June 27, 2000 Agenda
f
ORDERS OF THE DA Y
FOR TUESDA y, JUNE 27 . 2000 AT 9:00 A.M.
PAGE# ORDER
1 st Meeting Called to Order
2nd Adoption of Minutes - meeting held on June 13, 2000
3rd Disclosure of Pecuniary Interest and the General Nature Thereof
4th Presenting Petitions, Presentations and Delegations
DELEGATIONS
1 9:00 AM. Employee Recognition - Retirements and Years of Service (ATTACHED)
11:00 AM. Donna Lunn and Helen LeFrank - to speak to Council on "Connect Ontario"
Letter of Intent
11 :30 AM. Mel Mekinda of Mekinda Snyder Partnership Inc. - Staff Report "Elgin Manor
Rebuild"
Motion to Move Into "Committee Of The Whole Council"
Reports of Council and Staff
Council Correspondence - see attached
i) Items for Consideration
ii) Items for Information (Consent Agenda)
OTHER BUSINESS
1) Statementsllnquiries by Members
2) Notice of Motion
3) Matters of Urgency
9th In-Camera Items - see separate agenda
10th Recess
11 th Motion to Rise and Report
12th Motion to Adopt Recommendations from the Committee Of The Whole
13th Consideration of By-Laws
14th ADJOURNMENT
5th
2-26 6th
7th
27-42
43-66
8th
PLEASE NOTE: COUNCIL PHOTOS WILL BE TAKEN AFTER LUNCH
I BBQ LUNCH WILL BE PROVIDED I
June 28
August 13·16
Strawberry Social - Elgin County Pioneer Museum 1 :30-4:30 P.M. $3.00 per person
Association of Municipalities of Ontario 2000 AMO Annual Conference - Ottawa
EMPLOYEE RECOGNITION - JUNE 27. 2000 COUNCIL MEETING
RETIREMENTS
Marilyn J. Van Daele
Suzanne J. Nemett
25 years (full-time)
21 years (part-time)
Library (Main Branch)
Library (Port Stanley Branch)
LIBRARY SERVICES
Marilyn J. Van Daele
Carol A. Smetheram
25 years (full-time)
20 years (part-time)
Library (Main Branch)
Library (Port Stanley)
HOMES
Lise D. Jones
Vera Vachon
Barbara G. Vaughan
Mary M. Young
Christine P. Symms
20 years (full-time)
20 years (full-time)
20 years (full-time)
20 years (full-time)
20 years (part-time)
Terrace Lodge
Elgin Manor
Elgin Manor
Elgin Manor
Elgin Manor
Stewart A. Burberry
Richard J. Hiddink
Kelly Carr
Patty Wilson
15 years (full-time)
15 years (full-time)
15 years (part-time)
10 years (full-time)
10 years (full-time)
10 years (part-time)
10 years (part-time)
Elgin Manor
Bobier Villa
Elgin Manor
Claire LaBonte
Linda L. McCann
Venna J. West
Elgin Manor
Elgin Manor
Terrace Lodge
Elgin Manor
FINANCIAL SERVICES
Jo-Anne Thomas
15 years (full-time)
Financial Services
1
()
m
MEKINDA SNYDER PARTNERSHIP
ARCHITECTS AND PLANNERS INCORP~A TED
Scale
I
o 25 50 100f!
00\
sv'<:'
~\\(j
Ò '(>J
,¡IO"
,:,'IS."
SO
June 27, 2000
Schematic Floor Plans
ELGIN MANOR í1l
St. Thomas, Ontario ~
-------------~~~-~---------------~
Possible Future Link ",
-------------~~~~~-------------""""', "
" "
~, ",
"., ,
", '
15 Bed Special Care Unit '
Kitchen
1 ,T1? oqlt
Service
Entry
Laundry
Administration
2,301sqtt
-
47",
Activation Family Dining R
378sqtt
495sqft
Tuck Shop!
Gift Shop
543","
Future
Community Support
"'ea
2,776"'111
15 Bed High Intensity Needs Unit
MEKINDA SNYDER PARTNERSHIP
ARCHITECTS AND PLANNERS INCORPORA TED
Multi-Purpose
Room
2,312sqft
30 Bed RHA
Worship
Centre
30 Bed RHA
10 Beds
10 Beds
""0-
erator
=~"
Electrical
~~"
Mechanical
Room
""~o
Maintenance
Storage
~ "
Maintenance
Shop
Ræ,
SID.."
=~"
~~
keeping
Storage
241sqll
-~"
00=
120sqll
S "nkJerl
eter
1SOsqll
BASEMENT FLOOR
Area Calculations
2 RHAs x 15,350sf = 30,700 sf
Special Care/H.LD. RHA = 17,830 sf
Main Fir. Central Area = 14,055 sf
Basement = 7,600 sf
Total GFA = 70,185 sf
70,185 sf / 90 beds = 780 sf/bed
These figures do not include the area for the
Community Support Space.
----.--------.------....-.. .--.---.-. .--.---------------- .-------------..-
June 27, 2000
Schematic Floor Plans
ELGIN MANOR [!]
St. Thomas, Ontario
Courtyard
10 Beds
10 Beds
10 Beds
Typical 30 Bed RHA
June 27, 2000
Schematic Floor Plans
ELGIN MANOR 131
St. Thomas, Ontario L:J
MEKINDA SNYDER PARTNERSHIP
ARCHITECTS AND PLANNERS INCORPORA TED
15 Bed Special Care Unit
7 Beds
8 Beds
7 Beds
8 Beds
15 Bed High Intensity Needs Unit
June 27,2000
Schematic Floor Plans
ELGIN MANOR I¡l
St. Thomas, Ontario L:J
MEKINDA SNYDER PARTNERSHIP
ARCHITECTS AND PLANNERS INCORPORA TED
Ministry
of
Health
Ministère
de
la Santé
® Ontario
and
Long-Term Care
London Psychiatric Hospital
PO Box 5532, Station B
850 Highbury Avenue, North
London, On! N6A 4H1
Tel: (51 g) 455-5110
Fax: (519) 455-3712
st. Thomas Psychiatric Hospitai
PO Box 2004
467 Sunset Drive
St. Thomas, Ont N5P 3V9
Tel: (519) 631-8510
Fax:(519) 631-2681
June 23, 2000
Dr. Sharon Hertwig
Medical Officer of Health
Elgin-St. Thomas Health Unit
99 Edward Street
St. Thomas, ON
Dear Dr. Hertwig:
On behalf of the STPH Water Action Committee, I am requesting an alteration to the existing boiled
water order for St. Thomas Psychiatric Hospital.
Accompanying this letter is a report from OCWA that outlines the background, chronology,
equipment changes, and recommendations for this incident. The Action Committee reviewed the
report this morning, and considers that it accurately reflects the situation. The recommendations
have been reviewed and are all supported by the committee and by the St. Thomas Psychiatric
Hospital.
My staff will be setting up a complete testing protocol based on the recommendations of the report.
We will consult with the Health Unit, and others as necessary, to ensure that we have a properly
designed protocol. This will include specific consideration for dealing with the County of Elgin
Building and the OPP building, as well as the Early Learning Centre until their relocation.
We request that we turn water on in the following areas:
· tubs and showers
· housekeeping rooms
· staff washrooms
.&-U
Rooms that cannot beJD"al.~&; or are not locked, will not have the water supply turned on at this
point. '
The date of return to service of the water tower can not be identified at this point. When we are
in a position to 'do this, the normal water safety procedures for making a major system change will
be followed. The Health Unit will be informed of the timing of this change.
The investigative report regarding the source of the water contamination will be supplied to you
separately, with times to be confirmed by OCWA.
7196-93 (95106)·
7530-4601
Dr. S. Hertwig
Page 2
June 23, 2000
If you require additional information, please contact me.
Sincerely,
i
(¡,
Robert E. nningham
Administrator
London/St. Thomas Psychiatric Hospital
REC:ld
Enclosure
cc: G, Dawson, Elgin-St. Thomas Health Unit
p, Pressey, OCWA
G. Laird, ProFac
D. $atchell, USTPH
r\
. -
- ~
Ontario Clean Water Ag~ncy
.Agence Ontarienne Des Eaux
ST. THOMAS PSYCHIATRIC HOSPITAL
Water Facilities Report
June 13, 1000
Bob Cunningham
Administrator of the St. Thomas and London
Psychiatric Hospitals
,
ST. THOMAS PSYCHIATRIC HOSPITAL
WATER SUPPLY AND DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM
Escherichia coli Incident, June, 2000
WATER SUPPLY SYSTEM
Potable water and water for the fire protection system for the St. Thomas Psychiatric Hospital
(STPH) originates at Lake Erie, east ofPt. Stanley where it is treated at the Elgin Area Water
Treatment Plant (EA WTP). The EA WTP is presently owned and operated by the Ontario Clean
Water Agency (OCWA), a Schedule 4 Agency of the Province of Ontario. Most of the water is
initially pumped to the Elgin reservoir, north-east of St. Thomas where it is repumped to
communities such as Aylmer, London and St. Thomas. The City of St. Thomas Engineering
Department assumes control and responsibility for the water entering St. Thomas. Distribution
and monitoring of the St. Thomas water distribution system is under the City's jurisdiction and
they collect samples to ensure its' safety.
The St. Thomas distribution system connects to a 10-inch diameter cast iron pipe at the
intersection of Sunset and Elm. The ownership of the 10-inch main is presently with the Ontario
Realty Corporation even though there are several private domestic connections to it before it
reaches STPH. Discussions regarding a transfer to the City are ongoing. Water enters the hospital
complex tbiough the north end of the power plaht building. Prior to this time, it Was metered,
rechlorinated and directed to one of two in ground reservoirs. It was pumped to a steel elevated
storage tank which provides pressure (up to 66 pounds per square inch (psi) to the STPH
complex. Daily usage is about 180 000 litres/day.
The gas chlorinator has been out of service since about early May and a replacement liquid
chlorine system was installed June 19,2000 prior to this date hospital staffhave been
batch-dosing the reservoirs prior to filling it each time.
PARTIES INVOLVED
Ownership of STPH - Ontario Government
Responsible for facility - Ontario Realty Corporation (ORe)
Contract agency for ORC - PROF AC Facilities Management Services Inc. (Profac)
Operation and maintenance of water treatment - OCW A
Operation and maintenance of water distribution in St. Thomas - St. Thomas Engineering Dept.
Operation and maintenance of water distribution in STPH - Ontario Ministry of Health (tenant of
STPH)
Municipality in which STPH resides - Central Elgin
CLIENT GROUPS
There are about 200 patients and 600 staff at the STPH. There are additional staff also working
within the community. The former nurses' residence, now the County Administration building,
Central Elgin Municipal Office and several private offices are connected to the STPH to the
west. In pavilion six, there is the Early Childhood Learning Centre and a separate OPP
Detachment building located on the south east comer.
CHRONOLOGY OF EVENTS
June 14. 2000:
The Ontario Clean Water Agency (OCWA) received a call at 3:45 PM ITom Dave
Barretta ITom the Ministry of Environment (MOE), London Office, to inform us that a "Boiled
Water Order» had been issued by the Elgjn-St. Thomas Health Unit's (ESHU) Dr. Sharon
Hertwig, Acting Medical Officer of Health to the St. Thomas Psychiatric Hospital (STPH) and
associated buildings including the closure of the Day Care Centre due to the detected presence of
Escherichia coli (E. coli) in the water samples taken there. This facility's water system is an end
user of the water being produced at the Elgin Area Water Treatment Plant located east of Port
Stanley. All water quality parameters at the treatment plant were reviewed including the fÌee
chlorine residuals and water sample reS1Ùts over the last few months and found to be in normal
operating ranges in all areas. The concentrations for all parameters were well below the water
quality requirements outlined in the Ontario Drinking Water Objectives and MOE guidelines.
June 15. 2000:
'.
OCW A received a call ITom ESHU asking to be present at a 12:30 PM emergency
meeting to discuss the water quality issue at STPH since the positive tests for E. coli in the
second sample group was received. An action plan was needed. OCW A was to check all its
operating information to see if any parameters had changed in the last couple of weeks. The City
of St. Thomas and the ESHU expanded the sampling areas to include other areas fed through the
hospital and out buildings as well as customers along Sunset Drive. The next meeting was
scheduled for 12:00 PM June 16, 2000 at the ESHU.
June 16.2000:
All areas outside the STPH tested negative for E. coli while more tests in the
hospital tested positive. Bob Cunningham, Administrator of the STPH and London Psychiatric
Hospital (LPH) asked OCW A to act as their Consultant to identify the possible source of the E.
coli and to assist and make recommendation to return the water supply to a safe operating
condition in the shortest time frame. He also asked if we knew a place to get self-contained -
showers for the patients.
That afternoon with the help of Amy at Walkerton we found a 10ft. X 20 ft. four stall shower
unit in Sarnia and a seven stall shower unit available on Monday or Tuesday of the next week in
Sudbury.
An Action Committee was sent up to meet Saturday morning at 9:00 AM at the STPH Board
Room each day until the "Boil Warer Order" was lifted and the system back in operation. A call
was made to request Rick Turnbull and Gary Palmateer to visit the site and start an investigation
on possible source(s). Al Hydrant Services was called to initiate system flushing with
disinfecting levels of chlorine to exceed 50 ppm ftee chlorine.
June 17. 2000:
Site survey and meeting of the Action Committee at 9:00 AM to schedule
flushing and corrective actions as well as information feedback. Flushing began at 9:30 AM with
about seven teams. The procedure was to stick a piece of tape on each fixture as they flushed
them until the 100 - 200 ppm chlorine residual was achieved. If it was a patient area, the tape was
stuck over the door of the room as well when all the fixtures are flushed. Once the building was
completed, the time was recorded to keep track of the chlorine contact time. Random chlorine
residual spot checks along with a visual check was performed on completed areas to find the
areas where completed. No missed :fixtures were found. Flushing continued until I 0:30 - 11 :00
PM.
A mechanical contractor and PROF AC representatives were on site assessing the separation of
the Fire System, reservoir and the inspection of the water tower. Rick Turnbull and Gary
Palmateer were on site collecting samples to investigate possible sources,
June 18.2000:
Prior to the Action Committee meeting Glen Howard, Al Hydrant Services said
he had reports, that some areas had lost the chlorine residual over night. If this was the case, we
would have to rechlorinate these areas, Glen and an OCW A staff were requested to go around
and make a log of every tenth fixture with any low residual to be recorded. It turned out all areas
had a strong residual.
Arrangements were made for asbestos removal on Tuesday, June 20, 2000. Landmark was
scheduling the tower inspection on Monday, Junel9, 2000, Super chlorinating was completed
around 10:30 PM.
June 19.2000:
Started flushing super chlorinate out of the system at 6:30 AM and stopped at 11 :00 PM.
TalbotlVipond Mechanical contractors were on site at 8:30 AM and Landmark started working
On the tower at 8:00 AM to clean repair and paint the inside with two part epoxy paint system,
Meeting at 9:00 AM of the Action Committee in the hospital board room, reviewed progress and
critical path follow-up.
Meeting at 12:00 PM at the ESHU board room with the City of St. Thomas, Central Elgin,
County of Elgin, Ministry of Environment, ESHU and OCWA.
Public meeting held at the St Thomas Arena at 8:00 PM was well attended and seem to end in a
positive manner.
Tuesday June 20, 2000:
Started flushing super chlorinate out of the system at 6:30 AM and stopped at
11 :00 PM. Some people at about 4:00 PM were questioning, if staff were as diligent flushing out
the super chlorinate as they were on the fIrst time around. We had Glen Howard from A-I
Hydrant accompanied by an OCW A staff and a hospital staff do random visual and residual
testing through out the completed portions of the hospital with all areas coming back completed.
A decision was made to install a temporary water flow paced chlorine treatment system in to
by-pass the present pumping system to allow for a more organized approach to installing the new
water system.
Meeting at 9:00 AM of the Action Committee in the hospital board room, reviewed progress and
critical path follow-up.
Meeting at 12:00 PM at the ESHU board room with the City of St. Thomas, Central Elgin,
County of Elgin, Ministry of Environment, ESHU and OCWA.
Wednesday June 21, 2000:
Asbestos removal company arrived at 7:30 AM to remove all insulation on piping
areas to be worked on. TalbotlVipond had a crew working on the fIre system and Landmark was
working on the tower.
Meeting at 9:00 AM of the Action Committee in the hospital board room, reviewed progress and
critical path follow-up, no ESHU meeting.
Thursday June 22, 2000:
Met with mechanical contractors TalbotlVipond re-valve installation and reservoir
transfers, work continued on tire system changes. ABB Kent flow meter arrived due for
installation tonight with calibration tomorrow,
Meeting at 5:00 PM with George and TalbotlVipond and Mi1creek Plumbing to layout the time
line and priorities. They wanted to wait until Monday June 26, 2000 for a part to arrive. George
and I went down and pointed out plan Band if they would not complete it we would get another
contractor. It should be completed by 5:00 AM.
Meeting at 9:00 AM of the Action Committee in the hospital board room, reviewed progress and
critical path follow-up.
Meeting at 12:00 PM at the ESHU board room with the City of St. Thomas, Central Elgin,
County of Elgin, Ministry of Environment, ESHU and OCWA.
Meeting at 2:00 PM with the hospital's JH&S committee to update them on the proposed
changes.
EQUIPMENT CHANGES
1. Change flow meter to permit chlorine to be added proportional to flow installed June 23, 2000.
2. Provide new automatic dual pumping chorination system, installed June 20, 2000.
3. Provide chlorine residual analyser to monitor and record free chlorine residual at power plant
before distribution to clients, installed June 19.
4. The Seimens (Powers) SCD 600 system will provide alarms to signal if chlorine residual is too
high or too low, to be installed.
5. Change piping to separate fire system from potable water system, completed June 22, 2000
6. Provide a back up suction line for the fire truck to pump directly out of the reservoir and back
into the hydrant system, to be completed in about 3-4 weeks based on parts delivery.
7. To provide a line to the reservoir header from the relief side of the present fire pump,'to be
completed June 23,2000.
8. Inspection of the elevated tank for structural and coating condition resulted in cleaning, repair
work and the two part epoxy painting of the inside of the water tower, to be completed in three-
four weeks.
9. Two new 4 inch back flow (reducing pressure principle) systems being ordered and installed,
two - three weeks delivery.
10. All new six inch water piping to two in line Annstrong pumps with new controllers tied into
the Seimens (Powers) SCD 600 system to use the existing tower pumping program, three - four
weeks when the tower comes on line.
11. One new 4 or"6 inch reservoir filling valve (Dillon Engineering Consultants to determine),
two weeks.
12. New 10 inch replacement valve to be installed within a week to facilitate tower disinfecting
and protect the integrity of the system during this disinfecting process.
13. New 2 inch stainless steel ball valve to facilitate the disinfecting process and draining of the
tower supply piping.
14. New 8 inch drain valve to provide a quick transfer of water from the tower to the reservoirs
through the drain system, if necessary, installed June 22, 2000.
15. OCW A supplied a new chlorine residual test kit and associated training, completed June 20,
2000
16. Install a 4 inch bypass water supply line capable of flow proportionate chlorine treatment to
supply the hospital with safe potable water during the permanent piping and pumping system
installation, completed June 23 2000.
17. Program water pumping control system in the Siemens (powers) SCU 600 system with the
chlorine analyser alann circuit. This will shut pumps down if the chlorine exceeds the alann
limits.
RECOMMENDATIONS
I, Install a Milltronics level indication system on the reservoir tanks to monitor the levels
through the Seimens (powers) SCU 600 system. This would ensure an adequate fire water
reservoir is maintained through an full time monitoring system.
2 Continue daily ftee chlorine residual monitoring at the water distribution end limits for one
month, provided the system's daily ftee chlorine residuals tests for the first month remains above
the minimum 0.2 mg/llevel then reduce the testing ftequency to twice per week for one month.
Provided the twice weekly test remain above the minimum 0.2 mg/llevel than take the chlorine
test at the same time as you collect your lab samples (i.e. three times per week).
3. Lab sample schedule: collect one rotating (day & time) sample per week at the Early
Childhood Learning Centre as long as it is open; one sample per week at Pavilion 5 and one
rotating sample ftom the rest of the hospital (preferably near the end of the distribution system).
Once the daycare centre moves, take two samples on a rotating basis though out the hospital,
OPP station and the County building. Note: samples should be taken at different time at different
areas on different days, three samples per week is the minimum. More samples should be taken
in any area where you may be experiencing a lower than normal ftee chlorine residual. Any
adverse bacteriological samples are to be reported immediately to the Health Unit and the site is
to be resampled.
4. If a low chlorine residual is experienced in only one area, it is recommended to carry out a
flushing program to restore the residual. If you are experiencing a low residual in a number of
areas you should increase the chlorine dosage levels through the chlorine treatment system in the
power house.
5. Buildings including floors that are vacated should be capped off and isolated ftom the active
distribution system.
6. Consideration should be given to removal of the smoke stack reducing the potential of injury
and possible contamination of the ground in that area.
7. OCW A will supply the hospital with a contingency plan for the transition period relating to the
chlorine and water supply systems we have developed in other municipal systems. After nonnal
operations commence, the tower pumps will be interlocked with the chlorine analyser to shut
down the pumps if the chlorine analyser goes into alann.
8. Consideration should be given to extending the IO-inch pipeline on Sunset Drive to the
County Administration Building. At some future date, it is anticipated that the STPH will be ¥
closed and there may not be any means of maintaining a chlorine residual, Similarly, an alternate
water service should be provided to the OPP Detachment. This may require the drilling of a well
if it is less expensive than extending a water service ITom Sunset Drive,
9. Remove all chlorine cylinders from the old chlorine feed room and return cylinders to supplier
10. Hospital staffing during the transition period should be onsite 24 hours/day to monitor pumps
and alarms until the tower pumps and alanns are returned to nonnal operations to monitor
chlorine
CONTACTS
Ministry of Health
Bob Cunningham - Administrator (STPH and London Psychiatric Hospital) - 631 8510
Dale Satchell - Manager of Operations and Maintenance - 631 8510 (ext. 2654)
Communication Officer - Scott May
24-hour emergency - 1 877 677 6322
Elgin-St. Thomas Health Unit
Dr. Sharon Hertwig, Medical Officer of Health (Acting) - 631 9900
Laura McLachlin, Director of Communicable Diseases
George Dawson - Manager, Health Protection
Cynthia St. John - Administrator
Peter Ostojic - Chairman, Board of Health 637 3056
County of Elgin
Clayton Waters - County Engineer - 631 1460 ext 162
Karen Dunn - Emergency Planning Coordinator - 631 1460 ext 101
Mark MacDonald Chief Administrative Officer - 631 1460
Duncan McPhail- Warden - 785 2298
Municipality of Central Elgin
Lloyd Perrin - Public Works Superintendent 631 4860
ProFac
George Laird, Facility Manager, London - 452 6811
Gary Sirove, Area Manager, London - 452 6821
A-I Hydrant Service
Glen Howard - I 8883492493; 416 2821665
Ontario Clean Water Agency
Phyl Pressey, Client Service Representative -782 3101 (cellular 6618585)
Bruce Boland, Operations Manager -782 3101 (cellular 671 2594)
REPORT BY A-I HYDRANT SERVICES
DISINFECTION AND FLUSHING
ST. THOMAS PSYCHIATRIC HOSPITAL
Dear Sir:
Herein is a summary of the work carried out at the St. Thomas Psychiatric
Hospital over the last few days.
We arrived on site Saturday morning (June 17th) at 8:00 am. After the general
meeting at the board room, we set up our equipment at the north end of the pump
house/power house and commenced pumping a heavily chlorinated disinfection
solution into the system. Pumping rate was approximately 150 to 200 GPM and
was limited by the city water supply at the end of the fIre hose.
Chlorine strength pumped in was kept between 100 and 200 ppm, and was
achieved by dissolving granular Calcium Hypochlorite into the water in our
pumpel'. Exact concentration is difficult to measure and calibrate when pumping
in this fashion due to fluctuating water demand, however our goal was to exceed
50 ppm and achieve kill at the ends of the lines.
Once pumping had commenced, lines were opened at the end points of the main
lines to vent pressure and expedite disinfectant transport. These locations were at
the south end of the Tri-County building and at the OPP fire hydrant. Once a
concentration of 100 ppm was confirmed at the end of these trunk mains, teams of
workers began to go to every fixture and draw disinfectant out through the lines.
