete report. A representative from Grant Thornton LLP will be in attendance to present the auditor's report on the 2006 financial statements. 38 RATIONALE Deficit position: For the year ended December 31, 2006, expenditures exceeded revenues and reserve allocations by an amount of $240,914, increasing the deficit from $589,750 to $830,664, as outlined in the table below: Within the operating accounts, TRCA achieved an operating surplus of $425,014. A number of positive and negative variances contributed to this final surplus position. 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 ($284,400); unbudgeted sales tax and property tax recoveries ($244,000); and within the Restoration Services Division special tree planting and restoration projects produced revenues in excess of budget in the amount of $636,700, of which $332,000 will be used to offset the in -year deficit within the capital accounts caused by the construction of the Restoration Services Centre, as noted below. Although the 2006 budget had anticipated a deficit of $1,250,000 within the capital accounts (representing the difference between available funding and budgeted project expenditures in 2006), delays in completing the Restoration Services Centre resulted in an underexpenditure of $681,700 and a contribution to the overall deficit of $680,840. After taking into account the operating surplus within the Restoration Services Division of $332,000, the net deficit that can be attributed to this construction project in 2006 amounts to approximately $349,000. An additional $814,000 has been budgeted in 2007 to complete the project and the 2007 operating budget provides conservatively an amount of $200,000 that can be generated from special projects and used to pay down the cost of the Restoration Services Centre. It will take several years beyond 2007 before the costs of construction will be fully recovered in this manner. At the beginning of the year the deficit within the land accounts amounted to $158,000. Staff is pleased to report that there was available funding in 2006 to pay for all acquisitions during the year as well as for lands which had been acquired in prior years. 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. 39 Budget Actual Deficit, beginning of the year ($589,750) ($589,750) 2006 operating results - 425,014 2006 capital results (1,250,000) (665,928) Deficit, end of year ($1,839,750) ($830,664) Within the operating accounts, TRCA achieved an operating surplus of $425,014. A number of positive and negative variances contributed to this final surplus position. 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 ($284,400); unbudgeted sales tax and property tax recoveries ($244,000); and within the Restoration Services Division special tree planting and restoration projects produced revenues in excess of budget in the amount of $636,700, of which $332,000 will be used to offset the in -year deficit within the capital accounts caused by the construction of the Restoration Services Centre, as noted below. Although the 2006 budget had anticipated a deficit of $1,250,000 within the capital accounts (representing the difference between available funding and budgeted project expenditures in 2006), delays in completing the Restoration Services Centre resulted in an underexpenditure of $681,700 and a contribution to the overall deficit of $680,840. After taking into account the operating surplus within the Restoration Services Division of $332,000, the net deficit that can be attributed to this construction project in 2006 amounts to approximately $349,000. An additional $814,000 has been budgeted in 2007 to complete the project and the 2007 operating budget provides conservatively an amount of $200,000 that can be generated from special projects and used to pay down the cost of the Restoration Services Centre. It will take several years beyond 2007 before the costs of construction will be fully recovered in this manner. At the beginning of the year the deficit within the land accounts amounted to $158,000. Staff is pleased to report that there was available funding in 2006 to pay for all acquisitions during the year as well as for lands which had been acquired in prior years. 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. 39 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 $1,491,320. Staff is of the opinion that this amount is probably insufficient to meet material, unforeseen economic hardship. The 2007 budget provides for a surplus position of $100,000, a modest attempt at paying down the accumulated deficit and eventually building up reserves. The Special Projects reserve was set up to fund the cost of the new Restoration Services Centre in Vaughan, within the Boyd complex. During the year the reserve was used in its entirety to help finance a portion of the costs incurred for that project. The "Continuity of Reserves" schedule on page 17 of the financial statement package, provides a summary of reserves balances as of December 31, 2006. Internal Control Letter Appendix "C" of Attachment 2, "Report to the Business Excellence Advisory Board - Communication of Audit Results" contains the internal control or management letter, wherein the auditor highlights various internal control findings. There were no new findings during the 2006 audit cycle. The auditor notes that while management has addressed several items from the 2005 report, there still remains outstanding several recommendations, including improved sales and admission system and additional physical security of IT infrastructure. Management is in 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 18, 2007 Attachments: 2 40 Attachment 1 Toronto and Region Conservation Authority Financial Statements December 31, 2006 Grant Thornton DRAFT 41 Contents DRAFT 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 rare t Thorn tOn 42 Gran 1. Thorn tail Grant Thornton LLP Chartered Accountants Management Consultantsl DRAFT 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, 2006 and the statements of financial activitie s 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, 2006 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 Grant Thornton LLP April 4, 2007 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 1 43 Toronto and Region Conservation Authority Statement of Financial Acitivites and Deficit DRAFT Year Ended December 31, 2006 2006 Budget (Note 9) 2006 2005 Actual Actual Expenditures Watershed management and health monitoring $ 25,204,001 18,495,572 6,593,258 Environmental advisory services 3,778,299 3,692,577 3,711,406 Watershed stewardship 12,213,200 9,817,716 6,996,044 Conservation land management, development and acquisition 38,455,500 35,070,628 25,752,425 Conservation and education programming 16,047,000 15,254,922 13,821,526 Corporate services 5,627,900 5,244,585 4,833,133 Vehicle and equipment, net of usage charged Revenue Municipal Levies Other 101,325,900 27 129 134,295 87,603,129 63 842 087 26,902,400 21,097,727 21,771,302 5,407,300 8,081,985 2,246,443 Govemment grants MNR transfer payments 845,800 845,753 845,753 Provincial - other 3,192,200 5,552,902 2,252,108 Federal 1,499,400 1„217 1,110,042 Authority generated User fees, sales and admissions Contract services Interest income Proceeds from sale of properties The Conservation Foundation of Greater Toronto 1,235,100 2,8 ,712 1,454,127 Donations and fundraising 2,786,700 1,154,588 1,433,404 Facility and property rentals 2,249,400 2,218,706 2,256,811 Canada Post Corporation agreement 81,600 34,946 36,164 ORM Corridor Park contribution agreement 1,200,000 1,054,085 13,937,000 13,003,163 10,964,378 573,700 334,321 641,027 360,000 473,448 396,122 600,000 330,658 1,030,523 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 36,997,600 26,420,408 15,707,086 604,500 98,472,700 8 244,350 220,187 676,731 1,068,685 008.698 63,434,162 (2,853,200) (1,594,431) (407,925) 1,603,200 1,353,517 254,848 (1,250,000) (240,914) (153,077) (589,750) _... j5894,7501 (436,673) (1,839,750) (830,684) (589,750) See accompanying notes to the financial statements. Gran t Thorn LOC 44 2 Toronto and Region Conservation Authority Statement of Financial Position DRAFT December 31 Assets Cash and cash equivalents Marketable securities (Note 7) Receivables (Note 3) Inventory Prepaids Liabilities Payables and accruals Deferred revenue Municipal! Ilevies Capital, special projects and other Vacation pay and sick leave entitlements Fund Balances Reserves (Page 17) Deficit Amounts to be funded in future years $ 10,618,733 3,998,647 13,552,566 521,009 185.403 5,930,969 3,698,374 9,855,518 533,232 163.543 $ 28,876,358 $ 20,181,6 $ 16,478,710 6,962,306 6,372,978 5,399,556 6,982,184 5,182,857 645898 1 561 781 479 770 19106,500 1,873,150 3,226,667 (830,664) (589,750) 1,042,486 2,636,917 (1,646,898) (1,561,781) (603,412) 1,075,136 28,876,358 $ 20,181,636 Contingent liabilities and commitments (Note 8) On behalf of the Authority Chair Secretary-Treasurer See accompanying notes to the financial statements. Gran t Thorn LOC 45 3 Toronto and Region Conservation Authority Statement of Cash Flows DRAFT Year Ended December 31 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 $ (1,594,431) $ (407,925) (3,697,048) (4,604,763) 12,223 50,074 (21,860) 191,550 8,516,404 2,209,801 1,772,749 (395,097) 84,117 227.567 5,072,154 2.728 793 Investing Proceeds on maturities of marketable securities 1,698,376 2,994,618 Purchase of marketable securities (1,998,649) 1 999 998 (300,273) 994,620 Financing Increase in amounts to be funded in future years (84,117) (L567) Net increase (decrease) in cash and cash equivalents 4,687,764 (1,961,740) Cash and cash equivalents, beginning of year 5 930 969 7,892,709 Cash and cash equivalents, end of year 10,618,733 5,930,969 See accompanying notes to the financial statements. Grant Th orn toii 46 4 Toronto and Region Conservation Authority Notes to the Financial Statements DRAFT December 31, 2006 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, any eligibility 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. rare t Thorn tOii M 5 47 Toronto and Region Conservation Authority Notes to the Financial Statements DRAFT December 31, 2006 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 2006 2005 Municipal levies $ 125,000 $ Toronto Waterfront Revitalization Corporation 4,859,873 5,503,041 City of Toronto 484,836 443,902 Regional Municipality of York 356,562 328,441 Conservation Foundation of Greater Toronto 1,147,583 390,071 Government of Canada 756,595 850,523 Province of Ontario 3,418,598 337,016 Interest receivable 322,610 476,470 Trade and other 2,080,910 1,526,054 $ 13,552,566 $ 9,855,518 Grail l. Thorn toil 6 48 Toronto and Region Conservation Authority Notes to the Financial Statements DRAFT December 31, 2006 4. Trust funds The Authority administers funds on behalf of the Rouge Park Alliance amounting to $435,146 (2005 - $353,832). 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 2006 and 2005 are based upon the following transactions recorded in operations: Reserve balance, beginning of year Net proceeds from sale of properties Interest Applications: Greenspace acquisition project Reserve balance, end of year 2006 2005 330,658 7,570 1,030,523 (292,083) (1,030,523) $ 46,145 $ 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 2006 were $1,468,990 (2005 - $1,212,522). rare t Thornton M 7 49 Toronto and Region Conservation Authority Notes to the Financial Statements DRAFT December 31, 2006 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, 2006 consisted primarily of money market products. Further information on these investments is as set out below: Term to Maturity Less than one year Less than three years Market Value $ 1,685,880 2,540,066 Weighted Average Face Value Rate of Interest $ 1,499,998 2,498,649 $ 4,225,946 $ 3,998,647 3.85% 4.01% 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. Gran t Thorn tOn M 8 50 Toronto and Region Conservation Authority Notes to the Financial Statements DRAFT December 31, 2006 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 and the decision was received in April of 2006 which reduced the award by $4 million. As a result of this decision, the Authority has recorded an amount of $5,063,462 for market value, disturbance damages and interest. Still outstanding is the amount of injurious affection, interest on this amount and costs. Also outstanding are three remaining expropriations. (d) Lease commitments The Authority has entered into agreements to lease premises, equipment and vehicles for various periods until 2011. Minimum lease payments in aggregate for each of the next four years are as follows: 2007 404,773 2008 317,868 2009 143,312 2010 9,533 2011 7,150 9. Budget figures - 2006 The 2006 budget figures included in these financial statements are those adopted by the Authority on April 28, 2006. 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. rare t Thorn tOn M 9 51 Toronto and Region Conservation Authority Schedule of Financial Activities - Watershed Management and Health Monitoring Year Ended December 31 DRAFT Expenditures Watershed strategies Resource inventory andlenvironmental monitoring Flood forecasting and warning Floor control structures, operations and maintenance Source Water Protection 2006 Budget Actual Act al (Note 9) $ 1,777,800 1,829,166 1,386,534 2006 2005 1,335,201 1,367,149 1,197,062 213,700 241,495 245,339 325,000 277,834 332,308 1,445,000 1,562,300 1,129,761 5,096,701 5,277,943 4,290,004 Capital and other projects and studies Regional monitoring study and other monitoring projects 621,100 601,819 664,739 Water management projects 3,190,500 1,670,644 1,608,272 Lower Don flood control 14,522,500 9,834,803 1,046,965 Terrestrial Natural Heritage study 240,600 235,779 303,750 Floodplain mapping 432,000 137,966 341,243 Groundwater strategies 591,600 482,930 338,285 Other flood control projects 509,000 253,688 25,204,001 18495572 8593 258 Revenue Municipal Levies 7,163,300 5,616,568 3,998,802 Other 1,122,900 200,311 258,584 Government grants MNIR transfer payments 550,000 550,000 549,860 Provincial - other 1,591,950 1,954,540 1,436,685 Federal 303,550 410,716 251,431 Authority generated Contract services 12,953 100,644 interest 12,014 The Conservation Foundation of Greater Toronto 202,500 112,707 86,534 Toronto Waterfront Revitalization Corporation 14,522,500 9,834,803 1,046,965 Donations and fundraising 400,000 600,072 401,887 Sundry 88,500 154,540 65,725 26,245,200 19459224 &197117 Excess of expenditures over revenue $ 1,041,199 963,652 (396,141) Graiil. Thorn 10 52 Toronto and Region Conservation Authority Schedule of Financial Activities - Environmental Advisory Services Year Ended December 31 DRAFT 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 2,627,000 2,742,469 2,282,351 Sundry 1 818 3,445,500 3578809 3 786 83$ 2006 Budget (Note 9) 2006 2005 Actual Actual 1,631,799 1,588,579 1,269,344 2 146 499 2,103,998 2,442,062 3,778,298 3,692,577 3,711,406 (138,200) (138,200) 458,900 778,300 792,701 841,144 178,400 178,353 178,493 1,668 18,800 7,150 Excess of revenue over expenditures (332,798) ( 1 ,768) 75,432 Crant Th on-11_0C M 11 53 Toronto and Region Conservation Authority Schedule of Financial Activities - Watershed Stewardship Year Ended December 31 DRAFT Expenditures Watershed stewardship Capotal and other projects and studies Erosion control and slope stabilization project Erosion control - Peel and York Regions Toronto Remedial Action Plan Peel Natural Heritage project York Natural Heritage project Durham Natural Heritage project Nursery workshop and office 2006 Budget (Note 9) 2,450,400 $ 1,884,746 $ 1,821,665 2006 2005 Actual Actual 2,875,100 2,211,678 1,771,694 26,000 34,965 2,226,700 1,749,530 1,862,457 1,142,300 987,552 781,371 525,600 692,505 451,657 148,900 120,260 94,993 2,818,200 2,136,480 212,207 12,213,200 9,817,716 6,996,044 Revenue Municipal Levies 8,030,600 6,030,219 4,546,726 Other 99,000 1 ,055,708 349,239 Government grants Provincial) - other Federal Authority generated Contract services Tipping fees Interest The Conservation Foundation of Greater Toronto Donations and fundraising Sundry 505,500 202,109 231,757 628,300 653,317 580,331 573,700 321,368 540,383 600,000 298,672 471,726 992 815 235,300 310,495 114,252 5,406 34,591 122.600 1'73,896 98,952 9,052,182 6,968,772 Excess of expenditures over revenue $ (1,418,200) (765,534) $ (27,272) C-rant T1iort1t0i11 M 12 54 Toronto and Region Conservation Authority Schedule of Financial Activities - Conservation Land Management Development and Acquisition Year Ended December 31 DRAFT 2006 2006 2005 Budget Actual Actual (Note 9) Expenditu res Conservation land management Property services 1,314,300 1,259,553 1,100,952 CA land management 294,400 243,745 288,499 Rental iproperties 1,815,700 1,701,348 1,927,083 3,425,400 3,204,646 3,316,534 Capital and other projects and studies Greenspace acquisition 5,100,000 5,460,733 2,122,564 Rouge River Natural Areas Acquisition project - - 256910 Waterfront development 2,332,900 1,716,945 2,207,908 Port Union development 4,171,500 2,919,841 2,600,122 Mimico Linear Park 2,093,000 1,248,255 3,115,822 Tommy Thompson Park 2,552,200 324,523 342,974 Western Beaches Watercourse Facillity 13,658,400 12,030,662 8,535,881 Etobicoke Motel Strip waterfront project 553,200 5,408,357 154,267 Conservation area development 424,600 385,089 667,912 Living City Centre at Kortright - infrastructure 679,400 141,738 68,886 Peel campground improvements 1,083,600 239,092 258,314 Washroom upgrades 329,800 9,804 Peel land planning 187,300 240,278 Drinking water system upgrades 242,900 442,862 582,569 Black Creek Pioneer Village retrofit / attractions project 421,300 214,627 1,375,258 Greater Toronto Region trail - 33 2,560 ORM Corridor Park Development 1,200,000 1,08.3,143 14.3,944 38.455 500 35,070,628 25 752 425 Revenue Municipal Levies Other 5,396,300 3,525,326 5,172,734 3,272,100 5,922,490 693,581 Government grants Provincial - other 276,600 2,740,402 243,049 Federal 5,000 70,223 29,074 Authority-generated Rental properties 2249,400 2,218,706 2,256,811 Tipping fees - 4,722 Interest - 12,900 4,924 Proceeds from sale of properties 600,000 330,658 1,030,523 The Conservation Foundation of Greater Toronto 115,200 1,657,363 416,223 Toronto Waterfront Revitalization Corporation 22,475,100 16,585,605 14,660,121 Donations and fundraising 2,100,000 499,232 850,000 Canada Post Corporation agreement 81,600 34,946 36,164 ORM Corridor Park contribution agreement 1,200,000 1,054,085 Sales and property tax refunds - 66,374 220,187 Sundry 289800 181,071 472,825 38 061 100 4899,381 26,090,938 Excess of revenue over expenditures (394,400) $ (171,247) 338,513 Graiil. Thorn ton it 13 55 Toronto and Region Conservation Authority Schedule of Financial Activities - Conservation and Education Programming Year Ended December 31 DRAFT 2006 2006 Budget Actual ((Note 9) 2005 Actu Expenditures Conservation land programming Conservation areas $ 2,934,400 $ 2,952,818 $ 3,602,852 ORM Park Operation 1,126,000 1,034,804 Conservation /Heritage education programming Black Creek (Pioneer Village 5,298,500 5,072,641 5,026,405 Kortriglht Centre for Conservation 1,402,200 1,433,468 1,368,735 Community Transformation Partnership 1,443,400 1,053,119 822,457 Conservation Field Centres 1,973,000 1,882,536 1,866,651 Education Outreach 714,800 719,142 566,150 Conservation Education (Management 352,600 287,875 303,019 Program support and marketing 802,100 818 519 265,257 16,047,000 15,254,922 13,821,526 Revenue municipal Levies Other Government grants Provincial - other Federal Authority-generated Conservation areas 3,067,500 2,882,733 3,021,054 Black Creek Pioneer Village 3,132,600 2,959,528 2,600,951 Kortriglht Centre 1,155,500 1,105,454 1,028,694 ORM Park Operation 1,251,000 1,140,380 Conservation Field Centres 1,596,900 1,512,871 1,473,799 3,422,200 3,411,737 3,528,400 130,000 103,054 90,872 506,900 519,903 297,876 551,300 437,711 236,431 Community Transformation Partnership Corporate (Education Outreach The Conservation Foundation of Greater Toronto Donations and fundraising Sundry Excess of expenditures over revenue 458,500 314,587 38,991 2,857 667,100 286,700 95,200 16,321,400 799,960 837,118 49,878 135,026 9 247.,337 2 13.536.549 274,400 $ 150,430 284,977) Cant Thorn inn M 14 56 Toronto and Region Conservation Authority Schedule of Financial Activities - Corporate Services Year Ended December 31 DRAFT 2006 2006 2005 Budget Actual Actual (Note 9) Expenditures Corporate management 937,500 $ 964,568 $ 922,4.44 Office services 1,130,800 1,126,249 997,859 Financial services 791,200 788,668 781,838 Human resources 475,700 478,919 422,138 Information technology 870,400 841,550 850,731 Corporate communications 982,300 956,830 659,621 Professiionall Access (Program 94,171 Recoveries from Programs 69.) (725,315) (593,266) 4,537,900 4,525,640 4,041,165 Capital and other projects and studies Administrative office 690,000 463,923 274,334 Information Technology Acquisition project 400,000 627,900 255,022 517,634 5.244.585 4,833.133 Revenue Municipal: Levies 3,028,200 2,652,077 4,065,740 Other 5,000 7,721 13,023 Government grants MNR transfer payments 117,400 117,400 117;400 Provincial - other 11,250 134,280 23,941 Federal 11,250 16,250 5,625 Authority - generated Interest 360,000 447,540 390,383 Retail Sales 48,000 43,612 42,090 The Conservation Foundation of Greater Toronto 15,000 16,188 Donation and fundraising 11,900 Sales and property tax rebate 177,976 - Sundry 0 706 1_ 3,613,750 4,853948 Excess of revenue over expenditures $ (2,023,400) 0,835) $ 20,815 rail t Thorn t[ iil M 15 57 Toronto and Region Conservation Authority Schedule of Financial Activities - Vehicle and Equipment Year Ended December 31 DRAFT Expenditures Operations Fuel, maintenance and repairs Other overhead 2006 Budicict (Note 9) $ 425,600 $ 46,100 471,700 Capital Purchase of equipment and machinery Purchase of vehicles Proceeds on disposals or trade-in Total expenditures Recovery of expenditures by charges based on usage Charge (credit) to expenditures 230,000 130,000 (53,000) 307 000 778,700 (778,700) 2006 Actual 469,271 $ 56,334 525,605 289,612 174,587 (66,528) 397,671 923,276 896 147 27,129 2005 Actual 458,970 45,227 504,197 202,892 291,606 (32,870) 461,628 965,825 831 530) 134,295 Gran[ Th on-11_0C M 16 58 Toronto and Region Conservation Authority Continuity of Reserves DRAFT Year Ended December 31, 2006 Balance Beginning Inter-reserve Balance of Year Appropriations Transfers End of Year Vehicle and equipment $ 340,302 $ (27,129) $ Tree donation program 24,644 (2,132) Special projects 1,311,462 (1,311,462) Operating contingency 1,550,259 (58,939) Funds held under provincial sharing policy 46,145 $ 3,226,667 $ (1,353,517) $ 313,173 22,512 1,491,320 46,145 $ 1,873,150 (rant Thorn LOC M 17 59 Attachment 2 Report to the Business Excellence Advisory Board - Communication of Audit Results Toronto and Region Conservation Authority For the year ended December 31, 2006 Grant T1i orri tOn 60 Gran 1. Thorn tail Grant Thornton LLP Chartered Accountants Management Consultants April 4, 2007 To the members of the Business Excellence Advisory Board Toronto and Region Conservation Authority We are pleased to report that we have now completed our audit of the financial statements of Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (the "Authority -) for the year ended December 31, 2006. We have attached our draft auditors' report. We will finalize this auditors' report once we have the opportunity to discuss the results of our audit with you. The report to the audit committee has been prepared in accordance with the assurance recommendations issued by the Canadian Institute of Chartered Accountants (CICA) entitled "Communications with Those Having Oversight Responsibility for the Financial Reporting Process -. That standard recommends we communicate with the Business Excellence Advisory Board (the "Board ") various matters including: the overall audit strategy, our responsibility as auditors, any matters arising from the audit, misstatements, significant accounting policies, and any other matters that may be of interest to the audit committee. We express our appreciation for the cooperation and assistance received from the management and staff of the Authority during the course of our audit. If you have any particular comments or concerns, please do not hesitate to raise them at our scheduled meeting. Yours very truly, GRANT THORNTON LLP ti 4041Z utf` Allister Byrne, F.C.A Partner cc: Brian Denney, Chief Administration Officer Jim Dillane, Director Finance and Business Services Rocco Sgambelluri, Controller 15 Allstate Parkway Suite 200 Markham, Ontario T (416) 366 -0100 F (416) 475 -8906 E Markham @GrantThornton.ca W www.GrantThornton.ca Canadian Member of Grant Thornton International 61 Contents Page Status of the audit 1 Audit results 2 Reportable matters 4 Technical updates 6 Appendices Appendix A - Draft auditors' report 7 Appendix B - Internal Control Letter 9 Appendix C - Independence Letter 13 Appendix D - Accounting and Auditing Developments 16 62 Report to the Business Excellence Advisory Board - Communication of Audit Results Toronto and Region Conservation Authority For the year ended December 31, 2006 Status of the Audit 1 We have completed our audit of the financial statements of Toronto and Region Conservation Authority for the year ended December 31, 2006 and the results of that audit are included in this report. As noted in the covering letter, we have attached our draft auditors' Report as appendix 3. The following items need to be addressed /completed before that report is signed: • approval of the financial statements by the Board of Directors; 63 Report to the Business Excellence Advisory Board - Communication of Audit Results Toronto and Region Conservation Authority For the year ended December 31, 2006 Audit results Our audit identified the adjusted and /or unadjusted non - trivial misstatements noted below. Summary of misstatements Misstatements identified and adjusted in the financial statements by the authority as a result of our audit procedures were as follows: 2 Over /(Under) Statement of: Adjusted misstatements Assets Liabilities Equity Earnings Cheques Drawn but not (1,969,097) (1,969,097) Mailed at year end Total adjusted misstatements $(1,969,097) $(1,969,097) $ $ after estimated tax effect Non - trivial misstatements noted during the course of our audit but not adjusted in the financial statements were as follows: 64 Report to the Business Excellence Advisory Board - Communication of Audit Results Toronto and Region Conservation Authority For the year ended December 31, 2006 3 Over /(Under) Statement of: Adjusted misstatements Offset of Accruals Unrecorded Surplus - Maritime Life Posting of Prepaid Expenses Assets Liabilities Equity Earnings (15,276) 15,276 (29,132) (29,132) (11,370) (11,370) Prepaid amount erroneously (19,644) (19,644) expensed in period Total adjusted $(60,166) $(26,666) $ $(33,500) misstatements after estimated tax effect We have discussed the unadjusted misstatements with management and they have concluded that, individually and in aggregate, these unadjusted misstatements are not material to the financial statements of the authority. 65 Report to the Business Excellence Advisory Board - Communication of Audit Results Toronto and Region Conservation Authority For the year ended December 31, 2006 Reportable matters Internal control _Management is responsible for the design and operation of an effective system of internal control that provides reasonable assurance that the accounting system provides timely , accurate and reliable financial information, and safeguards the assets of the entity. 4 Through our role as auditors of your financial statements we possess an understanding of the entity and its environment, including internal control. However, a financial statement audit is not designed to provide assurance on internal control. Professional standards do require us to communicate to the audit committee significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in internal control that have come to our attention in the course of performing the audit. During the course of performing our audit, we identified the following weaknesses in internal control: • Sales /admissions system • Information Technology • Audit documentation and staff available Our comments and recommendations on these matters have been provided in an internal control letter [and attached as Appendix B]. Significant new accounting policies There were no significant new accounting policies noted in the year. Controversial, emerging or unique accounting policy issues During the course of our audit, we noted the following emerging or unique accounting policy issues that are applicable to your entity , further details have been summarized below along with other technical updates in Appendix D: • PS 3150 — Tangible Capital _Assets • CIC 3 3855 Financial Instruments: Recognition and measurement • CIC 3 3865 Fledges 66 Report to the Business Excellence Advisory Board - Communication of Audit Results Toronto and Region Conservation Authority For the year ended December 31, 2006 • CIC 3 1530 Comprehensive Income • CIC 3 3863 Financial Instruments — Presentation Sensitive accounting estimates and disclosures During the course of our audit, we noted the following accounting estimates and disclosures: 5 • In 2003, TRC 3 acquired properties from Ontario Realty Corporation (ORC). The municipalities did not charge ORC property tax because it is a provincial organization. after the acquisition, there were delays with the processing of the deed of the title, as well as delays with billings for 2004 and 2005 property taxes, hence, TRC . did not get billed the related property taxes for these 2 years. However, accruals were set up for 2004 and 2005 estimated tax amount that were unpaid. As of 2006, estimated outstanding tax amount for 2005 year is $73,892, while estimated outstanding tax for 2004 year is at $158,438. In 2006, management of the -Authority has decreased the 2004 tax accrual by 1/3 ($52,813) based on the understanding that there is no legal liability for property taxes that remains unbilled for over 2 years, and hence TRC 3 can reduce the 2004 tax liability. As management is insure of the status or whereabouts of these 2004 tax billings, only a portion of the tax liability has been written down. Cooperation during the audit We report that we received cooperation from management and the employees of the authority. To our knowledge, we were provided access to all necessary records and other documentation and any issues that arose as a result of our audit were discussed with management and have been resolved to our satisfaction. Consultations with other accountants To our knowledge, management did not seek the advice or opinion of other external accountants on financial reporting or accounting matters. Fraud and illegal acts Our inquiries of management did not reveal any fraud or illegal acts, nor did any of our audit procedures. Independence As external auditors of the authority, we are required to be independent in accordance with Canadian professional standards. These standards require that we disclose to the audit committee all relationships that, in our professional judgement, may reasonably be thought to bear on our independence. We have provided a letter to the audit committee, presented as appendix D of this report which confirms our independence with respect to the authority. 67 Report to the Business Excellence Advisory Board - Communication of Audit Results Toronto and Region Conservation Authority For the year ended December 31, 2006 Technical updates Accounting and auditing standards 6 Recent changes in accounting and auditing standards have been summarized in Appendix D. These accounting and auditing changes have had no potential effect on the authority for this year on the authority: • CIC . Section 1530 — Comprehensive Income • PS 1200 Financial Statement Presentation • PS 2700 Segment Disclosures • PS 1300 Government Reporting Entity • PS 110 Generally accepted accounting Principles • PS 2130 Measurement Uncertainty • PS 3150 — Tangible Capital _Assets • CIC 3 3855 Financial Instruments: Recognition and measurement • CIC 3 3865 Hedges • CIC 3 1530 Comprehensive Income • CIC 3 3863 Financial Instruments — Presentation 68 Report to the Business Excellence Advisory Board - Communication of Audit Results Toronto and Region Conservation Authority For the year ended December 31, 2006 Appendix A - Draft auditors' report 69 7 Grant Thornton LLP Chartered Accountants Management Consultants Auditors' Report To the Members of the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority Gran 1. Thorn tail DRAFT We have audited the statement of financial position of the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority as at December 31, 2006 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, 2006 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 Grant Thornton LLP April 4, 2007 Chartered Accountants 15 Allstate Parkway Suite 200 Markham, Ontario T (416) 366 -0100 F (416) 475 -8906 E Markham @GrantThornton.ca W www.GrantThornton.ca Canadian Member of Grant Thornton International 70 Report to the Business Excellence Advisory Board - Communication of Audit Results Toronto and Region Conservation Authority For the year ended December 31, 2006 Appendix B - Internal Control Letter 71 9 Gran 1. Thorn tail Grant Thornton LLP Chartered Accountants Management Consultants April 4, 2007 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, 2006 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 implemented new processes and technology to address the changing standards of conducting a financial statement audit. This approach includes an increased emphasis on internal control. 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. Our procedures identified a number of items that we wish 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 carne to our attention during the conduct of our normal examination, may not necessarily include all matters that may be identified through a more extensive or special engagement. Matters reported in 2005 We are pleased to report that appropriate action has been taken on the following of the recommendations made last year: 1. Payroll — Exception reports are now being generated and reviewed by the Controller and Payroll Supervisor for each pay. 15 Allstate Parkway Suite 200 Markham, Ontario T (416) 366 -0100 F (416) 475 -8906 E Markham @GrantThornton.ca W www.GrantThornton.ca Canadian Member of Grant Thornton International 72 Gran 1. Thorn tail 2. Information technology — non -water fire suppression System for Sever Room: (a) The Board has concluded that it will be impractical to install a non -water suppression system in the server room due to nature of building structure. There have however been improvements made to mitigate risk of fire arising within the server room, such as the instalment of a separate air conditioning system inside the server room. This will allow for temperatures to be regulated, and will protect servers from overheating. (b) Electronic door lock to server room: A computerized electronic lock system has now been installed at the server room, and access is only available to individuals in the IT department, the Director, and several property management personnel. The following matters were raised in last year's management letter and we would like to re- iterate them this year: 1. Sales /admissions system — improvements to the billing system to ensure completeness and cut -off of revenue: - Implementing pre - numbered billing and "request -to- invoice" forms is still outstanding. We understand that a software consultant has been engaged to investigate feasibility of this issue, and implementation and use is expected by the end of 2007; 2. Information technology — the following recommendations to improve physical security are in progress to be implemented by management: - Development of an off -site operational site as part of a disaster recovery plan a formalized IT Discovery Plan has been drafted to be presented to the Board in 2007 for approval. Additionally, the IT department is in the process of purchasing and setting up a new cluster in the Downsview office, which will have replicated information from TRCA's head office and act as the second offsite operations. Implementation and ability to use is expected by the end of 2007. Year end audit We again experienced delays in receiving agreed upon schedules, working papers and financial statements. For the most part this was related to TRCA being totally involved in the preparation of the 2007 budget and related deliberations which afforded little time for preparation for the audit. Your finance staff are certainly hard working and capable but we believe that in order to meet all of the budget and audit deadlines some additional staff resource may need to be considered. 73 Gran 1. Thorn toil 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. 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, GRANT THORNTON LLP Allister Byrne, F.C.A. Partner cc: Brian Denney, Chief Administration Officer Jim Dillane, Director Finance and Business Services Rocco Sgambelluri, Controller J: Data', Continuing Files', T, Toronto and Region Conservation authority CoirespondenceAFiscal 2006,TRCA Internal Controls Letter doe 74 Report to the Business Excellence Advisory Board - Communication of Audit Results Toronto and Region Conservation Authority For the year ended December 31, 2006 Appendix C - Independence Letter 75 13 Gran 1. Thorn tail Grant Thornton LLP Chartered Accountants Management Consultants February 21, 2007 The Business Excellence Advisory Board The Toronto and Region Conservation Authority 5 Shoreham Drive Downsvie\v, 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, 2006. Canadian generally accepted auditing standards (GRAS) 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 standards 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 March 27, 2006, the date of our last letter. 15 Allstate Parkway Suite 200 Markham, Ontario T (416) 366 -0100 F (416) 475 -8906 E Markham @GrantThornton.ca W www.GrantThornton.ca Canadian Member of Grant Thornton International 76 Gran 1. Thorn toil 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 and provide some additional audit services related to the implementation of the new audit standards regarding the documentation of internal control as required by the CICA. 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, 2006 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, GRANT THORNTON LLP 9744,444- I, Allister Byrne, F.C.A. Partner J: \Data \Continuing Files \T \Toronto and Region Conservation Authority \Correspondence \Fiscal 2006 \Independence letter 06.doc 77 Report to the Business Excellence Advisory Board - Communication of Audit Results Toronto and Region Conservation Authority For the year ended December 31, 2006 Appendix D - Accounting and Auditing Developments 78 16 PS 1200 Financial Statement Presentation This Section has been revised as a result of the CICA Public Sector Accounting Handbook requirement to adopt the full accrual basis of accounting for local governments. This Section establishes standards for recognition, presentation and disclosure in government financial statements. The main features of the Section are as follows: • Governments are required to present a statement of financial position, statement of operations, statement of changes in net debt and a statement of cash flows; • Financial statements should present net debt and accumulated surplus/ deficit on the statement of financial position, annual surplus/ deficit, the change in net debt and changes in cash flows; • Current year budget and actual figures are to be presented on both the statement of operations and the statement of changes in net debt; and • Funds and reserves are to be reported in the notes or schedules when the government chooses to report on them. This Section applies to local governments for fiscal years beginning on or after January 1, 2009. Earlier adoption is encouraged. This Section is currently applicable to senior levels of government. PS 2700 Segment Disclosures This Section establishes standards on how to define, identify and disclose segments in a government's summary financial statements. In providing segment disclosures, it is important that the definition of a segment is met, the objectives for segment disclosures are satisfied and an appropriate basis of segmentation is chosen. As a starting point, the standard suggests that major classifications of activities used in creating, presenting or managing budget information may be used to identify segments; however, professional judgment should be applied. The Section also addresses how to attribute items to the identified segments, how to account for and disclose changes in segmentation bases, as well as, changes in accounting policies. The Section specifies both the required and desired segment disclosures in a government's financial statements. As a minimum, the notes or schedules to the financial statements for each government segment must include: The basis for identifying segments, the nature of the segments, the activities they encompass and the method of significant allocations to segments; Segment expense by major object or category; Segment revenue by source and type; Aggregate net surplus /deficit of government business enterprises and government business partnerships accounted for under the modified equity method for each segment, if applicable; Aggregate net surplus /deficit of government organizations accounted for under the modified equity basis in accordance with PS 1300.47, if applicable; and A reconciliation between the information disclosed for the segments and the consolidated information in the summary financial statements. 79 The standard applies to the summary financial statements of federal, provincial, territorial and local governments for fiscal years beginning on or after April 1, 2007, although earlier adoption is encouraged. PS 1300 Government Reporting Entity Section PS 1300 defines the scope of the government reporting entity in terms of organizations that would be included and recommends how to account for those organizations. A government reporting entity would be comprised of organizations that are controlled by the government. The Section provides a listing of indicators to assist in the determination of whether control exists. The government reporting entity should be consolidated, except for government business enterprises. The Section provides the characteristics to be considered in determining if an entity is a government business enterprise. Once an entity is determined to be a government business enterprise, it should be accounted for by the modified equity method. The Section states that portfolio investments should be accounted for by the cost method and that trusts administered by a government or government organization should be excluded from the government reporting entity (but requires note disclosure). This Section applies for all fiscal years beginning on or after April 1, 2005. Transitional provisions allow governments to choose whether they will include a government organization on a modified equity basis in the financial statements of the government reporting entity, rather than fully consolidating, providing that the government organization was not previously consolidated and it has all of the following characteristics: the government organization is a separate legal entity with the power to contract in its own name and that can sue and be sued; • the government organization has the financial and operational authority to provide a government service within a defined service area; • there is a governance framework of appointed or elected local board representatives from the defined service area; and • there are significant restrictions on the governments ability to access assets If the above criteria are met, a modified equity basis, as opposed to full consolidation is permitted from the date of initial application until fiscal years beginning on or after April 1, 2008. For fiscal years that commence on or after April 1, 2008, a government must fully consolidate the government organizations. Earlier adoption of this Section is encouraged. A decision tree is included in Appendix A of the Section, to assist in applying the transitional provisions. 80 PS 1150 Generally Accepted Accounting Principles This Section significantly affects how all levels of government select their accounting policies. It is intended to clarify: What constitutes GAAP for the public sector; \\hat are the primary sources of GAAP for governments and those organizations that consider the Accounting Recommendations of the Handbook to be the most appropriate to their objectives and circumstances; That if the basis of accounting used to prepare financial statements in accordance with regulatory, legislative or contractual requirements conflicts with the requirement of this Section, that basis cannot be described as being in accordance with GAAP; and \\hat criteria must be satisfied in determining an "other source of GAAP" when there is no primary source of GAP available. Other key points noted in the Section: Removal of industry practice as a primary source of GAAP; Replaces PS 1200.014 and PS 1700.44; Closely resembles CICA 1100; and Italicized Recommendations and non - italicized paragraphs have equal authority. The standard is applicable to all governments for fiscal years beginning on or after April 1, 2005, excluding certain local governments currently required by legislation or regulation to prepare their financial statements in accordance with a basis of accounting other than GAAP. Transitional provisions deferred the application of this standard to fiscal years beginning on or after April 1, 2006 for those local governments. Earlier adoption is encouraged. PS 2130 Measurement Uncertainty This Section establishes disclosure standards when there is measurement uncertainty arising from items recognized or disclosed in financial statements. The disclosure standards in this Section supplement the standards in other Sections CICA 3855 Financial Instruments: Recognition and measurement This standard establishes standards for recognizing and measuring financial assets, financial liabilities and non - financial derivatives. The standard is based on four fundamental cornerstones: • financial instruments and non - financial derivatives represent rights or obligations that meet the definitions of assets or liabilities and should be reported in financial statements; • fair value is the most relevant measure for financial instruments and the only relevant measure for derivative financial instruments; • only items that are assets or liabilities should be reported as such in financial statements; and 81 • special accounting for items designated as being part of a hedging relationship should be provided only for qualifying items. The standard requires that financial assets and financial liabilities be recognized when, and only when, the entity becomes a party to the contractual provisions of the financial instrument or non - financial derivative contract. The standard requires that all derivative financial instruments within its scope, except for derivatives that are linked to and must be settled by delivery of equity instruments of another entity whose fair value cannot be reliably measured, be measured at fair value, even when they are part of a hedging relationship. The standard requires that all non - derivative financial assets be measured at fair value with the exception of: • loans and receivables and held -to- maturity investments, which should be measured at amortized cost; and • investments in equity instruments that do not have a quoted market price in an active market, which should be measured at cost, other than such instruments that are classified as held for trading. The standard requires that all financial liabilities be measured at fair value when they are classified as held for trading or are derivatives, except for derivatives that are linked to and must be settled by delivery of equity instruments of another entity whose fair value cannot be reliably measured. All other financial liabilities are measured at amortized cost. The standard permits an entity to designate any financial instrument, on initial recognition, as one that it will measure at fair value with gains and losses recognized in net income in the period in which they arise, except for financial instruments whose fair value cannot be reliably measured and financial instruments obtained in a related party transaction that were not classified as held for trading before the transaction. The standard that gains and losses on financial instruments measured at fair value is recognized in net income in the periods in which they arise, with the exception of: • certain gains and losses on financial assets classified as available for sale, which are recognized in other comprehensive income until the financial asset is derecognized or becomes impaired; and • certain financial instruments that are part of a designated hedging relationship, which qualify for special accounting in accordance with HEDGES, Section 3865. The standard will further allow for a differential reporting option. After initial recognition, an entity that qualifies under Section 1300 may elect to measure, available- for -sale financial assets that would otherwise be measured at fair value, other than financial assets that have a quoted market price in an active market or financial assets that are designated and effective hedging instrument. For publicly accountable enterprises and not-fir-profit organizations this standard should be applied for interim and annual financial statements relating to fiscal years beginning on or after October 1, 2006. Earlier adoption permitted only as of the beginning of a fiscal year ending on or after December 31, 2004. Earlier adoption is only acceptable where there are no previously issued interim financial statements within the particular fiscal year. With respect to the implementation dates, earlier adoption is only permitted if all the requirements in Sections 3865 and 130 are also adopted at that time. 82 Pending completion of research into the needs of users of financial reporting by non-publicly accountable enterprises, the standards will become effective for financial statements related to fiscal Pears beginning on or after October 1, 2007. Detailed transition guidance is provided, as well as examples for illustrative purposes. CICA 3865 Hedges This Section establishes standards for when and how hedge accounting may be applied. Hedge accounting is optional. The standard explains that the purpose of hedge accounting is to ensure that counterbalancing gains, losses, revenues and expenses (including the effects of counterbalancing changes in cash flows) are recognized in net income in the same period or periods. The standard clarifies that there are many hedging relationships for which hedge accounting is unnecessary because gains, losses, revenues and expenses on the hedging item and counterbalancing gains, losses, revenues and expenses on the hedged item are recognized in net income in the same period. The standard applies only when an entity chooses to apply hedge accounting. The standard stipulates three criteria for a hedging relationship to qualify for hedge accounting. These criteria are required at the inception of the hedging relationship. The standard requires an entity to disclose its accounting policy for hedging relationships, including its policy for gains and losses on cash flow hedges of anticipated transactions for non - financial assets and non - financial liabilities. It is anticipated that US /Canadian G -\P conflicts may arise in specific circumstances. For publicly accountable enterprises and not-fir-profit organizations this standard should be applied for interim and annual financial statements relating to fiscal years beginning on or after October 1, 2006. Retroactive application is not permitted. Earlier adoption is permitted only as of the beginning of a fiscal year. With respect to the proposed implementation dates, earlier adoption is only permitted if all the requirements in Sections 3855 and 130 are also adopted at that time. Pending completion of research into the needs of users of financial reporting by non-publicly accountable enterprises, the standards will become effective for financial statements related to fiscal years beginning on or after October 1, 2007. Detailed transition guidance is provided, as well as examples for illustrative purposes. CICA 1530 Comprehensive Income Section 130 establishes standards for the reporting and display of comprehensive income. This section does not address issues of recognition or measurement for comprehensive income and its components. The standard requires an enterprise to present comprehensive income and its components in a financial statement with the same prominence as other financial statements that constitute a complete set of financial statements. 83 For publicly accountable enterprises and not-fir-profit organizations this standard should be applied for interim and annual financial statements relating to fiscal years beginning on or after October 1, 2006. Earlier adoption permitted only as of the beginning of a fiscal year. With respect to the proposed implementation dates, earlier adoption is only permitted if all the requirements in Sections 3855 and 3865 are also adopted at that time. Pending completion of research into the needs of users of financial reporting by non-publicly accountable enterprises, the standards will become effective for financial statements related to fiscal years beginning on or after October 1, 2007. \Then comparative statements are provided for earlier periods, those financial statements are restated to reflect application of this Section only for the following items: • foreign currency translation of self - sustaining foreign operations; • appraisal increase credits; and, • donations from non - owners, unless this is impractical. CICA 3863 Financial Instruments — Presentation Section 3862 replaces the disclosure requirements of Section 3861, Finan &ZalInstruments — Disclosure and Presentation, and converges with IFRS 7. Section 3862, consistent with Section 3861, is based on the fundamental principle that entities should provide disclosures in their financial statements that enable users to evaluate the significance of financial instruments for the entity's financial position and performance. However, Section 3862 places an increased emphasis on disclosures about risks associated with both recognized and unrecognized financial instruments and how these risks are managed. Section 3863 carries forward unchanged the presentation requirements of Section 3861 (which was based on LAS 32).. These Sections apply to interim and annual financial statements relating to fiscal years beginning on or after October 1, 2007. Entities will be allowed a choice, in the interim, as to whether they these Sections together in place of Section 3861. 84 TERMINATION ON MOTION, the meeting terminated at 10:00 a.m., on Friday, April 27, 2007. David Barrow Chair 85 Brian Denney Secretary- Treasurer THE TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY MEETING OF THE BUSINESS EXCELLENCE ADVISORY BOARD #4/07 June 1, 2007 The Business Excellence Advisory Board Meeting #4/07, was held in the Victoria Room, Black Creek Pioneer Village, on Friday, June 1, 2007. The Chair David Barrow, called the meeting to order at 9:10 a.m.. PRESENT Paul Ainslie Vice Chair David Barrow Chair Rob Ford Member Peter Milczyn Member Gerri Lynn O'Connor Chair, Authority Gino Rosati Member ABSENT Eve Adams Member Bill Fisch Member Ron Moeser Member Maja Prentice Member RES. #C23/07 - MINUTES Moved by: Seconded by: Paul Ainslie Gerri Lynn O'Connor THAT the Minutes of Meeting #3/07, held on April 27, 2007, be approved. CARRIED PRESENTATIONS (a) A presentation by Paul Whittam, Manager of Financial Services, Toronto Zoo, in regard to item 7.1 - Valley Halle Property - Toronto Zoo (b) A presentation by Ron Dewell, Senior Manager, Conservation Lands and Property Services, in regard to the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority Land Acquisition Plan 2007. 