Agenda - the Municipality of Middlesex Centre

Transcription

March 5, 2014
COUNCIL CHAMBER
4:00 pm
MIDDLESEX CENTRE COUNCIL
AGENDA
The Municipal Council of the Municipality of Middlesex Centre will meet in Regular Session in the
Council Chamber on March 5, 2014 at 4:00 pm.
COUNCIL PRESENT: Mayor Edmondson – Chair presiding, Deputy Mayor Bloomfield, Councillors
Harvey, Brennan, McMillan, DeViet and Berze.
REGRETS:
STAFF PRESENT: Michelle Smibert – CAO, Stephanie Troyer-Boyd - Clerk, Greg Watterton –
Director of Finance, Maureen Looby – Director of Public Works and Engineering, Scott Mairs –
Director of Community Services, Ken Sheridan – Director of Fire Services, Aaron Stewardson –
Deputy CBO/By-Law Enforcement Officer.
ALSO PRESENT: Members of the public and press.
1.0
CALL TO ORDER
Mayor Edmondson calls the meeting to order at 4:00 pm.
2.0
R2014-071
ADOPTION OF THE ADDITIONS TO THE AGENDA
Motion by
THAT the Additions to the Regular Agenda of Council dated March 5, 2014 be added to
the Agenda as printed.
3.0
BUSINESS FOR WHICH PREVIOUS NOTICE HAS BEEN GIVEN
3.1
4.0
None scheduled
DISCLOSURE OF PECUNIARY INTEREST AND THE GENERAL NATURE
THEREOF
The Municipal Conflict of Interest Act requires any member of Council declaring a pecuniary interest and the general nature
thereof, where the interest of a member of Council has not been disclosed by reason of the member’s absence from the meeting,
to disclose the interest at the first open meeting attended by the member of Council and otherwise comply with the Act.
Name
Item
Nature
A community of diverse citizens, rooted in rural and urban traditions, united through involvement,
cooperation, and mutual respect
Council Agenda
5.0
2
March 5, 2014
ADOPTION OF THE MINUTES
Motion by
R2014-
THAT the minutes of the meeting of Council dated February 19, 2014 be adopted as
printed; and
FURTHER THAT the minutes of the Special meeting of Council dated February 26,
2014 be adopted as printed.
6.0
CONSENT AGENDA
Items listed under the Consent Agenda are considered routine and may require discussion but no action on the part of
Council. Consent items are received in one motion. Council members may request that one or more item be removed for
further action.
Motion by
R2014-
1. THAT accounts as presented by the Treasurer in the amount of $ 429,766.43 be
approved for payment.
2. THAT the 2014 Budget Engagement Report be received for information.
7.0
DELEGATIONS
4:00 pm
Middlesex Centre YMCA Update
4:30 pm
Brad McGhie and Greg Henderson – Arva Sports Complex
5:00 pm
Tom Albrecht – Don Black Investments – Request for Temporary Servicing
8.0
STAFF REPORTS
8.1
R2014-
Report # CS005/14 - Adoption of 2014 Budget
Motion by
WHEREAS section 290 of the Municipal Act S.O. 2001, c.25, as amended, requires
Council to adopt an annual budget including estimates of all sums required during the
year for the purposes of the municipality; and
WHEREAS Municipal By-Law #2010-080 requires that public notice be given of the
intention to adopt the budget; and
WHEREAS public notice has been given in accordance with the Municipal By-Law; and
WHEREAS Council through the review of the draft budget has directed that the
Municipal portion of the 2014 tax rate be 1.16% more than the 2013 Municipal portion of
the tax rate;
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT the transfer to reserves for fire vehicles
and equipment be reduced by $50,000 from $210,000 to $160,000; and
Council Agenda
3
March 5, 2014
FURTHER THAT the 2014 capital budget include the construction of a basketball/ball
hockey court in Ilderton Optimist Park to be funded 50% community donations and 50%
Reserve Funds; and
FURTHER THAT the 2014 Budget of Revenue and Expenditures, as prepared and
amended by the Director of Corporate Services and reviewed in draft form by Council
and appropriate notice given, be hereby adopted, as amended, as follows:
Expenditures
Revenue
Taxes
$31,894,221
$19,630,148
$12,264,073
AND FURTHER THAT the Director of Corporate Services be directed to prepare the
bylaw for the setting of the tax rates at such time as the upper tier and education rates
are formally received.
8.2
R2014-
Report # CS006/14 - Middlesex Centre Archives
Motion by
THAT the Council of the Municipality of Middlesex Centre recognizes and approves the
collection of historical records by the Middlesex Centre Archive Committee as a project
supported by the Municipality; and
FURTHER THAT Council authorizes that receipts for tax deduction purposes be issued
for any donations received by the Committee of $50 or more.
8.3
R2014-
Report # C-2014-004 - Compliance Audit Committee Appointments
Motion by
THAT By-Law #2014-024 being a by-law to appoint a Compliance Audit Committee be
approved.
8.4
R2014-
Report # CAO-2014/004 - Don Black – Request for Temporary Servicing
Motion by
That no action be taken on Don Black’s request for temporary servicing of his lands in
Komoka-Kilworth.
8.5
R2014-
Report # PWE-006-14 - Single Axle & Chassis and Attachments Tender Results
Motion by
THAT, the Public Works and Engineering Department capital budget be amended to
$224,500.00 (excluding HST), and;
FURTHER THAT, Council approves the Carrier Truck Centres tender for the purchase
of one cab and chassis with combination/dump body with snow & ice removal
equipment with the total price of $224,500.00 (excluding HST).
Council Agenda
8.6
4
March 5, 2014
Report # PWE-007/14 - Replacement of Culvert C-511 - Consultant Selection
Motion by
R2014-
THAT the engineering consultant firm of B. M. Ross and Associates Limited be selected
to undertake the Culvert C- 511 Replacement project in accordance with their 2014
proposal at a price of $40,000; and
FURTHER THAT staff be authorized to execute the necessary documents.
8.7
Report # CAO-2014/006 - Request for Assistance – Drainage Superintendent
Services
Motion by
R2014-
That staff be authorized to enter into discussions with Adelaide Metcalfe for an
agreement to provide Drainage Superintendent Services.
9.0
BY-LAWS
9.1
9.2
By-Law 2014-024 –Compliance Audit Committee
By-Law 2014-025 - Confirming
Motion by
R2014-
THAT By-laws 2014-024 and 2014-025 be approved and this constitutes first, second
and third reading and that By-laws 2014-024 and 2014-025 are hereby enacted.
10.0
R2014-
ADJOURNMENT
Motion by
THAT the meeting be adjourned at
The next Council meeting is Wednesday, March 19, 2014 at 4:00 pm in the Council Chamber.
INFORMATION ITEMS/COUNCIL CORRESPONDENCE
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
Arnprior Resolution – Electricity Rates
Atikokan Resolution – OPP Billing Model
Bluewater Recycling Meeting Notes – February 2014
Canada Post – Arva PO Hours
Elgin County – Hwy 401/4 Interchange
Hawkesbury Resoltuion – OPP Billing Model
Lobo Community Policing Minutes – January 2014
LTVCA 2014 AGM
OMERS 2013 Results
Kearney Resolution – OPP Billing Model
T. King correspondence – Pattyn Drain
February 19, 2014
COUNCIL CHAMBER
4:00 pm
MINUTES
The Municipal Council of the Municipality of Middlesex Centre met in Regular Session in the Council
Chamber on February 19, 2014 at 4:00 pm.
COUNCIL PRESENT: Mayor Edmondson - Chair presiding, Deputy Mayor Bloomfield, Councillors
Harvey, Brennan, McMillan, DeViet, Berze.
REGRETS:
STAFF PRESENT: Michelle Smibert – CAO, Stephanie Troyer-Boyd - Clerk, Greg Watterton –
Director of Corporate Services, Maureen Looby – Director of Public Works and Engineering, Arnie
Marsman – Director of Planning and Development Services, Scott Mairs – Director of Community
Services, Ken Sheridan – Director of Fire Services, Ben Puzanov – Planner (arrived at 7:00 pm)
ALSO PRESENT: Solicitor, Andy Wright, members of the public and press.
1.0
CALL TO ORDER
Mayor Edmondson called the meeting to order at 4:00 pm.
2.0
ADOPTION OF THE ADDITIONS TO THE AGENDA
There were no additions to the agenda on February 19, 2014.
3.0
BUSINESS FOR WHICH PREVIOUS NOTICE HAS BEEN GIVEN
3.1
4.0
None scheduled
THEREOF
Name
Item
Nature
None were declared on February 19, 2014.
A community of diverse citizens, rooted in rural and urban traditions, united through involvement, cooperation, and mutual
respect
Council Minutes
5.0
R2014-050
2
February 19, 2014
ADOPTION OF THE MINUTES
Motion by Councillor McMillan and Deputy Mayor Bloomfield
THAT the minutes of the Special meeting of Council dated January 31, 2014 be
adopted as printed; and
FURTHER THAT the minutes of the Regular meeting of Council dated February 5,
2014 be adopted as printed; and
FURTHER THAT the minutes of the Regular meeting of Council dated February
12, 2014 be adopted as printed.
Carried
6.0
CONSENT AGENDA
Items listed under the Consent Agenda are considered routine and may require discussion but no action on the part of
Council. Consent items are received in one motion. Council members may request that one or more item be removed for
further action.
R2014-051
7.0
Motion by Councillor DeViet and Councillor Berze
1.
THAT the January 2014 Building Permit Report be received.
2.
THAT the Community Services Advisory Committee dated December 2,
2013 be received.
Carried
DELEGATIONS
None scheduled.
8.0
STAFF REPORTS
8.1
R2014-052
Report # PS-F-2014-001 - Fire Department Response to 147 Union Ave.
Motion by Councillor Harvey and Councillor McMillan
THAT no action be taken on the request by Jennifer Reid to remove the charges
as a result of the fire department response to 147 Union Avenue on November
19th, 2013.
Carried
8.2
R2014-053
Report # PWE-005-14 - 2014 ‘A’ Gravel Tender Results
Motion by Deputy Mayor Bloomfield and Councillor Harvey
THAT Council award the north area tender to E&W Blane Trucking & Excavating
Ltd. for the Load & Haul of Granular ‘A’ for a total price of $66,960.00 (excluding
HST) in advance of the 2014 budget approval.
respect
Council Minutes
3
February 19, 2014
FURTHER THAT Council award the south area tender to Jennison Construction
Ltd. for the Supply & Apply of Granular ‘A’ for a total price of $384,200.00
(excluding HST) in advance of the 2014 budget approval.
Carried
8.3
R2014-054
Report # PDSD-BY-01-14 - Request for Waiving of Kennel Licensing Fees:
Animal Care Centre Lobo
Motion by Councillor Berze and Councillor McMillan
THAT no action be taken on Animal Care Centre Lobo’s request for a waiving of
the annual kennel licencing fee.
Carried
8.4
R2014-055
Report # CS002/14 - 2013 Council Remuneration
Motion by Councillor Brennan and Deputy Mayor Bloomfield
THAT the report regarding 2013 Council remuneration be received.
Carried
8.5
R2014-056
Report # C-2014-003 - Special Council Meeting
Motion by Councillor Harvey and Deputy Mayor Bloomfield
THAT a Special Council meeting be held on February 26, 2014 at 8:00 am in the
Council Chamber to consider the awarding of the tender for the Ilderton Water
Storage Project.
Carried
8.6
R2014-057
Report # CAO-2014/003 – Exemption from Procurement Policy – Ilderton Water
Upgrades
Motion by Councillor Berze and Councillor DeViet
THAT the Ilderton Water Upgrade Project be exempt from the
Procurement/Purchasing Policy as permitted by section 6.0 for the following
reasons:
 Any deviation from the specified composite glass-fused steel tankage may
put at risk the MIII subsidy;
 Alternative, out of date technology will expose the Municipality $1.0 million
(present value) in future maintenance costs;
 Middlesex Centre’s decision to specify composite glass-fused steel tankage
was based on it being state of the art technology rather than to favour any
particular supplier or group of suppliers.
Carried
respect
Council Minutes
8.7
R2014-058
4
February 19, 2014
Report # CAO-2014/001 - OSUM – Board of Directors
Motion by Deputy Mayor Bloomfield and Councillor Brennan
THAT Michelle Smibert be nominated to the OSUM executive committee for the
term of 2014-2016.
Carried
9.0
NEW BUSINESS
There was no new business raised on February 19, 2014.
10.0
R2014-059
RECESS FOR DINNER
Motion by Councillor Berze and Councillor Harvey
THAT Council recess for dinner at 5:00 pm and reconvene at 7:00 pm in the
Coldstream Community Centre.
Carried
11.0
7:00 pm
R2014-060
COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT
Motion by Councillor DeViet and Councillor Harvey
THAT the Council adjourn its regular meeting at 7:00 p.m. in order to sit as
Committee of Adjustment under Section 45 and 53 of The Planning Act R.S.O.,
1990, as amended.
Carried
11.1
Disclosure of Pecuniary Interest and the General Nature Thereof
The Municipal Conflict of Interest Act requires any member of Committee of Adjustment declaring a pecuniary interest
and the general nature thereof, where the interest of a member of Committee of Adjustment has not been disclosed by
reason of the member’s absence from the meeting, to disclose the interest at the first open meeting attended by the
member of Committee of Adjustment and otherwise comply with the Act.
Name
Item
Nature
11.2
Minor Variance Application A-3/14 Owner: Kevin Weller Agent: Richard Smythe
Address: 25684 Wood Road
Chair McMillan introduced the application and outlined the procedure for the public
hearing. She indicated that the purpose of the application is to seek relief from the
Middlesex Centre Comprehensive Zoning By-law 2005-005 as it relates to the minimum
interior side yard setback required for an agricultural building on the subject property.
The effect of the proposal is to recognize a hay storage building that was constructed
3.93 metres (12.9 feet) from the northerly interior side lot line of the property. The
respect
Council Minutes
5
February 19, 2014
Comprehensive Zoning By-law requires a minimum interior side yard setback for the
building of 4.5 metres (14.76 ft).
The subject property is known municipally as 25684 Wood Road and is located on the
east side of Wood Road and north of McEwen Drive. The property is legally described
as Part of Lot 1, Concession 13 (geographic Township of Lobo).
The agent for the applicant, Richard Smythe, explained that the variance was required
in order to recognize the building that was constructed too close to the lot line.
Ben Puzanov, Planner, reviewed the staff report in support of the application. He stated
that the application complies with the general intent and purpose of the Middlesex
Centre Official Plan and the Middlesex Centre Comprehensive Zoning Bylaw, is
considered to be minor in nature and represents appropriate development on the
subject property.
There were no members of the public in attendance for this application.
R2014-061
Motion by Deputy Mayor Bloomfield and Mayor Edmondson
THAT Minor Variance Application A-3/14, filed by Richard Smythe on behalf of
Kevin Weller for relief from the Comprehensive Zoning By-law’s interior side yard
setback requirement for an agricultural building, which stipulates a minimum
setback of 4.5 metres; whereas the owner is requesting a minimum northerly
interior side yard setback of 3.93 metres in order to recognize an existing hay
storage building; for a property legally described as Part of Lot 1, Concession 13
(geographic Township of Lobo), Municipality of Middlesex Centre and known
municipally as 25684 Wood Road; be granted.
FURTHER THAT Minor Variance A-3/14 not be subject to any conditions; and
FURTHER THAT the reasons for granting Minor Variance Application A-3/14
include:

