March 22, 2005 Agenda
ORDERS OF THE DA Y
FOR TUESDA Y. MARCH 22. 2005 - 9:00 A.M.
PAGE # ORDER
Meeting Called to Order
Adoption of Minutes - meeting March 8, 2005
Disclosure of Pecuniary Interest and the General Nature Thereof
Presenting Petitions, Presentations and Delegations
DELEGATION
9:30 a.m. Jim Wilgar, AIM PowerGen Corporation, Update on Wind
Turbine Power Source
Motion to Move Into "Committee Of The Whole Council"
Reports of Council, Outside Boards and Staff
Council Correspondence - see attached
1) Items for Consideration
2) Items for Information (Consent Agenda)
OTHER BUSINESS
1) Statements/Inquiries 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
59 13th Consideration of By-Laws
14th ADJOURNMENT
1st
2nd
3rd
4th
2
5th
3-22 6th
7th
23-27
28-58
8th
LUNCH WILL BE PROVIDED
1
To Whom It May Concern
09 March, 2005
RE AIM POWERGEN'S DELEGATION MEETING
MARCH 22, 9:30 AM ELGIN COUNTY COUNCIL
AIM PowerGen Corporation (AIM) representatives' look forward to meeting with
Elgin County Council and related officials to review our company's current and future
activities and plans.
The company has been very active in recent developments in Ontario's electricity
system. The previous Conservative Government in Ontario appointed AIM President and
CEO Mike Crawley to its Electricity Conservation and Supply Task Force. The current
Liberal Government implemented many Task Force recommendations. The Erie Shores
Wind Farm Project (ESWFP) of AIM PowerGen Corporation was one of the five projects
selected from some forty bids received in the recent Ontario Government 300 MW
renewable power tender. Construction of the initial 99 MW Phase I ofESWF is targeted
to begin in the summer of2005.
The purpose of our meeting on March 22nd is to provide further background and
related details with respect to AIM and to convey the work we are presently doing in
Elgin County notably in The Municipality of Bayham and the Township of Malahide. It
is our intention to also present future initiatives and to respond to questions members may
have with respect to this unique development. Wind studies by Dr. James Salmon of
Zephyr North, Option Agreements with area landowners, Environmental Assessment
procedures, Official Plan and Zoning Ammendments, Wildlife Studies, tower locations
and related electric line planning, Economic Impact issues are just some of the issues we
plan to review. Our goal is to work closely with landowners and area authorities to
finalize the many details necessary to make Erie Shores Wind Farm Phase I a reality and
to lay the ground work for the ESWF Phase II. Working together with all concerned is of
primary importance. Mike Crawley, CEO of AIM and Jay Wilgar, Vice President, Field
Operations will make the presentation and respond to related issues.
From our work in your area and other parts of Ontario, we know the value of
these types of meetings and thank you for this opportunity.
Yours very truly,
Jim Wilgar for Mike Crawley
AIM PowerGen Corporation
REPORTS OF COUNCIL AND STAFF
March 22. 2005
Staff ReDorts - (ATTACHED)
4 Director of Financial Services - Ambulance Over-Expenditure - 2004
6 Director of Financial Services - Additional Homes Funding - 2005
j)/UMl..f...tLj) 7 Financial Services - 2005/2006 Community Support Services Proposed Budget
10 Director of Human Resources - Benefit Renewal Report - 2005 - Effective March 1, 2005
15 Director of Engineering Services - Sparta Line - Chevron Warning Signs
18 Manager of Road Infrastructure - Talbot Trail A. T.v. Club of Aylmer - Tsunami Relief Ride
Manager of Road Infrastructure - New Sarum Bridge (to be sent out on Friday Fax)
Manager of Road Infrastructure and Purchasing Co-Ordinator - Big Otter Creek Slope
Rehabilitation (to be sent out on Friday Fax)
21 Manager of Administrative Services - Parking Agreement - Town of Aylmer
3
REPORT TO COUNTY COUNCIL
FROM:
Linda B. Veger, Director of Financial Services
DATE:
March 7, 2005
SUBJECT:
Ambulance Over-expenditure - 2004
Introduction:
Staff advised that a report would come forward highlighting the areas of over expenditure
in the 2004 ambulance budget. A copy of the most recent budget comparison is attached
for your reference.
Discussion:
On the revenue side - Provincial grant:
Variance (28,478)
The difference is made up of:
Received fewer dollars for wage increase than budgeted
Did not receive an operations increase that was budgeted
Received less for response time than budgeted
(6,413)
(10,587)
(25,851 )
Received a one time grant - A VLGPS - not budgeted
Received annual maintenance for AVLGPS - not budgeted
11,287
2,383
City of St. Thomas:
Variance 38,196
Reflects St. Thomas share of over expenditures and under funding.
Payments for contractor:
Variance (91,280)
Majority of this over expenditure is related to consumables - $71,071. The line was
somewhat under budgeted in 2004 plus increased call volumes resulted in increased
usage. Increased call volumes also increased overtime.
Operations:
Variance 14,940
First year estimates higher than required. The 2005 budget has been adjusted accordingly.
Repairs and Maintenance:
Variance 20,990
First year estimates higher than required. The 2005 budget has been adjusted accordingly.
Miscellaneous:
Variance (17,201)
As indicated to Council previously, additional charges from the St. Thomas Elgin General
Hospital relating to an inquest.
Conclusion:
The ambulance budget was over by $62,834 in 2004. Adjustments have been made in the
2005 budget lines to more closely reflect actual 2004 expenditures. The 2005 budgeted
Provincial grant does not reflect any increase for operations in 2005. Also, the estimated
Provincial wage grant increase has been calculated on nine months instead of twelve.
Thames EMS has carefully reviewed their 2005 submission to ensure increases have been
included where necessary as indicated by the 2004 costs.
The AVLGPS was originally purchased out of the mill rate stabilization reserve. Approval
for the funding came after the purchase. Staff suggest that the $11,287 be transferred to
that reserve to offset the costs. St. Thomas has received their total share of funding and
this transfer of funds will not affect their revenues.
Recommendation:
THAT staff be directed to transfer the Provincial grant ($11,287) from Ambulance
operations to the mill rate stabilization reserve to offset the cost of the A VLGPS; and,
THAT the report titled Ambulance Over Expenditure 2004 and dated March 7, 2005 be
received and filed.
Respectfully Submitted
~,1: . ~;;4/.A/
Linda B. VegetV'
Director of Financial Services
APPro~t;-,.:.,.,:v,-
?t(J
Mar~lq
Chief Administrative Officer
-
!rrmrN-fm(3Y1J( /7)
ItJnL3itL..,41Vee- O,y;;e-E'f:P:?€lVj}(~ -.;ZcoY'
COUNTY OF ELGIN
Ambulance Services
Budget Comparison
For The Year Ending December 31,2004
Total YTD YTD Variance %OF
Budget Budget Actual () Budget
Province of Ontario (1,635,907) (1,635,907) (1,607,429) (28,478)
City of Sl. Thomas (1,253,970) (1,253,970) (1,292,166) 38,196
Intermunicipal Transfers 0 0 0 0
Payments to Contractors 4,596,185 4,596,185 4,687,465 (91,280)
Salaries & Wages 60,000 60,000 59,707 293
Benefits 15,600 15,600 12,242 3,358
Membership Fees 500 500 250 250
Travel & Mileage 3,500 3,500 623 2,877
Professional Development 3,000 3,000 1,203 1,797
Office Supplies 7,000 7,000 635 6,365
Equipment 0 0 0 0
Repairs & Maintenance 30,000 30,000 9,010 20,990
Miscellaneous 500 500 17,701 (17,201)
1,820,408 1,820,4U8 1,88ij,242 (02,8::14) 1U::I.44'10
7
REPORT TO COUNTY COUNCIL
FROM:
Linda B. Veger, Director of Financial Services
DATE:
March 8, 2005
SUBJECT:
Additional Homes Funding - 2005
Introduction:
The Homes have recently been advised that they will receive an increase in funding
effective April 1, 2005.
Discussion/Conclusion:
The per diem increases affect the Nursing and Personal Care envelope, an increase of
$1.08, and the Program and Support envelope, an increase of $0.11. The 2005 total
increase is:
I EIQin Manor
I Terrace LodQe
I Bobier Villa
I Total 2005 increase
$29,1851
$32,321 I
$17,758 I
$79,264 I
The Directors provided Council with a year over year budget decrease of 7.66% or
$332,559. Several outbreaks have already occurred this year leading to a significant
number of overtime hours. That additional time may stretch budgeted staffing hours by the
end of the year. This additional funding will be utilized to offset those hours.
Recommendation:
THAT the report titled Additional Homes Funding - 2005 and dated March 8, 2005 be
received and filed.
Respectfully Submitted
Approved for Sub . .
----
~~J'~#N
Linda B. Veger ()
Director of Financial Services
REPORT TO COUNTY COUNCIL
FROM: Jennifer Ford, Financial Services
DATE: 08 March 2005
SUBJECT: 2005/2006 Community Support Services Proposed Budget
INTRODUCTION
The County of Elgin receives funding from the Ministry of Health and Long Term
Care, through a program known as Community Support Services, more
commonly known as the Adult Day Program, for elderly clients in East and West
Elgin. These funds are dispersed to the programs at Terrace Lodge and Bobier
Villla.
As well, the City of St. Thomas, who heads up the program at the Valleyview
Home for the Aged, receives funding from the County program to provide
services for the residents of St. Thomas and the Central Area of the County.
Since the two programs share similar goals and a Program Co-ordinator, the
delivery of this much needed service to the residents is enhanced by our joint
arrangement.
With the help of the Program Co-ordinator, information is obtained for the
completion of quarterly forms and the County's annual funding request. The
ability to cut costs and to ensure that services are not duplicated remains a
primary goal of the partnership that meets on a regular basis throughout the
year.
DISCUSSION:
In consultation with the Program Co-ordinator, the Directors of Terrace Lodge
and Bobier Villa, the budget for the 2005/2006 Adult Day program has now been
formulated. This program is funded 100% through Provincial funding and client
revenues with no additional cost to the County.
A request for additional funding for Elgin Manor has been included in the budget
package. If additional funds are found, and this request is granted by the
Ministry, a day program at the new Elgin Manor could be established which will
offer different services to clients that do not conflict with those services already
provided by Valleyview.
Transportation for clients to and from our Terrace Lodge facility constitutes a
large part of our budget for that end of the County. The Director of Terrace
Lodge wishes to explore alternative arrangements for transportation in an
attempt to offset this large budget item. Bobier Villa continues to rely on the
services of volunteers who offer transportation to our clients and are paid based
on mileage only for their services.
CONCLUSION:
The proposed budget must now be forwarded to the Province for their approval
with the appropriate official signatures attached.
RECOMMENDATION:
THAT the 2005/2006 Community Support Services Budget be approved; and
THAT the Warden, the Chief Administrative Officer and, the Director of Financial
Services be authorized to sign the Budget and forward same to the Ministry of
Health and Long-Term Care.
ReSpeCtfu~y Su~miJed
. ,,1~1/ 'y10n~/
~~r~ ~
Financial Services
:-pprov~uomi::;::'i)
~~I
Mark~
Chief Administrative Officer
---.....
%~'-"~~/L4/~
Linda Veger ,?