In the County building across the street, no large outlet was available, so quick
transport was achieved by opening a number oftaps simultaneously, Similar *
methods were used in Pavillion 5 to get the chlorine out.
Presence of superchlorinate was corrfumed in all cases by the use of litmus test
paper and colour compared to the shading scale on the litmus containers. In this
way a quick visual check determines that chlorine was brought out in high
concentration. The litmus paper is capable of indicating Concentration between
10 and 200 ppm.
A red ribbon or tape was applied to each fixture as the staff went through the
building. Spot checks were later carried out to confirm that all areas were done.
At each point staff was asked to run the water until it was clear, and until a
residual exceeding 100 ppm was obtained. Chlorination teams consisted of one
A-I Hydrant or one OCW A staff member, paired with one member of the
hospital staff, to ensure security and access, as well as proper testing.
On the first day of chlorination, the power house, laundry, Pavillion 3,
Elgin/Norfolk, Pavillion 2, OPP and administration buildings were completed.
At approx. 11 :00 PM work ceased with a plan to resume in the morning.
Water was shut off to the building during the late night and early morning to guard
against dilution of the chlorine slug.
On the Sunday, pumping of superchlorinate rêcommenced at approx. 6:00 AM and
staff resumed work as they arrived.
The rest of the areas were completed. The center core buildings, medical, kitchen,
Huron and Erie buildings, as well as Pavillion 5, Pavillion 1, and Pavillion 6 were
completed. It was detennined that Pavillion 4 could not be effectively isolated.
Although chlorine was brought into the Pavillion anyway, the decision was made
to cut off and cap the service into this building to guard against recontamination
from unused water in future.
Pavillion 3 was also cut off and capped for similar reasons. Additionally, the pipe
going to the second and third floors ofPavillion 6 were to be cut and capped as
these floors are to be unused now and in future. Chlorine was brought through
these lines where possible in any case.
All hose bibs were flushed with superchlorinate, as well as the greenhouse.
The farm area and compost buildings are not done. An attempt was made to bring
chlorine out through these lines, but after twenty minutes no chlorine was present.
Building staff affinned that these areas are in fact fed off of the fire line, and that
the water there is not on the potable system.
Fire lines were not chlorinated, as they have been isolated with a new check valve
against the potable system. Consideration should be given to installing a listed
double check backflow preventer on the fire line.
By Sunday night at approx 10:00 PM, all lines were flushed through with
disinfectant. It was decided to commence neutralization and flushing on Monday
morning.
Sewage holding tanks were periodically seeded with sodium thiosulphate to aid in
neutralization. On Sunday afternoon, residual was sampled and found to be less
than 1 ppm in the tanks. It was deemed safe to pump to the waste forcemain and
this was done as the tanks were quite full.
No more pumping from our pumper was carried on at this point and the water was
fed direct from the St Thomas incoming main, with the chlorination pump
installed by OCWA taking over disinfection of incoming water.
On Monday morning, the process was repeated, with all staff'revisiting the areas
and fixtures covered previously. This time, they were flushing off all chlorine into
the drains. Spot checks were done with litmus paper to ensure that all
high-residual chlorine was removed from the system.
Concurrent to the flushing offi'neutralizing process, I checked four or five fixtures
in each building, noting the presence/absence of chlorine. This was done to
ensure that in no area was there total loss of residual over the contact period. The
only area that was not confinned was the medical building, where sudden loss of
pressure due to a water shutdown precluded sampling.
The flushing off and removal of disinfectant was completed at about 10:00
Monday night.
On Tuesday morning, residuals were sampled at various endpoints and found to be
as follows:
Elgin County building-3.3 mg/L
opp Building 2.0 mg/L
Pavillion 5 1.8 mg/L
Tri County Bldg 2.4 mg/L
, '
Huron Building
1.8 mg/L
These readings were taken between 8:30 and 10:00 on Tuesday Morning
At this point, the Health Dept. was on site taking samples as well.
Please let me know if you need anything more in the way of documentation Phyl.
I would be happy to provide it if! can.
Regards,
Glen Howard
{J
v
\Y~ I,
~~, .
~ ¡.:-J
~~
REPORTS OF COUNCIL AND STAFF
JUNE 27. 2000
1. C. Bishop, Manager of Library Services ~ Bayham Township Library - New Furnace
(ATTACHED)
2. C. Bishop, Manager of Library Services - Rearrangement of Port Stanley and
Shedden Library's Open Hours (ATTACHED)
3. C. Watters, Manager of Engineering Services - Replacement of Existing Sign at
Administration Building (ATTACHED)
4. C. Watters, Manager of Engineering Services - St. George Street Bridge Deck
Rehabilitation (ATTACHED)
5. C. Watters, Manager of Engineering Services - Trans Canada Trail Update (to be
FAXED out separately)
6. C. Watters, Manager of Engineering Services - Topsoil and Sod Restoration on
Centennial Road
7. C. Watters, Manager of Engineering Services - Crack Sealing Contract
8. M. McDonald, Chief Administrative Officer - Tender Evaluations - Elgin Manor
Sewage System
9. M. McDonald" Chief Administrative Officer- Establishing a Police Services Board
Flam ana uecommlsslonlng aI t:lgln lVIanor lIo-De.r,~j!¡:w·ourseparatély)
---- ~
Reports Deferred from June 13. 2000 MeetinQ
10. G. Watters, Manager of Engineering Services - Structures in Lower Tiers
(ATTACHED)
C. Watters, Manager of Engineering Services - Connecting Links in Lower Tiers
(ATTACHED)
C. Watters, Manager of Engineering Services - Road 42 Lake Bank Erosion
~
(ATTACHED) _~~~~
13. C. Watters, Manager of Engineering Services - Corrt';ct-Work~ATT ACHED)
CORRESPONDENCE
1. Town of Aylmer, with 1) a resolution requesting John Street be excluded from the
County's Connecting Link program and be exempt from the financing of the proposed
Connecting Link Program 2) that the County Engineer report to the lower-tier
municipalities prior to assuming bridge structures greater than 3.0 meters.
(ATTACHED)
2
f
/D)
JI)
12-)
Township of Malahide - re: Province Wide Smoking Policy (ATTACHED)
C. Bishop, Manager of Library Services, Manager of Library Services - Connect
Ontario Notice of Intent (ATTACHED)
L. Veger, Director of Financial Services - Elgin Manor Re-Build (ATTACHED)
REPORT TO COUNTY COUNCIL
FROM:
Cathy Bishop, Managèr of Library Services
DATE:
February 18, 2000
SUBJECT: Bavham Township Librarv - New Furnace
BACKGROUND:
The Bayham Township Library has been experiencing difficulty with the heating
and air-conditioning.
DISCUSSION:
The Municipality of Bayham has informed the Manager of Library Services that
the heating and air-conditioning system needs to be replaced. The Manager of
Library Services has received 3 quotes from the Municipality of Bayham in regard
to replacing the system.
Roy Inch & Sons
Andrew frIIfTchanÎcalLtd.
Prouse
$6,928.25
$5;Z/Z/0.95 (preferred quote-by Bayham)
$6,675.00
The 40 year Library Lease with the Municipality of Bayham does state that the
County of Elgin (Library) is responsible for 100% of all the Municipality's cost of
operating, maintaining and repairing the building.
CONCLUSION:
The library budget or lease payments to the municipalities does not
accommodate these unforeseen circumstances and therefore it is suggested that
the funds be taken from the Mill Rate Stabiliztion Fund.
RECOMMENDATION:
THAT, the Manager of Library Services be authorized to pay the sum of
$5,440.95 to the Municipality of Bayham for the installation of a new heating and
air-conditioning unit in the Bayham Township Library and.
THAT the amount be paid out of the Mill Rate Stabilization Fund.
Respectfully Submitted
~¿Á¡¿
Cathy Bi· P Ý
Manager of Library Services
ubmission
Mar aid
Chief Administrative Officer
~
3
Municipality of
Bayham
O.þ ~.,
~0"funity Is 'io~
June 26, 2000
P.O. Box 160,9344 Plank Road,
Straffordville, Ontario NO] 1YO
Tel: (519) 866-5521 . Fax: (519) 866-3884
email: bayham@bayham.on.ca
,---"",-
n -,,- r--......."
I' ¡I,'1., , . ,'''l''''''w
. . n
I (,I".i JUrv ').' .,., ,I j
Ur '" L if ttì{[j /j
LJ;. '- ¡ ~_ ,,_ ,; ¡ 1
..'_ ~._. .! LJ L.~Jl!J
Ms. Cathy Bishop
Co-ordinator for Elgin County Libraries
County of Elgin
450 Sunset Drive
St. Thomas, ON
N5R 5Vl
. - ~ .
. ~ -. ~
Dear Ms. Bishop
Installation of a New Gas Furnace & Air Conditioning Unit for
The Straffordville Library
RE:
This letter will confirm that the Council of The Corporation of the Municipality of
Bayham at its regular meeting held Thursday, June 22nd, 2000 enacted the fo1\owing
Resolution, being No. 2000-322:
"THAT Staff Report PR2000-03 be received for informaiion,-
AND THAT Council approve of the quote submitted by Andrews Mechanical
Ltd. of $5,440.95 for the replacement of the furnace and air conditioning at the
Straffordville Library at the expense of Elgin County. "
Upon speaking with Dwayne Daniel, Chief Building Official, he has advised that the
work has already commenced. Therefore, if you have any questions in this regard, please
do not hesitate to contact him directly at 866-5521.
Yours truly,
/hi~ ~
Maureen Beatty, AMCT
Co-ordinator ofPlanninglDeputy Clerk
File: A20
C2000-39LibraryRenov
Bayham 150/2000 "Reflections & Connections" July 22 & 23, 2000
Join us for Sesquicentennial Activities throughout the Municipality
REPORT TO:
FROM:
County Council
Cathy Bishop,
Manager of Library Services
DATE:
SUBJECT:
June 19, 2000
REARRANGEMENT OF PORT STANLEY AND SHEDDEN
LIBRARY'S OPEN HOURS
INTRODUCTION/BACKGROUND:
Both Port Stanley and Shedden libraries are now being supervised by one full-time
Library Supervisor and staff from both libraries are now required to work in both
locations.
DISCUSSION:
The Supervisor has met with the staff to discuss any areas that may possibly need
improvement or change in regard to providing a more efficient service to the public.
After consulting with the patrons, staff have suggested that the open hours for Shedden
on Friday and the open hours for pt. Stanley on Saturday be rearranged to provide a
more accessible service to the public. The Port Stanley Library is the only library in the
Elgin County Library system to be open on Friday nights. Staff felt that Port Stanley
would attract more people being open morning hours as opposed to afternoon. No
additional open hours are required at this time.
CONCLUSION:
LIBRARY
PRESENT HOURS
REARRANGEMENT
OF HOURS
Shedden
Friday 1 :30 - 8:30 (7)
Saturday 12:00 - 4:00 (4)
Friday 10:00 - 5:00 (7)
Saturday 9:00 - 1 :00 (4)
pt. Stanley
RECOMMENDATION:
THAT the Shedden Library be permitted to rearrange their current open hours on Friday
to 10:00 a.m.- 5:00 p.m. with no increase in hours or budgetary impact and;
THAT the Port Stanley Library be permitted to rearrange their current open hours on
Saturday to 9:00 a.m.-1 :00 p.m. with no increase in hours or budgetary impact and;
THAT the change be implemented as soon as possible.
Respectfully Submitted
~~c#~
Cathy Bish p
Manager of Library Services
Mark c nald
Chief Administrative Officer
~
4
REPORT TO COUNTY COUNCIL
FROM: JIM CARTER
CORPORATE FACILITIES OFFICER
DATE: JUNE 9, 2000
SUBJECT: REPLACEMENT OF EXISTING SIGN AT ADMINISTRATION BUILDING
Introduction
The pylon sign in front of the Administration Building was erected in 1985 when the building was
rehabilitated. This sign was then expanded about 8 years ago because of the increase in
demand from the new tenants.
Discussion / Conclusion
The sign is presently leaning and increasing the sign size using the existing concrete
footings would not be a good investment. Also the existing concrete footings do not meet the
requirements to support the existing sign. Furthermore the sign is not large enough to
accommodate any new tenants.
The expanded sign would be a good investment for the County because there is finished and
unfinished office space available for lease. The sign is an inexpensive salesperson since it
would be promoting the building 24 hours a day for 365 days a year.
This cost is included in the 2000 budget.
Recommendation
That the price quotation of $ 10,818.00 be accepted from Excellent Signs to remove and
reinstall the pylon sign.
RESPECTFULL Y SUBMITTED
APPROVED FOR SUBMISSION
ðruJ~~
:fd)
CLAYTON D. WATTERS, MANAGER
ENGINEERING SERVICES
CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER
5
Quotation for the Replacement Sign
At 450 Sunset Drive
1. Excellent Signs and Displays Inc. $ 10,818.00
2. Great Lakes Signs $ 11,040.00
3. McBain Signs $ 11,365.00
4. Sterling Marking Products Inc. $ 12,133,00
Notes
Sales taxes extra
~ 6
,
~
.,
't.'.
,
..1.
".~:. ?i];";<:,~..;þ",,~'JZ''''..
/~/ ä;-" 'gø "'. ". qO;/). -,
'~"r. '",w~,' .~ 'i" f.../ _.~. þ -';.!',":;
" 0" ._" . ""'. .7: ¿,I ....'.-.: ;'. ~,- ,"';
..~ ,_ __. _ .··__~w _____._.___________
""...", ELGIN CQU\ßY AOMNSI!IAI!ON Ul»IG
...... 400 5U'IS8 DCIIVE.
SL 1HCtMS. 0IfW ()
...",.. I\IJOI1tOI'Ì TO OOSII'IG VIS U\JMtWID I"I!í;f< SlGI'I
.. -.:' ,..:,
·r::;." .:\-~·::r'.: {-~
g~~:l~~Iillci~J
.~ 450 Sunsct Drh'c
~' Elgin County-
~ Administration
- Building
---...-- -- ~-.-.-.__.~ -_..
-ST-ïe¡-¡¡J~1-1' &.;;;:;;;
. Associ.
_I.~ .!!B...!t!!Ÿ..J__B.E .º-~.J;::R_~.":"'u
WILLIAM OICK:'iuJ F -:-F
Lawyer :' ~ ..___3
==-.:_:::.:=.=.:::::.::~;:. . -:-- _.-
W. ta~~~~ER j¡J~
;-n G~Mi.sooTI'ÉÑÌ
CHAÃTEREO ACCOtl_N1'AlolT
..:-.- -"'....;..:...:....~--~.:...:_. ..i.:....:
, 51 THoùAS:-wnll'!!ME1.lilN t:
rotmiST ASSOCIATIOI Natary.
.and l.
. _. _~ u~~.. ,_ .. "~.w_.
'............... ....,..."..,..,....
Central
-
"--'.. --'~-
cmJ.II J\Q. Có6I :tm1
I'CC.. ~ ÞMHONV VMDB.OO
....... sœ DAANBl
.. .7·11" _ ""
....;..... ....~""-. --'~--~:..,.. .,,~.:'":"'~.
,
'"
'~',."~-
~'.~~~- .~.
..:..:...:.--_.~..".
'-.--
it_Ruot(ll1M1fIt1Ìr
Q ßlI1Hl11 &AaC
'/ _ 3IM"ClEAR wrAN IW1ES
'.
r--
REPORT TO COUNTY COUNCIL
FROM: PETER DUTCHAK
ENGINEERING SERVICES
DATE: JUNE 16, 2000
SUBJECT: ST. GEORGE STREET BRIDGE DECK REHABILITATION
Introduction
The Engineering Services closed a tender for the Rehabilitation of the St. George Bridge Deck
as approved in the year 2000 Capital Works Budget. The City of St. Thomas has agreed to pay
50% as their share for this proposed work.
Two prices were submitted for completing the works from each bidder. Option #1 would keep
one lane of traffic open at all times. Option #2 would allow the contractor to close the bridge
deck to traffic during construction.
Discussion
To complete the rehabilitation under Option #1, all construction would have to be staged from
one lane and then switch to the other. Essentially under Option #1, all operations would have
to be completed twice, once for each lane. This method raises the cost to complete the
proposed works as well as requiring twice the number of working days as compared to Option
#2.
The lowest bidder was Theo Vandenberk Construction Inc. for both Option #1 and Option #2.
The total Tender price submitted for Option #1, keeping one lane of traffic open at all times was
$203,546.10 and over $57,000 lower than the next lowest bid. The Tender price submitted for
completing the work and closing the bridge was $168,198.65. This represents a potential cost
savings of $35,347.45 to complete the same work.
Another potential benefit to awarding the contract under Option #2 is the reduction in time
required to complete the works. The proposed construction will begin no sooner than August
14,2000 to accommodate the local soccer schedule. Under Option #1 the proposed work will
require 39 working days and not be completed until October 6, 2000. This amount of time is
required for proper curing and staging operations. Under Option #2 however, the proposed
work will only require 19 working days and be completed by September 8, 2000. Option #2 has
fewer working days because all operations only have to be completed once and not once for
each lane.
.
8
...2
Page 2
FROM: PETER DUTCHAK
ENGINEERING SERVICES
DATE: JUNE 16,2000
SUBJECT: ST. GEORGE STREET BRIDGE DECK REHABILITATION
Technically the proposed work completed in Option #1 and #2 could yield the same quality,
however, it is generally accepted that a better finish can be achieved if the bridge deck is
overlaid all at once thereby closing the structure to traffic. It should also be realized that if work
was completed under Option #1 that there would be times during construction where traffic
would also be impacted somewhat. In a confined work area such as a 2-lane bridge, some
operations will require the use of the open traffic lane to complete the proposed work.
Conclusion
It has been a general County policy to have at least one lane of traffic open at all times during
construction operations whenever possible; however; in this situation there appears to be more
benefits in closing the bridge during construction.
Firstly, a substantial cost savings can be achieved. More than $35,000.00 can be saved under
Option #2 completing the same work as Option #1.
Secondly, it could be argued that the work completed using Option #2 would yield more
favorable results than Option #1 (i.e. no longitudinal construction joint in the bridge deck-riding
surface).
Finally the work would be completed in half the time under Option #2. A short detour route
would be signed onto Wellington Road and all Emergency and Transit Services would be
notified. The bridge will remain open to pedestrian traffic. Construction is always an
inconvenience to the local residents and minimizing the total construction time would surely be
appreciated.
For these reasons it would be more fiscally responsible to complete the proposed St. George
Street Bridge Deck Rehabilitation by allowing the contractor to close the bridge to traffic from
August 14 to September 8,2000. Written approval from the City of St. Thomas must be
obtained in order to complete the proposed works using Option #2.
9
... 3
Page 3
FROM: PETER DUTCHAK
ENGINEERING SERVICES
DATE: JUNE 16, 2000
SUBJECT: ST. GEORGE STREET BRIDGE DECK REHABILITATION
Recommendation
THAT Theo Vandenberk Construction Inc. be awarded Contract No. 2000-07, the St. George
Street Bridge Deck Rehabilitation for the total tendered price of $168,198.65, and,
THAT the contractor be allowed to close the bridge to traffic from August 14, 2000 until
September 8, 2000 as outlined in the Tender under Option #2, and,
THAT the Warden and the CAO be directed and authorized to sign the contract once a written
acceptance has been received by the City of St. Thomas.
RESPECT FULL Y SUBMITTED
aM~~
APPROVED FOR SUBMISS/ON
CLAYTON D. WATTERS, MANAGER
ENGINEERING SERVICES
if::/1D
CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER
1 0
St. George Street Bridge
Deck Rehabilitation
Contract No. 2000-07
June 16, 2000
Company Proposal #1 Proposal #2
Theo Vandenberk Construction Inc. $203,546.10 $168,198.65
KKN Builders Inc. $260,705.50 $183,558.50
COPE Construction Co. $267,179.00 $186,394.00
Notes:
GST Included
1 1
REPORT TO COUNTY COUNCIL
FROM: PETER DUTCHAK
ENGINEERING SERVICES
DATE: JUNE 22, 2000
SUBJECT: TRANS CANADA TRAIL AGREEMENT
Introduction
On the advice of our insurer and the County solicitor)n an effort to exercise prudent risk
management and to clearly define the responsibilities of all parties, a trail agreement is
required. Accordingly, at the March 28th session of County Council a resolution was passed
that stated the following:
THAT the municipality in which the trail section is located, be solely responsible for maintaining
the trail for its intended use(s) and inspect the trail, when road inspections are being done, to
the same conditions as per By-Law No. 96-15, being a by-law to establish minimum and
desirable roadway services standards for the Corporation of the County of Elgin; and,
THAT a formal agreement be entered into with each municipality responsible for a trailsection
located on County property; and,
THAT the agreement transfers all liability risks to the responsible party; and,
THAT once the formal agreements have been signed, sections of County Roads as passed by
the local resolutions, as follows, will be registered with the Ontario Trails Council to form parts of
the Trans Canada Trail.
A draft agreement has been written by the County solicitor and circulated to members of the
Trans Canada Trail Committee as well as to all Administrators requesting their comments.
Discussion
A formal agreement was drafted by the County solicitor and circulated to the Trans Canada
Trail Committee on April 28, 2000. On May 23rd it was circulated to all Municipal Administrators
per their request. Most of the lower tiers have responded with their comments at the date of
this report.
Common items of concern involved: transferred liability, saving the County harmless through
insurance, the need for specific instruction for trail maintenance operations, the agreement
cancellation notice time length (180 days), and the need for an agreement at all.
Page 1 of 4
FROM: PETER DUTCHAK
ENGINEERING SERVICES
DATE: JUNE 22, 2000
SUBJECT: TRANS CANADA TRAIL AGREEMENT
Discussion (continued)
Generally most comments revolve around the complexity, formality and excessiveness of the
agreement as drafted. Through conversations with the County solicitor it was explained that in
fact this agreement structure is almost identical to the agreement drafted for the maintenance of
the County Roads by the Lower Tiers. The actual agreement content in regards to the Trans
Canada Trail only forms a small portion of the content. The balance of the document is
necessary to properly identify the parties involved and structure a legal agreement.
Conclusion
The proposed County Road Maintenance Agreement and the proposed Trans Canada Trail
Agreement are very similar documents. Many comments and concerns are applicable to both
agreements, therefore, it would simplify matters by resolving all issues at one time with one
agreement that covers both the maintenance of the road system and trail network since the
maintenance efforts, liabilities, obligations and parties involved are the same.
Members of the Trans Canada Trail Committee have informed the County how time is of the
essence to register these trail sections. It appears that funding is available for the Trail but only
to those who have a registered trail. With the official opening of the Trail in September 2000
there are concerns that available funding will disappear.
One way to advance the Trail's progress is to authorize registration now with the understanding
that the maintenance agreement and the Trans Canada Trail agreement can be dovetailed into
a single document acceptable to the County solicitor and applicable parties by no later than
August 31,2000.
Council should be made aware that it is preferable to have signed a Trail agreement prior to
Trail registration and that by postponing this matter to a later date, Council risks registering the
Trail without following the advice of its insurer and its solicitor. Nevertheless, since timing is an
issue, the following recommendation is presented for your consideration.
Page 2 of 4
FROM: PETER DUTCHAK
ENGINEERING SERVICES
DATE: JUNE 22,2000
SUBJECT: TRANS CANADA TRAIL AGREEMENT
Recommendation
THAT a formal maintenance agreement for sections of Elgin County Road designated as
portions of the Trans Canada Trail be addressed in conjunction and within the proposed
maintenance agreement for County Roads and be completed and executed before the trail is
officially opened in September 2000; and,
THAT the County Administrator be authorized to register the proposed sections of Elgin County
Roads as listed in Schedule 'A' as sections of the Trans Canada Trail.