The requested Minor Variance complies with the general intent and purpose
of the Middlesex Centre Official Plan;

The requested Minor Variance complies with the general intent and purpose
of the Middlesex Centre Comprehensive Zoning Bylaw;

The requested Minor Variance is considered to be minor in nature; and

The requested Minor Variance represents appropriate development on the
subject property.
Carried
11.3
Minor Variance Application A-4/14 Owner: Virgilio and Almerida Reis Address:
21968 Richmond Street
Chair McMillan introduced the application and outlined the procedure for the public
hearing. She indicated that the purpose of the application is to permit the expansion of
a legal non-conforming use on the property. The land contains two single-detached
respect
Council Minutes
6
February 19, 2014
dwellings, known municipally as 21952 and 21968 Richmond Street. The dwellings are
both considered to be legal non-conforming uses because the Comprehensive Zoning
By-law permits only one single-detached dwelling per property. The owners are
proposing to demolish the dwelling at 21968 Richmond Street, which has a floor area of
approximately 169.9 square metres (1,828.8 sq ft), and would like to construct a larger
dwelling in its place that would have a floor area of approximately 250 square metres
(2,691 sq ft). The dwelling at 21968 Richmond Street is located approximately 42.67
metres (140 ft) from the front lot line.
The subject property is known municipally as 21952 and 21968 Richmond Street and is
located on the east side of Richmond Street (Highway 4) and north of Eight Mile Road.
The property is legally described as Part of Lot 16, Concession 8 (geographic Township
of London).
The applicant had nothing further to add to the planner’s report.
Ben Puzanov, Planner, reviewed the staff report in support of the application. He stated
that there is no negative impact anticipated from the request to replace and expand the
legal non-conforming single-detached dwelling.
John Brennan questioned why the committee would consider allowing a nonconforming use to continue. Ben Puzanov stated that the owner could tear down the
present house and rebuild the same size building so he does not see a larger house
having any additional impact.
There were no members of the public in attendance wishing to speak to this
application.
R2014-062
Motion by Councillor Berze and Mayor Edmondson
THAT the Application to Expand a Legal Non-conforming Use (A-4/14), filed by
Virgilio and Almerida Reis in order to replace the existing single detached
dwelling known municipally as 21968 Richmond Street with a larger singledetached dwelling that would have a floor area of not more than approximately
250 square metres; for a property legally described as Part of Lot 16, Concession
8 (geographic Township of London); be granted.
FURTHER THAT permission to expand the legal non-conforming use (A-4/14) be
subject to the following condition:

That the new, expanded single-detached dwelling be constructed generally in
the same location as the existing single-detached dwelling at 21968
Richmond Street that is to be removed; and
FURTHER THAT the reason for granting Application A-4/14 includes:

There is no negative impact anticipated from the request to replace and
expand the legal non-conforming single-detached dwelling.
Carried
respect
Council Minutes
11.4
7
February 19, 2014
Consent Applications B-4/14 and B-7/14 Owner: Melchers Construction Limited
Agent: Laverne Kirkness (Kirkness Consulting Inc.) Address: 10038 Oxbow
Drive and 140 Parkview Drive
Laverne Kirkness, agent for the applicant, requested that the Committee of Adjustment
receive the staff report and move directly to the Public Meeting for the zoning by-law
amendment and draft plan of condominium so that the presentation and comments on
the entire proposal can be received at the same time.
R2014-063
Motion by Councillor Harvey and Councillor DeViet
THAT the information report (PDSD-P-8-14) regarding Melchers Construction
Limited’s proposal be received.
Carried
12.0
R2014-064
PUBLIC MEETINGS
Motion by Councillor DeViet and Councillor Harvey
THAT Council move into Public Meeting at 7:25 p.m. under Sections 21, 34 and 51
of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P13, as amended.
Carried
12.1
Applications for Draft Plan of Condominium and Zoning By-law Amendment
Owner: Melchers Construction Limited Agent: Laverne Kirkness (Kirkness
Consulting Inc.) Address: 10038 Oxbow Drive and 140 Parkview Drive
Mayor Edmondson provided an introduction stating the purpose of the Public Meeting
and stated the process following the Public Meeting. He provided an overview of the
application indicating that the purpose and effect of the draft plan of condominium
application is to facilitate the residential development of the subject land in order to
accommodate the construction of 34 townhouse dwellings and two semi-detached
dwellings in a vacant land condominium form of tenure. A vacant land condominium is a
form of development in which individual lots are the condominium units. The proposal
also includes visitor parking areas and a private, common element road extending north
from Oxbow Drive and an emergency access extending south from Valleyview Drive.
The purpose of the zoning by-law amendment is to rezone a portion of the subject land
from site specific Urban Residential First Density (UR1-3) to site-specific Urban
Residential Third Density (UR3-#) in order to permit the construction of townhouses and
semi-detached dwellings on the land. The UR1-3 zone only permits single-detached
dwellings. The effect of the amendment would be to facilitate the development of the
subject property in accordance with the above draft plan of condominium application.
The subject land is known municipally as 10038 Oxbow Drive and 140 Parkview Drive,
and is legally described as Part of Blocks G and E and Block AE, Part of Lot 228 and
Lots 271-273, 276 and 277, Plan 113 and Block A, Plan 981 (geographic Township of
Lobo). Located in the village of Komoka, the subject land is situated on the north side
of Oxbow Drive, on the south side of Parkview Drive and on the west side of Valleyview
Drive. The land is located immediately east of Parkview Public School.
respect
Council Minutes
8
February 19, 2014
Laverne Kirkness, agent for the applicant, made a presentation on the proposed
development. He stated that the plan is to sever four lots capable of supporting fairly
large single family homes on the north side of the property fronting Parkview Drive and
developing a 36 unit condo plan with 2 storey townhouses and full basements on the
remaining lands with access from Oxbow Drive. In order to accomplish this, Mr.
Kirkness indicated that his client had submitted 3 applications to the municipality:
zoning by-law amendment, application for 4 consents and application for plan of
condominium. He indicated that the condo development is a vacant land condominium
where people own the inside of their unit as well as the front yard and the back yard.
Laverne Kirkness stated that this development represents infilling and intensification, is
an efficient use of serviced urban lands and provides for diversity and choice of housing
in the community. He explained that the application by Melchers Construction conforms
to the 3 policy frameworks that are considered in every planning application being the
Provincial Policy Statement, County Official Plan and the Municipal Official Plan. He
noted that land in full serviced settlement areas need to be used efficiently and that the
subject lands are presently underutilized. He explained that the best communities are
those that have a variety of housing types and not just single family dwellings on large
lots but offer smaller lots and different forms of housing. He recognized that diversity
and choice of housing is an important element in planning.
In response to some of the community comments and concerns, Mr. Kirkness indicated
that they do not believe that there will be a significant impact on the school with this
development and he noted the it will positively affect the community with a broader
demographic for the Kilworth-Komoka area. In response to the concerns that the
development is out of character with the neighbourhood, he maintained that character
to the community will attract a broader demographic and is a good principle. Mr.
Kirkness indicated that Oxbow Drive is a major road through the village and is designed
to carry much more traffic than it presently sees.
Planner, Ben Puzanov summarized public submissions and concerns received to date
noting he has received 39 letters of opposition, 1 letter of support and 1 petition with
364 names against the development. He stated that the concerns include but are not
limited to: traffic, public safety, proximity to the school, increased students at the
school, does not represent appropriate infill and not representative of existing
development, negative impact on quality of live, loss of privacy, noise, light and air
pollution, property values, impact from potential units resulting from possible rental
units, not enough parking, zoning should not change and development should happen
based of the present zoning, inadequacy of green space, overall impact on municipal
infrastructure including water and sewer, garbage collection, fire protection. He noted
that he will take all the information received tonight and meet with the developer and
agent. He indicated that there could be another public meeting depending on any
change made to the application by Melchers Construction Ltd.
There were approximately 120 members of the public in attendance for this meeting.
Paul Houghton of 200 Delaware Street spoke about the increase in residences north of
Oxbow Drive noting it has doubled in the past 10 years and this development will
increase the number by another 25% which he felt was significant to note. He indicated
that he supports development on the property but believes the highest priority should be
compatibility with the area. Mr. Houghton also noted that the density is too high for the
location noting that with the exception of the seniors apartments, all of Komoka is low
respect
Council Minutes
9
February 19, 2014
density zoning. He believes that medium density makes sense some place but not here
and that this area should remain single detached. He maintained that housing diversity
should be directed to the growth areas.
David Holden of 201 Oakcrest Drive stated that he accepts that development within the
growing community is the normal and the he would not be opposed to compatible low
density growth and development. Mr. Holden stated the he believes this proposal is
contrary to the Ontario Human Rights Code where every person has the right to own
real or personal property they have acquired in accordance with law and the peaceful
enjoyment of their property. Mr. Holden stated that he accepts significant changes are
coming to Kilworth-Komoka in the coming years but feels that a 36 unit 2 storey condo
development is not a good fit. He referenced OMB rulings supporting his argument.
Mr. Holden asked that Council consider this proposal in the context of the big picture
plan for the area.
Ron Wagler of 10047 Oxbow Drive spoke about the risk to road safety if this
development is approved. He noted that traffic and parking is already a problem on
Oxbow Drive especially during school drop off and pick up times. He expressed
concern about a single access onto Oxbow Drive noting increased congestion, trees
and sight line problems.
Vicki Searle of 176 Valleyview Drive stated that a mailing had been sent to all
residences in Komoka and she had visited many homes in the village before the
meeting. She stated that the overwhelming majority are opposed to the zoning bylaw
amendment and presented a petition to Council. Mrs. Searle stated that opposition to
the proposed development was focused on density, location and the fact that the
proposal is at odds with the existing character of the neighbourhood. She noted that
her property will be affected as there will be roads on 3 sides of her property; the new
roadway into the development will be 5 feet from their back fence. Mrs. Searle stated
that she is not opposed to development in the community but is opposed to it in this
location. She acknowledged that the developer is a member of the community working
in the best interest of the community and Komoka but should reconsider his
development proposal.
Rob Jonkhans of 64 Fieldstone Crescent South stated that as a real estate agent he is
aware that Parkview School in Komoka is a big selling feature for area homes. He
stated that Parkview potentially won’t have the same luster with higher density
development in the area.
Sabrina Lombardi of 72 Fieldstone Crescent South questioned if this proposal would set
a precedent in terms of additional medium density developments in the community.
R2014-065
Motion by Councillor Harvey and Councillor Berze
THAT the information report (PDSD-P-8-14) regarding Melchers Construction
Limited’s proposal be received.
Carried
respect
Council Minutes
12.2
10
February 19, 2014
Municipally-Initiated Official Plan Amendment Severances of Surplus Farm
Residences (OPA 33)
Planner Ben Puzanov gave a presentation detailing how the definition and criteria for
the Official Plan Amendment was developed. He followed up by summarizing the
content of the draft amendment.
There were approximately 60 members of the public in attendance at this meeting.
Wendy Lenders of 24618 Bear Creek Road stated that the severance of surplus farm
residences does not support agriculture. She said that it is essentially creating estate
lots by severances. Acknowledging that other municipalities allow the severance
surplus farm residences, she stated that it is not the right policy for Middlesex Centre as
we are situated too close to the city.
Brian McClary of 21731 Richmond Street stated that the severance of surplus farm
dwellings will give a young farmer more options and doesn’t limit agriculture operations.
13.0
BY-LAWS
13.1
R2014-066
By-Law 2014-022 Confirming
Motion by Councillor DeViet and Councillor Berze
THAT By-Law 2014-022 be approved and this constitutes first, second and third
reading and that By-Law 2014-022 is hereby enacted.
Carried
14.0
R2014-067
ADJOURNMENT
Motion by Deputy Mayor Bloomfield and Councillor Harvey
THAT the meeting be adjourned at 9:35 pm.
Carried
The next Council meeting is Wednesday, February 26, 2014 at 8:00 am in the Council Chamber.
__________________________________
Mayor
__________________________________
Clerk
respect
Council Minutes
11
February 19, 2014
INFORMATION ITEMS/COUNCIL CORRESPONDENCE
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
2014 Farmland Forum Flyer
EnviroFriends News
Explornet – Rural Broadband and Federal Budget
KCCA – Invitation to AGM
Low Impact Development Symposium – UTRCA
Madawaska – Resolution re: OPP Costs
Resolution – Mandatory Septic Inspections
Public Submission – Melchers Construction Limited Proposal
MPAC News – January 2014
Newcomer Champion Award
OMAFRA Connects – February 2014
Ontario Senior of the Year Award
Public Submissions – Surplus Farm Residences
respect
February 26, 2014
Council Chamber
8:00 am
SPECIAL MINUTES
The Municipal Council of the Municipality of Middlesex Centre met in Special Session on February 26,
2014 at 8:00 am. This Special Meeting of Council was called to consider the awarding of the tender
for the Ilderton Water Storage Project.
COUNCIL PRESENT: Deputy Mayor Bloomfield– Chair presiding, Councillors Harvey, Brennan,
McMillan, DeViet and Berze.
REGRETS: Mayor Edmondson
STAFF PRESENT: Michelle Smibert – CAO, Stephanie Troyer- Boyd – Clerk, Maureen Looby –
Director of Public Works and Engineering.
ALSO PRESENT: Members of the public and press.
1.0
CALL TO ORDER
Deputy Mayor Bloomfield called the meeting to order at 8:00 am.
2.0
THEREOF
Name
Item
Nature
3.0
STAFF REPORTS
3.1
Report # PWE-008/13 - Ilderton Water Supply Upgrades Project – Tender
Results
Director of Public Works and Engineering, Maureen Looby stated that the
recommendation is to award the tender to Finnbilt General Contracting Limited.
Councillor McMillan stated that she trusts staff and the consultant on this issue and has
no reason not to take the advice provided to Council.
respect
Special Council Minutes
R2014-068
2
February 26, 2014
Motion by Councillor Brennan and Councillor Berze
THAT, in reliance on the recommendations of Stantec Consulting Ltd., the
construction tender be awarded to Finnbilt General Contracting Limited for
$3,063,907.00 (excluding HST).
Carried
4.0
BY-LAWS
4.1
R2014-069
By-Law 2014-023 Confirming
Motion by Councillor Berze and Councillor McMillan
THAT By-Law 2014-023 be approved and this constitutes first, second and third
reading and that By-Law 2014-023 is hereby enacted.
Carried
5.0
R2014-070
ADJOURNMENT
Motion by Councillor Berze and Councillor DeViet
THAT the meeting be adjourned at 8:05 am.
Carried
The next Council meeting is Wednesday, March 5, 2014 at 4:00 pm in the Council Chamber.
__________________________________
Mayor
__________________________________
Clerk
respect
2013.09.03 8.0 9759
Municipality of Middlesex Cent
25/02/2014
11:56AM
Accounts Payable
Feb 1 - Feb 25 2014
Vendor
000000
Through
999999
Invoice Entry Date 01/02/2014 to 25/02/2014
Paid Invoices Cheque Date 01/02/2014
Account
Vendor
Number Name
Invoice Number
to 25/02/2014
Invoice
Date
Item Description
Chq Nbr
Item Amount
Department Summary
01-0000
BALANCE SHEET
11,808.17
01-1100
GENERAL ADMINISTRATION
30,330.21
01-1209
Medical Clinic
2,661.15
01-1300
COUNCIL
1,200.76
01-1400
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
2,118.68
01-2101
Fire Station - Arva
01-2104
Fire Station - Bryanston
1,013.30
01-2105
Fire Station - Coldstream
4,420.26
01-2106
Fire Station - Delaware
1,275.65
01-2108
Fire Station - Ilderton
1,486.65
01-2119
Fire Dept Administration
3,678.86
01-2405
Emergency Operations Centre
01-2505
Building Inspection
6,649.33
01-2705
Animal Control
1,279.15
01-3080
Debris & Litter Pickup
01-3215
Snow Plowing
26,059.92
01-3220
Sanding & Salting
46,506.22
01-3225
Ice Blading
01-3270
Railroad Charges
833.43
01-3301
Garage Overhead
25,943.09
01-3319
Administration
01-3355
Pit #1 - Olalando
01-3701
Garage - Denfield
43,793.72
01-3706
Garage - Delaware
31,299.57
01-3901
Streetlighting
01-3994
Sidewalks
01-4101
Wastewater Systems
01-4301
Water Systems
01-4505
Garbage Collection
3,675.00
01-7199
Recreation & Facilities Administration
3,222.99
01-7204
Community Centre - Bryanston
887.95
668.96
447.86
2,638.07
4,149.72
274.00
2,282.87
17,530.82
9,390.24
21,022.71
559.08
Page
25
2013.09.03 8.0 9759
25/02/2014
11:56AM
Accounts Payable
Feb 1 - Feb 25 2014
Vendor
000000
Through
999999
Account
Vendor
Number Name
Invoice Number
to 25/02/2014
Item Description
Invoice
Date
Chq Nbr
Item Amount
01-7205
Community Centre - Coldstream
01-7206
Community Centre - Delaware
8.70
01-7208
Community Centre - Ilderton
293.23
01-7210
Community Centre - Komoka
974.87
01-7308
Arena - Ilderton
01-7309
Arena - Wellness Centre
01-7506
Library - Delaware
01-8105
Planning Department
01-8305
Drainage Superintendent
01-8405
Tile Drainage
13-4111
KILWORTH WEST CONNECTION
3,584.93
90-2251
SERVICE ONE
2,544.57
90-3202
PWE T-2 2012 INTERNATIONAL
41.57
90-3204
2,307.27
90-3206
400.18
90-3207
PWE T-7 1995 FREIGHTLINER
771.20
90-3208
90-3212
PWE T-12 2008 CHEV SILVERADO
90-3214
PWE T-14 2010 FORD F150
435.03
90-3219
503.27
90-3220
PWE T-20 2005 WESTERN STAR
211.43
90-3221
203.62
90-3222
PWE T-22 2005 GMC 1 TON
90-3224
90-3232
90-3235
PWE T-35 1997 FORD
3,367.59
90-3236
PWE T-36 2002 VOLVO
1,270.88
90-3312
PWE G-12 2008 JOHN DEERE
621.84
90-3317
PWE G-17 2004 CATERPILLAR
886.36
90-3318
PWE G-18 2009 VOLVO
114.05
90-3508
PWE R-8 2009 CASE
90-3606
PWE WOOD CHIPPER
723.20
90-3607
PWE CHIPSPREADER
97.53
1,391.24
4,431.07
37,579.66
226.00
23,506.24
1,599.60
21,271.42
93.96
1,314.50
17.93
6,170.76
275.99
53.54
Page
26
2013.09.03 8.0 9759
25/02/2014
11:56AM
Accounts Payable
Feb 1 - Feb 25 2014
Vendor
000000
Through
999999
Account
Vendor
Number Name
Invoice Number
to 25/02/2014
Item Description
Invoice
Date
Chq Nbr
Item Amount
90-4301
WATER TECHNICIAN VEHICLE
342.09
90-7104
PARKS 2009 GMC
347.26
90-7105
PARKS 2010 DODGE
384.70
90-7208
PARKS 2009 KUBOTA LOADER
90-7209
PARKS 2011 KUBOTA
90-7305
ZAMBONI ICE RESURFACER KOMOKA
90-7306
ZAMBONI ICE RESURFACER ILDERTON
17.76
11.78
2,028.55
232.67
Report Total
Page
27
429,766.43
MUNICIPALITY OF
MIDDLESEX CENTRE
To:
For:
Council
March 5, 2014
ADMINISTRATION – CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER
Submitted by:
Michelle Smibert
Chief Administrative Officer
Date: March 5, 2014
Subject:
Number:
For:
Information
Action
Other