86 RES. #C24 /07 - PRESENTATIONS Moved by: Seconded by: Paul Ainslie Gerri Lynn O'Connor THAT above -noted presentation (a) be heard and received. CARRIED RES. #C25 /07 - PRESENTATIONS Moved by: Seconded by: Paul Ainslie Rob Ford THAT above -noted presentation (b) be heard and received. CARRIED SECTION I - ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY ACTION RES. #C26 /07 - VALLEY HALLA PROPERTY - TORONTO ZOO Lease Agreement with Liberty Entertainment Group Inc. for the restoration, operation and maintenance of the Valley Halla Property - Toronto Zoo, CFN 35903. Receipt of a request from the Board of Management of the Toronto Zoo for approval from Toronto and Region Conservation Authority to enter into a lease with Liberty Entertainment Group Inc. for the restoration, operation and maintenance of an event /function space, and health and wellness centre, at the Valley Halla property - Toronto Zoo, Rouge River watershed. Moved by: Seconded by: Paul Ainslie Gerri Lynn O'Connor THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT WHEREAS the Board of Management of the Toronto Zoo manages certain Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) lands including the Valley Halla property pursuant to an agreement between TRCA and the City of Toronto dated April 28, 1978; WHEREAS TRCA is in receipt of a request from the Board of Management of the Toronto Zoo, for approval from TRCA, to enter into a lease with the Liberty Entertainment Group Inc. for the Valley Halla Property; AND WHEREAS it is in the opinion of TRCA that it is in the best interest of TRCA in furthering its objectives, as set out in Section 20 of the Conservation Authorities Act, to enter into the subject lease in this instance; 87 THEREFORE LET IT BE RESOLVED THAT approval be granted to the Board of Management of the Toronto Zoo, to enter into a lease with Liberty Entertainment Group Inc., for the restoration, operation and maintenance of an event /function space, health and wellness centre subject to the following conditions; 1) the lease be on terms and conditions satisfactory to TRCA staff and solicitors; 2) the lease be subject to the approval of the Board of Management of the Toronto Zoo; THAT the restoration and adaptive use plan will generally follow the Liberty Entertainment Group Inc., Valley Halla Business proposal RFP #39 (2005 -11); THAT the said lease be subject to obtaining approval of the Minister of Natural Resources in accordance with Section 21(2) of the Conservation Authorities Act, R.S.O. 1990, C.27, as amended, if required; THAT The Rouge Park Alliance be so advised; AND FURTHER THAT appropriate TRCA officials be authorized and directed to take all necessary action to implement the lease including the signing and execution of documents. CARRIED BACKGROUND In April 28, 1978, the Board of Management of the Toronto Zoo entered into an agreement with TRCA to use certain lands for the operation and maintenance of the Toronto Zoo. Included in the lands placed under agreement with the Board of Management of the Toronto Zoo was the historically designated property know as Valley Halle. The Valley Halle villa was built by Dr. Robert Jackson in 1936 and has a number of interesting features such as a solarium, a formal garden, stained glass windows, wrought iron fixtures and elaborate interior carvings. It is situated on the east side of Meadowvale Road, south of Old Finch Road and is accessed by a gravel driveway running east from the main entrance to the Toronto Zoo. Valley Halle building is located in the Rouge River valley. It is constructed on the valley floor outside the flood plain as shown on the attached site location map. The building has been used by various organizations over the years, including Rouge Park for offices and has been popular with the film industry. The building has been vacant for a number of years. In 2003 the Toronto Zoo carried out a detailed building audit which included a multi -year maintenance plan. The costs related to the restoration and maintenance of the property was prohibitive for the Toronto Zoo, however, the Toronto Zoo felt there may be a private partnership model that would restore and maintain the property and be financially sustainable. 88 The Toronto Zoo carried out requests for proposals (RFP) in December 2005 for the restoration and adaptive use of the Valley Halle property. TRCA staff had input into the RFP and participated in reviewing the proposals. The Liberty Entertainment Group Inc. was selected and the Toronto Zoo has entered into lease negotiations. The Liberty Entertainment Group Inc. has been involved in a number of high profile historic restorations and adaptive uses in Toronto including the Liberty Grand Entertainment Complex, the Courthouse Market and Rosewater Supper Club. DETAILS OF WORK TO BE DONE TRCA staff and solicitor will work with the Toronto Zoo staff and Liberty Entertainment Group Inc. to finalize the lease. Report prepared by: Ron Dewell, extension 5245 Emails: rdewell @trca.on.ca For Information contact: Ron Dewell, extension 5245 Emails: rdewell @trca.on.ca Date: May 17, 2007 Attachments: 1 89 Attachment 1 VALLEY HALLA PROPERTY - TORONTO ZOO Lease Agreement with Liberty Entertainment Group Inc- for the restoration. operation and maintenance of the Valley Halle Property - Toronto Zoo TORONTO ZOO for The Living City 7 TRCA LANDS littlage LICENCE AREA II II °` t' , , /A '. 90 RES. #C27/07 - ENERLIFE CONSULTING INC. Agreement with Toronto and Region Conservation Authority. Recommending approval of an agreement between Toronto and Region Conservation Authority and Enerlife Consulting Inc. for the ongoing delivery and development of The Living City programs, specifically; Mayors' Megawatt Challenge, Greening Health Care; Sustainable Schools; Home Energy Clinic and the Community Scorecard. Moved by: Seconded by: Gino Rosati Peter Milczyn THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT approval be granted for Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) to enter into a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with Enerlife Consulting Inc. for the development and delivery of key programs for The Living City, including Mayors' Megawatt Challenge, Greening Health Care, Sustainable Schools, Home Energy Clinic and the Community Scorecard; THAT appropriate TRCA officials be authorized and directed to take whatever action may be required to give effect thereto including the signing of documents; AND FURTHER THAT staff be directed to report back to the Authority on an annual basis, with an update on the status of the business relationship. CARRIED BACKGROUND The business relationship with Enerlife Consulting Inc. was initiated in 2002 when they were retained to assist with The Living City Centre program, including the Kortright Building Assessment. At Authority Meeting #8/02, held on September 27, 2002, Resolution #A223/02, was approved as follows: THAT Enerlife Consulting be hired to complete project management services in accordance with Phase l of their proposal within 2002 to support the realization of The Living City Centre, at a cost of $56,610; AND FURTHER THAT Enerlife be contracted to complete the full proposal in 2003 at a total cost of approximately $135,000, subsequent to the satisfactory completion of Phase l and the availability of funding in 2003. Since that time, Enerlife Consulting Inc. has continued to work closely with TRCA staff in the development and delivery of 5 key Living City programs, including Mayors' Megawatt Challenge, Greening Health Care, Sustainable Schools, Home Energy Clinic and the Community Score Card, which are outlined further below. MAYORS' MEGAWATT CHALLENGE The Mayors' Megawatt Challenge brings municipalities together to improve energy efficiency and environmental management in their own buildings. In the program, municipalities are able to benchmark performance with their peers and share best practices. Through the Mayors' Megawatt Challenge, municipalities also demonstrate leadership, inspiring other organizations and individuals to take action toward healthier, more sustainable communities. 91 GREENING HEALTH CARE Greening Health Care helps hospitals work together to improve the efficiency of their energy and water use and reduce their generation of solid waste. Their actions reduce costs, contribute to the health and well -being of communities and demonstrate commitment by the health care sector to fiscal and environmental responsibility. SUSTAINABLE SCHOOLS Sustainable Schools is a program which identifies and evaluates best practices in green design, commissioning and operations and helps school boards take action to improve the energy and environmental performance of their new and recently -built schools. As well, Sustainable Schools helps governments and utility companies meet their energy efficiency and environmental goals. They, in turn, provide funding to support the design and operation of energy efficient schools, while the benefits are shared by all. HOME ENERGY CLINIC The Home Energy Clinic is designed to provide a complete solution to help homeowners deal with the volumes of information, opinions and incentives available to them when considering improvements to the energy efficiency of their homes. The on -line tool provides them with what they need to find out about the current energy efficiency of their house, book an EnerGuide for Houses audit, purchase what they need to implement improvements, learn how to perform the work and apply for their incentive payments. COMMUNITY SCORECARD The Community Scorecard reports on the residential energy use of municipalities and neighbourhoods to encourage energy conservation action at the community level, engage and inform homebuilders to improve the energy efficiency of houses and support the adoption of the Home Energy Clinic. RATIONALE TRCA has worked closely with Enerlife Consulting Inc. to develop new programs, raise funds, initiate pilot projects and deliver new programs. Through the programs developed in partnership with Enerlife Consulting Inc., TRCA has been successful in engaging more than 13 municipalities, nearly 30 hospitals and 4 major school boards in these programs of The Living City. These programs are one of the key areas where the TRCA is active in mitigating the impact of climate change through participant reductions in energy and water use. The programs identified in the MOU and the associated outcomes of more efficient energy and water use and resultant reductions in greenhouse gas emissions support TRCA's efforts to achieve The Living City vision for the Toronto region. The success of the initiatives outlined above and included in the MOU is dependant on the relationships that TRCA has with our municipal partners, school boards and hospitals, while Enerlife Consulting Inc. has the technical expertise needed to develop the tools and advise the participants on strategies and techniques for effective energy benchmarking and conservation. Together we have developed programs that neither TRCA nor Enerlife alone could undertake. 92 FINANCIAL DETAILS The programs are designed to be funded through a combination of membership fees, grants and sponsorships. The MOU will be worded such that Enerlife Consulting Inc.'s billing cannot exceed 5/6 of revenue when the funds raised do not achieve the budgeted amount, thus effectively limiting TRCA's financial risk. The MOU confirms that the databases and analysis tools developed by Enerlife remain the property of Enerlife but are available to TRCA to satisfy any obligations of TRCA to meet the expectations of our municipal and other clients. The MOU also provides for a small portion of any revenues obtained by Enerlife for services provided in other jurisdictions, but utilizing the programs developed with TRCA, to be paid to TRCA. Enerlife's billing for development and delivery activities on these projects was approximately $400,000 in 2006 and is expected to increase to between $500,000 and $600,000 in 2007 and $800,000 in 2008, as the programs expand across Ontario and revenue grows proportionately. DETAILS OF WORK TO BE DONE Staff is completing negotiations of a MOU with Enerlife Consulting Inc. to clarify respective responsibilities and formalize funding relationships. Report prepared by: Bernie McIntyre, extension 5326 Email: bmcintyre @trca.on.ca For Information contact: Bernie McIntyre, extension 5326 Email: bmcintyre @trca.on.ca Date: May 23, 2007 RES. #C28/07 - SMARTCENTRES Memorandum of Understanding. Authorization for staff to negotiate a Memorandum of Understanding with SmartCentres for sponsorship in support of the Greening Retail program. Moved by: Seconded by: Gino Rosati Peter Milczyn THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT staff be directed to negotiate a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with SmartCentres to become a major sponsor of the Greening Retail program; THAT the final terms and conditions of the MOU be satisfactory to Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) staff and solicitors; 93 AND FURTHER THAT TRCA designated signing officers be authorized and directed to take such action as is necessary to execute the MOU including obtaining all necessary approvals and signing of documents. CARRIED BACKGROUND At Authority Meeting #3/06, held on April 28, 2006, Resolution #A86/06 was approved as follows: THAT staff pursue funding and partnership opportunities in order to develop and implement a new program of The Living City that engages the retail sector in sustainable practices and technologies. Greening Retail is a new program of The Living City focused on making the best environmental practices of leaders in the retail sector common practice for all retailers. In Phase I of the program the premise for the Greening Retail program was confirmed that doing the right thing for the environment can also be good for the bottom line. In Phase 11, staff plan to undertake interviews with leading retailers to document the strategies, tactics and tools they use to successfully implement environmental best practices. In Phase III, staff will disseminate the results of Phase 11 and undertake pilot projects to illustrate what can be achieved. SmartCentres is a private real estate development company that has, over the last 13 years, developed over 175 shopping centres across Canada. SmartCentres has made a commitment to be a leader in the development of green shopping centres and is working closely with many agencies and organizations to achieve that goal. RATIONALE SmartCentres is a leader in the retail development industry and has made a commitment to sustainable practices and technologies. SmartCentre's financial support for the Greening Retail program and its contacts with most of the national retailers in Canada make it a strong partner to help make the program a success. DETAILS OF WORK TO BE DONE SmartCentres has indicated its desire to become a founding sponsor of the Greening Retail study. Staff is in the process of developing a MOU with SmartCentres to clarify respective responsibilities and formalize the relationship. Staff will report back to the board on the outcome of the negotiations. FINANCIAL DETAILS The total cost to complete Phase II of the Greening Retail program is $180,000. Environment Canada has provided $25,000 and it is anticipated that SmartCentres will provide the remaining $155,000 required to complete the Phase II study. Report prepared by: Bernie McIntyre, extension 5326 Email: bmcintyre @trca.on.ca For Information contact: Bernie McIntyre, extension 5326 Email: bmcintyre @trca.on.ca Date: May 23, 2007 94 RE0.#[29/O - TORONTO REGIONAL CENTRE OF EXPERTISE ON EDUCATION FOR SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT, UNITED NATIONS UNIVERSITY Memorandum of Understanding. Recommendation to enter into a Memorandum of Understanding with the City of Toronto and other organizations and institutions to participate in the governance and activities of the Toronto Regional Centre of Expertise. Moved by: Seconded by: Gerri Lynn O'Connor Rob Ford WHEREAS in March 2005, the Mayor of the City of Toronto wrote to the United Nations University requesting that the City of Toronto be included in an international network of Regional Centres of Expertise on Education for Sustainable Development; WHEREAS Toronto received this recognition in May 2005; WHEREAS the Toronto Environment Office has since worked locally to build a network of education for sustainable development (ESD) stakeholders to form a Steering Committee for the Toronto Regional Centre of Expertise on Education for Sustainable Development (Toronto RCE); WHEREAS Toronto's RCE aims to strengthen communication, coordination and collaboration among ESD stakeholders in the Toronto region; WHEREAS the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority is committed to education for sustainable development pursuant to its strategic plan, The Living City; AND WHEREAS the Toronto RCE initiative supports the work and partnerships of the TRCA in education for sustainable development; THEREFORE LET IT BE RESOLVED THAT THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT TRCA enter into a Memorandum of Understanding with the City of Toronto and other committed organizations and institutions (which as of May 2007 include the founding members of the Toronto Fl[>E, being the University of Toronto, York University, Seneca College, Toronto District School Board, Citizens' Environment Watch, Environment Canada, Education Alliance for a Sustainable Ontario, and Toronto Zoo) to participate in the governance and activities of the Toronto RCE for a term of two years; THAT the Memorandum of Understanding not obligate the TRCA to provide any direct financial contribution to the Toronto RCE; THAT the TRCA's Senior Manager, Eduoetion, or such position as TRCA may deoide, be named as the TRCA representative on the Toronto RCE Steering Committee; 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 95 BACKGROUND In the spring of 2004, the United Nations General Assembly passed a resolution marking 2005 -2014 as the International Decade for Education for Sustainable Development. As a result, the United Nations University (UNU) proposed establishing Regional Centres of Expertise on Education for Sustainable Development (RCEs) throughout the globe. The RCEs are intended to be a forum for strengthening local and international collaboration on education for sustainable development. In 2005, the opportunity to apply for status as an RCE was brought to the City by the Toronto Zoo. The Mayor of the City of Toronto subsequently wrote to the UNU requesting that Toronto be considered as a site for an RCE. As a result, Toronto was selected as one of seven RCEs. Since that time, the international network has grown to include thirty -five RCEs, including the province of Saskatchewan and Sudbury, Ontario, here in Canada. In April 2006, City of Toronto staff convened a meeting of major educational institutions (i.e., school boards, universities and colleges) and major social, environmental, and economic stakeholder groups to inform them about the International Decade for Education for Sustainable Development, and the intention to establish a RCE in Toronto. In subsequent follow -up meetings, the details of a Memorandum of Understanding as well as project ideas for the Toronto RCE were developed. As of May, 2007, the following organizations and institutions have agreed to participate in the governance and activities of the Toronto RCE and, subject to approvals, will be signing the Memorandum of Understanding: • City of Toronto • University of Toronto • York University • Seneca College • Toronto District School Board • Citizens' Environment Watch • Environment Canada • Education Alliance for a Sustainable Ontario • Toronto Zoo • Toronto and Region Conservation Authority RATIONALE The Memorandum of Understanding represents a significant milestone in the development of the Toronto RCE. It represents the first time a group of institutional, governmental, and non - governmental stakeholders in Toronto have come together to take a coordinated approach to education for sustainable development. In the context of the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority's (TRCA's) The Living City strategic plan and communication, outreach and education programs, the Toronto RCE provides the opportunity to secure expert advice and support in disseminating information about environmental issues, and in encouraging watershed citizens to adjust their lifestyles to include more sustainable behaviours. By participating in the Toronto RCE Steering Committee, TRCA will continue to demonstrate that it is a leader - both locally and internationally - on environmental sustainability issues. 96 PROVISIONS OF THE MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING (MOU) • The MOU provides that the Toronto RCE be governed by a steering committee, made up of one representative from each of the ten founding parties, and makes provision for the addition of membership on the steering committee up to a maximum representation of twenty organizations /institutions. • The steering committee will provide the overall direction for Toronto RCE activities and makes provision for the establishment of working groups to assist in approved activities and projects. • Each party will devote such time, attention and ability as may be necessary to operate the Toronto RCE. • The City of Toronto Environment Office will provide Secretariat functions for the Toronto RCE. • Liability and indemnification is addressed, including that each party be liable for its own costs and expenses in connection with the Toronto RCE 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 the Toronto RCE 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 continues for two years. 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 Email: rjarrett@trca.on.ca For Information contact: Renee Jarrett, extension 5315 Email: rjarrett@trca.on.ca Date: May 30, 2007 SECTION IV - RES. #C30/07 - Moved by: Seconded by: ITEMS FOR THE INFORMATION OF THE BOARD VEHICLE AND EQUIPMENT POOL Summary of vehicle and equipment management program. Rob Ford Paul Ainslie THAT the report dated May 17, 2007 on the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) Vehicle and Equipment Pool be received. CARRIED BACKGROUND At the Business Excellence Advisory Board Meeting #3/07, held on April 27,2007, the members requested a report on the status of TRCA's fleet of vehicles. 97 RATIONALE Attached is a list of Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) vehicles, marine and heavy equipment. The types of vehicles and equipment are reflective of the varied business operations of TRCA. The type of vehicle or piece of equipment being purchased is determined by analysis of the needs of the section /division including the use being made of the vehicle and equipment, fuel economy, safety rating and reliability. When replacement of a vehicle and item of equipment is necessary, staff review the needs and requirements of the division or section using that vehicle or piece of equipment prior to purchase to determine if there have been operational or other changes that would require a different type of vehicle or piece of equipment and to ensure TRCA takes advantage of technological changes. When a vehicle is purchased, it is assigned a chargeback rate per kilometre. This chargeback rate is set to cover the future replacement cost of the type of particular vehicle, licensing, insurance, fuel and maintenance costs. The kilometre chargeback cost is also based on the use of the vehicle and its expected life cycle. Each piece of equipment is assigned either an hourly or a yearly chargeback rate. The chargeback rate is sufficient to cover the on -going maintenance of the equipment, fuel, insurance, licensing and its eventual replacement. Where the equipment is assigned to a particular section for that section's exclusive use, a yearly rate is determined and budgeted for as part of the section's annual budget and work plan. Hourly rates are used when the piece of equipment may be shared across different operating units. The costs of vehicles are tracked using the services of ARI Financial Services Inc.. Each time a vehicle is fueled and serviced at a service facility, it is recorded and monitored by ARI. Each month a report is sent to TRCA documenting all costs to the vehicles. Staff in the Finance and Business Services section can also monitor the use of the ARI fuel and maintenance cards using an internet based system. TRCA staff review and approve the invoice for each month prior to payment. Most vehicles are 'assigned' to TRCA staff who submit a vehicle usage report each month. The vehicle usage report details how the vehicle was used, distance travelled and any servicing or occurrences. Account codes are assigned to the division /section to pay for chargeback costs of the vehicle. This information enables staff in the Finance and Business Services to monitor vehicle usage as part of TRCA's internal financial management system. Attached is a copy of TRCA's Vehicle /Equipment Usage Report (Attachment 2). TRCA maintains a 'pool' of vehicles and light trucks which can be signed out daily for staff who need to travel on TRCA business. Through the TRCA sustainable management systems program, staff has introduced smaller, more efficient vehicles to reduce the environmental impact of the fleet (e.g. 4 hybrid vehicles). The fleet also includes two bicycles. During the service life of the vehicle or piece of equipment the rates are monitored and adjusted to reflect the inflationary increases and use of the unit. The replacement of the vehicle or equipment varies by the type and use of the unit. When a unit has reached the end of its lifecycle it is sold at a public auction. 98 To obtain optimum use of the vehicles and equipment, the vehicles are transferred within the various work locations as seasonal needs and demands vary. During the peak work periods in the year, TRCA uses short term rental vehicles. This is usually necessary during the summer months. The rental vehicles are returned to the rental company promptly when the work is completed. TRCA has negotiated favourable rental rates with several local suppliers. Vehicles are serviced at local maintenance centres that accept the ARI Fuel and Maintenance cards. The mechanic or service manager must call the ARI call centre and obtain approval prior to carrying out any repairs or service to the vehicle. The ARI call centre is staffed with licensed mechanics that are trained and knowledgeable about manufacturers warranties and rebates. The Coordinator, Asset Management (Water and Fleet) must approve any major repairs to the vehicles. The heavy and marine equipment is serviced at local dealers and the repairs are approved by the Coordinator, Asset Management (Water and Fleet) and the supervisor in charge of that particular piece of equipment. TRCA staff carry out the daily checks and maintenance of the heavy and marine equipment. All staff who drive TRCA vehicles must have a valid Ontario drivers licence and attend a driver training program prior to driving a vehicle. An abstract of each employee's driving record is obtained from the Ontario Ministry of Transportation prior to being allowed to drive a TRCA vehicle. In the driving training program, staff is trained in the proper use of the ARI Fuel and Maintenance cards, completing the vehicle /equipment usage report and carrying out a circle check of the vehicle each time the vehicle is driven. Staff is also trained in the proper procedures in the case of a collision. Each year, TRCA sends a list of the staff permitted to drive TRCA vehicles to TRCA's insurance company. Staff at particular work locations are trained by supervisors on each piece of equipment prior to being allowed to operate it. Outside training personal are retained when certain accreditation is necessary to operate a particular piece of equipment. FINANCIAL DETAILS The vehicle and equipment reserve fund is used to pay the cost of replacing vehicles or pieces of equipment. Occasionally, additional vehicles or pieces of equipment are acquired to meet new workload needs. The reserve is used to pay for the initial costs of these 'new' vehicles or equipment if there is insufficient funding in the program. Once in the pool, the chargeback system ensures that there will be sufficient funds for the eventual replacement of each vehicle or piece of equipment. Divisions /sections include the chargeback costs in their annual budget. At December 31, 2006, the vehicle and equipment reserve was $340,302. 99 Insurance for vehicles and equipment is provided as part of a pooling arrangement among all Ontario conservation authorities. The rate for individual light trucks and vehicles averages about $600 per year. Report prepared by: Jim Tucker, extension 5247 Email: jtucker @trca.on.ca For Information contact: Jim Tucker, extension 5247 Email: jtucker @trca.on.ca Date: May 17, 2007 Attachments: 3 100 Attachment 1 TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION VEHICLES VEHICLE NO. LOCATION YEAR MAKE STYLE 1 -05-02 RESTORATION SERVICES ENGINEERING PROJECTS 2005 CHEV 1/2 TON PICKUP TRUCK 1 -00-03 PARKS AND CULTURE ALBION HILLS CA 2000 CHEV 4 DOOR SEDAN CAR 4-02-04 DOWNSVIEW OFFICE POOL VEHICLE 2002 FORD COMPACT EXT CAB PICKUP 1 -07 -05 FINANCE AND DEVELOPMENT ASSET MANAGEMENT 2007 GMC 1 TON SERVICE VAN 2 -02-06 FINANCE AND DEVELOPMENT ASSET MANAGEMENT 2002 GMC 1 TON SERVICE VAN 2 -03 -07 FINANCE AND DEVELOPMENT ASSET MANAGEMENT 2003 CHEV 1 TON SERVICE VAN 8-00-08 RESTORATION SERVICES RESOURCE MANAGEMENT 2000 GMC 3TON STAKE TRUCK 4-04-09 ECOLOGICAL WATER RESOURCES 2004 DODGE QUAD CAB 4X4 TRUCK 7 -00 -10 PARKS AND CULTURE BRUCES MILL CA 2000 FORD 1 TON STAKE TRUCK 4 -03 -11 PARKS AND CULTURE KORTRIGHT CENTRE 2003 FORD COMPACT EXT.CAB PICKUP 5 -00 -12 RESTORATION SERVICES ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING 2000 DODGE QUAD CAB PICKUP 5 -05 -13 PARKS AND CULTURE BOYD OFFICE POOL VEHICLE 2005 FORD MIDSIZE SUV 7 -01 -14 PARKS AND CULTURE ALBION HILLS CA 2001 CHEV 1 TON STAKE TRUCK 5 -05 -15 RESTORATION SERVICES RESOURCE MANAGEMENT 2005 CHEV 1 /2TON EXT.CAB PICKUP 6 -05 -16 RESTORATION SERVICES RESOURCE MANAGEMENT 2005 FORD 1 TON CREW CAB 8 -02 -17 RESTORATION SERVICES RESOURCE MANAGEMENT 2002 INTERN 5TON STAKE TRUCK 6 -04 -18 RESTORATION SERVICES - ENGINEERING PROJECTS 2004 FORD 1 TON STAKE TRUCK 2 -06 -20 FINANCE AND DEVELOPMENT ASSET MANAGEMENT 2006 GMC 1 TON STAKE TRUCK 2 -06 -21 FINANCE AND DEVELOPMENT ASSET MANAGEMENT 2006 FORD UNICELL BODY VAN 1-05- ECOLOGY SERVICES WATER MANAGEMENT 2005 CHEV 1/2 T EXT CAP PICKUP TRUCK 1 -07 -24 HEAD OFFICE POOL VEHICLE 2007 TOYOTA HYBRID 4 DOOR CAR 1 -01 -25 HEAD OFFICE POOL VEHICLE 2001 NISSAN COMPACT 4 DOOR CAR 4 -05 -26 WATERSHED MANAGEMENT EDUCATION 2005 NISSAN EXTEND CAB PICKUP TRUCK 1 -01 -27 PARKS AND CULTURE ALBION HILLS CA 2001 CHEV 8 PASSENGER VAN 2 -02 -28 RESTORATION SERVICES-ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING 2002 FORD 3/4 TON CREW CAB TRUCK 1 -05 -29 DOWNSVIEW OFFICE POOL VEHICLE 2005 CHEV SMALL STATION WAGON CAR 1-03-30 HEAD OFFICE POOL VEHICLE 2003 HONDA HYBRID 4 DOOR CAR 4-02-31 PARKS AND CULTURE BLACK CREEK PIONEER VILLAGE 2002 CHEV 1/2 T EXTCAB PICKUP TRUCK 6-03-32 PARKS AND CULTURE GLEN HAFFY CA 2003 CHEV 1 TON STAKE TRUCK 4-06-33 RESTORATION SERVICES ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING 2006 CHEV PASSENGER VAN 6-03-34 PARKS AND CULTURE ALBION HILLS CA 2003 CHEV 1 TON STAKE TRUCK 1-06-35 DOWNSVIEW OFFICE POOL VEHICLE 2006 DODGE MINI VAN 2 -0336 PARKS AND CULTURE BLACK CREEK PIONEER VILLAGE 2003 DODGE MINI CARGO VAN 6-05-37 PARKS AND CULTURE PETTICOAT CREEK CA 2005 GMC 1 TON STAKE TRUCK 4-08-38 RESTORATION SERVICES RESOURCE MANAGEMENT 2008 FORD 1 TON CREW CAB TRUCK 5-00-39 RESTORATION SERVICES. RESOURCE MANAGEMENT 2000 GMC 3/4T CREW CAB TRUCK 5 -05-40 RESTORATION SERVICES ENGINEERING PROJECTS 2005 CHEV 3/4T CREW CAB TRUCK 1 -06-41 RESTORATION SERVICES ENGINEERING PROJECTS 2006 NISSAN MID SIZE SUB 6 -05-42 PARKS AND CULTURE HEART LAKE CA 2005 CHEV 1 TON STAKE TRUCK 1 -05-43 HEAD OFFICE POOL VEHICLE 2005 CHEV SMALL STATION WAGON 4 -97-44 RESTORATION SERVICES - RESOURCE MANAGEMENT 1997 FORD 3/4T CREW CAB TRUCK 6 -07-45 RESTORATION SERVICES ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING 2007 FORD 1 TON CREW CABTRUCK 4 -98-46 PARKS AND CULTURE INDIAN LINE CAMPGROUND 1998 CHEV 1/2 T EXT CAB PICKUP TRUCK 4 -98-47 PARKS AND CULTURE ALBION HILLS CA 1998 FORD COMPACT EXT CAB TRUCK 1 -98-48 PARKS AND CULTURE INDIAN LINE CAMPGROUND 1998 CHEV MID SIZE SUV 4 -00-49 RESTORATION SERVICES- ENGINEERING PROJECTS 2000 FORD 1/2T EXT CAB PICKUP 2 -05 -50 WATERSHED MANAGEMENT STEWARDSHIP 2005 DODGE MINI CARGO VAN 9-06 -51 PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT ENFORCEMENT 2006 HONDA CREW CAB TRUCK 1 -07 -52 BOYD FIELD OFFICE POOL VEHICLE 2007 HONDA HYBRID 4 DOOR CAR 4 -02 -53 WATER MANAGEMENT STEWARDSHIP 2002 FORD COMPACT EXT CAB TRUCK 9-00 -54 ECOLOGY DIVISION SUSTAINABLE TECHNOLOGIES 2000 FORD MID SIZE SUV 6 -07 -55 PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT ENFORCEMENT 2007 HONDA CREW CAB TRUCK 9-06 -56 PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT ENFORCEMENT 2006 HONDA CREW CAB TRUCK 1 -07 -57 RESTORATION SERVICES ENGINEERING PROJECTS 2007 CHEV 1/2T EXT CAB PICKUP TRUCK 6-07-61 PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT ENFORCEMENT 2007 HONDA CREW CAB TRUCK 101 Equipment # Albion Hills CA TRCA MARINE AND HEAVY EQUIPMENT Description A1001 Tractor Loader Backhoe A2000 Gator Utility Vehicle 6x4 A2003 Outfront Mower 72" A2005 Rear Discharge Mower 62" A3004 Flail Mower 90.5" A8060 Centaur Cross Country Groomer A9000 JD 6x4 Utility Vehicle A8041 Sander A8051 Snowplow for truck Boyd CA B1002 B2001 B2008 B2009 B9000 Bruce's Mill CA Tractor 42hp Loader Outfront Mower 10.5' Outfront Mower 72" JD 4 WD Mower 72" JD Progator Utility Vehicle C1001 Loader Backhoe C2006 JD Outfront Mower C8045 Boss Snow Plow C3009 Groundsmaster 8.5' to 16' C9002 Utility Vehicle 4x2 w/ golf picker C8044 Sander - truck mounted C8050 Spreader /Grader Indian Line Campground D2000 JD Outfront Mower Albion Hills FC F2000 JD Outfront Mower Purchase Equipment Date # 97/10/31 A1000 97/10/30 A1004 00/05/24 A1005 01/07/11 A8000 97/09/04 A9042 05/01/20 A8002 03/05/22 A8044 96/11/15 A8045 01/11/26 A8047 A8048 00/09/28 01/06/11 03/05/27 B1000 04/04/20 03/05/20 96/05/01 01008 05/03/18 96/05/28 98/06/24 99/04/30 00/12/21 96/05/28 03/05/20 102 Description Industrial Loader 4x4 Tractor Tractor Snowmobile Automatic Floor Scrubber Snowmobile Snowblower 47" Double Track Setter Snowplow for truck Bannerman Sand /Salt Sprl Tractor Diesel Diesel Tractor Purchase Date 92/08/21 86/08/29 89/05/25 91/11/29 94/05/30 91/11/29 93/04/01 85/01/16 94/08/19 94/02/07 88/11/29 92/07/08 D1007 Tractor Loader Backhoe 94/06/10 Equipment # Glen Haffy CA F2003 F2004 F9002 Heart Lake CA H5033 H7000 H2O03 H2O04 H9000 H9001 TRCA MARINE AND HEAVY EQUIPMENT Description Outfront Mower Rear Discharge Rotary Mower Gator Utility Vehicle Honda 5 hp Outboard Motor Shorelander Boat Trailer Outfront Mower 4 wd 72" JD Outfront Mower Kubota Utility Vehicle Kubota Utiliiy Vehicle Petticoat Creek CA J3009 J9002 Kortright Centre Flail Mower JD Gator HPX 4x4 K8001 Western Snowplow 8' K8046 Salt /Sand Spreader on truck K8048 Snowblade 54" to loader K8064 Sand /Salt Spreader to loader Kubota Utility Veh 6x4 with cab Kubota 72" Blade Black Creek Pioneer Village L2000 Tractor w /mid mount mower 60" L2002 Tractor w/ Mower RC72 -F24 L8050 Sander L8053 V snowblade 9' L9012 Rotary Brush - L2002 L9013 Kubota Rotary Sweeper L8040 J.D. Snowblower Attachment Purchase Equipment Date # 96/05/02 02/06/11 F3013 96/05/01 F8042 F1003 F1000 05/04/16 01/04/17 01/06/20 03/05/19 04/05/20 04/06/20 H1001 H1002 H3005 J1002 98/07/07 J2001 04/04/19 J2000 J8042 K2002 04/11/11 K9040 01/11/16 K8010 02/01/08 K8045 02/01/08 K8061 06/01/27 06/01/27 00/06/01 L1001 96/05/02 L1003 97/01/27 L3011 01/11/01 L8048 97/11/14 L8052 05/11/08 L8041 00/11/20 103 Description Purchase Date Flail Mower 84/05/03 Snowplow 8' 84/12/10 Industrial Loader with cab 92/08/04 Tractor Loader 4x4 95/05/11 Turf Tractor Tractor Loader Flail Mower 88cc Tractor Loader 340B Outfront Mower 72" Outfront Mower 72" Snowplow 8' tractor moun Outfront Mower 72" Rotary Broom Trail Groomer Snowblower 47" Snowplow 7 front mount Industrial Loader Tractor Flail Mower Sand /Salt Spreader Snowblower McKee 520 Snowblower 94/08/12 88/10/20 95/04/25 85/05/07 93/04/05 95/03/21 94/11/28 95/04/13 88/10/31 93/04/01 88/11/28 89/03/08 92/06/01 87/08/15 87/01/29 88/05/15 TRCA MARINE AND HEAVY EQUIPMENT Equipment Resource Management M 1001 M 1009 M1010 M1011 M1011 M2003 M3028 M3029 M6001 M6002 M6028 M6029 M6045 M6051 M6052 M6053 M6054 M6057 M6058 M6059 M6055 M6056 M9079 M9078 M8103 M9030 M9042 M9048 M9059 M9064 M9075 M9076 Ecology N5001 N5010 Description Tractor 4WD - 60hp 4wd Backhoe Loader Tractor 4x4 , 62 hp w /cab /loader Tractor 4X4 21 HP w /tiller Rototiller M1011 Tractor with 48" mower Chainsaw Chainsaw Chainsaw Chainsaw Chainsaw Chainsaw Chainsaw 14" Chainsaw 16" Chansaw Chainsaw Chainsaw Chainsaw 16" Chainsaw 16" Chainsaw 16" Chainsaw 18" Chainsaw 18" Water Pump Irrigation Traveller, fert. injector Tee Gee Grademaker Tree Planter Rotory Tiller 78" tillage Rototiller 72" Double Disc Honda Generator Compactor Concrete Metal Saw Mercury 20 Hp Outboard Marvac 14 Ft Fibreglass Boat Purchase Equipment Date # 97/10/30 99/03/15 00/10/20 02/03/19 02/03/28 96/05/23 02/04/03 02/04/03 03/01/31 03/01/31 02/04/03 02/04/03 99/02/10 99/02/10 00/02/10 00/03/23 00/03/23 04/01/28 04/01/28 04/01/22 01/03/08 01/03/08 01/07/13 00/05/11 01/08/24 01/03/29 00/05/11 98/05/26 96/04/01 03/07/15 99/02/03 98/11/06 104 M1000 M1006 M1007 M1008 M1020 M3010 M6044 M8040 M8101 M9020 M9080 M9001 M9003 M9043 M9049 M9051 M9050 M9052 Description Scuffler Tractor 4WD w/ cab /load) Tractor 4WD w/ cab Tractor with scuffler Skidsteer Loader Flail Mower 88CC Chai nsaw Snowblower Snowplow - tractor mount Manure Spreader Brush Chipper 935 Seed Bed Lifter Treespade Rototiller - walk behind 3 Furrow Plow Side Diger 24" blade Edegal Side Digger Log Splitter N7001 Boat Trailer N8053 Snowblower Purchase Date 91/05/21 91/08/01 91/10/09 90/05/23 86/04/29 92/01/30 75/06/30 95/10/01 94/07/29 88/03/20 85/03/20 87/08/28 83/04/19 92/10/13 82/11/25 83/03/18 90/04/12 85/11/27 Equipment # Engineer Projects TRCA MARINE AND HEAVY EQUIPMENT Description Purchase Equipment Description Purchase Date # Date P1003 Thomas Skidsteer 02/07/10 P5002 16 FT Starcraft Jon Boat 92/05/14 P5013 50 HP Mercury Outboard 04/08/18 P5020 16 Foot Stanley Aluminum Boat 04/08/18 P7004 EZ Loader Trailer 04/08/18 P5012 5 HP Honda Outboard 04/04/12 Claremont FC R1000 Tractor 32 hp w/ Cab 02/04/15 R3000 72" rear mt rear discharge mower 02/04/15 R8000 Front Blade 60" 02/04/15 R8001 5 cu.ft. sand salt spreader 02/04/15 R8002 Loader with 60" bucket 02/04/15 Planning and Development S9090 Honda ATV 99/09/22 S7000 ATV Trailer 01/03/28 Lake St. George FC T2001 Tractor cab /mower /loader 00/06/08 T5000 16 Foot Sylvan Pontoon E 82/06/08 T8002 Front Blade 54" 00/09/15 T8030 Tufline Sand /Salt Spreader 05/03/05 T5003 12 Foot Lowe Aluminum Boat 06/05/17 T5004 16 Foot Slyvan Aluminum Boat 06/06/06 T5009 Mercury 9.9 HP Outboard Motor 06/01/26 T5008 Mercury 50 HP Outboard Motor 06/06/13 Environmental Monitoring V9000 Kubota Utility Vehicle 04/12/04 V5000 26 FTWorkboat (Agualab) 92/06/23 V5012 16 Foot Crestliner Jon Boat 00/06/26 V5008 10 Foot Utility Boat 95/08/23 V7000 Northtrail Boat Trailer 00/06/26 V5007 4 HP Mercury Outboard 95/06/13 V5017 26 Foot Electrofishing Boat 05/09/26 V5014 115 HP Yamaha Outboard Moto 02/09/24 V5004 15 HP Mercury Outboard 00/05/18 V5015 9 HP Yamaha Outboard 04/08/17 V5016 135 HP Evinrude Outboard 05/07/07 V7003 King Trailer 05/09/26 V5006 15 HP Envinrude Outboard Moto 98/05/26 105 Attachment 2 EQUIP.NEH. No. MAKE /MODEL DRIVER PLEASE PRINT FULL NAME AUTHORIZATION I DETAILS OF TRIP/USE VEHICLE /EQUIPMENT USAGE REPORT PAGE OF Division Area Period Covered S2130N3SSVA AO 2139W(1N FUEL FILL UP W w cc t— J ACCOUNT CODE KM DRIVEN /HOURS USED I i I I I I a ❑ VEHICLE ❑ EQUIPMENT Q CC VJ ❑ 2 Z Y W TOTAL /SUBTOTAL HRS. /KM'S TOTAL USAGE CHARGE g Y w 1— Q O TERMINATION ON MOTION, the meeting terminated at 10:05 a.m., on Friday, June 1, 2007. David Barrow Chair /ks 107 Brian Denney Secretary- Treasurer THE TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY MEETING OF THE BUSINESS EXCELLENCE ADVISORY BOARD #5/07 September 7, 2007 The Business Excellence Advisory Board Meeting #5/07, was held in the South Theatre, Black Creek Pioneer Village, on Friday, September 7, 2007. The Chair David Barrow, called the meeting to order at 9:08 a.m.. PRESENT David Barrow Chair Bill Fisch Member Rob Ford Member Ron Moeser Member Maja Prentice Member Gerri Lynn O'Connor Chair ABSENT Eve Adams Member Paul Ainslie Vice Chair Peter Milczyn Member Gino Rosati Member RES. #C31 /07 - MINUTES Moved by: Seconded by: Rob Ford Ron Moeser THAT the Minutes of Meeting #4/07, held on June 1, 2007, be approved. CARRIED SECTION I - ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY ACTION RES. #C32 /07 - 2008 BUDGET PROCESS AND COST CONTAINMENT ISSUES Advises of the 2008 budget process and responds to the City of Toronto request for consideration of cost containment in 2007 and 2008 Moved by: Seconded by: Ron Moeser Maja Prentice 108 THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT the staff report on the 2008 Budget Process and Cost Containment Issues be received; AND FURTHER THAT the report be circulated to the City of Toronto City Manager. CARRIED BACKGROUND At Authority Meeting #6/07, held on July 27, 2007, Resolution #A163/07 was approved as follows: THAT WHEREAS the City Manager, City of Toronto, has requested that Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) assist the city in dealing with its cost containment requirements and report back to the city by July 31, 2007; AND WHEREAS TRCA has already significantly constrained its 2007 budget while still meeting the needs of all of its municipal funding partners pursuant to the requirements of the Conservation Authorities Act; THEREFORE LET IT BE RESOLVED THAT the Chief Administrative Officer advise the City Manager, City of Toronto, that TRCA will continue to work with city staff to assist the city in dealing with its cost containment program and that TRCA staff will report to the city on possible actions to be taken based on a report and staff recommendations to the TRCA Business Excellence Advisory Board and Authority in September, 2007. At Authority Meeting #3/07, held on April 27, 2007, staff advised the members that a report would be presented to the Business Excellence Advisory Board (BEAB) in September, 2007 on the 2008 budget preparation process and reporting requirements, and changes that need to be put into place to ensure that staff meet the 2008 timelines for reporting to the board. RATIONALE 2008 Budget Process As the board is aware from previous discussions, TRCA's budget reflects funding from a number of different funding sources. About two thirds of the operating budget is self funded from operating revenues including development fees, admissions, food and retail sales. About one third of the operating budget is from four major municipal partners. Each municipal share of the budget is determined by an apportionment process using modified current value assessment. TRCA "levies" each jurisdiction in accordance with the apportionment formula. Having determined the levy, and once approved by the participating municipality, TRCA cannot change the levy for any one jurisdiction without adjusting for all. The regions of Peel, York and Durham and the City of Toronto each have their own requirements for budget submissions and financial reporting. Meeting each jurisdictions requirements within their time frame is an exhaustive process. It is complicated further by the fact that TRCA works with other conservation authorities to coordinate submissions to Peel, York and Durham. Because the municipal share is based on an apportionment formula, TRCA must wait until the last jurisdiction gives its approval before presenting a final budget to the Authority. This usually takes place in April of the current budget year. 109 The budget process begins in the spring of each year when staff meet to determine capital requirements for the following year. Participating municipalities require TRCA capital submissions in July and August. Operating budget preparation also begins in the summer partly to enable TRCA staff to advise participating municipality staff of estimates of the municipal operating levy for the coming year. Staff annually prepare "Preliminary Estimates, Operating and Capital" for submission to the Business Excellence Advisory Board in October. These estimates provide an order of magnitude for discussions with the various funding partners in the case of the operating budget and a list or needed capital works for submission to the partners. Approval of the estimates by the Authority enables staff to present the estimates to the funding partners for consideration. Staff will meet with municipal staff and present the TRCA estimates for the various jurisdictions to the various municipal budget committees. This process usually continues through to the end of March, 2008, enabling staff to finalize the TRCA budget for the April Authority meeting. In 2007, delays at the municipal level, unplanned employee absences in TRCA's finance area and additional work required as a result of the 2006 audit and year end all combined to leave little time for submission to BEAB. In 2008, municipal delays are not expected because in the absence of the municipal election, the approval dates are being advanced. Workload issues in the finance section of TRCA have been addressed by the addition one accounting clerk position. The Director and Controller are working with the auditors to ensure the 2007 work is completed in a timely fashion that does not impact the budget preparation process adversely. Cost Containment Issues The members have the benefit of the July 27, 2007, communication to the Authority, which describes the background to our relationship with the City of Toronto. Briefly, the city was levied for $6.77 million in operating levy. The city divides this about 53% to water reserves and 47% to property taxes so the property tax impact is about $3.2 million. As noted in the report, any adjustment to the city levy requires adjustment to the levies on Peel, York and Durham (as well as the Town of Mono and the Township of Adjala - Tosorontio). Unlike city departments and other city agencies and boards, TRCA does not have access to the city's contingency reserves. TRCA deals with its own financial issues and can legally carry a deficit. TRCA staff is completing a financial progress report as of August 31 for submission to BEAB in October. Preliminary review of expenditures and revenues for 2007 indicate a number of significant pressures: • The 2007 budget provides for fundraising revenue from the Conservation Foundation of $800,000. Estimates are that this will not be achieved. The shortfall could be as much as $500, 000. 110 • Since 2005, TRCA has accrued the value of the conservation land tax exemption for properties TRCA defines as being eligible. The Ministry of Natural Resources (MNR) failed to meet its deadlines for review of TRCA submissions and has arbitrarily decided that TRCA lands are ineligible. This ruling by MNR staff has no appeal route and because of delays, leaves no opportunity for TRCA to appeal to the Municipal Property Assessment Corporation (MPAC). The consequences of MNR's actions is to create a shortfall of about $700,000. TRCA staff has written to the Deputy Minister, MNR in the hopes this can be addressed. Legal action against the ministry is another option. • TRCA revenues from parks and culture, development services and other sources are generally on track to meet year end targets. Tracked against budget expenditures, there will be no significant operating surplus. • TRCA's memorandum of understanding (MOU) for the Remedial Action Plan (RAP) with the Government of Canada expired on March 31, 2007. Negotiations as underway but if the MOU is not renewed there is a potential pressure of $100,000. The 2007 budget is responding to significant growth in demand for services across all participating municipalities. It is difficult to make significant adjustments to the operating budget in the last third of the year when staff is struggling to meet existing service levels. As in the municipal sector, about 70% of TRCA expenditures are related to salary, wages and benefits. TRCA has some flexibility in terms of operational considerations but still faces pressure of competitive labour market conditions. In preparing the 2007 budget, many constraints were already imposed. For example, • TRCA overtime policies limit ability to incur overtime and where overtime is paid it usually relates to programs such as the rental portfolio where staff must respond to emergencies. • As part of its sustainability initiatives, TRCA has in place programs to curtail travel in favour of conference calls and use of car pooling and public transit. The TRCA fleet has been steadily downsized in favour of smaller and in some case hybrid vehicles. • Offices and facilities are covered by TRCA "ecoteams" and programs to reduce heat costs in winter and cooling costs in summer are in place. • Printing and communications activities have already moved significantly away from traditional hard copy to the use of electronic and web -based media. • "Contracting out" is already in place for a variety of services including waste management, printing, legal services, office cleaning, maintenance services, security and construction equipment. • Pooling of health and property insurance needs with Conservation Ontario has created economies of scale; in other cases, TRCA as a "provincial agency" has the benefit of negotiated contracts for services such as courier delivery. • Increased fees have been imposed where appropriate and parking rates at Black Creek Pioneer Village (BCPV) increased significantly. • Staff has in place a variety of funding sources which assist in reducing employment costs through internships, volunteer programs, cooperative programs, etc.. In dealing with the balance of the 2007 fiscal year and the pressures identified, staff has taken the following additional steps: 111 • All vacant positions, whether contract, part -time or full time, must be reviewed and approved by the Chief Administrative Officer (through Directors Committee), prior to being filled. • Overtime, travel and other discretionary costs will be closely monitored by Directors. • Additional efforts will be made to maximize revenue opportunities for the balance of the year. BCPV is perhaps the most significant with its annual Thanksgiving and Christmas programs. • Continue to seek non - tradtional funding sources and employment subsidy programs. • Some discretionary maintenance and equipment replacement expenditures may be deferred until 2008 but this does not achieve real savings particularly since some of this will be from capital funding. SUMMARY TRCA has advised the City of Toronto City Manager of TRCA's limited ability to respond to the request for cost containment in 2007. Again, as noted in the July 27, 2007, Authority communication, TRCA's funding from the city is modest in relation to the city's $7 billion operating program. Accordingly, city staff understand that we will work with them in formulating appropriate 2008 financial plans but there is little we can do of direct benefit in 2007. The more important issue is to meet TRCA's own 2007 budget pressures. Staff will have a complete report for BEAB in October. Report prepared by: Jim Dillane, extension 6292 Emails: jdillane @trca.on.ca For Information contact: Jim Dillane, extension 6292 Emails: jdillane @trca.on.ca Date: August 28, 2007 RES. #C33/07 - PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT PROCEDURAL GUIDE Endorsement of the Planning and Development Procedural Guide to further enhance Toronto and Region Conservation Authority's (TRCA's) working relationship with the development community and increase procedural transparency related to TRCA's development review and approval process. Moved by: Seconded by: Ron Moeser David Barrow THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT WHEREAS Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) staff is committed to working cooperatively with the development community and all municipal partners regarding the implementation of TRCA's planning and regulatory functions, including opportunities to increase procedural transparency and streamline the review and approval process where appropriate; 112 WHEREAS TRCA, through its Business Excellence objective, is committed to improve the delivery of all programs, including TRCA's planning and regulatory functions; THEREFORE LET IT BE RESOLVED THAT the Planning and Development Procedural Guide be endorsed; THAT TRCA staff be given the authority to make any necessary updates to the guide to reflect any procedural issues related to legislative change or technical updates related to current practices; AND FURTHER THAT all member municipalities and the Building Industry and Land Development Association (BILD, formerly GTHBA -UDI) be advised and circulated a copy of the Planning and Development Procedural Guide. CARRIED BACKGROUND Over the past five years there has been an on -going dialogue between TRCA and the development community (developers, consultants and proponents) regarding TRCA's plan review and approval process. As a result of this dialogue, various working groups have been formed between Planning and Development and Ecology staff to address issues related to policy development and interpretation, the preparation of technical guidelines, the practical application of those guidelines and streamlining opportunities. Significant progress has been made in improving TRCA's working relationship with the development community, primarily through the adoption of our technical guidelines and complete application checklists. However, additional opportunities for streamlining and increasing procedural transparency related to TRCA's review and approval process are continually sought. It was through this endeavour that the need to create a Planning and Development Procedural Guide was identified. Staff envisioned a guide that would assist anyone interested in obtaining development approvals from TRCA. The guide is to serve as a comprehensive reference document detailing TRCA's legislative authority, technical requirements, and review and approval procedures. It is to provide guidance for all types of applications, from straightforward, minor applications to complex, large -scale proposals. Furthermore, the guide should appeal to a wide audience, providing useful and relevant information to applicants both familiar with TRCA's processes and novices. As funding and staff time became available, the task of creating the guide was undertaken. Following full participation from both Planning and Development and Ecology staff, the Planning and Development Procedural Guide is complete. It is important to note however, that the guide will need to be updated from time to time to reflect legislative changes and current technical practices. DETAILS OF THE PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT PROCEDURAL GUIDE Structurally, the Planning and Development Procedural Guide is divided into nine sections: Introduction • The intent of the guide and the role of TRCA's Planning and Development Division. 113 Legislative and Policy Framework • A summary of the legislative and policy framework governing TRCA that sets the context for the regulatory and planning decisions and recommendations made. • TRCA's responsibilities as they pertain to the Conservation Authorities Act (including those under Ontario Regulation 166/06, TRCA's "Development, Interference with Wetlands and Alterations to Shorelines and Watercourses" Regulation), the Planning Act (including the Provincial Policy Statement), the Environmental Assessment Acts, as well as other applicable legislation including, but not limited to the Federal Fisheries Act, the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Act and the Greenbelt Act are outlined. Planning Applications • A description of how TRCA carries out its role as a commenting agency under the Planning Act. • Review and approval procedures are presented according to application type, including Official Plan Amendments, Zoning By -law Amendments, Plans of Subdivision, Site Plans, Consents and Minor Variances. • For each application type, the benefits of preliminary consultation are discussed, and the municipal screening and circulation process is outlined, TRCA's review procedures are presented, submission requirements are summarized and the level of service that can be expected is noted. Flowcharts are included to illustrate the various procedures. Environmental Assessments • An outline of TRCA's responsibilities under the Environmental Assessment Act with respect to the Environment Assessment review process. Permit Applications • A summary of TRCA's permitting process. • The areas and activities subject to TRCA's regulations are detailed, the importance of preliminary consultation is highlighted, review and approval procedures are summarized, including how they are affected by the fisheries timing windows set by the Ministry of Natural Resources, submission requirements are presented, the Permission for Minor Works Protocol is explained and TRCA's service delivery standards are noted. A flowchart is included to illustrate the procedures associated with permit applications. • The process associated with denying a permit is outlined and the role of TRCA's Enforcement Officers is described. Other Review Services • A description of the other review services offered by TRCA (i.e. Solicitor Realty Inquiries and Property Inquiries). Checklists and Guidelines • A list of the available checklists and guidelines. Fees • An explanation of the fee schedules adopted for TRCA's planning and permitting services. 