RESPECT FULL Y SUBMITTED
APPROVED FOR SUBMISSION
O)Jk
CLAYTON D. WATTERS, MANAGER
ENGINEERING SERVICES
M:W
CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER
Page 3 of4
SCHEDULE 'A'
Sections of Elain County Road Desianated as Trans Canada Trail
Municipality County Road Designated as Part Specific Portion of County Road
of the Trans Canada Trail Designated as Trans Canada Trail
Municipality -County Road #3 (Talbot Line) -from McPherson Road east to
of West Elgin Black's Road
-County Road #103 (Furnival Rd) -crossing at Gray Line
-County Road #3 (Talbot Line) -from Graham Road east to
Dunborough Road
Municipality -County Road #3 (Talbot Line) -from Dunborough Road east 1.7 km
of Dutton / to private access
Dunwich -County Road #8 (Lake View Line) -form Currie Road east to east side of
Lot 12
-County Road #16 (Fingal Line) -from Erin Line north west 0.6km to
private access
-County Road #14 (Iona Road) -from Homestead Line south to
Fingal Line
Township of -County Road #20 (Union Road) -crossing at Boxall Road
Southwold -County Road #45 (John Wise Line) -crossing at Bush Line
Municipality -County Road #28 (Centennial -from Highway #3 south to Elm Line
of Central Road)
Elgin -County Road #56 (Elm Line) -from Centennial Road east to
Quaker Road
-County Road #36 (Quaker Road) -from Elm Line east to Brouwers Line
Township of -County Road #35 (Springwater Rd) -from Brouwers Line north to
Malahide Highway #3
-County Road #40 (Springfield -from Highway #3 south to Nova
Road) Scotia Line
-County Road #42 (Nova Scotia -from Springfield Road east to
Line) Richmond Road
Town of -County Road #53 -crossing north of Catfish Creek
Aylmer
Page 4 of 4
REPORT TO COUNTY COUNCIL
FROM: PETER DUTCHAK
ENGINEERING SERVICES
DATE: JUNE 23,2000
SUBJECT: TOPSOIL AND SOD RESTORATION ON CENTENNAIL ROAD
Introduction
The Engineering Services Department has closed quotations to perform restoration works on Elgin
County Road #28, Centennial Avenue from Elm Street north to Highway #3 now that this road has been
resurfaced.
Discussion
During this year's resurfacing contract Elgin County Road #28, Centennial Road was pulverized, some
granular material was added and the road was paved. The road resurfacing efforts have created a
steep shoulder rounding that may prove difficult to maintain and which has concerned rnany residents
for esthetic and safety reasons.
The proposed restoration works will include placing topsoil 50mm thick and placing sod on this shoulder
rounding. This work will create an easier to maintain area and reduce the potential of washouts and
drainage interference. Although there may be other less expensive methods of stabilizing the shoulder
roundings on Centennail Road (i.e. topsoil and hydroseeding or spraying with RC-30 emulsion) the
placement of topsoil and sod would be the most effective, permanent and esthetically pleasing solution.
Three companies that have done similar work in the past were solicited for a price to complete the
proposed restoration as per the County's purchasing policy. While initially interested, none of these
companies submitted prices.
Conclusion
Because of the inclement weather conditions this spring, many construction and landscaping companies
appear to have a very busy work schedule. An advertisement run in the London Free Press will attract
the attention a company willing to do this work.
Recommendation
THAT the Engineering Services Department be authorized to advertise a quotation to complete a topsoil
and sod restoration of the shoulder roundings of Centennial Road; and,
THAT to expedite the process once bids are received that the lowest bid be accepted and awarded upon
approval of the Warden and the County CAO.
RESPECT FULL Y SUBMITTED
/ht I IL,~ A
~W~'VWIJ
CLAYTON D. WATTERS, MANAGER
ENGINEERING SERVICES
A~PROVED F9MISSION
MA1tJL .
CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER
REPORT TO COUNTY COUNCIL
FROM: PETER DUTCHAK
ENGINEERING SERVICES
DATE: JUNE 23,2000
SUBJECT: CRACK SEALING COUNTY ROADS
Introduction
Under the approved capital budget the Engineering Services Department has closed quotations
for Crack Sealing operations on County Roads #119 (Mill Road), #30 (Highbury Avenue) and
#73 (Imperial Road) north of Aylmer.
Discussion / Conclusion
Crack sealing will prolong the life of existing paved roads by preventing water from entering into
the sub-base and increasing the rate of deterioration. This preventative maintenance operation
will yield the greatest results when relatively newer roads are crack sealed. Once a road crack
migrates into the adjacent pavement it becomes virtually impossible to crack seal effectively,
therefore, roads that have been resurfaced within the past 3 to 5 years become the best
candidates for this operation.
The lowest quoted price was submitted by Niagara Crack Sealing for $23,600.00 plus G.S.T. to
complete 20,000 linear metres of crack sealing.
Recommendation
THAT the quoted price of $23,600.00 plus G.S.T. submitted by Niagara Crack Sealing be
accepted to complete pavement crack sealing operations on County Roads #119 (Mill Road),
#30 (Highbury Avenue) and #73 (Imperial Road) north of Aylmer.
RESPECT FULL Y SUBM/TTED
APPROVED FOR SUBMISSION
(J(lJ ~~
~
CLAYTON D. WATTERS, MANAGER
ENGINEERING SERVICES
CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER
CRACK SEALING VARIOUS COUNTY ROADS
JUNE 23, 2000
788873 ONTARIO LIMITED (NIAGARA CRACK SEALING)
TYKES ROAD PRESERVERS
ROADMASTER ROAD CONSTRUCTION & SEALING LIMITED
$25,252.00
$26,964.00
$27,178.00
REPORT TO COUNTY COUNCIL
FROM:
Mark G. McDonald,
Chief Administrative Officer.
DATE:
June 23rd, 2000
SUBJECT: TENDER EVALUATIONS - ELGIN MANOR SEWAGE SYSTEM
Introduction:
Attached for your consideration is a report from Dillon Consulting Engineers,
regarding an evaluation of the bids received on the design/build of a small
package treatment plant and the decommissioning of the lagoon system at Elgin
Manor. After careful review and clarification, Mr. Slim, P.Eng., has
recommended SaniTech Communal Systems as the supplier of choice.
Recommendation:
THAT SaniTech Communal Systems Incorporated be awarded the contract for
the design/build of a small packaged sewage treatment plant and the
decommissioning of the lagoon system at Elgin Manor, in the total amount not to
exceed $547,463.00 plus applicable taxes, in compliance with the instructions to
bidders as modified by Dillon Consulting Ltd.; and,
THAT an allowance of $20,000.00 be set aside to retain an engineering firm to
provide "on-site" inspections, review drawings and supervise start up procedures.
ALL of which is respectfully submitted,
~
--.
Mark G. McDonald,
Chief Administrative Officer.
June 22, 2000
Mr. Mark McDonald
Chief Administrative Officer
County of Elgin
450 Sunset Drive
St. Thomas, Ontario
N5R5VI
Elgin Manor Home for the Aged
Small Packaged Sewage Treatment Plant
Tender Evaluation
Dear Mr. McDonald:
~;%r~
H~:~jç;
JUL 1 2 2000
CO' ",',', , ,,~ -, .~¡~'
y; ,>;\) , '{ ~ H~ ¡:..; h" J
J"",.", , , ...,. ·=.~u "OJ
e:'r.w'í..nl"'1!:~.
iJC¡1Vj;"n..O
s- (6uVlC: \
JC{r¡G ??r*jDÓ
In response to the County's call for design,build tenders, five [¡nns subniitted quotations
for the supply and installation of a small packaged treatment plant and the
decommissioning of the existing lagoons. These were:
· Elgin Construction 969774 Ontario Limited
· SaniTech Communal Systems Inc.
· CMS Group Inc.
· SepTech Innovative Wastewater Engineering
· The John Hayman & Sons Company Limited
The bids provided little information to clearly defIne the scope of supply. Since this is a
design,build project, variations are expected and may be tolerated but not when they impact
the completeness of the project. We reviewed the scope of supply and prepared a list of
items that were clearly offered by some and not by others. We also enquired about certain
requirements that we felt necessary for process delivery, as well as completeness of supply.
Individual lists were faxed to each of the lowest three tenderers and clarifIcations and\or
adjustments were received.
The two highest base bids were considered non,responsive to the County's call for tenders
as they offered technologies with no discharge to the stream and\or without a reliable track
record of performance. These two were excluded from the normalization process. These
were the SepTech and Hayman tenders.
CMS Group Inc. had an excellent proposal for the treatment part ofthe project but felt that
the decommissioning was too risky for them to quote at a [¡xed price. This tenderer offered
a cost plus proposal for the lagoon decommissioning. However, the tender amount was
signifIcantly higher when the decommissioning costs are factored in.
· . . continued
'1\\ ..J1/I/>
""'''''?
DILLON
CONSULTING
495
Richmond Street
London, Ontario
Canada
N6A5A9
Mail: Box 426
London, Ontario
Canada
N6A4W7
Tdephone
(519) 438-6192
Fax
(519) 672-8209
Dillon Consulting
Limited
Page 2
County of Elgin
June 22, 2000
Elgin Construction had the lowest base bid but many of the clarifications and added items
that were not included moved them into second place. These were major items that are
considered necessary and essential for the process and or approvals. These are sunnnarized
herein.
The Terms of Reference did not provide the sewage strength or characteristics. Elgin
assumed a value that is typical of a weak sewage. A seniors' residence and home for the
aged are usually low water consumers which will result in a biologically stronger sewage.
We requested the cost impact of a moderate strength sewage from all three tenderers. Elgin
had to increase the base bid to compensate for the stronger sewage.
Elgin did not offer UV disinfection. CWorination and decWorination is technically
acceptable but will leave the County with a system that requires regular monitoring to
avoid upsets and possible discharge of toxic effluent into the stream. Since all other
tenderers offered a UV system, Elgin were asked to provide the same at an added cost.
The Elgin proposal did not include an access road into the plant for delivery of chemicals
and removal of sludge. When asked, Elgin added a gravel road at an added cost.
The process offered by Elgin is simpler and easier to operate but requires frost protection.
Elgin did not include a cover or housing over the plant. When asked, Elgin added a small
building over the plant at an added cost.
Alum is a chemical that crystalizes below 60°F. It is needed for phosphorus removal and
must be stored on site. Elgin did not include heating or heat tracing. When asked, Elgin
provided it at an added cost.
Fencing and stand-by power generation are not clearly noted in the Terms of reference. The
power generation need depends on the existing system and its ability to supply power to the
plant. Both Elgin and SaniTech did not include it butElgin offered an allowance of $20,000
should the County wish to add it. Therefore, we left this item out of the comparison table.
The fence is not required for the plant but the UV system will be outside and both safety
and vandalism would be a concern. We recommend that a fence be added. Elgin offered a
lump sum amount of $4,879. SaniTech's amount is not available at this time, but we
consider the Elgin amount as a good representation of cost and would recommend adding
it to SaniTech's bid.
. . . continued
""''''''',.~
Page 3
County of Elgin
June 22, 2000
Both tenderers have the necessary bonding and insurance. However, Elgin did not include
the costs of the building permit which is included in SaniTech' s bid.
The operating cost of the system proposed by Elgin is lower than that of SaniTech, but we
are not sure the amount offered by Elgin at $9.50 per day includes maintenance costs. In
addition we believe that both bids do not include manpower related operating costs.
Both lowest tenders did not include GST. When the costs of all the above items were added
to the base bids (except for building permit impact), the totals were as follows;
.
Elgin Construction
SaniTech
$595,303.10 plus GST
$547,463.00 plus GST
.
Although the decommissioning of the lagoons may be a simple exercise, there was a
remote possibility that toxic material may be present. Neither of the two bidders included
the cost of handling toxic sludge. SaniTech recommended a contingency be carried by the
County to cover such a possibility. Most domestic sewage lagoons would not have toxic
content, which was confinned by the County's recent tests. Therefore, we do not
recommend a contingency be carried.
The Class EA schedule may change when the MOE issues its final verdict. Both tenderers
did not include Schedule "C" cost in their bids. The County would have to deal with this
when and if necessary.
The supplied equipment of both Tenderers is well known to Dillon staff and we are
confident that, subject to good quality control, the project will provide the County with a
reliable system. Elgin Construction is also well known to Dillon staff. SaniTech has a good
support team to cover Engineering and Geotechnical work and Blue-Con as civil contractor
for lagoon decommissioning. Blue-Con is also well known to Dillon staff and offers good
quality workmanship.
Based on the above and the total nonnalized cost of bids, we recommend that the contract
be awarded to SaniTech Communal Systems at the base bid of $542,584.00 plus GST and
a fence cost which should be confinned prior to award. We also recommend that the
County budgets for quality assurance costs to ensure the Contractor's compliance with
project scope and the required level of quality. A budget of $20,000 would be reasonable
to review shop drawings, provide "as required" site visits, review and process payment
certificates and supervise start -up and commissioning.
. . . continued
---....-.-.-- .-.-......---.. ---
""""""".?
Page 4
County of Elgin
June 22, 2000
We trust the above is satisfactory.
Yours sincerely,
Dillou Consulting Limited
~
Hisham N. Slim, P.Eng.
Project Manager
hns:*cmf!OO-7869-1001
------ ------- ..---- -
---....--...--- --- -....----
""'~
\\\\\\\\'IW.'
Elgin County
Elgin Manor Home for the Aged
Design & Construction of Small Package Treatment System
Summary of Tenders
$715 000.00
Adjustment
$7,500.00
lS,OOO included in pr
EiQTn C-onstruction SanlTech Communal S
Ori . Bid: $421,146.0010rig. Bid: $542.584.00
Included Adiustmen ncluded I Adjustment
'July 5,01 uly 31 ,01
ok ok
ok ok
yes
yes
yes
No
yes
yes
No
yes
extra
yes
yes
yes
yes
No
yes
yes
No
yes
extra
No
f"Ton-responsive
No
No
yes
yes
yes
yes
No
yes
No
No
No
No
yes
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
Non-responsíve,
No
No
yes
yes
yes
yes
No
yes
No
No
No
No
yes
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
@costpluslO%
@cos!plus'lO%
@costpluslO%
@costpluslO%
@çostpluslO%
@costpluslO%
Not required
Not required
Not required
Unknown
Unknown
No
No
No
No
No
No
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
ok
yes
ok
yes
yes
yes
No
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
No
yes
yes
No
ves
Not required
storage only
90 dyas
3 month supply
$4,879.00
$547,463.00
$38,322.41
$585,785.41
¡S,QDa.ao
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
concrete
yes
yes
yes
yes
No
No
yes
No
yes
No
yes
yes
yes
yes
No
ves
required
$27,282.75
storage only
180 days
$19,757.00
Not required
$24,178.00
$92,560.35
yes
No
yes
No
No
No
yes
No
yes
No
yes
No not required
yes 45 gallon drum
No $5,500.00
No $4,879.00
Allowanc 12,000 included;
$595,303.10
$41,671.22
$636,974.32
3,467.50
Not required
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
No
No
yes
yes
yes
yes
No
No
Concretel
Tender validity date
Contractor's Similar Experience List
Packaged Plant Supplier Installation List
Engineer Identified
Engineering included
Geotechnical Investigation Included
Class EA Schedule "C" Allowance
Bonding @ 100% of contract amount
Insurance
Contingencies
PST
GST
Building Permit
Decommissioning of Lagoons
Conditional & Final Approval
Sludge Testing
Sludge Removal & Disposal
Demolition of Fence
Filing & Compaction
Top soil & Final Grading
Packaged Treatment Plant
Confirmation that Design Meets MOE Guidelines
Capacity at 100 M3/d
Influent Sewage Characteristics defined
Impact if Influent is 250(800), 250(SS) ,35{NH3-N), 1 O(P
Process Design Definition
Type of Biological Process Proposed
Number of similar plant installations In Ontario
Filtration System Proposed
Number of similar filter installations 1n Ontario
UV Disinfection Provided
Treatment Tankage materials (steel or Concrete)
Forcemain Extension to Plant
Influent Lifting Station
Outfall to the Existing Drain
Effluent Pumping Station
Access Road Surface Treatment
Plant Enclosure Provided
Control Building definition & size
Sludge Treatment Proposed
Size of Sludge Storage proposed
Standby Power generation type & size
Corrosion protection
Foam Control
Chemical Storage Capacity
Heated Alum storage and distribution
Security fencing provided
Power Suoolv to site
Revised Tender Lump Sum Amount
GST
Total Harmonized Tender value
Estimated OperatlnQ & Maintenance Costs
Project Component
Item
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
REPORT TO COUNTY COUNCIL
FROM:
Mark G. McDonald, CAO
June 21st, 2000
DATE:
SUBJECT: ESTABLISHING A POLICE SERVICES BOARD
Introduction:
The six municipalities involved in the establishment of a joint OPP contract have
suggested that County Council develop a recommendation regarding the three
municipal appointments to the five member Police Services Board and that the
County Chief Administrative Officer prepare the necessary resolutions and by-
laws, for consideration by the municipalities. The following report addresses
these suggestions and provides key background material on Police Services
Boards.
Appointments To the Police Services Board (PSB):
The Police Services Act requires that the five-member PSB be composed of two
members of Council (appointed by resolution), and one community member (also
appointed by Council resolution), and the remaining two members be appointed
by the Province as Orders-In-Council. Accordingly, the following appointment
process for the three municipal appointments is presented for your consideration:
1 elected representative from Eastern Elgin (Bayham and Malahide)
1 elected representative from Central Elgin
1 community member from Western Elgin (Southwold, Dutton/Dunwich and
West Elgin)
It is understood that the appointments would commence as soon as Council
resolutions have been received from all municipalities and would end on
December 31, 2000, since this is an election year (see sample resolution in
Appendix A attached).
County Council should also consider recommending to the in-coming Councils in
January, the length of term of the appointments (ie. one year, two year or three
year terms). Council may wish to recommend individuals as Provincial
appointees to the Ministry of the Solicitor General, although there is no guarantee
that these recommendations will be endorsed.
2
By-law Reauirement:
Under the Police Services Act, each participating Council shall pass a by-law
creating a police services Board and specifying the size and legal name of the
Board (see sample by-law in Appendix B attached). This by-law is then
forwarded to the County and the County will forward the by-laws, on behalf of the
municipalities, to the Public Appointments Unit at the Ministry of the Solicitor
General.
Resolution Reauirement:
Each municipality has previously passed a resolution agreeing to the
establishment of a nine (9) member PSB, however, upon review of the applicable
legislation it has been determined that a five (5) member PSB must be
established. Accordingly, each participating municipality should pass a new
resolution agreeing to the establishment of a 5 member board and rescinding any
previous resolution that is contrary (see Appendix C attached).
Conclusion:
In order to expedite the approval process, County Council should name the
municipaL Œpreseotatives_to_Jhe_F'SB through a recommendation-to-thesix
participating municipalities (see Appendix A). In addition, the draft by-law
contained in Appendix B and the suggested resolution in Appendix C should be
forwarded to the municipalities, for execution with the recommendation of
appointments. Each municipality would direct their responses to the attention of
the County Chief Administrative Officer who, in turn, would submit the
documentation to the Ministry of the Solicitor General on their behalf.
Recommendation:
THAT the report from the County Chief Administrative Officer entitled
"Establishing a Police Services Board", dated June 21st, 2000, be approved,
along with the attached Appendices as completed by County Council, for
consideration by the six municipalities participating in the group contract for OPP
services.
ALL of which is respectfully submitted,
,~/)
Mark G. McDonald,
Chief Administrative Officer.
3
Appendix A
That the following be appointed to the Police Services Board, known as the Elgin
Group, effective upon ratification by all six participating municipalities for a term
ending on December 31, 2000:
1.
an elected member representing
Bayham and Malahide.
2.
an elected member representing
Central Elgin
3.
a community member representing
Southwold, DuttonlDunwich and
West Elgin
4
Appendix B
SAMPLE BY-LAW
ESTABLISHING A JOINT BOARD
WHEREAS section 5.0 of the Police Services Act specifies that a council may
enter into an agreement under section 10 of the Act, alone or jointly with one or
more other councils to have police services provided by the Ontario Provincial
Police;
AND WHEREAS the Councils of the Corporation of the Municipalities of
Bayham, Central Elgin, DuttonlDunwich, West Elgin, the Townships of Malahide
and Southwold, h,ave entered into a contract agreement with the Ontario
Provincial Police to provide services to the six (6) municipalities;
AND WHEREAS section 10(3) of the Police Services Act specifies that in order
for two or more municipalities to enter into an agreement under this section, the
municipalities must have a joint board;
THEREFORE, be it enacted that a Joint Police Services Board consisting of five
members, as provided by section 27(5) of the Police Services Act, as amended,
be hereby constituted and that such board be know as the "Elgin Group".
5
Appendix C
THAT the Council of the Corporation of
Agrees with the establishment of a five
(5) member Police Services Board for the Elgin Group and all recommendations
contrary to this one be rescinded.
MAY 26 '00 11:54 FR
TO 815196337661
P.02/14
MAY 26 '00 11:59 FR
TO 815196337661
P.05/14
ROLE OF THE POLICE SERVICES BOARD
IN AN Opp CONTRACT LOCATION
Police Services Act, R.S.O. 1990, as amended, sec. 10(9)
10. (9) If one or more municipalities enters into an agreement under this section, the
board or joint board shall advise the Ontario Provincial Police detachment
commander assigned to the municipality or municipaJities, or his or her designate,
with respect to police services in the municipality or municipalities and shall,
(a) participate in the selection of the detachment commander of the detachment
assigned to the municipality or municipalities;
(b) generally determine objectives and priorities for police services, after
consultation with the detachment commander or his or h~ designate;
(c) establish, aft~ consultation with the detachment commander or his or her
designate, any local policies with respect to police services (but the board or joint
board shall not establish provincial policies of the Ontario Provincial Police with
respect to police services);
(d) monitor the p~fonllance of the detachment commander;
(e) receive regular reports from the detachment command~ or his or her designate
on disclosures and decisions made und~ section 49 (secondary activities);
(f) review the detachment commander's administration of the complaints system
under Part V and receive regular reports trom the detachment commander or his
or her designate on his or her administration of the complaints system
Public Appointments Unit
Police Support Programs Branch
1999
MAY 26 '00 12:00 FR
TO 815196337661
P.07/14
Suggestions for Selection of a 'Community Member'
Section 27 of the revised Police Service~' Act specifies that one position on a police services
board shall be that of a "person appointed by resolution of the council, who is neither a member of
the council nor an employee of the municipality".
The ministry has received a number of requests to provide suggestions for selecting a board
member for this newly created position. While the municipality may wish to follow its current
local practices used in appointing citizens to other boards, the following is a outline of possible
"best practices" which may assist council in the process of selecting the community member.
In a community served by a municipal police service, it is recommended that a candidate for 11
police services board possess the following qualifications:
· good communications skills, both written and verbal
· experience in budgeting and fmance
· experience in contract negotiation and dispute resolution
· volunteer service in the community
· previous experience on boards or committees
Although the Police Services Act does not specifY that board members must reside in the
municipality in which they serve, it is felt that it is preferable that they have ties to the
community either through residence or ownership of a business
It is suggested that candidates undergo an interview conducted by a panel to determine their
understanding of the role ofthe police services board in the community, particularJy the aspect
of civilian governance of a police service,
Included in the interview should be a discussion ofthe time commitment involved in serving
on a police services board, On the average, members serving in small to medium- sized
communities report that approximately 20 hours per month are required to carry out their
duties.
In addition to the regular monthly board meetings, candidates should be made aware that
there are training sessions, zone meetings, conferences and sub-committee meetings to attend.
Often, applicants to police service boards are unaware of the considerable time above and
beyond one meeting a month that is required to perform this function. Frequently, applicants
to the ministry have raised issues such as baby-sitting costs, mileage, traveling expenses and
other costs associated with their board duties.
It is suggested that candidates undergo a police security clearance as a condition oftheir
appointment to the board and that business and personal references be provided to the
selection panel.
(;g
Prepared By: Public Appointments Unit
MAY 26 '00 12:00 FR
TO 815196337661
P.081'14
Community Member Position
Su~!!ested interview Questions
I. Js :.ny l11ember of your Family sroving as an officer with the (name of municipal police 5elVicc or Opp
detac1lmenr)?
2, Do you, or any member of your family, seU goods or setVÍces to the (name ofpoliec servicclOPP detachment)?
3. Do you live or own a business in the area policed by (name of police selVice/OPPdetaehment)?
4. The time commitl11cnt required of a board member is generaJly greater than one board meeting per mont1l and
iueludes work on sub-commi\!.ees. attendance at training sessions, zone meetings, conferences or public
meelings It is estimated that the thue commitment is approximately 20 hours per month. How flexible is your
time, as some of these functions involve weekends and evenings?