CAO-2014/001
Page 1 of 1
2014 Budget Engagement
PURPOSE: To provide information to Council regarding the preliminary steps that staff undertook
to try to engage the public in the budget process.
BACKGROUND: The staff, with the assistance of our communications specialist put together an
on-line survey about the proposed 2014 budget. Staff used social media as well as our municipal
signage to push out the information regarding the survey.
As of the date of writing this report, we received 30 responses to our on-line survey and the results
are attached for your information. From our perspective the process worked well and with more time
and advance notice we could likely obtain additional responses. There is also an opportunity for us
to set up stations at municipal facilities (municipal office/arena facilities/libraries) where residents
can complete the form on-line. Staff will continue to explore additional opportunities to engage our
residents.
RECOMMENDATION: THAT the 2014 Budget Engagement Report be received for information.
Respectfully Submitted,
Michelle Smibert
th,, 2014
Wednesday, March 5
y,
Key Points:
1.
2
2.
3
3.
4.
Delivery Promises
20 3
2013 Actuals and 2014 Plan
l
d 20
l
Review of Programming Highlights
Review of Programming Highlights
Q
Q & A
The Big Numbers
g
2013 Plan2013 Actuals
M b
Members
2014 Plan
1000
1164
1200
$368000
$368000 $415000
$415000 $421 000
$421,000 N tR
Net Revenue
$97000
$120000
$113000 00
$113000.00
Municipality
Municipality Return
0
$42707.63
$21,500
Gross Revenue
Gross Revenue
Program Highlights
g
g g
Original Promise
2013 2014 Plan
Child Minding Hours
21 per week
25 per week
25 per week
Gym and child/youth programs
21 per week
30 per week
32 per week
15 hours per week
23 per week
23 per week
Group Fitness
Program Highlights Continued
g
g g
Before and After Care
26 kids currently enrolled, and climbing
23 sessions weekly (vs 11 in 2013)
Fitness Coaching
PD/Holiday Programs
Camp
All 10+ older members receive at no additional cost
ll
ld
b
i
ddi i
l
Appointments always within 7 days of joining
Tailored workouts, advice and support
(previously 13+ only)
Averaging 19 kids per PD day
Added $15 Emergency day Programs
500 camper weeks planned (283 in 2013 achieved)
Program Highlights Continued
g
g g
Public Track Use
‐>averaging 6 people per day (50% increase vs 2012)
Child & Youth
‐>huge focus on program quality improvements in 2014
‐> re Brand strategy with a focus on consistency between branches and message (telling the Y of our story)
branches and message (telling the Y of our story)
‐>improvements to program offerings and facility features
Library
‐>share gymnasium and library spaces to enhance programs
‐>partner on marketing opportunities, 1 week sign up passes
Municipality
‐>excellent communication and ability to work together on marketing and facility matters.
‐>i.e. partnered on Holiday Hoopla, Family day, pd days, etc
‐> really a sense of being one team
Who are we?
Family Memberships
Family
Memberships
Adult
Youth (13‐24yrs)
Child (3mth to 12yrs)
41%
41%
15%
3%
Assisted
11 2% ($36 000)
11.2% ($36,000)
Thank you!
y
Questions?
Copyright Reserved
The Contractor shall verify and be responsible for all dimensions. DO
NOT scale the drawing - any errors or omissions shall be reported to
Stantec without delay.
The Copyrights to all designs and drawings are the property of
Stantec. Reproduction or use for any purpose other than that
authorized by Stantec is forbidden.
Key Map
File Name:
n.t.s.
ZONING_PLAN.DWG
RT
BB
RT
13.06.17
Dwn.
Chkd.
Dsgn.
YY.MM.DD
Client/Project
DON BLACK INVESTMENTS
10293 GLENDON DRIVE
Kilworth, ON Canada
Title
AREA PLAN
Project No.
Scale
N.T.S.
161403374
Drawing No.
1
ORIGINAL SHEET - ANSI D
Sheet
Revision
1
1
0
STAFF REPORT
MUNICIPALITY OF
MIDDLESEX CENTRE
To:
Council
For:
March 5/14
Corporate Services Department
Submitted by:
Greg Watterton
Date:
February 19/14
For: 
Information
Action
Other
Number:



CS005/14
Subject:
Adoption of 2014 Budget
PURPOSE:
To make recommendation to Council regarding the adoption of the 2014 budget and setting of
the 2014 tax rates.
DETAILS:
At the February 12, 2014 meeting of Council, the 2014 Draft Budget was presented and
discussed.
Council discussed the pros and cons of undertaking the snowplowing of the various municipal
facilities by staff rather than a third party contract. Council was generally supportive of this
option.
Concern was expressed that the proposed transfer to reserves for the purpose of Fire Vehicles
and Equipment resulted in a projected balance in the fund higher than necessary, based on the
forecasted purchase of vehicles and equipment for that department. It should be noted that the
Asset Management Plan indicated that much of the equipment for Fire Services was in “poor”
condition based on their assessment.
A report was presented to Council advising of the Ilderton Optimist initiative to construct a
basketball/ball hockey court in Optimist Park in partnership with the Municipality. It was
recommended that the project be approved in the amount of $30,000 and moved forward from
the 2015 budget to 2014. It was also recommended that the $15,000 municipal portion of the
project cost be funded from eligible Development Charges and Parkland reserves with no
impact to the tax levy.
Council discussed the tax levy and was of the feeling that the increase in the levy over 2013
should be a total of 6.68%, being growth at 1.54%, inflation at 1.20% and the recommendation
of the Asset Management Plan of 3.94% for capital reserves. The summary following references
the 6.68% levy increase and the additional savings required to achieve that increase. The
additional savings required to achieve a 0% tax rate increase is also referenced.
There was some discussion regarding how the tax rate/levy should be determined. Staff makes
a point to reference the Municipal Long Term Financial Plan for the proposed tax rate/levy each
year. Admittedly, some assumptions are made that are part of the plan and not all assumptions
are realized. For example, it was assumed that the OMPF funding would remain the same but
the reality is that it has been significantly decreased. At the time of the Long Term Financial
Plan, this provincial funding accounted for 8.4% of total revenues. The decrease in this funding
has a significant impact on our operating budget and should be considered when looking at any
of the tax rate or levy increases.
STAFF REPORT
Staff has again reviewed the draft budget to attempt to determine areas of potential saving. The
Director of Community Services has indicated that customer service staff hours at the Wellness
Centre could be reduced, realizing a savings of wages and benefits totaling $16,254. This
reduction in customer service staff will have a direct impact on customer service that is
delivered at the Wellness Centre.
In addition, the Director of Public Works and Engineering has indicated that the departmental
operating budget includes $10,000 for the replacement of trees in various subdivisions that
could be deferred. However, it was noted that many requests from property owners to have
these trees replaced have been received. It has been found that tree planting can contribute
greatly to the quality of life for residents in Middlesex Centre.
In order to achieve a lower rate at this point, it would be necessary to either defer one or more
capital projects or decrease the recommended transfers to reserve funds. Otherwise it would
result in a decrease in level of service.
SUMMARY:
Item
Draft Budget as
presented
Decrease transfer to
Fire Vehicles &
Equipment Reserve as
per AM Plan
Reduction of customer
service hours at
Wellness Centre
Deferral of subdivision
tree planting
Reference
Reference
Levy Impact
Levy
Levy
Increase
Tax Rate
Increase
$12,314,073
7.93%
1.57%
Impact on
Average
Assessment
$371,486
$30.56
$50,000
$12,264,073
7.49%
1.16%
$22.55
$16,254
$12,247,819
7.35%
1.03%
$19.94
$10,000
$12,237,819
7.26%
0.94%
$18.34
$66,602
$114,470
12,171,217
12,123,349
6.68%
6.26%
0.39%
0.00%
$7.67
0
RECOMMENDATION:
WHEREAS section 290 of the Municipal Act S.O. 2001, c.25, as amended,
requires Council to adopt an annual budget including estimates of all sums
required during the year for the purposes of the municipality; and
WHEREAS Municipal By-Law #2010-080 requires that public notice be
given of the intention to adopt the budget; and
STAFF REPORT
WHEREAS public notice has been given in accordance with the Municipal
By-Law; and
WHEREAS Council through the review of the draft budget has directed that
the Municipal portion of the 2014 tax rate be 1.16% more than the 2013
Municipal portion of the tax rate; and
THAT the transfer to reserves for fire vehicles and equipment be reduced
by $50,000 from $210,000 to $160,000; and
FURTHER THAT the 2014 capital budget include the construction of a
basketball/ball hockey court in Ilderton Optimist Park to be funded 50%
community donations and 50% Reserve Funds; and
FURTHER THAT the 2014 Budget of Revenue and Expenditures, as
prepared and amended by the Director of Corporate Services and reviewed
in draft form by Council and appropriate notice given, be hereby adopted,
as amended, as follows:
Expenditures
Revenue
Taxes
$31,894,221
$19,630,148
$12,264,073
AND FURTHER THAT the Director of Corporate Services be directed to
prepare the bylaw for the setting of the tax rates at such time as the upper
tier and education rates are formally received.
Respectfully Submitted:
Reviewed By:
Greg Watterton
Director of Corporate Services
Michelle Smibert
CAO
STAFF REPORT
MUNICIPALITY OF
MIDDLESEX CENTRE
To:
Council
For:
March 5/14
Corporate Services Department
Submitted by:
Greg Watterton
Date:
February 18/14
For: 
Information
Action
Other
Number:



CS006/14
Subject:
Middlesex Centre Archives
PURPOSE:
To make recommendation to Council regarding the support of the Middlesex Centre Archives
Committee initiative.
DETAILS:
As Council is aware a Middlesex Centre Archives Committee has been established and is
currently compiling historical records from the Municipality in the former Delaware Township
offices.
The Committee wishes to accept donations in support of the initiative and in return issue
receipts for tax purposes. However, since they are not a registered charity or non-profit they are
not eligible to issue valid, tax deductible receipts.
Middlesex Centre has the ability to issue receipts for tax purposes for recognized projects in the
Municipality. A resolution is required approving the initiative as a recognized project of
Middlesex Centre, supported by Council.
The Committee has indicated that they will administer the donations received and provide a
listing to staff in order that the receipts for tax purposes be issued.
RECOMMENDATION:
THAT the Council of the Municipality of Middlesex Centre recognizes and approves the
collection of historical records by the Middlesex Centre Archive Committee as a project
supported by the Municipality; and
FURTHER THAT Council authorizes that receipts for tax deduction purposes be issued for any
donations received by the Committee of $50 or more.
Respectfully Submitted:
Reviewed By:
Greg Watterton
Director of Corporate Services
Michelle Smibert
CAO
MUNICIPALITY OF
MIDDLESEX CENTRE
To:
Council
For:
March 5/14
Administration
Submitted by:
Stephanie
TroyerBoyd
Date: Feb. 25/14
For:
Information
Action
Other



Number:
C-2014-004
SUBJECT: Compliance Audit Committee Appointments
PURPOSE
To provide establish a Compliance Audit Committee in accordance with Section 81.1 of The Municipal
Elections Act and to appoint members to the Compliance Audit Committee.
BACKGROUND
Section 81 and section 81.2 of Municipal Elections Act, 1996 (MEA), pertaining to compliance audit
applications, requires all municipalities and local boards to establish compliance audit committees.
The following summarizes the requirements as set out in sections 81 and 81.1 of the MEA:






mandatory appointment by all municipalities;
minimum of three, maximum of seven members;
the committee shall not include members of Council, employees or officers of the
municipality or any persons who are candidates in the election for which the committee is
established;
appointed by October 1st of election year;
serves a term concurrent with the term of office of the Council that takes office following the
next regular election; and,
Clerk has specific responsibility for the committee.
The powers and functions of a compliance audit committee are as follows:





consider a compliance audit application received by an elector and decide whether it
should be granted or rejected
if the application is granted, appoint an auditor to conduct a compliance audit
receive the auditor’s report
consider the auditor’s report and if the report concludes that the candidate appears to have
contravened a provision of the MEA relating to election campaign finances, the committee
may commence legal proceedings against the candidate for the apparent contravention
if the report indicates that there was no apparent contravention and the committee finds
that there were no reasonable grounds for the application, the council is entitled to recover
the auditor’s costs from the applicant
The Committee
The proposed terms of reference (attached) provides for a Municipal Election Compliance Audit
Committee composed of three (3) members.
STAFF REPORT
2
It is important that the Municipal Election Compliance Audit Committee members possess an in-depth
knowledge of the campaign finance rules of the MEA so that they can make independent decisions on
the merits of the applications. As the Committee will operate as a quasi-judicial committee, prior
experience on a committee, task force or tribunal would be an asset. A Committee composed of
professionals such as auditors, accountants, lawyers, academics and other individuals having a
familiarity with municipal election campaign financing rules is recommended.
Appointments to the Committee
For the 2010-2014 term, Municipal Council appointed Tim Cobban, Christene Scrimgeour and Andrew
Wright to the Municipal Elections Compliance Audit Committee. Staff is recommending that the same
three individuals be appointed to the Municipal Elections Compliance Audit Committee (MECAC)
being established for the 2014 Municipal Election. All three have agreed to sit on the committee for
this term.
All three applicants meet the membership criteria identified in the terms of reference for the MECAC,
which are as follows:
“The Committee will be composed of three (3) members, with membership drawn from
the following stakeholder groups:
(a)
(b)
(c)
(d)
(e)
accounting and audit – accountants or auditors with experience in preparing or
auditing the financial statements of municipal candidates;
academic – college or university professors with expertise in political science or
local government administration;
legal profession with experience in municipal law, municipal election law or
administrative law;
professionals who in the course of their duties are required to adhere to codes
or standards of their profession which may be enforced by disciplinary tribunals;
and
other individuals with knowledge of the campaign financing rules of the
Municipal Elections Act, 1996.
Members of Council, employees or officers of the municipality or any persons who are
candidates in the election for which the committee is established are not eligible to be
appointed to the Committee, pursuant to clause 81.1(2) of the Municipal Elections Act,
1996.
Further, an individual shall be deemed ineligible to be a member of the Committee if
they prepare the financial statements of any candidate running for office on Municipal
Council during the term for which the Committee has been established.”
In addition to the Committee Appointment By-Law, Terms of Reference for the Committee have been
drafted and are attached.
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended to Council:
THAT By-Law #2014-024 being a by-law to appoint a Compliance Audit Committee be approved.
STAFF REPORT
Submitted by:
Reviewed by:
Stephanie Troyer-Boyd
Clerk
Michelle Smibert
CAO
3
MUNICIPALITY OF MIDDLESEX CENTRE
BY-LAW NUMBER 2014-024
A BY-LAW TO APPOINT A COMPLIANCE AUDIT COMMITTEE
WHEREAS Section 81.1 of the Municipal Elections Act, 1996 requires
municipalities to appoint a Compliance Audit Committee before October 1st in an election
year to deal with matters regarding election campaign finances;
AND WHEREAS it is deemed expedient to establish and Election Compliance
Audit Committee regarding campaign finances;
THEREFORE the Council of the Municipality of Middlesex Centre enacts as
follows:
1. THAT a Committee, to be known as the Compliance Audit Committee, is
hereby established to deal with the matters provided for in Section 81 of the
2. THAT the Compliance Audit Committee shall consist of the following
individuals who will deal with each compliance audit request in accordance
with the Terms of Reference attached hereto as Schedule “A”:
Andrew Wright
Christene Scrimgeour
Tim Cobban
3. THAT the business of the Compliance Audit Committee be conducted in
accordance with the Terms of Reference set out in Schedule “A” attached
hereto, which shall form part of this By-Law.
4. AND THAT this By-Law shall come into force and take effect on the date of
passage.
READ a FIRST, SECOND and THIRD TIME and FINALLY PASSED on this 5th
day of March, 2014.
_____________________________
Mayor
_____________________________
Clerk
Schedule “A”
TERMS OF REFERENCE FOR COMPLIANCE AUDIT COMMITTEE
1.
MANDATE
The powers and functions of the Committee are set out in subsection 81 of the
Municipal Elections Act, 1996, as amended (MEA). The Committee will be
required to:
(a)
(b)
(c)
(d)
(e)
2.
review and consider a compliance audit application received by an elector
and decide whether it should be granted or rejected;
if the application is granted, appoint an auditor to conduct a compliance
audit;
receive the auditor’s report;
consider the auditor’s report and if the report concludes that the candidate
appears to have contravened a provision of the MEA relating to election
campaign finances, the Committee may commence legal proceedings
against the candidate for the apparent contravention; and,
if the report indicates that there was no apparent contravention and the
Committee finds that there were no reasonable grounds for the
application, the Council is entitled to recover the auditor’s costs from the
applicant.
COMPOSITION
The Committee will be composed of three (3) members, with membership drawn
from the following stakeholder groups:
(a)
(b)
(c)
(d)
(e)
accounting and audit – accountants or auditors with experience in
preparing or auditing the financial statements of municipal candidates;
academic – college or university professors with expertise in political
science or local government administration;
legal profession with experience in municipal law, municipal election law
or administrative law;
professionals who in the course of their duties are required to adhere to
codes or standards of their profession which may be enforced by
disciplinary tribunals; and,
Municipal Elections Act, 1996, as amended.
Members of Council, employees or officers of the municipality or any persons
who are candidates in the election for which the Committee is established are not
eligible to be appointed to the Committee, pursuant to clause 81.1(2) of the
Further, an individual shall be deemed ineligible to be a member of the
Committee if they prepare the financial statements of any candidate running for
office on Municipal Council during the term for which the Committee has been
established.
3.
TERM
The term of the Committee will be December 1, 2014 to November 30, 2018.
4.
MEETINGS
The Committee will meet as needed, with meetings to be scheduled by the Clerk
or his/her designate when a compliance audit application is received.
The City Clerk shall establish administrative practices and procedures for the
Committee and shall carry out any other duties required under this Act to
implement the Committee’s decisions.
5.
COMPENSATION
Members shall receive an honorarium of $100.00 per meeting.
6.
APPEAL PROCEDURE
a)
b)
c)
All candidates are required to file provincially prescribed financial
statements with the local municipal Clerk detailing their campaign
financing activities
An eligible elector who believes on reasonable grounds that a candidate
has contravened the Act relating to campaign finances may apply for a
compliance audit of the candidate’s election campaign finances
The application must be made in writing to the Clerk and include the
reasons for the elector’s belief that the candidate has contravened the Act
and be made within 90 days after the filing date for the financial
statements.
MUNICIPALITY OF
MIDDLESEX CENTRE
To:
For:
Council
March 5, 2014
Submitted by:
Michelle Smibert
Date: March 5, 2014
Subject:
Number:
For:
Information
Action
Other



CAO-2014/004
Page 1 of 1
Don Black – Request for Temporary Servicing
PURPOSE: To seek a Council resolution regarding Don Black’s request for temporary servicing of
his lands in Komoka-Kilworth.
BACKGROUND: Don Black along with his representative Tom Albrecht has submitted a plan of
subdivision for the lands along Glendon Drive which are adjacent to the draft plan approved
Edgewater Subdivision Lands. While the discussions are still ongoing with respect to the elements
of the plan, the applicant has asked if a temporary servicing solution would be considered by the
Municipality.
The options for the temporary servicing are shown on the attached plan. An EA for sewage
servicing has been completed and a bump up request has been filed. The EA is contemplating the
construction of a pumping station on the Edgewater lands and the trunk sewers to be installed
within the easement from the MNR. This is the ideal servicing solution for the Black lands and has
always intended to be serviced this way.
In the past, Council has denied other temporary servicing requests such as the Powell lands. The
difficulty in approving a temporary servicing solution from a policy perspective relates to the length
of the temporary timeline of the servicing and also affects the integrity of the permanent solution
that the municipality has already been involved in and also invested in.
RECOMMENDATION: That no action be taken on Don Black’s request for temporary
servicing of his lands in Komoka-Kilworth.
Michelle Smibert
STAFF REPORT
MUNICIPALITY OF
MIDDLESEX CENTRE
To:
Council
Public Works and Engineering Department
For:
March 5, 2014
Submitted by:
Maureen A. Looby
Date:
February 26, 2014,
For:
Information
Action
Other



Number:
PWE-006-14
Page 1 of 1
Subject:
Single Axle & Chassis and Attachments Tender Results
BACKGROUND
Three bids were submitted for the tender call for one new 2014 cab and chassis with combination/dump body
with snow & ice removal equipment. The results are listed below:
COMPANY NAME
MODEL
BID PRICE
(excluding HST)
Carrier Truck Centres
International
$224,240.20
Freightliner
$227,907.73
Western Star
$235,687.73
Team Truck Centres
Gerry’s Truck Centres Ltd
No Bid
DISCUSSION
The budget amount for the capital purchase is $210,000.00. The low tender from Carrier Truck Centres is
recommended for the cab and chassis with combination/dump body with snow & ice removal equipment.
The reason for the tender price increase was due to the specification for an aluminum dump body. The
aluminum modification was specified to decrease vehicle weight and increase carrying capacity for winter
operations and prevent salt deterioration.
RECOMMENDATION
THAT, the Public Works and Engineering Department capital budget be amended to $224,500.00 (excluding
HST), and;
FURTHER THAT, Council approves the Carrier Truck Centres tender for the purchase of one cab and chassis
with combination/dump body with snow & ice removal equipment with the total price of $224,500.00 (excluding
HST).
Prepared by:
Recommended by:
Reviewed by:
Original Signed by
Mauro Castrilli, C.E.T.
Transportation Coordinator
Original Signed by
Maureen A. Looby, M.Eng., P.Eng.
Director, Public Works & Engineering
Michelle Smibert, M.P.A., B.A., CMO
STAFF REPORT
MUNICIPALITY OF
MIDDLESEX CENTRE
To:
Council
For:
March 5, 2014
Public Works and Engineering Department
Submitted by:
Maureen A. Looby
Date:
February 25, 2014
For:
Information
Action
Other
Number:
PWE-007/13