114 Appendices • Appendices that provide further information and clarity to the reader, including the checklists and guidelines. • Appendices will be subject to change. For example, following legislative amendments or updated technical practices, the guidelines, which outline information requirements and submission design criteria, will require updating. The format of the guide was modelled after the documents created by TRCA's municipal partners, such as the City of Toronto. DETAILS OF WORK TO BE DONE The guide will be available on TRCA's website for downloading. In addition, TRCA's member municipalities will be notified in writing regarding its adoption and hard copies will be distributed to them. Further, BILD will be advised and a copy of the guide will be circulated to them. CONCLUSION The Planning and Development Procedural Guide will benefit all those seeking development approvals from TRCA. The guide builds on the personal customer service offered through our walk -in service and is an informative resource that provides a comprehensive summary of TRCA's legislative authority, technical requirements and review and approval procedures. This document consolidates all of the guidelines and checklists that have been developed and used operationally by TRCA staff with the development community over the past few years. It is not a policy document, but rather a guidance document for current procedures and practices. The guide will be updated on a periodic basis to reflect new legislative requirements, including the Bill 51 requirements for 'complete applications' that are currently unfolding and updated technical practices. The guide is a helpful document that will further improve working relationships with the development community, and ultimately, the public and member municipalities. Copies of the Planning and Development Procedural Guide will be available at the September 7, 2007 meeting of the Business Excellence Advisory Board. Report prepared by: Robyn McMullen, extension 5687 Email: rmcmullen @trca.on.ca For Information contact: Robyn McMullen, extension 5687 Email: rmcmullen @trca.on.ca Date: August 17, 2007 RES. #C34/07 - DIVERSITY STRATEGY - VISION AND VALUES Adopting the Diversity Strategy - Vision and Values. Moved by: Maja Prentice Seconded by: Bill Fisch 115 THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT the Diversity Strategy - Vision and Values for Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA), outlined in Attachment 1 and as amended by the Business Excellence Advisory Board, be adopted; THAT the Employee Code of Conduct be amended to include the Diversity Strategy - Vision and Values as a Commitment to Diversity and Inclusiveness in Section 2.0; THAT the Random Acts of Recognition policy be amended to include the Diversity Champion Award, outlined in Attachment 2; AND FURTHER THAT the Diversity Strategy - Vision and Values be publicized to TRCA staff and to the general public via the TRCA website. CARRIED BACKGROUND TRCA has increasingly demonstrated its commitment to diversity since 1997 with the creation of multicultural outreach programs such as the Multicultural Environmental Stewardship Program, Environmental Volunteer Network, Professional Access & Integration Enhancement Program, a Diversity Sub - management Committee (Diversity Committee), the position of Supervisor, Outreach and Diversity, by conducting an audit of Human Resources policies and practices, and holding special events such as Multicultural Day. The Diversity Committee, made up of 8 to 10 members, is an advisory group for all employees, to assist in creating an atmosphere of openness and inclusivity among TRCA employees, volunteers and other stakeholders. Tremendous progress has been made in improving TRCA' s accessibility as an organization for diverse staff, volunteers and partners. This work continues under the leadership of Human Resources and the Diversity Committee. RATIONALE The Diversity Strategy - Vision and Values formalizes and publicizes TRCA's commitment to diversity, links it to The Living City vision, and creates a clear focus for staff. By doing so, a consistent, clear commitment and strategy are communicated, increasing buy -in from TRCA staff and other stakeholders. By stating this commitment publicly and by adopting it into TRCA's Employee Code of Conduct and Random Acts of Recognition as outlined in attachments 1 and 2, respectively, TRCA will retain and attract job applicants, volunteers, partners and clients who share our commitment to diversity and The Living City. By making this commitment public, TRCA also increases its accountability on diversity issues, by making it clear where the organization stands on issues of access, inclusiveness, equity and fairness. Having an overall diversity strategy will also focus the work of the Diversity Committee, Human Resources and other staff working on access, equity and diversity issues. Stemming from this strategy, a 5 -year Diversity Plan of Action will be created to outline specific diversity initiatives and deliverables. In this way, a maximum return can be ensured for TRCA's investment in diversity. 116 DETAILS OF WORK TO BE DONE In our efforts to communicate to and engage all TRCA staff, a variety of initiatives will be carried out in stages in the coming months. These initiatives will be incorporated into the Communications and Outreach Strategy under the 5 -Year Diversity Plan of Action. These initiatives include, but are not limited to: • TRCA Internal Blog - a forum where TRCA staff can share experiences, stories, gain support and knowledge, ask questions, learn about each other, etc.. • Lunch and Learns - by holding a series of lunch and learns on diversity - related topics, staff is given the opportunity to learn about diversity in a fun and light- hearted atmosphere. It is anticipated that the speakers at the various lunch and learns will be a combination of internal staff and guest speakers from other organizations. • Looking Through the Eyes Of... - a series of staff perspectives and experiences will be published by internal email to all staff on a weekly basis. This will engage and connect staff, helping them to learn more about each other, their unique perspectives and approaches and their challenges and successes. Stories can be about the experiences of new Canadians, young professionals, women in positions of power, living in under - serviced areas, working with new Canadians, travel, experiencing new cultures, etc.. It is anticipated that eventually every TRCA staff person will submit a story to share with the organization. • Mentorship and Volunteerism - engage more staff to participate in the mentorship and volunteer program. This will provide diverse individuals with experience, guidance and contacts to assist them in gaining employment. To achieve this, the Diversity Committee will develop outreach information packages to explain the process, responsibilities and benefits to becoming involved. • Recognition and Rewards - to recognize internal and external individuals who demonstrate a commitment to diversity in their work and /or day -to -day lives. For example, the Diversity Champion Award in Random Acts of Recognition recognizes individuals who have been active mentors, individuals who work with diverse volunteers, individuals who actively include and outreach to diverse communities, etc.. Publicly celebrating active leaders who are making a difference will encourage and promote positive practices. FINANCIAL DETAILS The details noted above will be carried out in accordance with the $5,000.00 allocated in the annual budget. Report prepared by: Khoa Ly, extension 5582 Emails: kly @trca.on.ca For Information contact: Khoa Ly, extension 5582 Emails: kly @trca.on.ca Date: August 10, 2007 Attachments: 2 117 Attachment 1 Diversity Strategy - Vision and Values Definition The commitment to diversity and inclusiveness where all people, of all backgrounds, genders, generations and abilities work together to preserve and protect the environment in which we live. TRCA envisions a Toronto region where all people work together to preserve and protect the environment in which we live. TRCA staff and volunteers will engage in honest, open, respectful dialogue about engaging all people, including traditionally under - respresented groups, in TRCA's vision and mission for The Living City. TRCA will recognize the importance and value of diverse sets of values, needs and perspectives. Policy TRCA will meet or exceed international and local human rights codes and guidelines and provide regular training to staff on relevant legal issues (ie. rights and responsibilities). Diversity Values: 1. TRCA is an organization that engages diverse staff, board members, volunteers and community stakeholders. TRCA welcomes all people who are committed to our vision for The Living City. 2. TRCA believes that culturally diverse organizations perform better because of that diversity - TRCA believes that valuable wisdom, ideas and energy come from people of all parts of the community. 3. TRCA is a multi - disciplinary organization that respects a diversity of skills and encourages people with varying skills to work together to achieve more. 4. TRCA will be an inclusive organization for all people and all groups of people. 5. TRCA will recognize that some groups of people have been underrepresented in employment within the evironmental sector and will work toward addressing this inequity. 6. TRCA will be conscious of the demographic distribution of diverse groups of people (by gender, ethnic and religious backgrounds, region and nation of origin sexual orientation etc.) throughout the organization. 7. TRCA will respect the religious and cultural customs of its staff, volunteers, board members, partners and other stakeholders and make reasonable efforts to accommodate diverse religious needs in the workplace. 8. TRCA will work to foster and embrace diverse perspectives and understandings to encourage new and other ways of doing work. 9. TRCA will employ, work with and accommodate, in accordance with the labour laws, people of all ages and explore diversity issues openly and honestly. 10. TRCA will work with and accommodate people with diverse abilities and disabilities. 11. TRCA will continuously explore the ways in which people differ, how these identifiers intersect and also explore commonalities that make us human. (For example, ageism and gender bias can intersect and create a particular form of discrimination against older women in the workplace). 118 Attachment 2 Random Acts of Recognition Keeping the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority a great place to work is a goal for us all. People are not only working hard but they are working with kindness and consideration for others on their team. Those "random acts of kindness" is what this recognition program is all about. A simple acknowledgment that person has acted in a way that makes another TRCA employee's job a little easier. The Recognition Awards How do they work? Any employee can nominate someone or team for a recognition award. The nomination form (attached) outlines what the person did and how it was a random act of kindness. The award can be either public or private. The nominator can give the award themselves or have it as a surprise. Victoria will receive the nominations and make sure that the awards are available for the nominated employee. What are the Awards? The awards consist of "tokens" of appreciation that reflect the TRCA values that the employee has shown. The categories include 1. The Good Sport Award. This award is for the person who assisted others without having been asked. 2. The Wise Owl Award This would be for people who have mentored others, helped the new employee etc. 3. The Smile Award This would be for people who lead the team with a positive attitude, gentle suggestions and good humour. 4. The Green Award This would be for the people who are "nurturing" of people, of new ideas and positive communications among the TRCA staff. 5. The Diversity Champion Award The person who is inclusive in their language, their attitude and their activities. Diversity is a core value and this person is a role model. 119 6. And lastly, I couldn't do it without you award. Sometimes there is someone who is the person that everyone goes to a explain how things are done and they are always there for people. What does the Awards look like? They will be two things, the nomination form itself for the employee inside a thankyou card and tokens of appreciation like golf or tennis balls, mouse pads, books, pens, wild flower seeds, gift certificates to the Village gift shop, recycling boxes etc. Who can nominate? Any employee. Who can receive a nomination? Any employee. How often do we award people? Every other Friday, depending on the nominations received. Nominated employees will either find the token and card on their desks (private recognition) or will receive it from a member of the Management Team (public recognition). 120 RES. #C35/07 - CLAIREVILLE CONSERVATION AREA Agricultural Research and Training Facility Proposal by FarmStart at the Claireville Conservation Area, City of Brampton. Approval to enter into lease negotiations with FarmStart for the purpose of establishing a research and training farm that will develop locally based, ecologically sustainable and economically viable agricultural enterprises on Toronto and Region Conservation Authority land in Claireville Conservation Area. Moved by: Seconded by: Bill Fisch Gerri Lynn O'Connor THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) enter into lease negotiations with FarmStart for approximately 10 hectares (25 acres) of land being Part of Lot 7, Concession 8, N.D., City of Brampton, Regional Municipality of Peel; THAT the term of the lease agreement be not more than five years with the option for renewal; THAT the lease payment be on fair market value terms, for the term of the agreement; THAT the agreement be on terms and conditions satisfactory to TRCA staff and solicitors; THAT the appropriate TRCA officials be authorized and directed to take whatever action may be required to give effect thereto, including the obtaining of necessary approvals and the execution of any documents; AND FURTHER THAT the Humber Watershed Alliance and Friends of Claireville be advised of the TRCA intentions to lease the property to FarmStart. CARRIED BACKGROUND Over the past several months, FarmStart and TRCA staff have had discussions about a joint endeavour by which FarmStart would make use of lands owned by TRCA for the purpose of helping new farmers establish ecologically sustainable and economically viable agricultural enterprises to supply markets in the Greater Toronto Area (GTA). A proposal has been submitted that sets out the purpose and conditions of this joint endeavour and forms the basis for preparing a lease agreement for approximately 10 hectares in the Claireville Conservation Area, City of Brampton. FarmStart is a not - for - profit organization that receives provincial and federal government grants to: • coordinate farm facilities, resources and linkages important to new and young farmers; • develop effective land tenure and stewardship arrangements; • explore emerging local and direct farm market opportunities; • support a new generation of farmers; and • promote innovative and sustainable business models. 121 FarmStart currently has a partnership agreement with the University of Guelph and the Guelph International Resource Centre to operate an incubator farm near Guelph, Ontario. Programs that have been established by FarmStart at the incubator farm include: • new Canadian farmers initiatives; • land and water stewardship measures; • sustainable agricultural practices; • alternative energies; and • farm business management training. Following a review of existing TRCA -owned lands, the former McVean property, which is part of the Claireville Conservation Area specifically located north of Highway 7, on the west side of McVean Drive, in the City of Brampton, was determined to be the most suitable parcel of land. The available property is approximately 10 hectares in size, located in an urban area of the GTA and is easily accessible by both farmers and buyers. In addition, the site has been planted with hay for several years, maintaining soil fertility and weed control. Chemical use on the property has also been minimal, which will help transition the land to organic certification. FarmStart Objectives The FarmStart proposal identifies that a research and training farm will be developed on the property to: • operate new crop and ecological agriculture research and demonstration facilities; • offer new farmer training programs through a training farm and on site workshops; and • incubate and support new farm enterprises on site. FarmStart has also identified that they will maintain the highest standards of stewardship over the land, transition it to organic cropping methods, and maintain wild areas and shelterbelts in conjunction with the existing woodlots and riparian areas. The land will be transitioned to organic certification over the first three years of an agreement and an environmental farm plan will be developed at the outset to guide the development of the new farm facility. FarmStart will take a phased approach to developing the infrastructure needed to support new farmers on the McVean property. Fencing or borders will be required to protect crops from vandalism and crop theft and to separate public demonstration areas from the agricultural plots dedicated to crop and livestock production, farmer training and research. A reliable water supply and irrigation system will need to be set up. FarmStart, in consultation with TRCA, will conduct investigations into the most appropriate and cost effective strategy including water lines from municipal sources or a well. Other facilities will include greenhouses, windmills, storage sheds and meeting spaces. 122 At the end of the first five year period, the new farm facility will be fully operational with a dynamic research and demonstration facility, a training farm and from six to twelve new farm enterprises. The value of crops grown on the land will dramatically increase in both volume and dollar value compared to a historic cropping system, while maintaining and improving soil fertility and cultivation practices. Research and demonstration plots will be established to illustrate current and emerging sustainable farming practices such as low till /no till, trash mulch systems, all season unheated greenhouse production and water conservation practices. Wind and solar power will be used to power any equipment needed at the facility and to operate educational displays and demonstrations. In addition, public awareness of sustainable farming practices and food distribution issues will be increased through outreach and educational programming. Heritage Double English Wheat Barn FarmStart has identified that they do not require the heritage Double English Wheat Barn on the site. However they will cooperate with organizations involved in the possible restoration and use of the heritage structure. The potential exists for the barn to be a multi -use facility including weekly farm markets, an educational centre, community entertainment centre and meeting space. FarmStart would be willing to participate with TRCA, the local community and heritage societies to manage the barn, scheduling public and educational events and developing policies and procedures for use of the barn. Community Involvement and Collaboration The central area around the heritage barn will be set up as a demonstration area for public education around the practices of sustainable, ecological agriculture. Part of the property may be used for community purposes such as community gardens, youth programs and land stewardship activities. Community involvement is important to the success of the project. On -going efforts to partner and collaborate with community members will be undertaken. The Humber Watershed Alliance and Friends of Claireville members have been actively involved regarding the future use of the property including habitat restoration, heritage protection and interpretation and agricultural use. RATIONALE TRCA staff believe FarmStart has a role to play in facilitating new kinds of agriculture close to urban areas. One option is make available some of the land owned and managed by TRCA. Growing local food is an important component of sustainable communities, which is one of TRCA's objectives. Such use will not compromise the objectives of the Terrestrial Natural Heritage System Strategy. The FarmStart proposal will establish a training and research farm on TRCA land, facilitating the entry of new farmers and new Canadians into agricultural enterprises that will supply local markets in a sustainable way, supporting TRCA's vision for The Living City. The former McVean property is ideally situated in the middle of a growing and diverse near urban neighbourhood. This farm project, the first of its kind in Canada, will lead the way towards sustainable, local agriculture that serves the needs of growing communities and protects the local greenspace and ecosystems. Local, ecologically - friendly agriculture also supports healthy rivers and regional biodiversity through soil regeneration, ecological restoration and ecosystem integrity. 123 By encouraging new farmers, local food production and community engagement, this farm project will allow community members to access and connect to the source of their food, as well as know and value the land on which is it grown and those who have grown it. The site also allows for foot, bicycle, public transportation and vehicle access by both the farmers and consumers, which will help to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. The proximity of the site will also attract community use and stewardship as people come to buy their food, walk the trails and bring groups of children for educational and fun food oriented programs. DETAILS OF WORK TO BE DONE • TRCA staff will contact FarmStart to undertake detailed lease negotiations for the property. • TRCA staff will keep the Humber Watershed Alliance and the Friends of Claireville informed throughout the establishment and implementation of the project. They are currently aware of agricultural use for this parcel of land. FINANCIAL DETAILS FarmStart has identified the following funding sources for the project: • $15,000 for 2007 from the Catherine Donnelly Foundation which is allocated to land preparation and infrastructure. • $30,000 a year for three years from Center for Agricultural and Rural Development (CARD) for an agronomist /farm manager; as well as day -to -day management. • $30,000 a year for three years from CARD for a new Canadian farmer coordinator. • Core funding from Metcalf Foundation and Laidlaw (undisclosed) provides a portion of staff salaries managing the project plus administration costs. Laidlaw is committed for three years, and there is indication that Metcalf will provide three year core funding beginning in early 2008, when the current contract ends. Report prepared by: Sonia Dhir, extension 5291 Email: sdhir @trca.on.ca For Information contact: Gary Wilkins, extension 5211 Email: gwilkins @trca.on.ca Date: August 20, 2007 Attachments: 1 124 Attachment 1 ' '',,`,' . `, , �. ! CLi i re °ills ° � ; ref ConseI ation. Area 4i� Y 3: hA,. . 4 y. G ,. Legend .0 f r. F e_ � �0° TRCA Properly i ` 0 Watercourse r\ \ 14. v" Property . Location o\ a p df Vic` ( ;p r' - , PAetles f a. �r �,�/ `ec� 1 '4 ao1,01'i s / t, p�, r ,l / ^r -1`� fir." t �r '''' , ' / \f, '` dry /,' �\ fit' i�t Y, , • \ { i ( / /,q k J { { ` t.§ cps° < . i "� �' - i "�'`\ c , w. `�. �,`,, f !r i f j( d i 1 f fr :r f 1..(.- r ` , f- f 1 r ry r ' r I ` F r r r' ,J if,� °..':,/ ''' f 125 RES. #C36/07 - WORLD GREEN BUILDING COUNCIL Memorandum of Understanding with Toronto and Region Conservation Authority. Approval to enter into an agreement between Toronto and Region Conservation Authority and World Green Building Council for the development of the World Green Building Council Secretariat and continued support of their programs. Moved by: Seconded by: Bill Fisch Gerri Lynn O'Connor THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT approval be granted for Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) to enter into a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) with World Green Building Council (WGBC) for the development and support of the World Green Building Council Secretariat, to be located at TRCA's The Living City Campus; THAT appropriate TRCA officials be authorized and directed to take whatever action may be required to give effect thereto including the signing of documents; AND FURTHER THAT staff be directed to report back to the Business Excellence Advisory Board on an annual basis with an update on the status of the business relationship. CARRIED BACKGROUND On April 30, 2007, TRCA was awarded the bid to host the WGBC Secretariat at The Living City Campus. This followed a competition that was conducted with Montreal to secure a suitable location. The proposal put forth by TRCA, which secured the bid, outlined the capacity and resources that TRCA possesses to assist in the development of the WGBC Secretariat and to continue supporting the efforts of WGBC. The support offered in TRCA's proposal to WGBC takes a variety of forms such as human resources, marketing and communications, financial contributions, fundraising, office space, and finance and administration services. TRCA's bid to host the WGBC Secretariat has been successful in engaging both the Province of Ontario and the Regional Municipality of Peel to provide financial contributions in support of WGBC Secretariat development. Since the time that the bid was announced, TRCA has begun working closely with WGBC in the development of the secretariat. In order to move forward a MoU is required to formalize the business relationship between the two organizations. WGBC was founded in 1999 and provides a union of national green building councils whose common goal is the sustainable transformation of the global property industry. A sustainable property industry will balance environmental, social and economic issues to ensure a viable and valuable industry for future generations. Eleven countries are currently members of WGBC: Australia, Brazil, Canada, India, Japan, Mexico, New Zealand, Taiwan, United Arab Emirates, the United Kingdom and the United States of America. 126 WGBC has an ambitious strategic vision for the three years which contains '100- 100 -100' targets: 1) engage the 100 million people who make up the global construction industry; 2) create 100 green building councils globally; and 3) raise $100 million to further the goals of WGBC. RATIONALE TRCA made a commitment to WGBC when the WGBC's decision to locate the secretariat at The Living City Campus, based on the initial proposal, was accepted. The fundamental philosophies and goals of TRCA and WGBC are similar in nature. TRCA's vision for The Living City can be carried to a global context as WGBC works to promote sustainability in the built environments on a global scale. Through the roles and responsibilities outlined in the MoU, TRCA will be known as an official partner and supporter of WGBC. Both TRCA and The Living City Campus will gain international recognition in the arena of climate change mitigation and green building advancement. Together, programs will be developed that neither TRCA nor WGBC alone could undertake. FINANCIAL DETAILS WGBC, its secretariat and its programs are designed to be funded through a combination of membership fees, grants, donations and sponsorships. Fundraising will be performed by both secretariat staff and members of the WGBC board. The billing for the activity of WGBC in recent years has not exceeded $100,000. However, activity is expected to increase exponentially in the coming years through the 100- 100 -100 strategic vision targets. Therefore, the need for secured funding will also increase. This will be accomplished through the fundraising efforts of WGBC as they become dominant players on the international stage. Increased funding will also come through increased membership, as each member country is required to pay an annual membership fee. The only financial support that TRCA will be required to supply WGBC will be the funds that TRCA solicits directly for this initiative on behalf of WGBC. Support will also be provided in terms of in -kind contributions through staffing and support services. DETAILS OF WORK TO BE DONE Staff is completing negotiations of a MoU with WGBC to clarify respective responsibilities and formalize business relationships. Report prepared by: Andrew Bowerbank, extension 5343 Email: abowerbank @trca.on.ca For Information contact: Melissa Ferrato, extension 5569 Email: mferrato @trca.on.ca Date: August 28, 2007 127 RES. #C37 /07 - GLOBE INC. BOARD OF DIRECTORS Approval for Brian Denney to join the Board of Directors of GLOBE Inc. (Green Light on a Better Environment). Moved by: Seconded by: Bill Fisch Gerri Lynn O'Connor THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT Brian Denney, Chief Administrative Officer, be authorized to participate on the Board of Directors of GLOBE Inc., in support of the efforts of the Social Housing Services Council. CARRIED BACKGROUND Brian Denney has been invited to join the Board of Directors of GLOBE Inc. This board has been created by the Social Housing Services Council as a means of advancing energy retrofits and green building design within the social housing sector. This activity is consistent with Toronto and Region Conservation Authority's (TRCA) efforts to advance these kinds of projects as part of a comprehensive response to climate change mitigation. The time commitment will be modest based on preparation and participation in a few board meetings a year. Any compensation received will be directed to TRCA. Report prepared by: Brian Denney, 416- 667 -6290 Emails: bdenney @trca.on.ca For Information contact: Brian Denney, 416- 667 -6290 Emails: bdenney @trca.on.ca Date: August 29, 2007 RES. #C38 /07 - COMPENSATION RATES FOR MEMBERS OF AGENCIES, BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS Advises of comparable compensation rates for members of agencies, boards and commissions. Moved by: Seconded by: Rob Ford Bill Fisch THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT the report dated August 28, 2007, on compensation rates for agencies, boards and commissions, be received. AMENDMENT RES. #C39 /07 Moved by: Seconded by: Rob Ford Bill Fisch 128 THAT the following be inserted after the main motion: THAT subject to Ontario Municipal Board (OMB) approval, per diem for elected officials appointed to Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) be reduced to $70 effective January 1, 2008 with no change to the per diem for citizen members; AND FURTHER THAT TRCA officials be authorized and directed to make the necessary application to the OMB. THE AMENDMENT WAS CARRIED THE MAIN MOTION, AS AMENDED, WAS CARRIED BACKGROUND At Authority Meeting #3/07, held on March 30, 2007, Resolution #A54/07 was approved, in part, as follows: AND FURTHER THAT staff report back to the Business Excellence Advisory Board in September with a comparison of compensation rates for board members of other conservation authorities, boards and provincial agencies performing similar work. RATIONALE Attachment 1 is a list of a number of agencies, boards and commissions and the comparable per diem and honoraria paid to their members. TRCA staff did a similar analysis in 2005 and the table has been updated where appropriate to illustrate current compensation rates. Attachment 2 is the list of per diem rates paid to members of other conservation authorities in 2006. Conservation Ontario has not completed summary of 2007 rates. Report prepared by: Jim Dillane, extension 6292, jdillane @trca.on.ca For Information contact: Jim Dillane, extension 6292, jdillane @trca.on.ca Date: August 28, 2007 Attachments: 2 129 Attachment 1 2007 ALLOWANCES PAID TO MEMBERS OF OTHER SPECIAL PURPOSE BODIES QUESTIONS Toronto Waterfront Revitalization Corporation Toronto Police Services Board York Region Police Services Board Ontario Realty Corporation ORC Do you pay the members of the Board of Directors or other governing body for their services ? If "YES " how much do you pay and on what basis? If there is more than one meeting held on a given day, do they receive the same amount of per diem? Yes. - $ 500 per attended meeting . - $ 5,000 Lump Sum at the beginning of each fiscal year. Each meeting usually lasts 2 hours. If meetings continue all day (full day) their payment doubles. Yes. ( Partially) Provincial Appointees to the Board receive an annual remuneration of $ 8,791. Yes. ( Partially) The Municipal Citizen and 3 provincial appointees get a honorarium of $ 7,000 per year plus an allowance, annual cost of living increase (3 %). Yes. Members ( Part -Time ) $150 Per Diem There is no remuneration for 1 member - Civil Servant. Yes. If the organization has a Chair of the Board, what is the Chairs remuneration ? The Chair's remuneration is $ 7,500 per fiscal year. The Toronto Police Services Board is headed by a full time Chair. This position carries a salary of $ 90,963. Despite the increasing complexity of the position, the salary has not changed since 1987. No special remuneration. (Elected member) No Information provided from ORC contact person. Acting -Chair is a Civil Servant. Vice -Chair (Part -Time) is a Civil Servant, too. If the organization has municipal elected officials on its board, are these representatives treated differently? Mayor of Toronto is a member of the board of Directors. He does not receive any compensation. The City of Toronto Councillors are not compensated for their work on the Board, rather this service is seen as part of their regular duties. Elected members - Regional Council Appointees do not get paid. 130 QUESTIONS Committee of Adjustment City of Toronto Exhibition Place Board City of Toronto Toronto Zoo City of Toronto Toronto Parking Authority Do you pay the members of the Board of Directors or other governing body for their services ? If "YES " how much do you pay and on what basis? If there is more than one meeting held on a given day, do they receive the same amount of per diem ? Yes . We pay the members of the Committee of Adjustment. $ 350 per attended public hearing. Yes, they receive the same amount. No . They work on a voluntary basis No. Yes ( Partially) 4 members of the Board get paid. They receive annual compensation of $ 7, 537 . If the organization has a Chair of the Board, what is the Chair's remuneration ? The Chair receives an extra amount of $ 1, 000 per financial year. The Committee of Adjustment operates as four panels : Etobicoke, North York, Toronto East York and Scarborough. Each respective panel has a Chair. No Honorarium. President receives a gift after he finishes his term of appointment. Chairman is not paid. The Chair's remuneration is $ 10,767 per year. If the organization has municipal officials elected on its board, are these representatives treated differently? No municipal officials elected. Toronto City Council has appointed a Committee of Adjustment consisting of citizen members. No . The 6 City Councillors , members of Board are not paid to attend. The 2 City Councillor don' t get paid. 131 QUESTIONS Alcohol and Gaming Commission of Ontario AGCO Liquor Control Board of Ontario LCBO Toronto Port Authority Greater Toronto Airports Authority Do you pay the members of the Board of Directors or other governing body for their services ? If "YES " how much do you pay and on what basis? If there is more than one meeting held on a given day, do they receive the same amount of per diem ? Yes. Vice - Chair ( Part Time) $ 444 Per Diem Members ( Part -Time) $ 355 Per Diem Yes. Vice - Chair (Part Time) $ 150 Per Diem Members (Part Time) $ 100 Per Diem N 0 I N F 0 R M A T I 0 N Yes. Annual Retainer of $ 14,000. Meeting Fee: - in person $1,000 - by phone $ 750 If the organization has a Chair of the Board, what is the Chairs remuneration ? The Alcohol and Gaming Commission of Ontario is headed by a full time Chair. The Chair receives an annual salary of $129,558.42 Chair ( Part -Time) $ 350 Per Diem P R O V I D E D Chair receives $ 96,000. Committee Chair receives $ 3,000 to $7,500 annually. If the organization has municipal elected officials on its board, are these representatives treated differently? 132 Attachment 2 Conservation Authorities 2006 Per Diem, Mileage and Honourarium Rates 133 Half Day Full Day One Per Diem Rate Chairman Honourarium Mileage ($ /km) Ausable Bayfield $53.00 $63.00 $750.00 0.37 Cataraqui Region* 0 0 0 0.40 Catfish Creek $40.00 per meeting $600 N/A Central Lake Conservation Halton $50.00 $10,000 Vice Chair $3,000 0.45 Credit Valley $62.33 $10,000 Vice Chair $5,000 0.45 Crowe Valley Essex Region $50.00 in Watershed $70.00 out of watershed $1,000 N/A Ganaraska Region Grand River $59.50 1/2 day and full day (Vice Chair $125.00 for 2 meetings a day) $35,880 0.40 Grey Sauble ** $52.25 $76.00 $650.00 0.34 Hamilton Kawartha $50.00 0 0.42 Kettle Creek $52.50 $105.0 0 $1,030 0.39 Lake Simcoe Region $61.70 $5,000 Vice Chair $1,000 0.42 Lakehead Region $47.00 $55.00 per diem for each meeting 0.40 Long Point Region $55.00 per meeting $2,000 0.40 Lower Thames Valley $53.53 per day $1,772.55 0.3375 Lower Trent $35.00 per meeting 0 0.44 0.35 for staff Maitland Valley Mattagami Region $25.00 $1,000 .345 Mississippi Valley Niagara Peninsula $60.00 $4,094 0.422 Nickel District $70.00 out of town business $3,200 0.43 North Bay - Mattawa $20.00 $40.00 $2,500 0.38 Nottawasaga Valley Otonabee $38.00 $1,000 0.42 proposed Quinte $45.00 per meeting 0 0.40 Raisin Region $56.00 $2,250.00 0.3375 133 * Cataraqui - a resolution passed about 10 years ago as a cost cutting measure /lead by example. ** Grey Sauble - no per diem or mileage is paid for monthly Full Authority meetings - per diem and mileage paid only to special committee meetings 134 Half Day Full Day One Per Diem Rate Chairman Honourarium Mileage ($ /km) Rideau Valley $50.92 current $53.00 proposed $1,591.35 current $2,000 proposed 0.35 current 0.37 proposed Saugeen Valley $75.00 $130.0 0 $3,000.00 0.35 Sault Ste Marie Region $40.00 per meeting $350 0.39 South Nation Doesn' t exist $73.00 Doesn't exist 0.38 St. Clair Region $57.50 current $60.00 proposed $2,450 current $2,500 proposed 0.40 Toronto and Region $82.00 2 times per diem /or $36,000 if citizen appointee 0.3375 Upper Thames $59.50 $3,500 Vice Chair $1,675 0.35 * Cataraqui - a resolution passed about 10 years ago as a cost cutting measure /lead by example. ** Grey Sauble - no per diem or mileage is paid for monthly Full Authority meetings - per diem and mileage paid only to special committee meetings 134 SECTION IV - ITEMS FOR THE INFORMATION OF THE BOARD RES. #C40/07 - GOOD NEWS STORIES Highlights of Toronto and Region Conservation Authority's Work. Receipt of Good News Stories for April - July, 2007, from all sections of Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA). Moved by: Seconded by: Ron Moeser Rob Ford IT IS RECOMMENDED THAT the report on "Good News Stories" for April through July, 2007, be received. CARRIED BACKGROUND Management Team, a committee made up of senior staff at Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA), meets monthly to discuss strategic initiatives and organizational development. RATIONALE Key accomplishments of each TRCA section are highlighted 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 from April through July, 2007, and a brief description of each. • Earth Day - 2,000 people attended the Earth Day planting and celebration at Downsview Park. TRCA Chair provided remarks on behalf of TRCA. • Whole Foods Market - The Conservation Foundation raised about $4,000 on TRCA Day at the gigantic Whole Foods Market in central Toronto. • 2006 Operating Budget - TRCA achieved a $425,000 operating budget surplus in 2006. • Mayor's Corporate Citizen Award - Awarded to Kortright, as a local business that has made a notable contribution to the quality of life in Vaughan. • New Heronry - Great blue herons were found by terrestrial monitoring staff to be nesting at Albion Hills this year. • Headwaters Streams Study - $118,000 received from Oak Ridges Moraine Foundation. • World Green Building Council (WGBC) Secretariat - On April 30, 2007, TRCA was awarded the bid to host the WGBC Secretariat at the Living City Campus after an international competition was conducted to secure a suitable location. TRCA's bid to host the Secretariat was successful in engaging both the Province of Ontario and the Region of Peel to provide financial contributions in support of WGBC Secretariat development. TRCA's vision for a Living City can be carried to a global context as WGBC works to promote sustainability in our built environments at a global scale. • Highland Creek Regeneration - Approximately 150 Centennial College students and Highland Creek community residents, together with City of Toronto and TRCA, participated in the spring 2007 clean -up and rehabilitation event along the streams and riparian zones. 135 • Restoration Services Centre - TRCA Nursery irrigation taken off Humber River baseflow for the first time with the addition of retention ponds as part of the Restoration Services Centre. Staff moved into the new building and only used lighting for 1 hour in the office area in the first 3 weeks of occupancy. Awaiting confirmation of LEED certification. • Ground Source Heating and Cooling - Planning began with Daniels Corporation for up to 100 units in Mississauga with ground source heating and cooling. • Spring Planting Activities - During the spring 2007 planting period, TRCA staff, with the support of community volunteers, undertook the plantings of more than 164,000 units throughout the various watersheds, amounting to approximately 400 carbon credits. • Archaeology - Over 40 new archaeological sites found: 11 aboriginal sites; 23 aboriginal find spots; and 6 Euroindian sites. Ceremony by Peel Aboriginal Network blessed 6,000 year old ancestral campsite at Heart Lake Conservation Area. • Duffins Creek Corner Marsh - Second stage of wetland enhancement completed. Now one of the best sites for spotting shorebirds in our region. • Paddle the Don - Most successful Paddle the Don - 198 canoes /kayaks and 17 corporate teams. • The Conservation Foundation - Door -to -door campaign for donations to the foundation is proving successful, particularly due to coinciding with press coverage for Paddle the Don. • Terrestrial Natural Heritage - Completed the last of 3 workshops with municipal partners to set -up framework for incorporating the Terrestrial Natural Heritage System Strategy in their official plan updates. • Cold Creek Conservation Area - Conservation area reopened under management of Township of King. • Near Urban Agriculture - Youth Farming Challenge and City of Toronto committed funding to support urban farming. • Environmental Education - Released report entitled "Shaping Our Schools, Shaping Our Future" which encompasses all recommendations of the Environmental Education Working Group, which was Chaired by Roberta Bondar. The recommendations support the education work of TRCA, including the importance of outdoor experiential learning opportunities for students. • Ontario EcoSchools - Lake St. George, Albion Hills Field Centre, Claremont Field Centre and Black Creek Pioneer Village were once again certified as Ontario EcoSchools, demonstrating excellence in energy conservation, waste minimization, environmental education and greening for shade and energy. • False Mermaid - New native species for our jurisdiction called Floerkia proserpinacoides (common name is false mermaid) found at the Bolton Resource Management Tract. This species of spring wet woodland plant has never been recorded in our jurisdiction. • Planning and Development - New guideline developed for protecting Oak Ridges Moraine natural features on lots of record. • Greening Health Care - Presented the program in Kingston to over 15 hospital corporations representing 22 hospitals, with 10 indicating intention to join. 2 more satellite workshops are planned this year. • Frenchman's Bay - Thanks to $300,000 contribution from the province, environmental /design studies to be undertaken for new Frenchman's Bay harbour entrance. 136 • Tax Incentive Program - Three landholders in the Township of Uxbridge cashed shares for donation to land preservation in support of the Conservation Foundation. • The Living City - TRCA staff presented The Living City vision at the Canadian Institute of Planners Conference in Quebec City. • Greenhouse Gas - Federation of Canadian Municipalities has approved our letter of intent with the City of Vaughan to undertake a greenhouse gas inventory end energy management plan as part of the Partners in Climate Protection Program. • Green Living Show - TRCA received $17,000 in proceeds from the art auction as one of the selected charities. • Water Governance - Staff spoke in Vancouver on water governance and how conservation authorities are working with the province and municipalities. Opened up discussions with other provinces. • Canada Geese - Restoration Services staff relocated almost 813 Canada Geese from Rotary Park, Ajax and Bluffers Park, Scarborough to Lansdowne (approximately 80 km east of Kingston). • West Don Lands - Construction began on the flood protection landform and Don Park in the West Don Lands. • The Living City Campus - Provincial ministers advised they will work to garner provincial support for The Living City Campus. • Ducks Unlimited (DU) - Finishing contract with DU as part of wetland interpretation at Kortright. DU pleased with the products produced, and want to use the education material nationally. • Ecosystem Recovery Program - Salamander Foundation committed $90,000 over three years starting in 2008 toward the Ecosystem Recovery Program that will help us prioritize restoration actions and develop species and vegetation community targets to fulfill our biodiversity objectives. • World Green Building Council (WGBC) Congress - 30 countries hosted by WGBC /TRCA. Approximately 300 people enjoyed a fabulous event at the Liberty Grand celebrating the arrival of the World Green Building Council Secretariat to the Toronto region. • Greening Retail - SmartCentres has become the Founding Sponsor of the Greening Retail program with a contribution of $155,000 toward the completion of Phase II of The Greening Retail Study. The study, being undertaken in partnership with Ryerson University, is designed to identify the strategies, tactics and tools used by leading retailers around the world to successfully implement environmental best practices. The knowledge gained from this study will be made available to the retail sector through business schools, industry associations and the Greening Retail website. Through partnerships with retailers the Greening Retail program will undertake projects to demonstrate the effectiveness and return on investment from implementing environmental best practices. • Source Protection Authority - First meeting held of the Credit Valley- Toronto and Region - Central Lake Ontario Source Protection Authority on July 27th. • Toronto Star Reader Survey - TRCA's Ashbridges Bay Waterfront Park and Albion Hills Conservation Area ranked top among favourite parks. • PAIE Program - 90% of participants (planners and geoscientists) have secured a placement, mentorship or employment. 137 • Mimico Waterfront Linear Park - On July 25, 2007, Waterfront Toronto (TWRC) and TRCA entered into a Delivery Agreement to expand the funding required to complete Phase 1 of the park from $6.5 million to 10.6 million. The project is currently under construction with completion expected in July 2008. • Uxbridge Landowners - Continue to support TRCA's work in Uxbridge. So far, the Durham Conservation Trust has raised over $50,000 to green some beautiful spots on the Oak Ridges Moraine. • Port Union Shoreline Improvement Project - Two more properties acquired which are necessary to facilitate the construction of Phase 2 of the project. • Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan - Seventeen technical guidelines for implementing the plan have now been released as final documents. TRCA staff, through Conservation Authorities Moraine Coalition, participated on the review committee and coordinated conservation authorities' comments to improve and finalize the documents. Report prepared by: Kathy Stranks, extension 5264 Email: kstranks @trca.on.ca For Information contact: Kathy Stranks, extension 5264 Email: kstranks @trca.on.ca Date: August 28, 2007 RES. #C41/07 - 2007 MEDIA SUMMARY January to June, 2007. Summary of January to June, 2007 media coverage for Toronto and Region Conservation Authority. Moved by: Seconded by: Ron Moeser Rob Ford IT IS RECOMMENDED THAT the summary of media coverage for January to June, 2007 for Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) be received. CARRIED BACKGROUND At Business Excellence Advisory Board Meeting #1/06, held on March 3, 2006, it was requested that an overview of media coverage for TRCA be provided twice yearly. In April, 2006, staff provided a summary of the media coverage in community newspapers and major dailies from 2003 - 2005. Henceforth, staff will provide an annual three -year comparison summary to the Business Excellence Advisory Board. The following table outlines the media coverage received during the six -month period of January to June of the 2007 calendar year for TRCA, including conservation areas and campgrounds, Black Creek Pioneer Village and Kortright Centre for Conservation. Media includes major daily and community newspapers and consumer and trade publications. It does not include coverage on the internet. Cision (formerly Bowden's) clipping service and FPlnfomart was used by TRCA to collect this data. 138 MEDIA SUMMARY (2005 -2007) Month 2005 2006 2007 (period of January to June) Percentage Increase /Decrease 2007 vs. 2006 January 23 46 33 -29% February 32 63 18 -72% March 62 119 47 -61% April 72 72 47 -35% May 71 103 74 -29% June 68 97 28 -72% July 54 87 August 68 81 September 63 74 October 66 85 November 49 62 December 45 44 TOTAL 686 682 247 As of August 2007, TRCA has changed the parameters of the Cision subscription to electronic receipt and expanded the coverage to include the Internet (North American websites and blogs). Variances The media summary table above indicates a consistent month to month decrease in the number of media articles referring to TRCA including its key public use facilities. This is due to two factors: 1. The migration to on -line coverage in response to the public's increasing use of web -based information sources. This year there has been a deliberate effort to increase TRCA's presence online. For example, Parks and Culture facilities and programs received significantly more exposure on sites such as Toronto.com and Toronto4Kids.com than before. This coverage is not reflected in the media summary. 2. The concentration of media relations on higher- impact media. In an effort to optimize TRCA's return on media relations activity, efforts were dedicated to more in -depth articles in high circulation, and high- impact publications, as opposed to mere mentions in lower impact media. SUMMARY The number of articles derived from non -event media releases, and interviews with TRCA staff continue to surpass event listings. Staff is tracking an increase in the number of expert interview requests. It appears that TRCA staff is recognized as a dependable resource for topics surrounding the environment and climate change. Also of note is the significant coverage received for TRCA from all forms of the media (including print, television, radio, electronic) for the recent announcement of the World Green Building Council Secretariat and The Living City Campus. 139 FINANCIAL DETAIL As of August 2007, TRCA changed the parameters of the Cision subscription to electronic receipt and expanded coverage to include the Internet (North American websites and blogs). The subscription to FPlnfomart.ca will not be renewed for 2008. The incremental costs of the Cision subscription will be offset by the savings from not renewing the FPlnformart.ca subscription. The funds for this are budgeted in TRCA's 2007 Budget. Report prepared by: Lisa Hastings -Beck, extension 5632 Email: Ihastings- beck @trca.on.ca For Information contact: Lisa Hastings -Beck, extension 5632 Email: Ihastings- beck @trca.on.ca Date: August 17, 2007 RES. #C42/07 - SUMMARY OF REQUESTS FOR QUOTATIONS AND REQUESTS FOR PROPOSALS January 1, 2007 to June 30, 2007. Receipt of the 2007 mid -year summary of procurements approved by the Chief Administrative Officer. Moved by: Seconded by: Rob Ford Maja Prentice IT IS RECOMMENDED THAT the summary of procurements approved by the Chief Administrative Officer for the January 1, 2007 to June 30, 2007 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, 2007 to June 30, 2007, is found in Attachments 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: August 27, 2007 Attachments: 2 140 Attachment 1 REQUESTS FOR QUOTATION Sole Source (up to $50,000) January 1, 2007 - June 30, 2007 Project Awarded Bidder Cost ($) Plus Applicable Taxes Sustainable Stormwater Management Water Balance Model XCG Consultants Limited 10,000.00 Stouffville and Milne Dam Safety Booms Worthington Products Incorporated 30,768.00 Dalziel House Siding and Renovations Gordon V. Miller Contracting 11,256.00 New Pond Docks, Kortright Centre EZ -Dock Ontario 20,592.00 BCPV Radio Advertisement • extension of contract EZ Rock - Standard Radio 14,960.00 5,000.00 BCPV Brochure Promotions CTM Brochure Display 10,833.20 Port Union Waterfront Improvement Project • Survey Work Marshall Macklin Monaghan Ontario Limited 20,000.00 Guildwood Parkway Erosion Control Project • Survey Work Marshall Macklin Monaghan Ontario Limited 14,000.00 Restoration Services Centre • Grid -Tied Solar Power Generation PV 39,760.00 + fees & disbursements max. of 10% of contract value 141 REQUESTS FOR QUOTATION Lowest Bid (up to $100,000) January 1, 2007 - June 30, 2007 Project Awarded Bidder Cost ($) Plus Applicable TaxesWaynco Ltd. Black Creek Pioneer Village • Doctor's House High Efficiency Gas Furnace Pete's General Contracting 14,840.00 Pete's General Contracting • Halfway House Furnance and Air Conditioning Pete's General Contracting 11,950.00 • Printing Office and Weaver Shop Heating Old Style Plastering 22,900.00 System • Printing Office and Weaver Shop Ceiling 23,100.00 Tommy Thompson Park • 5,000 tones of 19mm crusher limestone Nelson Aggregate Co. 90,950.00 • 2,000 tonnes of limestone screenings Nelson Aggregate Co. 29,900.00 Horse Drawn Wagon Rides A & A Farmyard Friends 17,100.00 Solar Panels, Indian Line Campground Enerworks and 36,601.07 Suncapture Inc. Picnic Table Frames OK Welding 21,992.00 Bathurst Glen Golf Course • Beverage Products Pepsi Bottling Group 18,000.00 • Kitchen and Food Supplies Gorman Distributing 16,000.00 • Rental of Golf Carts Bennett Golf Carts 15,000.00 • Fertilizer Nu -Gro Corporation 20,000.00 • Point of Sale System Total e golf Solutions 19,500.00 • Turf Materials All Turf Ltd. 35,000.00 Transformer, Indian Line Campground Sturdy Power Lines Ltd. 34,579.74 Vehicle Acquisition • New loader /tractor Tractor Turf and Trail Co. 39,735.00 Ltd. • 2007 4X4 chassis cab truck with hydraulic dump box Foster Pontiac Buick GMC 36,801.00 • 2007 hybrid autombile Classic Honda 25,537.00 • 4 new utility vehicles Ed Stewart's Equipment 56,000.00 • 2007 automobile Brimell Toyota 17,252.00 142 Project Awarded Bidder Cost ($) Plus Applicable TaxesWaynco Ltd. Mimico Waterfront Linear Park Fontasy Sign and Display Inc. 16,500.00 • 1,200 tonnes of 50mm to 100mm round stone Waynco Ltd. 21,048.00 • 950 tonnes of 225mm to 450mm rip rap stone Dufferin Aggregates 26,296.00 • 600 tonnes of 3 to 5 tonne armour stone Belmont Rose Granite 28,200.00 • 5,000 tonnes of concrete sand Franceschini Brothers 74,850.00 Agg regates Sutron Water Level Sensors & Airlink Raven Bytown Marine Limited 11,806.00 Modems Waste and Recycling Removal • Turtle Island 30,395.00 (2 contracts to cover all TRCA locations) • U -Pak 24,150.00 Estimates based on 2006 tipping fees Roof Repair, Former Taylor Property Chouinard Bros. 11,109.43 Petticoat Creek Conservation Area • Gatehouse Precision Contracting 20,050.00 • Pool condition study & technical investigation MTE Consultants 27,375.00 Claremont Field Centre • Air conditioning - Phase 2 Comfort Zone Mechanical 13,000.00 REQUESTS FOR QUOTATION Lowest Bid Not Accepted (up to $100,000) January 1, 2007 - June 30, 2007 Project Awarded Bidder Cost ($) Plus Applicable Taxes Kortright Centre for Conservation • Wetland Signs Fontasy Sign and Display Inc. 16,500.00 Restoration Services Centre • Equipment storage fabric building • Cleaning services Cover -All Building Systems of Ontario Do It Right Cleaning Services 75,558,72 + contingency max. of 10% of contract value 21,600.00 Replacement of Windows, Former Jacobs Property Weida Windows Industries 18,997.00 143 Attachment 2 REQUESTS FOR PROPOSAL Sole Source (up to $50,000) January 1, 2007 - June 30, 2007 Project Awarded Bidder Cost ($) Plus Applicable Taxes Realty Tax Consultant Altus Derbyshire 20,000.00 Renewable Energy Business Case Professor Chris Kennedy 12,700.00 Albion Hills Field Centre • Architecutral assessment & redesign Montgomery Sisam Architects Inc. 48,800.00 REQUESTS FOR PROPOSAL Competitive Bid (up to $100,000) January 1, 2007 - June 30, 2007 Project Awarded Bidder Cost ($) Plus Applicable Taxes West Humber River Digital Floodline Mapping R.J. Burnside and Associates Limited 10,500.00 + contingency max. 1,220.00 Website Redesign Sideren 20,000.00 Heart Lake Conservation Area • Outdoor aquatic playground design Harrington and Hoyle Landscape Architects 78,625.00 Rouge Park • Interpretive planning consultant EcoLeaders 50,000.00 Playground & Equipment Design, Supply & Installation, Albion Hills Conservation Area & Indian Line Campground Belair Recreational Products Inc. 98,964.48 CN Rail Embankment Erosion Control Project Parish Geomorphic Limited 25,597.00 144 TERMINATION ON MOTION, the meeting terminated at 10:28 a.m., on Friday, September 7, 2007. Gerri Lynn O'Connor Brian Denney Chair Secretary- Treasurer /ks 145 THE TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY MEETING OF THE BUSINESS EXCELLENCE ADVISORY BOARD #6/07 November 2, 2007 The Business Excellence Advisory Board Meeting #6/07, was held in the South Theatre, Black Creek Pioneer Village, on Friday, November 2, 2007. The Chair David Barrow, called the meeting to order at 9:35 a.m.. PRESENT Eve Adams Member David Barrow Chair Bill Fisch Member Peter Milczyn Member Gerri Lynn O'Connor Chair, Authority Gino Rosati Member ABSENT Paul Ainslie Vice Chair Rob Ford Member Ron Moeser Member Maja Prentice Member RES. #C43/07 - MINUTES Moved by: Seconded by: Gerri Lynn O'Connor Bill Fisch THAT the Minutes of Meeting #5/07, held on September 7, 2007, be approved. CARRIED PRESENTATIONS (a) A presentation by Jim Dillane, Director, Finance and Business Services, TRCA, in regard to item 7.1 - 2008 Preliminary Estimates, Operating and Capital. (b) A presentation by David Love, Executive Director, The Conservation Foundation of Greater Toronto, in regard to item 8.1 - The Conservation Foundation of Greater Toronto Financial Activities. 