Director of Financial Services
@ Ontario
Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care
Ministere de [a Sante et des Soins de lonQue dUfee
IReCiPlent Number Iservice Provider Name
100931 Corp. of the County of Elgin
Type of Budget: II3I Base
lDl Expansion
[j] Enhancement
2005 FUNDING REQUEST
BUDGET SUMMARY
FORM 2
]
TOTAL BUeGEr REQUEST (Includes All Services to be Funded)
MINISTRY PROJECTED FISCAL ANNUALIZED
~..-.- /'tul/ED BUDGET ACTUAL 2005 2005
2004 2004
W ~ ~ ~
EXPENDITURES/REVENUES
EMPLOYEE SALARIES AND WAGES
(FORM 4)
2 EMPLOYEE BENEFITS
tFORM 5)
3 STAFF TRAINING
4 BOARDNOLUNTEER TRAINING &
RECOGNITION
I~ TRAVEL
16
BUILDING OCCUPANCY
$ 91,880 $ 91,880
25,817 25,817
500 500
400 400
2,476 2,476
11,000 11,000
2,800 2,800
121,160 121,160
12,600 12,600
11,000 11,000
7 OFFICE EXPENSES
8. PURCHASED CLIENT SERVICES
(FORM 9)
19. MEALS (Food Costs)
110_ CLIENT SERVICE SUPPLIES/MEDICAL
SUPPLIES & EQUIPMENT (FORM 7)
111 PURCHASED ADMINISTRATION SERVICES
(FORM 8)
12. CENTRAL AGENCY CHARGES
(FORM 10)
13. OTHER OPERATING
1,000
1,000
114. OTHER
115.. EXPENDITURE RECOVERIES
116. TOTAL EXPENDITURES
(Sum of Lines 1 through 15)
19. CLIENT FEES
750
750
$
$
$
281,383
$
281,383
17,600
17, 600
20. REVENUES ~ OTHER
(FORM 11)
121. MINISTRY BASE SUBSIDY REQUESTED
(Sum of a1l2(a) line 21)
22. ONE-TIMElNON-REGURRING SUBSIDY
(FORM 12)
23, TOTAL SUBSIDY REQUESTED
(Total lines 21 and 22)
$
$
$
263,783
$
263,783
$
- I $
$
263,783
ANNUALIZED _ An annualized budget is one that relates to a level of approved services and related recurring
operating costs for a full twelve month period of operation.
FISCAL _ A fiscal budget is one that relates to a level of approved services and related operating costs, Including
one-time costs, incurred during the twelve month period under review. The fiscal budget will be different from
the annualized budget only when an agency expands or reduces approved services, introduces new services,
is approved for a one-time project, or Incurs one-time costs such as Tetro wage settlement, equipment
replacement, office relocation, etc.
FROM:
DATE:
REPORT TO COUNTY COUNCIL
Harley Underhill, Director of Human Resources
10 March 2005
SUBJECT: Benefit Renewal Report -2005 - Effective March 1, 2005
INTRODUCTION
On March 3, 2005 we received the annual renewal report for the County of Elgin and it's member
municipalities from Buffett Taylor & Associates Ltd., Benefits Consultants. The report summarizes
their analysis of the group benefits renewal action required by Maritime Life, effective March 1,
2005.
DISCUSSION:
Please refer to the attached Executive Summary prepared by Brian Dalton, Senior Consultant from
the firm of Buffett Taylor & Associates Ltd.
Points of Emohasis:
1. As a result of aggressive negotiations on our behalf, Buffett Taylor & Associates have been
able to reduce the carrier's initial renewal position on the health and dental benefit lines.
2. The County operates an umbrella style group benefits program, and by doing so allows
participating lower-tier members the benefit of increased purchasing power that is available
through pooled insurance. Membership currently includes Central Elgin, Bayham, Malahide,
Dutton/Dunwich, Aylmer and Southwold.
3. The groups partnering with the County of Elgin are benefiting from rates lower than they would
likely be able to achieve in the open marketplace on a stand-alone basis. The County itself is
providing an inherent subsidy to the lower tier municipalities but continues to support the
pooled arrangement of the group.
RENEWAL OVERVIEW
The table below summarizes the 4-year history of renewal rate action, by benefit line:
2003
Renewal
-3.8%
No change
No change
+10.0%
+13.0% +
ODA fee
guide
increase
Overall +1.8% +7.4% -7.0% +3.2% +2.9%
Note - approximate increase to the total plan $41,725.00. County of Elgin share $20,031.00 and it
is anticipated that this expense be covered in the departmental budgets.
Benefit
Life
AD&D
LTD
EHC
Dental
2002
Renewal
+5.0%
No change
+17.5%
-3.0%
-8.0% + ODA
fee guide
increase
SeDt2003*
2004
Renewal
No change
No change
No change
+3.3%
No change +
ODA fee
-11.2%
No change
-25.0%
-1.0%
-1.0%
increase
2005
Renewal
+5%
No change
+4.5%
+6.5%
-11% + ODA
fee guide
increase
A meeting with the member municipalities and Buffett Taylor took place on March 21, 2005, to
discuss the renewal in particular and other group benefit issues in general.
CONCLUSION:
Buffett Taylor are confident that the final renewal position negotiated with the above carriers is fair
and reasonable, given the underlying claims experience and demographic composition, and taking
into account what they would expect to achieve from the group insurance marketplace.
Our consultants recommend that the County rates should be adjusted as per the attached renewal
summary spreadsheets, effective March 1, 2005.
A copy of the report, in its entirety, is available at the County Administration Services Office on the
first floor.
RECOMMENDATION:
THAT based on the recommendation of Buffett Taylor & Associates, the Maritime Life premium
rates presented in the 2005 Renewal Report be adopted for the County of Elgin and the Elgin
Member Municipalities, effective March 1, 2005.
Respectfully Submitted
~~/tLt;/
Harley . Underhill
Direct r of Human Resources
,
I /
Ma~cDoriald
Chief AaT;,;";,,,
---
er
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
2005 Employee Benefit Renewal with Maritime Life
The purpose of this document is to summarize our formal renewal report presented to the
County of Elgin.
We believe the final renewal position negotiated with Maritime Life is reasonable. Our
consultant Buffett Taylor provided an analysis based on the underlying claims
experience, and knowledge of current m<u:'v~place trends. The Life, LID and Weekly
mdemnity benefits have completed a 2-year rate guarantee and as such are now rated
based on current employee demographics. We conducted a market study September 2003
with the intent of obtaining a competitive costing for the municipality. As a result of this
study the Life LID and Weekly Indemnity were transferred to Liberty Health, generating
$85,000 in annual savings 7"/0 of total benefit costs.
The current renewal reflects the following rate action by benefit line:
Life msurance
LID
SID
Health
Dental
+5%
+4.5%
No Change
+6.5%
-11%
The proposed March 1, 2005 renewal rates represent a total cost that is 2.5% lower than
March 1,2002, prior to moving the Life, LID and Weekly indemnity benefits to
Maritime Life. The 2005-06 renewal rates represent a 2.9% increase over the 2004-05
policy period. Combined premium will increase from $1,405,212 to $1,446,937, a
$41,725 premium adju'~LU"m.
The cost increase specific to the County of Elgin equals $20,031, or 2.5%, these figures
include all adjustments for the increase in Dental Fee Guide. The County's annual
premium now totals $821,539. Health benefits are increasing 6.5%, $45,586, Dental
costs are reducing $23,183,7.5% (includingfee guide adjustments). Life insurance
premium is being adjusted 5.1 % this represents an annual $5,208 cost increase, Long
Term Disability premium is increasing 4.5%, $11,940. A total of $9,772 has been saved
through negotiations with Maritime Life, these savings were generated through
negotiations that resulted in an additional 1 % reduction in Health and Dental costs.
The County operates an umbrella style group benefits program, and by doing so allows
participating lower-tier or smaller member the advantage of increased purchasing power
through economies of scale. Lower Administration expenses are extended to the smaller
members, these are expenses that would not be available to these members in isolation.
Membership includes Central Elgin, Bayham, Malahide, Dutton/Dunwich, Aylmer and
Southwold.
These member municipalities benefit from participating in the Umbrella program on the
following basis:
· The County of Elgin provides subsidy in pooled LifelLTD rates for member
municipalities (i.e., the County would have lower rates on a stand-alone basis, and
conversely the member municipalities would pay higher on a stand-alone basis)
· County of Elgin provides subsidy in EHC/Semi-PrivatelDental rates for member
municipalities (the County claims-to-premium ratios are lower than the combined
member municipalities)
· Member municipalities benefit from lower administration costs due to economies-
of-scale from belonging to a larger group.
"""'"
Pre-Renewal
Em. ~
2005 Renewal
fWD.iJ.!m~
'""'"
""""""
....
Travel Assistance
1551.Bobier
74181
74183 CUPE, 74184 DNA
74185 Terrace Lodge
$1.50
$3.00
$42
$435
$1.50
$3.00
$42
$435
"
145
S
F
Hospital
All groups " S $11.99 $335 $12.78 $358 6.6%
147 F $23.89 $3,512 $25.47 $3,744 6.6%
.,-......~ .,...,.....y,.;S::ii848 i.>fi,~"-.;'_0.'. 'n";'-"~-"$4.1'G2'''- .. >-~
Extended Heatth Care
1551-80bier 6 S $54.41 $326 $58.00 '346 6.6%
23 F $146.68 $3,374 $156.36 $3.596 6.6%
5541-ElginManor 7 S $51.20 $358 $54.58 $382 6.6%
36 F $145.98 $5,255 $155.61 $5,602 6.6%
74181 non-union 6 S $5451 $436 $58.11 $465 6.6%
61 F $155.84 $9.506 $166.13 $10,134 6.6%
74183CUPE 0 S $49.59 SO $52.86 " 6.6%
4 F $141.66 $567 $151.01 $604 6.6%
741840NA 4 S $50.13 $201 $53.44 $214 6.6%
7 F $143.31 $1,003 $152.77 $1,069 6.6%
74185 Terrace Lodge 6 S $51.95 $312 $55.38 $332 6.6%
43 F $147.97 $6.363 $15774 $6,783 6.6%
Dental Care
1551-Bobier 6 S $34.40 $206 $31.84 $191 -7.4%
23 F $74.48 $1,713 $68.94 $1,586 -7.4%
5541-ElginManor 7 S $45.89 '321 $42.47 $297 -7.5%
36 F $99.18 $3,570 $91.80 $3.305 -7.4%
74181 Non-Union 8 S $29.66 $237 $27.46 $220 -7.4%
61 F $64.23 $3,918 $59.45 $3,626 -7.4%
74183CUPE 0 S $32.74 $0 $30.31 $0 -7.4%
4 F $71.22 $265 $65.93 '264 -7.4%
741840NA 4 S $32.52 $130 $30.10 $120 -7.4%
7 F $76.65 $537 $70.95 $497 -7.4%
74185TerraceLodge 6 S $4411 $265 $40.83 $245 -7.4%
43 F $95.34 $4,100 $88.24 $3,794 -7.4%
rrl)ttltoental'f'nUnIUmMOntblV',~qi' m'_'''''~" &1',)1205 '--"--," "c.-,-" ii-?:JW,;iF-';" ,--, '-$15:2821'--~-'''"'' "." ,,-SU;:14S;." -
LlfelnSl,Irance I
COl,lnlyProper-401A $11,568,000 $0.318 $3,864 5.0%
LongTennDisabllity
5541 Elgin Manor $91,800 $3.080 $2,827 $3.219 $2,955 4.5%
741840NA $44,649 $2.900 $1,301 $3.030 $1.359 4.5%
74181 Non-tJnlon $149,982 $2.840 $4,259 $2.968 $4,451 4.5%
74183CUPE $7,074 $3.080 $218 $3219 '228 4.5%
74185 $108,496 $3.080 $3,342 $3219 $3,492 4.5%
Weekly Indemnity $23,821 $1.620 $3,8591 $1.620 $3.859 0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
""""
1"A11rates and premIl,Im exdllde appJicable tax.