Page 1 of 2
Subject:
Replacement of Culvert C-511 - Consultant Selection
PURPOSE
To present the results of the Request For Proposals for professional engineering services for the Culvert C-511
Replacement project and obtain selection approval.
BACKGROUND
The culvert is located on Charlton Drive approximately 0.8km east of Bear Creek Road and crosses over
Lenders Drain.
The 2011 Structures Inspection and Assessment Report identified medium to severe corrosion at the bottom of
the culvert barrels and severe undermining of the southwest culvert wall. The Report recommended a culvert
replacement for 2014.
ANALYSIS
Three qualified engineering consultants were requested to submit proposals to undertake the Culvert C-511
Replacement project.
The terms of reference asked for a detailed work plan with projected scheduling being aligned with the various
elements of the project. Each proposal was evaluated using a common set of criteria associated with the
Company and project team’s qualifications and experience, demonstrated project management and project
understanding and approach. The evaluation was value driven and so price was a consideration but was not the
dominant factor.
Two proposals were received. Some comments regarding the main notable features of the proposals are
provided as follows –
Dillon – most comprehensive workplan, covered all elements, well experienced professionals
B.M. Ross – concise, specific workplan, covered proposal elements, sufficiently experienced but smaller team
In addition to these criteria the schedule and price were also evaluated and they are provided below.
Proposed Schedule - 2014
Cost (excluding HST)
Dillon Consulting Limited
April – November
$110,285
B. M. Ross and Associates Limited
March – September
$40,000
Spriet Associates
No Submission
STAFF REPORT
The Dillon proposal had higher price components in the areas of environmental investigation, design and
contract administration.
On the basis of the proposal submissions and evaluations it was concluded that B. M. Ross and Associates
Limited provided sufficient information to support their capability to undertake this project.
FINANCIAL IMPACT
The 2014 budget figure for the design, tender and construction of Culvert C- 511 is $580,000. The source of
financing has been identified as the Gas Tax Reserve Fund.
RECOMMENDATION
THAT the engineering consultant firm of B. M. Ross and Associates Limited be selected to undertake the
Culvert C- 511 Replacement project in accordance with their 2014 proposal at a price of $40,000; and
FURTHER THAT staff be authorized to execute the necessary documents.
Prepared and Recommended by:
Reviewed by:
Original Signed by
Maureen A. Looby, M.Eng., P.Eng.
Director, Public Works & Engineering
Michelle Smibert, M.P.A., B.A., CMO
MUNICIPALITY OF
MIDDLESEX CENTRE
To:
For:
Council
March 5, 2014
Submitted by:
Michelle Smibert
Date: March 5, 2014
Subject:
Number:
For:
Information
Action
Other