146 RES. #C44 /07 - PRESENTATIONS Moved by: Seconded by: Gino Rosati Peter Milczyn THAT above -noted presentations (a) and (b) be heard and received. CARRIED SECTION I - ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY ACTION RES. #C45 /07 - FINANCIAL PROGRESS REPORT For the period ending August 31, 2007. Reports on status of expenditures and revenues to the end of August, 2007, with projections to year end. Moved by: Seconded by: Gerri Lynn O'Connor Bill Fisch THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT staff be directed to continue to pursue all options to secure provincial relief with respect to the Conservation Land Tax Incentive Program (CLTIP); THAT the Financial Progress Report for the period ending August 31, 2007, dated October 25, 2007, be received; AND FURTHER THAT staff report to the board in December on any changes with respect to the CLTIP issue. 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, 2007. The projected actuals reflect experience in September and early October. The projected variance from the 2007 net operating budget is a deficit of $706,900. This is almost entirely due to the provincial decision to disallow TRCA's tax relief applications under the provincial CLTIP ($605,000) for the years 2005, 2006 and 2007. Staff are hopeful that continued discussions with the Ministry of Natural Resources (MNR) may lead to a more favourable settlement. However, for this exercise staff has presented a worst case scenario with regard to tax rebates. Also of concern is the $800,000 fund raising contribution from The Conservation Foundation of Greater Toronto. This amount is now projected at $500,000, more in line with the actual for the last two years. Most of this $500,000 has yet to be raised although a number of opportunities exist and are being actively pursued. 147 There are a number of other operating variances reported across all programs, which are modest and manageable. Revenues from conservation areas will come in below budget ($71,500), mostly as a result of an early season closure of the Petticoat Creek Conservation Area swimming facility. Black Creek Pioneer Village had lower than anticipated attendance ($94,600) and food service revenue was significantly below budget ($213,100). Kortright Centre is on target for operating revenues and expenditures, although special project funding during the year will allow both expenditures and revenues to exceed the budget by a similar amount. The variances in rental properties category result from the transfer of additional rental units from Ontario Realty Corporation, not anticipated in the budget. The expenditure shortfall ($474,900) in Watershed Management reflects a loss of provincial Remedial Action Plan MOU funding and a redistribution of expenditures to other budgets. The increase in Ecology expenditures ($153,800) reflects additional special projects funding, mostly under the provincial source water protection program. In almost all instances revenue shortfalls have been met with similar projected adjustments on the expenditure side. Expenditures have been and will continue to be constrained as much as possible in the latter part of the year in order to minimize the deficit for the year. However, the conservation land tax deficiency of $605,000, if it cannot be mitigated, will have to be dealt with in future years. The 2007 capital budget projected a deficit of $814,500 to cover the cost of the new Restoration Services building. Members will recall that during the 2007 budget approval process staff advised that this will be paid down over several years from revenues from land fill operations and other special projects. The 2007 projected actual deficit for capital is $1,063,780, or $229,280 in excess of budget. This amount is almost exclusively related to additional work on the new Restoration Services Centre. 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, 2007. In total, projected capital expenditures are $44,242,353 which is about $7.8 million less than budget.The key variances include: • delays in Toronto Waterfront Revitalization Corporation projects which are projected to account for about a $4.5 million underexpenditure; • delays in approvals for various water management and erosion projects; • Arsenal lands project still waiting for City of Toronto commitment and City of Mississauga final approvals; • The Living City Centre project was again delayed ($500,000) pending pursuit of provincial and federal contributions as well as fund raising capacity; 148 • the Restoration Services Centre (nursery relocation project) experienced additional costs of $231,500; and • conservation area development projects in Peel deferred to 2008 ($307,500). Report prepared by: Rocco Sgambelluri, extension 5232 Emails: rsgambelluri@trca.on.ca For Information contact: Ralph Kofler, extension 5274, Jim Dillane, extension 6292 Emails: rkofler @trca.on.ca; jdillane @trca.on.ca Date: October 25, 2007 Attachments: 2 149 Attachment 1 TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY Operating Variance Report as of August 31, 2007 Page Gross Expenditures (by functional Uni Reference Finance and Business Services Division Administration Page 8 Rental Properties Page 9 Property Sevices Vehicle & Equipment Reserve Watershed Management Division WM Divisional Management Watershed Strategies Conservation Field Centres Planning & Development Division Planning & Development Enforcement Ecology Division Ecology Page 10 Page 11 Page 12 Page 13 Page 14 Page 15 Page 16 Page 17 Community Transformation Partnerships Page 18 Restoration Services Division Restoration Services Parks and Culture Division Parks & Culture Divisional Management Conservation Areas Kortright Centre for Conservation Oak Ridges Corridor Park Black Creek Pioneer Village Food Services Office of the CAO Corporate Management Corporate Secretariat Human Resources Professional Access Program Page 19 Page 20 Page 21 Page 22 Page 23 Page 24 Page 25 2007 Budget 2007 2007 Actual P_ A. $ $ Budget vs. P. A. Variance Notes 2,294,000 2,397,028 2,287,300 (6,700)No significant variances on expenditure side. 1,694,900 1,467,788 1,806,500 111,600 Includes new Bob Hunter Memorial Park rentals from April 1, 2007. 1,267,100 1,720,310 1,872,100 605,000 Increase of $605,000 in taxes related to tax exemptions not approved by MNR for 2005, 2006 and 2007 344,697 Expenditures exceed recoveries until year -end. 5,256,000 5,929,823 5,965,900 709,900 831,900 330,022 357,000 2,421,700 794,449 2,516,300 2,515,100 1,538,181 2,522,016 5,768,700 2,662,652 5,395,316 2,961,500 1,969,875 2,931,500 559,300 328,723 559,300 (474,900)Expenses down due to less Remedial Action Plan revenue. 94,600 ORM Alliance - extra expenses funded by extra partner contributions.CTC - expense anticipated to be over budget. 6,916 (373,384) (30,000)Legal expenditures over budget by $50K. Expenditure savings, staff gapping $50K, no consultant contracts $30K. No variances - there maybe lower legal expenditures 3,520,800 2,298,598 3,490,800 (30,000) 2,960,600 1,760,792 3,114,400 153,800 Some gapping but also reclassfications of Planning Ecologists in NH. 5,342 OCETA program under due to less funding. 1,191,700 959,489 1,197,042 4,152,300 2,720,281 4,311,442 2,160,400 1,591,354 3,233,371 159,142 912,871 Inland Fill rev. & exp. down due to contractor delays Additional volume in Plant Propagation. 907,600 597,400 865,200 (42,400)Savings due to staff transfers and staff reductions. 3,241,800 2,229,490 3,118,806 (122,994)Some staff ended up charged to other programs. Numerous cost constraints to deal with rev. shortfall 1,389,400 1,071,687 1,530,300 140,900 Unbudgeted Ducks Unlimited Partnership projects flowthrough. Change in wedding program delivery. Increased operating costs due to business growth. 1,089,900 631,731 1,136,500 46,600 Increase due to program growth. 4,357,800 2,768,837 4,263,000 (94,800)Savings due to staffing and marketing reductions. 1,127,700 690,836 1,014,400 (113,300)Savings due to lower staff and operational expenditures. lower than projected attendance at BCPV 12,1 14, 200 7,989,981 11,928,206 (185,994) Page 26 438,700 291,926 Page 26 351,400 246,422 Page 26 539,400 336,843 438,700 371,400 549,400 Page 26 246,100 114,939 246,100 20,000 Legal costs over budget. 10,000 Employee ad hoc assistance projected over budge in HR 2,564,700 1,634,518 2,624,700 60,000 Expenditure Total 35,537,100 24,827,207 36,949,735 1,252,535 150 Toronto and Region Conservation Authority Operating Variance Report as of August 31, 2007 Funding Sources: Program /User fees: Rental Properties Black Creek Pioneer Village Food Services Development Services Restoration Services Conservation Areas Kortright Centre for Conservation Oak Ridges Corridor Park Conservation Field Centres All Other Program /User fees Reserves CFGT - Living City. 08+ moved below net CFGT - Flowthrough Other Municipal Provincial Federal Donations /Fundraising Non - Government Grants Reverse internal plant material charges included under user fees Other Revenue total Net Expenditures Net Expenditures funded by: CFGT - Living City Provincial Transfer Payments Municipal Levy Deficit / (Surplus) 2007 Budget 2007 2007 Budget Actual P.A. . vs. P. A. Variance Notes $ $ + /(- ) 2,092,100 1,573,120 2,216,100 2,133,500 1,089,733 2,038,900 1,303,100 596,719 1,090,000 2,757,000 1,804,954 2,878,700 2,220,000 970,922 2,227,588 3,183,100 2,713,775 3,111,600 1,233,600 800,486 1,347,400 1,211,000 997,645 1,260,700 1,657,900 957,411 1,626,541 488,500 388,986 526,700 73,600 71 63,600 251,000 371,701 569,489 1,372,500 883,045 2,109,200 2,148,100 1,113,128 2,008,750 1,143,500 614,734 836,041 124,000 Includes new Bob Hunter Memorial Park rentals from April 1, 2007. (94,600)Lower attendance in education and general admissions. (213,100)Savings due to lower staff and operational expenditures. lower than projected attendance at BCPV 121,700 $121.7K more revenue than budget . 7,588 Inland Fill rev. & exp. down due to contractor delays Additional volume in Plant Propagation. (71 ,500)Unrealized swimming program revenue. 113,800 49,700 (31 ,359) Weekend revenue shortfall at Lake St. George. Ovei budgeted revenue for Dorm 2 at Lake St. George. 38,200 (10,000) line moved below net exp. 318,489 736,700 Inland Fill rev. & exp. down due to contractor delays Additional volume in Plant Propagation. (139,350) (307,459)Expenses down due to less Remedial Action Plan revenue. 546,600 45,247 456,715 (89,885) 935,600 1,733,893 724,780 (210,820)Some Community Transformation projects did not go forward. (894,800) (874,032) (390,783) 504,017 23,855,900 15,781,538 24,702,021 846,121 11,681,200 9,045,669 12,247,714 406,414 800,000 845,800 10,335,500 500,000 845,924 845,800 10,335,500 (300,000)Fundraising goals likely not to be met (300,100.00) 8,199,700 566,400 706,400 * Reformatted for 2008 presentation: some recategorization of revenue and internal charges 151 Attachment 2 Toronto and Region Conservation Authority CAPITAL SUMMARY Actuals as of August 31, 2007 and Projected Variance as of December 31, 2007 Gross Expenditures: MONITORING AND REPORTING WATERSHED PLANNING Peel Water Management York Water Management Durham Water Management Water Cost Centres Costs covered by Water management Programs Floodplain Mapping York /Peel /Durham/Toronto Groundwater Terrestrial Natural Heritage Page Page 31 Page 32 Page 33 Page 34 Page 35 Page 36 Page 37 Page 38 REGENERATION Toronto Remedial Action Plan Project Page 39 (RAP activity also shown under other projects) Peel Natural Heritage Project Page 40 York Natural Heritage Project Page 41 Durham Natural Heritage Project Page 42 Regeneration Cost Centres Page 42b Regeneration Cost Centres covered from other budgets Valley and Shoreline Regeneration Projects Page 43 Other Erosion Control Projects Page 44 City of Toronto Waterfront Project Page 45 Region Of Durham Waterfront Project Page 46 Waterfront Revitilization Corporation Projects Page 47 Humber Bay Shores Waterfront Park SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITIES Stewardship Education Sustainable Communities PEEL CLIMATE CHANGE MITIGATION PROJECT Page 48 Page 49 Page 49b Page 50 Page 51 2007 BUDGET 2007 Actuals 2007 P_ A. Diff. P_ A. Variance Notes 992,200 609,564 905,377 (86,823)Some Water Quality work carried forward to 2008 479,900 350,812 372,800 725,400 272,301 705,000 307,600 69,927 288,816 2,259,600 853,609 1,794,326 (1,838,900) (767,339) (1,405,844) 438,500 69,828 308,200 552,300 47,583 516,600 330,000 240,769 406,737 1,597,300 584,649 1,518,180 (12,000) (20,000) 1,261,000 441,174 1,082,825 580,300 213,058 633,174 159,700 77,215 159,700 449,500 194,467 465,700 (446,700) (199,432) (452,900) 4,439,800 955,629 3,979,691 181,300 28,185 181,046 1,846,800 687,950 1,619,716 410,000 150,126 357,709 10,545,600 3,462,290 6,127,200 3,000,000 644,600 206,000 254,200 2,500,000 69,299 3,000,000 339,078 300,413 120,070 219,871 522,500 195,000 254,200 1,680,400 (107,100)Some Watershed Plans & Intergration delayed (20,400)Surface Water Studies behind schedule (18,784)Surface Water Studies behind schedule (465,274)Some Watershed Plans & Intergration delayed 433,056 (130,300)Carryforward to 08. (35,700) 76,737 Addtional funding sources obtained to support higher expenditures (79,120) Etobicoke- Mimico work delayed (20,000) (178,175)Etobicoke- Mimico work delayed 52,874 Additional funding for Duffins work 16,200 (6,200) (460,109)Guildwood Parkway, Beechgrove deferred (254) (227,084)Arsenal Lands Park still unable to proceed (52,291)delays (4,418,400)Port Union - park development and land acquisition cost savingsTommy Thompson Park - project schedule to be extended multiple years Western Beaches - project schedule extended /monitoring continues til 2010 Litigation still in progress (122,100)delays (11,000) (819,600)Claireville planting $550k to be done in spring 08 152 Toronto and Region Conservation Authority CAPITAL SUMMARY Actuals as of August 31, 2007 and Projected Variance as of December 31, 2007 FLOOD PROTECTION Lower Don Other Flood Control Projects INFRASTRUCTURE Public Use Infrastructure Other Facilities Retrofits Drinking Water System Upgrades Living City Centre Design and Build Nursery Relocation Project Kettle Lakes Nature Reserve BCPV Retrofit and Attraction Development Information Technology Project Administrative Office REGIONAL OPEN SPACE Waterfront Open Space Acquisition - Greenspace Strategy Expenditure total Funding Sources: Program /User fees Reserves CFGT - Living City CFGT - Flowthrough Other - Municipal Other - Provincial Other - Federal Other - Donations /Fundraising Non - Government Grants Lease Revenue Land Sale Proceeds Transfers between Projects Revenue total Net Expenditures Provincial Transfer Payments Municipal Levy Page Page 52 Page 53 Page 54 Page 55 Page 56 Page 57 Page 58 Page 59 Page 60 Page 61 Page 62 Page 63 Page 63 2007 2007 BUDGET Actuals $ $ 2007 Diff. P.A. . P.A. . 8,186,100 4,092,525 8,200,000 13,900 Variance Notes 1,028,900 (8,753) 716,100 (312,800)Carryforward to 08 415,300 308,793 435,300 20,000 1,817,500 227,422 1,510,000 (307,500)Carried forward to 2008 for projects Just Get Active, Campground Improvements /AH Water Play 500,000 814,500 390,600 563,500 500,000 700,000 530,000 4,720,000 4,933 6,540 954,903 121,277 240,796 384,595 88,857 (500,000) Project delayed 1,046,000 231500 Extra work for generator, photovoltaic, truckport. 300,000 (90,600)Carryforward to 08 513,500 (50,000)Carryforward to 08 420,000 (80,000)Carryforward to 08 655,300 (44,700)Carryforward to 08 62,765 530,000 384,595 4,720,000 52,042,400 16,251,592 44,242,353 (7,800,047) 100,000 203,100 7,132,700 2,527,500 379,300 500,000 19,692,200 450,000 (20,000) 30,964,800 27,500 41,158 400,474 281,267 351,298 4,645 7,784,035 600 100,000 182,250 7,268,069 2,109,691 307,295 500,000 15,205,153 450,000 (12,000) (20,000) 600 (20,850) 135,369 (417,809)Stewardship projects & Dam funding not secured (72,005) (4,487,047)TWRC Project changes. 8,878,377 26,103,058 (4,861,742) 21 ,077,600 7,373,215 18,139,295 (2,938,305) 20,243,100 17,075,515 (3,167,585)Lower utilization due to delays (Surplus) / Deficit 834,500 1,063,780 229,280 153 RES. #C46/07 - 2008 PRELIMINARY ESTIMATES, OPERATING AND CAPITAL Approval of the 2008 Preliminary Estimates, Operating and Capital. Moved by: Bill Fisch Seconded by: Gino Rosati THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT the 2008 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 2008 Preliminary Estimates, Operating and Capital. CARRIED RATIONALE As members are aware, approval of the 2008 Preliminary Estimates, Operating and Capital, is the first formal stage toward approval of the 2008 budget. Approval of the preliminary estimates means that staff will submit requests to the municipal funding partners for an average municipal operating levy increase of 6.9% over 2007. This proposed levy increase of 6.9% is in excess of the 4% guideline the Authority was advised of at its meeting in September. The preliminary estimates now assume that no exemption will be available through the provincial Conservation Land Tax Incentive Program (CLTIP) and proposes that property taxes be levied back to the participating municipality where the lands are situated. Since TRCA lands are mostly exempted in the City of Toronto, the net impact of this tax adjustment is that the levy increase for Toronto is 4% but averages at 6.9% when all of our jurisdictions are considered. Gross expenditures are estimated to grow at 4.5 %, an increase of $1,613,600. This growth is primarily salary related, including some annualizations and new positions. The estimates include a new provision of $300,000 for property taxes on lands which, for the last three years, staff had assumed would be eligible for the CLTIP. As members are aware, this matter is being appealed but as yet there is no resolution. There is general inflation provision in operations due to higher fuel and energy costs but this is modest in terms of the overall impact on gross expenditures as the operating budget is mostly driven by wage pressures. Non -levy revenues are projected to grow at 3.8 %, an increase of $897,300. Significant increases are projected in operational areas and development fees. In terms of Net Operating Expenditures (gross expenditures less operating revenue), the increase is 6.1 %. This is the portion of the operating budget funded from the Ministry of Natural Resources (MNR) transfer payments, municipal levy and starting with 2008 includes operating grants from The Conservation Foundation of Greater Toronto (CFGT). These grants were previously treated as operating revenue. The estimates assume that MNR transfer payments and CFGT contributions will be flatlined at the 2007 level. The increase in the municipal levy is 6.9 %. 154 The 2008 preliminary estimates include a provision of $800,000 in general contributions from CFGT. As this target will not likely be met in 2007 and has not been met the last several years, the final budget may reflect a reduced provision, more in line with the Foundation's ability to raise unrestricted revenue. The 2008 estimates currently provide for almost 14 new full -time equivalents (FTE), as outlined on page 7 of the budget document. This schedule will not include new staffing requirements within the capital estimates until the detailed capital budgets have been determined. Most of these new FTE's are funded from revenues and do not impact the levy. Staff will have the new position details available for the meeting. 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, Durham and York and the City of Toronto to present TRCA budget requirements. Meetings with the participating municipalities to finalize the budget will occur over the next four months. Meetings with Peel, York and Durham include representatives of the other conservation authorities which have jurisdiction in those regions. The apportionment of the municipal levy is based on modified current value assessment (CVA). The attachments include a breakdown of this apportionment (using 2007 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 includes the initial submissions to the participating municipalities. As staff work through the various municipal processes, these numbers will change to reflect decisions by the funding partners as to what they are able to support. The final capital budget which will be presented in April, 2008, will include Toronto Waterfront Revitalization Corporation projects as well as funding from other sources and any carry forward of project funding from 2007. Staff will make a presentation to the board on the 2008 Preliminary Estimates, Operating and Capital on November 2, 2008. Report prepared by: Jim Dillane, extension 6292 Email: jdillane @trca.on.ca For Information contact: Ralph Kofler, extension 5274; Rocco Sgambelluri, extension 5232 Email: rkofler @trca.on.ca; rsgambelluri@trca.on.ca Date: October 25, 2007 Attachments: 1 155 Attachment 1 ACTORONTO AND REGION Y� onserva ton for The Living City 2008 PRELIMINARY ESTIMATES OPERATING AND CAPITAL As submitted to the Business Excellence Advisory Board on November 2, 2007 156 TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY 2008 PRELIMINARY ESTIMATES TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGES Section 1: Apportionment of Levy 2008 Apportionment of Levy - Summary 1 2008 Apportionment of Levy - Matching / 2 Non - Matching Format Basis of Apportionment - Municipal Levy 2007 3 -4 Section 2: Operating Estimates Operating Estimates Summary 5 -6 Full -Time Equivalents of Staffing 7 2008 Operating Estimates - Detailed 8 -26 Section 3: Capital Estimates Requests for Funding 27 -30 157 SECTION 1 2008 APPORTIONMENT OF LEVY 158 Page 1 TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY APPORTIONMENT OF 2008 OPERATING BUDGET LEVY GENERAL PROGRAMS SUMMARY 2008 GENERAL LEVY LEVY EXCLUDING TAX TAX ADJ. ADJUST. $ $ A DJA LA -TO SO RO NT IO 847 1,000 DURHAM 331,956 125,506 TORONTO 6,984,261 4,200 MONO 892 200 PEEL 1,215,524 129,270 YORK 2,043,045 214,999 LEVY ON HAND / SPECIAL 10,576,525 475,175 10,576,525 475,175 * excludes Rouge Park levy TOTAL GENERAL LEVY $ 1,847 10 457,462 6,988,461 1,092 10 1 ,344,794 14,228 2,258,044 % 23,91 2007 Operating ROUGE OPERATING Change PARK LEVY * 08/07 $ $ 837 1,010 120.7% 3,8861 369,200 88,262 23.9% 81,752: 6,769,988 218,473 3.2% 848 244 28.8% 1,192,109 152,685 12.8% 4 2,002,518 255,526 12.8% 123,800 123,800 111 10,335,500 716,200 6.9% 10,335,500 716,200 6.9% 159 Page 2 TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY APPORTIONMENT OF 2008 LEVIES MATCHING* AND NON - MATCHING FORMAT * Based on preliminary estimates of provincial funding. 160 OPERATING LEVY MATCHING* NON - MATCHING TOTAL $ $ $ ADJALA- TOSORON TI O 68 1,779 1,847 DURHAM 26,546 430,916 457,462 TORONTO 558,529 6,429,932 6,988,461 MONO 71 1,021 1,092 PEEL 97,205 1,247,589 1,344,794 YORK 163,381 2,094,663 2,258,044 845,800 10, 205, 900 11, 051, 700 * Based on preliminary estimates of provincial funding. 160 Page 3 THE TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY BASIS OF APPORTIONMENT - MUNICIPAL LEVY - 2008 (BASED ON 2006 FOR 2007 MODIFIED CURRENT VALUE ASSESSMENT FIGURES) MUNICIPALITY CURRENT % CURRENT TOTAL POPULATION VALUE MUNICIP- VALUE POPULATION IN ASSESSMENT ALITY IN ASSESSMENT AUTHORITY AUTHORITY IN WATERSHED $(000's) Township of Adjala - Tosorontio Durham, Regional Municipality of City of Toronto Town of Mono Peel, Regional Municipality of York, Regional Municipality of $(000's) 1,278, 874 24,182, 754 421,988,773 1,077,860 169,069,124 135,188, 932 752,786,317 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 10,170,220 11,378,971 2,633,564 24,182, 754 52,285,676 107,858,902 8,924,546 169,069,124 7,225,257 42,987,886 26,604,656 50,272,220 4,577,626 3,521,286 135,188, 932 As provided by the Ministry of Natural Resources 4 100 5 * * 51,155 20,056,788 421,988,773 53,893 73,441,914 123,440,684 9,846 394 190,404 159,013 2,108,054 2,108,054 6,578 329 989,812 444,593 662,014 598,052 639, 033,208 3,966,708 3,310,435 86 8,746,389 87,276 75,057 95 10,810,022 84,686 80,452 19 500,377 18,442 3,504 20,056,788 190, 404 159,013 63 32,939,976 354,667 223,440 33 35,593,438 582,624 192,266 55 4,908,500 52,521 28,887 73,441,914 989,812 444,593 4 289,010 41,307 1,652 100 42,987,886 226,358 226,358 99 26,338,609 142,487 141,062 100 50,272,221 211,082 211,082 43 1,968,379 22,635 9,733 45 1,584,579 18,145 8,165 123,440,684 662,014 598,052 161 Page 4 TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY 2008 LEVY APPORTIONMENT MUNICIPALITY ADJALA - TOSORONTIO DURHAM, REGIONAL MUNICIPALITY OF Ajax 8,746,389 Pickering 10,810,022 Uxbridge 500,377 CITY OF TORONTO TOWN OF MONO PEEL, REGIONAL MUNICIPALITY OF Brampton Mississauga Caledon 32,939,976 35,593,438 4,908,500 YORK, REGIONAL MUNICIPALITY OF Aurora Markham Richmond Vaughan Whitchurch - Stouffville King 289,010 42,987,886 26,338,609 50,272,221 1,968,379 1,584,579 MODIFIED CURRENT VALUE ASSESSMENT IN WATERSHED $(000's) 2008 GENERAL LEVY PROPORTIONATE FACTOR 2007 GENERAL LEVY PROPORTIONATE FACTOR 51,155 20,056,788 421,988,773 53,893 73,441,914 123,440,684 639,033,208 0.00801% 3.13861% 66.03550% 0.00843% 11.49266% 19.31679% 0.00823% 3.08266% 66.57231 % 0.00834% 11.33314% 18.99531 % 100.00000% 100.00000% 162 SECTION 2 2008 OPERATING ESTIMATES 163 Page 5 TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY 2008 Preliminary Operating Budget Page 2007 2007 2008 08 / 07 08 / 07 Gross Expenditures (by Reference Budget P.A. . Budget % Chq. $ Chq. functional Unit) $ $ Finance and Business Services Division Administration Rental Properties Property Sevices Page 8 2,294,000 2,287,300 Page 9 1,694,900 1,806,500 Page 10 1,267,100 1,872,100 Vehicle & Equipment Reserve Page 11 Watershed Management Division WM Divisional Management Watershed Strategies Page 12 Page 13 2008 over 2007 Change $ Intro: all budgets affected by COLA and market adjustments. 2,356,800 2.7% 62,800 Modest upgrades in IT capacity. Annualization of Records Clerk, NP Clerk and maternity leave return. 1,845,700 8.9% 150,800 Expenditure increases reflect new Bob Hunter Memorial Park units from ORC 1,689,100 33.3% 422,000 Increase of $300.000 in taxes related to tax exemptions not approved by MNR, Annualization of Property Agent & clerk positions. Expenditures exceed recoveries until year -end. 5,256,000 5,965,900 5,891,600 12.1% 635,600 831,900 357,000 440,200 -47.1% 2.421, 700 2.516.300 2.583.000 6.7% Conservation Field Centres Page 14 2,515,100 2,522,016 2,613,500 3.9% Planning & Development Division Planning & Development Enforcement Ecology Division Ecology Community Transformation Partnerships Restoration Services Division Page 15 Page 16 (391.700) Remedial Action Plan: budgeted at lower amount. 161,300 Don /Highland - vacant Don Specialist position restored. Rouge: more Regen. Trust funding available. Duffins - 07 gapping not present in 08. 98,400 Wages and other costs related to additional volume. 5,768,700 5,395,316 5,636,700 -2.3% (132.000) 2,961,500 2,931,500 3,126,400 5.6% 164,900 More staff & costs to Environmental Assessments, Increased legal expenditures. 559,300 559,300 579,000 3.5% 19,700 3,520,800 3,490,800 3705,400 5.2% 184,600 Page 17 2,960,600 3,114,400 3,126,100 5.6% 165,500 More staff & costs Flood Forecasting. Water resources. Source Water Protection slightly up but not enough revenue for a surplus as in 07. Page 18 1,191,700 1,197,042 814,800 -31.6% (376.900) Fewer programs projected. Restoration Services Page 19 Parks and Culture Division Parks & Culture Divisional Management Conservation Areas Kortright Centre for Conservation Oak Ridges Corridor Park Black Creek Pioneer Village Page 20 Page 21 Page 22 Page 23 Page 24 Food Services Page Office of the CAO Corporate Management Corporate Secretariat Human Resources Communications Professional Access Program 4,152,300 4,311,442 3,940,900 -5.1% (211.400) 2,160,400 3,233,371 2,306,800 6.8% 146,400 Restoration Services Centre - annualized new costs net c recoveries. Plant Propagation - exp. & rev up. Inland Fill revenue higher. 907,600 865,200 954,400 5.2% 46,800 Share of new Restoration Services building operating costs added. 3,241,800 3,118,806 3,477,000 7.3% 235,200 Outdoor Aquatic Playground Program at Heart Lake added and admision fee increase. Increased security. insurance deductible and internet service costs. FT Asst. Superintendent position reinstated to full year. 1,389,400 1,530,300 1,624,700 16.9% 235,300 Increased Wedding program. Increased Day Camp Program. Added Jr. Clerk contract position. 1,089,900 1,136,500 1,211,000 11.1% 121,100 Added maintenance of Oak Ridges Corridor Park . 4,357,800 4,263,000 4,288,900 -1.6% (68.900) Maintenance: utilities increase + supplies cost increase. Marketing staff transferred to Corporate Communication_ 25 1,127,700 1,014,400 1,282,800 13.8% 155,100 Higher Wedding / Corporate Events activity projected. Page 26 Page 26 Page 26 Page 26 12.114, 200 11, 928, 206 12, 838, 800 6.0% 724,600 438,700 351,400 539,400 989,100 438,700 371,400 549,400 1,019,100 453,800 361,400 600,300 1,157,600 3.4% 2.8% 11.3% 17.0 15,100 10,000 60,900 168,500 Page 26 246,100 246,100 257,400 4.6% 11,300 2.564.700 2.624.700 2.830,500 10.4% 265,800 Expenditure Total 35,537,100 36,949,735 37,150,700 4.5% 1,613,600 Modest increase in corporate legal provision. Annualization of maternity leave in 2008 Events Coordinator transferred here from BCPV. Additional website development & support . Participation in Green Living Show. Page 6 Toronto and Region Conservation Authority 2008 Preliminary Operating Budget Funding Sources: Program /User fees: Rental Properties Black Creek Pioneer Village Food Services Development Services Restoration Services Conservation Areas Kortright Centre for Conservation Oak Ridges Corridor Park Conservation Field Centres All Other Program /User fees Reserves CFGT - Living City. 08+ moved belov net CFGT - Flowthrough Other Municipal Provincial Federal Donations /Fundraising Non - Government Grants Reverse internal plant material charges included under user fees Other Revenue total Net Expenditures Net Expenditures funded by: CFGT - Living City Provincial Transfer Payments Municipal Levy Deficit / (Surplus) 2007 Budget 2007 2008 08 / 07 08 / 07 P. Budget % Chg. $ Chg. $ $ 2008 over 2007 Change 2,092,100 2,216,100 2,256,500 7.9% 164,400 Rent increases and more units in new Bob Hunter Memorial Park. 2,133,500 2,038,900 2,136,200 0.1% 2,700 No fee increase, slight attendance increase. 1,303,100 1,090,000 1,524,300 17.0% 221,200 More Corporate Events 2,757,000 2,878,700 3,301,600 19.8% 544,600 Increased revenues by 20% from 2007, new Seaton Lands and Markham funds. 2,220,000 2,227,588 2,484,100 11.9% 264,100 Plant Propagation -exp. & rev up. Inland Fill revenue higher. 3,183,100 3,111,600 3,351,600 5.3% 168,500 Camping Fees increased. Outdoor Aquatic Playground Program at Heart Lake added and admision fee increase. 1,233,600 1,347,400 1,445,600 17.2% 212,000 Increased Day Camp Program. Increased Wedding program . 1,211,000 1,260,700 1,657,900 1,626,541 488,500 526,700 73,600 63,600 251,000 569,489 1,372,500 2,109,200 2,148,100 2,008,750 1,143,500 836,041 546,600 456,715 935,600 724,780 1,211,000 1,738,200 4.8% 80,300 488,500 188,200 155.7% 114,600 Additional reserve to balance to levy. 205,500 - 18.1% (45,500) 1,224,700 - 10.8% (147,800) line moved below net exp. Foreign Professionals program not funded via CFGT i 08 Some Community Transformation projects did not go forward. 2,125,000 -1.1% (23,100) 746,000 -34.8% (397,500) Remedial Action Plan: budgeted at lower amount. 487,100 - 10.9% (59,500) 796,000 -14.9% (139,600) Some Community Transformation projects did not go forward. (894,800) (390,783) (956,900) 6.9% (62,100) 23,855,900 24,702,021 24,753,200 3.8% 897,300 11,681,200 12,247,714 12,397,500 6.1 % 716,300 800,000 500,000 800,000 845,800 845,800 845,800 10,335,500 10,335,500 11,051,700 6.9% 716,200 (300,100.00) 566,400 (300,000) -0.0% 100 Fundraising goals to be discussed. * Reformatted for 2008 presentation: some recategorization of revenue and internal charges 165 Page 7 TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY Full -time Equivalent Employees Seasonal, Part -time FULL -TIME Contract TOTAL FTE's 2007 2008 2006 2007 2006 2007 Finance & Business Services 51.8 55.1 1.6 0.3 53.4 55.4 Watershed Management / Planning / 136.5 143.1 23.9 24.3 160.4 167.4 Ecology / Restoration Services Parks and Culture 64.0 52.0 104.7 118.6 168.6 170.7 Office of the CAO 18.3 20.7 1.9 2.0 20.1 22.6 Total Operating 270.5 270.9 132.0 145.2 402.5 416.1 Capital * 91.8 94.6 22.5 19.9 114.3 114.5 TOTAL STAFFING 362.3 365.5 154.5 165.1 516.8 530.6 * 2007 capital staffing is still in progress until detailed capital budget completed. 166 TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY 2008 OPERATING BUDGET- PRELIMINARY DIVISION: ACTIVITY: Finance and Business Services Administration Page 8 2007 2007 2008 Budget P. A. Budget % Chq. $ Chq. $ $ $ Expenditures: Financial Services 830,200 824,600 904,300 8.9% 74,100 Office Services 1,255,900 1,254,800 1,279,900 1.9% 24,000 Information Technology 612,200 612,200 666,200 8.8% 54,000 GIS 459,100 459,100 498,300 8.5% 39,200 Project Surcharge (927,200) (927,200) (1,048,300) 13.1% (121,100) Environmental Management Systems 63,800 63,800 56,400 -11.6% (7,400) Expenditure Total Funding Sources: Program /User fees Reserves CFGT - Living City CFGT - Flowthrough Municipal Provincial Federal Donations /Fundraising Non - Government Grants 2,294,000 2,287,300 2,356,800 2.7% 62,800 474,000 514,500 474,000 Revenue Total 474,000 514,500 474,000 Net Expenditures 1,820,000 1,772,800 1,882,800 3.5% 62,800 Comments: Major 08 over 07 Changes (in addition to economic factors): Modest upgrades in IT capacity. Wage costs: Annualization of Records Clerk, A/P Clerk and maternity leave return. TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY 2008 OPERATING BUDGET- PRELIMINARY DIVISION: ACTIVITY: Finance and Business Services Rental Properties Page 9 Expenditures: Basic Rentals ORC Rentals Special Agreements Central Services Expenditure Total Funding Sources: Program /User fees Reserves CFGT - Living City CFGT - Flowthrough Municipal Provincial Federal Donations /Fundraising Private Revenue total Net Expenditures 2007 2007 2008 Budget P. A. Budget % Chq. $ Chq. $ $ $ 559,800 559,800 562,300 693,000 804,600 829,000 101,500 101,500 104,000 340,600 340,600 350,400 1,694, 900 1,806,500 1,845,700 0.4% 19.6% 2.5% 2.9% 2,500 136,000 2,500 9,800 8.9% 150,800 2,092,100 2,216,100 2,256,500 7.9% 164,400 2,092,100 2,216,100 2,256,500 7.9% 164,400 (397,200) (409,600) (410,800) 3.4% (13,600) Comments: Major 08 over 07 Changes (in addition to economic factors): Expenditure increases reflect new Bob Hunter Memorial Park units from ORC 168 TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY 2008 OPERATING BUDGET- PRELIMINARY DIVISION: ACTIVITY: Finance and Business Services Property & Taxes Page 10 Expenditures: Property Services Taxes & Insurance Conservation Land Planning Expenditure Total 2007 2007 2008 Budget P. A. Budget % Chq. $ Chq. $ $ $ 809,600 809,600 910,500 12.5% 100,900 372,000 977,000 684,100 83.9% 312,100 85,500 85,500 94,500 10.5% 9,000 1,267,100 1,872,100 1,689,100 33.3% 422,000 Funding Sources: Program /User fees Reserves 139,600 139,600 CFGT - Living City CFGT - Flowthrough Municipal Provincial Federal Donations /Fundraising Non - Government Grants 55,000 209,000 55,000 Revenue Total Net Expenditures 55,000 209,000 194,600 253.8% 139,600 1,212,100 1,663,100 1,494,500 23.3% 282,400 Comments: Major 08 over 07 Changes (in addition to economic factors): Increase of $300,000 in taxes related to tax exemptions not approved by MNR, Annualization of Property Agent & clerk positions. NOTES: 2007 VARIANCES Increase of $605,000 in taxes related to tax exemptions not approved by MNR for 2005, 2006 and 2007 Sales tax rebates of $154,000, unbudgeted TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY 2008 OPERATING BUDGET- PRELIMINARY DIVISION: Finance and Business Services ACTIVITY: Vehicle & Equipment Page 11 2007 2007 2008 Budget P. A. Budget % Chq. $ Chq. $ $ $ Expenditures: Fuel, Maintenance & Repairs 452,800 452,800 486,100 7.4% 33,300 Vehicle Purchases - New Vehicle Purchases - Replacement 245,900 305,900 270,000 9.8% 24,100 Equipment Purchases - New 5,000 5,000 - 100.0% (5,000) Equipment Purchases - Replacement 130,000 130,000 83,900 -35.5% (46,100) Equipment Disposal Proceeds (53,000) (53,000) (30,000) -43.4% 23,000 Internal Recoveries (780,700) (840,700) (810,000) 3.8% (29,300) Expenditure Total Funding Sources: Program /User fees Reserves CFGT - Living City CFGT - Flowthrough Municipal Provincial Federal Donations /Fundraising Private Revenue Total Net Expenditures Comments: Major 08 over 07 Changes (in addition to economic factors): Normal rate of replacements. TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY 2008 OPERATING BUDGET- PRELIMINARY DIVISION: Watershed Management ACTIVITY: WM Divisional Management Page 12 2007 2007 Budget P. A. 2008 Budget % Chq. $ Chq. $ $ Expenditures: Divisional Management 208,700 208,700 R.A.P. Administration 623,200 148,300 $ 228,300 211,900 9.4% -66.0% 19,600 (411,300) Expenditure Total 831,900 357,000 440,200 -47.1% (391,700) Funding Sources: Program /User fees Reserves CFGT - Living City CFGT - Flowthrough Municipal Provincial 322,850 85,350 Federal 322,850 85,450 Donations /Fundraising Private 118,200 118,300 - - - - - -63.4% -63.4% - - (204,650) (204,550) Revenue Total 645,700 170,800 236,500 -63.4% (409,200) 17,500 Net Expenditures 186,200 186,200 203,700 9.4% Comments: Major 08 over 07 Changes (in addition to economic factors): Remedial Action Plan: budgeted at lower amount. TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY 2008 OPERATING BUDGET - PRELIMINARY DIVISION: ACTIVITY: Watershed Management Watershed Strategies Page 13 2007 2007 2008 Budget P. A. Budget % Chq. $ Chq. $ $ $ Expenditures: Don River 279,500 261,900 296,700 6.2% 17,200 Humber River 361,900 367,800 365,000 0.9% 3,100 Rouge River 400,000 400,000 475,000 18.8% 75,000 Highland Creek 9,700 9,700 38,400 295.9% 28,700 Etobicoke - Mimico Creek 274,400 369,700 275,400 0.4% 1,000 Duffins Creek 231,000 231,000 253,800 9.9% 22,800 Oak Ridges Moraine 132,900 142,000 137,300 3.3% 4,400 Waterfront Strategy 68,700 68,700 71,200 3.6% 2,500 CTC Source Water Protection Plan 821,900 845,900 828,500 0.8% 6,600 Portion funded from Capital (158,300) (180,400) (158,300) Other Expenditure Total 2,421,700 2,516,300 2,583,000 6.7% 161,300 Funding Sources: Program /User fees Reserves CFGT - Living City CFGT - Flowthrough Other - Municipal Other - Provincial Other - Federal Other - Donations /Fundraising Other - Private 48,600 48,600 33,600 - 30.9% (15,000) 20,000 880,150 34,250 400,000 143,700 36,500 20,000 20,000 891,350 905,900 45,450 60,000 400,000 400,000 182,538 143,700 Revenue Total 1,526,700 Net Expenditures 1,624,438 1,563,200 2.9% 25,750 75.2% 25,750 2.4% 36,500 895,000 891,862 1,019,800 13.9% 124,800 Comments: Major 08 over 07 Changes (in addition to economic factors): Don /Highland - vacant Don Specialist position restored. Rouge: more Regen. Trust funding available. Duffins - 07 gapping not present in 08. 2007 Actuals: ORM Alliance - extra expenses funded by extra partner contributions. CTC - expense anticipated to be over budget. TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY 2008 OPERATING BUDGET- PRELIMINARY DIVISION: ACTIVITY: Watershed Management Conservation Field Centres Page 14 2007 2007 2008 Budget P. A. Budget % Chq. $ Chq. $ $ $ Expenditures: Program Management 133,400 133,400 137,700 3.2% 4,300 Education Support Services 276,600 286,775 281,900 1.9% 5,300 Albion Hills 719,100 709,710 750,400 4.4% 31,300 Claremont 640,700 642,880 694,700 8.4% 54,000 Lake St. George 675,800 681,251 729,300 7.9% 53,500 Education Special Projects 134,500 134,500 134,500 Recoveries from Other programs Expenditure Total (65,000) (66,500) (115,000) 76.9% (50,000) 2,515,100 2,522,016 2,613,500 3.9% 98,400 Funding Sources: Program /Userfees 1,657,900 1,626,541 1,738,200 4.8% 80,300 Reserves 10,000 10,000 10,000 CFGT - Living City CFGT - Flowthrough 124,500 143,500 152,500 22.5% 28,000 Municipal Provincial Federal Donations /Fundraising 9,500 9,500 - 100.0% (9,500) Non - Government Grants 134,500 134,500 134,500 Internal Revenue Total 1,936,400 1,924,041 2,035,200 5.1% 98,800 Net Expenditures 578,700 597,975 578,300 -0.1% (400) Comments: Major 08 over 07 Changes (in addition to economic factors): Wages and other costs related to additional volume. TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY 2008 OPERATING BUDGET- PRELIMINARY DIVISION: ACTIVITY: Planning & Development Planning & Development Page 15 2007 2007 2008 Budget P. A. Budget % Chq. $ Chq. $ $ $ Expenditures: Planning Services 817,600 767,600 874,100 6.9% 56,500 Regulation Services 680,500 680,500 724,200 6.4% 43,700 Solicitor /Realtor Enquiries 51,600 51,600 53,300 3.3% 1,700 Policy, Research and Special Projects 457,900 517,008 434,000 -5.2% (23,900) Hearings 200,000 250,000 250,000 25.0% 50,000 Environmental Assessments 1,109,900 1,109,900 1,410,800 27.1% 300,900 Portion funded via other Program Categories (356,000) (445,108) (620,000) 74.2% (264,000) Expenditure Total 2,961,500 2,931,500 3,126,400 5.6% 164,900 Funding Sources: Program /Userfees 2,757,000 2,878,700 3,301,600 19.8% 544,600 Reserves CFGT - Living City CFGT - Flowthrough Municipal 836,500 834,800 826,100 -1.2% (10,400) Provincial Federal Donations /Fundraising Non - Government Grants 14,200 14,200 - 100.0% (14,200) Revenue Total Net Expenditures 3,607,700 3,727,700 4,127,700 14.4% 520,000 (646,200) (796,200) (1,001,300) 55% (355,100) Comments: Major 08 over 07 Changes (in addition to economic factors): Increased revenues by 20% from 2007, new Seaton Lands and Markham funds. More staff & costs to Environmental Assessments, Increased legal expenditures. 174 TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY 2008 OPERATING BUDGET - PRELIMINARY DIVISION: Planning & Development ACTIVITY: Enforcement Page 16 2007 2007 Budget P. A. 2008 Budget % Chq. $ Chq. $ $ Expenditures: Enforcement 509,300 509,300 Legal 50,000 50,000 $ 529,000 50,000 3.9% 19,700 Expenditure Total 559,300 559,300 579,000 3.5% 19,700 Funding Sources: Program /User fees Reserves CFGT - Living City CFGT - Flowthrough Municipal Provincial Federal Donations /Fundraising Private - - - - - - - - - Revenue Total - Net Expenditures 559,300 559,300 579,000 3.5% 19,700 Comments: Major 08 over 07 Changes (in addition to economic factors): TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY 2008 OPERATING BUDGET- PRELIMINARY DIVISION: Ecology Page 17 Expenditures: Program Management 2007 2007 2008 Budget P. A. Budget % Chq. $ Chq. $ $ $ 381,800 372,600 409,900 7.4% 28,100 Sustainable Development Planning Review Services 30600 30600 25100 -18.0% -5500 Special Projects 190,000 300,000 100,000 -47.4% (90,000) Natural Heritage Management 546,300 552,300 594,600 8.8% 48,300 Water Resources 917,300 888,200 969,600 5.7% 52,300 Flood Forecasting & Warning 222,700 235,000 313,400 40.7% 90,700 Op. & Maintenance of Dams, Channels and Water Control Structures 313,800 313,800 320,300 2.1% 6,500 Source Water Protection 358,100 421,900 393,200 9.8% 35,100 Expenditure Total 2,960,600 3,114,400 3,126,100 5.6% 165,500 Funding Sources: Program /User fees Reserves CFGT - Living City CFGT - Flowthrough Municipal 115,000 427,000 25,000 -78.3% (90,000) Provincial 450,000 300,000 450,000 Federal 25,000 4,516 25,000 Donations /Fundraising Non - Government Grants 74,000 79 125,000 68.9% 51,000 Internal 12,300 Revenue Total 664,000 743,895 625,000 -5.9% (39,000) Net Expenditures 2,296,600 2,370,505 2,501,100 8.9% 204,500 Comments: Major 08 over 07 Changes (in addition to economic factors): More training revenue. More staff & costs Flood Forecasting, Water resources. Source Water Protection slightly up but not enough revenue for a surplus as in 07. NOTES: 2007 VARIANCES Some gapping but also reclassfications of Planning Ecologists in NH. Lower revenues from Training Sessions and Products. Source Water Protection & Sp. Proj. up. TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY 2008 OPERATING BUDGET - PRELIMINARY DIVISION: Ecology ACTIVITY: Community Transformation Partnerships Page 18 Expenditures: Energy Protects Development, Management & Communications Mayors' Megawatt Challenge MMC:Vaughan PCP Challenge Greening Health Care Home Energy Clinic PowerStream Relationship Sustainable House Demonstration Greening Retail Sustainable Schools All Others 2007 2007 2008 BUDGET P. A. BUDGET %CHG. $ CHG. 150,100 52,886 115,300 - 23.2% 113,400 73,440 106,300 -6.3% 8,400 14,600 156,000 148,970 206,900 32.6% 12,500 2,900 5,400 - 56.8% 36,000 - 170,900 39,175 104,600 - 38.8% 164,300 146,345 5,400 - 96.7% 353,100 266,326 79,800 - 77.4% Sustainable Development Protects (148,600) Sustainable Communities - General Sustainable Communities Charette Greening the Urban Village, CMHC Proposal OCETA Sustainable House Design Comp The Municipal Tool Kit All Others 47,700 35,300 (132,600) (154,700) 22,000 7,400 2,100 (34,800) (7,100) 14,600 50,900 (7,100) (66,300) (158,900) (273,300) 86,100 22,500 - 36.3% (12,800) 5,400 - 5,400 295,900 116.0% 158,900 20,000 137,000 425,000 Expenditure Total 1,191,700 1,197,042 814,800 - 31.6% (376,900) Funding Sources: Program /User fees Reserves CFGT - Living City - CFGT - Flowthrough 33,500 306,489 28,000 -16.4% (5,500) Municipal 211,000 137,000 213,600 1.2% 2,600 Provincial 52,000 265,150 146,500 181.7% 94,500 Federal 271,000 258,225 32,000 -88.2% (239,000) Donations /Fundraising 132,000 42,215 82,000 -37.9% (50,000) Non - Government Grants 492,200 157,963 312,700 -36.5% (179,500) Revenue Total 1,191,700 1,167,042 814,800 -31.6% (376,900) Net Expenditures 30,000 Comments: Major 08 over 07 Changes (in addition to economic factors): Fewer programs projected. TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY 2008 OPERATING BUDGET- PRELIMINARY DIVISION: Restoration Services Page 19 2007 2007 2008 Budget P. A. Budget % Chq. $ Chq. $ $ $ Expenditures: Program Management 378,400 493,588 400,600 5.9% 22,200 Inland Fill Program 230,000 143,000 230,000 Plant Propagation 467,100 525,000 486,300 4.1% 19,200 Planting and Special Projects 740,600 1,637,383 785,800 6.1% 45,200 Asian Longhorned Beetle 540,400 470,400 560,700 3.8% 20,300 Internal Recoveries (513,500) (513,500) (555,800) 8.2% (42,300) Funded from Other Projects (160,100) (185,300) Archaeology 477,500 477,500 584,500 22.4% 107,000 Expenditure Total 2,160,400 3,233,371 2,306,800 6.8% 146,400 Funding Sources: Program /User fees 2,220,000 2,227,588 2,484,100 11.9% 264,100 Reserves CFGT - Living City CFGT - Flowthrough Municipal 190,000 690,400 140,000 -26.3% (50,000) Provincial 50,000 50,000 Federal 490,400 442,400 510,700 4.1% 20,300 Donations /Fund raising Non - Government Grants 3,100 3,100 Internal Recoveries (839,800) (344,483) (895,800) 6.7% (56,000) Revenue Total 2,060,600 3,015,905 2,292,100 11.2% 231,500 Net Expenditures 99,800 217,466 14,700 -85.3% (85,100) Comments: Major 08 over 07 Changes (in addition to economic factors): Restoration Services Centre - annualized new costs net of recoveries. Plant Propagation - exp. & rev up. Inland Fill revenue higher. NOTES: 2007 VARIANCES Inland Fill rev. & exp. down due to contractor delays. Additional volume in Plant Propagation. 178 TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY 2008 OPERATING BUDGET- PRELIMINARY DIVISION: Parks and Culture ACTIVITY: Divisional Management Page 20 2007 2007 BUDGET P. A. 2008 BUDGET %CHG. $ CHG. $ $ Expenditures: $ 438,300 67,500 121,200 327,400 32.1% 5.6% -38.7% 4.1% 106,600 3,600 (76,400) 13,000 Divisional Management 331,700 313,300 Parks /Culture- Fundraising 63,900 48,900 Parks /Culture- Sales 197,600 195,300 Parks /Culture- Customer Service 314,400 307,700 907,600 865,200 954,400 5.2% 46,800 FUNDING SOURCES: User fees: 14,500 12,200 Reserves CFGT - Living City CFGT - Flowthrough Other - Municipal Other - Provincial Other - Federal Other - Donations /Fundraising Other - Private 14,500 - - - - - - - - 14,500 12,200 14,500 NET EXPENDITURES 893,100 853,000 939,900 5.2% 46,800 Comments: Major 08 over 07 Changes (in addition to economic factors): Share of new Restoration Services building operating costs added. TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY 2008 OPERATING BUDGET- PRELIMINARY DIVISION: ACTIVITY: Parks & Culture Division Conservation Areas Page 21 2007 2007 2008 Budget P. A. Budget % Chq. $ Chq. $ $ $ Expenditures: General Operations 100,000 96,000 100,000 West Zone West Zone Administration 132,500 127,400 165,300 24.8% 32,800 Albion Hills 665,500 677,700 728,950 9.5% 63,450 Glen Haffy 189,900 202,000 196,410 3.4% 6,510 Indian Line 462,800 434,000 493,100 6.5% 30,300 Boyd 233,900 226,900 248,100 6.1% 14,200 Heart Lake 279,400 285,400 326,300 16.8% 46,900 East Zone East Zone Administration 72,000 37,800 67,740 -5.9% (4,260) Bruce's Mill 407,900 372,400 393,940 -3.4% (13,960) Petticoat Creek 373,400 349,806 425,460 13.9% 52,060 Land Management East Zone: West Zone: 122,600 107,500 124,800 1.8% 2,200 176,900 176,900 181,900 2.8% 5,000 Major Maintenance 25,000 25,000 25,000 Expenditure Total 3,241,800 3,118,806 3,477,000 7.3% 235,200 Funding Sources: Authority Generated 3,183,100 3,111,600 3,351,600 5.3% 168,500 Reserves 5,000 5,000 5,000 CFGT - Living City CFGT - Flowthrough Municipal Provincial Federal Donations /Fundraising Private Revenue Total 3,188,100 3,116,600 3,356,600 5.3% 168,500 Net Expenditures 53,700 2,206 120,400 124.2% 66,700 Comments: Major 08 over 07 Changes (in addition to economic factors): Camping Fees increased. Outdoor Aquatic Playground Program at Heart Lake added and admision fee increase. Increased security, insurance deductible and Internet service costs. FT Asst. Superintendent position reinstated to full year. TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY 2008 OPERATING BUDGET - PRELIMINARY DIVISION: Parks and Culture Page 22 ACTIVITY: Kortright Centre for Conservation 2007 2007 2008 BUDGET P. A. BUDGET %CHG. $ CHG. $ $ $ Expenditures: Administration 106,600 110,800 126,900 19.0% 20,300 Grounds 108,600 103,900 113,000 4.1% 4,400 Buildings 167,200 167,500 179,900 7.6% 12,700 General Programs 50,300 60,400 51,800 3.0% 1,500 Day Use 63,500 60,000 89,400 40.8% 25,900 Public Programs 33,200 37,600 33,600 1.2% 400 Education Programs 309,700 318,800 313,200 1.1% 3,500 Cafe 62,400 70,100 77,200 23.7% 14,800 Gift Shop 92,100 97,000 98,000 6.4% 5,900 Maple Syrup Program 234,700 249,000 227,300 -3.2% (7,400) Energy Workshops 75,700 72,900 77,400 2.2% 1,700 All other Programs 48,100 140,400 199,700 315.2% 151,600 Marketing 37,300 41,900 37,300 Expenditure Total 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 1,389,400 1,530,300 1,624,700 16.9% 235,300 1,233,600 1,347,400 1,445,600 17.2% 212,000 1,233,600 1,347,400 1,445,600 17.2% 212,000 155,800 182,900 179,100 15.0% 23,300 Comments: Major 08 over 07 Changes (in addition to economic factors): Increased Wedding program . Variance comments 2007: Expenditures: Unbudgeted Ducks Unlimited Partnership projects flowthroug h. Change in wedding program delivery. Increased operating costs due to business growth. 181 TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY 2008 OPERATING BUDGET- PRELIMINARY DIVISION: Parks and Culture ACTIVITY: Oak Ridges Corridor Park Page 23 GROSS EXPENDITURES: Golf Course Operations FUNDING SOURCES: User fees: Reserves CFGT - Living City CFGT - Flowthrough Other - Municipal Other - Provincial Other - Federal Other - Donations /Fundraising Other - Private NET EXPENDITURES 2007 2007 2008 BUDGET P. A. BUDGET %CHG. $ CHG. 1,089,900 1,136,500 1,073,300 -1.5% (16,600) 137,700 137,700 1,089,900 1,136,500 1,211,000 11.1% 121,100 1,211,000 1,260,700 1,211,000 1,211,000 1,260,700 1,211,000 (121,100) (124,200) - 100.0% 121,100 Comments: Major 08 over 07 Changes (in addition to economic 1 Added maintenance of Oak Ridges Corridor Park . 