5. We are secking candidates who have an awareness of pOlicing issues specific to this community; e1<pcrience in
policy ITk1king and budgeting and who have done volunteer work in the community. Would you please discuss
your experience as it rclate.~ to our requirements.
G. What is the relationshi p betweeu a police services board and the police setvicclOPP detachment, and what are
the duties and responsibilities of the board (NOTE: the duties of municipal police services boards differ from
those of boards in an Opp contract location. See Police Service.. Act as amended, 1997.
(Note: Candidate should understand thaI it is a civilian go.erning body.
In the case of a mUI,¡ci"al Dolioe selVices board, the answer might include: working with the chief in setting
policing priorities: involvement in strdtCgic plannhtg; financial management; police complaints process;
board ro]e in labour negotiations and collective bargaining; board serves as a liaison between police service
and the community.)
In the case of an opp contract board, the candidate should understand that IDe board l)works with the
detaclnnent commander in determining the poJicing priorities of the community; 2) ensures that the
community is receiving the level of policing as set out in the contract 3) is involved in the selection of the
detachment commander: 4) acts as a liaison between tlle OPP and the community it serves.
7. As a board member you may find yourself in situations where there are a number of conflicting viewpoints
regarding an issue. Could you please describe for us the steps that might be taken to resolve an issue in the
course of board disoussions.
8. Are you aware of any programs or initiatives that are currently being used by the (ruune of police serviee/OPP
detaehmem)'1 Are there any programs you would like to see initiated by the poJice in the community?
9. Board metnbers are frequently approached by the local media and asked about board business. decisions, etc.
How would you handle media inquiries? (should be aware that boards generally have a protocol for handling
the media. i.e. there is OlÚY 011e spokespersQ1l.
10. Can you tell us why you would like to selVe on the board and what you hope to accomplish?
Prcp¡u\!d hy: Public Appointm(~1l1s. Unjt
Policing ServiceS Division
Minisuy oftbí: Sol~tor G~M1'.al
2000
Tenn of
office
Ssme.~nd
r=ppoinr-
ment
Idem
RemuMr.
ðtion
Pe~ns who
~re incligible
lobe
mcmbcn.
ofab~,d
Trom...ition
MAY 26 '00 12:01 FR
TO 815196337661
Term of Office - Community Member
(10.1) The term of office for a member
appointed by resolution of a council shall be
as Set out by the council in his or her appoint·
ment. but shall nOt exceed the term of office
of the council that appointed the member.
(10.2) A member appointed by resolution
of a council may continue to sit after the
expiry of his or her term of office until the
appointment of his or her succeSSOr, and is
eligible for reappointment, 1997, c.8.
s.19(2).
(II) If the position òf a member who is
appointed by a municipal councilor holds
office by virtue of being the head of a munici-
pal council becomes vacant. the board shall
notify the council, which shall forthwith
appoint a replacement.
(12) The council shall pay the members of
the board who are appointed by the Lieutenant
Governor in Council or Solicitor General
remuneration that is at IeaS! equal to the pre-
scribed amount. R.S,O. 1990, c. P,15, s.27
(11, 12).
(13) A judge, a justice of the peace, a
poJice officer and a person who practíses
criminal law as a defence counsel may not be
a member of a board,
(14) The members of a board, including
persons described in subsection (13), who arc
in office immediately before subsection 19 (3)
of the Police Services Amendment Act, 1997
comes into force may continue to be members
until the expiry of their terms. 1997, c. 8,
s. 19 (3).
(10.1) La durée du mandat d'un mcmbre
nommé par résolution d'un conseil est indi-
qu~ par Ie conseil dans I'acte de nomination
du membre, mais ne doit pas dépasser la durée
du mandat du conseil qui a nommé Ie mem-
bre.
(10.2) Tout membre nommé par résolution
d'un eonseil peut continuer de siéger après
I'expiration de son mandat jusqu'à la nomina·
tion de son successeur. et son mandat est re-
nouvclable, 1997, chap. 8, par. 19 (2).
(11) Si Je poste d'un membre qui est nom·
mé par un conseil municipal ou qui occupe ¡e
poste en tant que président d'un tel conseil
devient vacant, la commission de police en
avise Je conseil, qui l}o"mme sans déJai un rem-
plaçant.
(12) U conseil verse aux membres de Ia
commission de police qu.i sont nommés par Ie
lieutenant..gouverneur en conseil ou 1e sollici·
teur général une rémunération d'un montant
égal ou supérieur au montant prescrit. L.R.O.
1990. chap. P.IS, par. 27 (11) et (12).
(13) Ne peuvent être membres d'une com-
mission de police, los juges, Jes juges de paix,
les agents de police et les personnes qui exer-
cent Ie droit criminel à titre d'avocats do Ia
défense.
(14) Les membres d'une commISSIon de
police, y compris Ies personnes visées au para-
graphe (13), qui sont en fonction immédiate-
ment avant !'entrée' en vigueur du paragraphe
19 (3) de la Loi de 1997 _diflllnlla Loi sur
Ies services policiers peuvent continuer d'être
membros jusqu'à ¡'expiration de ¡eut mandaI.
1997, chap. 8, par. 19 (3).
P.09/14
Dur6:du
matl&t
Idem: renou·
vcllc:ment du
mand~~
¡clem
Rt:munéra·
tion
PCfSonne~
in:¡dmissi.
b1~~titte.dc
memb~
d"une com-
mÌS5.ion de
police
Disposition
tnmsitoirc
MRY 26 '00 12:02 FR
TO 815196337661
P.101'14
Oath of Office for Police Services Board Members
Ontario Regulation ] 44/91
1, The oath or affirmation of office to be taken bv a member of the board shall be in one
of the following fonns:
I solemnly swear (affirm) that I will be loyal to Her Majesty the Queen and to Canada.
and that I will ùphold the Constitution of Canada and that I will, to the best of my
ability, discharge my duties as a member of the (insert name ofmunicipaliry) Police
Services Board faithfully, impartially and according to the Police Service Act, any
other Act, and any regulation, rule or by-law,
So help me God.(Omit this line in an aJJirmation.)
or
I solemnly swear (affirm) that I wi\1 be loyal to Canada, and that I will uphold the
Constitution of Canada and that I wil1, to the best of my ability, discharge my duties as
a member of the (insert name of municipality) Police Services Board faithfully,
impartially and according to the Police Services Act, any other Act, and any
regulation, rule or by-law.
So help me God. (Omit this line in an Affirmation.)
O. Reg" 499/95, s. 1
MAY 26 '00 12:02 FR
TO 815196337661
P.11/14
o. Reg. 123/98 -- GENERAL
I
PART I
REMUNERATION OF POLICE SERVICES BOARDS MEMBERS -- s. 1
1. A municipality shall pay to each board member who is appointed by the
Lieutenant Governor in Council or the Solicitor General,
(a) in cities having a population exceeding 500,000 according to the last revised
assessment roll, not less than $1,000 a year;
(b) in cities having a population exceeding 100,000 and not exceeding 500,000
according to the last revised assessment roll, not less than $500 a year;
(c) in cities having a population not exceeding 100,000 according to the last
revised assessment roll, not less than $300 a year;
(d) in municipalities other than cities, not less than $100 a year.
MAY 26 '00 12:02 FR
TO 815196337661
P.12/14
Oath of Secrecy for Police Services Board Secretary/Administrator
The following Oath of Secrecy is taken from the Public Services Act and
may be administered to the Board Secretary/administrator:
I, (name) do swear (or solemnly affirm) that I will faithfully discharge
my duties as Police Services Board Secretary (Administrator) and will
observe and comply with the laws of Canada and Ontario, and except as
I may be legally authorized or required, I will not disclose or give to any
person any information or document that comes to my knowledge or
possession by reason of my being Board Secretary (administrator).
So help me God. (omit this phrase in an affirmation)
Public Appointments Unit
Policing Services Division
1999
MAY 26 '00 12:03 FR
TO 815196337661
P. 13/14
CODE OF CONDUCT
For Members of Police Services Boards
Police Services Act Ont. Reg. 421/97
1 Board rnembers shall attend and actively participate in all board meetings.
2 Board members shall not interfere with the police force's operational decisions and
responsibilities or with the day-to-day operation of the police force, including the recruitment
and promotion of police officers.
3, Board members shall undergo any training that may be provided or required for them by tne
Solicitor General.
4. Board members shall keep confidential any information disclosed or discussed at a meeting of
the board, or part of a meeting of the board, that was closed to the public,
5, No board member shall purport to speak on behalf ofthe board unless he or she is authorized
by the board to do so.
6. A board member who expresses disagreement with a decision of the board shall make it clear
that he or she is expressing a personal opinion.
7. Board members shall discharge their duties loyally, faithfully, impartially and according to the
Act, any other Act and any regulation, rule or by-law, as provided in their oath or affirmation
of office.
8. Board members shall uphold the letter and spirit of the Code of Conduct set out in this
Regulation and shall discharge their duties in a manner that will inspire public confidence in
the abilities and integrity of the board.
9, Board members shall discharge their duties in a manner that respects the dignity of individuals
and in accordance with the Human Rights Code and the Charter of Rights and Freedoms
(Canada).
J O. Board members shall not use their office to advance their interests or the interests of any
person or organization with whom or with which they are associated.
11. (1) Board members shall not use their office to obtain employment with the board or the
police force for themselves or their family member.
(2) For the purpose of subsection (1) "family member" means the parens spouse or child of
the person, as those terms are defined in section 1 of the Municipal Conflict of Interest Act.
MAY 26 '00 12:03 FR
TO 815196337661
P.14/14
Code of Conduct (continued)
12. A board member who applies for employment with the police force, including employment on
contract or on a fee for service, shall immediately resign ITOm the board,
13, Board members shall refrain ITom engaging in conduct that would discredit or compromise the
integrity of the board or the police force.
14. A board member whose conduct or performance is being investigated or inquired into by the
Commission under section 25 of the Act shall decline to exercise his or her duties as a
member of the board for the duration of the investigation or inquiry"
15. If the board determines that a board member has breached the Code of Conduct set out in this
Regulation, the board shall record that determination in its minutes and may,
(a) require the member to appear before the board and be reprirnanded~
(b) request that the Ministry of the Solicitor General conduct an investigation into the
member's conduct; or
(c) request that the Commission conduct an investigation into the member's conduct under
section 25 of the Act.
** TOTAL PAGE. 14 **
06/26/00 MON 12:34 FAX 519 866 3884
MUNICIPALITY OF BAYHAM
141 002
~&\.y~
Municipality of
Bayham
" .;':~f <~\?': :" .,",,:"','
.." ·I!,( ...".".."
~,' "", ",. ;/"::~, ':':' .:::: ",:',
":''.~''','' " ":,' ,<,,;: ::. :: ;:/
o :.: s"
:ÞPO.ttll..lty l,¡'"lØ-"
P.O. Box L60, 9344 Plank Road.
Strafforclvilk, Ontario NOJ lYO
TeJ:(519) 866-5521 . Fax: (519) 866-3884
email: bayham@bayham.on.ca
June 26, 2000
Fax No. (519) 633-7661
Mark McDonald
Chief Administrative Officer
Cow1ly of Elgin
450 Sunset Dr.
St. Thomas, ON
N5R5VI
Dear Mr. McDonaJd,
Re: Appointments - Police Services Board
Further to the proposed composition of and appointments to the Police SerVices Board,
please be advised that the Council of the Municipality of Bayham COI1sidered potential
appointees at its meeting June 22"\ 2000.
After careful consideration, Council adopted a resolution which included the following:
"That the Municipality of Bayham recommends the appointment of
Councillor Cliff Evanitski to serve a.l· an East Elgin representative on the
Police Services Board. "
Council is confident that Councillor Evanitski has the interest and background to serve
the Board well. Some background information on his qualifications is attached.
It would be most appreciated if you would mange for this request to be brought forward
by County Council in jts deliberations regarding Board membership.
Should you require anything further, please do not hesitate to contact me.
06/26/00 MON 12:33 FAX 519 866 3884
MUNICIPALITY OF BAYHM1
1Þ~y~
Municipality of
Bayham
:"':::1'1::':"'>, :,::" , ,
" " '.. .., ',' .,
. ""n" .,.
: ~~ .':" ': ," "',',::, ",,:, \
" ,,' ,',' .'
. ' . , , .,
o ~('
:ÞÞOrtonity 1.. "to
p.o. Box 160,9344 Plank Road,
St.r3ffordville, Ontario NO] I YO
Tel: (519) 866-552J . Fa..'I:' (519) 866-3884
erna;l: bayham@bayham.on.ca
June 26, 2000
Fax No. (519) 633-7661
Mark McDonald
Chief Administrative Officer
County ofE/gin
450 Sunset Dr,
St. Thomas, ON
N5R SVI
Dear Mr. McDonald,
Rc: Opp Contract - Invoicinl! and Police Services Board
~001
...."..F.\:='¡,..~.
~w~.-,.
~"';!'Im', :.'. !:.~
~: 1~ , " 't:.T1
;'~' 00'1..
\~~¡)~
Th.is is further to your cOlTespondence dated June lStl" 2000, regarding invoicing for police
services, and also regarding the issue ofthe proposed composition of the Police Services Board.
I am pleased to advise that the Council of the Municipality of Bayham adopted the following
resolution at its meeting June 22''',2000:
"ThaI the Municipality of Bayham hereby confirms ilS approval of Option 2
(Enhanced Service) in the proposal for conn-act policing form the Ontario
Provincial Police dated January 25''', 2000, and agrees thai Policing Serviceð'
shall be provided by the O.P.P.
That the Munžcipalily of Bayham CIgrees that the Police Services Board for Ihe
joint police services contract shall be comprised of five members, pursuant 10 the
Police Service.~ Aa
That Ihe County of Elgin be advised rhe Municipalily of Bayham CK:cepts the
funding method whereby the Counly direcIly invoices the member local
municipalilieJ, instead of a special upper-tier levy.
And thai ¡he Municipalily of Bayham recommends the appoinlment ofCounci1lor
Cliff Evanits/d 10 serve as an East Elgin repnçenralive 011 the Police Services
Euard, "
Should you require anything further, please do not hesitate to contact me.
uo/~o/uu MUN ll:J4 rAÅ 519 ð66 Jð84
Ml~IÇIPALITY OF BAYHAM
I4i 003
PROFESSIONAL BIOGRAPHY
Cliff Evanitski
Cliff Evanitski is owner of Write Way Communications, a consulting company
providing a variety of media, public and government relations' services. He was
elected to the Municipality of Bayham's Ward 3 seat in July of 1998.
Prior to starting his own company, Cliff worked as a reporter, firstly with CJBK
Radio in London. Then from 1988 to 1992, Cliff was a photojournalist, reporter
and eventually assignment editor with Maritime Independent Television (MITV) in
Halifax. As a broadcaster, Cliff specialized in covering municipal issues with a
focus on the police and fire beats. His understanding of and ability to work with
police officials led to his role as producer of a local Crimestoppers series in Metro
Halifax. Cliff has also participated on committees that formulated media relations
policies for the Halifax and Dartmouth Police Departments.
Ð6/21/2ÐÐÐ 1Ð:42
7735334
MALAHIDE TOWNSHIP
PAGE Ðl
Township of
MALAHIDE
87 John Street South,
Aylmer, Ontario N5H 20
Telephone: (519) 773-5344
Fax: (519) 773-5334
Email: malahide@township.malalùde.on.ca
www.township.m.a1ahide.on...ca
June 21, 2000
Association of Municipalities of
Ontario,
393 University Avenue, Suite 1701,
Toronto, Ontario.
M5G IE6
Dear Sirs:
RE: Province Wide Smoking Policy.
Malahide Township Council has reviewed the Resolution regarding "Province Wide Smoking
Policy" and has concerns that the Resolution is too broad in its terms. Council notes that tobacco
is a legal product and those that use it should not be discriminated against.
Council believe that there U'e businesses where smoking should be tolerated and others where
Council believes a smoking environment should not be tolerated.
Council would not like to see a u.niforrn standard imposed on all businesses or municipalities,
Businesses should have the right to choose if they want to offer their clientele a smoking and/or
non~smoking environment. Employees should be aware of the designation prior to accepting
employment.
The freedom of choice should remain with the individuals.
Council strongly believes that decision making with regard to this matter should be carried out on
. .
a local level and handled by the local municipal Councils.
Malahide Township Council does not believe that AMO should be supporting or promoting
discriminatory legislation.
Malahide Township Council asks that the above letter be circulated to the membership for
support.
Yours very truly,
TOWNSHIP OF MALAHIDE
é?~
R. MILLARD, C.A.O.lCLERK
Copy - Council /"
- County ofElgin. [/.
C:\MyFil@\djana'sfilC5\R.a.ndy\âmo·smoidng.-jun2 14.wpd
!\AI'DALL R. MILLARD
C.AO./Cld
~û: clerk@tuw11Sh¡p.mala~iJ.e.o{'\.c:I
..
.~
~
. ,u~·
SUSAN E. WrLSON
Tn!'4SUrt::"
Ern.:¡il; rr.e:~surl:r@tClwn~h(p.ma!l'lh1de.or;.c~
The Ontario Flue-Cured Tobacco Growers' Marketing Board
P.O. BOX 70, TILLSONBURG, ONTARIO, CANADA N4G 4H4 . TEL. (519) 842-3661 FAX. (519) 842-7813
May 23, 2000
MAY 25 2000
Deaf Municipal Officer:
As an elected municipal official for our tobacco growing region of Southwestern Ontario,
we would like to bring the attached resolution, proposed by the AMO Board, to your
attention. This resolution will be on the floor at the next annual AMO meeting in Ottawa
in August 2000.
I am certain our Board members and fellow producers would be interested in hearing
your thoughts and intended approach to the proposed resolution.
We look forward to your response.
Sincerely yours,
THE ONTARIO FLUE-CURED TOBACCO
GROWERS' MARKETING BOARD
4/~--
George Gilvesy I
Chairman
/kd
57
'-
Proposed AMO Conference Resolution
43
.....
Province-Wide Smoking Policy
WHEREAS it has been determined that second-hand tobacco smoke is a health hazard because
of its irritating and discomforting properties, adverse effect and risk to heaith. and to persons who
reside and work in the Province of Ontario: and
WHEREAS ¡tis desirable to provide for the regulation of smoking and second-hand smoke for the
health, safety and welfare of the person who reside and work in the Province of Ontario and for
the better protection of persons from conditions injurious to health; and
WHEREAS the Province of Ontario has implemented initiatives through public health programs
and targets regarding the air quality with programs such as the DriveClean program and by
prohibiting smoking on school properties; and
WHEREAS provinciallegislatíon and regulation would ensure a uniform approach and thus a level
playing field for the public and other affected stakeholders throughoutthe Province of Ontario and
would ensure a viable approach in regulating smoking in public places and workplaces; and
WHEREAS matters with respect to health clearly fall under the mandate of the Government of
Ontario;
~
THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT AMO seek the Government of Ontario's commitment to
safe guard the citizens pf all municipalities in a uniform and ccnsistent manner from the health
hazards that result from smoking in public places and workpiaces; and
FURTHER BE IT RESOLVED THAT AMO petition the Government of Ontario to recognize its
heaith protection role in this regard and to immediately move to a provincially established smoking
policy and standard.
t......J
58
REPORT TO COUNTY COUNCIL
FROM: CLAYTON WATTERS, MANAGER
ENGINEERING SERVICES
DATE: APRIL 12, 2000
SUBJECT: STRUCTURES IN LOWER TIERS
Introduction
This report provides further information to the report titled "Structures in Lower Tiers" from
January 31, 2000. It also serves to illustrate the value of the structures in both the Lower Tiers
and the Upper Tier.
Discussionl Conclusion
The current County of Elgin system classifies any structure that uses a deck/superstructure to
transfer the load to the foundations as a bridge. Any structure that uses a combination of
significant granular layers and a pipe or box is classified as a culvert. It is only necessary to
inspect structures greater than 3 meters or 20 feet every two years. It is prudent to inspect
structures less than 3 meters at least every 5 years.
There are three alternatives to consider with respect to the Lower Tier Structures:
1. Lower Tier maintains ownership and contracts out inspection/management
2. Lower Tier maintains ownership and County completes inspection
3. County assumes ownership of all structures
The principal benefits to the County assuming ownership of the lower tier structures are:
>- achieve legal and safety requirements
>- moderate expenditures
>- cost savings
The charts on pages 2 and 3 illustrate the total number of structures per municipality, average
age, replacement costs, and the costs per year to maintain each set of infrastructure. The
weighted average age and weighted average cost are shown for bridges and culverts.
If we assume lifespans of 100 years for bridges and 125 years for culverts, we can calculate the
cost to maintain each system per year. The addition of the cost to maintain/year for both the
bridge and culvert systems is shown on the bottom line of each page.
14
...2
Page 2
Upper Tier Structures
BRIDGES
Expected Lifespan= 100
Num. Of Ave. Age
Struct. (years)
Ave. Repl.
Cost ($)
Cost to
Total Cost($) Maintain/year($)
West Elgin
Dutton/Dunwich
Southwold
Central Elgin
Malahide
Bayham
Aylmer
8 27.6 $ 816,250.00 $ 6,530,000.00 $ 65,300.00
4 38.8 $ 975,000.00 $ 3,900,000.00 $ 39,000.00
6 66.0 $ 616,666.67 $ 3,700,000.00 $ 37,000.00
14 46.0 $ 748,214.29 $ 10,475,000.00 $ 104,750.00
13 29.5 $ 596,153.85 $ 7,750,000.00 $ 77,500.00
10 41.8 $ 1,130,000.00 $ 11,300,000.00 $113,000.00
2 37.5· $ 700,000.00 $ 1,400,000.00 $ 14,000.00
Total =
Weighted Ave. Age=
Weighted Ave. Cost=
57
40.2
$ 790,438.60
$ 45,055,000.00
$ 450,550.00
CULVERTS
Num. Of Ave. Age
Struct. (years)
Ave. Repl.
Cost ($)
Expected Lifespan = 125
Cost to
Total Cost($) Maintain/year($)
West Elgin
Dutton/Dunwich
Southwold
Central Elgin
Malahide
Bayham
Aylmer
9 49.1 $166,666.67 $1,500,000.00 $ 12,000.00
14 36.6 $185,714.29 $ 2,600,000.00 $ 20,800.00
16 38.6 $183,333.33 $ 2,933,333.33 $ 23,466.67
15 35.0 $185,000.00 $ 2,775,000.00 $ 22,200.00
19 28.5 $141,176.47 $ 2,682,352.94 $ 21,458.82
4 20.8 $ 300,000.00 $ 1,200,000.00 $ 9,600.00
0 0.0 $- $- $-
Total =
Weighted Ave. Age=
Weighted Ave. Cost=
77
35.4
$177,801.12
$ 13,690,686.27
$ 109,525.49
COMBINED
Weighted Ave. Age= 37.4
Weighted Ave. Cost= $ 438,400.64
Total Replac. Value = $ 58,745,686.27
Cost to Maintain/yr = $ 560,075.49
~
15
...3
Page 3
LOWER TIER STRUCTURES
BRIDGES
# Of Ave. Age Ave. Replacement
Struct. (years) Cost ($)
Expected Lifespan = 100
Cost to
Total Cost ($) Maintain/year($)
West Elgin
Dutton/Dunwich
Southwold
Central Elgin
Malahide
Bayham
Aylmer
10 41.0 $ 132,500.00 $ 1,325,000.00 $ 13,250.00
2 70.0 $ 150,000.00 $ 300,000.00 $ 3,000.00
7 53.6 $ 292,857.14 $ 2,050,000.00 $ 20,500.00
17 46.5 $ 388,000.00 $ 6,596,000.00 $ 65,960.00
16 49.1 $ 214,000.00 $ 3,424,000.00 $ 34,240.00
10 59.6 $ 255,000.00 $ 2,550,000.00 $ 25,500.00
2 38.5 $ 1,000,000.00 $ 2,000,000.00 $ 20,000.00
Total = 64
$ 18,245,000.00
$ 182,450.00
Weighted Ave. Age = 49.6
Weighted Ave. Cost = $ 285,078.13
CULVERTS
Num. Of Ave. Age
Struct. (years)
Ave. Repl.