CAO-2014/006
Page 1 of 1
Request for Assistance – Drainage Superintendent Services
PURPOSE: To consider a request from Adelaide Metcalfe to assist with Drainage Superintendent
Services.
BACKGROUND: Adelaide Metcalfe’s Drainage Superintendent is retiring effective March 1st and
the CAO emailed all of the lower tiers to see if anyone had some capacity to assist with Drainage
Superintendent services. We had indicated that we would be open to discussions and following a
meeting with the CAO, and in consultation with our Drainage Superintendent, we determined that
we could assist.
We talked about an evaluation process so that we can ensure this arrangement works for
Middlesex Centre and also Adelaide Metcalfe. It is envisioned that our current Superintendent
would be working for Adelaide Metcalfe one day per week. Both municipalities have supports in
place to assist with the administration such as report writing, drainage billing and reception
services. We had indicated that we would use a billing system to collect the Superintendents
wages, benefits and mileage.
If the staff recommendation is approved then staff will work with Adelaide Metcalfe to work on an
agreement to cover off the fee, work schedule and an evaluation process/plan.
RECOMMENDATION: That staff be authorized to enter into discussions with Adelaide
Metcalfe for an agreement to provide Drainage Superintendent Services.
Michelle Smibert
MUNICIPALITY OF MIDDLESEX CENTRE
BY-LAW NUMBER 2014-024
A BY-LAW TO APPOINT A COMPLIANCE AUDIT COMMITTEE
WHEREAS Section 81.1 of the Municipal Elections Act, 1996 requires
municipalities to appoint a Compliance Audit Committee before October 1st in an election
year to deal with matters regarding election campaign finances;
AND WHEREAS it is deemed expedient to establish and Election Compliance
Audit Committee regarding campaign finances;
THEREFORE the Council of the Municipality of Middlesex Centre enacts as
follows:
1. THAT a Committee, to be known as the Compliance Audit Committee, is
hereby established to deal with the matters provided for in Section 81 of the
2. THAT the Compliance Audit Committee shall consist of the following
individuals who will deal with each compliance audit request in accordance
with the Terms of Reference attached hereto as Schedule “A”:
Andrew Wright
Christene Scrimgeour
Tim Cobban
3. THAT the business of the Compliance Audit Committee be conducted in
accordance with the Terms of Reference set out in Schedule “A” attached
hereto, which shall form part of this By-Law.
4. AND THAT this By-Law shall come into force and take effect on the date of
passage.
READ a FIRST, SECOND and THIRD TIME and FINALLY PASSED on this 5th
day of March, 2014.
_____________________________
Mayor
_____________________________
Clerk
Schedule “A”
TERMS OF REFERENCE FOR COMPLIANCE AUDIT COMMITTEE
1.
MANDATE
The powers and functions of the Committee are set out in subsection 81 of the
Municipal Elections Act, 1996, as amended (MEA). The Committee will be
required to:
(a)
(b)
(c)
(d)
(e)
2.
review and consider a compliance audit application received by an elector
and decide whether it should be granted or rejected;
if the application is granted, appoint an auditor to conduct a compliance
audit;
receive the auditor’s report;
consider the auditor’s report and if the report concludes that the candidate
appears to have contravened a provision of the MEA relating to election
campaign finances, the Committee may commence legal proceedings
against the candidate for the apparent contravention; and,
if the report indicates that there was no apparent contravention and the
Committee finds that there were no reasonable grounds for the
application, the Council is entitled to recover the auditor’s costs from the
applicant.
COMPOSITION
The Committee will be composed of three (3) members, with membership drawn
from the following stakeholder groups:
(a)
(b)
(c)
(d)
(e)
accounting and audit – accountants or auditors with experience in
preparing or auditing the financial statements of municipal candidates;
academic – college or university professors with expertise in political
science or local government administration;
legal profession with experience in municipal law, municipal election law
or administrative law;
professionals who in the course of their duties are required to adhere to
codes or standards of their profession which may be enforced by
disciplinary tribunals; and,
Members of Council, employees or officers of the municipality or any persons
who are candidates in the election for which the Committee is established are not
eligible to be appointed to the Committee, pursuant to clause 81.1(2) of the
Further, an individual shall be deemed ineligible to be a member of the
Committee if they prepare the financial statements of any candidate running for
office on Municipal Council during the term for which the Committee has been
established.
3.
TERM
The term of the Committee will be December 1, 2014 to November 30, 2018.
4.
MEETINGS
The Committee will meet as needed, with meetings to be scheduled by the Clerk
or his/her designate when a compliance audit application is received.
The City Clerk shall establish administrative practices and procedures for the
Committee and shall carry out any other duties required under this Act to
implement the Committee’s decisions.
5.
COMPENSATION
Members shall receive an honorarium of $100.00 per meeting.
6.
APPEAL PROCEDURE
a)
b)
c)
All candidates are required to file provincially prescribed financial
statements with the local municipal Clerk detailing their campaign
financing activities
An eligible elector who believes on reasonable grounds that a candidate
has contravened the Act relating to campaign finances may apply for a
compliance audit of the candidate’s election campaign finances
The application must be made in writing to the Clerk and include the
reasons for the elector’s belief that the candidate has contravened the Act
and be made within 90 days after the filing date for the financial
statements.
105 Elgin St. West
Arnprior, ON K7S 0A8
tel
fax
613 623 4231
613 623 8091
arnprior@arnprior.ca
www.arnprior.ca
February 11, 2014
Kathleen Wynne, Premier
Legislative Building
Queen’s Park
Toronto, ON M7A 1A1
Dear Premier Wynne,
Please be advised that Council of the Corporation of the Town of Arnprior, at their
meeting held on February 10, 2014, adopted Resolution No. 059-14, as follows:
“WHEREAS the Council of the Corporation of the Town of Arnprior
recognizes that increased electricity rates are challenging for the
economic competitiveness of the Town of Arnprior and its residents;
AND WHEREAS the County of Renfrew passed a resolution on November
27, 2013 encouraging the Government of Ontario to ensure that our
electricity rates both in the short and long-term, allow our businesses to
remain competitive in a global environment and ensure that the vulnerable
residents of our communities are not overburdened by ever-increasing
electricity rates;
AND WHEREAS the Council of the Corporation of the Town of Arnprior
supports the County of Renfrew in its attempt to encourage the
Government of Ontario to not approve any further rate increases for
electricity;
AND WHEREAS it is estimated that electricity costs will increase by
approximately 50% within the next five years;
AND WHEREAS an increase in electricity rates by the Ontario Energy
Board will exacerbate an existing problem for industry and consumers with
low or fixed incomes in Arnprior;
THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT the Town of Arnprior urges in the
strongest possible way that the Government of Ontario ensures that
electricity rates both in the short and long-term, allow our businesses to
remain competitive in a global environment and ensure that the vulnerable
residents of our communities are not overburdened by ever-increasing
electricity rates;
AND FURTHER BE IT RESOLVED THAT this resolution be sent to the
Premier of Ontario, the Minister of Energy and Infrastructure, the Ontario
Energy Board, the Ontario Power Authority, Associations of Municipalities
(AMO), MPP John Yakabuski, Ontario Municipalities and Local
Municipalities in Renfrew County for support.
AND FURTHER BE IT RESOLVED THAT the Town of Arnprior urges the
Ontario Energy Board in the strongest possible way not to approve any
further rate increases for electricity.”
Your assistance in ensuring our businesses stay competitive and our residents
are not overburdened by ever-increasing electricity rates is greatly appreciated.
Respectfully,
Maureen Spratt, Clerk
c
Minister of Energy and Infrastructure
Ontario Energy Board
Ontario Power Authority
AMO
John Yakabuski, MPP Renfrew-Nipissing-Pembroke
Ontario Municipalities (by email)
Renfrew County Municipalities (by email)
January 2014 Bluewater Recycling Association Meeting Highlights
Blue Box Update
AMO and the City of Toronto are now jointly in arbitration with Stewardship Ontario on
the Blue Box funding quantum for 2012 Blue Box operations to be paid out in 2014. The
actual arbitration process starts in April and they are currently in preparation mode. The
AMO Board was also advised that the Honourable Jim Bradley, Minister of the
Environment, has convened a municipal-producer table to find common ground on Bill
91, the Waste Reduction Act. Key AMO executive and board members involved in the
waste diversion file are the municipal representatives. Further information on both of
these items will be provided to members as it becomes available.
Unwrapping the True Costs of Packaging
Excessive packaging on products is more than just frustrating. It is also taking a toll on
the environment and driving up the costs of garbage and recycling.
Today, Blue Boxes and garbage bins brim with packaging made of mixed materials – like
new plastics, laminated paper and resealable pouches – some of which cannot be recycled
and end up in landfill. What can be recycled is more difficult and costly to manage than
ever before.
Over the past five years, the amount of plastic recycled by Ontario municipalities has
increased by more than 10,000 tonnes, increasing Blue Box costs by more than $13
million.
Every year, Ontario residents recycle about 900,000 tonnes of waste through municipal
programs – at an annual gross cost of about $326 million.
Currently, property taxes pay for about 50 per cent of the cost, with industry paying the
balance. Municipal property taxes pay 100 per cent of garbage collection and disposal
costs.
AMO believes that the best way to encourage greener packaging would be to make
individual producers more responsible for the costs of disposing or recycling their
packaging.
This will give businesses an incentive to reduce waste and create new packaging that is
easier and less costly to recycle. It will better protect our environment and help to control
spiraling costs.
Ontario’s proposed Waste Reduction Act offers a new approach
Bill 91, the Waste Reduction Act would lift the 50 per cent cap on industry funding for
the Blue Box program and create incentives for business to reduce waste and improve
packaging and consumer choice. The bill also targets greater industrial and commercial
recycling.
The bill received second reading in September, but has stalled in the legislature.
Diesel Rack Prices Doubled Since 2009
Wholesale Diesel Price (before taxes)
100.0
90.0
¢/l
80.0
70.0
60.0
50.0
40.0
The graph represents the average diesel rack prices (cost per litre before tax) in Ontario.
The average daily rack price for diesel broke the three digit mark recently, coming in at
102.6 cents per litre. We haven’t seen diesel prices break the 100-cent per litre mark
since mid-2008.
The Canadian average is calculated from the averages of the following locations:
Charlottetown, Saint John, Halifax, Quebec City, Montreal, Maitland, Ottawa, Toronto,
Hamilton, London, Sarnia, Nanticoke, Thunder Bay, Sault Ste. Marie, Winnipeg, Regina,
Calgary, Edmonton, Kamloops, Vancouver and Nanaimo.
The trend continued across the province of Ontario, the association stated, where the
average weekly rack price was 101.1 cents per litre before tax.
OTA calculates the average cost by taking the rack price of diesel in nine locations
(Maitland, Ottawa, Toronto, Hamilton, London, Sarnia, Nanticoke, Thunder Bay, and
Sault Ste. Marie) to provide an average for the province. On the first data point (first
week of April 2009), the average diesel rack price for these locations was 53.59 cents per
litre. It has nearly doubled since then.
While some individual locations in Ontario, such as Thunder Bay, surpassed the 100cents per litre mark previously, this is the first time the average of these nine locations
has broken this mark since 2008.
’Management of Excess Soil - A Guide for Best Management Practices
The Ministry of the Environment has released the final version of ’Management of
Excess Soil - A Guide for Best Management Practices‘. It is available on the
Environmental Bill of Rights Registry and the ministry‘s website. You can access the
guide at:
http://www.ene.gov.on.ca/environment/en/resources/STDPROD110253.html
While not enforceable like a regulation, the document provides guidance on many aspects
of managing soil for site owners, developers and contractors and promotes a consistent
approach to managing excess soil across the province. The document outlines the
ministry‘s expectations for the beneficial management of excess in a manner that
promotes sustainability and protects the natural environment.
In addition to finalizing the guide, the Ministry will also be undertaking a review of the
need for additional soil management policy which will consider the best management
practices and what the Ministry heard through engagement with the public, stakeholders
and other Ministries.
Ontario Organic Waste Management Report (2013-2033)
The Ontario Waste Management Association (OWMA) and the Regional Public Works
Commissioners (RPWCO) are pleased to release the Ontario Organic Waste Management
Report (2013-2033), which was completed by 2cg Inc. as a joint project by the two
organizations.
The Report was commissioned to provide the basis for the development of an organic
waste diversion strategy for the province of Ontario. It also provides relevant
information for both the public and private sectors that will allow them to plan for the
future diversion and the processing of organic wastes collected from residential and IC&I
sectors.
The Report deals with leaf and yard wastes, residential source separated organics and
industrial, commercial and institutional organic waste streams. It also incorporates the
various technological approaches to managing organics in the province.
This report consists of the following sections:
•
An overview of the Current Situation;
•
An overview of Future Generation and Processing Capacity;
•
Jurisdictional Scan; and
•
Options for the development of a Strategy
The views and opinions related in the report do not necessarily reflect those of the
OWMA and the RPWCO. Over the next several months, the two organizations will be
working together to develop recommendations for an Organics Diversion Strategy for
Ontario. This work will rely heavily on the work completed in this Report but additional
sources will also be utilized.
OWMA’s Policy Position on Disposal Levy
The OWMA supports the use of disposal levies if properly designed and implemented, as
a means of changing behavior; reducing waste generation; promoting reuse and
increasing waste diversion in Ontario.
However, the policy will only work if levies are set at appropriate sufficient level to
encourage diversion; enforcement is diligent; and haulers or generators do not simply
export waste to disposal facilities outside of Ontario. It is also important that funds raised
by this levy are not injected back into the waste sector to unbalance or distort the
marketplace and are not used to support specific technologies or individual projects.
The economic realities and regulatory framework of waste disposal in Ontario necessitate
creative and informed thinking relative to disposal levies. A disposal levy must apply in
a manner that captures waste destined for export and closes any option to redirect
disposal from Ontario landfills to other jurisdictions. If properly designed, phased and
implemented, disposal levies could be an effective instrument to encourage Ontariobased recycling capacity and economic activity.
The Facts About The Ontario Deposit Return Program
“The Beer Store’s award winning bottle-return program, which includes the Ontario
Deposit Return Program (ODRP) for LCBO wine and spirit bottles, is the most successful
container recycling program in North America. 92 per cent of the 2.3 billion alcohol
containers sold in Ontario each year are recovered, reused and recycled. By recycling
more than half of what the Blue Box recycles the Beer Store deposit system is central to
Ontario’s waste reduction effort.
The ODRP handling fee paid to the Beer Store covers the cost of collecting, transporting
and recycling more than 300 million LCBO bottles every year and is less than half the
similar fee charged in British Columbia. The Beer Store was selected by the Ontario
government to operate ODRP because it would have cost taxpayers significantly more to
renovate more than 640 LCBO stores to create a parallel system. Piggy backing the
recovery of LCBO containers on the existing Beer Store system of beer container
recovery was the most cost effective solution. By recycling LCBO containers through
the Beer Store municipal taxpayers now avoid $40 million in waste management costs
annually which is far greater than program’s total operating cost. And the program works.
It has more than doubled its key performance target of recycling an additional 25,000
tonnes of glass annually.”
Changes to OTS Incentives
WDO continues to assess the potential impacts of OTS’s proposed changes to incentives.
These changes include reducing the manufacturing and processor incentives, and moving
incentive payments made to collectors and haulers from OTS to processors. We have
informed OTS that the proposed changes to the payment structure for the collection and
transportation incentives would require changes to the Program Plan, which would need
prior approval by WDO and the Minister.
EPR debate shifts to batteries in Ontario
A proposal to alter the battery recycling system in Ontario — and hand it over to
producers — has become a lightning rod for debate in Ontario.
A recent editorial in the Toronto Star accused Waste Diversion Ontario (WDO), the
group responsible for reviewing and approving extended producer responsibility (EPR)
proposals, of jeopardizing the private battery recycling sector in Ontario by siding with a
producer-backed proposal submitted in September by Call2Recycle. Call2Recycle
represents a host of single-use battery makers, including Duracell and Energizer, and was
recently tapped to oversee a national battery recycling campaign for federal government
agencies and departments throughout Canada.
The problem with the group's proposal to take over Ontario's battery recycling problem,
according to the fiery editorial, is it will force private battery recyclers out of the business
by contracting with an unnamed American battery smelter in Pennsylvania.
The criticisms come just weeks after some vocal lawmakers in the province raised
complaints over a comprehensive EPR proposal in Ontario, which was dubbed a "job
killer."
Responding to the recent battery grievances, WDO said it is obligated to review all
proposals, including the one presented by Call2Recycle.
WDO currently oversees industry-run EPR programs in Ontario for packaging and paper,
electronics, hazardous materials and tires.
Ice River Springs launches the first 100% recycled plastic water cooler bottle
Ice River Springs is launching an innovative new 15 litre bottle for water coolers. The
bottle is made of 100% recycled plastic and is green.
The new bottles have been launched because of Ice River Springs’ pioneering initiatives
to reduce energy use and recycle plastics in a closed loop system. Ice River Springs is the
only beverage company in North America to operate a bottle recycling operation that
takes in bottles from municipal recycling programs, sorts, purifies and then produces
certified food-grade plastic ready for reuse.
The bottles are green because it enables Ice River to reclaim plastic from green bottles,
that might otherwise go to waste. Consumers are supportive. In a research study of 849
bottled water users 82% said a bottle made of 100% recycled material giving them a
green tint would make the brand more appealing.
The product will be available in major retail chains starting in Western Canada under the
Arrowhead brand name.
Green PET bottles, which are BPA free, are an alternative to returnable polycarbonate
bottles. BPA is an ingredient that has been banned in baby feeding bottles.
Ice River Springs is a family owned water bottling company based in Shelburne, Ontario
that began operations in 1995. It has grown to be one of the largest bottlers of water in
North America with ten bottling plants. It runs a plastic recycling operation enabling it to
produce 100% recycled PET bottles in a closed loop system.
Paper mills report Operation Green Fence benefits