182 TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY 2008 OPERATING BUDGET- PRELIMINARY DIVISION: ACTIVITY: Parks and Culture Black Creek Pioneer Village Page 24 2007 2007 2008 Budget P. A. Budget % Chq. $ Chq. $ $ $ Expenditures: Program Management 240,300 236,800 247,700 3.1% 7,400 Curatorial 337,100 335,100 253,400 -24.8% (83,700) Photography Interpretative Programming 1,410,100 1,406,100 1,363,100 -3.3% (47,000) Special Events 78,000 82,500 95,000 21.8% 17,000 Heritage Education 256,100 251,100 275,300 7.5% 19,200 Building Maintenance 1,134,100 1,106,100 1,203,500 6.1% 69,400 Admissions 158,000 165,000 174,600 10.5% 16,600 Giftshop 409,300 395,000 428,600 4.7% 19,300 Marketing and Sponsorships 334,800 285,300 247,700 -26.0% (87,100) Expenditure Total 4,357,800 4,263,000 4,288,900 -1.6% (68,900) Funding Sources: Program /User fees 2,133,500 2,038,900 2,136,200 0.1% 2,700 Reserves CFGT - Living City CFGT - Flowthrough 10,000 - 100.0% (10,000) Municipal Provincial 197,000 220,800 197,000 Federal Donations /Fundraising 5,100 5,000 5,100 Private 22,000 26,500 22,000 Revenue Total Net Expenditures 2,367,600 2,291,200 2,360,300 -0.3% (7,300) 1,990,200 1,971,800 1,928,600 -3.1% (61, 600) Comments: Major 08 over 07 Changes (in addition to economic factors): No fee increase, slight attendance increase. Maintenance: utilities increase + supplies cost increase. Marketing staff transferred to Corporate Communications. Variance Comments 2007: Savings due to staffing and marketing reductions. Lower attendance in education and general admissions. TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY 2008 OPERATING BUDGET- PRELIMINARY DIVISION: ACTIVITY: Parks and Culture Food Services Page 25 2007 2007 2008 Budget P. A. Budget % Chq. $ Chq. $ $ $ Expenditures: Weddings: Sales Costs & Revenue 409,300 325,000 440,300 7.6% 31,000 Corporate Events: Sales Costs/ Revenue 510,700 490,000 614,000 20.2% 103,300 Banquet Costs & Internal Functions 89,300 88,000 94,000 5.3% 4,700 Visitor Services 173,400 170,000 195,600 12.8% 22,200 Equipment Adjust for Internal charges (55,000) (58,600) (61,100) 11.1% (6,100) Expenditure Total 1,127,700 1,014,400 1,282,800 13.8% 155,100 Funding Sources: Program /Userfees 1,303,100 1,090,000 1,524,300 17.0% 221,200 Reserves CFGT - Living City CFGT - Flowthrough Municipal Provincial Federal Donations /Fundraising Private Adjust for Internal (55,000) (58,600) (61,100) 11.1% (6,100) Revenue Total 1,248,100 1,031,400 1,463,200 17.2% 215,100 Net Expenditures (120,400) (17,000) (180,400) 49.8% (60,000) Comments: Major 08 over 07 Changes (in addition to economic factors): Higher Wedding / Corporate Events activity projected. For 07 actual: Savings due to lower staff and operational expenditures. lower than projected attendance at BCPV TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY 2008 OPERATING BUDGET- PRELIMINARY DIVISION: Office of the CAO ACTIVITY: CAO Programs Page 26 2007 2007 2008 Budget P. A. Budget % Chq. $ Chq. $ $ $ Expenditures: Corporate Management 438,700 438,700 453,800 3.4% 15,100 Corporate Secretariat 351,400 371,400 361,400 2.8% 10,000 Human Resources 539,400 549,400 600,300 11.3% 60,900 Communications 989,100 1,019,100 1,157,600 17.0% 168,500 Professional Access 246,100 246,100 257,400 4.6% 11,300 Expenditure Total 2,564,700 2,624,700 2,830,500 10.4% 265,800 Funding Sources: Program /User fees Reserves 10,000 - 100.0% (10,000) CFGT - Living City CFGT - Flowthrough 83,000 83,000 25,000 -69.9% (58,000) Municipal Provincial 246,100 246,100 257,400 4.6% 11,300 Federal Donations /Fundraising Non - Government Grants Revenue Total Net Expenditures 339,100 329,100 282,400 - 16.7% (56,700) 2,225,600 2,295,600 2,548,100 14.5% 322,500 Comments: Major 08 over 07 Changes (in addition to economic factors): Events Coordinator transferred here fro Annualization of maternity leave in 2008 Modest increase in corporate legal provision. NOTES: 2007 VARIANCES Legal costs over budget. SECTION 3 2008 CAPITAL ESTIMATES 186 C C ci The Living City Centre LO LO CO C ter' ter co 0) N. CD cp CD co.... co. CY) CO 8 CD co is co CD czo CD czo CD 4=o m- CO 8 Q ea fk c+a▪ - • CM CM 4=0 fD CD 4=t r-m r-m CO CD Irti r N CO co • cv cv 187 Information Technology Public Use Infrastructure cs z 0 z z 0 TORONTO AND REG c.NE E co LLI CLI 7,p E LU 2 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 N m m -4 . . ▪ . . 6 Li j r- = CO CO cc▪ ; 6 4 6 Li -,-1- CO LO 0) 10 0") 6 0) CO 11 r-- ck.1 01 411 dr. dr. CO 6 CO 0") 6 -,-1- 03 6 LC) 6 6 6 6 6 6 C. CJ 6 6 6 6 0.4 03 = -0- CO 0) Li ) 6 c- 0.5 .7J cc O ,4 14 2 „ , � irri oki cd coi. coi. co. c.. 1 co. 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 o, kr) kr) kr) pp Pf) r--- 6 6 N co- $27 043,000 co co 4 cc, 01 4 4 co v N Lc) N Lc) OD LC) OA ▪ E2 ▪ 0") CO 6 6 N- 6 ▪ co c-4 CO CO r°, ID CO . . . . . . .z. .z. 2W W c; k; cei 6 k; kr; 6 CN co 6 co cc) = = = C,,I (.0 CO .sr 04 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 CO 6 6 6 CO Q 6 Q. Q. 6 6 6 CN 6 LC ) r- CO 6 CO 6 {NI 41 i Li i {NI ▪ 6 cei 6 m N m c) IS ) N (.0 03 0") - 's- 's- dr. 0,3. 's- C".,1 r-- r-- co. co. co. co. LE 6 6 6 6 ■=. ■=. ■=. ■=. ■=. ■=. ■=. ■=. ■=. V) co m m co F W .=. 6 kr; kr; 6 kr; cb kr; cd cc.; kr; 03 C.4 CO t t CO C...1 N a) 03 kr.i LC.. Q. Q 6 6 6 0-) CO 6 6 03 C.") 6 LC) 6 CN LC) F3 F3 -4 0 o C 7 j LC; o i 6 6 o , c o LC; o,1 6 cd cd 4r5 r--: cei o,▪ 1 6 co CN o4 6 N -4 N ,- CN r-- r-- m ,- ,..0 r-- c. co ID C...1 's- 's- 6 LC) CO CO C...1 6 CO 's- CO CO 's- CO CO N- E4 0,3. 0,3. '5- • 0,3. 0,3. 0,3. 0,3. ,,,-, 0,3. 0,3. 0,3. '5- • 's- } ID LC.. qr. Terrestrial 66666 4.0 CO 6 CZ CN - - _ ciP CN CN • CN 6 49. cz, 6 o 6 6 6 2 q 8 01 g 4 4 ▪ 49. 49. 49▪ . 49. 49. CN ▪ 46 ▪ *4' 49. 49. 49. rm 6 V.„ ES 'la 111 rt .0 7,71 17 L.- i'..; ,., w AI LL > .L1 rt .0 b .F.-• x...- rm L ...:: ..0 h til ' SI rt E L.:-' C.1 s.) rt LP • VI Li g i ,,, .; 9.: ,i2T , r i 9 .1c,9 0 L w to E ii Lb ,s....- A '5 : 0 7 • 0 ', r.:...' (.; m .,.. u... 0 J- r.', r?? 1? ... ..X .6 . 4A ..... 'a 0 ... h e..r w to L')I c Eki :..2 el ''''' CO rt LL LEI 188 6 6 CO Public: Vise 1 nfirastru ure • E qt. LLEqt. E.7 E7 E _J 1.11 a. • a. _J • tp 0 X 6 6 L O b L 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 = w = 6 . = co. co co W S ef3. ri cki ef3. ef3. t Eql 0 a L ▪ 0 13 6 TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION 0 u- af'Yark Ca 56=9 CC, CN , ,7 (0 c1/4 LO J N- CJ CC) 10 CO 0J N IX) LO CN 10 qr. LO (.0 LO (.0 CO CO v CN CS (C. .4 C \J- EG 4 EG .47 •s- (0, iqPiq 0 0 0 .:=. .:=. .:=. co .:=. 10 8 ,2,2p cp cp Lo ,Pop cp. .4 c:. .p r-- .,— 10 C) C) OD o NZ -rf Ci Ci Li S -ri: 's' -ri: co cS Li S 4,6 0 ) CO LO (c) CO 0) - . 1 - CO N. C J LO C) CO Ck.I EIG Co •s— -.1- EG •s— N. C.") EIG EIG CO CO EG EG EG EG EG EG EG Cki C-.I CO C) C, CO .=:. 8 8 8 LO LO LO (7, C, CO C) Cd l'--: CC■ Ci co cS c.6 cn Li S (0 CS -rf d CO CO -.1- (c) CO r CO CO -.1- Ck.1 LO Ck.1 EG Co •s— •s— •s— N. C.") EG EG er'), er'), er'), er'), er'), er'), er'), er'), oki cNi= iFfr CJ CC, C) CJ CC, cN 0 0 0 0 (0 (0 (0 (0 ,CD C) C, CO C) CC N.,. C , . I . 7 ) . . . C) N.,. C) . N. co .:=; co isi -4 c) (c) Ifl (c) -.1- d Ifl .:= Lei co c) C\J C\J -ct = () co Is) 0 c '4 c) co 0 CO CO 05 e0), eO, (.0 C) C, LO C) CO CO 's— LC) 0) LO ID 115 CO . . . . 4 4.0 (.") C...1 CO C, CJ 0) Cc) C'ql N 10 .63 co .,— LC) 's— 's— . LC) C\J CJ 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 C6 (0, 8 51 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 CN qr. 05= ,18 CO CN qr. 0) CO 10 CN C, h.. c:, LO LO CO kfi kr5 4,0 qr. qr. qr. qr. qr. ion. ion. 4 4. ion' ion. CN .. CN CN CN iqPiq iqPiq 10 CD q CS LO C, 1? C, LO LO 0") 0") C) C) LO CO CD c6 kri .7) CJ r--- co 6 kri . . (-9 •s— •s— R 2 r-Co," 4 4. Z; .63 LO CS 10 10 10 10 10 10 CN 4 E,,,), 0) = E le op ET_ 01 CD 17. -E -{1 IC C ci) co w c cp o) c co ._ w ci) c o. o. 8 -= .= o. co co 0 op -7. 0 cl. 0_ .7. GO co co .E cu 0) _ _1 o, „L. 0 -ie- .— co a) a) 0. r :: , CO w Z 0 00 w co :5- z a.) co c:. - EL til 2 To -E L u_ 2-15 - — T-0 w .5 T -0 i, S ti ..... w co co co 0 c 0 — _. - — — = = LI- S— DI t ._ co co c W cla iy- 7.N. 0 LL 0 3: Z Z GO — CI Z 189 Enhancement Pro 0 TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AU =a 0 . . . . . 8 ...0 ...0 4=7 CO a=. wo co c-LA L= 'at co cm 6 r•-: , . C.-- OD CO Cq CO C,-) co Le Le ac, a‘c ac, ac3 eca CP VD- 44 VI. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Pc, w 0 0 0 0 0 0 41-) 0 =1 F-, co =a co co E co ,,- — -I 6 C N. NJ 0 1— r--, 6 4r) co ..• n— S-0 Cn Eh LIJ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 g3 L.0 0 0 0 0 0 0 r- L. -, 0 C 0 0 C,J — — — r--,. LCD CO I,- C,7 cia °D L1J ctd uJ c‘i 0 0 0 0 0 0 4r4 ,— a= r co 0. 0 6 =a 6 ,=, g LP CO... CN T... '&4 6 6 0 co 6 0 c' (1) 0 0 C. CD 0 8 0,aar ar5 es- N.- N: Lec Ltc in C^,J tq Ch v.. Ir. qr.. T.. .1. m 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 C. 0 0 0 0 0 0 4= 4.0 c) 6 6 6 Lo 6 6 j N. 0 Le c--La L 0 4 ca 0 r--, 0 0 ,=) CO Flood Forecasting/Warning ural Hazard 190 RES. #C47/07- TRCA GOVERNANCE STRUCTURE 2008 -2009 Meeting Schedule and Amendment of Rules Of Conduct. To amend the Rules of Conduct to change the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority governance structure and provide a schedule of meetings for the forthcoming Authority year, beginning February 29, 2008 and ending February 27, 2009. Moved by: Seconded by: Peter Milczyn Gino Rosati THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT the Rules of Conduct for Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) be amended to remove all references to the Business Excellence, Sustainable Communities and Watershed Management advisory boards from the governance structure, add the Budget /Audit Advisory Board, increase the membership and adjust the responsibilities of the Executive Committee and make such changes as required as set out in the report dated October 15, 2007; THAT staff report back at Annual Authority Meeting #1/08, to be held on February 29, 2008, with the amended Rules of Conduct for final approval; THAT the members of the Executive Committee that were elected for a 3 -year term at Annual Authority Meeting #1/07, held on February 23, 2007, continue to sit on the Executive Committee until Annual Meeting #1/10, unless any member does not wish or is unable to continue to hold their position for the remainder of the term; THAT elections be held at Annual Authority Meeting #1108 for the remaining Executive Committee positions outlined in the report dated October 15, 2007, and the Chair and Vice Chair of the Authority, to sit until Annual Meeting #1/09; THAT the Schedule of Meetings 2008 -2009, dated October 15, 2007 be approved (Attachment 2); THAT the Executive Committee be delegated the powers of the Authority during the month of August, 2008, as defined in Section 2.10 of the Rules of Conduct; AND FURTHER THAT the Schedule of Meetings 2008 -2009 be distributed at the earliest opportunity to TRCA watershed municipalities and the Ministry of Natural Resources. CARRIED BACKGROUND TRCA annually reviews meeting schedules of municipal partners and recommends a schedule to the Business Excellence Advisory Board with as few conflicts as possible with these schedules as well as other key dates and functions. 191 The City of Toronto expanded the number of committees reporting to City Council which created numerous conflicts in 2007 that could not be avoided within the regular reporting cycle of TRCA. City members expressed concern to TRCA staff with these conflicts and directed staff to review the schedules to try to eliminate the conflicts. At Toronto City Council held on September 26 and 27, 2007, Council approved the 2008 Schedule of Meetings and resolved, in part, that: 3. The City Clerk be requested to: a. report to the Striking Committee as soon as possible on potential modifications to the meeting times for City Council meetings; and b. consult with the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority in order to determine if there are alternate dates when the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority can schedule its meetings. In addition, members from TRCA's other participating municipalities have also experienced difficulty with scheduling conflicts resulting in their being unable to attend some meetings. In 2007, passage of the Ontario Clean Water Act resulted in an amendment to the Conservation Authorities Act changing the quorum for meetings of conservation authorities to one half of the members from one third. RATIONALE In reviewing the meeting schedules of TRCA's municipal partners, it was determined Friday morning is still the best time for meetings. The City of Toronto is the only municipality to conduct council or committee meetings at this time and given Toronto's expanded schedule, staff has determined that creating a 2008 schedule with the existing board structure will result in several scheduling conflicts. Further, other agencies such as police commissions, GO Transit, Greater Toronto Transportation Authority, etc. are now using Friday to schedule meetings. Advisory boards were created to allow members the opportunity for more discussion of particular topics than would otherwise be possible at the Authority. In recent years, members who are not on a particular advisory board have expressed interest in hearing presentations and having more information about reports that went to the board of which they were not members. Staff has been asked to repeat presentations made to a board at the Authority meeting. All of which serves to inform the members but is not always efficient. As a result, staff recommends that the Business Excellence Advisory Board, Sustainable Communities Board and Watershed Management Advisory Board be removed from the TRCA governance structure.; the Executive Committee and Authority would meet once per month each; and a Budget /Audit Advisory Board would be established to meet as required. Governance Structure • Authority remains unchanged with 28 members as this is established by the Conservation Authorities Act; 192 • Executive Committee to be comprised of 12 members including 6 members representing the City of Toronto, and 2 members representing each of the regions of Peel, York and Durham. The Chair and Vice Chair of the Authority are members of the Executive Committee and count as part of the total of 12 members. If the Chair or Vice Chair of the Authority represent the Town of Mono /Township of Adjala - Tosorontio, then the Executive Committee will consist of 13 members. • Budget /Audit Advisory Board to be comprised of 5 members - The Chair of the Authority and 4 members at large; 1 member representing each of the regions of Peel, York and Durham, and the City of Toronto. Under the current Rules of Conduct, the members of the Executive Committee, except for the Chair and Vice Chair, were appointed to the Executive Committee for 3 years, ending at Annual Authority Meeting #1/10. As a result, it is recommended that these members remain on the Executive Committee for the rest of the term, unless any member does not wish or is unable to continue to hold their position for the remainder of the term. At Annual Authority Meeting #1/08 the Chair, Vice Chair and remainder of the members required above would be elected for a one year term. Staff recommends that the Rules of Conduct be amended to hold elections for Executive Committee members annually to afford members more opportunity to be on the Executive Committee during their term(s) on TRCA. The Executive Committee would have the same powers and responsibilities as it does now. Administrative policies including human resources, financial policies and matters relating to land and facilities management which previously were dealt with by the Business Excellence Advisory Board would be presented to the Executive Committee. Staff further recommends that a Budget /Audit Advisory Board (BAAB) be established to review the preliminary estimates, budget and annual financial statements as well as performing the functions of the audit committee. The BAAB will then make recommendations to the Authority. The members of the BAAB will be elected at the annual meeting and meetings will be called by the Chair. All other reports that previously would have gone to an advisory board, would be presented to the Authority for consideration, to minimize duplication of reports going to both the Executive Committee and Authority. Members are encouraged to become involved in TRCA matters and staff will request members become involved in task or working groups on an issue -by -issue basis. Rules of Conduct The Rules of Conduct as amended on November 25, 2005 will be updated by staff to reflect the changes outlined in the staff report. Section II of the Rules of Conduct delegates powers to the Executive Committee (Attachment 1) and staff recommends that these powers remain as delegated. Sections 1.4, 4.3, 4.4, 4.5, 4.6, 8.1, 8.2, 13, 16, 17, 18, 19 and 27 - 30 will be amended, and any additional sections required to complete the changes to the governance structure will be added. Meetings of the BAAB will be held as required and BAAB will make recommendations to the Authority. All other financial items will go to the Executive Committee for approval where the power is delegated as noted above, otherwise to the Authority for approval upon recommendation of the Executive Committee. 193 Meeting Schedule Executive Committee meetings have been scheduled on a Friday at the beginning of each month and Authority meetings on a Friday near the end of each month. All effort has been made to avoid conflicts with City of Toronto meetings whenever possible, however the following conflicts exist due to scheduling of Toronto City Council meetings, holidays and to attempt to space Executive Committee and Authority meetings at least 2 weeks apart: • April 11, 2008 - Licensing & Standards Committee with Executive Committee; • May 9, 2008 - Licensing & Standards Committee with Executive Committee; • June 13 - Government Management Committee with Executive Committee; • June 27, 2008 - Public Works & Infrastructure Committee with Authority. The City of Toronto schedule only goes until December 31, 2008 while the TRCA schedule goes until February 27, 2009, so conflicts in January and February 2009 can not be determined. 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 is recommending powers be so delegated to the Executive Committee for August, 2008, with the required report being brought to the Authority at its meeting to be held on September 19, 2008. At Authority Annual Meeting #1/02, held on January 25, 2002, Resolution #A6/02 was approved in part as follows: THAT the dates of future Annual Meetings be changed to accommodate the budget meeting schedule for our member municipalities, such that the Annual Meeting held following a municipal election be in January while the Annual Meetings in the interim two years between elections be moved to February; In accordance with Resolution #A6/02, the 2009 annual Authority meeting is scheduled to be held on Friday, February 27, 2009. 194 All meetings will be held at Black Creek Pioneer Village (BCPV), except for the December Executive Committee meeting 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.. Members are requested to hold from 10 a.m. to 1 p.m. in their calendars to accommodate the longer meeting time that may be required to deal with all items that previously would have gone to an advisory board. FINANCIAL DETAILS The estimated annual savings to TRCA of the change in governance structure in terms of catering services, mileage and per diem is $5,000. There would be additional savings of an undefined amount for staff time and copier /courier costs. Report prepared by: Kathy Stranks, extension 5264 Emails: kstranks @trca.on.ca For Information contact: Kathy Stranks, extension 5264 Emails: kstranks @trca.on.ca Date: October 15, 2007 Attachments: 2 195 Attachment 1 RULES OF CONDUCT 11 Executive Committee 2. The Authority delegates the following powers to the Executive Committee: 2.1 to enter into contracts or agreements which are not for the acquisition or disposition of land but which are either necessarily incidental to a project approved pursuant to the Act or necessarily incidental to the works approved by the Authority; 2.2 to accept such tenders and to award contracts as described in subparagraph 2.1 in accordance with the specific monetary limits set by the Authority and in accordance with the policies and procedures established by the Authority; 2.3 to ensure that policies and practices are in place for the authorization of payments of accounts within the approved budget of the Authority in accordance with any monetary or other limits set by the Authority; 2.4 to authorize the purchase of goods, equipment or services necessary for carrying on the work of the Authority within the approved budget of the Authority in accordance with any monetary or other limits set by the Authority; 2.5 to employ the staff of the Authority as required, except for the staff referred to in Clauses 2.6.1, 2.6.2 and 2.6.3 of subparagraph 2.6 of this paragraph, subject to compliance with the limits to the number and to the salary and wage schedules established and approved by the Authority; 2.6 to terminate the services of the staff of the Authority except for, 2.6.1 the Chief Administrative Officer, 2.6.2 the Secretary- Treasurer, 2.6.3 such other senior staff as the Authority may designate; 2.7 to direct the staff of the Authority; 2.8 to recommend and report to the Authority on all matters not within the jurisdiction of an Advisory Board or which may be assigned to it by the Authority; 2.9 to instruct legal counsel; 196 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; 2.11 to grant or refuse permission, and to hold hearings to which the applicant shall be a party before refusing such permission, for the doing of those things within the area under the jurisdiction of the Authority which are set out in Section 28 of the Act, all as provided for in the said Section 28 of the Act; and, 2.12 to authorize the investment of money not required immediately by the Authority: 2.12.1 in treasury bills, bonds, debentures or other evidences of indebtedness of or guaranteed by the Government of Canada or the Province of Ontario; and 2.12.2 in term deposits, investment certificates, debentures or any other evidences of indebtedness of any chartered bank, financial institution or corporation in accordance with the policies established by the Authority. 197 Attachment 2 TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY MEETING SCHEDULE 2008-2009 FEBRUARY 2008 TIME DESCRIPTION CONFLICT Feb. 29 10:30 a.m. ANNUAL Authority #1/08 FCM Board of Directors*; Toronto Council scheduled Mon & Tues MARCH 2008 TIME DESCRIPTION CONFLICT Mar. 7 10:30 a.m. Executive #1/08 FCM Board of Directors*; Toronto Council scheduled Mon & Tues Mar. 28 10:00 a.m. Authority #2108 AMO Board of Directors *TRCA schedule does not conflict with FCM Annual Conference in May APRIL 2008 TIME DESCRIPTION CONFLICT Apr. 11 10:00 a.m. Executive #2/08 Licensing & Standards Apr. 25 10:00 a.m. Authority #3/08 Public Works & Infrastructure; Toronto Council scheduled Mon & Tues MAY 2008 TIME DESCRIPTION CONFLICT May 9 10:00 a.m. Executive #3/08 Licensing & Standards May 23 10:00 a.m. Authority #4/08 Public Works & Infrastructure; Toronto Council scheduled Mon & Tues JUNE 2008 8 TIME mE DESCRIPTION CT CONFLICT June 13 10:00 a.m. . Executive #4108 Government Mgt. June 27 10:00 a.m. Authority #5108 Public Works & Infrastructure; Toronto Council scheduled Mon & Tues JULY 2008 TIME DESCRIPTION CONFLICT Jul. 11 10:00 a.m. Executive #5/08 FCM Board of Directors Jul. 25 10:00 a.m. Authority #6/08 AUGUST 2008 TIME DESCRIPTION CONFLICT Aug. 8 10:00 a.m. Executive #6/08 FCM Board of Directors SEPTEMBER 2008 TIME S 0 DE C RIP I N T CO NFLICT Sept. 5 10:00 a.m. Executive #7/08 FCM Board of Directors Sept. 19 10:00 a.m. Authority #7/08 OCTOBER 2008 TIME DESCRIPTION CONFLICT Oct. 3 10:00 a.m. Executive #8/08 Oct. 24 10:00 a.m. Authority #8/08 198 NOVEMBER 2008 TIME DESCRIPTION CONFLICT Nov. 7 10:00 a.m. Executive #9/08 Toronto Schedule not Available for2009 Nov. 28 10:00 a.m. Authority #9/08 Jan. 30 DECEMBER 2008 TIME DESCRIPTION CONFLICT Dec. 12 10:00 a.m. Humber Room Executive #10/08 Toronto Schedule not Available for2009 JANUARY 2009 TIME DESCRIPTION CONFLICT Jan. 9 10:00 a.m. Authority #10/08 Toronto Schedule not Available for2009 Jan. 16 10:00 a.m. Executive #11/08 Jan. 30 10:00 a.m. Authority #11/08 FEBRUARY2009 TIME DESCRIPTION CONFLICT Feb. 13 10:00 a.m. Executive #12/08 Toronto Schedule not Available for 2009 Feb. 27 10:30 a.m. ANNUAL Authority #1/09 • 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. • All meetings will be held from 10:00 a.m. to 1 p.m., 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. 199 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE RES. #C48 /07 Moved by: Seconded by: Bill Fisch Eve Adams THAT the committee move into closed session to discuss item 7.4 - Compensation Study. CARRIED ARISE AND REPORT RES. #C49 /07 Moved by: Seconded by: Eve Adams Peter Milczyn THAT the committee arise and report from closed session. CARRIED RES. #C50 /07 - COMPENSATION STUDY Moved by: Seconded by: Bill Fisch Gino Rosati THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT confidential item 7.4 - Compensation Study, as amended, be approved; AND FURTHER THAT staff report back when the item is completed and can be made public. CARRIED RES. #C51 /07 - REGION OF DURHAM - ACCOUNTABILITY FRAMEWORK Resolution from the Region of Durham requesting new reporting framework. Moved by: Seconded by: Bill Fisch Gerri Lynn O'Connor THAT item 7.5 - Region of Durham - Accountability Framework, be referred back to staff. CARRIED RES. #C52 /07 - DURHAM REGION LAND ACQUISITION FUNDING POLICY FOR CONSERVATION AUTHORITIES Response to report from Region of Durham on creation of land acquisition policy for conservation authorities. 200 Moved by: Seconded by: Gerri Lynn O'Connor Bill Fisch THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) commend the Council of the Regional Municipality of Durham for their foresight and commitment to preservation of conservation greenspace as set out in the Durham Region Land Acquisition Funding Policy For Conservation Authorities; THAT the Region of Durham be advised that to improve the value and effectiveness of the policy, the following changes are recommended: 1. amending clause a) (ii) to delete reference to "and be outside of urban areas "; 2. clarify clause b) (iii) as to the meaning of the term "mainly recreational in nature" so as not to exclude lands required to meet criteria #7 of the Planning Evaluation Criteria, "property needed to secure public access (outdoor education and trails) "; THAT the Region of Durham be requested to convene a meeting with representatives of the five Durham conservation authorities as soon as possible to further clarify the proposed policy and criteria and the process to submit land acquisition requests; AND FURTHER THAT this report be circulated to the Central Lake Ontario, Kawartha Region, Ganaraska Region and Lake Simcoe Region conservation authorities as well as the Councils of the City of Pickering, Town of Ajax and Township of Uxbridge. AMENDMENT RES. #C53/07 Moved by: Seconded by: Gerri Lynn O'Connor Bill Fisch THAT the following be inserted after the main motion: AND FURTHER THAT staff be directed to arrange a meeting with the Durham Region Chief Financial Officer Jim Clapp, Finance Committee Chair Marilyn Pearce and all conservation authorities within Durham Region. THE AMENDMENT WAS CARRIED THE MAIN MOTION, AS AMENDED, WAS CARRIED BACKGROUND Attached is a report from the Regional Municipality of Durham setting out the Durham Region Land Acquisition Funding Policy for Conservation Authorities. This report was received by TRCA staff two days before the Oct 10th joint meeting of the Durham Finance and Planning Committees at which the policy was approved. TRCA had no time to comment. 201 TRCA staff has met with Regional staff about the land acquisition funding policy and have shared with the Region the TRCA greenspace strategy document. It was our hope that the criteria being developed by the Region would mirror the criteria that TRCA uses with all its funding partners in land securement. RATIONALE The Region of Durham policy demonstrates the Region's commitment to greenspace acquisition. Similar programs are in place in Peel and York regions and the City of Toronto. TRCA participates in these programs and successfully leverages the funding partners contributions. In reviewing the criteria being recommended for use by the Region in determining which properties will receive funding, staff find that the description of the technical criteria is for the most part similar to that being used by TRCA. There are two areas of concern. One of the criteria states: a) ii) properties acquired will be located within, or contribute to, the enhancement of the Regional Official Plan Greenlands System, and be outside of urban areas; TRCA agrees that properties should be acquired consistent with the Region's Official Plan Greenlands System and, indeed, the other criteria will ensure lands acquired meet natural heritage and other environmental criteria. However, there are properties in 'urban areas' that meet the criteria which cannot be acquired through the development process and which are critical in terms of flood plain management, trail linkages and the Durham waterfront. Also, TRCA staff suggest that the Region clarify the reference in the criteria as follows: b) iii) Regionally funded acquisitions will not overlap the jurisdiction of others, duplicate responsibilities or services, or be mainly recreational in nature; In the list of Planning Evaluation Criteria which identify the attributes of the land which must be met for acquisition to proceed, reference is made to: • conservation purposes "; • within or contributing to the Greenlands System; • natural heritage and hydrogeological features; • supporting long term planning and growth management; • consolidating, enlarging or enhancing existing tracts of conservation lands; • environmental features at risk; • property is needed to secure public access (outdoor education & trail$) • property suitable for reforestation to contribute to Region's official plan target of 30 %. The criteria contemplates that land will be needed for public access and includes trails. Trails are an important part of the Region's official plan as well as economic and tourism programs. Trail development will require land securement so it is appropriate to include this as a criterion. However, as noted, there is a potential exclusion for lands "mainly recreational in nature ". TRCA needs confirmation that strategic trail linkages will not be excluded. 202 Durham Region as been supportive of TRCA acquisition requests in recent years. TRCA has leveraged its investment with funds for land acquisition from various partners. The Region proposes funding only up to 40% of acquisitions. TRCA anticipates being able to meet this requirement. In 2006, TRCA's Wilder acquisition involved a Region of Durham contribution of $270,000. This was about 15% of the total value of the acquisition. However, there will be circumstances where such leverage is not available and it is hoped that the Region will be flexible as to the percentage of the Region's contribution. Report prepared by: Jim Dillane, extension 6292 Email: jdillane @trca.on.ca For Information contact: Jim Dillane, extension 6292 Email: jdillane @trca.on.ca Date: October 31, 2007 Attachments: 1 203 Attachment 1 DURHAM REGlON 111.4 Regional Municipality Durham aerie% Department yom.region. &Awn". once Pat lei Moak ikee. t. CMM ReSiorai Clerk Zan** argyikkrAt* br rCwrimuratele October 11. 2007 Mr. Russ P Chief Adria" native Officer CenrL.Ek o Ontario Conservation Authority iQO.Whitinq Avenue 2thawa ON 11H 313 ,AECEIVEK) iv 12M RE: DURHAM REGION LAND ACQUISITION FUNDING lar44142"1. FOR CONSERVATION AUTHORITIES (2007445) OUR FIL : D00 Mr. Powell, the Joint Finance & Administration and Planning Committees of Regional Council considered the above matter and at a meeting held on October 10, 2007 Council adopted the following recommendations of the Committee: THAT the Durham Region Land Acquisition Funding Policy for Conservation Authorities, detailed in Attachment #1 to Joint Report #20074-36, be adopted with Regional funding to be based primarily upon the following criteria: i) properties will be purchased for conservation purposes only, as part of Conservation Authority land acquisition plans; ii properties acquired will be located within, or contribute to, the enhancement of the Regional Official Plan Graeolancis System, and be outside of urban areas; iii) properties acquired will contain key natural heritage and/or key hydrological features; iv) acquisitions will support Regional long-term planning and growth management (i.e. not preclude or corripromise future planned growth); v) for competing proposals, preference will be given to properties that: • consolidate, enlarge and/or otherwise enhance existing tracts of publicly owned conservation lands; • have the greatest percentage of natural feature coverage; • are located on the Oak Ridges Moraine; • have the greatest risks of damage or degradation; and (i) 1009# R S'Afkium 204 -2_ exhibit other significant featuresfresources (e.g, well head protection); b) THAT the funding criteria will remain as follows: i) the Region will not own the lands acquired; Tend acquisitions will be addressed during the Business Planning and Budget process; iii) Regionally funded land acquisitions will not overlap the jurisdiction of others, duplicate responsibilities and services, or be mainly recreational in nature; iv) prior to disbursement of funding, a firm offer of purchase and sale will be required; v) Regional funding will be no more than 40% of the total direct cost of the land acquisition; vi) secured commitments from other funding partners will be required; vii) Conservation Authorities will continue to submit consolidated five -year plans, including land acquisition programs as a separate program area, as part of the Business Planning and Budget process; and viii) Conservation Authorities will adjust and acquisition budgets as required to conform to property tax guidelines as set by Regional Council during the annual detailed budget process; c) THAT the Regional funding commitments made against the Land Conservation and Protection Reserve Fund for specific acquisition projects will expire at the end of each budget year, unless otherwise identified as a multi -year commitment, or as authorized by the Commissioner of Finance, based upon communication with Conservation Authorities regarding program delays, or other timing issues; d) THAT land acquisitions and related funding requests submitted by Conservation Authorities and adequately meeting the criteria identified in parts a) and b) will be jointly approved by the Commissioners of Planning and Finance, with accountability and transparency ensured through an information report, on each approved purchase and expenditure, to be provided during the annual Business Planning and Budget process; e) THAT where a priority Conservation Authority land acquisition prospect becomes available, but was not addressed through the Business Planning and Budget process, funding will be reviewed on a case -by -case basis, and will be subjected to the same financial and planning criteria described herein, with - funding approval through a joint Planning and Finance and Administration Committee; and f THAT a copy of Joint Report #2007-J-36 6 be forwarded to the Region's five Conservation Authorities." Please find enclosed a copy of Report #2007-J-36 for your information. P.M. Madill, AMCT, CMM I Regional Clerk PMMltf c: L. Laliberte, General Manager, Ganaraska Region Conservation Authority I. MacNab, General Manager, Kawartha Region Conservation Authority D.G. Wood, Chief Administrative Officer, Lake Sirncoe Region Conservation Authority B. Denney, Chief Administrative Officer, Toronto and Region Conservation Autiicri RI. Clapp, Commissioner of Finance A.L. Georgieff, Commissioner of Planning 206 DURHAM REGION The Regional Municipality of Durham To: Joint Finance & Administration and Planning Committees From: R.J. Clapp, Commissioner of Finance Georgieff, Commissioner of Planning Report No.: 2007-J-36 Date: October 2, 2007 SUBJECT: Durham Region Land Acquisition Funding Policy for Conservation Authorities RECOMMENDATIONS: That the Joint Finance and Administration and Planning Committee end to Regional Council: The "Durham Region Land Acquisition Funding Policy for Conservation Authorities," detailed in Attachment #1, be adopted with Regional funding to be based primarily upon the following criteria: 1 Properties will be purchased for conservation purposes only, as part of Conservation Authority land acquisition plans; Properties acquired will be located within, or contribute to, the enhancement of the Regional Official Plan Greenlands System, and be outside of urban areas; iii. Properties acquired will contain key natural heritage and/or key hydrological features; iv. Acquisitions will support Regional long-term planning and growth management (i.e. not preclude or compromise future planned growth); v. For competing proposals, preference will be given to properties that: a. Consolidate, enlarge and/or otherwise enhance existing tracts of publicly owned conservation lands; b. Have the greatest percentage of natural feature ve ge; c. Are located on the Oak Ridges Moraine; d. Have the greatest risks of damage or degradation; and, e. Exhibit other significant features/resources (e.g. well head protection). 207 Report 2007-J-36 Page 2. 2. The funding criteria will remain as follows: The Region will not own the lands acquired; Land acquisitions will be addressed during the Business Planning and Budget process; iii. Regionally funded land acquisitions will not overlap the jurisdiction of others, duplicate responsibilities and services, or be mainly recreational in nature; iv. Prior to disbursement of funding, a firm offer of purchase and sale will be required; v. Regional funding will be no more than 40% of the total direct cost of the land acquisition; vi. Secured commitments from other funding partners will be required; vii. Conservation Authorities will continue to submit consolidated five-year plans, including land acquisition programs as a separate program area, as part of the Business Planning and Budget process; viii. Conservation Authorities will adjust land acquisition budgets as required to conform to property tax guidelines as set by Regional Council during the annual detailed budget process; The Regional funding commitments made against the Land Conservation and Protection Reserve Fund for specific acquisition projects will expire at the end of each budget year, unless otherwise identified as a multi-year commitment, or as authorized by the Commissioner of Finance, based upon communication with Conservation Authorities regarding program delays, or other timing issues. 4. Land acquisitions and related funding requests submitted by Conservation Authorities and adequately meeting the criteria identified in recommendations 1. and 2. will be jointly approved by the Commissioners of Planning and Finance, with accountability and transparency ensured through an information report, on each approved purchase and expenditure, to be provided during the annual Business Planning and Budget process. 5. Where a priority Conservation Authority land acquisition prospect becomes available, but was not addressed through the Business Planning and Budget process, funding will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis, and will be subjected to the same financial and planning criteria described herein, with funding approval through Joint Planning and Finance and Administration Committee. 6. A copy of this report be forwarded to the Region's five Conservation Authorities. 208 Report 2007-J-36 Page 3. 1.0 REPORT: The purpose of this report is to establish a Durham Region Land Acquisition Funding Policy for Conservation Authorities, and establish the parameters around Regional participation in funding the acquisition of properties for conservation purposes. 2.0 BACKGROUND Regional funding for the protection of the environment is directed towards the Region's five Conservation Authorities. To access Regional funding, the Conservation Authorities annually submit, to the Region's Finance Department, a consolidated five-year Conservation Authority Budget and Forecast at the start of each Budget year. This must include operating and capital and special project expenditures, as well as a land acquisition budget and forecast of expenditures for the current year and subsequent four-years. As part of the 2007 Business Planning and Budget process, Regional Council approved a contribution to land securement equivalent to the 2006 contribution of $0.9 million. Conservation Authorities could access these funds following parameters consistent with previously approved commitments, including: Regional funding of no more than 40% of the total cost of acquisition projects; A firm offer of purchase and sale; Secured commitments from other funding partners; and, Submission to the Region of five-year acquisition plans and other information necessary to access financial implications and funding availability. Since 2005, Regional Council has made significant contributions to Conservation Authority land acquisitions demonstrating Regional benefits, including approximately $2.0 million for acquisitions in the Glen Major, Beaver River, East Cross and Long Sault and Enniskillen areas. 209 Report 2007-J-36 Page 4. Regional Council directed staff to "...develop a Regional funding policy (for and securement), including parameters to ensure financial viability, consistent funding criteria, avoid duplication of responsibilities and services, and maximize net benefits to Regional taxpayers." This Land Acquisition Funding Policy for Conservation Authorities is intended to assist Conservation Authorities by providing clear parameters to obtain Regional Funding for land acquisition projects. This will assist Conservation Authorities in their Business Planning and Budgeting process, and will help focus the Regional program on acquisition projects to maximize Regional benefits. ELEMENTS OF LAND SECUREMENT In Durham Region land securement for conservation purposes consists of the following elements: • Planning Policy; • Land Stewardship; • Acquisition by easement, donation and purchase; and, • Monitoring. 3.1 Planning Policy Policies and area specific designations in Provincial Plans (e.g. Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan and the Greenbelt Plan), municipal official plans and zoning by-laws, establish detailed processes and regulations to protect sensitive or significant environmental lands. The protection of natural features is paramount when considering the use and/or development of land. Land Stewardship The vast majority of land within the Region is and will remain under private ownership. Land Stewardship is the management of natural heritage areas on private land, 210 Report 2007-J-36 Page 5. Land Stewardship is promoted through public education programs that raise awareness and inform landowners and other stakeholders of the importance of protecting natural heritage features and of practices that will assist in protecting these features located on private land. Such programs are currently delivered by Conservation Authorities and other not-for profit organizations and where appropriate are supported by the Region (e.g. annual Children's Groundwater Festival, the Region's Water Efficiency Program, and the Durham Environmental Advisory Committee annual environmental achievement awards). Land Acquisition Acquisition is the ownership of property rights and can take the form of purchase/fee simple, bequests and donations and easements. Generally, the purchase/fee simple approach requires partnerships amongst stakeholders and a significant financial commitment. Donations and easements generally require much less financial commitment. To ensure the most effective use of limited financial resources, acquisition should only target the protection of priority lands where the public interest is not adequately served through land use planning or stewardship. Monitoring • Regular reporting on land securement initiatives is essential, as a basis for evaluating success and the effectiveness of the program and recommending improvements. Land use planning and stewardship are the primary eans of protecting and enhancing valued environmental features. • These are delivered through protective Provincial and Regional policies and programs delivered through the conservation authorities. However, it is also recognized that in certain circumstances an added level of protection through land acquisition may be beneficial. 211 Report 2007-J-36 Page 6. This Durham Region Land Acquisition Funding Po icy for Conservation Authorities will focus on the Region's involvement in land acquisition for conservation purposes. Conservation Authorities will continue to submit consolidated five-year plans, including land acquisition programs as a separate program area, as part of the Business Planning and Budget process. They will also be required to report through the Region's Accountability framework. LAND ACQUISITION FUNDING POLICY — KEY ELEMENTS In response to Council direction, a Lands Acquisition Funding Policy for Conservation Authorities has been developed to establish a consistent, focused and transparent set of criteria that the Region will follow, when participating in Conservation Authority Land Acquisitions, that will maximize effectiveness and minimize duplication of efforts by other stakeholders. The recommended Acquisition Policy, as detailed in Attachment 1, has been developed based on the following principles: Forming Partnerships Many stakeholders, including area municipalities, conservation authorities and not-for-profit/non-govemment organizations (e.g. Oak Ridges Moraine Land Trust, Nature Conservatory of Canada and Ducks Unlimited etc.), are currently active in acquiring land and/or registering easements for conservation purposes. The Region of Durham has maintained funding to Conservation Authorities despite the provincial cut backs in funding and accordingly, the funding for land acquisitions will be through Conservation Authorities. As per Council direction, the Region's role shall not duplicate the efforts of other stakeholders, but should serve to complement or fill gaps and add support to other stakeholders through partnerships, as deemed necessary, and as resources permit. 212 Report 2007-J-36 Page 7. Forming and maintaining partnerships with key stakeholders can be beneficial in leveraging funchng opportunities, sharing resources and avoidi duplication. The securing of East Cross Forest is an example of a successful project where the Region formed valuable partnerships for land acquisition. The Region partnered wi[h the Oik Ridges Moraine Foundation, the Nature Conservancy of Canada, the Township of Scugog and the Kawartha Region Conservation Authority to secure East Cross Forest Lands. Given the vast area ofthe Region, ni nhiconi|omdmooets.andthnindmnostby other organizations in securement, a partnership approach will leverage the most benefits from Regional investments. The five Durhen, Conservation Authorities will continue with their role in co- ordinating acquisition priorities priorities and efEorts. The Authorities are well positioned to act as the main broker among all key stakeholders (not-for-profit and non- government agencies) to effectively achieve the Region's objectives. • In identifying target properties for acquisiuon, conservation authonties shall ensure that information is shared with all stakeholders and that reasonable notice is given to minimize competition for properties, maximize resource coordinatiori and maximize benefits 10 residents from Iarid acquisition Corisistent with the partnership approach, Regional funding will be a catalyst for pa by ethers. To make the most effective use of Regional resources, Regional funding shall not exceed 40% of the direci cost of a land acquisition. 4.2 Priority Areas for Land AcamUwition Partnerships Area Municipalities have effectively taken the lead in acquiring natural heritage features within urban and rural settlements by way of dedication, at no cost, through the development approvals process. In this way, Area Municipalities have effectively assembled Iands along their waterfronts and streams and vaileys in Urban Areas. • However, acquisition through dedication is not as effective when dealing with natural heritagelhydrological features within the Greentands System designated iri the Regional Official PIan, outslde of urban areas having a Region-wide benefit. 213 Report 2007-J-36 Page 8. These are areas where Regional support through partnership acquisition efforts can be most beneficial. Furthermore, the acquisition of natural heritage features within the rural area often presents unique opportunities to secure large areas into public ownership at lower cost. Consideration will also be given to the significance of contribution to the environmental goals and objectives of the Region due to the lands environmental characteristics and the priority for protection. Conservation Authorities will be requested to prepare and submit land securement strategies that outline areas targeted for acquisition over the longer-term, and include priority areas outlined in this policy report. The specific areas targeted for land acquisition, should not undermine the future orderly growth of the Region in accordance with long range Provincial and Regional plans. In all instances acquisition should be determined to be the only effective method of protection. 5.0 FINANCING AND REPORTING PROCESS Conservation Authorities, must continue to submit their consolidated proposals for conservation land acquisition, and all relevant information, for consideration as part of the Region's annual Business Planning and Forecast process. This provides opportunity to assess acquisition priorities, and grant budget allocations to the Land Conservation and Protection Reserve Fund. Detailed Budgets will be required to conform to available funding through Regional Council's property tax guideline approvals. Land acquisition funding requests submitted by Conservation Authorities and adequately meeting the criteria identified in recommendations 1. and 2. will be jointly approved by the Commissioners of Planning and Finance, with accountability and transparency ensured through an information report, on each approved purchase and expenditure, to be provided during the subsequent Business Planning and Budget process_ It is understood, however, that a land acquisition opportunity may arise outside of the Region's Business Planning and Budget process. 214 Report 2007-J-36 Page 9. Where a priority Conservation Authority land acquisition prospect becomes available, but was not addressed through the Business Planning and Budget process, funding will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis, and will be subjected to the same financial and planning criteria described herein, with funding approval obtained through a report to Joint Planning and Finance and Administration Committee. The Regional funding commitments made against the Land Conservation and Protection Reserve Fund for specific acquisition projects will expire at the end of each budget year, unless otherwise identified as a multi-year commitment, or as authorized by the Commissioner of Finance, based upon communication with Conservation Authorities regarding program delays, or other timing issues. The evaluation of requests for Regional funding and/or support will be based upon an evaluation of the request, and funding availability. To evaluate requests for funding, Conservation Authorities will be required to submit a report indicating how the information requirements detailed in Attachment 1, have been met. No funds will be disbursed to any land acquisition project until the Treasurer and Commissioner of Finance confirms the expenditure amounts and a 'firm option for purchase and sale for the properties in question exists, along with other requirements. In all cases of land acquisition for conservation, the Region will only provide funding involving willing landowners, and provided lands are acquired by Conservation Authorities at or below market value. 6.0 CONCLUSIONS All of the Conservation Authorities expressed support for establishing a policy, around funding, noting that having clear guidelines up-front for Regional involvement in land securement will assist them in coordinating their land acquisition initiatives and financing. This Land Acquisition Funding Policy for Conservation Authorities, as outlined in Attachment 1, provides a comprehensive approach for the acquisition of land for conservation purposes within the Region. 215 Re Dort 2007-J-3 • A goal is to ensure that land acquisition efforts of Regional Council, in partnership with the Conservation Authorities in Durham Region, will contribute to the protection, enhancement and restoration of the natural environment in Durham Region and will reinforce the Region's commitment to leave a natural heritage legacy for Durham residents. It is recommended that the Funding Policy be adopted. R.J. Clapp, CA Commissioner of Finance and Treasurer Recommended for Presentation to Committee: G.H. ubitt, M.S.W. Chief Administrative Officer Attach. 216 AL. Georgieff, M.C.I.P., R.P.P. Commissioner of Planning did200Tre securernen1 final Attachment #1/Pg. 1 of 5 Durham Re ion Land Ac u sition Fundin • Polic for Conservation Authorities Subject to the annual Business Planning and Budget process, the Region will participate in the funding of land acquisition for conservation purposes only, as part of Conservation Authority land acquisition plans, and based upon requirements outlined in this Policy. 2. The Region's role will not duplicate the efforts of other stakeholders, but will serve to complement or fill gaps and add support as deemed necessary, and as resources permit Properties acquired will be located within, or contribute to, the enhancement of the Regional Official Plan Green Lands System, and be outside of urban areas. 4. The source and annual amount of funding available for Greenlands acquisition including budgetary contributions to the Regional Land Conservation and Protection Reserve Fund, will be determined through the annual Business Planning and Budget process. 5. The Region will maintain and/or form partnerships with the five Durham Conservation Authorities as appropriate, for the purpose of leveraging funding opportunities, sharing resources, co-ordinating acquisition priorities and efforts and maximizing Regional benefits. Consistent with the partnership approach, Regional funding will be a catalyst for participation by others. 6. The funding criteria will remain as follows: The Region will not own the lands acquired; ii. Land acquisitions will be addressed during the Business Planning and Budget process: iii. Regionally funded land acquisitions will not overlap the jurisdiction of others, duplicate responsibilities and services, or be mainly recreational in nature; iv. Prior to disbursement of funding, a firm offer of purchase and sale will be required; v. Regional funding will be no more than 40% of the total direct cost of the land acquisition; vi. Secured commitments from other funding partners will be required; vii. Conservation Authorities will continue to submit consolidated five-year plans, including land acquisition programs as a separate program area, as part of the Business Planning and Budget process; viii. Conservation Authorities will adjust land acquisition budgets as required to conform to property tax guidelines as set by Regional Council during the annual detailed budget process; 217 Attachment #1/Pg. 2 of 5 7 Land acquisition funding requests submitted by Conservation Authorities and adequately meeting the criteria identified in recommendations 1. and 2. will be jointly approved by the Commissioners of Planning and Finance, with accountability and transparency ensured through an information report, on each approved purchase and expenditure, to be provided during the annual Business Planning and Budget process_ Where a priority Conservation Authority land acquisition prospect becomes available, but was not addressed through the Business Planning and Budget process. funding will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis, and will be subjected to the same financial and planning criteria described herein, with funding approval through Joint Planning and Finance and Administration Committee. 9. The Regional funding commitments made against the Land Conservation and Protection Reserve Fund for specific acquisition projects will expire at the end of each budget year, unless otherwise identified as a multi-year commitment or as authorized by the Commissioner of Finance, based upon communication with Conservation Authorities regarding program delays, or other timing issues. 10. The evaluation of requests for Regional funding and/or support will be based upon this Funding Policy and the availability of Regional funds. 11. Requests for funding will also be evaluated on the basis of considerations as illustrated in the table set out in Schedule A such as: • geographical priority areas and within the Region; • significance of features; and • enhancements to land assemblies already in public/agency ownership. 12. In all cases of land acquisition for conservation, the Region will only provide funding in support of acquisitions or easements involving willing landowners, and provided lands are acquired by Conservation Authorities, at or below market value. 