Cost ($)
Expected Lifespan = 125
Cost to
Total Cost ($) Maintain/year($)
West Elgin
Dutton/Dunwich
Southwold
Central Elgin
Malahide
Bayham
Aylmer
26 31.8 $91,153.85 $ 2,370,000.00 $ 18,960.00
23 50.7 $102,173.91 $ 2,350,000.00 $ 18,800.00
12 24.1 $ 92,083.33 $1,105,000.00 $ 8,840.00
17 33.0 $ 87,647.06 $ 1,490,000.00 $ 11,920.00
17 36.2 $ 99,117.65 $ 1,685,000.00 $ 13,480.00
7 41.4 $102,857.14 $ 720,000.00 $ 5,760.00
1 70.0 $ 100,000.00 $ 100,000.00 $ 800.00
Total = 103
Weighted Ave. Age= 37.1
Weighted Ave. Cost= $ 95,339.81
$ 9,820,000.00
$ 78,560.00
COMBINED
Weighted Ave. Age= 41.9
Weighted Ave. Cost= $ 168,053.89
Total Replc. Value = $28,065,000.00
Costta Maintain/yr= $ 261,010.00
1 6
...4
Page 4
Conclusion
The total cost to maintain the Upper Tier bridges is $450,550.00 and the total for culverts is
$109.525.49. The yields a total yearly cost of $560,075.49 for the Upper Tier structure system.
The total cost to maintain the Lower Tier bridges is $182,450.00 and the total for culverts is
$78,560.00. The yields a total yearly cost of $266,01 0.00 for the Lower Tier structure system.
Alternatively, the County could provide inspection services only, which would necessitate
rearranging the Construction Technologists work schedule and hiring additional summer staff
for the construction season ( see separate report).
Recommendation
That a by-law be prepared to assume from the lower tiers all structures greater than 3.0 meters
in span and that the 2000 Engineering Services Budget be increased by $261,000 to account
for load capacity evaluations, inspections, capital and miscellaneous projects.
~U~L Y SUP'/lfTTED
Ol%~ß .
CLAYTON D. WATTERS, MANAGER
ENGINEERING SERVICES
MA ONALD
CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER
7 17
REPORT TO COUNTY COUNCIL
FROM: CLAYTON WATTERS, MANAGER
ENGINEERING SERVICES
DATE: JANUARY 31,2000
SUBJECT: CONNECTING LINKS IN LOWER TIERS
Introduction
At the April 13, 1999 County Council meeting of the report on Connecting Links in the Lower
Tiers was deferred to a future meeting for discussion prior to the 2000 budget.
Discussion/ Conclusion
Connecting links are roads that are owned by the local municipality but had a provincial
designation. These roads provided a "connecting link or continuity" to the provincial highway
system. These roads are in the Villages of West Lome, Port Stanley, Aylmer, Belmont and Port
Burwell as well as two sections in Port Bruce that connected the new highway to the old
highway.
County Council directed staff "to investigate the costs and other implications of the County
assuming responsibility for connecting links" - Table I and /I lists the capital costs (work that is
required in 1 to 5 years) and annual road maintenance costs.
Continuity of the road system is the main focus of the County to assume the roads. The link in
West Lome, or Graham Road, would connect with County Road 76 on the north and south
limits of the village. In Belmont, or Belmont Road, the link would connect with County Road 74
on the north and south limits of the village. The link in Aylmer, or John Street, would connect
with County Road 73 on the north and south limits of Aylmer. The link in Port Stanley, Colbome
StreeU Bridge Street, would connect with Joesph Street Hill and Carlow Road. The link in Port
Burwell, or Robinsion Street, would connect with Bridge Street and Wellington Street.
The above cases require that the County assume the roads for continuity. The old connecting
link will connect roads on either side of the village to a county road. In the case of Port Bruce
the County Road connects to the same point. Therefore this road acts like a crescent, which is
a local road. This is similar to Port Stanley where the County requires only a portion of the old
connecting link, we do not require the road from the west side of Carlow Road to the beach.
~
1 8
...2
REPORT TO COUNTY COUNCIL
FROM: CLAYTON WATTERS, MANAGER
ENGINEERING SERVICES
DATE: JANUARY 31,2000
SUBJECT: CONNECTING LINKS IN LOWER TIERS
PAGE 2.
The implications of assuming the roads are liability, annual maintenance costs and capital
costs. The County's liability would increase but there would be a corresponding decrease at the
lower tier. The annual County road maintenance allocation would increase by $19,800 with a
corresponding decrease in the lower tier municipalities. Also an annual increase in the capital
budget of $90,000 would be required every year to meet basic minimum capital needs.
The Draft 2000 Engineering Services Budget has not accounted for these expenditures
however should Council wish to proceed the following recommendation is presented.
Recommendation
That the County assume all of Graham Road in the former Village of West Lorne, now part of
the Municipality of West Elgin; and,
That the County assume all of Belmont Road in the former Village of Belmont, now part of the
Municipality of Central Elgin; and,
That the County assume all of John Street in Aylmer; and,
That the County assume Bridge Street from the west limit of Carlow Road to the east limit of
Colborne Street and Colborne Street from the south limit of Bridge Street to the Port Stanley
north limits in the former Village of Port Stanley, now part of the Municipality of Central Elgin;
and,
That the County assume Robinson Street from the north limits of Port Burwell to the south limit
of Wellington Street in the former Village of Port Burwell, now part of the Municipality of
Bayham; and,
That the County revert all roads south of the south limit of Dexter Line to the Municipality of
Malahide; and further,
That the Engineering Services 2000 Budget be increased by $109,800 ($19,800 for
maintenance allocation and $90,000 for capital allocations).
RES(ffW:J¡; Y SUBMITTED
CLAYTON D. WATTERS, MANAGER
ENGINEERING SERVICES
R SUBMISSION
MAR NALD
CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER
I 'j
. .
CONNECTING LINKS ROAD/ STRUCTURE TRANSFER FROM
LOWER TIER MUNICIPALITIES TO COUNTY OF ELGIN
TABLE I
MUNICIPALITY/ KILOMETERS ANNUAL ROAD
ROAD # TOWNSHIP STRUCTURES CAPITAL MAINTENANCE
4 CENTRAL ELGIN 1.97 $285,000 $5,500
PORT STANLEY LIFT 0
BRIDGE (*)
19 BA YHAM 0.86 $30,000 $2,400
73 AYLMER 2.70 $315,000 $7,500
JOHN STREET BRIDGE 0
JOHN STREET CULVERT $5,000
74 CENTRAL ELGIN 1.59 $310,000 $4,400
BELMONT BRIDGE 0
76 WEST ELGIN 1.96 $240,000 $5,500
TOTALS $1,185,000 $25,300
(*) This report assumes that central Elgin will maintain the lift bridge at its cost. All capital costs
will become a County responsibility.
CONNECTING LINKS ROADI STRUCTURE TRANSFER FROM
COUNTY OF ELGIN TO LOWER TIER MUNICIPALITIES
TABLE II
MUNICIPALlTYI KILOMETERS ANNUAL ROAD
ROAD # TOWNSHIP STRUCTURES CAPITAL MAINTENANCE
73 MALAHIDE 1.96 $0 ($5,500)
TOTALS $0 ($5,500
~ "
~(Y;
REPORT TO COUNTY COUNCIL
FROM: CLAYTON WATTERS, MANAGER
ENGINEERING SERVICES
DATE: APRIL 10,2000
SUBJECT: ROAD 42 LAKE BANK EROSION
Introduction
The continuing erosion of the lake bank adjacent to Elgin County Road 42 East of Port Burwell
obligates us to explore the possible solutions and choose the most appropriate and economical
one.
Discussion
Lake bank erosion in this area is caused by an underground perched water table and by wave
action from the Southwest. Sediment is removed from the bottom of the slope and is
transported easterly by lake currents. The perched water exits the bank at mid cliff height
causing weakness and structural collapses. The collapsed sections are then eroded by wave
action and the process repeats. Theses two processes result in general bank erosion at a rate
of 1.5 meters per year and in gullying which can erode 25 meters in a few days.
The protective measures that have been used to delay the gullying effect include:
~ Placing fill, stumps, and straw bales to prohibit erosion
~ Using tiles, stone, and filter cloth to convey groundwater
~ Planting vegetation to hold surface cover
Although these solutions have successfully slowed the erosion gullies, a solution to combat the
general lake bank erosion is necessary. Three possible solutions are as follows:
Relocate Road:
Relocating the road one concession North to Glen Erie Line would require replacement of one
bridge, removal of one bridge, property widening, and road reconstruction for 6.8 kilometers.
The costs would be $350,000 for the bridge replacement, $100,000 for the bridge removal,
$50,000 for the property acquisition, and $220,000/km for road reconstruction. The total cost of
this solution would be $1,996,000.
Build breakwater:
A breakwater could be constructed along the lake bank at a cost of $3,100,000Ikm for 6.4
kilometers. This would include either importing large stone from Northern Ontario or building an
on site concrete batch plant to build large pier blocks. This option would also require the
completion of an Environmental Assessment. The total cost of this solution would be
$19,840,000.
21
...2
Page 2
FROM: CLAYTON WATTERS, MANAGER
ENGINEERING SERVICES
DATE: APRIL 10,2000
SUBJECT: ROAD 42 LAKE BANK EROSION
Do Nothing:
Continued mitigation of the gullies could proceed until the general lake bank erosion consumed
the road. After that time motorists could be permanently detoured to either County Road #45 or
to Glen Erie Line. The total cost for this solution would $75,000 for the year 2000 escalating to
$300,000 in 2010 at which time erosion protection would become uneconomical.
Regardless of the solution chosen, safety to the public should be of prime concern. The local
road superintendent should continue to monitor the erosion gullies weekly. If the erosion gully
sites encroach within 25 meters of the traveled roadway, then the road section would be
immediately closed and the County notified. The shortest detour route would then be used for
all the traffic.
Conclusion
The third solution (Do nothing) is the least costly but does not achieve the responsibility of the
County to provide arterial routes for the travelling public. Safety is also compromised with this
solution, as the lake bank becomes closer and closer to the traveled roadway.
The second solution (Build Breakwater) provides an excellent method of erosion protection for
urban areas, and has been performed in Port Stanley and in Port Burwell. This solution
becomes uneconomical as total length increases and urban density is reduced. As well as
protecting the lake bank, a road reconstruction would be required on this section within the next
five years bringing the total cost higher.
The first solution (Relocate Road) maintains the County's responsibilities to the public while
moderating total costs. It is a long-term solution and provides for the highest level of service of
the three options. Lakeshore Line would remain open for many years. After ten years it would
resemble Gray Line in West Elgin with incomplete throughway. After fifty years it would
resemble the situation south of Nova Scotia Line in Malahide with access through side roads
only.
...3
22
Page 3
FROM: CLAYTON WA TIERS, MANAGER
ENGINEERING SERVICES
DATE: APRIL 10,2000
SUBJECT: ROAD 42 LAKE BANK EROSION
Recommendation
That the County of Elgin proceeds with the first solution of relocating County Road 42 one
concession to the North. This includes the following steps:
}o Form an agreement with Bay ham for assumption of Glen Erie Line
}o Begin property acquisitions for a 100 foot right of way
}o Budget for an expenditure of $2,000,000 ($400,000 per year for five years in reserve)
}o Begin engineering survey and design
RESPE~~/TTED
CLAYTO D. ~TTERS, MANAGER
ENGINEERING SERVICES
OR SUBMISSION
MAR ONALD
CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER
23
TOWN OF AYLMER
ID:519-765-1446
APR 05'00
16:26 No.005 P.Ol
fA
I!O..
OF
AYLMER
~CIL RBSOLU'rIO.
eo_c:1J. _o...be~
MAR 2 7 ZUUU
~ ~ ·········.........1'.....
-- .. /:r:;,-----~.....-
lIecoad.. by ~!Æ~~~M~.r¿eM'.L.....
"That the Counc' of the Town of Aylmer request that John Street not be
Included in the ounty of Elgin's Connecting Link Program; and further,
That the Town of Aylmer request the County of Elgin that it be exempt from
the financing of Its proposed Connecting Link Program."
&.e~
Iliad of CouDcil
~~~
Cler
110. 9..:"
25
TOWN OF AYLMER
ID:519-765-1446
APR 05'00 16:26 No.005 P.02
19
2'0..
or
AYLMER
C'OUIfCZL RBSOLVrZOa
Co1UacU .eu.bens
MAR 2 '{ LUUU .
~~ ~ ··········........1'.....
!l?;;/.:ç¡~..... .
SBC!~IId" ~ . ~4~~.<¿....
"That prior to the Zn~~ :~ ElgIn giving consideration to assumIng bridge
structures greater than 3.0 metres, that the County Engineer be requested
to present his report relating to this matter directly to lower tier
municipalities for their Input."
*-4 br
ßt~~·
lIead of CouDcil
Ci¡lfu .;Y~
110. f &
26
REPORT TO COUNTY COUNCIL
FROM:
Cathy Bishop, Manager of Library Services
DATE:
June 23, 2000
SUBJECT: CONNECT ONTARIO NOTICE OF INTENT
BACKGROUND:
Connect Ontario is an exciting new $82 million initiative to develop a network of
50 connected smart communities across Ontario. The purpose of Connect
Ontario is to transform communities through cooperative partnerships and
innovative use of modern technology. The goal is to spur growth in jobs, new
investment and economic development.
DISCUSSION:
For the past several months the Elgin Community Development Corporation
(ECDC) has coordinated an effort involving various public institutions to
determine the interest in pursing a Connect Ontario Grant. The Province has
requested interested Communities to provide a notice of intent to make
application for funding no later than June 30, 2000. Donna Lunn, is the
community facilitator for the project hired by ECDC through funding provided by
Human Resources Development Canada. Donna will be doing a brief
presentation to council.
CONCLUSION:
Over the next two months, the Province will provide feedback and a preliminary
response to the formation of a 'smart communities" program for Elgin and St.
Thomas. If successful, staff will bring forward a detailed application including the
role of Elgin County for County Council's consideration.
RECOMMENDATION:
THAT the Council of the Corporation of the County of Elgin supports in principle
the letter of intent by Elgin Community Development Corporation (ECDC) to
access funds from Connect Ontario to develop a network of smart communities
and partnership in Elgin and St. Thomas; and,
THAT a full report and application detailing all costs and commitments be
prepared for consideration by all potential funding partners
"'~'
Page 2
Connect Ontario
Letter of Intent
Respectfully Submitted
Approved for Submission
c~~
Cathy Bis p ~
Manager of Library Services
MW
Chief Administrative Off
REPORT TO COUNTY COUNCIL
FROM:
Linda B. Veger, Director of Financial Services
DATE:
May 29, 2000
SUBJECT:
Elgin Manor Re-Build
Introduction/Discussion:
The following estimated costs and revenues were presented to the Building Committee.
Estimated costs associated with rebuilding Elgin Manor:
· Arch itect
· G.S.T.
· Legal, Survey, etc.
· Furniture and Equipment
· Water, Sewer, Decommissioning
· Land
· Construction
Estimated revenues and financing:
· Ministry of Health
· Ministry of Health
· Private Room Rate
· County of Elgin Financing
Assumptions:
6%
3% Net Cost
$150,000
$6,000/bed
$1,OM
$120,000
$120,000/bed
$10.35/diem Additional Operating Per Diem
$2.50/diem Compliance Premium
$9.00/diem - 77 Private Beds @ 75% occupancy
$755,000/annum - already incorporated into annual
budget
· 90 Beds - 77 Private, 1 Respite, 12 Basic
· Revenues are estimated at 100% occupancy. This target is met when the Home achieves an
actual occupancy of 97%.
· The cost per bed includes furnishing, equipment, architect fees, legal, and surveying. This cost
does not include the land purchase.
· The cost per bed is based on a room size of approximately 750 fe. Actual room size may be
reduced as determined by the Committee and Architect.
Based on the above the estimated cost to build is:
Description Amount
Land 120,000
Water and Sewer 1,000,000
Buildinq Construction 10,800,000
G.S.T. 357,600
Total 12,277,600
Revenues and financing per annum:
Two sources of revenues have not been considered in the following summary; 1) the sale of the
nursing home beds, and 2) fundraising.
05/06/00
emrebuil
12
Descri tion
Amount
340,000
82,125
190,000
755,000
Total
1,367,125
Based on an interest rate of 8% per annum, the County would require 15 years, 8 months to pay this
off. The County is in an excellent cash position created by a number of reserves. A portion of the
actual dollars required to finance this project will be provided through our own "cash in bank" which will
reduce financing costs. A portion of these reserves may also serve as a contingency against
increased costs. Construction costs are increasing at an average of 9% per year.
Available reserves include:
Reserve Current Balance
Financinq 1,411,932
Elqin Manor Redevelopment 385,522
Elain Manor Retrofit 143,777
Special Circumstances 922,073
Total 2,863,304
The County will continue to receive the operating per diem ($10.35/diem, $340,000/annum) for a total
of 20 years from the first payment. The compliance premium ($2.50/diem, $82,125/annum) will
continue indefinitely.
Elgin - St. Thomas Health Unit
The County assumed a mortgage held by Manulife Financial. This mortgage matures on April 1, 2001
with a balance of $1 ,613,869 which will utilize a portion of our cash.
Conclusion:
On June 1, 2000 the Building Committee met with the Architect to review preliminary sketches and
cost estimates for the new Home. The Committee agreed that the numbers, although higher than
estimated early in 1999, fall within reasonable parameters given the current costs of construction. Mr.
Mekinda has been invited to the June 27, 2000 Council meeting to provide more detail.
Recommendation:
THAT Council agrees in principle with the preliminary estimates for the rebuild for Elgin Manor; and
THAT the Building Committee be authorized to proceed with planning the new building based on those
estimates; and
THAT the building budget, including furnishings, equipment, architect fees, legal, surveying, land
acquisition, and lot servicing be set at an upset limit of $12.3M.
Respectfully submitted on behalf
Zilding Committee.
~~~
Linda B. Veger
Director of Financial Services
05/06/00
emrebuil
Mark. onald
Chief Administrative Officer
i ~
COUNCIL CORRESPONDENCE - June 27. 2000
Items for Consideration
1. Linda Andrew, Clerk, Township of Ashfield, Province-Wide Moratorium on Liquid
Manure Facilities. (ATTACHED)
2. Ernie Hardeman, Minister of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs, acknowledging
Council's support of the Chatham-Kent's resolution regarding the drainage program
review. (ATTACHED)
3. James Knight, Executive Director, Federation of Canadian Municipalities, regarding
nominations for a Technology in Government Week Distinction Award 2000.
(ATTACHED)
4. Lois Warden, Program Supervisor, Children's Programs and Tom McCallum,
Executive Director, Elgin Association for Community Living, requesting the County's
support for the development and delivery of resources for children with
developmental disabilities and their families. (ATTACHED)
5. Paul Courey, Solicitor, Raphael Partners, with a response to th~ Department of
Justice' legal opinion on the relationship of Fisheries to the Drainage Act.
27
B6/B7/BB 22:19:59 EST; ASSOCIATION OF?-)
1 519 633 7661 CLERK-Elgin Co
Page BB2
JUN-07-00 WED 05:36 PH AHO
FAX NO, 416 971 6191
p, 01
TOWNSHIP OF ASHFIELD
A.R. T, LUCKNOW, ONT, NDG 2HO
MRS. UNDA B. ANDREW, A.M.C.T.
Clsl'II· Treasurer
(519) 529·]383
TOI
ALL ONTAlUO MúNICIP.Al.1'!IXS
FROM',
LINDA ANDREW, CLElU{
PROVINCE·WIDE MORATORIUM ON LIQUl))~ FACILITIES
nE;
Please be advísed Ù11lt m. Courn:il offhe Township of Ashfield adopted !he following rc5olutloD at their meetiDg of
June 6, 2000.
)¡¡]y moved and seconded
WHE:II.EAS The Township of Asbfield has enacted ooe of the most sWlgeat Manore Management By·laws in the
Province of Ontario;
AND WHEREAS thís By·Jaw requ.ires me completioll ora Nutrient M~ement Plan for the cons1r\ etiOD ofnew
livenoe!:: facUities, or the addiÙOII to e~igfu¡g fa¡:ilities, which muJts in a tivcstock operation of over 100 JJIirnaI
Ul!ì~, such pl2ns receiving B third pany revÌOIW by OMAFRA;
AND WHEREAS in ....hfie!d ToWtlsbip, these intcllSive lives1>Jck operations are spreading JiquJd manure with
JU1lOffwhìeh has b_ proven to be enlering the dr,,;nage systems, nweing its way to Lake H1uon, in spill: of the
MlltJure Managemenl By-law, their Nl1Irient Mallagement Plms and the OMAFllA guiddinei;
AND w:HElŒAS the Ministry of the Environmont bao suffered cutbacks to the point !hat ils iJ1Sp= have
admÜœd that they cannot respond to evory eaU ÙlJ:y get about1lUlDure runoff entering our waœr systemS. 'I'1iJ:hiJ! !he
cnneallimo fume;
AN» WHEREA-S the Government of OnW'Ío has said that it wiJl hold:! 1 Inqully into the issues S1Jm)IID.ding Ibe
contamination of me W!Ier sysrem in Walkerton by E,Coli bactw;
AND WHEREAS the TO'\\'!Iship of Asbfield feels ÙlJ:t it is prudent and imperative, ;n ~gl1t ofrhe _wt tragedy in
Walketton, for the Ga~mment afOmma 10 aandu'" an invesdgslian into the issues &U¡1'Cuodiag the guaranrec of
qu,ul:JI of water, bod! 1]:\)811 and ruraJ, including fun idenlificarlonofpotenlÎa\ hazards [pi' contamination;
NOW TRElŒFORE BE IT RESOLVED TlIAT the Township of Ashfiald bereby ~ds thet the Gove:rronœt
of Ontario Immediately put in place a roàraoorium proluòiting Ibe oonstructian of any ~ liquid ¡n1l11= fi1ci.liri". or
tJle addition 10 ¡¡r¡y existing faeilirie.s, umi! it has been proven that W environmeot and ~ur drmJdng water will not
be negativeJy imp,cled by ÙlJ:m;
AND FURTHER THAT this resolution he circulated to all municipalities in tbe proviljee of Ontæio urging tbem
to eonlJ!et PrtmiC!!' Mike Harris, the Minister )f Ihe Environment. Ihe Minister nf Agric\ lrore Food &. Rural Affairs
MIl thel! loa~ M1'P. indicating their sUpport far Ibis resolution,
00 behalf of Ceuzu;U. I wauld request your favounble eonsidmtiotl of the above resol~tion IItJd would app=íaæ
receiving a wrilœr1 indication of your slIpport. ThankyDIII
c1L.,),) (í'. .1"-.. .~
Lind. Andrew, Clerk
Townsbip of A.hfield
28
Tbis mA~rinl is provided undél" COnirott as a paid service by the oncinalÍnR: or~2.uwdion ~nd does
n.ec~ss:'rily Nn~CE l~11i: vieWS" Or pClsition.s ottJie AssocJot.loa Dr Municipd.tics of Ontario (~MO) i DI
subsldJ,;lry cGmp:l.lucs. offiœtS'. dirtCLo~ Dr RRC1]ts. ' ts
__ l' ._~
Minister of Agriculture,
Food and Rural Affairs
lIi
Ministre de I'Agriculture,
de 'Alimentation
et des Affaires rurales
JUN 0 2 2000
Ontario
Queen's Park, Ontario
M5S 183
Mrs. Sandra J. Heffren
Deputy Clerk
Corporation of the Municipality of the County of Elgin
450 Sunset Drive
St. Thomas, Ontario
N5R 5Vl
JUN 7 2000
-, "1'1
COUNTi Of b_lÃ-!\J
-~rp~~A~~
ðCJi'J~\.H..~
Dear Mrs. Heffren:
Thank you for your letter of April 27, 2000 in which you expressed the support of the
Council of the Corporation of the County of Elgin for the resolution of the Corporation of
the Municipality of Chatham-Kent on the review of the drainage program.
Please fmd enclosed a copy of my letter to Mr. Brian Knott of the Corporation of the
Municipality of Chatham-Kent.