China Customs cites improved yields at Chinese paper mills as result of improved
oversight of incoming scrap shipments.
If recyclers in North America look back at the dollars-and-cents impact of Operation
Green Fence in 2013 and see red ink, it may or may not comfort them to read about
positive bottom-line effects being touted by the General Administration of Customs of
the People’s Republic of China (China Customs), one of the agencies that oversees
Operation Green Fence.A mid-January 2014 news release from China Customs refers to a
study conducted by a regional papermaking association claiming improved pulping yields
thanks to Operation Green Fence.“According to [an] estimation made by the Fuyang
Paper Association, papermaking companies in Fuyang earned $6.60 to $10.75 more on
each ton of imported waste paper due to the lower moisture content and less foreign
substances [in bales.].”The news release, posted here, continues, “In this way, Green
Fence has brought in $11.5 million more for the local papermaking industry (which
imported 1.5 million tons of waste paper) for the first 10 months of 2013, according to
the association.”The China Customs news release connects the positive financial news to
its inspection regimen at Chinese ports. “There are less plastic films and pop cans hidden
in the waste paper now and the moisture content is lower,” it quotes an inspector at the
Fuyang Customs Office as saying as he looked at inbound bales in December 2013.“The
foreign suppliers realize now we will say ‘no’ to those waste paper [bales] whose
classification is confusing, and we will no longer accept those that contain foreign
substances,” the inspector, surnamed Wang, adds.China Customs says the Hangzhou
Customs District received some 6.5 million tons of scrap materials from February to
November 2013 and “seized at the scene 3,508 tons of those whose import were
prohibited by the state. The antismuggling bureau has filed for investigation 11 solid
waste smuggling cases involving a value of more than $81 million.”
Inconvenient Truths Regarding Waste and Recyclables Collection – and What We
Are Doing About Them
Over the last 30 years, the waste collection industry has been transformed into the waste
and recyclables collection industry.
Thirty years ago, waste generally was collected with manual collection trucks – once or
twice a week – at the curb or, in some cases, at the back door. Bulky waste was collected
either on a regular or as needed basis.
The diversion of residential recyclables and organics has grown from negligible levels in
the 1970s to rates of 60 percent or more today for some communities. This has been
possible only through the delivery of two additional curbside collection services for the
separate collection of 1) recyclables and 2) yard wastes and other organics. Sometimes
overlooked is that the achievement of today's high residential diversion rates has been
possible only by the provision of these additional collection services by collection system
managers.
An inconvenient truth associated with these additional collection services is that they
have added air pollutants to the local air shed. In a recent project conducted by SWANA's
Applied Research Foundation, an attempt was made to quantify the air pollution impacts
associated with the provision of separate curbside collection services for recyclables and
organics. In this project, researchers estimated that the quantities of air pollutants emitted
from 41 collection vehicles servicing 163,500 single-family households range from 1,627
pounds of particulates to 5.8 million pounds of carbon dioxide per year. These air
pollution impacts were based on the use of diesel fuel by these collection trucks (which
typically get 2.5-3.0 miles per gallon).
As we know, however, a quiet revolution is occurring in the waste and recyclables
collection industry through the conversion of fleets to compressed natural gas (CNG)
fuel. In addition to fuel cost savings, the reduction in air pollution through conversion to
CNG is substantial. As an industry, we need to document and communicate this benefit.
Another inconvenient truth associated with the curbside collection of recyclables and
yard waste is the increase in truck accident risks in the communities where these services
are provided. The ARF research project mentioned previously also attempted to quantify
these risks. The project concluded that the additional curbside collection services required
to collect source-separated organics on a weekly basis and recyclables every other week
from 163,500 single family homes would require that these single-unit trucks travel an
extra 1.575 million miles on community roads every year. Based on these parameters,
additional truck accident risks of 0.18 accidents per year would be expected in the local
community. As collection system managers, we must do everything in our power to
minimize these risks through effective safety programs.
Alberta waste technology projects get $32-million boost
Six innovative Alberta waste management and waste-to-energy projects have received
nearly $31.8-million in funding from an independent organization that battles greenhouse
gas emissions in the oil-rich province.
The independent organization, Alberta-based Climate Change and Emissions
Management Corporation (CCEMC), is funded through payments to an emissions fund
that collects cash for each tonne that exceeds a company’s emissions limits.
The most elaborate and expensive project of the six is the $30.7-million Edmonton Waste
Management Centre, which received $10 million in CCEMC funding for its installation
of high solids anaerobic digestion technology.
The facility will utilize micro-organisms to convert 40,000 tonnes per year of organic
solid waste into biogas. Cumulative CO2 emissions will reduce 198,570 tonnes by 2020.
“By using the biogas to generate electricity and heat, we cancel out the production of the
same amount of power from fossil fuel sources and their respective emissions,” said
Christian Felske, technical specialist at Waste Management Services, in a statement
within the CCEMC’s annual report for 2012-2013.
The other Alberta waste management project to receive $10 million in funding from
CCEMC is the Drayton Valley Aspen Integrated Resource Recovery (AIRR) Facility.
This $22-million project aims to take the Drayton area’s residual municipal waste and
convert it into solid fuel pellets – a process that hasn’t been seen in our country. The fuel
pellets will then be used as an alternative fuel source to fire Alberta coal plants.
The University of Calgary is getting $1.3 million towards its optimal biocell technology
project worth $3.2 million. The decomposition of organic biomass in municipal solid
waste landfills produces a potent biogas that results in significant amounts of methane
and carbon dioxide emissions. But this project’s biogas can be used to create clean,
renewable power. The University is developing a project that will use an optimal biocell
to maximize biogas production and allow for the capture and use of the biogas to
generate energy. It leaves only 30 per cent of the original mass for disposal.
A 100-year old potato farm is going high tech with its CCEMC injection of nearly $3.6
million towards its waste-to-energy aspiration. GrowTEC will turn organic waste –
including the farm’s cull potatoes – into renewable energy to power the farm and feed
energy back into the grid.
Lastly, CCEMC is contributing nearly $2 million to Devon Canada’s $5.9-million
Organic Rankine Cycle Waste Heat Recovery Project. The project works by using a
turbine to harness low-grade waste heat from the glycol-cooling process in oil
production. The turbine will use the waste heat to generate electricity for an estimated
five to 10 per cent of the facility’s power requirements, offsetting the requirement for
grid electricity and reducing greenhouse gas emissions.
Diesel Price (Retail incl. Tax)
150.0
140.0
130.0
127.6
133.1
132.0 130.2
127.4
124.2
122.8
124.9
136.3
127.4
118.1 117.0 117.2
120.0
¢/l
110.0
100.0
90.0
80.0
Dec-09
Nov-09
Oct-09
Sep-09
Aug-09
Jul-09
Jun-09
May-09
Apr-09
Mar-09
Jan-09
Dec-08
60.0
Feb-09
70.0
Diesel Price (Retail incl. Tax)
150.0
140.0
130.0
120.0
¢/l
110.0
100.0
90.0
80.0
Jan-14
Oct-13
Jul-13
Apr-13
Jan-13
Oct-12
Jul-12
Apr-12
Jan-12
Oct-11
Jul-11
Apr-11
Jan-11
Oct-10
Jul-10
Apr-10
Jan-10
Oct-09
Jul-09
Apr-09
60.0
Jan-09
70.0
0
Jan-14
105
Jan-14
Dec-13
119
Oct-13
Jul-13
106
Apr-13
Nov-13
Oct-13
103
Jan-13
Oct-12
Sep-13
Aug-13
Jul-13
102
Jul-12
20
Jun-13
100
Apr-12
40
104
Jan-12
60
105
Oct-11
Jul-11
Apr-11
May-13
Apr-13
108
Jan-11
Oct-10
Jul-10
Mar-13
119
Apr-10
Jan-10
80
107
Feb-13
100
105
Oct-09
Jul-09
$/tonne
120
Jan-13
0
Apr-09
Jan-09
$/tonne
Commodity Prices
140
112
Commodity Prices
200
180
160
140
120
100
80
60
40
20
Middlesex Centre Community Policing Committee/Lobo
Minutes from Meeting, Thursday January 16, 2014
Komoka Community Centre
Present: Jo-Ann Sybers, Constable Steve Skeaff, Pam Warzecha, Ric Hodgson, Dale Pfile, Faye
Coles, Sandra Davies, Roger Dyer, Keenan Rowcliffe, Kathryn Sharpe
Regrets: Serena Moro
1. Call To Order Ric Hodgson
2. Approval of Agenda motion to accept Jo-Ann Sybers seconded Pam Warzecha
3. Approval of Minutes (Nov 21/14)
seconded by Faye Coles
motion to accept as circulated Pam Warzecha
4. Business
5.1 Roads update: Once a report is presented it goes to someone to review; it is shelved
if they feel they do not need to continue further. Ric has questioned this policy and is
waiting to hear council’s reply. No action has been taken on this committee’s report’s
suggestions.
5.2 Al Lamont update: The clock and table are ready for the library. Wording for a plaque
was discussed. Ric will check with the library supervisor as to a date the library is available.
Ric will contact Carolyn Lamont and the mayor; Roger will contact the Lion’s Club and
Sandra will contact the Optimist Club.
5.3 The brochure update is deferred until the February or March meeting.
5.4 Community Meeting: Thursday, April 10/14 7:00pm Komoka Community Centre in the
old library room.
5. Reports
5.1 Treasurer’s Report – balance of $1227.45
5.2 Community Policing Officers Report Constable Steve Skeaff went through the stats
and gave Pam a letter to keep on file to be used for future police checks.
6. New Business - none
7. Next Meeting: Thursday, Feb 20, 2014 at 7:00
8. Adjournment
MEDIA RELEASE 2014‐02‐27 FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE “Conservation Authority Budget Approved for 2014” LTVCA Holds Annual General Meeting Chatham‐Kent ‐ The Lower Thames Valley Conservation Authority (LTVCA) held its Annual General Meeting on February 20 at the University of Guelph Ridgetown Campus. Brian King was re‐elected as Chair and John Kavelaars as Vice‐chair. The 2014 budget of $2,245,649 received approval at the meeting. The 10 member municipalities of the LTVCA include Chatham‐Kent, Dutton/Dunwich, Lakeshore, Leamington, London, Middlesex Centre, Southwest Middlesex, Southwold, Strathroy‐Caradoc and West Elgin. Each municipality appoints a Director as their representative to the Board for up to a three year term. LTVCA staff presented the 2013 Annual Report and a water management report. Emphasized were the benefits of the flood control structures and the monitoring of watershed conditions during a very wet year. Over 58,000 trees were planted, with the LTVCA providing $81,000 in grants leveraged for landowner reforestation. Recognized were the contributions made to conservation by over 800 volunteers and the $500,000 of support given by private, corporate and government grants. The objectives of the LTVCA include protecting life and property, protecting and restoring habitat, research and monitoring, providing opportunities to enjoy, learn and respect through strong partnerships with the local community. Programs include water management, municipal plan review, tree planting, land stewardship, preservation of conservation lands, education and outreach, and community relations. ‐30‐ For more information, please contact: Don Pearson General Manager 519‐354‐7310 ext.224 Don.Pearson@ltvca.ca OMERS REDUCES FUNDING DEFICIT, IMPROVES FUNDED STATUS AND STRENGTHENS BALANCE SHEET
DURING YEAR OF TRANSITION TO NEW PUBLIC MARKETS STRATEGY
$4 billion investment income earned in 2013
Toronto (February 24, 2014) – The OMERS Primary Pension Plan concluded 2013 with a $1.3
billion reduction in unfunded liability, an improvement in its funded ratio by 3% to 88%, $4 billion
in total investment income, and a stronger balance sheet and cash flows to secure its long-term
obligation to pay defined pension benefits to its 440,000 plan members.
In order to satisfy its obligations and secure the pension promise, OMERS has implemented
prudent and evidence-based investment strategies in public and private markets that target
positive absolute returns.
The total investment income of $4 billion reflected a 6.5% gross return, compared with a minimum
target of 7% gross return to match assets with liabilities over the long term. Public market equity
returns in excess of 20% were offset by a significant market valuation reduction in the fund’s
holdings of inflation-linked bonds and commodities, resulting in a 0.5% gross return from public
markets. Private market investments continued to record strong results with a 15.5% gross
return.
The total fund has produced $34.4 billion of cumulative absolute dollar income over ten years for
a 7.6% annualized gross return, and $21.7 billion over five years for an 8.4% annualized gross
return since the 2008 global credit crisis and stock market meltdown, both substantially above the
actuarial assumption for investment returns.
Public market investments, valued at $37.7 billion, or 57% of the total fund, earned $200 million
as OMERS Capital Markets completed the transition to a more diversified risk-balanced portfolio
designed to deliver more consistent investment returns than the traditional pension plan strategy
of investing 60% in equities and 40% in bonds. The five-year annualized gross return of 5.8%
produced cumulative investment income of $9.2 billion.
“The public markets portfolio put in place in 2013 is the last piece of our investment strategy to
earn more predictable and stable long-term returns,” explained Michael Nobrega, president and
chief executive officer of OMERS Administration Corporation. “We now have a long-term strategy
that balances portfolio risks to the drivers of capital market returns, namely growth and inflation.”
The structure has a portfolio that tracks the performance of market returns across a wide range of
global asset classes and geographies, balances risk to growth and inflation outcomes, uses
prudent levels of economic leverage, and is projected to achieve a 6.5% annualized net return
over the medium and long term. Commonly known as a beta portfolio, this approach does not
predict the direction of public markets.
Our evidence-based research shows, over rolling ten-year periods since 1970, that a riskbalanced portfolio has outperformed a 60/40 portfolio 75% of the time. However, in any one year,
the risk-balanced portfolio may underperform the 60/40 portfolio 41% of the time. In 2013, the
total beta portfolio lost $407 million due to a sudden and unexpected spike in interest rates in the
second quarter. As part of the prudent risk management of any beta strategy, portfolio hedges
were used in 2013 that contributed $120 million of investment income.
“It is difficult to pick a perfect time to undertake such a major portfolio restructuring, but the timing
of implementation is not critical to earning long-term returns from the beta portfolio. A balanced
beta portfolio is designed to outperform a less diversified one over time but market shocks (such
as the sudden and unexpected interest rate spike in 2013) will cause underperformance until
markets return to underlying economic fundamentals that drive investment returns,” Mr. Nobrega
said.
The new public markets strategy includes an absolute dollar return portfolio designed to generate
cash returns, known as alpha. Separate investment teams use proprietary research and skill to
exploit market opportunities by taking long and short positions in global stocks, bonds,
specialized credit products, currencies, commodities and macroeconomic trends. The alpha
portfolio contributed $487 million in cash returns to the Pension Plan. Building additional alpha
portfolios is a priority in 2014.
“We have a high conviction that this public markets strategy is the right one for a prudent pension
plan investor committed to paying retirement benefits to contributing plan members over the next
six to seven decades,” Mr. Nobrega added.
The Pension Plan’s net assets are also diversified through the successful transition into private
market investments that continued to deliver strong and consistent absolute dollar returns.
Valued at $28.0 billion, or 43% of the total fund, private market investments earned $3.8 billion in
2013. The five-year private markets annualized gross return of 11.3% produced cumulative
investment income of $12.5 billion.
Four investment teams manage private market assets realizing strong gross returns. Borealis
Infrastructure, with $9.3 billion of net investment assets, earned $1.1 billion (12.4%); Oxford
Properties, with $9.1 billion, earned $1.2 billion (14.3%); OMERS Private Equity, with $7.1 billion,
earned $1.4 billion (23.6%); and OMERS Strategic Investments, with $2.5 billion, earned $181
million (9.1%).
OMERS has built a balance sheet, with an AAA credit rating, to withstand severe market shocks,
preserve liquidity and generate increasing cash flows. Net assets grew from $60.8 billion in 2012
to $65.1 billion in 2013. OMERS collected $3.5 billion in contributions from employers and plan
members and paid out $2.9 billion in benefits to a retired population that expanded by 5,370 to
130,000 pensioners. With accrued pension benefits of $73.0 billion, the funding deficit was
reduced by $1.3 billion to $8.6 billion due to higher actuarial asset values, higher contribution
rates and lower inflation.
About OMERS
In 2013, OMERS marked 50 years of providing a stable and secure defined benefit pension plan
for Ontario workers and is now one of Canada’s largest pension funds with $65.1 billion in net
assets. OMERS provides first-class pension administration and innovative products and services
to 440,000 members. OMERS members and their employers contribute to the Plan in equal
amounts through their contributions. Nearly one in every 20 employees working in the province of
Ontario is an OMERS member. Through the OMERS Worldwide brand, our team of investment
2
professionals uses a direct drive, active management investment strategy to invest in public and
private market assets, including publicly-traded equities, fixed income, infrastructure, private
equity and real estate. For more information, please visit www.omers.com, or
www.omersworldwide.com
- 30 –
Media Contacts:
OMERS
John Pierce
416-350-6784
jpierce@omers.com
OMERS
Lori McLeod
416-369-2399
lmcleod@omers.com
www.omers.com
3
OMERS 2013 Returns OMERS Pension Plan Fact Sheet OMERS Primary Pension Plan gross rate of return over one, five and ten years 1 Year Rate of Return 5 Years Rate of Return 10 Years Rate of Return 6.5% 8.4% 7.6% Investment returns of OMERS Primary Pension Plan by Investment Entity for 2013 and 2012 Gross Returns – Year Ended December 31, 2013 Rate of Return 2012 Rate of Return OMERS Capital Markets 0.5% 7.5% OMERS Private Equity 23.6% 19.2% Borealis Infrastructure 12.4% 12.7% Oxford Properties 14.3% 16.9% OMERS Strategic Investments 9.1% ‐10.1% Total Plan 6.5% 10.0% 4
( D R AF T F E B 1 0)
THE OMERS ORGANIZATION
Established in 1962, OMERS provides defined pension benefits to local government employees
throughout Ontario. The OMERS Primary Pension Plan is a jointly sponsored, multi-employer pension
plan with approximately 1,000 employers and 440,000 plan members. Employers range from large
cities, including Toronto, to numerous local agencies with only a handful of employees. Plan members
include union and non-union municipal workers; police, firefighters and paramedics; the non-teaching
staff of school boards; and employees of children’s aid societies, transit systems and electrical utilities.
Plan members and employers contribute equally to the Plan and share equally in funding gains or
losses. With $73.0 billion of pension obligations and net assets of $64.4 billion, the Plan ended 2013
with a funding shortfall of $8.6 billion, compared with a shortfall of $9.9 billion in 2012. Subject to
investment returns, the Plan should return to surplus position between 2021 and 2025.
In 2006, Ontario legislation replaced the Ontario government as sponsor of the Plan with a statutory
corporation called the OMERS Sponsors Corporation ("SC") and continued the administrator as a
statutory corporation called OMERS Administration Corporation ("OAC"). The SC and OAC each has its
own mandate and board of directors.
OMERS Sponsors Corporation (“SC”) is responsible, among other duties, for plan design, including
setting benefit levels and contribution rates. The 14 members of the SC Board are nominated by
designated groups representing employers and Plan members.