13. No funds will be disbursed to any Land Acquisition project until the Treasurer and Commissioner of Finance confirms a 'firm option for purchase and sale for the properties in question, among other requirements. 14. Regional Council reserves its right to rescind, with notice, any commitment made to purchase land for conservation purposes, based upon competing funding priorities, as identified through the Business Planning and Budget process. 218 Attachment #1/P 15. In identifying target properties for acquisition, Conservation Authorities shall ensure that information is shared with all stakeholders and that reasonable notice is given to minimize competition for properties, maximize resource coordination and maximize benefits to residents from land acquisition initiatives. 16. In addition to the completion of Schedule A to this Attachment, information required by the Region for analysis of each request for Regional funding must include: Up-to-date details on multi-year (at least five-year) land acquisition plans (if not already submitted), programs and opportunities, including details on how the proposed acquisition fits within these policies/strategies and an indication of long term areas targeted for acquisition that have consideration for Regional priority areas; Intended uses of the lands to be acquired e.g. passive use, recreation etc. and multi-year stewardship work plans to achieve these goals; Capital, operating and administrative cost details, including estimated multi- year cost impacts from proposed stewardship work plans and details on timing; Information on additional funding partners and details on their financial commitments to the acquisition project over time; A copy of the land appraisal and signed letter of intent to purchase properties (the latter can be forwarded when available, and prior to the disbursement of funds); and, Information on existing land designations and protections, with detailed reasoning as to why acquisition is the best securement altemative. 17. Accountability Conservation Authorities shall report back to the Region within the parameters set by the Region's Accountability Framework, providing required details on land acquisition activities, funds expended and related achievements. 219 Attachment #1/Pg. 4 of 5 Schedute A — P ann n. Evaluation Criteria To be considered for Funding under the Durham Region Land Acquisition Funding Policy for Conservation Authorities, the proposed purchase must meet Regional Greenlands Objectives expressed in the Durham Regional Official Plan. All applications for funding shall provide the information required to facilitate determination of qualification. Primary Considerations: Must be met to qualify for consideration: 1. The property is being purchased for conservation purposes; 2. The property is located within or contributes to the enhancement of the ROP Greenlands System outside of urban areas; 3. The property contains key natural heritage and/or key hydrological features; Key Hydrologic Features include: a) permanent and intermittent streams; b) wetlands; c) lakes, and their littoral zones; d) kettle lakes, and their surface catchment areas; e) seepage areas and springs; and f) aquifers and recharge areas. Key Natural Heritage Features include: a) significant habitat of endangered, threatened, special concern and rare species; b) fish habitat; c) wetlands; d) Areas of Natural and Scientific Interest (ANSIs), life science; e) significant valleylands; f) significant woodlands; g) significant wildlife habitat; h) sand barrens, savannahs and tallgrass prairies; and i) alvars. 4. The purchase is supportive of the long term planning and growth management of the Region (ie. will not preclude or compromise future planned growth); 220 Secondary Considerations: Attachment #1iPg, 5 of 5 To be assessed when there is a need to differentiate between multiple requests. (To be evaluated on a point sysleml The property will csoidate, large otherwise enhance ex-sting tracts of publicly owned conservation lands, 2. Signifcance rif feature( on site; % of natural feature coverage of overall property' 4. The prope-ty is located on the Oak Ridges Moraine nvironrnental feature( degradation the property are at risk of damage or 6 Presence nd s.griifeance of other features/resources that exist .g. well head protection and cultural featu-es. Property is needed to secure puhIir cretg. 'up...itria,oe education & trails 8. The property will be eforested thereby contributing to the 30% woodland coverage tare l in accordance i.ifen the Regiorial Mcial Pia Total Points a1lif2nn7ravrarFAILlwrvi AilftlitittWrrit :Math RES. #C54/07- 2008 FEE SCHEDULE Changes to the TRCA 2007 Fee Schedule for Public Facilities and Programming. Moved by: Seconded by: Gerri Lynn O'Connor Peter Milczyn THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT the 2008 Fee Schedule Public Facilities and Programming, including the proposed changes, be approved effective January 1, 2008. 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, 2008, in order to meet Parks and Culture projected revenue targets outlined in the 2008 budget. Conservation Area Admission General admission fees for Heart Lake Conservation Area to be increased to be in line with Albion Hills and Boyd conservation areas. These rates are based on the additional amenities and programs offered at these locations. Camping Fees Camping fees at Albion Hills and Indian Line campgrounds to be increased by an average of 5% to cover the cost of campground enhancements. Group Camping Fees Group campsite fees at Indian Line and Albion Hills campgrounds to be changed from a per camping unit fee to a per person fee. The permit fee would include the first 20 persons and a fee would apply to each additional person per night. Cross Country Ski Equipment Rental Fees Adult cross country ski equipment rental fees to be increased to reflect industry average rates. The 2007 schedule which remains unchanged in 2008 except as noted above will be made available at the meeting. Changes to the 2007 Fee Schedule are highlighted in Attachment 1 in bold and italic. Report prepared by: Derek Edwards, extension 5672 Email: dedwards @trca.on.ca For Information contact: Martha Wilson, extension 5674 Email: mwilson @trca.on.ca Date: October 10, 2007 Attachments: 1 222 Attachment 1 Proposed Changes to TRCA's 2007 Fee Schedule 223 ITEM # ITEM DESCRIPTION PST 8% GST 6% 2008 BASE 2008 GROSS 2007 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 Glen Haffy, Bruce's Mill and Petticoat Creek. 0.00 0.29 4.71 5.00 5.00 1.2 for each adult from sixteen to fifty -nine years of age at Boyd, Albion Hills and Heart Lake. 0.00 0.34 5.66 6.00 6.00 1.3 for each senior sixty years of age or over at 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, Albion Hills and Heart Lake. 0.00 0.29 4.71 5.00 5.00 9.0 For a permit to occupy an individual unserviced campsite, inclusive of general admission 9.1 at Albion Hills, per night 0.00 1.48 24.52 26.00 24.75 9.2 at Albion Hills, per week 0.00 8.83 147.17 156.00 148.50 9.3 at Albion Hills, per month (28 days) 0.00 29.44 490.56 520.00 495.00 9.4 at Indian Line, per night 0.00 1.56 25.94 27.50 26.00 9.5 at Indian Line, per week 0.00 9.34 155.66 165.00 156.00 9.6 at Indian Line, per month (28 days) 0.00 31.14 518.86 550.00 520.00 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 0.17 2.83 3.00 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 1.79 29.71 31.50 30.00 10,2 at Albion Hills, per week 0.00 10.70 178.30 189.00 180.00 10.3 at Albion Hills per month (28 days) 0.00 35.66 594.34 630.00 600.00 10.4 at Albion Hills, per season 0.00 117.46 1957.54 2075.00 1975.00 10.5 at Indian Line, per night 0.00 1.87 31.13 33.00 31.50 10.6 at Indian Line, per week 0.00 11.21 186.79 198.00 189.00 10.7 at Indian Line, per month (28 days) 0.00 37.36 622.64 660.00 630.00 10.8 at Indian Line, per season 0.00 149.44 2490.56 2640.00 2520.00 10.9 on a holiday or other designated date, in addition to the basic permit fee specified in item 10.1 or 10.5 0.00 0.17 2.83 3.00 2.25 11.0 For a permit to occupy an individual serviced campsite with water, hydro and sewage hook -up inclusive of general admission; 11.1 at Indian Line with 30 amp hydro service, per night 0.00 2.15 35.85 38.00 33.75 11.2 at Indian Line with 30 amp hydro service, per week 0.00 12.90 215.10 228.00 202.50 11.3 at Indian Line with 30 amp hydro service, per month (28 days) 0.00 43.02 716.98 760.00 675.00 223 ITEM # ITEM DESCRIPTION PST 8% GST 6% 2008 BASE 2008 GROSS 2007 GROSS 11.4 at Indian Line with 50 amp hydro service, per night 0.00 2.44 40.56 43.00 0.00 11.5 at Indian Line with 50 amp hydro service, per week 0.00 14.61 243.39 258.00 0.00 11.6 at Indian Line with 50 amp hydro service, per month (28 days) 0.00 48.68 811.32 860.00 0.00 11.7 on a holiday or other designated date, in addition to the basic permit fee specified in item 11.1 and 11.4 0.00 0.17 2.83 3.00 2.25 12.0 In addition to basic camping fees as specified in item 9.0, 10.0, 11.0 12.1 for a permit to park an additional vehicle, per night 0.63 0.48 7.89 9.00 8.25 12.2 for a permit to park an additional vehicle, per season 4.21 3.16 52.63 60.00 55.00 12.3 for each additional person occupying a campsite over and above the campground's specified site limit, per night 0.00 0.29 4.71 5.00 4.25 13.0 For a permit to occupy a group campsite at Albion Hills or Indian Line for a group of up to twenty persons, inclusive of general admission; 13.1 at Albion Hills Pleasantview group campsite, for an adult group 0.00 14.15 235.85 250.00 240.00 13.2 at Albion Hills Pleasantview group campsite, for a youth group 0.00 11.32 188.68 200.00 200.00 13.3 at Albion Hills Meadowvale or Cedar Grove group campsite, for an adult group 0.00 11.32 188.68 200.00 200.00 13.4 at Albion Hills Meadowvale or Cedar Grove group campsite, for a youth group 0.00 9.34 155.66 165.00 165.00 13.5 at Indian Line group campsite, for an adult group 0.00 14.15 235.85 250.00 200.00 13.6 at Indian Line group campsite, for a youth group 0.00 11.32 188.68 200.00 165.00 13.7 for each additional person per night, in conjunction with a permit issued under items 13.1 to 13.6 0.00 0.29 4.71 5.00 0.00 21.0 For rental of a cross - country ski equipment package consisting of skis, boots and poles; 21.1 for each person sixteen years of age or over, per day. 1.39 1.04 17.32 19.75 19.00 21.2 for each person sixteen years of age or over, per day, after 1:00 p.m. 1.04 0.78 12.93 14.75 14.00 21.3 for each child fifteen years of age or under, per day. 0.92 0.68 11.40 13.00 13.00 21.4 for each child fifteen years of age or under, per day, after 1:00 p.m. 0.77 0.58 9.65 11.00 11.00 21.5 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. 1.76 1.32 21.92 25.00 17.50 224 SECTION IV - ITEMS FOR THE INFORMATION OF THE BOARD RES. #C55/07- THE CONSERVATION FOUNDATION OF GREATER TORONTO Financial Activities Report. Status update on the fundraising activities of The Conservation Foundation of Greater Toronto. Moved by: Seconded by: Gino Rosati Peter Milczyn IT IS RECOMMENDED THAT the staff report on the financial activities of The Conservation Foundation of Greater Toronto (CFGT) be received. CARRIED BACKGROUND Since 1961, The Conservation Foundation of Greater Toronto (CFGT) has raised nearly $ 28 million. In just the last five years the foundation has raised over $ 14 million. Much of this work is done by the foundation's board in cooperation with a corporate cabinet which works to raise money for Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) projects. These board and corporate cabinet consists of volunteers who give freely of their time. The CFGT raises two kinds of revenue: restricted and discretionary. Restricted revenue is dedicated to a particular project, while discretionary revenue is for general purposes. For instance, last year the foundation received a restricted donation of over $ 1 million for the purchase of the Wilder property in the Township of Uxbridge. The foundation receives many restricted donations. The CFGT's goal is to raise enough discretionary revenue to cover its operating costs and transfer $ 800,000 to TRCA. Despite success in raising restricted revenue, the foundation continues to fall short of its goal for discretionary revenue. The foundation's inability to raise discretionary revenue creates budget issues for TRCA since it relies on the transfer of $ 800,000 to balance the operating budget. FINANCIAL DETAILS • In 2005 the foundation raised $ 633,000 in discretionary revenue. After expenses of $ 337,000 were deducted, $ 296,000 was left. This was $504,000 short of the goal. Overall the foundation fell short of its total revenue target by just under $ 1 million. • 2006 was a little better as the foundation raised $ 884,000. After expenses of $ 362,000 were deducted, $ 522,000 was left for transfer to TRCA. This was $ 278,000 short of the goal. Overall, the foundation exceeded its total revenue target by over $ 1.5 million. • In 2007 the foundation anticipates raising $ 500,000 in discretionary revenue. After estimated expenses of $ 389,000 are • deducted, $ 111,000 will be left ($ 689,000 short of the goal). Overall, the foundation will fall short of its total revenue target by about $ 500,000. To raise more discretionary revenue, the foundation invested in individual donors in 2007 and will continue to do so in 2008 and 2009. Over time, these investments will generate significant discretionary revenue. The CFGT will continue to raise restricted revenue and it will prepare for a capital campaign for The Living City Campus. Once again, the foundation will rely on its volunteer board to help raise this money. 225 A final point to remember is that much of the money raised by the foundation would not normally be available to TRCA. The original reason for creating the foundation was to attract additional money from private sources like individuals, corporations and foundations. This is truer in 2007 than it was in 1961. Report prepared by: David Love, 416 - 667 -6291 Email: dlove @trca.on.ca For Information contact: David Love, 416 - 667 -6291 Email: dlove @trca.on.ca Date: October 11, 2007 RES. #C56/07- GOOD NEWS STORIES Highlights of Toronto and Region Conservation Authority's Work. Receipt of Good News Stories for August and September, 2007, from all sections of Toronto and Region Conservation Authority. Moved by: Seconded by: Gerri Lynn O'Connor Gino Rosati IT IS RECOMMENDED THAT the report on "Good News Stories" for August and September, 2007, be received. CARRIED BACKGROUND Management Team, a committee made up of senior staff at Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA), meets monthly to discuss strategic initiatives and organizational development. RATIONALE Key accomplishments of each TRCA section are highlighted 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 from August and September, 2007, and a brief description of each. • Lower Don River- Railway bridge over the lower Don River was completed and the Don Watershed Trail reopened to the public. • Conservation Forests- The second of the proposed six conservation forests in the Etobicoke watershed was endorsed by the City of Brampton Council on August 1st 2007. TRCA and Brampton received $20,000 from Tree Canada through their Green Streets Canada program to match Region of Peel Natural Heritage funding for this project. The " Community Conservation Forest" will provide a central showcase for over 60 years of conservation in the Etobicoke and Mimico watersheds. 226 • Archaeology - At the 'Stopover site' at Heart Lake Conservation Area, there is a very old (i.e. Late Palaeo- Indian /Early Archaic, circa 11,000 years ago) component to the campsite which was unexpected. • At the 'Lewis site' at Bruce's Mill Conservation Area, the 19th century pioneer homestead site that TRCA is currently excavating has an unexpected Pre - Contact component which includes artifacts that date to 10,500 years ago. Incidentally, the 19th century component is even more interesting than we first anticipated, with coins dating to 1804 and 1816, plus an unusual ceramic - firing kiln that appears to date to the 1810s/1820s. • Conservation Foundation- Over the summer, over 320 monthly donors and 530 one -time donors were recruited by going door -to -door in TRCA's jurisdication. • So far in 2007, committed landowners in Durham Region have contributed nearly $110,000 for conservation work in the Duffin's watershed. • Oak Ridges Corridor Park- The 1,000 acre park in Richmond Hill was transferred from private ownership to the province, significantly increasing the public land inventory in the Humber watershed. • Toronto Urban Farm- Youth Challenge Fund awards Afri -Can Food Basket with $150,000 for each of 3 three years to help support the Toronto Urban Farm at Black Creek Pioneer Village. • Department of Canadian Heritage- Awarded $42,900 to Black Creek Pioneer Village to increase access to collections through an artifact digitization project. • Erosion and Sediment Control Training Program- $20,000 committed by Fisheries and Oceans Canada to the program. • Tommy Thompson Park- Up to 17,000 monarch butterflies migrated through the park on the weekend of September 22 -23, 2007. • TRIEC Award - TRCA awarded Immigrant Success Award 2007 from TRIEC as large employer for being an inclusive organization in our employment practices. • Toronto Waterfront Aquatic Habitat Restoration Strategy- Received national award for public sector excellence. • Conservation Education- Husky Injection Molding Systems Inc. and Earth Rangers committed $98,000 to continue the Husky Environmental Weeks Program at the Albion Hills Field Centre. • $10,000 from Toronto Community Foundation for the Healthy Students /Heathly Futures program. • PAIE Program - Presented the program at the 6th Annual Diversity Conference in Toronto on September 17, 2007. • Pearson Eco- Business Proiect- Greater Toronto Airports Authority committed $275,000 /year for 7 years toward development of the Pearson Eco- Business Zone, to be Canada's largest eco- industrial park. • Peel Village Golf Course- Pit and mound restoration techniques at the course proving successful. Report prepared by: Kathy Stranks, extension 5264 Email: kstranks @trca.on.ca For Information contact: Kathy Stranks, extension 5264 Email: kstranks @trca.on.ca Date: October 22, 2007 227 TERMINATION ON MOTION, the meeting terminated at 11:05 a.m., on Friday, November 2, 2007. David Barrow Chair /ks 228 Brian Denney Secretary- Treasurer THE TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY MEETING OF THE BUSINESS EXCELLENCE ADVISORY BOARD #7/07 December 7, 2007 The Business Excellence Advisory Board Meeting #7/07, was held in the South Theatre, Black Creek Pioneer Village, on Friday, December 7, 2007. The Chair David Barrow, called the meeting to order at 9:10 a.m.. PRESENT Paul Ainslie Vice Chair David Barrow Chair Bill Fisch Member Rob Ford Member Peter Milczyn Member Ron Moeser Member Gerri Lynn O'Connor Chair, Authority Maja Prentice Member Gino Rosati Member ABSENT Eve Adams RES. #C57/07 - MINUTES Moved by: Seconded by: Bill Fisch Gino Rosati THAT the Minutes of Meeting #6/07, held on November 2, be approved. PRESENTATIONS Member CARRIED (a) A presentation by Paul Speck, Vice President, Aon Reed Stenhouse Inc., in regard to item 8.1 - Insurance and Risk Management Program. (b) A presentation by Allistair Byrne, Partner, Grant Thornton LLP, in regard to item 7.2 - Audit Plan. 229 RES. #C58 /07 - PRESENTATIONS Moved by: Seconded by: Maja Prentice Paul Ainslie THAT above -noted presentations (a) and (b) be heard and received. CARRIED SECTION I - ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY ACTION RES. #C59 /07 - REGIONAL MUNICIPALITY OF DURHAM - ACCOUNTABILITY FRAMEWORK Resolution from the Regional Municipality of Durham requesting new reporting framework. Moved by: Seconded by: Bill Fisch Ron Moeser THAT item 7.1 - Regional Municipality of Durham - Accountability Framework, be deferred for further discussions with Durham Region. CARRIED RES. #C60 /07 - AUDIT PLAN Initial auditor communication on audit planning for 2007. Moved by: Maja Prentice Seconded by: Paul Ainslie THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT the auditor's "Initial Communication on Audit Planning" report for 2007 be received; AND FURTHER THAT the auditor fees for the 2007 audit year be set at $31,000. CARRIED RATIONALE The attached report, entitled Report to the Business Excellence Advisory Board - Initial Communication on Audit Planning, has been submitted by Toronto and Region Conservation Authority's (TRCA) external auditor, Grant Thornton LLP. The document covers the terms of the financial statement audit engagement for the year ending December 31, 2007. Included in the document is the audit engagement letter, the auditor's letter of independence and a recap of recent accounting and auditing developments that may have an impact on TRCA's financial statements. Members of the Authority are encouraged to contact the auditor with comments, concerns or additional expectations. 230 A proposal call for audit services was conducted in 2004. At that time, Grant Thornton LLP was awarded the audit services contract for a 5 -year period, pending satisfactory annual performance. It is staff's intention to conduct a similar process in 2009 for the 2009 audit year. FINANCIAL DETAILS The fee schedule for the 2007 audit proposes fees of $31,000. This increase is not in line with the 5 -year proposal call which would have required fees of $26,000 for the current year. Given recent developments within the accounting world, including major corporate failures, that have heightened stakeholder expectations and the auditor's increased work load that has resulted from the growth that TRCA has experienced since the proposal call was conducted in 2004, staff is of the opinion that the request for additional fees is reasonable and recommend acceptance of the proposed fees. The $31,000 will be identified in the final 2008 Operating and Capital Budget. Report prepared by: Rocco Sgambelluri, extension 5232 Email: rsgambelluri @trca.on.ca For Information contact: Rocco Sgambelluri, extension 5232; Jim Dillane extension 6292 Emails: rsgambelluri @trca.on.ca; jdillane @trca.on.ca Date: November 22, 2007 Attachments: 1 231 Attachment 1 Report to the Business Excellence Advisory Board — Initial Communication on Audit Planning Toronto and Region Conservation Authority For the year ended December 31, 2007 Grant Thorn on 232 Grant no ton% Grart Thornton LLP Chartered A ocourta its Managemert Consultants November 12, 2007 To the Members of the Business Ex cellence Advisory B oard of Toronto and Region Conservation Authority We are pleased to enclose a copy of a document titled Report to the Business Excellence Advisory B oard — Initial C ommunic ati on on Audit Planning. This document covers the terms of our financial statement audit engagement of Toronto and Region C onservation Authority for the year ending D ecember 31, 2007. This document will help the committee understand the audit and nor- audit services we provide to Toronto and Region C onservation Authority and the level of responsibility assumed by Or ant Thornton LLP under C anadian generally accepted auditing standards. If you have any particular comments, concerns or additional expectations that may require us to undertake additional work over and above that which is currently contemplated, please do not hesitate to raise them at our scheduled meeting. Y ours very truly, GRANT TH ORNTON LLP 97,4 "4-7-414,s, Allister Byrne, F.C.A. Partner cc: Jim Dillane Rocco Sgambelluri Brian D ennev 15 Allstate Parkway Suite 200 Markham, Ontario L3R5B4 T (416) 366 -0100 F (905) 475 -8906 E Markham@GrantThorntonLa W www.0rantTh omton.ca Ca 'adz" Hem to r oTG a it non natbI al 233 Contents Page Snapshot of the business and recent changes 1 Achieving effective governance 3 Quality assurance, indep en. dence and communication 4 Our audit approach 5 Client service team 8 Audit tirn etab le 9 Fee schedule 10 Appendices Appendix A — Audit engagement letter Appendix B — Letter of independence Appendix C — Accounting and auditing developments 234 We consider aH relevant factors Alien preparing an audit plan specifically talorodto your entity Report to the Business Excellence Aduisoky Board —Initial Communication on Audit Planning Toronto and Region Conservation Authority For the year ended December 31, 2007 Toronto and Region Conservation Authority- Snapshot of the business and recent changes The foil co,tting is a sun-11112w of recent changes to the entity's business environment, regulatory environment in ,thich it operates, and relevant accounting and auditing standards We have considered these factors in ptepatin,g the 2007 audit plan for Toronto and Region Conservation Authority Entity-specific changes To the extent we considered nec essaty to plan our audit, we inquire daith management and corroborated through observation of client activities, to reconfirm our understanding of entity processes and the current business environment. From this process, we did not identify any recent entity-specific changes at the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority that required consideration in the planning of the 2007 audit. Broader business environment Through our review of the public s ector in Canada, we did not identify any specific facto is which impacted audit risk & assessments, as well as the on-going financial performance of the entity. Accounting & auditing standards As in pitot periods, there continues to be significant change with respect to accounting and auditing standards. Accounting standards issued by the CICA and those under development which may affect your business for the current and future yeats include: • PSAB Section 3150 — Tangible Capital Assets • PSAB Section 1200 — Financial Statement Presentation • PSAB Section 2700 — Segment Disclosures • PSAB Section 1150 — Generally Accepted Accounting Principles • PSG-6 — Including Results of Organizations and Partnerships Applying Fair Value Measurement • PSG-7— Tangible Capital Assets of Local Governments • Re- el,p os ure Draft — Government Transfers • Statement of Principles — Financial Instruments Report to the Eusirwess Excellence Advisory Board— Initial Corrovrrovunicati©ry on Audit 2 Planning T ©r©rvt© and Regi©ry C©rvservrati©ry Authority F©rthe year erv€Ie€I December 31, 2007 Auditing standards issued by the CICA and those underdevelopment wahich may affe ct your business for the cuttent and future yeats include: • Section 5365 — Communication with Actuaries • Section 9110 — Agreed -upon Procedures Regarding Internal Control over Financial Repotting • AuG-45 — Legislative Auditot's Report on Financial Statements of a Federal, Provincial or Territorial Government Further detail of the changes to accounting and auditing standards, including management's preliminary comments on their applicability to the entity are included in Appendix C. Ifyou have any questions about these changes we invite you to raise them during our meeting. We will be pleased to address your concerns. 236 Report to the Business Excellence Advisory Board — Initial Communication on Audit 3 Planning Toronto and Region Conservation Authority Forthe year ended December 31, 2007 Achieving effective governance There are several fundamental components of effective governance. The Board of Directors plays a key role in achieving strong governance, patticularly with respect to financial repotting. Roles in ensuring strong financial reporting The Board of Directors Roleof the • Help set the tone for the organization by emphasis ng honesty, ethical behaviour and Board of Directors tad prevention hers set the tone brthe Oversee management, including ensuring that management establishes and • organization by maintains internal controls to provide reasonable asstrance regarding reliability of finandal reporting emphasizing honesty, • Recommend the nomination and compensation of external audtors to the board etlical behaviow and fraud • Directly oversee the work of the externei auditors including revieWng, discussing and approving audit plan prevention • Re iewquarteriy and annial finandal statements and recommend approval to the board; reviewMD &A and press releases before they are publicly disclosed Roleof • Prepare finandal statements in accordance with Canadian GAAP Management • Design, implement and maintain effective internal controls over finandal reporting processes • Exercise sound judgment in selecting and applying critical accounting principles • Safeguard assets • Prevent, detect and correct errors • Provide representations to external auditors • Assess quantitative and qualitative impact of misstatements discovered during the audit on fair presentation of the finandal statements • Certify disclosures in annual and interim filings Roleof • Provide an audit Onion that the finandal statemerts are in accordance with Canadian Grant Thornton LLP GASP • Conduct our audit in accordance with Canadian GAAS • Maintain independence and objectivity • Be a resource to the Board of Directors and management • Communicate matters of interest to the Board of Directors 237 Grad Thornton LLP has a robust quality control program Tlrougioutthe audit process we encourage the audit ccsnmittee to contact us ifthere are any questions or concerns Report to the Business Excellence Advisory Board — Initial Communication on Audit 4 Planning Toronto and Region Conservation Authority For the year ended December 31. 2007 Quality assurance, independence and communication Quality assurance Grant Thornton LLP has a robust quality control program that forms a c ore part of our client service. We combine internationally developed audit methodology, advanced technology, rigorous reviewprocedures, mandatory professional development requirements, and the us e of specialists to deliver high quality audit services to our clients. In addition to our internal processes, we are subject to inspection and oversight by standards etting and regulatory bodies. We are proud of our firni's approach to quality assurance and would be pleased to discuss any aspect with you at your convenience. Independence We have a rigorous process where we continually monitor and maintain our independence. We are required to communicate this annually to the Business Exc ell enc e Advisory Board of Toronto and Region Conservation Authority in writing and have attached our letter of independence as Appendix B. The process of maintaining our independence includes, but is not limited to: • Identification of threats to our independence and putting into place safeguards to mitigate th os e threats. For example, we evaluate the independence threat of any non-audit services provided to Toronto and Region Conservation Authority; • Confin iingthe independence of our engagement team member. Communication with the Business Excellence Advisory Board Communication is key to quality se rvice. In conducting our audit we will communicate frequently oath the Business Excellence Advisory Board so that issues and concerns are addressed in a timely and productive mariner. We encourage the members of the Business Excellence Advisory Board to c ontact us at any time if questions or concerns arise. 238 Report to the Business Excellence Advisory Board — Initial Communication on Audit 3 Planning Toronto and Region Conservation Authority Forthe year ended December 31, 2007 Our audit approach An understanding ofyout entity andyout business drives the Grant Thornton LLP audit approach. Tailoring is central to our approach and a key aspect in providing Toronto and Region Conservation Authority with quality service. Understand the business and industry Understand Internal control Assess financial reporting risks • Accounting system • Mon routine transactions • Fiaud iisk • Atitiuuntinnestimates • Misappropriation of • Going corium assets Tailored audit am-coach Qeliserables The objective of out audit is to obtain reasonable assurance that the financial statements are free of material misstatement. The responsibilities of the Business Excellence Advisoty B oard and management are broad and therefore the financial statement audit engagement is not designed to identify all matters which may be ofinterest to the Business Excellence Advisor/Board or 239 ...In our opinion, the financial statements present rainy, hull serial respects, the financial position ot.. Report to the Business Excellence Advisory Board —Initial Communication on Audit 6 Planning Toronto and Region Conservation Authority For the year ended December 31, 2007 management in the discharge of these responsibilities. However, we will communicate the following should we encounter them during the course of our audit: • Misstatements, other than trivial errors • Ftaud • Misstatements that may cause future financial statements to be materially misstated • Illegal or possibly illegal acts, other than those considered inc onsequential, and • Material weaknesses and significant deficiencies in internal control over financial reporting. Internal control Out audit includes gaining an understanding of Toronto andRegion Conservation Authority's internal control over financial reporting. Our understanding will focus on processes associated with the identified financial statement risk areas (see belo -4. The audit team uses this undestanding to determine the nature, extent and timing of our audit procedures. Our understanding may also result in valuable internal control findings for your consideration. Please note that the objectives of a financial statement audit are different from fiduciary control objectives. Therefore, management and the Business Excellence Advisory Board cannot rely on out findings to discharge their responsibilities in this area Risk assessment Out risk assessment process has identified the following areas where we call focus our attention: Risk Area Planned Audit Procedures 1) Revenue generated from municipal levies, contrails, grants and special projeds 2) Employee Compensation Obtain schedules prepared by management and test the various calculations and cmtradsthrough the sampling process. Subsequent collections 'All also be examined as part of the testing of the related receivables. Analytic re'iewof revenue and various reconciliations as well as deferred revenue schedules 'ill be tested and analytically reviewed. The T4 summary and general ledger reconciliation 'till be reviewed for reasonablenessvvth unusual items investigated further. Payroll accruals be ermined and both payables and compensation expenses 'till be analytically reviewed. A serice organization report be obtained. Materiality The purpose of our audit is to provide an opinion as to whether your financial statements present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position, results of operations and cash flows in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles as of December 31, 2007. Therefore, materiality is a critical auditing concept and as such we apply it in all stages of the engagement. Applying the concept of materiality at the planning and execution stage of the engagement recogni2es that the audit team cannot verify every balance, transaction or judgment made in the financial reporting process. During audit planning we make a preliminary assessment of materiality for purposes of developing our audit strategy, including determining the extent of our audit procedures. During the completion stage, we consider not only the quantitative assessment of Baud can occur 1 any company, at any lime, and can be perpetrated by anyone. We are committed to executing our audit l a most effective, efficient and timely mamer Report to the Business Excellence Advisory Board — Initial Communication on Audit 7 Planning Toronto and Region Conservation Authority For the year ended December 31, 2007 materiality, but als o qualitative factors, in assessing the impact on the financial statements, our audit opinion and the matters rep ottedto the Business Excellence Advisory Board. Fraud considerations We are responsible for planning and perfar ningthe audit to obtain reasonable assurance as to w ether the financial statements are free of material misstatement caused by error or by fraud. Our audit procedures consider the requirements of CICA Handbook Section 5135, The Auditor's Responsibility to Consider Fraud and Error. Section 5135 was issued to heighten the awareness of the potential for fraud when planning and executing audits and it emphasizes the need for professional skepticism during the audit. The following provides a summary of some of the fraud - related procedures we plan to perform during the audit. • Dis cuss amongst the engagement team where the financial statements many be susc eptible to material misstatement due to fraud. • Gather information to identify the asks of material misstatement due to fraud, including our understanding of internal control and making detailed inquires to both management and the Business Excellence Advisory Board • Using the information gathered in our risk assessment process. Client assistance and readiness Client assistance and readiness are integral to the successful meeting of our targeted report release date. As presented farther below, it is also critical in meeting our agreed fee. To facilitate the communication process, we have provided management with a letter detailing expected assistance and the critical milestone dates. Deliverables We are committed to executing our audit in amost effective, efficient and timely manner. We will provide the following deliverables to the Business Excellence Advisory Board: • Initial communication on audit planning • Audit report on the financial statements of Toronto and Region Conservation Authority, • Communication of audit results, and • Management letter that provides our observations and recommendations regarding internal controls, based on matters identified during the course of our audit. 241 Report to the Business Excellence Advisory Board — Initial Communication on Audit 8 Planning Toronto and Region Conservation Authority For the year ended December 31, 2007 Client service team e have assembled a team of outstanding professionals to demonstrate our commitment to quality and servic e to Toronto and Region Cons ervation Authority. E iigaigement Member Role Phone Allister B7.rne Chris Anderson Engagement partner Technology Risk Managemert partner (416) 777 -7217 (416) 360 -4977 Emil abprne @GrantT hornton.oa oandersonGrantT hornton.oa Michelle Shi Audit manager (416) 777 -4501 michelleshi GrantThornton.oa Arita Ko Audit senior (416) 366 -0100 ex.6011 akoGrantThornton.ca Armando Minicuca Tax specialist (416) 360 -2374 aminicuod GrantThornton.oa 242 Report to the Business Excellence Advisory Board — Initial Communication on Audit 9 Planning Toronto and Region Conservation Authority Forthe year ended December 31, 2007 Audit timetable November 12, 2007 Audt planning visit December 7, 2007 Meeting vtith Business Excellence Advisory Board and presentation of Report to the Business Excellence Advisory Board — Initial Communication on Audit Planning December 31, 2007 Date for all confirmations March 17, 2008 Year -end visit TBD P reliminary dearance to be Rovided on draft consolidated finandal statemerts TBD Meeting vtith the Business Excellence Advisory Board and presentation of Report to the Business Excellence Advisory Board — Communication of Audit Results 243 Our approach to dealing vith lees is to avoid surprises Report to the Business Excellence Advisory Board — Initial Communication on Audit 10 Planning Toronto and Region Conservation Authority Forthe year ended December 31, 2007 Fee schedule Service Current period proposed fees Prior period actual fees Amual audit $31,000 $26,000 Total (before applicable taxes) $31,000 $26,000 Fee proposal considerations Upfront and periodic discussions are central to our approach in dealing oath fees. Our goal is to avoid surpxises by having early and frank communication. We wish to provide Toronto and Region Conservation Authority with a competitive price and fair value, while also alloying sufficient audit hours to conduct an effective audit and deliver quality se twice. • e have established a proposed fee for the audit for the year ended Dec ember 31, 2007 that is based on the level of activity and the anticipated complexity of the audit of the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority financial statements. The proposed fee is based on receiving the following from management: • Draft financial statements including the notes to the financial statements; • All working papers and schedules as outlined in our requirements letter] • Trial balance together with re concile d control accounts; • All books and records made available to us when requested; and • Use of the entity's staff to help us locate information and provide explanations. Our ability to deliverthe services outlined in the agreed timetable and ourproposed fee wi11 depend upon these schedules being available /tasks being completed by the due dates. If there are any variances to the above plan, we call discuss them oath you and agree to any additional fees before costs are incurred, w exever possible. Any audit work related to segment reporting and tangible capital assets call be rendered s eparately, and any unforeseen work outside the scope of this proposal will be billed separately after discuss ion oath appropriate entity officials and the Business Excellence Advisor/ Board 244 Report to the Business Excellence Advisory Board — Initial Communication on Audit Planning To rwt© and Regi©FI Cons ertfati©r Auto ©rity For the year ended December.', 2007 Appendix A - Audit engagement letter Grant Thornton Grart Tharrtcn LLP Chartered P. ccourtarts Marwgement Consultants November 12, 2007 Toronto and Region Conservation Authority 5 Shoreham Drive b own svi ew, ntati o M3N 1S4 Attention: Mr. Brian Denney, Chief Administrative Officer D ear Sir: Thank you for reappointing Grant Thornton LLP as auditors of Toronto and Region Conservation Authority ( "the Organization ") for the year ending December 31, 2007. The purpose of this letter is to con in our mutual understanding of the terms o f our engagement. OBJECTIVE, SCOPE AND LIMITATIONS Our statutory function as auditors of the Organization is to report to the shareholders by expressing an opinion on the Organization's annual financial statements. We will conduct our audit in accordance with Canadian generally accepted auditing standards and will issue an audit report. The audit will not be planned or conducted in contemplation of reliance by any third party or with respect to any specific transaction. Therefore, items of possible interest to athirdparty will not be specifically addressed and matters may exist that would be assessed differently by a third party, possibly in connection with a specific transaction. An auditor conducting an audit in accordance with Canadian generally accepted auditing standards obtains reasonable assurance that the financial statements taken as a whole are free of material misstatement, whether caused by fraud or error. It is important to recognize that an auditor cannot obtain absolute assurance that material misstatements in the financial statements will be detected because of: (a) factors such as use of judgment, and the use of testing of the data underlying the financial statements, (b) the inherent limitations of internal control; and (c) the fact that much of the audit evidence available to the auditor is persuasive rather than conclusive in nature. Furthermore, because of the nature of fraud, including attempts at concealment through collusion and forgery, an audit designed and executed in accordance with Canadian generally accepted auditing standards may not detect a material fraud. Further, while effective internal control reduces the likelihood that misstatements will occur and remain undetected, it does not eliminate that possibility. For these reasons, we cannot guarantee that fraud, error and illegal acts, if present, will be detected when conducting an audit in accordance with Canadian generally accepted auditing standards. 15 Irate Parlauay Suite 200 Markham, Ontario L3R0B4 T (416) 368 -0100 F (905)475.8906 E Marldla mig Gra MTh° mto n.ca W mww.GrantThomton.ca Canadian Member of Grant Ttiomtn Intma6onal 246 2 Grp n Thornton Should the Organization wish to include the financial statements and our report thereon in a document proposes to be used in connection with a public offering of securities at some future date, we would consider our consent to the inclusion o f our report in such document at that time. MANAGEMENT' S RE SPONSIBILITIE S Management is responsible for: Financial Statements (a) the preparation and fair presentation of the Organiz'ation's financial statements in accordance with Canadian generally accepted accounting principles; (b) when differential reporting options have been used to present the financial statements, acknowledging that: (i) the Organization meets the criteria for using such reporting options; (ii) the owners have been appropriately informed of such reporting options; (iii) the owners' written unanimous consent has been obtained for each differential reporting option; and (iv) such consent has not been withdrawn; Completeness ofinformation (c) providing us with and making available complete financial records and related data, and copies of all minutes of meetings of shareholders, directors and committees of directors; (d) providing us with information relating to any known or probable instances of non - compliance with legislative or regulatory requirements, including financial reporting requirements; (e) providing us with information relating to any illegal or possibly illegal acts, and all facts related thereto; (f) providing us with information regarding all related parti es and related party transactions; Fraud and error (g) the design and implementation o f internal controls to prevent and detect fraud and error; (h) an assessment of the risk that the financial statements may be materially misstated as a result of fraud; (i) providing us with information relating to fraud or suspected fraud affecting the entity involving: (i) management; (ii) employees who have significant roles in internal control; or (iii) others, where the fraud could have a material effect on the financial statements; j) providing us with information relating to any allegations of faud or suspected fraud affecting the entity's financial statements communicated by employees, former employees, analysts, regulators, or others; (k) communicating its belief that the effects of any uncorrected financial statement misstatements aggregated during the audit are immaterial, both individually and in the aggregate, to the financial statements taken as a whole; 247 3 Grant Thornton is Recognition, measurement and disclosure (1) providing us with its assessment of the reasonableness of significant assumptions underlying fair value measurements and disclosures in the financial statements; (m) providing us with any plans or intentions that may affect the carrying value or classification of assets or liabilities; (n) providing us with the measurement and disclosure of transactions with related parties; (o) providing us with an assessment of all areas o f measurement uncertainty known to management that are required to be disclosed in accordance with MEASUREMENT UNCERTAINTY, CICA HANDBOOK — ACCOUNTING Section 1508; (p) providing us with information relating to claims and possible claims, whether or not they have b een discussed with the Organization's legal counsel; (q) providing us with information relating to other liabilities and contingent gains or losses, including those associated with guarantees, whether written or oral, under which the Organization is contingently liable; (r) providing us with information on whether or not the Organization has satisfactory title to assets, liens or encumbrances on assets, and assets pledged as collateral; (s) providing us with information relating to compliance with aspects of contractual agreements that may affect the financial statements; (t) providing us with information concerning subsequent events; and Written confirmation of significant representations (u) providing us with written confirmation of significant representations provided to us during the engagement on matters that are: (i) directly related to items that are material, either individually or in the aggregate, to the financial statements; (ii) not directly related to items that are material to the financial statements but are significant, either individually or in the aggregate, to the engagement; and (iii) relevant to your judgments or estimates that are material, either individually or in the aggregate, to the financial statements. It is agreed that for any electronic distribution of your financial statements and our report thereon, management is solely responsible for the accurate and complete repro duction of the financial statements and our report thereon. While the report may be sent to the Organization electronically by us for your convenience, only the signed (electronically or manually) report constitutes the Organization' s record copy. If management intends to publish or otherwise make reference to Grant Thornton LLP in a document that contains other information, management agrees to (a) provide Grant Thornton LLP with a draft of such document to read, and (b) obtain our approval for inclusion of our report, b efore the document is finalized and distributed. Management also agrees that if our name is to be used in connection with the financial statements, it will attach our auditors' report when distributing the financial statements to third parties. 248 4 OUR RESPONSIBILITIES Grant Thornton We will perform the audit in accordance with Canadian generally accepted auditing standards. These standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position, result of operations and cash flows in accordance with Canadian generally accepted accounting principles. Accordingly, we will plan and perform our audit to provide reasonable, but not absolute, assurance of detecting fraud and errors that have a material effect on the financial statements taken as a whole, including illegal acts whose consequences have a material effect on the financial statements. One of the underlying principles of the profession is a duty of confidentiality with respect to client affairs. A ccordingly, except for information that is in or enters the public domain, we will not provide any third party with confidential information concerning the affairs of the Organization without the Organization's prior consent, unless required to do so by legal authority, or the rules of professional conduct/code of ethics. We will communicate in writing to those responsible for financial reporting oversight, the relationships between Grant Thornton LLP and the Organization (including related entities) that, in our professional judgement, may reasonably be thought to bear on our independence. Further, we will confirm our independence with respect to the Organization. The objective of our audit is to obtain reasonable assurance that the financial statements are free of material misstatement. However, if we identify any of the following matters, they will be communicated to the appropriate level of management: (a) misstatements, resulting from error, other than trivial errors; (b) fraud or any information that indicates that a fraud may exist; (c) any evidence obtained that indicates an illegal or possibly illegal act, other than one considered inconsequential, has occurred; (d) significant weaknesses in the design or implementation of internal controls to prevent and detect fraud or error; and (e) related party transactions identified by us that are not in the normal course of operations and that involve significant judgments made by management concerning measurement or disclosure. The matters communicated will b e those that we identify during the course o f our audit. Audits do not usually identify all matters that may be of interest to management in discharging its responsibilities. The type and significance of the matter to be communicated will determine the level of management to which the c ommuni cati on i s directed. We will consider the Organization's internal control to identify types of potential misstatements, consider- factors that affect the risks of material misstatement, and design the nature, timing and extent of further audit procedures. This consideration will not be sufficient to enable us to render-an opinion on the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting. 249 5 Other Services Grant Thornton Any additional services that you may request and we agree to provide will be the subject of separate written arrangements. OTHER MATTERS Privacy and Confidentiality Grant Thornton LLP is committed to the protection of personal infoimation. During the course of planning, performing and reporting on the results of our audit of the Organization's financial statements, partners and employees assigned to this engagement will need to obtain, use and disclose personal information in the possession of or under the control of the Organization. The Organization is responsible for obtaining, when required under law or regulation, consent from those parties that provided the Organization with their personal information for Grant Thornton LLP to obtain, use and disclose it for its required purposes. Use of Electronic Conununications During the course of our engagement(s), we may need to electronically transmit confidential infoimation to each other and to outside specialists or other entities engaged by either Grant Thornton LLP or the Organization. Electronic methods include telephone, cell phones, e -mail and fax. These technologies provide a fast and convenient way to communicate. However, all forms of communications have inherent security weaknesses and the risk of compromised confidentiality cannot be eliminated. The Organization agrees to the use of electronic methods to transmit and receive information. Working Pap ers{R.eports All materials, reports and work created, developed or performed by Grant Thornton LLP, including its working papers during the course of the audit are the property of Grant Thornton LLP. Fees and Expenses Our audit fee for the year ended December 31, 2007 has been estimated to be $31,000. The fee estimate by Grant Thornton LLP take into account the agreed -upon level of preparation and assistance from your personnel and providing the information to us on the dates specified in our Requirements Letter. Any delays in providing the requested infoimation on the specified dates could result in an extra billing. We will discuss such circumstances with you should they arise. Normal administrative expenses which include items such as computer and technology usage, software licensing, research and library databases, photocopies, postage supplies and delivery, fax charges, printing of statements and reports, and similar expense items are charged on the basis of a percentage of our professional costs. The administrative fee is 3.5 % of the audit and tax fees quoted. B ills, including exp enses will be rendered on a regular basis as the assignment progresses. Accounts are due when rendered. 250 6 Grp n Thornton We retain the right to suspend or terminate our service in the event ofnon- payment, and you will be obligated to compensate us for all time expended and to reimburse us for out -of- pocket expenses through the date of termination. Any audit work related to segment reporting and tangible capital assets will be rendered separately. Interest on Overdue Accounts All accounts outstanding over 30 days will be charged interest at the rate of 1.5% per month (18% per annum) until paid. T axes All fees and other charges do not include any applicable federal, provincial, or other goods and services or sales taxes, or any other taxes or duties whether presently in force or imposed in the future. Any such taxes or duties shall be identified and charged separately on our billings. Other If, in our opinion our professional obligations require it, we may resign from the engagement prior to completion. Should the Organization not fulfill its obligations set out herein and in the absence of rectification by the Organization within 10 days Grant Thornton LLP, upon written notice to you, may terminate its perfonriance and will not be responsible for any loss, cost or expense resulting from such early termination. L incitation of L cab ility In any action, claim, loss or damage arising out of the engagement, the Organization agrees that Grant Thornton LLP' s liability will be several and not joint and several and the Organization may only claim payment from Grant Thornton LLP of Grant Thornton LLP' s proportionate share of the total liability based on degree of fault. Any action against Grant Thornton LLP must be commenced on or before the date which is the earlier of: i) eighteen months from the date on which our audit report is provided to you and, ii} the date by which an action must be commenced under any applicable legislation other than limitation legislation. In no event shall Grant Thornton LLP be liable to the Organization whether the claim be in tort, contract or otherwise, for an amount in excess of the professional fees paid by the Organization for the engagement. In no event shall Giant Thornton LLP be liable to the Organization, whether a claim be in tort, contract or otherwise for any consequential, indirect, lost profit or similar damages, or failure to realize expected savings. Giant Thornton LLP will use all reasonable efforts to complete within any agreed upon time-frame the performance of the services described above. However, Grant Thornton LLP shall not be liable for failures or delays in performance that arise from causes beyond its control, including the untimely performance or non- p erformance by the Organization of its obligations. 