Once the review process is complete, I look forward to receiving the report on the
consultations. This report will be posted on the ministry web site. I urge you to watch for
it at www.gov.on.caJomafra.
Thank you for taking the time to share your concerns with me.
Sin
~
rnie Hardeman
Minister
Enclosure
c: Rural Ontario Municipal Association (ROMA)
Mr. Patrick Moyle, Executive Director, Association of Municipalities of Ontario
Canadian Federation of Agriculture
Mr. Jack Wilkinson, President, Ontario Federation of Agriculture
Mr. Steve Peters, MPP, Elgin-Middlesex~London
29
Minister of Agriculture,
Food and Rural Affairs
~
Ontario
Ministre de l'Agriculture,
de l'Alimentation
et des Affaires rurales
Queen's Park, Ontario
M5S 183
MAY 1 5 2000
Mr. Brian Knott
Director of Legal Services/Clerk
The Corporation of the Municipality of Chatham-Kent
Civic Centre
P.O, Box 640
Chatham, Ontario
N7M 5K8
Dear Mr. Knott:
Thank you for your letter of April 6, 2000 expressing the support of the Municipality of
Chatham-Kent for the drainage programs in Ontario.
~
The Ontario Minístry of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs recognizes the value of
drainage to the agricultural industry. The purpose of the review was to ask key users, such
as Chatham-Kent, if the programs are still meeting their priorities, and ensure the program
is managed effectively and efficiently as possible.
Minístry staff have now completed the public consultation meetings across the province.
They focussed on the three aspects of the Drainage Program, namely, the Municipal Outlet
Drainage Program, the Tile Loan Program and the Tile Installation Licensing Program. I
understand that Mr. Chris Masterson and Mr. Tim Dick made an excellent presentation on
behalf of Chatham-Kent to the meeting on Apri112, 2000 in Guelph. It was valuable to
have the perspective of a large municipality with extensive experience in drainage at the
meeting.
There is no doubt that drainage programs have made a significant contribution to the
agricultural and rural communities in Chatham-Kent and indeed all across Ontario. I look
forward to hearing the views of all stakeholders once the consultation process is complete.
Sinc
~
G(~
Miníster
~ 30
CounciUor Joanne Monaghan
Kitimat. British Columbia
President
Présidente
Councillor Jack Layton
Toronto, Ontario
First Vice President
Premiere vice présidente
Alderman John Schmal
Caigary Alberta
Second Vice President
Dellx¡ème vice présídent
Maire Vves Ducharme
Hull, QlIébec
Troísieme vice presíden1
Third Více President
Mayor Sam Synard
Marystown, Newfoundland and Labrador
Past President
Président sorlant
James W. Knight
Executive Director
Directeur générsl
,ft
~
Federation of Canadian Municipalities
Fédération canadienne des municipalités
June 15, 2000
Technoloav in Government Week
I am writing to invite you to nominate outstanding employees for a
Technology in Government Week Distinction Award 2000, in recognition of
their excellence in the management of information and information
technologies in the public sector.
Now in its 8th year, the Distinction Awards are an annual celebration
of those extraordinary people who conceive, develop and/or implement 1M
and IT projects which produce positive and tangible results. A stand-alone
municipal category formally acknowledges the leadership and innovation
demonstrated by the country's municipal governments.
On October 2, 2000, a total of up to three gold medals will be
awarded for Group III, "Innovative Service Delivery in the Municipalities"
from within the following population breakdowns: Up to 25,000: 25,000-
100,000; and over 100,000. In addition, municipal governments can be
nominated as a partner with the federal government in Category A2 -
Building Partnerships and Alliances, and under Group IV - Global
Leadership, and Group V - Unique Achievement Award. The Federation of
Canadian Municipalities is pleased to participate in this important recognition
program through this call for submissions and by serving on the awards
jUdging panel.
This is a great opportunity to honour outstanding 1M and IT projects
in your municipality, and the extraordinary people who made them happenl
For entry rules and a nomination ballot, please contact Andrea Waiton at
(613) 731-9851, ext, 16, or for a complete nomination kit on-line, visit
WMV~~chgov.col11
Nominations close on July 14', 2000, so obtain your entry
information and ballot form today.
Yours sincerely,
(~-'1(~-~
G,es Knight
Executive Di rector
31
24, rue Clarence Street, Ottawa, Ontario K1 N 5P3
TelephonefTéléphone: (613) 241-5221. FaxiTélécopieur (613) 241-7440
Celebrate
your Municipality's
TWlJlßLOGV'
I~ !DVEBNMEtII WEEH
Technollogy in Gtwernment Week
October 2-5, Ottawa., Canada
rl- E 8TH ANNUAL CELE9RJ\TION OF EìC:r.EU.ENEE IN THE MANA,GUUNT
OF INFOIRMAII1tON AND TECHNOLOGY INI 'If HE PIIIßI.Ie SE:crOR
OcrO~ER 2, ,2000
'[' ]L~ Is YOllr oppor1!mi1y In t:omrlJ¡ute to 1111: rt'\:ognitloD of outstmdlng
iD¡jj,~idllal~ or te:wa:; wlto al'e hdpmg to renew IÌw.. way lUu!IIÌdp~.l gov(Jrnm~nls tlu
~u:;in(js~, Ibl!Ulgh lÌœ U~(j oI in[orll]a~<¡n 1L'\;11lJQlogy. Nommale IllilJSli whose «¡CUS
¡][ld ene!'g)' j¡¡ 1he pa:;¡ ye;¡r made 'Ul iGlIIlw,([j'le Jde.1 or program l1appf!l,
In 1999,ihJ'ee. gold ma1als w('.re .¡warded It) Ihe [nUowiJlg: Pel' Kristell$e.n, Oty of
Nmurimo. British Columhi:t; Sllbdivi~ion 1lackillg Mod~ile J)~'Vd( JlIImt Project.
Rede:dgn¡¡tion and SllMi~i:;tOIl11r;¡cki.ug Applicatiull Df::v~lupm~ijt 'Team, :\illroidp>l1
JX~ JiC( ()( .Rocky Vie", Nt). 44; and \1i'Emnel <Wlnds()( E¡¡sex RegiQu¡Ü U,br¡u:y
Netw»)I'k), Whu1S01' l'u1>Jk li1\Jl'31Y, WJß¡ S{)¡~ Ollmrio. 'I'lLls ye<tr, up ro iliœe gold
med:lL~ will be aw-iUXIIed to the J!lOst oulst'Uuiilll¡) munldp~d, Oiooduees from wHhio Rite
foJlowill!( JopuIatlOll bccakclo",'IDS; up 10 25,000; 25,000-100,000; illld ovcr 100,000,
I11t' wj11Jier~ will b~, ;11Jjjounœd dßlÍug T\iclJnology ill G<¡,¡;rll1J1eJlt Week a! lh~
D¡~Ij¡¡(ti()1l.!.w¡¡r¡ s 2000 Gala ou Oc[ober 2, 200(1, ~;e¡bœ ¡m ellIhusiaötic alld¡~nœ I}!
fellow I!(J.UJiuees, seWOJ' goyerrunentI1lHI!l: g&8 and Jndt'8ÙT execlUÍ\"es. The DistÌJJcl!on
Aml"ds 2000 GOr", is sporu;oœd y¡ tbe pÖV'.lle æclDr IiJ feco/$11æ exœlJe!JIOB in go\'erume.o.r.
Ei'I.'TRY DEADLINE fOR M[l'i[C~IPAI. ~O~IJN~ liS Jny 14, 200n.
1'01' entry I'IJIC$111:IId a nomimuion ~;¡]10í; ¡r!$it u'WW.te(~l1g()v_com" lir o:mt2iM;
.åNIJ)t]!A W;U;roN, DlSflNcnol'i A\!,¡\JUjs 2000, TCCQNOLOGYIiN G()"lJllWNT WBRJ\:
2487 futubr Mellue, Suire 214, üttm"i, Ontarjo Nt\' 8B9
Tel.: (6IJ) 731-9851 eJ>.1. 16 Fax: (613) 731-2-[07 E-mull: barbm:¡uv)'l1lle@zlictJlll
COmp!clCNoml1la!lion Nt al'aiJahic oll!JJlcat www.techgov.com 32
100?IrlDloßjI ITiI'i Gmímnmmtl Wr.'i'J{ It. A. (&YaM ø: OIA EViI!:HT ~ø)û(I! K~r1f¡ dl;l &æn.~, In£.. All rl¡ !M ~ßr.L :rot): Rm 1'(iJt!fi[Jfj. ~ I\r¡¡mrnm, MA ~j2~M.27:trz
~
~
~
Elgin Association for Community Living
400 Talbot Street, St. Thomas, Ontario NSP IB8
Telephone - (519) 631-9222· Fax - (519) 633-43n E· C
Family nnchment entre
7 Morrison Drive
St. Thomas, ON
N5R 485
Telephone: 631-9496 Fax 631-0820
June 4, 2000
~¡¡,¡ '~,'2 _
Dear Sir or Madam:
We are writing to inquire about your/your agency's interest in becoming
and exciting opportunity.
The Atkinson Million Dollar Early Years Challenge will provide at least $1 million over five
years to support one or more demonstration projects in Ontario communities which involve
designing and delivering a broad range of children's and family support services in an integrated
and holistic way. The Atkinson Charitable Foundation agrees with the core recommendation of
the Early Years Study (McCain & Mustard) commissioned by the Premier of Ontario, 1999,
Mr. Mike Harris that early years programs should be seamless and universally available to all
children and all families.
This Atkinson Initiative is challenging communities, the provincial and federal governments,
corporations and unions to contribute financially to ensure that resources are delivered in a
seamless manner. The number ofprojects funded will depend on the total money raised.
The Elgin Association for Community Living Children's Programs span the ages rrom 0 to 21
years of age for children with developmental disabilities and their families. Although we focus
on individuals with developmental disabilities, we do operate several integrated programs such
as our Parent/Child Place and our Licensed Home Child Care Program, It is our dream to create
in Elgin county a wide range of readily available supports and services for all children and
families to enhance the quality oflife for each child and to ensure that every youngster has the
opportunity to achieve their full potential and to develop into active, healthy adults.
How can we make this happen? One of the recommendations of this initiative is that
partnerships with other agencies that currently serve children is crucial to providing seamless
supports and services. We believe that this first step is so important, and so we are writing to
you to find out if you are interested in becoming involved. What that involvement may be is up
to you/your agency, and can be determined at a later date.
At present, we only wish to know if you are interested in exploring this opportunity as a
worthwhile venture for Elgin County.
33
.
Creating an environment within the Association and within the
communities of Elgin County where persons with a developmental disability
can live, learn, work and fully participate.
In order to be considered for the Atkinson Foundation, we must provide a letter of intent
outlining our proposal by June 23, 2000. We need to have a list of names of agencies,
individuals, or companies who are interested in becoming involved in this new and innovative
project.
Due to the tight time constraints, we have enclosed a copy ofthe Atkinson Initiative. Our phone
number is 631-9496; fax: 631-0820; email address is lois@fec.wwdc.com. Should you wish to
further discuss the initiative, you may call either me or Tom McCallum at 631-8012 Ext. 228.
We welcome all ideas and suggestions about what this proposal can encompass, and we propose
to schedule several meetings for agencies and interested parties to participate and share their
comments,
Sincer y
//7'(&,. ()
-,'!" " ,
~/í( - ...Ø2L~'~Û1
Lois vt arden
Program Supervisor, Children's Programs
(
"/L,
ID'¡ l
Tom McC ,llum
Executive~irector
Looking forward to hearing ftom you in the near future.
34
MVCS c...· r-~ ,::?,] - ~i=:"'i C3i,
'¡' 43313D2
04í19JOO 15:26 [Y :ü~.'3~~,~,~~::;:L-:j
~'-~
; '" .^ t k i 1'1 c 0' . 11
..i.~ ......__LV .t.._
C\cri1ohle Fo,doj'~n
MILLION DOLLAR
EARLY YEARS CHALLENGE
REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS
1, Introduction
.õ,s a society, we sre becoming more a.¡1d more aware of the L-nporta."1ce
of providing our children With everything they need to succeed in Hfe,
We íI\'a..'1t them to grow up in quality enviroI"_'!lents, to achieve their full
potential, a.i1d to grow Lr¡to adults who are active. healthy contributors
to socíecy.
At tJ.'"1e same time, we recognize that ch!1dren are not isolated
individuals-they are part of a family unit. We want the adults in th".t
unit to enjoy both the peace of mind and econemiç opportunity that
can only come from kno"-'ing that their children are 1.rI stimulating.
canng. and supportive environments-whether at home. or in early
childhood development settings.
If we are to truìy honour our responsibility to children and their
families. we must give fam1ìies and other caregj'<:ers the S\.1ppOl"t they
35
H\¡~~
II
>'3':,
~ ,,~~,-~-.
~ <';':,.)j.jl.i~
04-/~;/OO
15: 26 2:-: J= ~'': -'lG'~:: 413
...:,~;",
-"~I
:1'\£ Ä j!¡¡n~c:n C1"t!rttsbIG FcuncaiH~~'
::~~d to ~ramote the besL pOSSHHe developm~ilt of C'.h.ildren. All
families-="both '(hose with ;tay-at-home p~ents 2.n¿ those ç..iL~ pa:re:lts
1J.rorkiJ.'""1g outsid~ oÍ the nome--n1ust have access to a sea.zn1ess net"~ork
of community supports.
Todav, vlhile some fa...-nilies receive that support, t:lanv do not. Som~
- . .. .. or
parents receive pr~- and pcst...nata} counselling a..:71d nuUition
suppon-lTI<'..ny do not; some childæn have an early opportunity tc
develop ,he foundation for later j2..."lguage and lea...ming-many do no..:
some chlidren take p-art In the stJnl1..llati.'1g environment of a licensed
setting-many do not:-Some children benefit from the early diagnosis
of problems and remedlaJ support offered by community agenCies-
many do not. Some children have regular a.ccess to quality recreational
programs and facilIties, maJ1Y do not. For some children, formaj
schooling builàs on a solid foundation of ea.-rIier leEJ1Ùl'1g and he:>lthy
social deveiapment-for ma..'1Y, it åoes not.
Even those families who are fortunate enough to rece!ve some or many
of these supports, tend to e:!..-penence. them as isolate.d, disconnected
services. instea.d of as part of a broad. integrated, community-based
network of family supports, For many, it's like tryL'1g to put together a
jigsaw puzzle where few of the pieces interlock, ¡t's Just too easy fOL
fam!\!es to fall throug.'1 t."le o:racks.
In recent months, th~e ha.s been a great deal of public dialogue about
t.he need for Inœgrated early ch.!1dhood development programs. The
MoC";,,,-]v[ustard stuày anà other sLrnilar reports have shOne a new
spotltght on this 1"1eed. ?..t th~ Sfu"'11e tim.e. L"-1e ?ro\1nc~ of Ontario ha.s
scnt out encouraging signals conce-rning fut~-e action.
,
Î
[
¡
¡
,
¡
ì
¡
¡
I
,
;
!
Ai;, we;come as t.r¡ese signals may be, nl£ Atkinson Charitable
FoW1da.tion. (ACF) believes that it is :ime to move from tal..J,¡: to ac",..ion.
We are prepared to provide $1 million doHar:;; over a. multi-year
period to support. community-based demonstration projects that
show t.he benefits of a seamless approach to early chJldhood
âevelooment pro~rams. We bel!~e that t."r¡e success of t.l-¡ese
demoñstratioñ p;oJects can lead to the provL.'1.ce~wide adoption of "'-'"1.
integrated approach.
We are hopeful that, after meaningful discussions. this money ",ill
lever further ccntIibutions from the Province of Ontario, the
Gover'nment of Canada, corporations and 1a.bour unions.
36
t
t
¡
¡
¡
¡
¡
¡
,
!
I
rives
I"""';...:
--
__ ...:-=,:::.r
-
e 43313Q2
Ml¡¡iQn Doilar Eerij 1'ec:U''1i C'ia!1el"lg&--Reque5t for prOPQsei!>
04ÎÎ9/00
15:26 CY :J=,.'.Sr;lc:~O:413
2. What is the Million Dollar Early Years Challenge?
Tne ACF agrees With a core n::commendatlon of the Early Years Slud.y
t:,at early years progra!ns should be seamless!)' fu"1.d universally
ava.tiable to all chndren and aU famiUes. For this to happen, there
mu,n be substa.."'1t1aJ and sustained government funding, In. the [mal
analysis" only governmen.t ha.s t.'îe resources to make sure that all
fanJil1es have access to such programs,
At the same tlIDe, we beHeve that tIlls v"ill happen more quickly when
the publ1c and government can see and understaI1d L.';e benefits of a
universal approach. there is a significant role now for voluntary and
private sectors of our society to collaborate with governments to
support the capacity of communities to create early years programs,
a.¡1d to demonstrate the value of such progralï:ls.
TIle Atk.inson Charitable Foundation 1s putting up at least $1 million
aver five yea:-s to finance one or more demonstration projects. In turn,
we are challenging:
ß communities; to develop and implement new approaches
to providing seamless early years programs:
· the Ontmo Government: to provide the demonstration
projects wlth matching funds;
· the Govern.ment of Cana.dá: to match funds provided by
the prov!nce: and,
· oorporatio¡:¡.¡; and wOOOIl.S; to contt1bute fmanciaJly to the
ChaUenge,
¡ The more money that we are able 1:0 raise through the Challenge, t.Ì1e "
t more projects we vvilJ be able'Lo fund.
f, !
3. Who is EiigibBe to Apply for Funds?
A,"y community if! Ontario is el.lgibJe to apply for
funds to operate a. demonstration project. The term
·community" :nay be self-defined Le, it could be a
municipality, county, neighbourhood, school
catchment area. or any other unit that regards
itself as a community_ YOU!" community must,
however. show it Is ready to mount a seamless
37
MVC:::
.
I
I
i
-
.¡:::¡¡. .:..-::: ":3=':"-: -,
(,i./19/v-r, 1~';>'" R '0,=· ~';D""1'1"
"." .... ___-' _ . . "_'-- _,.;.;0........,. _"
-
~ 433~ 302
The Atíf.\!'\Bon CnSl"fwOii!- Fcu.nde.tIor.
approach to delivering early childhood development programs. Your
readiness can be sho\\'TI through:
. ,he involvement. oj a wide variety of partners in develop1ng
the proposal: this must include. schoo! Doards,
munieipalitiea and public health units, and could also
include: parenting centres. family reSOUrce prog,.-ams. early
intenrention programs. child care providers, nursery
schools, community agencies. hospitals and other health
care p;-oviders. parks and recreatiomÜ services, public
libraries, url10ns representing chl1d care stalf. teachers,
etc.; and, aIlJ oLÌ'ler local authorities that assist in the
healthy development of children (we recognize that d!.fJeren.t
partners will have d!.fJerent capaciíLes QJ'.d. roles, and
en.l;;ouro.ge you to ÍJ'1.l.JO¿ve the broadest range of pa.¡-tnersl:
· a commitment to the project by aJI agencies necessary to its
implementation:
~ a high level of parental !nvolvemçnt;
· a dear and thorough plan to implement the project;
· a plan to evaluate the project and communicate 1t:;; results
(the Atkir'.son Charitable Foundation can assist. if necessary.
by making the ad.l.Ji.ce oj experts Q,1)Q.Ua.ble and may aLso
cond.wct its own ove,aU eualua1iDn of a1l. of the projects fw1.d.ed
a¡1.d com¡nw:icate IJ:s findings); and.
· a will1ngr;.ess to devote community resources to the project.
4, What Age Children Should Your Project Serve?
Our main focus is on children 0-6. since that is where the primary
need exists, At the same time, we recolffiize that when children reach
the age of seven a!1d older t..Ï1ey can stiÌi benefit from seamless
programs. We also appreciate that there may a1ready exist some
mature, sea...-nìess programs for children aged 6-12.
So in addItion to projects for children 0--6, we Will aJso consider, I
fundmg programs ~hat mvolvð dilldren up to 12:;,or that invo!Ýe taking I
existing seamless programs for ch1Jdren 7-12 and expanding them I
downward to 0-6.,.. .
L
38
- '(~,Z, ~~~1~:"3t~~~~:~~;;~;;;~~~"'~ge~-;i~;-h~spit-al~ a..-¡d other health
care providers, parks and recreation services, junior
kirldergarte::t and kindergarten, p~,blìc healt...~ ser....ices
aIld libranes;
· delivering some portion of the seIVices seven days a week,
12 months a year, a.nd in hours beyond the tradtUonal 9-5.
· the delivery of some/many of these services in a common
loca.tion. by common staff. and follov..ing a common set
of standards:
· breaking doviTI the barriers that now ex!st to fa.tn11!es
needing more than one service, or needing t-~ move from
one service to another:
· offe¡ing µniver~ programs that are avallable and
affordable to âlt~fa.miJie$\ (¡,e. not just to fan1ilies in a
certain Income group or to families with aU parents in the
labour force);
· tailoring programs to meet the needs of all children in the
community; including children W1th special needs; and.
· suppor+..mg·parents' participation in theJr cWldren's
early'learnlng.
We are looJ<..irtg for highly-c.ea.tive programs that
challenge conventJonal wisdom and modes of
delivery-projects t.':1at point the way to a better
Ú,¡tu:"e.
r";;;
We encourage you to describe for us YOTJr vision of
how a "seamless" approach to delivering early
childhood development programs would work Lì
your community. Your actual project could
ÍZ¡volve the .realization of that vision, or a
mmremen: to the next stag'e(s) in realIZing
that ViS~O[l_
39
=. ..." '-12
M\i'CS f'~~'1" -. ':'7,;'7; l.2:~4=l'¡ :::!,
"ª 4331302
.
I
,
!
¡
U4/"1,;!llJiJ
I:: :""0 !,. ·Ur-I'H) l"~' <...'-
- ...... ¡::'.E-"lC ,. ,-'
¡he AlkinÞcn Charitable f:ounáallQ"
6. Tell Us About the 8enêfits Your Program wm Bring
.:..s part of your proposal, your community should outiine the benefits
that you e.~pect your project wi.ll br'.ng to:
· ch!1dren:
· families:
· communIties; and,
· proVIders of chndren's prcgra.'I1s.
A key goa.l of the Mlliion Dollar' Ear!y Years Challenge !s to show policy
makers how a searnless approach v.111 be mon: beneficial than the
current approach,
More L'1format!on on QUI' vision of searniess early childhood
àeveiopment progra.'11s ean be found in two Atkinson. Letters available
on our Web sIte at www.atkinsor¡fdn..or!.ca
L
7. What Can Challenge Funds be Spent On?
Funds proVided by the ACF through the Mmi.on Dollar EQJ'ly Years
Challenge may be spent on work such as:
9 research activIties:
· eOI!'_'TIu.nity development actiVities that bring partners
tOgether to deslgn and implement seamless
mod:::s oj activity;
· evaJuation activities to assess t...~e benefits of t.}-¡e
new approach;
· communication activities to disseminate project
actiVities and benefits, both durtng the life of
the project and follomng the compJeUon of
t..'1e project: a.1'1d,
· other ne....iJ operating costs necessary to
carrying out the project. e,g. bunding
partnerships, re-designing services,
ensuring conm-,u!ty and a smooth
tra."lsiUOI1 to a new de1!very mode1,
staff development. ete,
40
";....:.:
r';VÇS
.'
~ 433"1302
~-,""'''
~.,,,
15:26 CY
: O·~' 9./1éJO: 4'1;'
04/'19/0C
--
--
Mj,¡¡Q... DOH'í:.; ::'031\1 'te.ð,...: CttiJ!:IHH",ge--Re,"!u6õt fOr PrQPQ:oaiS,
,
t }\.CF funds 2..:'e not intenàed to pay for the entin; cast of demon-
stration projects. Communities "¥.Iiu b~ expected to express their
¡ ~mŒJjm~¡ by d,dicating re~u"e' to ¡ho pmJ'" "w.l! Thoa,
¡resources may come from me par~"1ers operating the project, from
; other o~,tside fundIng sources. or some cornbination of the tvro,
So HowWiiI We D€?cide Which Projects to Fund?