REPORT TO COUNTY COUNCIL
FROM: Clayton Watters, Director of Engineering Services
DATE: February 18, 2005
SUBJECT: Sparta Line - Chevron Warning Signs
INTRODUCTION
At the February 10, 2004 session of County Council, a report regarding the placement of
Chevron Warning signs on Sparta Line was presented.
The following summarizes the discussion at the Council session as well as the Council
resolution:
The Manager of Engineering Services noted that if the area in question was urban in nature and
illuminated, chevron signage would not be required. Also, if the speed limit were reduced chevron
signage would not be needed on the soufh side but would be needed on the norlh curve. Mr. and
Mrs. Cummings, residents from the area, were in attendance and the Warden offered them an
opparlunity to speak. Mrs. Cummings noted that no collisions have occurred at this area on Sparta
Line during the past 28 years, the area is well lit and signage offers additional obstacles that could
be hit, if someone veered off the road. The matter was deferred for furlher investigation and the
site will be visited during the April road tour.
Moved by: Council/or Hofhuis
Seconded by: Councillor Wilson
THA T the report entitled "Sparla Line - Chevron Warning Signs Update" dated January 30, 2004,
from the Manager of Engineering Services, be deferred until May 2004 to allow for further
investigation into resident concerns, local options, and firm costs for using existing hydro poles for
illumination.
DISCUSSION:
County engineering staff reviewed the curves on Sparta Line at the border of Central Elgin
and Southwold. Staff determined that the two curves warranted a reduced speed advisory.
The speed for the south curve warrants an advisory limit of 40 km/h and the north curve
warrants an advisory of 20 km/h. Staff have placed reduced speed advisory tabs on all
curves with the exception of the two curves on Sparta Line at this location. During the
2004 County Council road tour this road section was reviewed.
Starf from the Municipality of Central Elgin and the County of Elgin requested clarification
from Hydro One on whether they were prepared to allow the Municipality of Central Elgin
to install street lights on the four hydro polesr on the north curve. The estimater $2r700r
will provide for all labourr materials and taxesr for the installation of four streetlights on
Hydro One infrastructure. This estimate does not include the annual energy costs.
The north curve has two options to satisfy the requirements of the Ontario Traffic Manual:
install speed advisory tabs and chevrons or install streetlights. The cost for the speed
advisory tabs signs and chevrons is $1,500 and the cost for the street lighting is $2JOO
plus the annual maintenance costs of energy and lamp replacements.
The south CUrve has three options: install speed advisory tabsr install streetlights or
reduce posted speed limit.
The purpose of the Ontario Traffic Manual (OTM) is to promote uniformity of treatment in
designr application and operation of traffic control devices and systems across Ontario that
are consistent with the intent of the Highway Traffic Act (HTA).
The OTM states that Chevron Alignment signs must be used if a location is rural in naturer
orr the location is urban in nature and non-illuminated.
Chevron warning signs are not required in urban, illuminated areasr since roadside
features such as buildings and streetlights offer drivers ample indication of changes in
horizontal road alignment.
A reduction in the posted speed limit to 40 km/h through the south curve would eliminate
the necessity of Chevron warning signsr howeverr even with this reduction in speedr the
north CUrve will require Chevron signs. The north curve would have to be reduced to a
posted speed limit of 20 km/h in order to eliminate Chevrons and reduced speed limits
lower than 40 km/h are not permitted by the HTA.
CONCLUSION;,
The OTM suggests that Chevron warning signs are not required in illuminated, urban areas
as surrounding features offer drivers ample indication of changes in horizontal road
alignment.
The County does not install streetlights along County roads except where exceptional
safety concerns are evident such as intersections. The installation of luminaries along any
section of County road would be precedent setting, expensive anci not necessarily
required. Howeverr a local municipality may choose to install said lighting at its own
expense without objection from the County.
Staff would not object to the Municipality of Central Elgin installing adequate illumination
(at its expense) along the CUrve in question and thus negate the requirement to install
Chevron warning signs. However, in the absence of illumination, Chevron warning signs
are required on the most northerly curve while a posted speed reduction to 40 km/h on
the south curve would eliminate Chevron signs there. It should be noted that existing
advance CUrve warning signs and a checkerboard sign are still required at this location.
Upon review of other available options, staff still believes the best option is to erect
warning signage as prescribed by the OTM to remain consistent and to minimize the
County's exposure to liability.
RECOMMENDATION
That the standard, 45 em x 60 em, chevron alignment signs be installed on Sparta Line,
County Road 27, as per Ontario Traffic Manual.
Respectfully Submitted
~h~
')
/
Mark G:lvrCDullald ----
Chief Administrative Officer
Approved for Submission
'-i6
Clayton D. Watters
Director of Engineering Services
REPORT TO COUNTY COUNCIL
FROM: Peter Dutchak, Manager of Road Infrastructure
DATE: March 4, 2005
SUBJECT: Talbot Trail A.T.V. Club of Aylmer - Tsunami Relief Ride
Introduction
The County has received a request from the Talbot Trail A.T.V. Club of Aylmer care of
Andre Verhaeghe to traverse over a number of Elgin County Roads during a Tsunami
Relief fund raising ride scheduled for April 9, 2005.
Discussion
The County has received a request from an All Terrain Vehicle (A.T.V.) Club seeking
permission to cross a number of County Roads in the west half of Elgin County. The
purpose is to hold a "ride" to raise funds for the Tsunami relief effort. The ride is
scheduled for April 9, 2005 with a rain date of April 16, 2005.
Section 191.8 of the Highway Traffic Act (HTA) states that "no person shall drive an off-
road vehicle on a highway except in accordance with the regulations and any applicable
municipal by-laws". The HTA also states that the council of a municipality may pass by-
laws permitting specific restricted use of highways under their jurisdiction for the use of
A.T.V.'s.
There are however exemptions to A.T.V. restrictions within the HTA. Persons driving an
off-road vehicle (including snowmobiles) directly across a highway are exempt so long as
they comply with the rules of the roadway.
In this instance, the requestor is only seeking permission to. cross County roads and not
drive down them. The ride will predominantly utilize local municipal roads. Therefore, a
by-law permitting A.T.V.'s to cross County roads is not required. However, by-laws must
be passed by the local councils if they wish to grant permission to this club for this event.
It is staff's understanding that local approvals and applicable by-laws are being processed.
Staff has discussed this request with the OPP Staff Sargent and he concurs with staff's
understanding of the Highway Traffic Act as it relates to A.T.V.'s and this specific request.
Conclusion
An All Terrain Vehicle Club is requesting County permission to traverse over a number of
County Roads in the west half of the County during a Tsunami fund raising ride scheduled
for April 9, 2005 with a rain date of April 16, 2005.
The Highway Traffic Act allows municipal Councils to permit specific ATV usage on roads
under their jurisdiction. There are however exemptions to ATV restrictions in the HTA.
One of these exemptions is that All Terrain Vehicles are permitted to cross highways
without specific approval so long as the operators follow the rules of the roadway.
. In other words, specific County approval or a by-law is not required if A.T.V:s are only
crossing County roads.
Recommendation
For Council's information.
Respectfully Submitted,
Approved for Submission,
~.,)uJ~
&Jt~k
Peter Dutchak,
Manager of Road Infrastructure
Clayton Watters,
Director, Engineerinq Services
,,/C-
G/(<J -/
Mark G.lircbu"dld, -
Chief Administrative Officer
<
Andre G. Verhaeghe
R.R.iS
Aylmer, On. NSH 2R4
County of Elgin
TO Whom It May Concern:
On behalf of the Talbot Trail A.T.V. Club of Aylmer, I hereby
.request permission to ride on or cross over the following
County Roads on April 9, 2005 or rain date, April 16, 2005.
The purpose of the ride is to rai~e funds for the Tsunami Relief.
Beginning at the Flying M Restaurant, we will proceed crossing over
County Road 4, 19, 20,14,13, 8, 5, 76, and 3.
First stop at lana Restaura~t.
Second stop, Lunch at Swainl~ ~reenhouse.
Third stop gasoline at Gogo Gas Bar. south end of Rodney.
Return to Flying M.
Note: Time is of the essence. Awaiting your earliest reply.
Find enclosed map
Yom{t
/
/
Andre G. Verhaeghe
RECEiVED I1AR a 42005
REPORT TO COUNTY COUNCIL
FROM: Peter Dutchak, Manager, Road Infrastructure
Sonia Beavers, Purchasing Co-Ordinator
DATE: March 18, 2005
SUBJECT: New Sarum Bridge
Introduction
As part of the 2005 approved Budget, a Request for Tender was issued as per the
County's Purchasing Policy. Sealed bids were received until Thursday, March 17, 2005,
for labour, equipment, material and supervision required for the replacement of the
New Sarum Bridge located on Belmont Road (County Road #74) just north of Edgeware
Line and 1 km south of Ron McNeil Line in the Municipality of Central Elgin.
Discussion
Formal Bids were received as follows:
Company
Facca Inc.
Owen Kinq Ltd.
I Quotation Bid (includinq taxes)
I $1,155,574.96
$1,272,872.00
Facca Inc. submitted the lowest quotation at a total price of $1,155,574.96 (including
taxes). The total price includes labour, equipment and material required for the
replacement of the New Sarum Bridge using methods described in the tender. The
tender price also includes an on-site detour to eliminate traffic delays due to this bridge
replacement. Although Facca Inc. submitted the lowest bid, the County's consultant
has expressed concern regarding some unbalanced items within the Tender submission.
Our consultant still recommends Facca Inc. as the successful and lowest bidder
however there appears to some ambiguities with some minor items.
The Capital Budget allocation for the labour, equipment, material, testing and
supervision required for the New Sarum Bridge is $850,000.00. This figure was derived
using an estimate completed by the County's engineering consultant for the project.
The construction of the bridge alone was estimated at $750,000 and therefore the
lowest price received was approximately $406,000 or 65% over budget.
After discussions with bridge contractors and consultants it appears that bridge
construction project costs have increased substantially due to the anticipation of
numerous bridge projects being let this year by the MTO and successful COMRIF bridge
applicants.
.;?
Because the New Sarum Bridge has not deteriorated to a condition that warrants a
posted weight restriction and the structure can remain safe for the near future, staff
recommends to defer this project and reallocate these capital funds towards other
transportation infrastructure projects. Staff believes it is paramount to retain the same
amount of capital spending as last year in order to maintain the condition of our assets.
The following is a list of capital road projects that staff recommends completing this
year in lieu of the New Sarum Bridge Project:
~ Proiect
Plank Road Slope Rehabilitation
(to allocate additional funds to cover the shortfall in this
project as indicated in the report of the same name)
Dexter Line Erosion Engineering Study
(to complete a report on a potential option to mitigate
shoreline erosion near Port Bruce as part of the proposed
Environmental Assessment to be completed in 2006)
King George Lift Bridge
(to allocate additional funds as part of the rehabilitation
of the mechanical/electrical project)
Avon Road Reconstruction
(to allocate additional funds to capital account to
complete the reconstruction of Avon Drive through the
hamlet of Avon in 2005 - existinq allocation $425(000)
I Putnam Road Hot Mix Asphalt Resurfacing
(from Avon to Lyons Line - 5.6km)
I
Conclusion
Municioalitv
Cost
Bayham
$150,000
Central Elgin
$50,000
Central Elgin
$50,000
MaJahide
$150,000 I
Malahide
$425,000
I $850,000
TOTAL
Tenders were advertised for the replacement of the New Sarum Bridge and were
received until March 17, 2005. The lowest price received was 65% over the project
estimate.