251 7 Governing Law Grp n Thornton This engagement will be governed by the laws of Ontario. The Organization and Giant Thornton LLP agree to submit any unresolved dispute or any litigation arising as a result of or in relation to this letter to the exclusive jurisdiction of the Courts of Ontario. Survival of Terms This engagement letter will continue in force for subsequent audits unless terminated by either party by written notice prior to the commencement of the subsequent audit. The Organization and Grant Thornton LLP agree that the limitation o f liability paragraph will survive the termination of this engagement contract. We are proud to serve as your auditors and we appreciate your confidence in our work. If you have any questions about the contents of this letter, please raise them with us. If the services outlined herein are in accordance with your requirements and if the above terms are acceptable to you, please have one copy of this letter signed in the space provided b el ow and return it to us. Y ours very truly, GRANT THORNTON LLP LlP Allister Byrne, F.C.A. The services and teems as set forth in this letter are agreed to. Toronto and Region Conservation Authority B y: B rian Denney, Chief Administrative Officer (Date) 252 Report to the Business Excellence Advisory Board — Initial Communication on Audit Planning To rwt© and Regi©FI Cons ertfati©r Auto ©rity For the year ended December.', 2007 Appendix B - Letter of independence Grant Thornton Grart Thornton LLP Chartered A000urtarts Maragemert Consultants November 12, 2007 The Business Excellence Advisory B card Toronto and Region Conservation Authority 5 Shoreham Drive Dawnsview, Ontario M3N 1S4 D ear B oard Members: We have been engaged to audit the financial statements of Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (the "Organization ") for the year ending December 31, 2007. Canadian generally accepted auditing standards (GAAS) require that we communicate at least annually with you regarding all relationships between the Organization and Grant Thornton LLP that, in our professional judgment, may reasonably be thought to bear on our independence. In determining which relationships to report, these standards require us to consider relevant rules and related interpretations prescribed by the appropriate provincial institute f ordre and applicable legislation, covering such matters as (a) (b) (c) (d) (e) holding a financial interest, either directly or indirectly, in a client; holding a p o siti on, either directly or indirectly, that gives the right or responsibility to exert significant influence over the financial or accounting policies Ufa client; personal or business relationships ofimmediate family, close relatives, pat ners or retired partners, either directly or indirectly, with a client; economic dependence on a client; and 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 21, 2007, the date of our last letter. We are not aware of any relationships between the Organization and Giant Thornton LLP that, in our professional judgment, may reasonably be thought to bear on our independence, that have occurred from February 21, 2007 to November 12, 2007. The total fees charged to the Organization for audit services were $30,500 during the period from February 21, 2007 to November 12, 2007. GAAS requires that we confirm our independence to the audit committee in the context of the Rules of Professional Conduct of the Institute of Chattered Accountants of Ontario. Accordingly, we hereby confirm 15 Wlslate Parkway Suite 200 Markham, Ontario L3R 504 T (416)366-0100 F (005) 475 -8906 E Markham11OrantThomton,ca W www.GrantThomton.ca Canadian Member otGrant Tltombn lab matlonal 254 T orison that we are independent with respect to the Organization within the meaning of the Rules of Professional C onduct of the Institute of Chartered Accountants of Ontario as of November 12, 2007. This report is intended solely for the use of the B usiness Excellence Advisory B oard, management, and others within the Organization and should not be used for any other pulp oses. We look forward to discussing with you the matters addressed in this letter at our upcoming meeting. Y ours truly, GRANT THORNTON LLP Chartered Accountants Allister Byrne, F.C.A. pnt-F„ .t- 255 Report to the Business Excellence Advisory Board — Initial Communication on Audit Planning To rwt© and Regi©FI Cons ertfati©r Auto ©rity For the year ended December.', 2007 Appendix C - Accounting and auditing developments 256 Report to the Business Excellence Advisory Board — Initial Communication on Audit Planning Toronto and Region Conservation Authority For the year ended December 31, 2007 PSAB Accounting developments Public Sector Accounting Board Effective date PSAB Section 3750 - Tangible Capital Assets PSAB has approved revisions to Section P S 3150 "Tangible Capital Assets." The Section row applies to all levels of government, inducing local governments. The most prominent change for local governments is the requirement to recognize and amortize all their tangible capital assets. Redsionsto the Section include: • The definition of cost has been am ended to clarify that cost isthe gross amourt, and that capital grants are not to be netted against the cost of the relatedtangible capital asset. Guidance on the cost of leased tangible capital assets is also prodded • The 40 -year guideline on the amortization period has been removed • There is additional guidance on the commencement and cessation of capitaling carrying costs • During the period of transition, local governmentsshculd follow Public Sector Guideline PSG -7, Tangible Capital Assets of Local Government The revi sed Section appliesto local governments for fiscal years beginning on or after January 1,2009. Earlier adoption is encouraged. PSAB Section 1200 — Financial Statement Presentation This Section has been revised as a result of the CICA Public Sector Accounting Handbook requirement to adopt the full accrual basis of acrountinq for local governments. This Section establishes standards for recognition, presentation and disclosure in government financial statements. The main features of the Section are as follows: • Governments are required to present a statement of financial position, statement of operations, statement of changes in net debt and a statement of cash flows • Financial statements should present net debt and accumulated surplus/ deficit on the statement of financial position, annual surplus/ deficit, the change in net debt and changes in cash flows • C urrert year budget and actual figures are to be preserted on both the statem ert of operations and the statement of changes in net debt • Funds and reserves are to be reported in the notes or schedules .open the governmert chooses to report on them This Section currently appliesto senior levels of government. This Section Wil apply to local governments for fiscal years beginning on or after January 1, 2009. Earlier adoption is encouraged. 257 Report to the Business Excellence Advisory Board — Initial Communication on Audit Planning Toronto and Region Conservation Authority For the year ended December 31, 2007 Public Sector Accounting Board Effective date PSAB Section 2700 - Segment Disclosures This Section establishes standards on howto define, identify and disclose segments in a government's summary financial statements. In providing segment disclosures, it is important that the definition of a segment is met, the objectives for segment disclosures are satisfied and an appropriate basis of segmentation is chosen. The Section specifies both the required and desired segment disclosures in a government's financial statements. As a minimum, the rotes or scheduiesto the financial statements for each government segment must include: • The basis for identifying segments, the nature of the segments, the activities they encompass and the method of significant allocations to segments • Segment expense by major oiled or category • Segment revenue by source and tppe • Aggregate net surplusldeficit of government business enterprises and government business partnerships accounted for under the modified eguity method for each segment, if applicable • Aggregate net surplusldeficit of government organizations accounted for under the modified equity basis in accordance with PSA 1300.47, if applicable; and • A reconciliation between the information disclosed for the segments and the consolidated information inthe summary financial statements The standard applies to the summary financial statements of federal , prowl ncial , territori al and local governments for fiscal pears beginning on or alter April 1, 2007. Earlier adoption is encouraged. PSAB Section 7750 — Generally Accepted Accounting Principles This Section significantly affects how all levels ofgovernment select their accourting pcl icies. It is intended to clarify. • "I ndust 7'' GAAP no longer e>1sts • That constitutes GAAP for the public sector • That are the primary sources of GAAP for governments and those organizations that consider the Accounting Recommendations of the Handbook to be the most appropriate to their objectives and circumstances • That ifthe basis of accounting used to prepare financial statements in accordance with regulatory, legislative or contractual requirements confl ids With the requirement of this Section, that basis cannot be described as being in accordance with GAAP • That criteria must be satisfied in determining an "other source of GAAP" when there is no primary source of GAAP available The standard is applicable to all governments for fiscal years beginning on or alter April 1, 2005, excluding certain local governments currently required by Iegsiation or regulation to prepare their financial statements in accordance With a basis of accounting other than GAAP H O'AE'vE R Transitional provisions deferred the application of this standard to fiscal years beginning on or after April 1, 2006 for those local governments. Earlier adoption is encouraged. 258 Report to the Business Excellence Advisory Board — Initial Communication on Audit Planning Toronto and Region Conservation Authority For the year ended December 31, 2007 Public Sector Accounting Board Effective date PSG -6 —Inducing Results of Organizations and Partnerships Applying Fair Value Measurement PSG -6 provides guidance to governments when reporting on government organizations and government partnerships in their summary financial statements. Government organizations and government partnerships are required to base their accounting polices on CICAHandboca — Accounting and adopt the financial instrumert standards, specifically. • CICA 1530 — Comprehensive Income • CICA 3355— Financial Instruments — Recognition and Measurement, and • CICA3865— Hedges This Guideline communicates the application of P SAB's existing standards to the reporting of fair value measurement adustments. This Guideline applies from the date that the government organizations and partnerships implement CICA 1530, CICA 3855 and CICA3865. These Sections in CICA Handbook — Accounting are effedive for fiscal years beginning on or after O Bober 1 , 2007. PSG -7 — Tangible Capital Assets of Local Governments This Guideline providestransitionel guidance to local governments on preserting information related to tangible capital assets in notes or schedulesto its financial statements urtil such time as Tangible Capital Assets, Section PS 3150 is adopted by local governments. PS 3150 applies to local governments for fiscal years beginning on or alter January 1, 2109, although earlier adoption is encouraged. This Guideline appliesto fiscal years beginning on or alter January 1, 2007. Earlier adoption is encouraged. Re-Exposure Draft - Government Transfers PSAB issued a Re -Exposure draft, 'Government Transfers" proposing to am end the current Public Sector Accounting Handbook Section, PS 3410 Governmert Transfers. In general, the proposed standard: • Defines government transfers • Details when government transfers should be recog-ii zed as revenue or expenses • Describes when a recipient government would recognize a Iiability for a transfer • Provides guidance on determining the authorization date ofthe transfer, and • Addresses multi -year operating transfers provided and received, capital transfers received, the point of authorization, and the volatility of results The revised Section is proposed to apply to all governments for fiscal years beginning on or after J amary 1 , 2009. Statement of Principles — Financial Instruments The committee has examined the possible treatment of inancal inslrum ents for government ertities and proposed the following: • Two categories would be used, amortized cost and fair value • Any unrealized hedging income would be reported on the statement of net debt • Disclosure would be consistent with section 3855 of the accounting handbook, which is in accordance with !FRS 7 This is open Or comment until December 3, 2007. An exposure draft is expeded in June 2008, and is anticipated to be approved by November 2008. 259 Report to the Business Excellence Advisory Board — Initial Communication on Audit Planning Toronto and Region Conservation Authority Forthe year ended December 31,2007 Auditin • devel o s merits Auditing — Standards issued by the CICA Effective date Section 5365 — Corrrninication with Actuaries This Section and the appended Joint Policy Statement (JP S) have been revised to focus on appropriate methods of communication between actuaries involved in the preparation of the financial statements, and audtors. They reflect an increased emphasis on auditor independence and a change from the previous practice ofthe auditor relying on the work of the aduary vho is not independent of the audted ertity. Applies to audits of financial statements for periods commencing on or alter October 1 , 2007. Section 9110 - Agreed -upon ProceduresRegarding Internal Control over Financial Reporting This news edion deals with the public accourtant's professional responsibilities in concluding an agreed -upon procedures engagement regarding irternal control over financial reporting. In addition to the basic professional standards to be met in concluding such engagements, the Section deals Wth: • establ ishi m the terms of the engagement • performing and documenting the agreed -upon procedures and • reporting findings from having performed the agreed -upon procedures. Applies to engagemens entered into on or alter May 1,2007. AuG -45 — Legi dative Auditor's Report on Financial Statements of a Federal, Provincial or Territorial Government A legislative audtor of the financial statements of a federal, provincial or territorial government may be required by his or her mandate to egress an opinion on whether the financial statements are presented fairly in accordence Wth stated accounting policies. This Guideline provides guidance on the %circling of the auditor's report in such circumstances. This Guideline is effedive with respect to audit reports issued on or alter July 1, 2006. 260 Report to the Business Excellence Advisory Board — Initial Communication on Audit Planning Toronto and Region Conservation Auth ority For the year ended December 31, 2007 Auditing — Standards under development Status Accounting Estimates (CAS 540) The objective of this project is to replace e>1sting Canadian standards and guidance on evaluating the reasonableness of accounting estimates used by management for financial reporting purposes and on audting fair value measuremerts and disclosures contained in financial statements with the equivalent International Standard on Auditing (ISA). This project proposes to replace Sections 5305, Audit of Accounting Estimates and 5306, Auditing Fair Value Measuremerts and Disclosures, Wth a newCanadian Auditing Standard (CAS) that essentially adopts the revised and clarified International Standard on Auditing 540, Auditing Accounting Estimates, Inducting Fair Value Accounting Estimates, and Related Disclosures (ISA 540), that is currently being developed by the International Auditing and Assurance Standards Board (IAASB). It is closely linked to the project on Materiality. The AASB issued an exposure draft in January 2007, with comments requested by March 23, 2007. Analytical Procedures The objective of this project is to replace e>1sting Canadian standards and qui dance on the use of analysis in risk assessment procedures, in substartive procedures, and as an overall reviewof the financial statements with the equivalent International Standard on Auditing (ISA). This project proposes to replace Section 5301, Analysis, with a new Canadian Auditing Standard (CAS)that essentially adopts the clarified Irternational Standard on Auditing 520, Analytical Procedures (ISA 520), that is currently being developed by the International Auditing and Assurance Standards Board (IAASB). The IAASB is developing the exposure drat. Audit documentation (CAS 230) The objective of this project is to replace e>1sting Canadian standards and guidance on audt documentation for an audit of financial statements with the equivalent International Standard on Auditing (ISA). This project proposes to replace Section 5145, Documentation, with a newCanadian Auditing Standard (CAS) that essentially adopts the clarified Irternational Standard on Auditing 230, Audit D mum ertation (ISA 230), that is currertly being developed by the International Auditing and Assurance Standards Board (IAASB). The AASB issued an exposure draft in January 2007, with comments requested by March 16, 2007. Audit Evidence (CAS 500) The objective of this project is to replace e>1sting Canadian standards and guidance on .chat constitutes audit evidence in an audit of financial statements, the quartity and quality of audit evidence to be obtained and the audit procedures that auditors use for obtaining that audit evidence, Wth the equivalent International Standard on Auditing. This project proposes to replace Section 5300, Audit Evidence, Wth a newCanadian Auditing Standard (CAS) that essentially adopts the clarified Irternational Standard on Auditing 500, Consideri ng the Relevance and Reliability of Audit Evidence (ISA 500), that is currently being developed by the International Auditing and Assurance Standards Board (IAASB). The AASB issued and exposure draft in May 2007, with comments requested by August 24,2007. 261 Report to the Business Excellence Advisory Board — Initial Communication on Audit Planning Toronto and Region Conservation Authority Forthe year ended December 31, 2007 Auditing — Standards under development Status Audit E vidence — Additional Considerations The objective of this project is to replace existing Canadian standards and guidance on audt proceduresthat auditors use for obtaining audit evidence. This project proposes to replace Section 5030, Inventories, and Sedi on 6560, Communications vtith LawFirms Regarding Claims and Possible Claims, v,ith a newCanadian Auciting Standard that essentially adopts the clarified International Standard on Auditing 501, Audit Evidence — Adcitional Considerations for Specific Items (ISA 501), that is currently being developed by the International Auditing and Assurance Standards Board OAASB). The IAASB is developing the exposure drat. Audit Sampling and Other Testing The IAASB is developing the The objective of this project is to issue Canadian standards and guidance that '411 adopt the International Standard on Auditing (ISA) on the use of audit sampling and other means of seleding items for testing Men designing audit procedures to gather audit evidence. This project proposes to adapt as a Canadian Auditing Stardard (CAS), the darified International Standard on Auditing 530, Audit Sampling and Other Means of Testing (ISA 530), that is currently being developed by the International Auditing and Assurance Standards Board Q AASB). exposure drat . Auditors' Reports Several related prcjeds are The objective of this project is to revise standards and guidance dealing vstth the standard report of an auditor ti iho has been engaged to express an opinion on general purpose financial statements prepared in accordance Wth generally accepted accounting principles. The project vrill also provide guidance on en auditor's report on special purpose financial statements. Phase 1 The AASB proposes to revi se Section 5400, The Auditor's Standard Report, to adopt the new standard audit report w rding contained in International Stardard on Auditing 700, The Independent Auditor's Report on a Complete Set of General Purpose Financial Statements OSA 700). Phase 2 The AASB vJll address the remaining issues in and propose to adopt ISA 700, along vtith International Standards on Auditing 705, Modificationsto the Opinion in the Independent Auditor's Report, 800, Sped ct C cnsiderati ons— Audits of Special Purpose Financial Statements and Specific Elements, Accounts or Items ofa Financial Statemert and 805, Special Ccnsiderationc \Ahen Reporting on Summary Financial Statements. The project also proposes revisicns to cther Handbook Sections, such as. • Sedions 5090, Audit of Financial Statements —an Introduction, and 5095, Reasonable Assurance and Audit Risk, regarding the objectives and principles governing an audit; • Sedion 5110, Terms of the Engagement, regarding terms of the engagement; • Sedion 5405, Date of the Auditor's Report, regarding the date of the auditor's repot; and • Sedion 6550, Subsequent Events, regardng subsequent events. Further, the project also proposes revi dons to examples of audt reportsthroughout the Handbook. in progress. 262 Report to the Business Excellence Advisory Board — Initial Communication on Audit Planning Toronto and Region Conservation Authority For the year ended December 39, 2007 Auditing — Standards under development Status Cormurications with Those Charged with Governance (CAS 260) The objective of this project isto converge existing Canacan standards and guidance on the auditor's cammurication with those hawing oversight responsibility for the financial reporting process when performing an audit of an entitys financial statements with the equivalert International Standard on Auditing. This project proposes to replace Section 5751, Communications with Those Having Oversight Responsibility for the Financial Reporting Process, with a newCanadian Auditing Standard (CAS) that essentially adopts the clarified Intematimal Standard on Auditing 260, Canmunications with Those Charged Wth Governance QSA 260), that is currertly being developed by the International Auditing and Assurance Standards Board (IAASB). The AASB issued an exposure draft in January 2007, with comments requested by January 29, 2007. Comparatives The objective of this project isto replace existing Canadian standards and guidance regarding comparative figures in audited financial statements with the equivalent International Standard on Aiditing (ISA). This project proposes to replace existing Canadian standards and guidance regarding comparative figures in audited financial statements, with a newCanadian Auditing Standard (CAS) the adoptsthe clarified International Standard on Auditing 710, Ccmparatives, (ISA 710), that is currently being developed by the International Auditing and Assurance Standards Board (IAASB). The proposed new standard vwuld replace part of existing Section 5701, Other Reporting Matters, and Assurance and Related Services Guideline AuG — 8, Auditor's Report on Comparative Financial Statements. The AASB i s considering the disposition of the remaining standards and guidance in Section 5701. The IAASB is developing the exposure drat. Consideration of Laws and Regulations (CAS 250) The objective of this project isto replace existing Canadian standards and guidance about material misstatements arising from the consequences of illegal ads with the equivalent International Standard on Auditing (ISA). This project proposes to replace Section 5136, Misstatements — Illegal Ads, with a newCanadian Auditing Standard (CAS)that essentially adopts the clarified Intematicnal Standard on Auditing 250, The A.jditcr's Responsibilities Relating to Laws and Regulations in an Audit of Financial Statements (ISA 250), that is currently being developed by the International Auditing and Assurance Standards Board (IAASB). The AASB issued an exposure draft in May 2007, with canments requested by July 13, 2007. Consideration of the Internal Audit F ruction (CAS 610) The objective of this project into replace ebsting Canadian standards and guidance on using the work of internal audit in carrying out an audit engagement with the equivalent International Standard on Auditing (ISA). This project proposes to replace Section 5050, Using the Work of Internal Audit, with a newCanadian Auditing Standard (CAS)that essentially adopts the clarified Intematimal Standard on Auditing 610, The Auditor's Consideration of the Internal Audit Function (1SA 610), that is currertly being developed by the International Auditing and Assurance Standards Board (IAASB). The AASB issued an exposure draft in January 2007, with comments requested by March 16, 2007. 263 Report to the Business Excellence Advisory Board — Initial Communication on Audit Planning Toronto and Region Conservation Auth ority For the year ended December 31, 2007 Auditing — Standards under development Status Controls at a Service Organization The objective of this project is to replace existing Canadian standards and guidance to auditors ho issue audit reports on the processing of transactions by a service organization for use by user organizations and their auditors with the equivalent International Standard on Assurance Engagements (ISAE). This project proposes to replace Section 5970, Auditor's Report on Controls et a Service Organization, with a newCanadian standard that essentially adopts the newlnternational Standard on Assurance Engagements 3402, Assurance on Contrds at a Service Organization (ISAE 3402), that is currently being developed by the International Auditing and Assurance Standards Board (IAASB). The IAASB is developing the exposure drat. Employee FutrreBenefts— [Permed Plan The AASB has deferred this project. The objective of this project is to revise guidance relevant to the auditor's application of generally accepted auditing standards to the recognition, measurement and disclosure of the cost of employee future benefits for defined benefit plans as set out in CI C A H andbmk — Acccunting Section 3461, Employee Future Benefits. This project proposes to revise ALTO -29, Audit of Employee Future Benefits — Defined Plans, as a result of the issuance of ALTO -43, Audit of Policy Liabilities of Insurance Enterprises, and proposed revisions to Section 5365, Communications with Actuaries. Entities Using Service Organizations The IAASB is developing the exposure drat. The objective of this project is to replace existing Canadian standards and guidance on the factors that an auditor considers when auditing the financial statements of an entity that uses a service organization to process certain trensadions with the equivalent International Standard on Auditing (ISA). This project proposes to replace Section 5310, Audit Evidence CcnsideretionsV.hen an Entity Uses a Service Organization, with a newCanadian Auditing Standard (CAS) that essentially adopts the revised and clarified International Standard on Auditing 402, Audit Consideretions Relating to Entities Using Service Organizations (ISA 402), that is currently being developed by the International Auditing and Assurance Standards Board (I AASB). External Confimvations The objective of this project is to replace existing Canadian standards and guidance on the use of confirmations as a means of obtaining audit evidence v,ith the equivalent International Standard on Auditing (ISA). This project proposes to replace Section 5303, Confirmation, with a newCanadian Auditing Standard (CAS) that essentially adopts the revised and clarified International Standard on Auditing 505, External Confirmations (ISA 505), that is currently being developed by the International Auditing and Assurance Standards Board (IAASB). The IAASB is developing the exposure drat. 264 Report to the Business Excellence Advisory Board — Initial Communication on Audit Planning Toronto and Region Conservation Authority For the year ended December 31, 2007 Auditing — Standards under development Status Financial Statement Audits —Objective and General Principles (CAS 200) The objective of this project is to establish standards regarding the independent auditor's overall responsibilities when conducting an audit of financial statements. This project proposes to develop a newCanadian Auditing Standard (CAS) that essentially adopts the clarified International Standard on Auditing 200, Overall Objective of the Independent Auditor, and the Conduct of an Audit in Acccrdance with International Standards on Auditing, (ISA 200), that is currently being developed by the International Auditing and Assurance Standards Board (IAASB). The AASB issued an exposure draft in May 2007, with can ments requested by August 24,2007. Group Financial Statemeits(CAS 600) The objective of this project is to replace existing Canadian standards and guidance addressing reliance by one auditor (the primary audtor) on the report and work of another auditor (the secondary auditor) .open auditing group financial statements, with the International Standard on Auditing. This project proposes to replace Section 6930, Reliance on Another Auditor, With a newCanadian Auditing Standard (CAS)that essentially adopts the clarified International Standard on Auditing, 600, Special Considerations - Audits of Group Financial Statements (Including the Work of Component Auditors) (ISA 600), that is currently being developed by the International Auditing and Assurance Standards Board (IAASB). The IAASB is currently reviewing the comments received on the exposure draft Identifying and Assessing the Risk of Material hisstatements (CAS 375) The objective of this project is to replace existing Canadian standards and guidance on obtaining an understanding of the entity and its environment, inducing its irternal control, and on assessing the risks of material misstatement in a financial statement audit with the equivalert International Standard on Auditing (ISA). This project proposes to replace Section 5141, Understanding the Entity and Its E nvironment and Asseing the Risk of Material Misstatements, wth a newCanadian Audting Standard (CAS)that essentially adopts the clarified International Standard on Auditing 315, Identifying and Asseing the Risk of Material Misstatemerts Through Understanding the Entity and Its E nvironm ert (ISA 315), that was recently approved by the International Auditing and Assurance Standards Board (I AASB). The Final Canadian Auditing Standard (CAS 315) has been approved by the AASB. There are m charges from the existing standard Material Weaknesses in Internal Control The objective of this project is to adopt expanded guidance being developed by the International Auditing and Assurance Standards Board (IAASB) on the meaning of material weaknesses in internal control and the auditor's responsibilitiesto identify and communicate internal contrd issues to those charged with governance. This project proposes to develop a newCanadian Auditing Standard (CAS) that essentially adopts a newlnternational Standard on Auditing, Material Weaknesses in Internal Control that is currently being developed by the International Auditing and Assurance Standards Board (I AASB). The IAASB is developing the exposure drat. 265 Report to the Business Excellence Advisory Board — Initial Communication on Audit Planning Toronto and Region Conservation Auth ority For the year ended December 31, 2007 Auditing — Standards under development Status Materiality and Evaluation of Msstatements (CAS 320 & 450) The objective of this project is to replace existing Canadian standards and guidance on the concept of materiality and its application daring an audt of financial statements or other financial information with the equivalert International Standard on Auditing. This project proposes to replace Section 5142, Materiality, with two newCanadian Auditing Standards (CASs)that essentially adopt the clarified Irternational Standards on Auditing, Materiality in Planning and Performing an Audit (ISA 32J) and Evaluation of Misstatements Identified During the Audit (ISA 450), that are currently being developed by the IAASB. An earlier project to revise section 5142, Materiality, and AuO 41, Applying the concept of Materiality, has now been terminated. The AASB issued an exposure draft in December 2006, with comments requested by January 17, 2007. Modifications to the Auditor's Report The objective of this project into replace existing Canadian standards and guidance on reservations in the auditor's report, and cther reporting matters, with the equivalent International Standard on Auditing. This project proposes to replace Section 5510, Reservations in the Auditor's Report, and Section 5701, Other Reporting Matters, Wth a newCanadian Auditing Standard (CAS) that essentially adopts the revised and clarified International Standards on Auditing 705, Modifications to the Opinion in the Independent Auditor's Report (ISA 705), and 706, Emphasis of Matter Paragraphs and Other Matters) Paragraphs in the Independent Auditor's Report (ISA 706) that are currently being developed by the International Auditing and Assurance Standards Board (IAASB). The exposure draft is under development. Planning an Audit of F inancial Statements (CAS 300) The objective of this project is to replace existing Canadian standards and guidance on the considerations and adiities applicable to planning an audit of financial statements with the equivalent International Standard on Auditing (ISA). This project proposes to replace Section 5150, Planning, with a new Canadian Auditing Standard (CAS)that essentially adopts the clarified Irternational Standard on Auditing 300, Planning an Audit of Financial Statements (ISA 300), that was recently approved by the International Auditing and Assurance Standards Board (IAASB). The Final Canadian Auditing Standard (CAS 300) has been approved by the AASB. There are m charges from the existing standard 266 Report to the Business Excellence Advisory Board — Initial Communication on Audit Planning Toronto and Region Conservation Authority For the year ended December 31, 2007 Auditing — Standards under development Status Quaity Control The objective of this project is to replace e>1sting Canadian standards and guidance on quality control policies and procedures to be established by the firm , and on the specific quality control procedures to be performed by the practitioner and other members of the assurance team in an assurance engagement with the equivalent International Standard on Quality Control (ISQC) and International Standard on Auditing (ISA). This project proposes to replace GSF-QC , General Standards of Quality Control for Firrn sthat Perform Assurance Engagements, and Section 5030, Quality Control P rocedures for Assurance Engagements, v,ith a nevi Carmdian Standard on Quality Cortrol (CSQC) and Canadian Auditing Standard (CAS) that essentially adopts the clarified International Standard on Quality Control 1, Quality Control for Fi rip sthat Perform Audits and Reviews of Historiuil Financial Information, and Other Assurance and Related Services Engagements (ISQC 1), and International Standard on Auditing 220, Quality Control for Audits of Historical Financial Information (ISA 220), that are currenly being developed by the International Auditing and Assurance Standards Board (IAASB). As a result of this project, a subsequent project vvll be undertak en t o replace requirements and guidance in current Section 5030 that deal v,ith assurance engagements other than audits of financial statements. The IAASB is developing the exposure drat. Related Parties (CAS 550) The objective of this project is to replace e>1sting Canadian standards and guidance on howthe auditor reduces to an acceptably low level the risk of not identifying a material misstatement in financial statements arising from related party transadions with the equivalent International Standard on Auditing (ISA). This project proposes to replace Section 6010, Audit of Related Party Transadions, v,ith a newCanadian Auditing Standard (CAS)that essentially adopts the revised and clarified International Standard on Auditing 550, Related Parties (ISA 550), that is currently being developed by the International Auditing and Assurance Standards Board (IAASB). The AASB issues an exposure draft in March 2007, with comments requested by June 8, 2007. 267 Report to the Business Excellence Advisory Board — Initial Communication on Audit Planning Toronto and Region Conservatio n Auth ority For the year ended December 31, 2007 Auditing — Standards under development Status Reporting on a Complete Set of General Purpose Financial Statements The objective of this project is to replace e>1sting Canadian standards and guidance on the auditor's standard repert with the equivalent International Standard on Auditing (ISA). This project proposes to replace Section 5400, The Auditor's Standard Report, with a newCanadian Auditing Standard (CAS) that essentially adopts the clarified International Standard on Auditing 700, The Independent Audtor's Report on a Complete Set of General Purpose Financial Statements (ISA 700), that is currently being developed by the International Auditing and Assurance Standards Board (IAASB). The exposure draft is under development. Reporting on Summary Financial Statements The objective of this project is to replace Canadian guidance on the auditor's repert on summarized financial statements with the equivalert International Standard on Auditing (ISA). This project proposes to replace Assurance and Related Services Guideline AuG 25, Auditor's Report on Summarized Financial vith a newCanadian Auditing Standard (CAS) that essentially adopts the revised and clarified International Standard on Auditing 805, Special CcnsiderationsVVhen Reporting on Summary Financial Statements (ISA 805), that is currertly being developed by the International Auditing and Assurance Standards Board (IAASB). The exposure draft is under development. Responses to Assessed Risks (CAS 330) The objective of this project is to replace e>1sting Canadian standards and guidance on determining overall responses and designing and performing further audt procedures to respond to the assessed risks of material misstatement at the financial statement and assertion levels in a financial statement audit with the equivalert International Standard on Auditing (ISA). This project proposes to replace Section 5143, The Auditor's Procedures in Response to Assessed Risks, vith a newCanadian Auditing Standard (CAS) that essentially adopts the clarified International Standard on Auditing 330, The Auditor's Responses to Assessed Risks (ISA 330), that was recently approved by the International Auditing and Assurance Standards Board (IAASB). The Final Canadian Auditing Standard (CAS 330) has been approved by the AASB. There are m charges from the e>1sting standard Responsibilities Relating to Fraud (CAS 240) The objective of this project is to replace e>1sting Canadian standards and guidance on the auditor's responsibility to consider fraud and misstatements arising there from, in an audt of financial statements and other financial information vith the equivalent International Standard on Auditing (ISA). This project proposes to replace Section 5135, The Auditor's Responsibility to Consider Fraud, with a newCanadian Auditing Standard (CAS)that essentially adapts the clarified International Standard on Auditing 240, The Auditor's Responsibilities Related to Fraud in an Audit of Financial Statements (ISA 240), that was recently approved by the International Auditing and Assurance Standards Board (IAASB). The Final Canadian Auditing Standard (CAS 240) has been approved by the AASB. There are m charges from the e>1sting standard. 268 Report to the Business Excellence Advisory Board — Initial Communication on Audit Planning Toronto and Region Conservation Auth ority For the year ended December 31, 2007 Auditing — Standards under development Status Responsibility in Relation to Other Information (CAS 720) The objective of this project is to replace existing Canadian standards and guidance on the auditor's responsibilities Wth respect to documents that contain financial statements that the auditor has audited Wth the equivalent International Standard on Auditing (ISA). This project proposes to replace the existing Canadian standards and guidance relating to documents containing audted financal statements, with a newCanadian Auditing Standard (CAS) that essentially adopts the clarified International Auditing Standard on Auditing 720, Auditor's Responsibility in Relation to Other Information in Documents Containing Audited Finandal Statements (ISA 720), that is currertly being developed by the International Auditing and Assurance Standards Board (IAASB). The proposed new standard would replace part of existing Section 7500, Auditor Assoclation Wth Annual Reports, Interim Reports and Other Public Documents. The AASB is considering the disposition ofthe remaining standards and guidance in Section 7500. The AASB issued an exposure draft in January 2007, with comments requested by March 16, 2007. Restrictions in the Auditor's Report or Other Corm- unications The objective of this project is to develop standards and guidance on: • what is meant by the terms "general use" and "restricted use" report • when it is appropriate to restrict the use of the auditor's report and • the appropriate language to be used in the auditor's report, cr other communication issued by the auditor, when restri cting the use andlordistribution of the report or communication, or disclaiming respcnsibility when the report is used for extraneous purposes. This project proposes to develop a newSection that more clearly explains and distinguishes between the following: • Restriction in distribution: A restri ction in distribution alerts the addressee that he or she is nct entitled to give the report to anyone outside the expressly permitted group of intended reclpients. Because the restriction is in the opinion, a third party who obtains a copy is at least put on notice that the report was not intended for him or her. • Restriction in use: A restriction in use describes the purpose for which the report is intended. Therefore, it addresses both third parties and intended addressees, warning both that the report is not intended for secondary uses. It can therefore help to restrict liability even with regard to an auditor's o n client. • Disclaimer of responsibility. A disclaimer is more direct, and adwisesthat no respcnsibility is being assumed either to third parties, or, when drafted in such a mamer, to dients and third parties, when the report is used for an extraneous purpose. This project also proposes to build on the guidance in Ameri can Institute of Certified Public Accountants AU 532, 'Restricting the Use of an Audtor's Report," and, if appropriate, to harmonize with it. The proposed Section %cold, however, be broader in scope than AU 532, .ohi ch deals only with 'restrictions in use" (and not other types of restrictions and limitations) and is not applicable, for example, to service auditors' reports or Iettersto underwiters. The AASB has deferred this project. 269 Report to the Business Excellence Advisory Board — Initial Communication on Audit Planning Toronto and Region Conservation Auth ority For the year ended December 31, 2007 Auditing — Standards under development Status Subsequent Events (CAS 560) The objective of this project is to replace e>1sting Canadian standards and guidance on the procedures the auditor performsto be satisfied that events occurring following the date of the financial statem erts have been identified with the equivalent International Standard on Auditing (ISA). This project proposes to replace Section 6550, Subsequent Events, Wth a newCanadian Auditing Standard (CAS) that essentially adopts the clarified International Standard on Auditing 560, Subsequent Events (ISA 560), that is currently being developed by the International Auditing and Assurance Standards Board (IAASB). The AASB issued an exposure draft in January 2007, with comments requested by March 16, 2007. Terms of Audit Engagements The objective of this project is to replace e>1sting Canadian standards and guidance on establishing an understanding of, and agreement on, the terms of the engagement for the audit of financial statements Wth the equivalent International Standard on Auditing (ISA). This project proposes to replace Section 5110, Terms of the Engagement, with a newCanadian Auditing Standard (CAS) that essentially adopts the clarified International Standard on Auditing 210, Terms of Audit Engagements (ISA 210), that is currently being developed by the International Auditing and Assurance Standards Board (IAASB). The IAASB is developing the exposure drat. Uangthe Work of an Expert The objective of this project is to replace e>1sting Canadian standard and guidance on using the work of a specialist in obtaining audit evidence with the ccrrespondng International Standard on Auditing. This project proposes to develop a newCanadian Auditing Standard (CAS) that essentially adopts the revised and clarified International Standard on Auditing 620, Using the Work of an Auditor's Expert (ISA 620), that is currently being developed by the International Auditing and Assurance Standards Board (I AASB). As a result of this project, a subsequent project wrll be undertak en t o revise and clarify the e>1sting Section 5049, Use of Specialists in Assurance Engagements that deal Wth assurance engagements other than the audit of financial statements. The IAASB is developing the exposure drat. Wi ittca. Representations (CAS 580) The objective of this project is to replace e>1sting Canadian standards and guidance on the use ofmanagement representations in gathering sufficient appropriate audit evidence in an audt of financial statements with the equivalent International Standard on Auditing (ISA). This project proposes to replace Section 5370, Management Representations, with a newCanadian Audting Standard (CAS)that essentially adopts the revised and clarified International Standard on Auditing 580, Written Representations (ISA 580), that is currently being developed by the International Auditing and Assurance Standards Board (I AASB). The AASB issued an exposure draft in January 2007, with comments requested by March 23, 2007. 270 RES. #C61/07 - APPOINTMENT OF AUDITORS The Conservation Authorities Act requires every conservation authority to undergo an audit of its accounts and transactions each year. Moved by: Seconded by: Maja Prentice Paul Ainslie THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT Grant Thornton LLP be appointed auditors of Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) for the year 2008, in accordance with section 38 of the Conservation Authorities Act. CARRIED BACKGROUND Section 38 of the Conservation Authorities Act reads as follows: 38. (1) Every authority shall cause its accounts and transactions to be audited annually by a person licensed under the Public Accountancy Act . R.S.O. 1990, c. C.27, s. 38 (1). (2) No person shall be appointed as auditor of an authority who is or during the preceding year was a member of the authority or who has or during the preceding year had any direct or indirect interest in any contract or any employment with the authority other than for services within his or her professional capacity. R.S.O. 1990, c. C.27, s. 38 (2). (3) An authority shall, upon receipt of the auditors report of the examination of its accounts and transactions, forthwith forward a copy of the report to each participating municipality and to the Minister. R.S.O. 1990, c. C.27, s. 38 (3). RATIONALE Grant Thornton LLP was appointed TRCA auditor for the years 2004 to 2007, following a competition for audit services conducted in the summer of 2004. Although the contract period is for 5 years starting with 2004, the annual reappointment is subject to performance satisfactory to TRCA. Staff is pleased to report that the 2006 audit was completed to its satisfaction and it anticipates similar performance for 2007. It is therefore recommending the reappointment of Grant Thornton LLP for the 2008 audit year. Report prepared by: Rocco Sgambelluri, extension 5232 Emails: rsgambelluri @trca.on.ca For Information contact: Rocco Sgambelluri, extension 5232 Emails: rsgambelluri @trca.on.ca Date: November 21, 2007 271 RES. #C62/07 - ADMINISTRATION FEES FOR PLANNING, PERMITTING AND ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT REVIEW Recommendations for adjustments to the existing 2006 fee schedule for Toronto and Region Conservation Authority planning services, permitting and Environmental Assessment review services. Moved by: Seconded by: Maja Prentice Paul Ainslie THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT the Fee Schedule for Planning Services, Permitting and Environmental Assessment Review services dated November 28, 2007, be approved, to be effective January 4, 2008; THAT staff inform all municipalities within Toronto and Region Conservation Authority's (TRCA) jurisdiction and the development industry of the updates to the TRCA fee schedule, to be effective January 4, 2008; THAT staff work with our municipalities to make all necessary procedural requirements for the upcoming Bill 51 requirements, and that fee adjustments be made at that time to accommodate changes in timing or rigour of review effort; AND FURTHER THAT staff continue to monitor fee implementation as well as the cost implications of the current level of service demands for planning, ecology, engineering, hydrogeology and enforcement. CARRIED BACKGROUND A provincial Omnibus Bill was passed in January 1996 which empowered conservation authorities (CA) to collect fees for services approved by the Minister of Natural Resources (MNR). Conservation authorities are entitled to set rates, charge and collect fees for services rendered. The document entitled Policies and Procedures For the Charging of Conservation Authority Fees (June 1997), included in the MNR Procedural Manual sets guidelines for fees collection. The document states that CA fee structures should be designed to recover, but not exceed, the costs associated with administering and delivering the services on a program basis. The manual also states that setting fees are dependent on the complexity of applications and the level of effort required to administer the application. TRCA's latest approval of planning and permitting fees to cover administrative costs was implemented two years ago in January 2006, with a 15% fee increase from the previous fee schedule. The volume of applications has remained high, and we have been able to achieve our revenue targets as projected. 272 In our report assessment in 2006, TRCA staff provided an extensive list of streamlining accomplishments with the development community and municipal partners as part of our strategy for better service delivery initiated in 2003. As part of that strategy, a restructured fee schedule and collection process was implemented and has been upgraded on several occasions since 2003. Improvements in the delivery of service for the Planning and Development, and Ecology divisions have been significant since this initiative started, and the increased revenue has gone a long way to building professional capacity and capability within our integrated multi - disciplinary review teams for planning, ecology, engineering and enforcement. Our level of service has remained similar for the past 3 to 4 years. The majority of commenting turnaround on standard applications is within the target of 30 -45 days. In the City of Toronto the majority of all applications received comments within the 15 to 30 day range. In all municipalities within TRCA's jurisdiction there will continue to be slowdowns during peak summer constructions periods due to volume and demands from the new Regulation. In addition, TRCA has been experiencing a slow down in the water management aspects of the response time particularly with the high demands on senior engineering modeling capabilities and complex hydrogeological reviews. There have been many competing engineering demands for staff time including watershed plans, new flood modelling and flood forecasting, all of which facilitates development. Despite this heavy workload, TRCA's review team has been able to process approximately a 20 -25% increase in the number of permit approvals during our busiest months - a significant streamlining accomplishment. TRCA's Environmental Assessment (EA) review is predominately covered by service agreements with local and regional municipalities. With the significant increase in all forms of municipal EAs, staffing levels can not provide the dedicated service to certain municipalities without the formulation of a designated review team. Delays are being experienced in municipalities that do not have service agreements and where they are experiencing increased volume of complex EAs. TRCA accomplishments for streamlining efforts include: • provision of a new Planning and Development Procedural Manual distributed to municipal partners and BILD (Greater Toronto Area Building, Industry and Land Development Association); • update of all technical /scientific guideline documents to assist applicants in the provisions for technical review; • continuing training and streamlining efforts with municipal departments; • increasing senior response to files and negotiations; • meeting with BILD representatives to keep them informed and solicit ideas for improvement; • advocating for complete application submission to improve review timeliness. The TRCA fee schedule has continued to be tailored to better suit review demands and to improve the level of service for applicants since 2003. The current fee schedule has been in place now for two years and is in great need of change to reflect the review demands of today and the anticipated demands the next growth period. 273 RATIONALE The analysis that staff undertook to determine proposed fee increases included the need for a combined inflationary increase to accommodate internal costs for staff salaries, benefits and overhead costs with additional increases related to specialized needs to cover review requirements. Demands for covering complexity and volume of work, plus specialized technical services were also considered. Although the Consumer Price Index over the last 3 years indicates an inflation rate between 1.9% to 2.2% for the Annual Canadian Average, and between 1.6% and 1.8% for the Annual Toronto Average rate, the Construction industry Price Index (CPI) is much higher in the Metropolitan Toronto Areas, with the following highlights: • New Housing Index 14.9% increase in 2004 -2006 • Non - Residential Buildings 21.2% increase in 2004 -2006 • Apartment Buildings 18.4% increase in 2004 -2006 Critical pressure points for increasing costs for the development review process include: • increased involvement in Ontario Municipal Board (OMB) hearings in 2007, expert testimony and negotiations to settle; • First Nations consultation related to Environmental Assessment and development review; • implementation of Ontario Regulation 166/06 resulting in increased regulated mapped area by 40 %, thus increasing the volume of permits required and landowner consultations; • increased senior effort for technical negotiations and managing negotiation efforts; • volume of EA undertakings has significantly increased as well as associated permitting for construction; • enforcement demands for increased charges and court appearances; • pre - consultation and Bill 51 requirements (only minor adjustments to date). To date, there has been no increase in enforcement staffing. TRCA is looking to conduct a streamlining effort in 2008. TRCA staff conducted a comparative review of the fee schedules within our jurisdiction, particularly in the areas of block /secondary plan, subdivision and multi- unit /condominium applications. These applications, including Master Environmental Servicing Plans (MESP) are the areas where TRCA is experiencing the greatest financial and workload pressure. Many of these exercises go on for years. Markham Town Centre, for instance, has taken five years and is continuing; Block 40/47 in Vaughan is well into several years of the MESP /Block planning process with yet unresolved environmental and servicing issues; Seaton includes MESPs and EAs for a whole new town within a fast tracked timeframe. These are very complex examples of the extraordinary efforts that are needed to assist applicants and to coordinate with our municipal partners. The municipalities include a base fee concept combined with a per unit or lot additional fee to reflect the scale and complexity of each application in block planning. Based on the analysis described above the specific fee adjustments recommended include a general 20% increase on all fees and base fees for 2008 and 2009. 