Projects will be judged by a pane! of experts appointed by The AU(.;L'1son
Chantable Foundation together with those representing ol..'ler funding
partners. 111<:' pane! will make recommendalions to the ACF Board of
Tr<.::stees, which will make the fi.nal åecision
9. The Role of the Atkinson Charitable Foundation
The ACF intends to be a slgnrnC2.Ilt, active and helpful pa.c-mer L."1. L,"is
project. !,. particular we see our role as:
& pro"'.;iòing a. .t1na.:.~cial gra..7'lt iÒr up to five: years: and;
· providL"1g access [if ne.eded) to our experts in:
- community development. mobilization and
par'lJ1ership buiì.ding;
- evaluation: a."1d.
- r:ommuni~.ations.
1 Q, The Next Steps
If your corrill1unity is interested ill operau"'''1g a demonstration project,
we in'i<1te you to foHow these steps:
I. Submit a Letter of !ntent by June 23, 2QOO
The letter of Jrmmt is your indication to us that you mtend to develop
and submit a formal proposal The letter should com.a.Jn the fO:Uowillg
information:
· the narne(s) and contact numbers of the orga¡·lÍZa,t!on(s}~
making the application and a pre1!minax}' list a~~
partners in the project (a brief desCription of eachweYl4 be
1}elpful); r<?JJ1Cmber, we are tnrerested in. (~mmuniry~~
re,-miness- ~o the more partners who are signed on in the
leltè'ro:ifi'i'ítent. the r¡¡(;rejauourabiy we wll1 view your iJtteresL;
~
41
ì
!
!
,
f:
ì
I
MVCS [;;1 C1.4 'lZC :;'¿:":::.:='f'; :SI"·¡
II
I
I
ì
'g' 4331302
1~'?6 ¡;;¡ ·1= ·.l~"···Þ'·L13
.-f.... U, '. _ ..I..;;.J. ,.
04/19/00
The) AUdnDQM Chlil.¡ollaÞì8 F~¡,mdilUon
pi ease designate a tentative "lead partner- v.ith which we
should communicate and which can serve as t.l-¡e
adminIstrative centre for the projecl;
. a. brief outhne (approx.. 2 pages) of the type of project that
you would like to operate; please include In this your v!slon._>
of what a seamless early years program will look like in /
your community; if your project Is Just for children 0-6, ~.
D1ease also describe for us how the next stage would work",,;.~ ,; Q.
.. , __ I y(.L'"!
i.~v1Sion for ch11dren 7-12; '- '\ r"-:j ..
/ . "\ I ,.1
~'. an assessment of our capacity to do evaluation work and ') .' , \.ø ccU-,r
\ whether you need help to prepare an evaluation plan: ~~,..¿;.<-'.
,
· lClenUfication of any rules or regulations that ""ill need to be
5?~ to operate the demonstration project;
o the !a"gtn of tlmc l ;)will ta..1;:.e you to prepare a formal ! -,\¡ -.~
proposal and whether; , '
- you are now ready to prepare a proposal; or.
------ .-- "
- you will need developmental funding to preparê'a. ii&
broposal. the amount of funds that you wiU--rrêêcÎ. ."...,
~d '^'!1zt L';;:; fun.:!,; '\';Om be used for.-----
Please make sure that your letter of intent reaches us by June 23,
2000. Do not submit a íorrnal proposal at iliis time.
The 1:Ætter of Intent should be mailed to:
Charles Pascal
EJæcut1Ve Director, The Atki!'Json Charitable Foundation
One ¥onge St., Fifth Floor
Toronto, Ont. M5B lE5
If you prefer. you may send your Letter of Intent bye-mail
(cpc¡scal@thestar,ca) or by fax {4l6J 865-3619,
It Submit a. Formal Proposal
Once our expert panel has reviewed all of the letters of lntent. we
win ad,ise you regarding subm1ttlng a more In-depth proposal If you
are selected.
42
RAPHAEL
TIARTNERS
LÄRR¡STERS AND SOLICITORS
RECEIVED
!I¡¡IURY
WU-JO$OR
rOROtJro
CHA1f!AM
I~AMlt,JGI0t-J
JUL 10 2000
June 27,2000
COUNTY OF ElGIN
ADMINiSTRATIVE SERViCES
Department of Justice Canada
Legal Services Unit - Fisheries and Oceans
Station 800, 8th Floor
200 Kent Street
OTTAWA, Ontario
KIA OE6
cOpy
Attn: Mike Ravner
Dear Sir:
RE: County of Elgin and D.F.O.
Thank you for your response on behalf of Ms. Stoneman. For convenience I would like
to respond in the order ofthe issues raised in your letter.
1.
Jurisdiction:
I appreciate that your department is only claiming jurisdiction over fish habitat,
not agricultural drains. That is, with respect, not the point. The point is that the
provisions ofthe Fisheries Act conflict with the provisions of the Drainage Act. There is
a valid sphere of jurisdiction for each level of government, but not surprisingly in a
modern society they often overlap.
As you know, probably better than I, there is a long history of judicial
interpretation of constitutional power in this country and it does not suffice for one level
of government or the other to simply claim jurisdiction, exclusive of the other. The
interpretation of the "property and civil rights" provision of the constitution has occupied
courts for as many years as this nation has existed.
Given that the provisions of the Fisheries Act, if your interpretation is correct,
must have brought you into conflict with many other persons and agencies over the years,
I wonder whether you have had occasion to have your jurisdiction determined by a court.
If so, I would be pleased to review those decisions. I can advise my client much more
intelligently on the basis of some authority cited to me, rather than on a bald assertion
that this is a matter offederal jurisdiction exclusively.
25Young5trret
P.O. Box 178
Tilbu¡Y,OntorioUOP2l0
(519)682-1644
Fox (519) 682-1146
Emoiltilbury@rophoelportners.com
"Berl RophacL Q_CISM
IM.m1lr.Ior helawSodct~nI /Jhcrt~
·StonRophoel.oc
·Rudolphlob!.o.c
Ooug ¡¡sA,$ulmon"llC
DavidCovil!
lome~O. Wicket!
"RoymondG.ColoUI1Î
Brion P. NololI
DavidE.Jorklin
OovidG.G¡eenol'loy
Jer¡yF,Q'Brien
PelerK.HmsIOve(
G. Joseph Folmneri
PelerlFeslerygo
ArlhurB,Weingorden
SheldonL$,hwarfz
RkhardA.R"Hawcish
ChBfYlHenshnw
Robert A" Besunder
Pau!Caurey
leslieJ.Dorretl
FrankSoro!j
Croî~ Houle
MoryJaneMoynohan
QwenThomns
JdlroyRaphnel
Anne!isKThor,en
OfCOUUSEl
'leon Poroinn"l)(
Gnbrie1J,Cmrre'j',I}(
CariS Cohen,Qf
D~lton E, (hml,~r\ ~ (
LeÐnorclFeîqnwn ';1
AIIulI D, H~1!\lnn. ')( 1193:; ~?~~1
TOm C. OdelleJP-,,'J( (:9!~¡'1n;
HmoldJO'grimr.;" (1m 1,';:;)
~~~~;~~r~~:;.~I~~~I(~~~~~~~~!;O"
Page -2-
2. Municipal Decision Making;
Thank you for conceding that this is an interesting point, but it is hardly
irrelevant. The essence of interpreting the distribution of powers is precisely the
balancing of competing interests. The line of cases involving airports and aeronautics
and the decisions concerning farm products marketing legislation are but two examples of
this subj ect.
I appreciate that the act empowers the Minister to issue permits. However this
entire subject has arisen oflate because of the change in circumstances which no longer
sees the Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources acting as a delegate ofthe Minister.
Either the Minister has the power to delegate, or was acting illegally during the years
when the provincial agency was handling this subject.
In our view, the Minister is simply looking for a new delegate and we are simply
suggesting that he is looking at the wrong one.
The last paragraph on page two of your letter is somewhat confusing and I am not
sure whether you understand that drainage superintendents are employees of
municipalities, not of conservation authorities.
Any class authorization to drainage superintendents should be made to
municipalities. Municipal councils are the proper bodies to regulate the activities of
municipal corporations and their employees.
The conservation authorities do have a limited, emphasize limited, role in the
Drainage Act. The drafters ofthat legislation created a balance which the legislature felt
appropriate. It is not for any other agency, even a federal agency, to alter that balance.
By doing so, the federal government is intruding on an area of provincial jurisdiction.
I believe that the key to D.F.O.'s position is contained in your phrase "it is
administratively more efficient for the Department of Fisheries and Oceans, in expanding
their pilot program, to deal with the far fewer conservation authorities than the numerous
municipalities in Ontario".
Unfortunately for D.F.O., the County of Elgin still believes that democracy is
important, if not always administratively more efficient.
Page -3-
The reasoning put forward is circular and only seeks to justify an unjustifiable
position. It will not do to simply tell the municipalities that D.F.O. will look after
everything and that they will be alright in the long run. This municipality is not inclined
to abandon its responsibilities so lightly.
I will carefully review any decisions with which you provide me on this point,
both favourable and unfavourable to our respective clients. Depending on what you
provide to me, I may further research the subject myself. At the conclusion ofthat
process I will recommend to my clients a course of action since it does not appear that
your department is interested in resolving this matter on any other basis. If that is not the
case, please let me know.
Paul Courey
PC/TK
COUNCIL CORRESPONDENCE - June 27. 2000
Items for Information - (Consent AaendaJ
1. AMO Member Communications 1) Land Ambulance Funding Update; 2) AMO Acts to
Protect Ontario's Water; 3) AMO Responds to Media Reports of Government Action
on Electricity and Privatization of Municipal Services. (ATTACHED)
2. Bill Bowick, President, Ontario Trails Council, with a copy of the Consolidated
Provincial Trails Policy for Council's information. (ATTACHED)
3. Diana Summers, Manager of Policy and Research, Ontario Good Roads Association,
regarding Council's resolution requesting the reinstatement of suburban roads
commissions. (ATTACHED)
4. J.L. Oliver, General Manager, Long Point Region Conservation Authority, re: Ministry
of the Environment to establish a provincial groundwater monitoring network.
(ATTACHED)
5. AMO, Preliminary Program for AMO Annual Conference August 13-16, 2000, Ottawa.
(Available in Administrative Services Office)
~L~
B6/16/BB BB:46:11 EST; ASSOCIATION OF?->
1 519 633 7661 Mark McDonald
Page BB3
JUN-16-00 FRI 09:43 AM AMO
FAX NO. 416 971 6191
p, 02/02
Member Communication
Â~_ Assoc:lation of
Municipalitis8
.¡. of Ontario
For Your
Onformation
3113 UnhntrwottyAwnue. SUU'1D1
Tctontn. ON M!!G 1 E8
ToT: (418) ~1~geœ. tax: (.'6) 971..ø191
am.U: ..rnoO_mo.munlcam,ccm
To the attention of the Clerk and Council.
Please ensure that copies of this are distributed to all Members of Council
For Immediate Attention
June 15, 2000 - FYI. 00/023
LAND AMBULANCE FUNDING UPDATE
Issue:
Status of the Province's funding commitment for the land ambulance transfer.
Background:
On March 23, 1999, Finance Minister, the Honourable Ernie Eves, announced that "effective January 1,
1999, the Province will assume half the 'approved cost' of land ambulances..." ,Since the announcement,
AMO has been working with the provincial government through the Land Ambulance Implementation
Steering Committee (LAISC) on a number of transition matters, including the definition of 'approved
costs',
LAISC has had some success. On May 15, 2000 the Ministry sent a memorandum to each Upper Tier
Municipality/Designated Delivery Agent (UTMIDDA) that stated the Ontario Government Pharmacy and
the Judson Street Store would remain open for five more years. The Ministry of Health and Long Term
Care (MOHL TC) has also made it clear that it will continue to 100% fund dispatch costs, In addition, the
1999 call data has been released, so municipalities have more information for planning and budgeting.
There are several other decisions on funding that MOHL TC must make regarding ambulance services,
The first relates to base costs. At this point we have no final decision regarding what base funding the
government will offer, however, municipalities which have assumed the service are receiving 50% of the
Province's 1999 budget. The Ministry committed lasl week to review the ambulance budget of a
municipality currentiy running the service to see if there are any disparities that should be included in
approved costs. Ministry staff will report back at the July 18th LAISC meeting. AMO has been reiterating
the message that municipal costs are not Identical to provincial costs and that this has to be reflected in
the government's base cost funding decision.
The second issue is the provincial funding to meet the Ministry's mandated response time standard. No
provincial decision has been made, and no funding has been approved for these costs. Municipal
representatives on LAISC have made it clear that the Province should cover 100% of the capital cost to
initially meet this standard and 50% of the operatingfcapital costs to maintain the 1996 standard, The
Ministry has said it will take $40 to $50 million in capital cost to get the services to the provincially
mandated standard. Municipal officials are uncomfortable with this estimate,
The third issue is transitional costs (legal and consulting fees, computer hardwarefsoftware and other
transition costs). Despite the precedent set in other downloads (I.e. Ontario Works) and the
recommendation of AMO that these costs be 100% funded by the Province, LAISC was advised that the
Province has decided not to cover these expenses. Notwithstanding, AMO will continue to document
these expenses as they represent costs not included in LSRlCRF and will pressure the government to
review this decision. MOHL TC will be advising UTMs/DDAs of the Province's decision.
This information is available through AMO's MUNICOM network at www.municom.com
For more information contact: Jeff Fisher, Senior Polley Advisor at 416-971-9856 ext. 315.
For transmission problems: (416) 971-9856 ex!. 300
44
B6/13/BB 22:27:13 EST; ASSOCIATION OF?-)
1 519 633 7661 CLERH-EI~in Co
Pa~e BB2
JUN-13-00 rUE 07:30 PM
AMO
FAX NO,
416 971 6191
/ ~('
p, 01
AsSOCiatiOn or
Municipalities
of Ontario
Member Communication
AI~rt
3~3 Unlveraity Avenue, SUUê 1701
Toronto, ON M5G 1 E6
,..1: (416) 871-9856' fax: (416) 871-8191
emalJ: amo@amo.municom,com
To the attention of the Clerk and Council
Please ensure that copies of this are distributed to all Members of Council
For Immediate Action
June 13, 2000 . Alert· 00[014
AMO ACTS TO PROTECT ONTARIO'S WATER
Issue: Yesterday, AMO President Michael Power, released a Municipal Action Plan that clearly
identifies the necessary requirements to protect Ontario's drinking water.
Facts:
While attending the June 12th regular Council meeting of the City ofWilldsor, President Power unveiled
a comprehensive action plan for protecting drinking water. The Plan calls for action on three fronts:
distribution, dealing with sources, and defining and clarifying responsibilities.
AMO has called for an immediate tripartite partnership which will accelerate and enhance federal and
provincial infrastructure investment using the increased surpluses they are experiencing. AMO is lool<ing
for a shift in funding priorities to focus on core infrastructure needs as well as a change to the
requirement far private sector dollars since this may not be possible for many parts of Ontario.
In order to deal with quantity and quality issues, the Plan looks far a comprehensive. sustainable water
management strategy. The strategy must encompass, among other matlers, strong planning principles
to protect sources and must involve province-wide mapping and the monitoring of underground water
resources and the development of information systems that support effective decision making. The
authority for implementing nutrient management strategies and the reaffirmation of the provincial interest
in effective drainage management are critical to ensuring safe water.
Defining and clarifying responsibilities requires a comprehensive water protection policy and legislation
with enforceab!e water protection regulations, Resources must be aligned with responsibility, including
timely and effective investigations and the investment in research and new technology, We afso need
immediate financial resources when disaster strikes,
Windsor City Council unanimously passed a resolution supporting AMO's Municipal Action Plan for
Protecting Ontario's Water, They are requesting that other municipalities take similar action, The Rural
Executive lent its support at a recent meeting.
Windsor's City Council also unanimously agreed to donate $5,000 to the Brockton (Walkerton)
Response Centre. Many municipalities have provided financial support which is proving extremely
important as the community continues to cope with the tragedy.
AMO Action: That Municipal Councils throughout Ontario support AMO's Municipal Action Plan for
Protecting Ontario's Water and consider providing financial assistance to Walkerton.
This information is 8vailab[e through AMO's MUNICOM network at www.munícom.com.
For more Information contact: Pat Venin!, Director of Policy and Government Relations at (416) 971-9856 ex!. 316
Transmission problems: Lorna Ruder at 416-971-9856 ex!. 300
45
--
86/13/88 22:28:81 EST; ASSOCIATIOn OF?->
1 519 633 7661 CLERK-Elgin Co
Page 883
JUN~13-00 rUE 07:31 PM
AMO
FAX NO, 416 971 6191
/ G:;'(
p, 02
'. ASSOClauon 01
Municipalities
of Ontario
Member Communication
Alert
393 University Avenue, Suite 1701
TORl"to, ON M5G 1 E6
Tel: (416) 971-9856' fax: (416) 971-11191
omall: amo@amo.munrCDm_com
To the immediate attention of the Clerk and Council
Please ensure that copies of this are distributed to all Members of Council
June 13,2000· Alert - 00/015
AMO RESPONDS TO MEDIA REPORTS OF GOVERNMENT ACTION
ON ELECTRICITY AND PRIVATIZATION OF MUNICIPAL SERVICES
Issues:
Government Directive to the OEB and proposed electricity legislation will undo municipal hydro
business plans, and,
. Leaked government paper on proposal to privatize all municipal services.
Facts:
i) Electricity Restructuring:
There has been much speculation by electricity experts since the introduction of Bill 35 that in moving
to a competitive market, rates would go up in the short term and then comedown. There are real costs
in seltlng up a business (e.g., incorporation, due diligence. business planning, billing systems, etc.) and
in any business venture these costs are captured through pricing, in this case electricity rates.
Last week, Minister Wilson (MEST) directed the OEB Chair to "make customer protection its first
priority when considering rate applications, and to ask municipalities to justify rate increases. To
ensure that electricity customers come first, the government is preparing legislation: (Power Switch,
MEST June 9, 2000, Volume 3, Issue 2) (See www.ene.gov.on.ca).
In order to do this, the government will have to undo much of Bill 35 - the legislation and regulations
that municipalities have followed. This has serious financial and legal implications for those
municipalities that have completed their business plans and undertaken related business obligations,
The investment of municipal dollars, ranging in the millions, that have been spent on investigating
electricity restructuring options and developing business plans are now threatened to be lost.
The proposed action makes it equally difficult for municipalities trying to finalize their work in order to
be ready for the November 7, 2000 deadline for incorporation. If the government proceeds with quick
iegislation that caps rates of return and changes electricity rules at the end of the process, it will
destabilize private sector investment and create a volatile situation similarto the ever-evolving property
assessment system.
In addition, the government has decided that the debt retirement charge (DRC) to deal with the
residual stranded debt of the former Ontario Hydro is to be set at 0.7 cents per kilowatt-hour of
electricity consumed in the province. While this is not a new charge, it is more than double the
anticipated rate. While the stranded debt of Ontario Hydro could be paid off sooner, it is not without
cost which must also be borne by the consumer.
46
.../2
B6/13/BB 22:2B:5B EST; ASSO~IATION OF?->
1 519 633 7661 ~LERH-Elgin ~o
Page BB4
JUN-13-00 TUE 07:32 PM AMO
Member Communication: Alert
FAX NO, 416 971 6191 p, 03
June'!,,). ?UUu - r-ttyc £I.l..
ií) Proposal to Privatize Municipal Services:
June 13th's Globe and Mail reported that the government is considering the privatization of all
municipal services except for fire and police. The article indicates that the provincial government will
oversee the initiative over a five-year period and audit the decision-making process of council - that
councils must prove to Queen's Park that services delivered by municipal government employees are
of better value,
Minister Clement, in responding to questions from the media and the Opposition, did not deny the
report - that the government is looking at any and all options for more efficient municipal operations,
We are trying to confirm what, if any, decisions have been taken.
In May, AMO shared with the provincial staff its proposals for additional labour relation tools. The report
clearly indicates that mandatory competing out would not serve the municipal sector.
Action:
AMO has written the Premier. A copy of the letter is attached. On the electricity matter, AMO has
strongly urged the govC3rnment to abandon any retroactive changes. In terms of labour relation tools,
new ones are needed, but municipal councils should determine when and how they can be used
locally.
This information is availablo through AMO's MUNICOM network at www.rnunicom.colJ}~
For more Inform~tion contact (416) 971-9856:
Pat Moyle, Executive Director at exl. 306; or
Pat Vanin;, Director of Policy and Government Relations atext. 316
Transmission problems:
Lorna Ruder at 416-971-9856 exL 300
47
---------
66/13/66 22:29:27 EST; ASSOCIATION OF?-)
1 519 633 7661 CLERH-Elyin Co
Paye 665
JUN-13-00 rUE 07:32 PM AMO
FAX NO, 416 971 6191
p, 04
OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT
June 13, 2000
Hon. Michael D. Harris
Premier of Ontario
Legislalive Building
Queen's Park
Toronto, ON M7 A 1 A 1
Dear Premier:
Recent reports in the media have suggested that your government is contemplating new legislation
which will directly impact municipal governments. Specifically, the Globe and Mail has reported that
your government is considering the mandatory privalization of an municipal services save and except
police and fire services. Further, the provincial government will oversee the initiative over a five-year
period and audit the decision-making process of council.
It has also been reported that the govemrnent is contemplating retroactive changes to the hydro
restructuring legislation. As you can appreciate, many municipalities have done all the work to comply
wilh the provisions and regulations of Bill 35 and have filed rale applications with the Ontario Energy
Board,
Premier, on behalf of the municipal sector, I strongly urge you and your government to abandon any
retroactive changes to the electricity legislation. While municipalities are looking for some new labour
relation tools to help them operate more efficientiy, a provincially forced approach is not one of them,
The recent actions of the government concerning forced mergers, tax capping, referendum legislalion
and these polential new actions are making municipal governments largely irrelevant. Many of my
colleagues are asking if the real agenda is simply to replace allloeal government with Queen's Park.
The public feels the closest to local government. They feel that local government is responsive to
their needs since they have direct access to the local decision-making process. If a council does not
follow the will of the people, they will be "unelected" every third November.
Premier, as I have said on many occasions to you, we need a new deal. This incremental destruction
of local government is unwarranted, unprecedented and unhealthy for local democracy.
~
Michael Power
AMO President
48
cc Hon. Tony Clement, Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing
..,-.."-
.-. -".'-'- ----- ,--."-~ ---.'-'
393 University Ave., Suite 1701 Toronto, ON M5G 1E6
tel: (416) 971-9856 . toll free: 1-877-426-6527 . fax: (416) 971-6191 . email: amo@amo.muicom.com
- -------.
G'b.1;'~*,(\¡,
oèrk'f¡~Jlj
-
R Þ t{~:t~~~=;
ti ~~~'i~
~~
;¡ &.~
~ ùd". ~
~~~ h~
~~~#
~ l'RANSC.~
~i%"~&i
~~~Æ!~
ONTARIO
-TRAIlS-
COUNCIL
£3,,"~?-.@Ð
May 10, 2000
JUN 5 2000
Dear Trail Supporter,
f\n~ '$.!"P',.f f).... g<': !"o~M
\.h_fãj~\; ! f :;A« ~:~~¿].n~
SERV1CES
We are very pleased to send you the Consolidated Provincial Trails Policy resulting fÌ'om
the workshop held in North Bay in October, 1999. The consensus document is attached
along with a background report and list of those organizations that reviewed the policy in
its final form and forwarded letters of support.
We feel that tlùs is a great step forward in building a first class network of all-season
trails for our Province. Such a network will bring major benefits to our economy, to the
health and happiness of our citizens and to our visitors by offering greater access to all
that is Ontario.
The Honourable Tim Hudak, Mi..'1Ïster of North em Development and Mines has offered
to present this report to the provincial Cabinet. Political leadership at the Cabinet level
will do much to encourage other supporting legislation and policy.
If you require additional information, please call the offices of either sponsoring
organization - the Ontario Trails Council at 1-877-668-7245 or the Ontario Federation of
Snowmobile Clubs at (705) 739-7669.
Bill Bowick, President
Ontario Trails Council
I am formally signing on behalf of:
Bert Grant, President,
Ontario Federation of
Snowmobile Clubs
Bob Gray
Master of Ceremonies
Encl.