The current condition of the New Sarum Bridge is such that it does require
replacement, however, it is not in an unsafe condition a this time. Staff therefore
recommends to defer this project and allocate these funds toward other road
infrastructure needs.
Staff will continue to monitor the condition of the New Sarum Bridge and include its
replacement in a future Capital Budget.
3'
Recommendation
That the New Sarum Bridge Replacement Project be deferred, and;
That the capital allocation for the New Sarum Bridge ($850,000) be reallocated as
follows:
Proiect
Plank Road Slope Rehabilitation
(to allocate additional funds to cover the shortfall in this
pro;ect as indicated in the report of the same name)
Dexter Line Erosion Engineering Study
(to complete a report on a potential option to mitigate
shoreline erosion near Port Bruce as part of the proposed
Environmental Assessment to be completed in 2006)
King George Lift Bridge
(to allocate additional funds as part of the rehabilitation
of the mechanical/electrical pro;ect)
Avon Road Reconstruction
(to allocate additional funds to capital account to
complete the reconstruction of Avon Drive through the
hamlet of Avon in 2005 - existinq allocation $425,000)
I Putnam Road Hot Mix Asphalt Resurfacing
(from Avon to Lyons Line - 5.6km)
I
R~L ~,IIY:I Sub.m, "i;tt_ewd,\\
\~M~~
Petert:5Utchak
Manager, Road Infrastructure
C~~I~
Sonia Beavers
Purchasing Co-Ordinator
Approved by,
(J)yJ v-~
foil un ici oa Iitv
Cost
Bayham
$150,000
Central Elgin
$50,000
Central Elgin
$50,000
Malahide
$150,000
Malahide
$425,000
$850,000
TOTAL
Clayton Watters,
Direct~, Ineerin9Jices
~! -------
Ma~nald.
Chief Administrative Officer
if
REPORT TO COUNTY COUNCIL
FROM: Peter Dutchak, Manager, Road Infrastructure
Sonia Beavers, Purchasing Co-Ordinator
DATE: March 10, 2005
SUBJECT: Big Otter Creek Slope Rehabilitation
Introduction
In 2004 it was discovered that the Big Otter Creek slope adjacent to Plank Road
immediately north of Port Burwell was sliding. Engineering has been completed and
approvals have been received to remedy this slope movement and protect the roadway.
As part of the Capital Budget, a Request for Tender was issued as per the County's
Purchasing Policy. Sealed bids were received until Wednesday, March 9, 2005, for
labour, equipment and material required for the Big Otter Creek Slope Rehabilitation.
Discussionl Conclusion
Formal Bids were received as follows:
Company
969774 Ontario Limited ( Elqin Construction)
Van Bree Drainaqe and Bulldozinq Ltd.
Blue Con Inc.
Malonev and Peppinq Construction Ltd.
Quotation Bid (including taxes) I
$ 522,016.91 I
$ 618,493.07 1
$ 636,393.20 1
$ 935,885.13 1
969774 Ontario Limited (Elgin Construction) submitted the lowest quotation at a total
price of $ 522,016.91 (including taxes). The total price includes labour, equipment and
material required to complete this project as specified in the Tender Document.
A total of $500,000 has been allocated for this project ($250,000 in both 2004 and
2005.) The total project cost, including engineering services and concrete barrier will
be approximately $650,000, therefore a shortfall of approximately $150,000 exists.
Staff recommends that these additional funds be re-allocated from New Sarum Bridge
Replacement Project that is being proposed to be deferred under a separate report.
-5
Recommendation
THAT 969774 Ontario Limited (Elgin Construction) be selected to provide labour,
equipment and material required for the Big Otter Creek Slope Rehabilitation located
immediately north of Port Burwell, in the Municipality of Bayham at the quoted price of
$522,016.91 (including taxes) which is included in the 2005 Capital Budget, and;
THAT $150,000 be re-allocated to this project from the New Sarum Bridge Replacement
Project.
Respectfully Submitted,
Approved by,
(MJJ~
Peter Dutchak
Manager, Road Infrastructure
Clayton Watters,
~;'~c''"'sc
M~nald.
Chief Administrative Officer
---,
.J.<CH\' I. - ~j ~
Sonia Beavers
Purchasing Co-Ordinator
&
REPORT TO COUNTY COUNCIL
FROM:
Sandra Heffren
DATE:
March 7, 2005
SUBJECT: Parking Agreement - Town of Aylmer
Introduction:
The Town of Aylmer has approached the County to enter into an agreement whereby
Town Police would enforce parking and traffic infractions on County Roads within the
Town limits.
Discussion:
Currently, enforcement of traffic infractions on County Roads within the Town of Aylmer
limits is not being carried out. It appears to be a jurisdictional issue, in that the OPP is
responsible for issuing tickets on these roads, however, as the Town of Aylmer has its own
police force, the OPP does not cross the jurisdictional boundary. The Town of Aylmer is
requesting that the County enter into an agreement to authorize Town of Aylmer Police to
enforce parking and traffic matters on John Street, Beech Street and Elm Street and to
administer the revenue voluntarily paid for infractions.
The County Solicitor has reviewed the agreement forwarded from Aylmer and indicated the
County could enact a by-law and sign the agreement subject to the following:
1. Pass a resolution giving Council's consent to the assumption of power by the Town of
Aylmer (a majority of votes is required).
2. Request each lower tier municipality, excluding Aylmer, to pass resolutions giving their
consent to the subject by-law (the population of the lower tier municipalities from which
consent is sought must form the majority of all electors in the County).
Conclusion:
Traffic enforcement on County Roads within the Town of Aylmer limits is not being carried
out and the Town is willing to provide enforcement on these roads with voluntarily paid
ticket revenues being returned to the Town. This does not impact revenue to the County
as no tickets are currently being issued for infractions on these roads.
Recommendation:
THAT the County of Elgin consents to the assumption of power by the Town of Aylmer to
enforce parking, traffic and other matters on County Roads within the Town of Aylmer
limits, namely, John Street, Elm Street, and Beech Street, which shall include issuance of
tickets, Informations, Summons, fines and the administration of all relative voluntary
payments; and,
THAT the County Solicitor be authorized and directed to prepare the necessary by-law and
consenting agreement for consideration; and,
THAT the Warden and the Chief Administrative Officer be authorized to sign the
consenting agreement, subject to the following:
In accordance with Section 191 of the Municipal Act, 2001, lower-tier municipalities be
requested to pass resolutions giving their consent to a by-law with the Town of Aylmer,
setting out terms and conditions under which the Town would enforce parking, traffic and
other infractions on County Roads within the geographic boundaries of the Town of
Aylmer.
Respectfully Submitted
Approved for Submission
~
Mark G. riifCDcr'JalJ, ~
Chief Administrative Officer.
~
/
-
\J(J.~JP..~ ~
San~ Heffrl(-
Deputy Clerk.
CORRESPONDENCE - MARCH 22. 2005
Items for Consideration
1. County of Dufferin, with a resolution requesting the Ministers of Finance and
Transportation develop a new formula for the gasoline tax rebate to municipalities
based on per lane kilometer of roadway, and bus and rail transit systems on a per
route kilometer basis. (ATTACHED)
2. Patricia Bergeron, Clerk-Treasurer, Municipality of Tweed, with a resolution
petitioning the Provincial and Federal Governments to allow expenses incurred by
municipalities in anticipation of infrastructure funding prior to the November 15th
COMRIF program announcement. (ATTACHED)
3. Elgin's Family Fair, with an invitation to Council members to attend the "Elgin's
Family Fair" to be held on April 9th, 2005 at the St. Thomas Senior's Centre.
(ATTACHED)
4. Harry Mezenberg, Bet-Har Farms Ltd., requesting County Council's assistance to the
Elgin County land owners in dealing with the Emerald Ash borer. (ATTACHED)
5. The Association of Municipal Tax Collectors of Ontario, with a resolution
urging the Province to amend the legislation commencing for the 2006 taxation
year, to specify that once a property reaches CVA taxation it remains at CVA
taxes, regardless of the result of future reassessments.
CORPORATION of the MUNCIP ALITY OF TWEED
255 Metcalf Street, Postal Bag 729
Tweed, Ontario KOK 3JO
Ph: 613-478-2535
Fx: 613-478-6457
March 2, 2005
Mayors, Reeve and Members of Councils
Municipalities of the Province of Ontario
Dear Members;
The Municipality of Tweed recently made application under the COMRIF program for
infrastructure replacement in an area which has been in need of updated services for some
time. Previous to this, in anticipation of provincial/federal funding for infrastructure
projects and in an attempt to be pro-active, the Council of the day carried out pre-
engineering studies for the proposed project. Their intent was to be ready to respond
immediately to the long awaited confirmation of a provincial/federal funding program.
COMRIF program guidelines indicate that expenses incurred prior to the November 15t\
2004 announcement date will not be eligible for inclusion in approved projects.
Council's concern is that the pre-engineering studies which were carried out prior to
November 15th, 2004, which were done in good faith and in expectation of a funding
program, will now become wasted taxpayer dollars.
The Council of the Municipality of Tweed passed the following resolution, for which
support by municipalities in the Province is respectfully requested.
Patricia Bergeron, Clerk-Treasurer
Date: January 18, 2005
Meeting No. 2
Resolution No. 44
Moved by J. Flieler
Seconded by J. Albert
That the Municipality of Tweed petition the provincial and federal governments to allow
municipalities to use the pre-engineering studies that were carried out prior to the
announcement ofthe COMRIF program, and further that a copy ofthis resolution be
forwarded to M.P. Daryl Kramp, M.P.P. Leona Dombrowsky, and the Association of
Municipalities of Ontario for circulation to all municipalities in the Province for support.
Carried.
Vance Drain, Reeve
Chief Administrative Officer/ Clerk
Ijdean@dufferincounty.on.ca
Court House
51 Zina Street
Orangeville, ON
L9W 1E5
Telephone: (519) 941-2816
Fax No: (519) 941-4565
COUNTY OF DlW1<J:<.RIN
WHEREAS the Liberal Government had promised up to 2 cents per liter gasoline tax rebate to
all municipalities;
AND WHEREAS the Minister of Finance has recently announced a plan to have a one cent per
liter of gas tax going to municipal governments now, increasing to 1.5 cents in 2005 and to 2
cents in 2006;
AND WHEREAS the Province has stated that this rebate has now been earmarked solely for
those municipalities with public transportation;
AND WHEREAS most small rural communities do not have public transportation;
AND WHEREAS rural areas have increased traffic flows at higher rates of speed and need more
significant repairs more often than urban areas having public transit;
AND WHEREAS the gas tax is paid mostly by people who do not use public transit systems, and
who will receive little or no benefit for their hard earned contribution from this rebate
program;
AND WHEREAS the Eastern Ontario Wardens Caucus did request that a fair funding formula
be determined for the gas tax allocation in order to allow those municipalities without public
transit to derive an equal benefit;
THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the Corporation of the County of Dufferin request the
Minister of Finance and the Minister of Transportation ofthe Province of Ontario to develop a
new formula for the gasoline tax rebate to municipalities, based on a per lane kilometer of
roadway, and for both bus and rail transit systems on a per route kilometer basis;
AND FURTHERMORE that a copy of this resolution be circulated for support to A M 0 for
distribution to all municipalities and to
Ontario Good Roads Association
Minister of Finance
Minister of Transportation
Premier of Ontario
Ernie Eves, MPP
John Tory, Leader of the Opposition
Howard Hampton, Leader ofNDP
FiI
-
-Igin/s
ramily
.