274 In reviewing performance of the current fee schedule and its suitability, staff in addition recommend a few adjustments, as needed, to more appropriately represent the level of service required. In some cases this will result in a reduction in costs to applicants where warranted. Small scale residential planning approvals and permitting provisions have remained modest and in some cases have stayed the same. TRCA maintains efforts to keep the small scale application very affordable for the first time applicant with relatively minor issues. The overall alterations to the budget with a 20% increase is approximately $600,000 to $800,000, based on current volume and type of applications to TRCA in 2006 and 2007 - not a huge amount of money in view of the scale of work in our jurisdiction. This increase will not cover significant staff changes. It is anticipated that this will cover modest salary increases /cost of living and expenses, plus modest increases in OMB and Mining and Lands hearing costs. Addressing the increase in planning and technical efforts over a larger geographic area for the new Regulation is still difficult to estimate. (Our assessment is based on only the level of effort since May of 2006 and may not be representative of a long term sustainable effort.) The estimation is based on the best information and projections of workload as we see the volume today. Planning Fees All planning fees are increased by 20 %, plus some specialty service fees. Increases in fees are primarily attributed to projects requiring fundamental work in environmental and land use planning to determine the development feasibility of a property and the basic form /relationship of development to open space, natural features and natural hazard lands. Fee recovery must be commensurate with staff's level of effort and complexity of files. Major adjustments must be made to MESP and subdivision applications to capture the large scale and complexity of these efforts, and the cyclical review that occurs over sometimes many months or years on some of the most complex applications. Streamlining of new applications Site plans Site plan review fees need to have an intermediate development category to reflect the number of applications that fit between the existing minor and major categories. Examples include estate residential applications, and commercial industrial site plan applications for which technical studies are required. Block Planning and MESP Review It is recommended that Block planning and MESP document review will be charged as a combined base fee, with an additional charge of $450.00 per hectare. These changes reflect the complexity and scale of work required for these comprehensive work components involving multi - disciplinary technical review, extensive field review and feature staking. As an example, a Block Plan of 137 hectares would be charged a base fee of $14,000 plus $61,650, for a total of $75,650. This fee marginally covers TRCA's initial review process. It does not cover cyclical reviews that progress over several years. 275 TRCA reserves the right to customize fee agreements for MESP and draft plan of subdivision review to reflect the needs of the municipal partner or developer and unusual planning or technical circumstances. An example would be the upcoming Seaton Town Community planning exercise for which the MESPs have just been initiated. The status of application fees should be reviewed on an annual basis. TRCA reserves the right to re- negotiate fees to reflect cyclical reviews and extended time frames beyond two years for MESP submissions and one year for draft subdivision plans on an as needed basis. Subdivision /Multi -Unit and Condominium Subdivision and Multi -Unit Buildings and Condominium applications will be separated in the fee categories. Subdivisions commonly take considerable time and effort to complete with a greater workload on the details of lot layout and technical feasibility. On this basis subdivisions will be charged with a standard base fee and an additional per lot fee of $100.00 if there has been no comprehensive MESP. Multi -unit and Condominium application fee structures will remain the same with the proposed 20% increase. Applications and OMB Participation Recently a significant amount of planning staff time has been spent attending OMB meetings and settlement negotiations. It is recommended that a 3 phase fee process be established, with the standard base (phase 1) fee charged at application submission stage, the administration fee (phase 2) will be charged for post negotiation /settlement or hearing. The standard clearance fee (phase 3), would be charged at the final release of the development approvals. The phase 2 fee would be an administration fee only, and would not cover the ultimate costs for legal fees and comprehensive technical testimony and hearing participation. A minor phase 2 administration fee would be $3,000.00; and a major phase 2 negotiated settlement fee would be $10,000.00. Permitting All permitting fees are increased by 20 %: • standard permits will go from $3,220.00 to $3,865.00 • major project permits will increase to $5,800.00. Permission for Minor Works Applications will be increased 20% to a modest $75.00. The site visit fee remains the same. Solicitor /Realtor /Propertv Inquiry A general 20% increase to $240.00 is proposed. Environmental Assessment Review All fees are subject to a 20% increase as proposed. 276 Service Level Agreements Many of our municipal partners who are under heavy pressure for environmental assessment and growth have established, over the last few years, service agreements with TRCA to provide dedicated staff teams to review and in some cases coordinate complex environmental reviews. These arrangements are working extremely well with York Region, Peel Region and the City of Brampton. Other municipalities, where EA workloads are rapidly escalating would benefit from establishing these streamlined review processes. In the absence of these service agreements, TRCA needs to establish some basis of a negotiated fee structure to cover the costs of major review efforts and technical support to our partners. The current fee schedule cannot support the level of effort required for special projects like Highland Creek in Toronto, regional infrastructure master plans for transportation and infrastructure, or controversial individual EAs such as Pine Valley. Minor Works Streamlining As part of our streamlining efforts, staff has developed a Permission for Routine Infrastructure Works protocol which provides for delegated approvals to staff for routine applications for public infrastructure. These projects will include road and pathway reconstruction, bridge and retaining wall structural maintenance, utility maintenance, utility watercourse crossings by trenchless technology, off -line stormwater management pond maintenance and general drainage structure maintenance. These projects can be fast - tracked through the process to improve our level of service. This recommendation is outlined in a separate report to be considered by the Executive Committee on December 7, 2007. Fisheries Timing Window TRCA and MNR /Fisheries and Oceans Canada (DFO) want to deter the extension of fisheries timing window requests and the impacts that they can bring. Sometimes these requirements are needed to facilitate construction completion, however, TRCA prefers that timing windows be respected within the construction management process and timelines. Based on the delegation of responsibilities for timing windows in 2007 by MNR, TRCA has a new fee. It flags TRCA's concerns to foster better construction planning around these sensitive fisheries resources. The Fisheries Timing Window Extension fee will be charged at $5,000.00. New Specialized Services and Fees Preconsultation TRCA has always, in our procedures, advocated early pre - consultation to address requirements for technical input and guidance before applications are submitted. These meetings or site visits often assist the applicant in identifying issues for design and planning consideration, and reduce both the number of resubmissions and the overall review time. Cost savings for the applicant can be significant, in addition to achieving a better planning product. In anticipation of the upcoming Bill 51 requirements for Pre - consultation and the provision of complete application standards, staff welcome this effort and see it as supporting better environmental planning. However, the upfront level of effort will increase for CAs and municipal partners. TRCA proposes no charge for pre - consultation meetings and coordination, but believes we need to charge for site visits and follow -up, written correspondence where complex issues need to be reviewed up front and on site. 277 Specialized Technical Review and MESP Updates As municipalities intensify and address growth demands, greater requirement for MESP updates and specialized technical reviews will be a necessary inclusive of water resources engineering, ecology, hydrological and geotechnical review. Review efforts will also include site visit verifications. The scope of the service can be customized to a Terms of Reference as needed and negotiated on a project basis for updating purposes. Special Policy Area (SPA) Negotiations Over the last two years there has been a number of applications in flood prone Special Policy Areas (SPA) where specialized technical reviews and modeling efforts have been required to assist applicants and municipal partners in assessing the planning and design response that meets provincial standards for SPAs. This time consuming effort, often with, lengthy negotiations facilitated by TRCA, warrants a fee premium of 25% of the applicable fee to help offset costly detailed technical and policy efforts. Technical /IT Data Provisions TRCA staff provides a significant volume of mapping and geographic information system (GIS) data for all applicants and our partners for planning and technical assessment purposes. A listing of data charges for the provision of these important digital layers for analysis purposes is provided in Attachment 4. DETAILS OF WORK TO BE DONE Staff will inform our municipal partners and the development industry of these changes to TRCA's fee structure and procedural adjustments. An information /application flyer is being produced to assist municipal partners with their planning desk inquiries about TRCA applications (a draft is currently ready for review and is available through TRCA's Planning and Development division). A streamlined walk -in service will also be implemented to assist first -time applicants, and reduce the amount of wait time due to volume. Provisions for Bill 51 requirements for complete Planning applications in coordination with TRCA's municipal partners, and refinement of our procedural working relationships, to effectively alter the up -front advisory services for pre - consultation with our municipal planning counterparts. Report prepared by: Carolyn Woodland, extension 5214 For Information contact: Carolyn Woodland, extension 5214 Date: November 28, 2007 Attachments: 4 278 Attachment 1 ar'MO:SI('a, �asxyr�'vaaw \.- n. of v Lion for The Living City TRCA Administrative Fee Schedule For Planning Services APPLICATION TYPE APPLICATION FEE CLEARANCE FEE Screening letter $75 N/A Concept Development /Property Enquiry *minor $225 *major $5,000 with one site visit $345 N/A N/A N/A Variances $345 N/A Consent /Severance /Land Division *minor $690 *major $1,655 N/A $725 Single Residential Site Plan *minor $480 *major $2,800 N/A $600 Site Plan *minor $1,050 *intermediate $4,000 *major - 25ha or less $9,660 - greater than 25ha $13,800 N/A $1,000 $2,100 $2,100 Official Plan Amendment (OPA) *minor $1,050 *major $4,150 N/A $1,800 Zoning By -law Amendment/ Rezoning (ZBA /RZ) (see Note 1) *minor $1,050 *major $4,150 N/A $2,100 Multi -Unit Building Application & Condominiums *minor - 5ha or less $10,400 *major - 25ha or less $20,700 - greater than 25ha $27,600 $3,450 $7,600 $7,600 Subdivision *minor - 5ha or less $10,400(base fee) *major - 25ha or less $20,700 - greater than 25ha$27,600(base fee) Subdivisions without prior comprehensive MESP review will be charged an additional $100 per lot $3,450 $7,600 $7,600 Golf Courses or Aggregate Pits - 25ha or less $7,000 - greater than 25ha $14,000 N/A N/A Block and Tertiary Plans and Master Environmental Servicing Plan (MESP) - 25ha or less $7,000 (base fee) - greater than 25ha$14,000(base fee) Additional charge of $450 per hectare for comprehensive MESP N/A N/A N/A 279 Rates effective January 1, 2008 TRCA Administrative Fee Schedule For Planning Services OTHER APPLICABLE FEES Description Fee Pre - consultation meeting Pre - consultation technical team site visit No charge $2500 Additional Site Visit Charges (First site review is allowed as part of processing. Multiple field assessments, stakings and negotiations are charged separately.) Up to 1/2 day $600 Up to 1 day $1,200 including travel time Additional Clearance fee for Subdivision Phases $1,500 * Applicant Driven Formal Modification $1,000 Re- submission due to *incomplete submissions $3,000 All applications located in Special Policy Area (SPA) or Flood Vulnerable Area will be charged a 25% premium on the applicable fee Specialized technical review process with a site visit will be charged for MESP updates on a negotiated basis with a Terms of Reference Applications that proceed to OMB negotiations or hearings will be charged Phase 1 - standard application fee Phase 2 - administration fee: (negotiations & expedited review) $3,000 minor $10,000 major Phase 3 - standard clearance fee *See Definitions 280 TRCA Administrative Fee Schedule For Planning Services Notes 1. The application fee will be paid at the time of filing an application to the municipality. The final clearance fee will be billed directly by the TRCA and paid prior to final clearance of an application. All payments must be made within 30 days of TRCA notification in writing. Interest will be charged and accumulated beyond 30 days. 2. Re- submission fees will be billed directly by the TRCA and must be paid prior to final clearance of an application. 3. Only one set of fees apply when processing and reviewing a combined application (e.g. a subdivision /OPA /ZBA). The highest rate of fees applies. 4. The TRCA reserves the right to request additional fees or adjust fees should the review require a substantially greater level of effort or development application scenarios not captured in the schedule. Custom fees will be negotiated for fast - tracked or unique circumstances for large scale /complex review efforts. TRCA reserves the right to assess fee requirements after one year of processing planning applications. Additional fees can be charged post one year and unreasonable delays. 5. Where a site visit and /or extended review is required for a Variance application, a clearance fee of $100 is applicable. 6. Subdivisions that have several phases, will be charged a separate clearance fee of $1,500 at the time of clearing each phase. 7. All application fees (except Concept Development) include one initial site visit. 8. TRCA reserves the right to adjust fees to reflect requirements under Bill 51 for either planning or regulatory legislation. Definitions Minor - An application is determined to be "minor" where no technical studies are required, or only a scoped Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) is required. Minor Subdivision - A subdivision application is determined to be "minor" where no technical studies, or only a scoped Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) is required and where the site is 5ha or less. Intermediate - Non - residential site plans of a mid -scale requiring technical studies for estate residential and commercial /industrial site plans. Major - An application is determined to be "major" where technical studies beyond a scoped Environmental Impact Statement (such as Stormwater Management or Geotechnical) are required.. Incomplete Submissions - A submission for review is deemed to be "incomplete" where TRCA has provided a checklist of requirements, and the application has not met all requirements. Applicant driven formal modification - A fee for an "applicant driven formal modification" will be charged where plans are submitted for review after the application has received draft plan approval from the municipality. 281 Attachment 2 'ar'�xrx ?C Waaxre• j Ne- 4,,,.onservation for The Living City TRCA Administrative Fee Schedule for Development, Interference with Wetlands and Alterations to Shorelines and Watercourses (Ontario Regulation 166/06) ONTARIO REGULATION 166/06 PERMIT APPLICATION FEE Works on Personal Residential Property *minor $345 *major $700 Municipal Projects: • Regional /Local; NO EA required • Emergency Works $1,040 $3,400 Utilities • Single residential • Development project based $1,000 $2,750 Projects on Subdivision Lands, Commercial, Industrial and Institutional Properties, Resource -based Recreation and Other Projects Standard Projects Include: $3,865 per project $5,800 per project $2,070 per project $500 • SWM ponds and associated outfalls • Other outfalls • Road Crossings • Grading • In- stream Works Major Projects: • New Road Crossings • Natural Channel Modifications Minor Improvements Red Line Revisions by TRCA All applications located in a SPA (Special Policy Area) or Flood Vulnerable Area will require an additional 25% on standard fee Permission for Minor Works - Letter of Approval (see qualification criteria, as approved June 9, 2006) $75; $285 with site visit Municipal: $2,070 Permit Revisions Residential minor /major: 25% of current fee Others: 50% of current fee Permit Re- Issuance for Ontario Regulation 158 (1 time only) Permit Re- Issuance for Ontario Regulation 166/06 (1 time only) 50% of current fee 50% of current fee No permit required /regulatory and fisheries review & advice only $600 ONTARIO REGULATION 166/06 PROPERTY INFORMATION FEE Solicitor Realtor /Property Inquiry $240 *See Definitions 282 TRCA Administrative Fee Schedule for Development, Interference with Wetlands and Alterations to Shorelines and Watercourses (Ontario Regulation 166/06) IMPLEMENTATION GUIDELINES Notes: 1. The permit fee will be paid at the time of filing an application to the TRCA. In the event that the permit fee is not paid at the time of filing an application, fees must be paid prior to issuing a permit. 2. The TRCA reserves the right to request additional fees should the review require a substantially greater level of effort. 3. All permits are issued for two years. 4. Ontario Regulation 158 was revoked with the approval of Ontario Regulation 166/06. Any request for an extension for a permit under Ontario Regulation 158 not granted before May 8, 2006, will be considered under Ontario Regulation 166/06. One permit re- issuance extending the permit approval for a period of two years will be granted before the works are considered new works. Such requests will be assessed in accordance with any new updated technical hazard information. Extensions will not be required for those works not located within an area regulated under the new regulation. 5. There are no extensions for permits issued under Ontario Regulation 166/06. On a one -time basis, and upon notification 60 days prior to the expiration of an Ontario Regulation 166/06 permit, applicants may apply for re- issuance of a new permit for the original approved works, before the works are considered new. Such requests will be assessed in accordance with any new updated technical hazard information and the current policies in place. There is no guarantee of an automatic approval. 6. TRCA reserves the right to adjust fees related to regulatory legislation changes or updates. Definitions Personal Residential Property Minor - Applications on a personal residential property determined to be "minor" include ancillary structures such as decks, sheds, garages and pools; minor additions (less than 50% of the original ground floor area); and the placement of less than 30 cubic metres of fill. Major - Applications on a personal residential property determined to be "major" include major additions (greater than 50% of the original ground floor area), new structures or buildings; all works in the floodplain; and the placement of 30 cubic metres or more of fill. 283 Attachment 3 'ar'Ixrx rCirWaaaxre•(j . er vati for The Living City TRCA Administrative Fee Schedule for Environmental Assessment and Regulatory Review Services Effective January 2008 APPLICATION TYPE APPLICATION FEE Change from 2006 ONTARIO ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT ACT APPLICATIONS OR APPLICATIONS MADE IN ACCORDANCE WITH UTILITY BOARD ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT REQUIREMENTS Environmental Assessment Review Master Plan $25,000 - major $10,000 - minor (subject to negotiation) new - similar scope and scale to subdivision review Individual EA $25,000 - $50,000 (subject to negotiation) new - similar scope and scale to a major subdivision review Class EA - Schedule /Category C $10,000 new Class EA - Schedule /Category B $5000 new - similar scope and scale to a major site plan review Class EA - Schedule /Category A - EA pre- approved - Ont. Reg. 166/06 Permit may be required n/a (see below) n/a (see below) EA Addendum Reports $1800 new - similar in scope and scale to EA detailed design review Detailed Design Review Detailed Design (based on 2 reviews) $2500 20% increase Environmental Management Plan $1800 new Regulatory Review Ont. Reg. 166/06 Permit Application - Individual or Class EA - Schedule /Category B & C $2400 decrease - similar in scope and scale of Schedule B & C Permit Review Ont. Reg. 166/06 Permit Application - Class EA - Schedule /Category A (or equivalent) $1040 20% increase Revision to Ont. Reg. 166/06 Permit 50% of current fee - major change 25% of current fee -minor change added fee for minor modifications to the plans Section 35 of the Fisheries Act (no permit required) $600 20% increase Fish Timing Window Extension $5000 new 284 TRCA Administrative Fee Schedule for Environmental Assessment and Regulatory Review Services Effective January 2008 APPLICATION TYPE APPLICATION FEE Change from 2006 Permission for Routine Infrastructure Works - Letter of Approval $300 plans only $600 technical reports or site visit decrease - similar in scope and scale of Fisheries Act Review; includes 20% increase of those fees two - tiered to tie to the Routine Infrastructure Works - Letter of Approval Emergency Works $3400 20% increase EA Property Screening or Inquiry $240 20% increase Other Additional Site Visit Charges First site review is allowed as part of processing up to 1/2 day $600 up to 1 day $1200 20% increase 285 TRCA Administrative Fee Schedule for Environmental Assessment and Permitting Services IMPLEMENTATION GUIDELINES Notes: 1. The application fee will be paid at the time of filing an application with TRCA. Applications will not be processed until fees are received. 2. Only one set of fees applies when processing and reviewing a combined application (e.g. an EA Property Screening or Inquiry or an Ontario Regulation 166/06 Permit Application). The highest rate of fees applies. 3. TRCA reserves the right to request additional fees, should the review require a substantially greater level of effort (e.g., Environmental Management Plan Review). 4. All application fees (except EA Property Screening or Inquiry) include one initial site visit. 5. Specific Municipal Service Delivery Agreements take precedence over the fee schedule. 6. For the Class Environmental Assessment Act Applications, the schedules or categories specific to the respective class EA document or environmental assessment review procedures of utility boards or commissions, including Enbridge, Consumers Gas or Bell Canada, will be applied. 7. Permission for Routine Infrastructure Works application review is subject to the respective TRCA procedure. 8. Emergency Works application review is subject to respective TRCA procedure. 9. TRCA has extensive environmental and cultural data that is available for use by the proponent, subject to the waiver of a legal disclaimer and the provision of user fees. Where there are data sharing agreements in place, municipalities, agencies, and Crown corporations or agencies are exempt from these fees and the data will be provided free of charge. For all others, an application form for the purchase of such data will be forwarded to the proponent for use at their discretion. 286 Attachment 4 r ar'Ixrx rCirWaaa} ••(j+� . er vati for The Living City Fee Schedule for TRCA Data Effective January 2008 TRCA Data Fee Change from 2006 GIS Data Sets, including: • Environmentally Significant Areas • Natural Cover (forests, successional, etc.) • Special Policy Areas (under S.3 of PPS) • Target Terrestrial Natural Heritage System • TRCA Property • TRCA Species of Conservation Concern (Flora and Fauna) • Vegetation Type (ELC Communities) • Watercourses • Watershed Boundaries $50 per hour data compilation new Fish Monitoring Data $50 per hour data compilation new Regulation Limits • CAD format or pdf. format $25 per tile in CAD format OR current $20 per tile in .pdf format Archaeological and Heritage Resources Data $50 per hour data compilation new Baseflow Data $50 per hour data compilation new Engineered Flood Elevation Data $50 per hour data compilation current Engineered Flood Plain Maps $100 per map current Hydrogeological Data $50 per hour data compilation new Notes: 1. The fee for TRCA data will be paid at the time of filing an application to TRCA. Applications will not be processed until fees are received. 2. Fees are not charged to agency partners where there is a signed reciprocal agreement. 3. Data will be provided to project proponents at the discretion of TRCA staff. Where confidentiality agreements are in place with other agencies, such data will not be provided. 4. Applicants will be required to sign a disclaimer form regarding data use and propriety rights. 5. GIS point data for TRCA Species of Conservation Concern (Flora and Fauna) and Vegetation Type (ELC Communities) are to be used only for evaluation and analysis. Data are not to be displayed in any format for public viewing, including maps in reports or maps at public consultation centres. 6. Areas of Natural and Scientific Interest (ANSI), and Provincially Significant Wetland (PSW) data can be obtained from the Ministry of Natural Resources at www.mnr.gov.on.ca. 7. Greenbelt and Oak Ridges Moraine information can be obtained from the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing at www.mah.gov.on.ca. 8. Asian Longhorn Beetle (ASLB) information can be obtained from the Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA) at www.inspection.gc.ca. 287 RES. #C63/07 - CTC SOURCE WATER PROTECTION FUNDING AGREEMENTS Approval to enter into agreements with the Ministry of Environment and Credit Valley Conservation to provide stewardship, outreach, education and other services in support of the Clean Water Act, 2006. Moved by: Seconded by: Maja Prentice Paul Ainslie THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT staff be authorized and directed to enter into funding agreements with the Ministry of Environment and Credit Valley Conservation for the purposes of providing stewardship, outreach and education services in support of provincially- funded municipal drinking water source protection programs, including the execution and signing of documents; AND FURTHER THAT staff report at least annually on municipal drinking water source protection agreements entered into, including future agreements with Central Lake Ontario Conservation Authority, the value of each, and the status of work in terms of completion and terms and conditions being met. CARRIED BACKGROUND On behalf of the Credit Valley, Toronto and Region and Central Lake Ontario conservation authority's (CTC) Source Protection Region, a grant funding agreement dated October 17, 2007 was signed by Toronto Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) with Ontario Ministry of Environment (MOE) to secure $91,900 to implement an education and outreach program from November, 2007 to March, 2008 in TRCA's and CVC's jurisdictions. Similarly, on November 1, 2007 a second grant funding agreement with MOE was signed by TRCA in the amount of $253,179 to promote early actions to protect sources of municipal drinking water in support of the Clean Water Act, 2006 (hereafter referred to as 'the Act'). An agreement between TRCA and Credit Valley Conservation (CVC) is currently being prepared by staff for these two agreements identifying the roles and responsibilities of each of the two conservation authorities. The Act is designed to protect municipal drinking water at the source. Among other things, the Act creates the Ontario Drinking Water Stewardship Program. One purpose of the program is to provide financial assistance to those undertaking early actions to protect sources of municipal drinking water. The province has provided funding to the lead conservation authorities (CA) in each source protection region to go directly to landowners to fund specific 'on the ground' early actions. CAs were also encouraged to apply for funding for education and outreach programs to increase public awareness of the importance of, and knowledge of, how to protect private wells and water in general. As the Ontario Drinking Water Stewardship Program evolves, it is expected that there will be future programs for which CAs will be eligible to apply and /or be asked to deliver. These programs are separately funded from the delivery of legislated and regulated source protection authority responsibilities under the Clean Water Act 2006, for which the Authority previously has approved TRCA entering into a memorandum of agreement (Resolution #A168/06, approved at Authority Meeting #6/06, held on July 28, 2006). 288 Staff acted on the assumption that creation of the Toronto and Region Source Protection Authority provided sufficient authority to enter into these agreements which provide funding to fulfil TRCA's obligations under the Clean Water Act, 2006. RATIONALE To ensure there is clarity in terms of TRCA fulfilling its obligations under the Conservation Authorities Act as well as the Clean Water Act, 2006, staff is seeking direction from the Authority to have authority to enter the necessary funding agreements with MOE. Further, TRCA will be entering into agreements with one of the two partner conservation authorities, CVC, to flow funds for various projects and works required to provide stewardship, outreach, education and other services in support of municipal drinking water source protection. There will be a number of these agreements and staff is seeking blanket authority to enter into these agreements as they occur. Staff will report to the Authority at least annually on the agreements that have been executed with a brief description of each, the value of the work and status of the work in terms of time to completion and terms and conditions having been met. FINANCIAL DETAILS These agreements involve provincial funds flowing to TRCA in its capacity as CTC lead authority and work to be carried out by TRCA, CLOCA and CVC. Work is not undertaken without commitment of provincial funds. Report prepared by: Jim Dillane, extension 6292 Email: jdillane @trca.on.ca For Information contact: Jim Dillane, extension 6292; Adele Freeman, extension 5238 Emails: jdillane @trca.on.ca; afreeman @trca.on.ca Date: November 21, 2007 RES. #C64/07 - TORONTO AND REGION REMEDIAL ACTION PLAN FUNDING Administration and implementation of the Toronto and Region Remedial Action Plan led by Toronto and Region Conservation Authority on behalf of the Ontario Ministry of the Environment and Environment Canada. Agreements with both of these agencies have been and will be signed to provide the funds necessary to carry out these functions. Moved by: Seconded by: Maja Prentice Paul Ainslie THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) enter into agreements with the Ontario Ministry of the Environment (MOE) and Environment Canada (EC) to enable TRCA to continue functioning as the lead administrator of the Toronto and Region Remedial Action Plan (RAP); 289 THAT TRCA continue to assist the provincial and federal governments to implement the Toronto and Region RAP for a period of three years ending March 31, 2010; AND FURTHER THAT TRCA continue to advocate for the provincial and federal governments to increase funding support to protect the Great Lakes. CARRIED BACKGROUND The Canada - Ontario Agreement Respecting the Great Lakes Basin (COA) outlines that the governments of Canada and Ontario share responsibility for the management of the Toronto and Region RAP. Recognizing the value of TRCA in helping the governments meet their COA targets, a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between EC, MOE and TRCA was signed. This 5 -year MOU expired on March 31, 2007. Under the three party MOU, TRCA received $250,000 annually from both EC and MOE. These dollars were divided amongst projects led by TRCA, academia and others that were designed to meet the objectives of the RAP. At the time of the MOU expiration, EC was not able to commit to a renewed agreement as the use of MOUs was restricted by federal financial advisors. As the federal government was unable to resolve its financial issues in a timely manner, it was determined that MOE and TRCA would sign a two party Grant Funding Agreement. This agreement was signed, effective April 1, 2007. The Grant Funding Agreement with MOE stipulates TRCA will receive $250,000 annually over three years for the purpose of the administration, coordination and facilitation of the Toronto and Region RAP. The three year time frame is consistent with the expiration of the current Canada - Ontario Agreement Respecting the Great Lakes Basin (2007- 2010). Included in the TRCA -MOE Grant Funding Agreement is the clause that MOE may adjust the amount of funds it provides to TRCA in any of the funding years based upon the ministry's assessment. TRCA has thus far received $250,000 from MOE, and project managers that rely on RAP funding have been working with a reduced budget (see table). In late October, 2007, it was determined that EC could enter into a contribution agreement to support TRCA as the lead administrator and coordinator of the Toronto and Region RAP. Similar to the funding arrangement with MOE, EC will provide $250,000 per year for a period of three years. This agreement is still being finalized and is expected to be signed shortly. The agreement details the payment schedule to be: • a payment of $125,000 upon signing the agreement; • a payment of $62,500 on January 1, 2008; and • a payment of $62,500 on May 1, 2008. 290 The following table provides the details regarding how the RAP funds are distributed: RAP MOU Projects 2007/08 Account Code MOE only EC and MOE Clean Waters Permeable Pavement 416 -95 $ 25,000 $ 25,000 Rainwater Harvesting Demo 416 -97 $ 10,500 $ 25,000 Erosion and Sediment Control Demo $ 15,000 Erosion and Sediment Control Training $ 5,000 Habitat Action Terrestrial Natural Heritage 104 -23 $ 15,000 $ 30,000 Don River Fish Management Plan $ 35,000 Rouge River Fish Management Plan $ 15,000 Stewardship and Outreach Education Program Steward Initiatives & Outreach various $ 27,000 $ 54,000 Monitoring and Research Regional Monitoring Network 124 -01 $ 50,000 $ 55,000 Sustainability Watershed Strategies various $ 50,000 $ 100,000 RAP Implementation Mechanism Administration 101 -01 $ 11,000 $ 15,000 RAP Manager /Supplies /etc. 102 -03 $ 61,500 $ 68,000 Re- evaluation of RAP Targets new $ 58,000 TOTAL $ 250,000 $ 500,000 DETAILS OF WORK TO BE DONE It is recommended that TRCA continue as the lead administrator for the Toronto and Region RAP. It is also suggested that TRCA staff continue to seek opportunities to advocate to the federal and provincial governments regarding the need to increase funding support to this RAP in order to meet their obligations to protect and enhance the Great Lakes and make significant improvements to the environmental conditions in the Great Lakes region. Report prepared by: Kelly Montgomery, extension 5576 Email: kmontgomery @trca.on.ca For Information contact: Kelly Montgomery, extension 5576 Email: kmontgomery @trca.on.ca Date: November 22, 2007 RES. #C65/07 - EARTH RANGERS FOUNDATION LEASE AMENDMENT CFN 31514. Approval to amend the lease to reflect the new vision and use for the Earth Rangers Centre and to revise the site plan. 291 Moved by: Seconded by: Maja Prentice Paul Ainslie THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT WHEREAS The Earth Rangers Foundation entered into a lease of certain lands within the Kortright Centre for Conservation, City of Vaughan, with Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) for the construction and operation of a wildlife veterinary and rehabilitation centre; WHEREAS TRCA is in receipt of a request from The Earth Rangers Foundation to revise the site plan and update the purpose of the lease; THEREFORE LET IT BE RESOLVED THAT TRCA amend the Earth Rangers Foundation lease so that the purpose of the lease will include using the site to showcase sustainable technologies and practices; AND FURTHER THAT the site plan be revised to permit the construction and operation of an aviary and training centre. CARRIED BACKGROUND At Authority Meeting #6/01, held on July 27, 2001, under Resolution #A139/01, the Authority directed staff to enter into a lease of certain lands within the Kortright Centre for Conservation, City of Vaughan, with The Earth Rangers Foundation for the construction and operation of a wildlife veterinary and rehabilitation centre. The lease was signed on August 1, 2001. At Authority Meeting #6/02, held on June 21, 2002, under Resolution #A153/02, the Authority approved the building, site plan and trail plan associated with the Earth Ranger Centre (ERC). The Earth Rangers Foundation completed the construction of the ERC and veterinarian residence in 2004 and began operations. The ERC building is a landmark in Canada for energy efficiency and has been recognized for outstanding leadership and design related to sustainable energy practices. In May of 2006, the Earth Rangers Centre received a Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) Gold designation from the Canada Green Building Council. The Earth Rangers mission is to inspire children with a lasting passion to build a better future. In order to achieve this they are focusing on three areas: school programs featuring Animal Ambassadors (features non - releasable animals), outdoor leadership camps and environmental technologies at the ERC. In the Fall of 2006, The Earth Ranger Foundation decided to transfer their wildlife hospital to the Toronto Wildlife Centre and focus the ERC programs on living responsibly and transforming the ERC into a showcase for sustainable technologies and practices. The ERC will continue to house their Animal Ambassadors and provide educational opportunities. At Authority Meeting #1/07, held on February 23, 2007, under Resolution #A17/07, staff were directed to submit a bid to the World Green Building Council to develop and support a Secretariat to be located in The Living City Campus. TRCA's bid was successful. As part of the efforts to transform the ERC, The Earth Rangers Foundation agreed to lease approximately 4,200 square feet of the ERC to the World Green Building Council, to support a Secretariat. 292 RATIONALE The new vision for the Earth Ranger Centre complements TRCA's vision for The Living City Campus at Kortright. The proposed aviary and training centre are in the general location of two animal pen structures approved by the Authority at Meeting #6/02 as part of the original site plan. The aviary will be subject to required building approvals and a permit under Ontario Regulation 166/06. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS This change to the lease has no financial implications for TRCA. Report prepared by: Ron Dewell, extension 5245 Email: rdewell @trca.on.ca For Information contact: Ron Dewell, extension 5245 Emails: rdewell @trca.on.ca Date: November 27, 2007 RES. #C66/07 - RECORDS MANAGEMENT Approval of Toronto and Region Conservation Authority's Records Management Policy and Procedures Guide, and the updated Records File Classification and Retention Schedule, dated October, 2007. Moved by: Seconded by: Maja Prentice Paul Ainslie THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT Toronto and Region Conservation Authority's (TRCA) Records Management Policy and Procedures Guide, dated October, 2007, be approved; THAT TRCA's Records File Classification and Retention Schedule, dated October, 2007, be approved to replace the previously approved schedule. CARRIED BACKGROUND TRCA's records program was launched in 1985 when space related problems forced the creation of a centralized filing system. Since then, the records program has grown to be a comprehensive and important service for TRCA staff. 293 Records Management Policy and Procedures Guide When the records program was launched in 1985, a Records Management Policy & Procedures Guide was created. The original one page policy is no longer adequate. The new policy describes records and documents and explains the difference between the two forms of information. This has become increasingly important since the introduction of Laserfiche, TRCA's Electronic Document and Records Management System (EDRMS). As TRCA now manages information in both paper and the electronic realm, a new policy was developed. The new policy highlights the following: • records classification - how records are filed; • records retention - how long records are kept; • records disposal - how they are disposed of or archived; • electronic records management - how, what and where we store electronic records; • Laserfiche (Benefits, use and procedures); • storing of information in different ways; • security - allowing staff access to certain files; and • migration - keeping the information current by moving to new hardware /software. The new policy is based on widely used, well researched records management principles and practices. Compliance with the policy will be monitored by records staff. Copies of the Records Management Policy and Procedures Guide will be made available at the meeting or upon request. Records File Classification and Retention Schedule TRCA's records retention schedule is forwarded to the Authority for approval of changes in retention periods or new record series on an annual basis. This year, the schedule also includes a new records file classification or structure. This enables staff to better manage electronic and paper information. With the introduction of Laserfiche, records staff realized that the supporting file structure was inadequate to support record needs. Accordingly, records staff met with TRCA staff to discuss the problems. The most common comments were that there was more than one location to store information or in some cases, no existing category to store information. As well, work within the organization crosses divisional boundaries and staff was undecided as to where information should be filed as the old structure was divisional based. Records staff investigated other organizations in terms of record management systems and came up with a function or activity based classification system. The new structure took its roots from TRCA's business plan. Using the plan as a guide, records staff crafted a new structure. The new structure was introduced to senior management for recommendations, which were incorporated. Meetings were then held with many middle managers to further refine the structure. Considerable feedback was received from staff. In cases where staff was asked for feedback but chose not to be involved, basic record series was created. 294 The new file structure continues to be a work in progress and will no doubt look very different a year from now. The goal of the new structure is to be more comprehensive in nature yet much easier for staff to use. It will form the backbone for Lotus Notes records as well as Laserfiche. Mapping of the old record series to the new will be challenging as file series names have changed. In some cases, moving the records to the new series will be done on a file -by -file basis, while others will be moved in blocks of information. It is anticipated that the new structure will be fully operational by the new year. Copies of the new Records File Classification and Retention Schedule will be made available at the meeting or upon request. Report prepared by: John Annunziello, extension 5272 Email: jannunziello @trca.on.ca For Information contact: John Annunziello, extension 5272 Email: jannunziello @trca.on.ca Date: October 25, 2007 SECTION IV - ITEMS FOR THE INFORMATION OF THE BOARD RES. #C67/07 - INSURANCE AND RISK MANAGEMENT PROGRAM Summary of status of Toronto and Region Conservation Authority's insurance and risk management program. Moved by: Seconded by: Maja Prentice Paul Ainslie IT IS RECOMMENDED THAT the report on Toronto and Region Conservation Authority's (TRCA) insurance and risk management program, dated November 21, 2007, be received. CARRIED RATIONALE At the December 7, 2007 meeting of the Business Excellence Advisory Board, a presentation will be made by Mr. Paul Speck, Vice President, AON Reed Stenhouse, insurance brokers for TRCA and Conservation Ontario. Annually, staff request the broker to update the board on various insurance coverages as well as any insurance issues of which the board should be aware. Mr. Speck will review with the board the status of the following coverages: • Property; • Crime; • Boiler and Machinery (pooled with Conservation Ontario); • Commercial General Liability; • Umbrella Liability (pooled in part with Conservation Ontario); • Automobile (pooled with Conservation Ontario); 295 • Errors and Omissions; • Directors and Officers; • Marine; • Non -Owned Aircraft. Report prepared by: Jim Dillane, extension 6292 Email: jdillane @trca.on.ca For Information contact: Jim Dillane, extension 6292 Email: jdillane @trca.on.ca Date: November 21, 2007 RES. #C68/07 - GOOD NEWS STORIES Highlights of Toronto and Region Conservation Authority's Work. Receipt of Good News Stories for October and November, 2007, from all sections of Toronto and Region Conservation Authority. Moved by: Seconded by: Rob Ford Gino Rosati IT IS RECOMMENDED THAT the report on "Good News Stories" for October and November, 2007, be received. CARRIED BACKGROUND Management Team, a committee made up of senior staff at Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA), meets monthly to discuss strategic initiatives and organizational development. RATIONALE Key accomplishments of each TRCA section are highlighted 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 from October and November, 2007, and a brief description of each. • EcoAction - Received $105,000 from EcoAction for 2 new two -year stewardship programs starting in January 2008 at Port Union Park and the Headwaters of Petticoat Creek. • LEED for Neighborhoods - TRCA's Senior Manager, Water and Energy Management, is chairing the Water & Ecology Subcommittee for the development of LEED (Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design) for Neighborhoods in Canada. • Trails - York Region is contributing $87,000 to connect inter - regional Humber trail to Rutherford Road in Granger Greenway and $18,000 for trail work in the Bartley Smith Greenway; part of the Don watershed. 296 • Planning and Development - Toronto City Council overturned community council recommendation and denied the development application for Roundtree Mill Road in Etobicoke. • Solar Photovoltaic Array - A 2.5 kW solar photovoltaic array has been installed at the Restoration Services Centre as part of the energy efficiency initiatives associated with this LEED building program. On completion, the grid -tied solar panel array is expected to generate approximately 8 percent of the building's projected electrical consumption. The electrical power will be utilized as it is generated to energize the various systems within the building. This initiative is a further demonstration of a sustainable technology that is readily available and easily adaptable to other building projects and shows TRCA's ongoing commitment to showcase and promote renewable energy sources and efficient designs. • Standard Offer Contract - Ontario Power Authority (OPA) has extended a Standard Offer Contract (SOC) to TRCA for the electrical power that it will produce at the Restoration Services Centre. The solar photovoltaic array is expected to generate approximately 3600 kWh per year that will produce an electricity savings within the local hydro grid. Through the SOC, OPA provides an ongoing incentive payment to TRCA for $0.42 per kWh produced over the life of the agreement. • Dog-strangling Vine - The terrestrial monitoring group has completed a review of the distribution, ecology and control of Dog - strangling vine (an invasive exotic plant). Dog - strangling vine (DSV) is considered to be one of the most invasive plants of Southern Ontario and is having major impacts on native terrestrial biodiversity. This review was funded by the Rouge Park Alliance in an effort to improve success of habitat restoration in the Rouge Park, where this species has gained a strong foothold. The results of the review highlight the need for ongoing monitoring of our watersheds to track the distribution of DSV, and to identify vulnerable areas where the spread is likely to occur. This monitoring information is important as it will help us target removal efforts as part of restoration and land management planning within our watersheds. • Water Management Guideline - TRCA hosted a Water Management Guideline workshop with municipalities and the building industry. Over 60 people attended and supported TRCA's direction in water management. • Sponsor Recognition Event - Successful sponsor recognition event held at Tommy Thompson Park (TTP) for winged migration program. Sponsors were Imperial Oil Foundation and TD Friends of the Environment, who supported 40 classes at TTP. • EcoSchools - TRCA held info workshop on EcoSchools with non - school board centres. • Field Centres - Field centres reduced kilometres traveled for food service delivery by 5,000 km by purchasing more locally sourced food. • RBC has contributed $20,000 for residential visits to the field centres. • Etobicoke Trail - Toronto commits $400,000 Section 37 money to complete section of Etobicoke trail from Lake Shore to Queensway. • Spills - Obtained phase one funding($11,000) from NRCan GeoConnections Program to develop a spills response and tracking tool for the Region of Peel. • Trumpeter Swans - The swans were observed for the first time at the Granger Greenway wetland complex located on the Boyd North lands at the Restoration Services Centre. The family of four appears to be utilizing the habitat wetlands as a stopover point on their fall migration. 297 • Plug -in Hybrid Electric Vehicle (PHEV) - TRCA converted its Toyota Prius hybrid electric vehicle into a PHEV, one of 12 in Canada. A PHEV can get over half of its energy from electricity. It has additional battery storage capacity allowing net electric range of 50 km which can be used either in pure electric operation under 55 km /h for the first 50 km or in higher speed operation with much lower than normal gasoline consumption for more than 50 km. After using up the battery capacity, it then operates as a conventional hybrid automobile. • Groundwater Management - TRCA selected as lead to proceed with a two -year, $200,000 study across the province on isotopes in groundwater. • Land Acquisition - Vernon and Rita Purcell property transfer closed. It is a $500,000 donation to TRCA of approximately 50 acres of land in Pickering. • Humber Report Card - The 2nd edition of the report card was been published. • W. Garfield Weston Foundation - Committed to a three year contribution totalling $550,000 to fund visits to TRCA field centres for 20 grade six classes from high risk neighbourhoods in Toronto under TRCA's Environmental Leaders of Tomorrow program. Total student attendance will be over 2,000 participants. Students will stay at a field centre for a couple days where they will be immersed in environmental and sustainability education programs. The program is designed to create a new generation of environmental leaders, specifically those from neighbourhoods that are starting to lose their connection with the environment. • Restoration Services Centre (RSC) - Received LEED (Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design) Platinum certification, the 1st building to achieve this designation in Ontario, and one of 4 in Canada. RSC also received the 2007 Green Design Award from Ontario Wood Works. • Archetype Sustainable House - Building Industry and Land Development Association (BILD) has agreed to take on the project as a Blitz build where they will endeavour to build a LEED Platinum house in 4 days. • Sauriol Dinner - 850 people attended the dinner with most table sponsors ever. Two provincial cabinet ministers attended. Estimated revenue is $90,000 with TRCA retaining 60% and the Oak Ridges Moraine Land Trust retaining 40 %. Ray Anderson is the 2008 speaker. Mr. Anderson made a significant investment to green his company (Interface Inc.) while still making a profit. • PAIE Program - One participant landed a project manager position within the planning department of the Ontario Ministry of Transportation and another a junior planner position with Peel Region. • Community Conservation Forest - Second of six conservation forests was launched by Brampton at Elgin Woods Park. The project focuses on enhancing greenspace within the City of Brampton and educating communities about the health of the Etobicoke Creek. This Community Conservation Forest will reflect over 60 years of conservation in the Etobicoke watershed and, in addition to improving the urban forest, this initiative will serve as a local landmark, reflect a legacy of environmental stewardship, incorporate interpretive signage for education and further strengthen partner relations and community networking. • Water Budget - Received water budget for TRCA's jurisdiction from the consultant. • Integrated Watershed Planning - The Canadian Council of Fisheries Ministers endorsed integrated watershed planning and has asked Conservation Ontario to participate in a working group. • Regional Biodiversitv - An otter was spotted in the Humber watershed for the first time in 27 years. 298 • Two (male and female) Red Belly Woodpeckers were spotted at the feeders at Kortright for the first time. This is very unusual as they are normally a Carolinia species that does make it to Pelee and Rondo Provincial park. According to several birders that we have talked to say that because of warmer weather that the birds territory seems to be expanding to include more of southern Ontario. Report prepared by: Kathy Stranks, extension 5264 Email: kstranks @trca.on.ca For Information contact: Kathy Stranks, extension 5264 Email: kstranks @trca.on.ca Date: November 23, 2007 TERMINATION ON MOTION, the meeting terminated at 10:13 a.m., on Friday, December 7, 2007. David Barrow Chair /ks 299 Brian Denney Secretary- Treasurer