49
Toll Free: 1-877 ON TRAIL (1-877-668-7245)
232 Guelph Street, Suite 203, Georgetown, Ontario, Canada L7G 481
May 2, 2000
Honourable Tim Hudak, Minister
Ministry of North em Development and Mines
Room 5630, Whitney Block,
Toronto, Ontario M7A IW3
Dear Mr. Hudak,
We are very pleased to present to you the Consolidated Provincial Trails Policy report.
The consensus document is attached along with a background report and letters of
support fÌ'om many of the organizations which reviewed the policy in its final fonn.
On behalf of all trail supporters, we would like to thank you for coming to the North Bay
session last November to attend a forum to develop an Ontario Trails policy. Your
comments were very encouraging and we appreciate your supportive message in taking
this report to Cabinet for ratification.
Yours truly,
Bert Grant, President
Ontario Federation of
Snowmobile Clubs
Bob Gray, Chair
Nipissing East Commumty
Opportunities,
Special Advisor,
North Bay Mattawa
Conservation Authority
ill Bowick, President
Ontario Trails Council
t~~f
Ene!.
Ontario Trails Council, 232A Guelph St., Suite 203, Georgetown, Ontario L 7G 4B 1
50
Towards a Provincial Recreational Trails
Policy
Prepared by: the Provincial Trails Community
ONTARIO TRAILS POLICY
We believe a Trails Policy, implemented by legislation and assigned to a lead
ministry, is imperative to the future of trails in Ontario. It is important to define
areas of provincial interest and opportunities for provincial partnership in trails.
Similarly it is important to define areas of responsibility for other trail partners.
1.0 BENEFITS AND NEEDS
Recreational trails, whether single-use or shared-use, are an important, valuable
and value-added asset. These recreational corridors can be as simple as an
historical footpath or as varied as a shared-use, four seasons railtrail. The
physical, participative and esthetic aspects of trails appeals to people from all
walks of life. They support activities as diverse as bird-watching and long-
distance snowmobile travel; they provide an educational resource and routes for
alterative modes of transportation in cycling and walking.
Recreational trails bring together elements of wellness, fitness, spiritual
renewal, physical activity, social interaction, job creation, natural and cultural
heritage appreciation and environmental protection.
Recent studies show substantial economic benefits from investments in trails.
Direct returns come from tourism-related business providing food and
accommodation, from businesses providing activity-related equipment sales and
service, and from development and maintenance of the trail facility itself job
creation and employment, property and sales tax and new dollars from out-of-
province tourists are other economic benefits.
Ontario's trail community has accomplished a great deal during the past thirty
years. Volunteer efforts combined with creative partnering have resulted in
hundreds of community-based trails across Ontario, the formation of a
provincial trails association, international recognition for the Bruce Trail and
North American leadership in the provision of snowmobiling. Successful
partnerships have evolved in trail securement, planning, management and use
and the Provinces' reputation for quality trail experiences continues to grow.
January 2000
51
The Province of Ontario has contributed to this success by supporting provincial, regional
and local initiatives through trail securement, planning, development and operational
assistance.
The most significant pillar supporting trail efforts has, and will continue to be, the
contribution of volunteers and community leaders. However the time has come for the
Province to take a more active role in facilitating the work of the trail community.
All trails need to be financially sustainable. Trail groups have developed different ways
and means of supporting their efforts in trail planning, development, maintenance and
operations including user fees, membership fees, fundraising strategies, the provision of
countless hours of volunteer labour and various contributions of in-kind support. Some
trail groups develop trails for their members while others develop trails for use by the
general public. It would be nice if it were so but not all trail users are members of
organized trail clubs and associations and therefore many do not directly contribute to their
chosen trail activity. Provincial assistance is required.
The trail community views corridors as valuable resources to establish a network of high
quality, all-season trails. A trail policy is required to facilitate municipalities, conservation
authorities, community organizations, private landowners and trail-user groups to take a
lead role in the development and management of these corridors as recreation trails in their
areas. A policy is required to encourage shared-use of trails wherever feasible and
recognize the value of single-use trails. A trail policy is required to ensure consistency in
the provincial government's approach to trails across Ontario. A trails policy is also
required to clarify effective roles and responsibilities.
2.0 PRINCIPLES GOVERNING A PROVINCIAL TRAILS POLICY
Several principles should govern the development of a provincial trails policy. These
include the following:
Trail planning, development and management are a shared responsibility;
Community participation underlies successful trail development;
It is important to maintain the continuity and accessibility of corridors;
The provincial trails system includes single-use and multiple-use trails;
Shared-use trails should be encouraged wherever possible;
Partnerships are required for a sustainable trail system; and
Trails need government encouragement, support and action.
52
2
3.0 TRAIL CORRIDORS
3.1 CROWN LAND AND PUBLIC LAND
The Province supports and promotes trails and trail development on crown land and public
land wherever feasible.
3.2 RIGHTS-OF . WAY SECUREMENT
The Province supports and encourages public or charitable ownership of rights-of-way and
shore allowances and other significant types of corridors, including abandoned and/or
active railway rights-of-way, utility corridors and unopened road allowances by provincial,
federal, county, regional and municipal governments, conservation authorities and other
public bodies.
Rights-of-way acquisition is recommended in consideration of the potential for future
development and management as other single or shared-use recreational trails as well as
other additional, approved, linear public uses, associated amenities and corridor functions.
The Province will request the railway companies with land holdings in Ontario to follow a
corridor disposition protocol whereby the province and other levels of government will be
given first right of refusal to purchase abandoned rail corridors. The Province may appoint
trail or other organizations to act as its agent to secure and maintain a continuous corridor
for public purposes. The sale and severing of rail corridors to private interests should only
be pursued after all public agencies and trail partners have had the opportunity to consider
corridor acquisition.
3.3 UTILIZATION OF CORRIDORS
The Province will encourage and facilitate consultations with hydro, telecommunications
and natural gas providers, the mining, forestry, agriculture and railway industries, related
provincial agencies and ministries and other organizations that own and/or utilize
corridors. The objective of these consultations is to create new partnerships and trail
opportunities. These partnerships should be guided by a generic or standardized trail
agreement where feasible and environmentally sound and not in conflict with other public
purposes.
3.4 CONTINUITY OF PUBLIC OWNERSIDP
It is important to maintain the continuity of trails wherever possible in public ownership
and management. This should be an overriding principle in all provincial trail activities.
Trail easements or other securement approaches over private lands will be encouraged
where private landowners are supportive and will allow the use of portions of their lands
for public trails.
53
3
3.5 RELATIONSIllP WITH ADJACENT LANDOWNERS
The Province will encourage the establishment of management practices along trail
corridors to engender good neighbour relations with adjacent landowners. In rural areas,
the right to farm and other agricultural needs will be respected and addressed by the trail
managers. Particular consideration will be given to situations involving urgent need or
hardship.
Formal agreement for authorized trail uses will be necessary and, correspondingly,
unauthorized encroachment or trespasses will be treated as such.
Subject to an overriding principle of maintaining the continuity of the corridor ownership,
existing crossings will be honoured, and new ones may be granted on the condition that the
integrity of the corridors will be maintained.
3.6 CORRIDOR USE
Unauthorized use of corridors, such as abandoned rail lines, can create long term problems
for trail users, land managers and adjacent landowners. In the absence of formal trail
establishment and designation, utility and resource corridors shall be considered closed to
recreational trail use.
3.7 FUTURE DISPOSITIONS
The Province, where provincial interest is established, will develop publicly accountable
procedures where the abandonment and disposition of trails and corridors is deemed
necessary .
The Province will develop criteria and publicly accountable procedures for acquisition,
disposition and development of trails and corridors.
4.0 TRAIL DEVELOPMENT
4.1 PLANNING AND CONSULTATION
Provincial trail planning and development directives will be developed in an open
consultative process with all levels of government and the trail community.
4.2 DESIGNATION OF TRAILS
Enabling legislation will identify the conditions required for a trail to be designated as a
provincial trail. Consideration could be given to the requirement to have an approved
management plan and an assigned management authority.
54
4
4.3 FINANCIAL SUSTAINABILITY
All trail users will be expected to contribute to the development and maintenance of a
financially sustainable recreational trail system. The nature of the contributions will vary
and will be determined by the individual groups. Individual trail groups, community-based
organizations and government will work together as partners to develop a sustainable
funding system to meet their needs.
5.0 RESPONSIBILITIES
5.1 PROVINCE
A designated lead ministry will be responsible at the provincial level for facilitating the
development and maintenance of trails, for the development of public ownership of
existing and future recreational corridors, and for the coordination of a multi-ministry
approach to trails. The Government will manage acquired corridors in reserve status; enter
into lease agreements to permit trail development and management by community-based
organizations; assist with the planning, design and management of corridors for
recreational purposes; administer a grant program to assist with the development of trails;
and arrange for the designation of formal trail opportunities.
Each ministry will address the implications of the trails policy on its respective policies
and legislation. Particular attention should be drawn to directions such as the intent and
implementation of the Line Fences Act, application of the Provincial Cycling Policy,
implementation of provincial policy land use statements, provincial park management
policies and the Resource Based Tourism policy.
5.2 ONTARIO PARKS
When trails pass through Provincial Parks, Ontario Parks, under its parks management
process, will encourage, develop and manage specific trail rights-of-way segments where
it is consistent with program priorities and trails policy. Ontario Parks will encourage
friends and other park group's involvement in trail development and use.
In certain instances, particularly where corridors link directly with or through provincial
park properties, Parks Ontario will consider trail linkages inside their lands. Trail
development and management within these properties will be undertaken directly, or under
the direction of Ontario Parks through its parks management process and consistent with
trails policy.
55
5
53 ORGANIZED TRAIL GROUPS
Organized local, regional and provincial trail groups will continue to have a key role in
trail planning, development, management and operations.
For shared-use trails, each user group will help to develop a funding mechanism, whereby
their members will contribute equitably towards the development and maintenance of the
trails.
At the local level, trail groups will assist and promote the formation of community-based
trails and encourage their members to contribute to the development and maintenance of
trails.
At the provincial level, trail groups will, through participation in the Ontario Trails
Council, contribute to the development of province-wide policies and standards and the
establishment of shared programs and values.
5.4 COMMUNITY -BASED ORGANIZATIONS
Local and regional user and community-based trail organizations, working in partnership
with the Ontario Trails Council and various levels of government, will assume the primary
responsibility for active trail development and management. These organizations will
receive grants, raise funds and provide volunteer labour to develop and maintain the trail
system.
Local trail development and associated management will be undertaken by community-
based groups. They will ensure public input and work in co-operation with the lead
provincial ministry and/or local municipal government and/or other trail organizations.
5.5 ONTARIO TRAILS COUNCIL
The Government recognizes the Ontario Trails Council as representing the broad spectrum
of trail groups with a role to provide direction on issues of common interest to
government, business and the general public.
The Ontario Trails Council will redefine its provincial and regional roles and
responsibilities. The Ontario Trails Council, with support and input from the trail
community, will investigate the merits of forming an Ontario Recreational Trails
Foundation. This foundation would be responsible for the generation and distribution of
funds for trail development and management.
The Ontario Trails Council will work with the Province and other trail groups to develop a
mechanism for equalization of trail funding across the province.
The lead ministry should consider assisting with the financial support of the goals of this
organization.
56
6
5.6 MUNICIPAL! LOCAL GOVERNMENT
Municipal governments should be encouraged to plan, develop and maintain trails as part
of their Parks and Recreation programs and to link these community trails with province-
wide trail networks.
5.7 CONSERVATION AUTHORITIES
The Conservation Authorities have considerable experience in developing, managing and
maintaining trail systems both within and connected to their management areas. As agents
for municipalities, the conservation authorities, should be encouraged to continue to
coordinate local and regional trail interests and perform. active roles in trail securement,
design and development.
In certain instances, particularly where corridors link directly with or through conservation
authority properties, the Conservation Authority will consider trail linkages inside their
lands. Trail development and management within these properties will be undertaken
directly, or under the direction of the Conservation Authority.
57
7
GLOSSARY
Authorized Uses
The only permitted uses on a particular trail. Often identified in a management plan.
Community-based
An organization established in and/or by individuals and/or other organizations in a local
or regional community defined geographically or by a common interest
Corridor
A natural or human-made (often pre-existing) route through its surroundings, whether rural
or urban, that is suitable, with or without development, for one or more trail uses.
Organized Trail Groups
Groups of trail users, builders, operators and/or their supporters who have come together
for the purposes of establishing, promoting or sustaining a trail or trail system.
Shared-use Trail
A trail established, designed, dedicated and/or operated for the purpose of supporting and
allowing two or more trail activities to occur simultaneously or in different seasons.
Single-use Trail
A trail established, designed, dedicated and/or operated for the purpose of allowing only
one trail activity.
Trail System
An integrated network of single-use and shared-use trails that may not necessarily
interconnect but share programs, systems and values.
58
8
RATIONALE - ONTARIO TRAILS POLICY
In 1973, the Provincial Government and Trail Organizations met to form an
Ontario Trails Council. & a result, government undertook to manage the trail
system under provincial policies and guidelines. In the late 1970's the Province of
Ontario ceased direct management of trails and encouraged individual trail
organizations such as the Bruce Trail and the OFSC to take on an operational role.
While interest in trails in Ontario was increasing, there was still no provincial
policy or distinct legislation to guide trail organizations. There was no lead
government agency to assist with the development and management of Ontario
Trails and it was becoming a serious challenge for volunteer organizations.
In 1988, a group of trail enthusiasts got together at a "Meeting of the Minds"
Forum and established a new organization to represent all trail using associations
and individuals. This new group was also named the Ontario Trails Council. The
organization took as its mandate the promotion of "development, management and
use of an integrated recreational trails network in the Province of Ontario". The
Ontario Trails Council continues to work to that mandate.
When the Trans Canada Trail concept was unveiled in 1994 each provincial
jurisdiction reviewed their existing trail policy. Ontario had none. The growing
rails-to-trails movement should have been a positive force for trail development
but lacked government support to do so. An inter-ministerial committee
established to deal with abandoned rail line acquisition gave little consideration to
recreational trails as it lacked a provincial trails policy under which to operate.
The interest in recreational trails is growing. There is an ever-increasing awareness
of their value from social, economic, health and environmental points of view as
well as their application as alternate transportation and utility corridors. The
Province of Ontario has the mandate to establish policy and legislation but
currently, leadership is coming from outside of government. The only
organizations viewing the trail network as a province-wide system are the OFSC -
the world's most successful snowmobile organization - and the Ontario Trails
Council- an umbrella group of volunteers. Neither organization is currently
capable of delivering the necessary leadership, the former because of it' s mandate
and the latter due to it's size. We desperately need a policy to guide government
support.
59
LIST OF SUPPORTERS
for the
CONSOLIDATED PROVINCIAL TRAILS POLICY
Elgin Trans Canada Trail Committee
545 Talbot St.
St. Thomas, ONN5P 3V7
Phone #: 519-631-1680 Ext. 135
Fax: 519-633-9019
Email: tsmith@city.st-thomas.on.ca
Contact: Marie Turvey, Chairman, Elgin Canada Trail Committee
The Corporation of the City of North Bay
200 Mcintyre St. East
P.O. Box 360, North Bay, ONPlB 8H8
Phone #: 705-474-0400
Contact: Jamie Houston, OALA, C.S.L.A Manager of Parks & Facilities
Friends of Mattawa River Heritage Park
Clo of Samuel De Champlain Provincial Park
Box 147, Mattawa, Ontario POH 1VO
Phone #: 705-744-2276
Contact: Came Pinkerton-Steer, Secretary
Elora Cataract Trailway Association
Box 99,
Fergus,ONN1M2W7
Phone #: 519-843-3650
Fax#: 519-843-6907
Contact: H. Deryk Smith, Chair
West Nipissing Adventure Trails
P.O. Box 2160 Sturgeon Falls,
ON POH 200
Phone#: 705-753-0160
Fax #: 705-753-6636
Contact: David Lafleur, Secretary
- 1 -
60
Voyageur Trail Association
150 Churchill Blvd.,
Sault Ste. Marie, ON P6A 6W3
Phone #: 705-253-5353 or 1-800-393-5353
Email: vov!U!:eur.trail@sympatico.ca
Web Site: http://www3.!!YIllpatico.calvoyageur.trail
Contact: Gayle Phillips
North Simcoe Railtrail IDe.
P.O. Box 272
Midhurst, ON
LOL lXO
Contact: Bill Wilson, Vice-President, North Simcoe Rai1trail Inc.
Huronia Trails & Greenways
15 Cloverhill Crescent,
Cookstown, ON LOL lLO
Phone #: 705-458-4037
Fax #: 705-458-9143
Email: trails@interhop.net
Contact: Frieda Baldwin
Ontario Trails Council
232A Guleph St. Suite 203
Georgetown, ONL7G4Bl
Phone #: 1-877-668-7245
Contact: James Girling, Vice President
Credit Valley Conservation
1255 Old Deny Road West
Meadowvale, ON L5N 6R4
Phone #: 905-670-1615
Fax #: 905-670-2210
Contact: Frank Dale, Chairman
Nipissing East Community Opportunities (NECO)
510 Main St. East, Suite 204,
North Bay, ONPIB IB8
Phone #: 705-476-8822 or 1-888-476-8822
Fax #: 705-495-6038
Email: neco@vianet.on.ca
Website: http//www.neco.on.ca
Contact: Bob GTay, Chair
-2-
61
Ontario Federation of All Terrain Vehicle Dubs
P.O. Box 217
Mattawa, ONPOH 1 VO
Phone #: 705-744-3743 or 1-800-264-5271
Fax#: 705-744-3747
Email: info@ofatv.org
Website: www.ofatv.org
Contact: Phil Bangs
The Canadian Ecology Centre
P.O. Box 147, Hwy 17 West
Mattawa, ONPOH 1VO
Phone #: 705-744-1715
Fax#: 705-744-1716
Website: www.canadian.ecology.com
Contact: Bill Steer, Coordinator Education, Ecology & Sustainable Outdoor Tourism
North Bay-Mattawa Conservation Authority
701 Oak Street, East,
North Bay, ONP1B 9T1
Phone #: 705-474-5420
Fax #: 705-474-9793
Email: nbmca@efui.com
Contact: William F. Beckett, Secretary-Manager
Discovery Routes
701 Oak Street East,
North Bay, ONPlB 9T1
Phone #: 705-474-5420
Fax #: 705-474-9793
Contact: Arne Schmidt, chair
Rainbow Routes
S.RD.C., Tom Davies Square,
200 Brady St.
Sudbwy, ONP3E 5K3
Phone #: 705-674-4455 Ext: 4611
Fax#: 705-671-6767
Email: Melissa.bresnahan@region.sudbUly.on.ca
Contact: Melissa Bresnahan, Executive Director, Rainbow Routes Association
- 3 -
62
Ontario Federation of Snowmobile Dubs
106 Saunders Rd. Unit 12,
Barrie, ONL4N 9A8
Phone # 705-739-7669
Fax#: 705-739-5005
Contact: Tim West, Manager of External Relations
Superior-Sunset Trails
153 Balsam Street,
Ignace, ON POT ITO
Phone #: 807-934-6345 or 934-6482
Fax #: 807-934-6667
Email: psmyk@ignaceJakeheadu.ca
Contact: Dennis Smyk, chair
Canadian All-Terrain Vehicle Distributors Council
3780-14th Ave. Suite 211,
Markham, ON L3R 9Y5
Phone #: 905-470-9406
Fax #: 905-470-9407
Contact: Adrian Coleman
The Magnetawan Area Business Association
Contact: Ken Turner, Past President
Municipality of Bayham
Box 343
Port Burwell, ONNOJ 1TO
Contact: Dave Mason, Councillor, Ward One
Eastern Ontario Trails Alliance
RR#2,
Tweed, ON KOK 3JO
Phone #: 613-478-1444
Fax #: 613-478-2235
Contact: Cindy Cassidy
Georgian Cycle & Ski Trail Association
601 First St.
Collingwood, ON L9Y 4L2
Phone #: 705-445-7722
Contact: Immediate Past President
63
-4-
Kettle Creek Conservation Authority
44015 Ferguson Line, RR 8,
St. Thomas, ON N5P 3T3
Phone#: 519-631-1270
Fax#: 519-631-5026
Contact: BryanD. Hall
Ontario Parks Association
1185 EgIinton Ave. East, Suite 404,
Toronto, ON M3C 3C6
Phone #: 416-426-7157
Fax #: 416-426-7366
E-Mail: opa@opassoc.on.ca
Contact: Lynda Rotteau
Ontario Competitive Trail Riding Association
5 David Wright Court,
Newmarket, ON L3Y 4Wl
Contact: Diana Regendanz
Conservation Ontario
Contact: Bonnie Fox, Policy & Planning Specialist
-5-
64
-- ---- --
ONTARIO
GOOD ROADS
ASSOCIATION
530 OTTO ROAD, UNIT 2
MISSISSAUGA, ONTARIO
L5T 2L5
TELEPHONE 905-795-2555
FAX 905-795-2660
'lfflo.¡ri.trÍJI(~Ortø<tÍJ
,..,,~r,;o~~.
RE~,:?;¿r\ :;~?\f:,y
June 7, 2000
JUN 12 2000
." ~!'¡
t:i"",U~~"''i
Ms. Sandra Heffren
Deputy Clerk,
County of Elgin
450 Sunset Drive, St. Thomas, Ontario
N5R 5V1 .
Dear Ms. Heffren:
I am writing with regard to the resolution passed by the council of the County of
Elgin requesting the Minister of Transportation to reinstate suburban roads
commissions.
The OGRA Board of Directors, acting as the Resolutions Committee, discussed
this resolution at length but a motion to not endorse the resolution was passed.
The rationale for not endorsing the resolution is based on OGRA's policy that all
municipalities need access to a long-term, consistent source of revenue based
on 10 cents per litre of fuel tax revenue. The OGRA Board of Directors feels that
a return to suburban roads commissions does not adequately deal with the level
of underfunding that our transportation infrastructure is experiencing.
OGRA will submit this resolution, along with the recommendation of the Board of
Directors, to the Annual Conference in February, 2001 for a full debate by the
delegates.
Please contact me at the OGRA office if you would like further information on the
position of the Board.
Yours truly;
"-
ÌX\~U~
DiJm3' Šummers
Manager of Policy and Research
65
.
LONG POINT REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY
R.R.#3· Simcoe' Ontario' N3Y 4K2 . Tel: (519) 428-4623' Fax: (519) 428-1520
Date: June 8, 2000
File: 3.6.7 (water conservation initiatives)
JUN 13 ~1JlJ
MEMORANDUM:
TO: Member Municipalities within the Long Point Region Conservation Authority
FROM: J.L.Oliver, General Manager, LPRCA
RE: Provincial Groundwater Monitoring Network - LPRCA Participation
Member municipalities are probably aware of an announcement made in early May by
the Minister of the Environment to establish a provincial groundwater monitoring network This
network will consist of groundwater level monitoring wells along with the computer hardware to
collect, transmit and store data. The second component of the network will be the periodic
collection of groundwater samples for chemical analysis for selected parameters, In our case, the
local network of monitoring wells could be at trom 8-10 locations across the Big Creek and Big
Otter Creek watersheds, as well as within the Lynn River and Nanticoke Creek drainage systems.
This network program will also be directly complimentary to our current groundwater
management study within Big Creek, which is being undertaken as part of the Provincial Water
Protection Fund.
The Ministry hopes to work closely with conservation authorities, and through us, with
municipalities, to establish and continue the network over at least an initial period of six years,
The Board of the LPRCA approved our participation in the program at our meeting on June 7/00.
The Ministry will be paying a1l capital costs and analysis costs in year one and we wi1l assume
data co1lection and analysis costs from year two to year six.
We hope and assume this program will be of interest and benefit to our municipalities
where part or all of the municipal water supply is rrorn groundwater sources. We will keep our
municipalities infonned as the program gets underway, and will want direction from our
municipalities on priority locations for monitoring wells andJor parameters to be monitored.
Please contact the writer or Dave Holmes, Field Superintendent, if there are any
Z~stions at this t,i"m, e in, regards to this new program
, /'~ '
. ~ ,
/ '" i I
'/, .~,.! 1-,"7
- / '-~~---" I: ,,'.' '- -----
~~/ 1L Olive;, V'
(/ General Manager
66
<I
A member at the Conservation Ontario Network