200503 14
Dear County Council Members,
Various organizations throughout Elgin County are in the planning stages of organizing
and hosting a family event, "Elgin's Family Fair," to be held on Saturday, April 9th , 2005, at
the St. Thomas Seniors' Centre, 225 Chestnut Street, St. Thomas.
The goals of Elgin's Family Fair will be to:
* inform parents, children and care givers of the available resources and
programs in Elgin County and surrounding area
* build awareness and understanding of the early years as a
foundation for lifelong learning, behaviour and health
* provide an entertaining, educational, interactive learning
environment for the families to experience during this event
Every display will feature an activity for the children to enjoy while the parents/care
givers learn about programs and resources which are available in Elgin County and surrounding
areas to support them with providing opportunities for their children.
The event will begin at 9:00am. with Opening Ceremonies. The planning committee,
Partnerships of Community Agencies, would welcome your attendance at this event.
Please RSVP your intent to attend by calling: 631 - 9496
Sincerely,
Elgin's Family Fair planning committee
RECEIVED
!,I.~R I ~ 2005
COUNlYfJFa.sN
,~......, " '~"""""""""'Ril'!:'"
;~~~,*I'~~,~:~#!lt,?~~
BET-HARFARMS L'rD
RECEIVED
R.R.#2 20077 Thomson Line
Rodney, Ontario
NOL 2CO
Telephone: (519)785-0249
Fax: (519)785-2307
~iilh '--
.j
CQUN1Y OF El.GIN
;~!)M'NISTRAT!VE SERVICES
March 7, 2005
Mr. Warden and members of Elgin county council.
( re ; Emerald Ash borer)
1 am writing council with my concern on the spread of the Emerald Ash borer which is spreading
in Essex and Kent counties ,1 am sure that most of you are aware that the no firewood zone has
been expanded to the western county line.
1 have spoken with Mark McDonald and our tree commissioner Rob Lindsay and expressed my
concerns with the way that it is being dealt with by the federal authority west of our county, there
has been a lot of damage to farmers fields and woodlots as well as cutting the wrong type of
trees.
Nobody that 1 have spoken to believes that the borer can be contained so that means that
inevitably it will arrive in Elgin county ,it may already be here.
In our neighbouring county there is no tree by-law and landowners have the flexibility of
managing their woodlots and minimizing some of the damage, we in Elgin have restrictions on
what we can do.
1 do not want you to think that 1 am opposed to the by-law in Elgin 1 was and still am in full
support of controlling our woodlots, but with the Ash borer that is threatening the existence of
Ash trees in our county ,county council needs to address the problem and come up with a plan to
help the landowners deal with the threat of the borer and give some flexibility in what they can
do on their properties to minimize the damage from some of the contractors hired by the Federal
agency.
1 don't know the answer but it should be dealt with ,we need to be proactive and tIy to have a
plan in place before the borer gets to Elgin county.
1 would like to have input on any solution, we border Kent county and it will hit us before it
arrives in Central or East Elgin.
Thank you for your attention to what could be a devastating problem in our county.
Yours tru1~'1~rry Mez~e~, ~
/1/' - /.,/.:;.l24-~'- . ../
c,c, Mark McDonald
Graham Warwick
,"-; .. /'
L/?Lt.,VA~
l
:'~"l"H':= ill\GE D
-~~~L~~: ~:l ~ .
TO MUNICIPAL COUNCIL
At th F b 5 2005 E t. t' f th As . t' f M . CtltS:i!cQr;;~LGINf 0 t . th f II - I t.
e e ruary , xecu Ive mee mg 0 e sOCIa Ion 0 "~J;lI,CI~8bJJIX OIle ors 0 n ana, e 0 oWing reso ulan
was passed: AIJMh~l,;; rFlA TIVE ERI/ICES
MAR 1 7 2005
March 9, 2005
Backamund
In the 2004 Ontario Budget, the Province announced a plan to give municipalities a range of options to modify the parameters of
the tax capping program in order to increase progress towards taxation based on eVA; however, the legislation does nothing to
keep properties at ev A taxation for future years.
Property tax protection for increasing properties has now been in place for 8 years, with decreasing properties shouldering the
burden of that protection in most municipalities. Municipalities strongly believe that once a property reaches CVA taxes, it should
no ionger be protected from normal economic assessment increases and that decreasing properties should be allowed the benefit
of paying property taxes in accordance with their current value assessment, and not be subject to unpredictable and fiuctuating
clawback rates, calculated annually.
RESOLUTION
WHEREAS mandatory property tax increase protection has been in place for the business sector since the original implementation
of current value assessment (CVA) in 1998; and
WHEREAS many protected properties continue to pay property taxes at a level far below CVA tax; and
WHEREAS properties that should be receiving property tax decreases continue to pay at an unfair level of over 100% of CV A tax
in order to fund tax dollars not levied to properties protected by the capping regime; and
WHEREAS the Province of Ontario has provided optional capping tools which may be utilized to increase progress towards taxation
based on CV A; and
WHEREAS property taxation based on CVA has been the goal since the implementation of current value assessment in 1998; and
WHEREAS property taxation based on eVA is considered to be a fair and equitable method of distributing taxes: and
WHEREAS assessment value volatility is naturally controlled through the process of annual reassessments;
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT the Association of Municipal Tax Collectors of Ontario (AMTCO) strongly urges the
Province of Ontario to amend the legislation commencing for the 2006 taxation year, to specify that once a property reaches CVA
taxation, it remains at CVA taxes, regardless of the result of future reassessments; and
THAT A COPY OF THIS RESOLUTION BE FORWARDED to The Honourable Dalton McGuinty, The Honourable Greg Sorbara,
The Honourable John Gerretson, the Municipal Finance Officers Association (MFOA), the Association of Municipal Managers,
Clerks & Treasurers of Ontario (AMCTO), the Association of Municipalities of Ontario (AMO), and all the AMTCO member
municipalities, requesting endorsement.
Yours truly,
~
Tony Derro,
Secretary.
;?
To Educate and Serve with Integrity
CORRE~P<:>NDENCE - MARCH 22. 2005
Items for Information (Consent Aaenda\
1. Federation of Canadian Municipalities, Members' Advisory, Today's Budget Makes
"New Deal" a Real Deal. (ATTACHED)
2. Dianne Wilson, Deputy Clerk, Municipality of Central Elgin;
Lynda Millard, Clerk, Municipality of Bayham;
supporting County Council's recommendation requesting the Elgin Group Police
Services Board solicit a change to provincial legislation to enable the Ontario
Provincial Police to permit emergency services personnel to access closed roadways.
(ATTACHED)
3. OANHSS Executive Report, Weekly Report on Emerging Issues, March 2, 2005
Issue (ATTACHED)
4. Douglas J. Robertson, Conestoga-Rovers & Associates, with information concerning
the Green Lane Landfill Optimization Environmental Assessment Draft Environment
Assessment Report. (ATTACHED)
5. Marc Whittingham, Federal Co-Chair Industry Canada and Christine Dukelow,
Provincial Co-Chair Ontario Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing, with
information for COMRIF Intake One Applicants concerning the assessment of
applications and an update on Intake Two to be launched in the late spring of 2005.
(ATTACHED)
6. Ontario News Release Communique, "Retail Closings During Easter Weekend".
(ATTACHED)
7. Pat Crimmins, Regional Deputy Clerk, The Regional Municipality of Halton, with a
resolution acknowledging the benefits of memberships in organizations such as the
Association of Municipalities of Ontario and the Federation of Canadian
Municipalities. (ATTACHED)
8. Mary Kardos Burton, Assistant Deputy Minister, Acute Services Division, Ministry of
Health and Long-Term Care, advising that the County qualified for special grant
money intended for the upgrading and enhancing of existing land ambulance services
equipment. (ATTACHED)
9. Norma I. Bryant, Clerk, Municipality of West Elgin;
Denise McLeod, Deputy Clerk;
supporting County Council's resolution addressing the financial shortfall faced by
Ontario farmers. (ATTACHED)
10. Dianne Wilson, Deputy Clerk, Municipality of Central Elgin, supporting County
Council's resolution addressing the financial shortfall faced by Ontario
farmers.
Fax Server
2/23/2005 7:38
PAGE 001/001
Fax Server
Fedmtion of
Canadian Municipalities
Federation canadienne
des mnniclpalit6s
February 23,2005
Please Distribute to All Members of Council
MEMBERS' ADVISORY
TODAY'S BUDGET MAKES "NEW DEAL" A REAL DEA~
This is a great day for Canada's communities, large and small. With today's Budget, the
Govemment of Canada has delivered on its New Deal commitments and set the stage for a
fruitfullong-te rm relationship with the m unici pal sector.
Today's commitments of $600 million in gas tax revenue, combined with last year's $700 million
GST refund, delivers $1.3 billion in new revenue to be shared by every municipal govemment in
Canada. The commitment today to maintaining and replenishing existing infrastructure
programs means that this is net, new revenue for our communities. We applaud the
Govemment for recognizing the challenges Canadian cities and communities face and for taking
action to help us meet these challenges.
Most importantly, the Government of Canada has taken a significant step in engaging our sector
as a partner in addressing long-standing issues. We have long stressed that the New Deal is
about more than money, that it is about governments working together to solve problems that
affect all Canadians. Today, the Govemment has demonstrated its commitment to that
approach, and we are closer than ever to having a true seat at the table of national change.
The Budget also delivered on a number of our key proposals. The Governmenfs pledge to top
up FCM's Green Municipal Funds by $300 million demonstrates its already strong working
relationship with the municipal sector to build sustainable communities. And with a portion of the
funds refocused toward helping communities clean and redevelop their brownfields, and a
portion of the gas tax flowing to cities and communities for transit and green infrastructure,
Canada has taken a giant step forward in meeting its environmental goals.
The Budget, although committing to replenish affordable housing programs once existing funds
are expended, leaves a number of important questions unanswered. This underlines the need
for municipal governments to continue working closely with the Government of Canada on this
issue.
This is the first day of a new relationship, one that will help to ensure our prospe rity and quality
of life. We urge the Government to continue strengthening this relationship by consulting
municipal leaders regularly, as it has done during the last year. The pressing challenges we
face can only be met if all orders of govemment continue to work together toward a common
goal.
For more information on the Budget and what it means for the municipal sector, visit the FCM
website at htto://www.fcm.ca where you will find President Maclean's statement and a series of
issue backgrounders.
Contact Robert Ross, (613) 241-5221, ex!. 399.