OMERS Administration Corporation (“OAC”) is responsible, among other duties, for administration of the
Pension Plans, preparation and approval of the actuarial valuations and investment of the pension
funds. OAC is governed by a board of directors consisting of 14 members nominated equally by
sponsors representing employers and sponsors representing Plan members. As a result of the
implementation of key recommendations of the scheduled review of the OMERS Act in 2012 by Tony
Dean (who was appointed by the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing in May 2012), the SC Board
and the OAC Board worked collaboratively to appoint an independent chair for the first time in 2013 as
the 15th OAC Board member.
Delivering the Pension Promise
OAC manages the assets in the Pension Plan to deliver defined benefits to plan members when they
retire.
OAC has five core investment platforms, operating in Toronto, London and New York City, that execute
the investment strategies within the regulatory framework of a fiduciary responsible for prudently
investing the single most important asset of most Plan members. The investment strategies are
implemented under the oversight of the OAC Board and senior management, consistent with a rolling
five-year enterprise-wide strategic plan that is updated, reviewed and approved annually. The total
investment enterprise has the executive leadership, corporate culture and in-house expertise to
2
compete as a principal investor, implement robust risk and other management policies and procedures
and comply with international best standards of financial reporting and disclosure. All employees are
eligible for short-term and certain employees are eligible for long-term performance-based financial
incentives. As a principal investor, OAC is committed to directly owning and actively asset managing the
vast majority of investments.
Actuarial, government relations, pension policy and communications teams deal with plan growth,
regulatory issues, member services, public pension reform and stakeholder relations.
Implementing Prudent Pension Plan Investment Strategies
OAC began to transform the investment strategies of the Pension Plan in 2004 with the decision to
reduce public market investments from 82% of the total fund to approximately 53% over time and
increase private market investments from 18% to approximately 47%. The shift in asset mix policy
reflected the concerns of sponsors that the Pension Plan was over exposed to volatile stock markets.
An unexpected large loss of capital is the biggest threat to performance. Stock market shocks have
occurred more frequently since 2002 with declines by 10% or more on five occasions, including the 33%
meltdown due to the 2008 global credit crisis. Large stock market surprises to the upside were less
frequent. The first priority of a prudent pension plan investor is to preserve capital, recognizing that a
33% decline on $1 billion in a single year would require a 50% return to get back to $1 billion.
A second priority is to shift from a concentration of assets in Canada, which represents less than 3% of
world market capitalization. Today, OAC invests 53% of Pension Plan net assets outside Canada,
compared with less than one-third historically, with investments diversified by asset classes, economic
sectors, geographies and income streams.
A third priority is to directly own and actively manage virtually all investments. Today, OAC investment
professionals manage approximately 90% of total fund assets, substantially reducing investment costs
compared with outside fund management.
The overriding objective of these strategic priorities is to earn more reliable and consistent investment
returns to match assets with liabilities over the long term.
The investment strategies implemented at the total fund level involve:
• investing half of each new dollar in public market assets and half in private market assets to
balance volatile liquid publicly-traded securities with stable and relatively predictable illiquid
privately owned assets;
• prudent use of leverage to mitigate risk and enhance returns; and
• investing in non-traditional pension fund asset classes to earn recurring long-term returns.
Working toward this balanced approach has contributed $21.7 billion of cumulative investment to the
Plan in the five years since the 2008 global credit crisis and stock market meltdown. The 8.4% five-year
3
gross annualized return was substantially above the 6.5% net return estimated by the Plan’s
independent actuary as being necessary on an ongoing basis to eliminate the current funding deficit
and match assets and liabilities over a longer period of time. Our 10 year gross annualized return was
7.64%.
Strategies for Investing in Private Markets
Private market investments are a key contributor to OAC’s strategy to secure consistent and reliable
long-term returns. Today, 43% of the Pension Plan net assets are invested in the private markets and
managed on behalf of the OAC by four investment platforms. The large-scale private market assets that
OAC prefers are illiquid compared with stocks and bonds. OAC believes that owning these assets long
term compensates for illiquidity by delivering strong cash flows and value gains over time, and as such
these assets are a good match for the Pension Plan’s liabilities.
Borealis Infrastructure (Borealis) is the infrastructure investment arm of OMERS. Borealis identifies,
pursues and manages investments in large-scale infrastructure businesses on behalf of OMERS and
other large institutional investors and has assets under management exceeding $20 billion. The
infrastructure portfolio consists of assets that are generally protected by revenue, inflation and other
guarantees which generate reliable income that is an ideal match with the Pension Plan’s long-term
liabilities.
Recent deals include equity positions in a Czech Republic natural gas transmission
operator; a Michigan-based gas co-generation plant; expansion of Canada’s LifeLabs medical testing
clinics through a major acquisition; and four U.S. wind farms. Bruce Power, Canada’s largest nuclear
power generation facility and the Pension Plan’s largest single investment, returned to full operating
capacity in 2013 as the result of follow-on investments by Borealis and its co-investment partner.
Oxford Properties (Oxford) invests on behalf of OAC in a portfolio of high-quality income-producing
properties in world-class cities in Canada, the United States and Britain with assets under management
exceeding $24 billion. The Oxford portfolio is a reliable source of investment income. Oxford carefully
manages leasing risk within the portfolio. Currently, the properties in the portfolio are close to being
fully leased with contract terms averaging eight to ten years and leases staggered to avoid a
disproportionate amount of renegotiations in any given year. More than 15 major development projects
are underway in Toronto, Calgary, Vancouver, London, New York City and Washington. Recent deals
4
include a joint venture to develop London’s upscale St. James Market district; co-development of a
major office property in London’s financial district; acquisition of a prestigious shopping plaza in
London; development of a major bank tower in downtown Toronto; and co-development of 12 million
square feet of multi-use space in New York’s Manhattan.
OMERS Private Equity (OPE) focuses on acquiring, on behalf of OAC, majority ownership of private
companies in North America and Europe. Today it has $7 billion of assets under management. Recent
investments include UK-based VUE Entertainment, one of the largest cinema operators in the world;
Civica Group, also headquartered in the U.K., a leading provider of systems and business process
services software for the public sector; and Caliber Collision Centers, a U.S.-based leader in providing
auto collision services. The investments are expected to be owned for 4 to 7 years and this year
completed the exit of three companies which resulted in a combined annual compound return in excess
of 40 per cent and over four times the amount of the capital invested.
OMERS Strategic Investments (OSI) has assets under management of $3 billion, consisting of a Calgarybased oil and gas production company that produced the largest portion of investment income in the
OSI 2013 portfolio as natural gas prices began to recover; a U.S.-based global airport management
company; and a Canadian technology venture capital firm. OSI also forms relations with like-minded
institutional investors around the world to invest with Borealis in large-scale infrastructure assets.
Assets under manarement are determined as described in our Annual Report.
Strategies for Investing in Public Markets
Restructuring the public markets portfolio to earn more consistent long-term returns is the final piece of
the total fund investment strategy put in place by OMERS Capital Markets (OCM) in 2013.
Like most pension plans, OCM historically invested 60% in equities and 40% in bonds. While a 60/40
portfolio appears diversified in allocating capital, it actually has 95% of its risk allocated to equities. As
a result, the 60/40 portfolio does well when stock markets increase, as occurred in the 1990s and
periodically since, but suffers substantial losses when stock markets fall.
5
To improve earnings power, OCM has adopted risk-balanced strategies for investing in public markets:
1.
A beta portfolio captures market returns, invests in a wide selection of market opportunities
and has less equity concentration. We use modest economic leverage to enhance returns over
time. The portfolio is rebalanced on a regular basis to maintain a target total portfolio
volatility of 10% annually.
2. An alpha portfolio uses active management strategies to find and exploit market opportunities
in any market in the world, earn absolute returns and expand overall return potential.
A significant change in our approach is that we have separated the management of the beta and alpha
portfolios under different teams, breaking with our previous practice of the same team managing both
beta and alpha in an asset class.
Replacing the highly concentrated equity approach with diversified risk-balanced strategies has a higher
probability of earning the level of consistent long-term returns required to meet the pension promise.
Rebalancing the portfolio was a complex process that required OCM’s traders to size and time
transactions to be cost-effective in implementing the strategies and minimizing the impact on market
pricing. The result of the transition is a portfolio with better risk balance to public equities, nominal and
inflation-linked bonds and a broader selection of commodities.
Building the New Strategies
The following graph identifies the building blocks of the new investment model. It compares a
hypothetical 60/40 portfolio’s historical annualized return from 1970-2013, which had an average risk
free rate of return of 5.25% with a hypothetical portfolio where the risk-free rate is only 1.25%. The
column on the right in the graph sets out the expected return of the risk-balanced portfolio, the new
investment model.
6
The first building block of each illustrated portfolio return is the risk-free rate (the return on cash)
represented by the three-year Government of Canada bond yield. Currently, this return is 1.25%. To do
better than 1.25% requires structuring a policy portfolio using different asset classes to generate higher
potential returns. This is commonly known as a beta portfolio. The 60/40 portfolio has a long-term
average historical beta return of 3.7%. This is the second building block in the chart. Investors
generally expect a positive return from beta over the business cycle. The third block is the portfolio’s
alpha, the additional return earned by skilled investors.
The 5.45% current expected return from a 60/40 portfolio is substantially lower than the 9.45%
historical average return realized since 1970 and is short of the 7.0% gross return (6.5% net) required
to meet OMERS pension promise. OCM’s risk-balanced portfolio is designed to do better than 5.45% by
diversifying beta investments across the full universe of markets, balancing risk across economic
scenarios using prudent levels of economic leverage, and implementing alpha strategies that further
diversify risk and enhance returns. The beta management team is tasked with generating a 5.75% to
6.75% annual return (including the risk-free rate) over business cycles, and other investment
professionals implement alpha strategies designed to generate an additional 1.5% to 2.0% to the total
portfolio return.
We have implemented the risk parity strategy with a long term view similar to other pension plans.
The Beta Portfolio
The beta strategy balances risk to the drivers of capital market returns, namely growth and inflation.
The beta portfolio is based on the evidence that:
•
equities and commodities perform best when economic growth exceeds investor expectations;
•
commodities and inflation-linked bonds perform best when inflation rises faster than investor
expections;
•
nominal bonds and inflation-linked bonds perform best when economic growth falls short of
investor expectations; and
•
nominal bonds and equities perform best when inflation is below investor expectations.
7
The beta portfolio does not rely on forecasting the direction of markets and removes the need to predict
which of the economic scenarios will prevail when conditions discounted in markets change.
In summary, OAC believes the risk-balanced beta portfolio is better diversified across asset classes and
geographies, is less concentrated in equity risk and is expected to experience less capital loss and
faster capital recovery during and after periods of recession.
Beta Portfolio Performance versus the 60/40 Portfolio
Our research shows that the risk-balanced beta portfolio will generate superior returns over time. The
objective of our beta strategy is an efficient portfolio with a higher Sharpe Ratio, which measures return
relative to risk. A portfolio balanced to economic conditions improves the Sharpe Ratio by a factor of
almost two when compared with a 60/40 asset mix. Historically, the 60/40 portfolio has a Sharpe
Ratio of 0.37 compared with 0.63 for the risk-balanced beta portfolio. This means that every 1% of risk
in the beta portfolio earns 0.63% of return.
The chart below tracks the cumulative performance of the traditional 60/40 portfolio and an illustrative
risk-balanced beta portfolio if it had been in place since 1970. Five recessions have occurred since
1970. With the exception of the 1979-1982 recession, the hypothetical beta portfolio suffered smaller
losses and experienced faster recoveries of capital than the 60/40 portfolio. This is an important
feature of OCM’s portfolio design as it takes time and exceptional returns to recoup severe losses. The
hypothetical risk-balanced portfolio has the same level of risk (10% market volatility) as the 60/40
portfolio, but generates a higher expected return.
8
Our historical analysis shows that the beta portfolio outperformed the 60/40 portfolio over various time
periods. For example, stress testing shows that the risk-balanced beta portfolio outperformed the
60/40 portfolio 59% of the time on a rolling one-year basis, a modest improvement, or conversely it
underperformed 41% of the time. Over rolling 10-year periods, however, the benefits of the beta
strategy become significant, outperforming the 60/40 portfolio 75% of the time. The probability of the
beta portfolio outperforming the 60/40 portfolio over the long term is persuasive in enabling OAC to
underwrite the pension promise to plan members with greater confidence.
The beta portfolio is not an absolute return strategy. It will incur mark-to-market capital losses when the
economy is in recession or there is an unexpected sharp spike in interest rates. This occurred in May
and June 2013 when the Federal Reserve announced it would taper its asset purchases and the
markets reacted immediately by tightening financial conditions and increasing market interest rates.
When interest rates rise at a moderate rate and in an orderly fashion, our research shows that a betterbalanced and diversified beta portfolio will still outperform the 60/40 portfolio.
Alpha Strategies
OCM manages its alpha strategies separately from the beta portfolio. This is a departure from the
common industry practice of managing beta and alpha together in asset class portfolios with the
objective of adding value above a market-based benchmark return. The beta portfolio is a long-term
asset mix and does not predict the direction of markets. The alpha portfolio, by contrast, takes views on
the direction of investment markets and relies on the skill of internal and external investment teams to
deliver absolute returns. The alpha portfolio is uncorrelated to the beta portfolio and, because it is not
tied to market returns, adds further diversification at the total portfolio level.
Each alpha team is allocated a risk budget, not capital, and sets a specific absolute dollar return target
for the risk assumed. Taking long and short positions gives portfolio managers flexibility to find broader
investment opportunities that should improve portfolio returns.
On a risk allocation basis, the alpha strategies currently represent about 8% of public markets risk.
OCM will continue to expand alpha risk to as much as 20% of total portfolio risk with the goal of
increasing absolute returns from 50 basis points to between 150 and 250 basis points to generate
substantially higher dollar profits.
9
Risk Management
In separating alpha from beta and building the risk-balanced beta portfolio, OCM has implemented
stronger risk management practices to monitor, resolve and report daily on market risk, credit risk,
counterparty risk, liquidity risk and the prudent use of leverage. A key function of portfolio management
is to develop overlay programs to manage risk. Overlay programs adjust currency risk, concentration
risk in an asset class and other risks that might arise as a result of business cycle conditions.
10
Terry King
22860 Highbury Avenue North
RR#3
Ilderton, ON NOM 2A0
February 14, 2014
Attention: Members of Council
Municipality of Middlesex Centre
10227 Ilderton Road
Coldstream, ON NOM 2A0
Dear Council Members:
Re:
Expression of Concern Regarding Council’s Approval of Pattyn Report
The purpose of this correspondence is to express my discontent and concern with the January 8,
2014 decision of Middlesex Centre Council (“Council”) to approve the Report on the Pattyn
Drain “C” Extension 2013 (the Pattyn Report”).
“
The drainage concerns addressed were the subject of an Ontario Municipal Board (“0MB”)
Appeal which resulted in an 0MB Order dated December 14, 2012. The 0MB Order imposed
several compliance conditions and criteria which an engineering report commissioned under the
Drainage Act, must contain. The Pattyn Report adopted by Council on January 8, 2014, does not
meet or satisfy those criteria.
Unwilling to accept a report would which comply with the engineering criteria properly
determined and imposed by order of the 0MB, the Pattyns chose instead to allow the compliance
deadline provided in the 0MB Order to lapse. This opened the door for them to seek and obtain
Council’s approval of a report which the 0MB had specifically rejected. Members of Council
were well aware of the process adopted by the Pattyns to avoid compliance with the 0MB Order.
In my view, Council has made a conscious choice to enable the Pattyns to avoid and subvert a
decision of the 0MB and is thereby complicit in that process. That Members of a publicly
elected body should collaborate in this scheme is both frustrating and reprehensible.
The Pattyn Report proposes a drainage system which is to be constructed on private property.
The swales which make up the design will eventually dissipate and the drainage tile will fail, as a
result of excessive run off created by elevated residential lands and septic beds. As an adjacent
property owner, I, or a subsequent purchaser of my property, must now bear the risk of the cost
of repair, even though a more efficient and long term design, at no cost to the taxpayer, is
achievable and was provided for in the 0MB Order.
I urge Council to adopt a more proactive approach with regard to rezoning applications by
initially addressing and requiring resolution of issues such as: environmental impacts, drainage
issues, and the impact on adjacent properties. In my opinion, if these issues are more carefully
considered by Council in granting rezoning applications, appeals to the 0MB on these issues
would be less frequent; furthermore, ordinary citizens of your community would not come out of
the process frustrated at the lack of integrity and respect by its elected representatives for the
laws they are mandated to uphold.
Sincerely,
//
&&ck
N
Terry King

Agenda - the Municipality of Middlesex Centre

Transcription

Similar documents

August-September 2014 - Municipalité d`Ormstown

August-September 2013

Municipality of L`Orignal, ON, Canada

Portfolio Sites We Love

February 2012

Winter 2013 - Burlington Professional Firefighters Association, IAFF

Press Release

MUNICIPAL PLANNING COMMISSION

A Monthly e –News Letter of Dharmavaram Municipality July 2016