The Corporation of the !Jvfunicipafity of Centra[ 'Efgin
450 Sunset Drive, 1st Floor, St. Thomas, Ontario N5R 5V1
Ph.519.631.4860 Fax 519'631.4036
March 1 st , 2005
Sandra J. Heffren
Deputy Clerk
County of Elgin
450 Sunset Drive
St. Thomas, ON
N5R 5V1
RECtElVED
Dear Ms. Heffren:
MAR 2~
" tooNrt(fag.:t~
ed., ','!""f"-::""~
~~_'Sf''1';''':i:'J
Re:
Access for Emergency Services Personnel
Please be advised that Council discussed your correspondence respecting the above
noted matter at their meeting dated Monday, February 28th, 2005 and the following
resolution was passed:
THAT: Correspondence received from The County of Elgin seeking Council's support for
their resolution respecting access for emergency services personnel to roadways that
have been closed to traffic be endorsed.
If you have any questions or concerns respecting this information, please do not hesitate to
contact me at the municipal office.
Yours truly,
~x~
Dianne Wilson
Deputy Clerk
03/07/2005 MON 12:01 FAX 519'866 3884 Municipality of Bayham ~002/006
Municipality of
Bayham
OJ> ~~
1>O'"fIUdty 1& "l"
P.O. Box 160,9344 Plank Road,
5trdffordville, Ontario NO] 1 YO
Tel; (519) 866-5521 . Fax: (519) 866-3884
cmail: bayham@bayham.on.ca
March 7, 2005
Honourable Dalton MeGuinty, Premier
Legislative Building
Queen's Park
Toronto ON
M7A IAI
Dear Premier
Please be advised that at the regular :meeting of the Council of the Municipality of Bay ham held
March 3, 2005, correspondence from the Elgin Group Police Services Board was considered and
the following resolution passed:
"THAT the Elgin Group Police Services BQard correspondence to the Ministry of Community
Safety & Correctional Services, Office of the J<'ire Marshall dated February 11,2005 be reccived;
AND THAT the Council of the Municipality of Bayham supports the request to the Provincial
government for amendments to the appropriate legislation to permit access to closed roads by
volllDteer firefighter using personal vehicles."
A copy of this letter and the resolutions passed by the Elgin Group Police Services Board and the
County of Elgin are enclosed for ease of reference,
I trust our volunteer firefighters can count on support from the government regarding the
requested changes to legislation.
Yours truly
~~~~
Mrs. Lynda Millard
Clerk
File: Pl6
C2005-021
03/07/2005 MON 12:01 FAX 519 866 3884 Municipality of Bayham
~ 003/006
021)4/2005 MON 14:40 FAX 519 633 7661 COllllcY of Elgin ->~-> Ilayham 8.1(b)
Mar 3/05 Motion # 05- 1/ ~
ELGIN GROUP POLICE SERVlt;t;~ tsUA~U
Chair David M. Rock
Municipality of
6ayham
Municipality of
Central elgin
Municipality of
DuttonlDunwlch
Municlpanty of
West Elgin
Township of
Malahide
Township of
Soulhwold
Tel. (519) 631-1460 Ext. 161
Fax (519) 633-7661
Res. (519) 633-1563
fHo
February 11, 2005
M'nistry of Community Safety and Correctional Services
Office of the Fire Marshal .
5775 Yonge Street, 7th Floor
TORONTO, Ontario
M2M 4J1
DeaT Sir.
The Elgin Group Pollee Services Board at its meeting held on February 2, 2005
adopted the following resolution:
"THAT the Elgin Group Police Services Board support the resolution from the
County of Elgin regarding a proposed amendment to the applicable legislation to
permit access to volunteer firefighters using personal vehfoles to closed roads
when responding to emergency calls; and,
THAT the Ontario FIre Marshal's Office be encouraged to facilitate the required
change to the appropriate legislation, and that copies of this resolution be
forwarded to lower-tier municipalities, AMO, Eastern Wardens and Western
Wardens Associations, and Steve Peters M.P. for consideration.
- Carried.
Signed Chair David M. Rock"
The Elgin Group Police Services Board is very concerned with the impact on service
delivery that could occur if firefighters using personal vehicles when responding to
emergency calls were not pennitted access by pOlice to closed roads, and requests
that the Ontario Fire Marshal's Office facilitate a change to legislation on behalf of
Ontario Communities.
Copies of ~ resolution from the County of Elgin and the Office of the Fire Marshal's
Communique of December 14, 2004 are attached for ease of reference.
~~~ )
Mark G. MCl..UJ IClJJ,
Secretary/Administrator.
Police Services Board.
c.c. - Elgin Constituent Municipalities
- Association of Municipalfties of Ontario
- Eastern Ontario Wardens Caucus,
- Western Ontario Warden Caucus
- Steve Peters, M.P.
r: yr
~
~ OG,lc
is' 0/-.1'-1
::--------
03/07/2005 MON 12:01 FAX 519 866 3884 Municipality of Basham
~ 004/006
02/14/2005 MON 14:40 FAX 51.9 633 7661. C<>untlf of n",in +++ Bayham
~ 003/001;
MARK G. MeDONAtO
CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER
(Mrs.) SANDRA J. H5fFREON
MANAGER OF ADMINISTRATIVE
SERVICES
4s() SUNSET DRIVE
ST. TClOMAS, ONTARIO
N5R 5'11
PHONE (519) 631.1460
FAX (519) 63F661
WNW.elgin-county.on.ca
January 25, 2005
'Since 1852'
Mr. Dave Rock, Chair
Elgin Group Police Services Board
450 Sunset DrIve
ST. THOMAS, OntariO, N5R 5V1
Dear Mr. Rock:
The Council of the Corporation of the County of Elgin, at its meeting held on January 25,
2005, adopted the following recommendation:
"THAT the Elgin Group Police Services Board be encouraged to solicit a change
to the applicable legislation to enable the Ontario Provincial pollee to penmjt
emergency services personnel to access roadways that have been closed to
traffic; and,
THAT copies of this resolution be sent to local municipalities, the Westem
Wardens and Eastern Wardens Associations and the local M.P.P. for support.
- Carried.
(signed) Warden James Mcintyre"
Currently, local volunteer"fire fighters, when responding to a call, are not permitted access
to travelways closed by police forces, in keeping with legislation. Municipalities are very
concerned with the insurance liability and recognition issues of volunteer emergency
service personnel when responding to emergency situations. Council is requesting that
the Elgin Group PSB address these concerns through solicitatIon of changes to the
legislation.
We look forward to your response.
Yours truly,
>:!E'!!t::ru)
Deputy Cleri<.
SJHfdb
cc Western and Eastern Wardens Association
Steve Peters, M.P., Elgin-Middlesex-london
Constituent Municipalities
03/07/2005 MON 12:01 F,~1 519 866 3884 Municipality of Bayham
~ 005/006
02/14/2005 MON 14:40 FAX 519 633 7661 Coun.y or ElgIn ~~~ nasham
~ 004/005
. ~(j';::~:~}~:~J~;~:;~:;,;t~r:;~\;~~;;i,::te2e:it~d:~ i~i~:;:;l::;t;~1~;~1:~fn~;~:;;Jl,'?/}:ic~n~~~~;~t:gt;Mt:i~;:~!:}
Fi~ Marshal's
>
ctu commissaire des incendies
December 14, 2004
. (12004-29
FIREFIGHTER RESPONSE IN
PERSONAL VEHICLES ON CLOSED ROADS
(E;d,IYtt:lt1 l>MfibutJon)
Earlier this year, the Office of the Fire Marshal (OFM) became aware of an issue that may
potentially affect the response of firefighters in personal vehicles if a response is required
on a closed road. This communique explains the nature of the issue and outlines
measures that could help fire departments to prevent this issue from having a potentially
serious impact on service delivery and firefighter safety.
Subsection 6 (3) of the Fire Protection and Prevention Act, 1997, states "A fire chief is the
person who is ultimately responsible to the council of a municipality that appointed him or
her for the delivery of fire protection services". This responsibility extends to areas that
contain roads or are accessible by road:;; closed by police services under the authority
granted to them in Section 134 ofthe Highway Traffic Act, 1990.
Subsection 134 (3) of the Highway Traffic Act, 1990, prohibits any person from driving or
operating a vehicle on a road that has been closed by the police. This subsection does not
apply to road service vehicles, ambulances, fire department vehicles, public utility
emergency vehicles, and police vehicles. It does however apply to firefighters using their
personally owned vehicles to respond to emergency incidents who travel on closed roads,
regardless of whether or not they have a flashing green light.
The Ontario Provincial Police has recently advised all detachments that firefighters
responding to emergency incidents In personally owned vehicles are not to be allowed on
roads that have been closed under the authority of the Highway T raffle Act, 1990.
Furthermore, firefighters in personal vehicles found traveling cn these closed roads may
be charged with an offence.
Insurance companies may find fault with firefighters convicted of offences related to travel
on closed roads or collisions/accidents that occur while traveling on closed roads. This
may Increase the rates charged to firefighters for personal auto insurance.
@ Ontario
Ministry ot. Col'nrr1unity Safety Office of Minister.e de ta Seeuttte Bureau du
and Correctional Services the Rr~ commutkilltaire et des Services commlssalre
Marshal c.orreclionnels da:s: 1n~ndles
03/07/2005 MON 12:01 ~1X 519 866 3884 Municipality of Bayham
02/14/2005 MON 14:41 FAX 519 633 7661 County of Elgin ~~~ Basham
~ 006/006
~ 005/005
The OFM encourages fire departments to implement the followIng recommendations:
. Municipal councils should be advised of how the road closure issue may affect
response times, response capabilities, firefighter morale and recruItment/retention of
firefighters.
· Fire officials should ensure that local emergency plans contain procedures for the
effective management of long-term road closures.
· Fire officials should meet with the local police service to establish a protocol for early
notification of impending road closures.
· Fire officials should meet with local and/or regional police, public works officials, and
Ministry of Transportation officials to develop formal agreements and protocols to be
followed in the event of road closures.
· Fire officials should keep in mind the local need for road closures In winter and
consider implementing standby staffing of fire stations when notified road closures
will occur. Road closures have a negative effect on response times and f1reftghter
turnout, and increase the level of risk for firefighters.
The OFM consulted fire service stakeholders for their input. The OFM continues to explore
possible long-term solutions to this Issue.
~
03/07/2005 MON 12:01 FAX 519 866 3884 Municipality of Bayham
~ 001/006
FAX
~oIZ~ @
P.O. Box 160
9344 Plank Road
Straffordville, Ontario
NOJ 1YO
Phone (519)866-5521
Fax (519)866-3884
Date: March 7, 2005
Number of pages including cover sheet: 6
From: Lynda Millard, Clerk
To: Various
Subject: Support of Elgin County & Police Services Board
John Gerretsen Minister of Municipal Affairs & Housing Fax: 416-585-6470
Monte Kwinter Minister of Community Safety & Correctional Services
Fax: 416-325-6067
StevePeters,M.P.P. E1gin-Middlesex- London Fax 519-631-9478
County of Elgin Fax: 519-633-7661
Thanks
- .ftpula
File: FaxesfC2005-006
OANHSS
(f)
rt
March 2, 2005 - Vol. 12, No.9
In This Issue:
1. Member Survey Extension
2. Convention - 7 Days and Counting!
3. New Survey Related to Pharmacist and LTC Homes
4. LTC Residents Claim Some Costs for Tax Credits
5. Short Term Sustainability Program
6. MOHL TC Program Standards Delay
7. Staffing Reports Overdue
8. Physiotherapy Funding Decision Anticipated this Week
9. High Intensity Needs Fund (HINF) Claims
10. Convalescent Care Program Information Sessions in Progress
11. Concerns Raised about Electronic Rate Reduction Forms
12. LTC Home Capital Development on Track
13. OANHSS Board Meeting Summary Report
14. What We're Doing for You This Week - February 28 - March 4, 2005
15. Upcoming OANHSS Events
**********************************************************************************
1. Member Survey Extension
Weare still accepting completed 2005 Member Value and Satisfaction Survey until the end of day
tomorrow (March 3). The survey is very short- you should be able to complete it in 10-15 minutes. The
survey was emailed to full members and it is also available on our website at www.oanhss.ore:. You can
also contact Debbie Humphreys at dhumuhrevs@oanhss.org for another copy.
We have had a very strong response to date and appreciate the feedback. The results will provide valuable
information for the Board of Directors and staff to identifY where we need to focus our efforts to perform
strategically and deliver full value for membership.
2. Convention - 7 Days and Counting!
The Convention is just next week! Be sure to send in your registration if you haven't already done so. With
over 400 people already planning to attend we expect this year's event to be another big success!
OANHSS Executive Report
March 2, 2005
(
ONTARIO ASSOCIATION OF NON-PROFIT HOMES AND SERVICES FOR SENIORS
Affair at Arcadian Court - Update
Plan to attend this gathering for the long term care sector that we are hosting as part of Convention. The
evening starts at 6:00 p.m. and runs until 8:30 p.m. Monique Smith is planning on attending, as well as key
stakeholders and government staffers including: George Zegarac, Assistant Deputy Minister, MOHLTC;
Tim Burns, Director, LTC Homes Branch; David Clarke, Director, LTC Planning and Renewal Branch;
and Geoff Quirt, Assistant Deputy Minister, Seniors' Secretariat.
3. New Survey Related to Pharmacist and LTC Homes
We understand that some long term care home members may be in receipt of a survey for completion by
the facility, the pharmacist and the medial director. Be advised that this is not research in which we have
played a key design or promotional role. While we were apprised last sunnner ofthe plan for this study, the
advisory committee on which we had representation was not consulted on the design ofthis survey, the
selection of homes to receive the tool or the timing of its release. By way of background, the research
project is titled Evaluation of the Collaborative Impact of the Pharmacist and Pharmacist-Conducted
Medication Reviews on Drug Prescribing and Utilization in Ontario Long Term Care Facilities.
4. LTC Residents Claim Some Costs for Tax Credits
Residents in long term care homes may have two costs that are eligible for credits on annual tax returns.
The two categories are property tax and medical expenses. Since most NFP homes do not pay property tax,
we are drawing your attention specifically to the medical expense deduction.
. Property Taxes - Residents in long term care homes that pay property tax can claim up to 75% of their
yearly co-payment fee as rent. This amount is then used to calculate a credit that reduces the amount of
income that a resident pays tax on.
. Medical Expenses - Residents in long term care homes can claim the fees paid in support of their care
as a medical expense on their income tax returns. The Income Tax Act (ITA) states that medical
expenses include amounts paid for full-time care in a nursing home where the patient has a severe and
prolonged mental or physical impairment that has been certified in prescribed form by a medical doctor.
All regular fees paid to the nursing home, including food, accommodations (including preferred
accommodation), nursing care, administration, maintenance and social programming qualifY as medical
expenses for the purposes ofthe ITA. Additional personal expenses, which are separately identifiable,
such as hairdresser fees, are not allowable expenses. If a resident is entitled to, and claims a disability
deduction, a cap of about $10,000 is placed on the medical deduction. However, if the disability
deduction is not claimed, 100% of the payments made to the long-term care facility qualifY. In any case
the medical deduction is reduced by 3% of net income (line 236) to a maximum of$1,728.
If you wish more details on either of either of these credits contact Rose Pace at roace@oanhss.ore:.
5. Short Term Sustainability Program
In December the government indicated to providers in the Short Term Sustainability Program (STSP) that it
would be extending the program until the end of March and moving to actual occupancy plus three percent
for any eligible homes in the revised program.
OANHSS Executive Report
2
March 2, 2005
ONTARIO ASSOCIATION OF NON-PROFIT HOMES AND SERVICES FOR SENIORS
On that basis, homes in the program were able to plan their staffing in the interim. At last week's MOHL TC
Operations Meeting, we learned the government is reconsidering whether, for homes in the program, it will
flow dollars to the envelopes in exactly the same distribution that it currently flows a home's funding.
OANHSS and OLTCA took issue stating that this was a breach of understanding of what the government
had said it would be providing and have written a joint letter to the ADM. A copy is available on request.
6. MOHL TC Program Standards Delay
It was confirmed again that the MOHLTC is delaying further rollout of the revised program standards until
the new legislative framework is drafted. We have again asked that this direction be officially
communicated to LTC homes. We have been assured that compliance staff has been told that the current
standards and policies remain unchanged except for the new requirements related to bathing, meal plan
approval by the dietitian and the 24 hour RN coverage. If any member is told by compliance staff that the
other new policies and standards are to be implemented, please let Margaret Ringland know by emailing
mrine:land@oanhss.ore:.
7. Staffing Reports Overdue
Any member home that has yet to remit the staffing report which was sent out in January should do so
immediately as your response is well overdue. The MOHLTC has indicated that there will be serious
ramifications for not completing the survey.
Phase two of the staffing reports will require "head counts" as of February 28,2005. While the MOHLTC
indicates it wants monthly staffing reports, we have pointed out the burden that such reporting will create is
not warranted given that the data is unlikely to vary. We have recommended that reports be tied to funding
increases such as will occur April 1, since it is only when funding is added that any augmentation of staff
might occur.
We continue to express concern about how this data will be interpreted and used to track the staffing
increases promised by the Minister. We have asked for some recognition of layoff prevention in the data
and for homes who already staff above the provincial average and whose wages and wage adjustments have
prevented any significant staffing increases. Weare concerned that the data may not reflect the level of
increase promised by the government. We know that the Minister and bureaucrats are under significant
pressure to show the promised level of increase (2000 staff). We have been told that failure to deliver could
have implications with regard to future funding increases. We will be working with the bureaucrats to
determine how we might use the data to paint a positive picture.
8. Physiotherapy Funding Decision Anticipated this Week
The urgency for the MOHLTC to confrrm its direction for physiotherapy services to LTC homes and
CCAC, post delisting was relayed again to the MOHLTC at our Operations Meeting last week. Again no
details were provided, but there was recognition of the need to advise all parties immediately of the
direction to avoid the loss of service in LTC homes who rely on Schedule Five clinics as physiotherapists
working in these clinics leave for other positions.
We also stressed that a reallocation of the existing Schedule Five funding directly to LTC homes will result
in a loss of service for some and a gain for others. This reality is because of the urban/rural discrepancy in
service with those outside of urban centres less likely to have access to Schedule Five Clinics. Another
OANHSS Executive Report
3
March 2, 2005
ONTARIO ASSOCIATION OF NON-PROFIT HOMES AND SERVICES FOR SENIORS
point we made was the importance of allowing for the continuance of CCAC service to LTC homes in
northern Ontario where such service is currently provided effectively.
Finally, we pointed out that the provision ofthe new convalescent care program is dependent on significant
physiotherapy services. Since the added per diem funding for convalescent care was based on the Ottawa
pilots where physio was provided by the clinics at no cost to the homes, homes may reconsider applying for
the program if there is no an assurance of the continuance of the Schedule Five level of service or
equivalent additional funding.
We will continue to press for decisions.
9. High Intensity Needs Fund (HINF) Claims
Although we have been told that the MOHLTC has processed all 2003 and 2004 HINF claims, we have
raised concerns about the rejection of claims where verbal approval was provided by the compliance
advisors who then did not record this approval. While the process now requires written approval, it did not
in the past and members report having claims refused even though they documented the verbal approval.
The MOHLTC has been apprised of this issue and asked to honour all claims where the homes have such
documentation.
10. Convalescent Care Program Information Sessions in Progress
The MOHLTC regional sessions to present the details on this new program have begun. Members with an
interest in delivering this program need to attend the session in your region in order to get the program
details, application forms and submission deadline. In light ofthe short turnaround time, we remind you
that the OANHSS Resource Development Services (ORDS) is prepared to assist with proposal
development on a fee-for-service basis. Call or email Doug Shinobu at 905-851-8821 ext 225 or
gshinobu@oanhss.ore:.
11. Concerns Raised about Electronic Rate Reduction Forms
The Toronto region of the MOHLTC has been the pilot site for electronic rate reduction submissions.
While we are supportive of this approach, several concems have been raised that need to be addressed
before further rollout. One in particular is the MOHLTC requirement for all residents in basic
accommodation to be recorded in the system, even those paying the maximum basic accommodation fees.
We have noted that this is excessive and beyond what is currently required in the manual process. Privacy
legislation also prevents homes from asking for Notice of Assessment forms from such residents. At our
meeting with the MOHLTC we were advised that the concerns will be addressed and we will be apprised
on the action taken.
12. LTC Home Capital Development on Track
The latest MOHLTC update on the LTC homes build and rebuild program shows 18,418 new beds are now
in operation. All but 500 of the remaining allocation of new beds are under construction. These remaining
500 awarded beds have been returned to the MOHLTC and no decision has been made about any
reallocation. Of about 16,000 "D" beds, only apprnyimotely 207 have yet to sign development agreements.
Another two facilities (400 beds) are not rebuilding, five homes closed permanently. (469 charitable home
OANHSS Executive Report
4
March 2, 2005
ONTARIO ASSOCIATION OF NON-PROFIT HOMES AND SERVICES FOR SENIORS
beds) and several have downsized (335 beds). Just over nine thousand have completed the redevelopment
and are open. In total, the not-for-profit sector has seen a net increase of 6835 beds since 1998.
13. OANHSS Board Meeting Summary Report
A summary report of the February 21, 2005, meeting of the Board of Directors is attached for member
information.
14. What We're Doing for You This Week - February 28 - March 4, 2005
o Continuing Care E-Health Council
o OANHSS Finance Committee
o Ontario Health Providers Alliance
o Meeting with John Baird, MPP, Nepean-Carleton, PC Critic Health
o MOHLTC Stakeholders Briefrng on Physio with Minister's office
o Meeting with Cam Jackson, MPP, Burlington, PC Critic LTC
o MIS LTC Homes Advisory Working Group meeting
15. Upcoming OANHSS Events
(for further details, contact Karen Elliott at karenelliott@!.oanhss.orvor 905-727-1537)
o 2005 OANHSS Annual Meeting & Convention - March 8-10, 2005 - Sheraton Centre,
Toronto
o 2005 Administrator Certification Program - April 3 - 8, 2005 - Sutton Place Hotel, Toronto
o 2005 Human Resource Management Program Part 1 - April 13-14, 2005 - Heritage Centre,
Unionville - Details being planned
o Client Handling Lift Training -
April 26, 2005 Hamilton
April 27, 2005 Toronto
May 9, 2005 London
May 12, 2005 Ottawa
Donna A. Rubin, CEO
Email: drubin(ci)oanhss.ora
Executive Reports are confidential communications for OANHSS Full Members only. Copies are posted in the member access
area of our website under "newsletters".
The OANHSS Executive Report is distributed for information purposes only. The Ontario Association of Non-Profit Homes and
Services for Seniors (OANHSS) is not engaged in rendering legal or other professional advice. If legal advice or other expert
assistance is required, the services of a professional should be sought.
@ Copyright 2005 OANHSS
OANHSS Executive Report
5
March 2, 2005
~~
~@
Summary Report
Key issues and decisions from the OANHSS
Board Meeting held on February 21, 2005
1. Membership
. New memberships were acknowledged - Sunnybrook and Women's College Health
Science Centre (Level Two Veterans' Program) and St. Joseph's Lifecare (Not-for-Profit
Nursing Home in Brantford).
2. Funding Campaign
. OANHSS' funding campaign strategy was reviewed. It has the following components:
o Media campaign across Ontario - member host sites are being sought and members
are to be encouraged to attend these events - CEO will be presenting our case for
funding to the media at these events.
o Regional support - identification of local papers in which camera ready ads could be
placed and financial support for the cost.
o Posters to be provided to members to display in homes highlighting the need for
funding.
. Messaging that will avoid backlash in media for the provision of more funding to LTC homes
was discussed. OANHSS message includes reference to the need for funding across the
continuum including LTC homes, supportive housing and community services.
. It was agreed that members should be encouraged to respond to media reports on long
term care in local media using OANHSS' key messages and to have their boards and
committees of management write to the Minister and connect with the local MPPS about
the funding needs again using OANHSS key messages.
3. Bed Utilization and Occupancy
. Reviewed current trends and data on occupancy and bed utilization.
. The Association's position on actual occupancy plus three approach to funding was
confirmed as the preferred approach for all homes and not just those eligible homes in a
revised Short Term Sustainability Program. The government will be conducting a funding
review in the future and will be considering such requests as part of that process.
4. Physiotherapy
. The member data on the level of physio service showed that over half receive support from
Schedule Five Clinics. It also showed the majority of this support is in urban settings.
. It was reiterated that any redistribution of the funding attached to Schedule Five service to
LTC homes will be inadequate to maintain current levels of service where clinics provide the
LEADERS RESPONDING TO SENIORS' NEEDS
OANHSS-
2
service to homes. Where homes receive service from CCACs, there are variances in
member perspective on the adequacy of this service with those in the north most likely to be
satisfied and most concerned if CCACs are no longer able to deliver such service in long
term care homes.
· It was agreed that this member data and feedback should be submitted to the MOHL TC
and that we continue to pressure for decisions on future directions fro physiotherapy
services.
5. Alternate Levels of Care (ALe)
. The growing trend by hospital to institute a "first available bed" policy for ALC patients
waiting for placement in LTC homes and to charge these patients exorbitant fees where
they do not accept this bed was identified as a direction that was not appropriate.
. It was therefore agreed that OANHSS should reconfirm the with the government our
previous positions about this practice as outlined in its July 2004 paper on this topic (on
OANHSS website) and further recommend that fees charged to patients should not exceed
the allowable co-payment charged to patients in complex continuing care beds.
. It was noted that the work being done with OL TCA, OACCAC and OHA is intended to
address this concern and to provide the government with a joint policy recommendation.
6. Occupancy Protection and Outbreaks
· It was agreed that OANHSS support the calculation of occupancy during outbreaks for only
units closed on a go forward basis for 2005 and onwards and that prior to 2005, such
calculation should based on the facility-wide occupancy even where only individual units
were closed during any outbreak.
7. Compliance Culture
· It was reconfirmed that OANHSS continue to press for attention by the MOHL TC to the
current compliance culture to address problems, attitudes and inconsistencies and establish
an effective disputes resolution/problem solving process.
· It also continues to be the board's position that the larger issue of compliance program
design and direction needs to be a priority in the MOHL TC "long term care revolution"
action.
8. Proposal for Teaching LTC Homes
· Supported a proposal that an education and research provision should be included in the
new LTC legislation. This provision is intended to lead to the creation of "teaching LTC
homes". The lead for this proposal is Larry W. Chambers PhO, President, Elisabeth Bruyere
Research Institute.
9. MOHL TC Risk Management Framework for LTC Homes
· An update on recent developments related to the second wave of this framework
development was provided.
. The board emphasized the importance of:
o incorporating adjustments for such things as resident profile, home size, unique
populati6fisel6 when establishing and applying risk-indicators and measures.
LEADERS RESPONDING TO SENIORS' NEEDS'
OANHSS 3
o allowing homes with good records to have reduced compliance oversight or even just
self monitoring provisions.
o Incorporating more reliability and consistency in compliance advisor findings before
the applying the framework.
o maintaining confidentiality of the results of the risk findings (i.e. should not be on
public reporting website).
10. MOHLTC Management Information Service (MIS)
· MIS is a national framework that defines the account code standards for collecting financial
and statistical data for health care organizations.
· An update was provided on the status of the MOHL TC plans to introduce MIS reporting to
long term care.
. Some pilots are to take place in 2005 with broader rollout in 2006.
11. Care Planning Partners "Open Doors"
. Information was shared about an initiative of Care Planning Partners, publishers of The
Care Guide, who is launching what they hope will become an annual province-wide, one
day event, called "Open Doors". The idea is that long term care homes and retirement
residences across the province will "open their doors" to the community on June 18, 2005
and host an open house.
· The objective is to demystify long term care and increase awareness of participating homes
within their respective communities. There will not be a cost for homes to participate - those
interested will receive a marketing kit with sample flyers, program ideas and collateral
material.
· OANHSS has accepted an invitation to support this event through sponsorship.
11. CEO Report
A comprehensive report from the CEO on the ongoing activities of the Association was shared at
the meeting, and is attached as information for members.
Information Contact: Donna Rubin
P: 905-851-8821 ext.230
F: 905-851-0744
e-mail: drubin@oanhss.org
LEADERS RESPONDING TO SENIORS' NEEDS
CEO REPORT
February 2005
SUPPORTIVE PUBLIC POLICY ENVIRONMENT
1. Bed Development
We continue to track the status of members' development projects. The good news is that, as of
January 2005, all members with new beds or D beds are either finished their projects and open or
under construction with the following exceptions:
. Three charitable D category homes have yet to finalize the direction they will be pursuing;
. two municipal D category homes have advised the MOHL TC that they will not be
redeveloping;
. two D category homes took the upgrade option and are now Cs; one nursing home member
turned back their new bed award; and,
. three charitable homes have closed because they were unable financially to support the
redevelopment.
These homes were the Salvation Army home in Orillia (closed in 1998), Villa Maria in Windsor
(closed in 2001) and most recently, The Laughlen Centre in Toronto. We have expressed concern
to the Minister's office about the latest closure and the loss of yet more not-for-profit beds.
The issues now related to redevelopment will be the ability of the homes to carry their debts,
especially the charitable homes. Tracking the status of viability of these homes may be an activity
we pursue over the next couple of years to be proactive in identifying problems and working with
the government on solutions.
2. Convalescent Care
Further to the government's recent announcement, OANHSS scheduled a conference call session
to assist members interested in applying for the program to better understand what elements
would contribute to a successful proposal.
3. Diagnostic Equipment Funding
Considerable effort was made to ensure members were aware of the lift funding opportunity and
also in securing clarifications from the MOHL TC on elements of the program.
4. Mental Health Issues in Long Term Care
Submitted the position paper approved at the last Board meeting to George Zegarac, Assistant
Deputy Minister, Community Health Division. No response or acknowledgement has been received
as yet. It will be raised at the both the next Mental Health/LTC Interface Group meeting and the
next MOHL TC Operations meeting.
LEADERS RESPONDING TO SENIORS' NEEDS
ONTARIO ASSOCIATION OF NON-PROFIT HOMES AND SERVICES FOR SENIORS
5. Non Emergency Ambulance Transfers
At the last Board meeting, the draft letter outlining Association concerns was reviewed. The
revised letter was finalized and submitted to the Assistant Deputy Ministers for both Acute Care
and Community Health. A response has yet to be received.
6. Nursing Strategy Funding
Details were sought on release of the nursing strategy funding including the recipients in long term
care. These strategies related to support for new graduates and late career nurses and the
development of mentorship/preceptorship programs. While we have asked members if they were
supported, we do not have a complete list yet. We do know, however, that 144 of the 225 long
term care submissions were funded: fifty of seventy-three for the new graduate support, sixty-four
of eighty for late career nurses, and thirty of seventy for preceptorships.
7. Physiotherapy
A survey to determine whether members had physiotherapy services provided by Schedule Five
clinics was conducted (see separate Board Report).
8. Provincial Advisory Committee on Seniors' Housing
OANHSS is an ex-officio member of the provincial Advisory Committee on Seniors' Housing, a
multi-stakeholder group involving seniors' organizations, associations and the Ministries of Health,
Housing and the Ontario Seniors' Secretariat.
At the January meeting, there were several discussion items of interest, including:
o enlightening results from a Region of Peel study on the housing preferences of older adults
related to important factors in selecting a future home, features of preferred home, what
seniors will pay, preferred community type (i.e. seniors vs integrated), interest in non-profit
and co-op housing, assistance required, etc. - the survey also asked respondents about
their views on housing options - six options were described and of those respondents were
most interested in more information on life lease
o A list of CMHC research currently underway related to seniors housing included the
following projects of note:
. An Examination of Life Lease Housing Issues
. Life Lease Ownership by the Elderly of Suites with Continuing Care Services
. Determining the Implications of the Aging of the Canadian Population for Housing
and Communities
. The Legal Framework for Supportive Housing
. Seniors' Housing for Seniors - A Feasibility Study (looking at interest and feasibility
of senior homeowners in subdividing their home into multiple units)
o Eight recommendations related to affordable housing for seniors, formed and approved by
the Peel Advisory Working Group on Older Adults" Housing, were endorsed by the Advisory
Committee.
LEADERS RESPONDING TO SENIORS' NEEDS
ONTARIO-ASSOCIATION OF NON-PROFIT HOMES AND SERVICES'FOR SENIORS
At an upcoming meeting, OANHSS representatives will present on life lease housing and the
MOHL TC will provide an overview and update on supportive housing.
9. Resident Assessment Project
We met with the new manager for the project to introduce the Resident Assessment Instrument
2.0 (RAI 2.0) to long term care homes. We were able to brief her on past developments and
perspectives. We also provided relevant resources and documents, and a list of experts and
potential project team members. OANHSS members were updated on this development via
Executive Report.
10. Resident Satisfaction Project
Submitted the letter reviewed at the last Board meeting to Tim Burns. As a result, Tim met with the
project Technical Working Group, on which OANHSS has four member representatives, and
confirmed that there is no fixed MOHL TC position regarding a specific tool and further that the tool
selection will include a competitive submission process. The work seems to be back on track with
its original direction.
VISIBLE AND INFLUENTIAL VOICE
11. Collaboration with Stakeholders:
. Alternate Level of Care Working Group (ALC) - The ALC Working Group continues to
meet with representatives from OANHSS present. As indicated in a separate report to the
Board, the group is currently working on a policy document to share with government.
. Association of Municipalities of Ontario (AMO) - AMO continues to connect with us on
issues related to long term care. Most recently we shared our submission on the LTC Act.
. Elder Health Elder Care Coalition (EHEC) - EHEC will be meeting with ADM, George
Zegarac and Barbara Hall mid-February to discuss the advisory role seniors should have
with regards to the LHINs. They would like to see a seniors advisory sub-group for each
LHIN.
. Family Councils Program - Provided members with information on the regional
workshops organized by this provincial program and about the survey to gather accurate
baseline data on the current status of family councils across the province.
. Ontario Hospital Association (OHA) - We have been invited to participate in the OHA led
task force on LHINs. This multi-stakeholder group began meeting early in the process and
has had some success in influencing government to its ideas. For example, the government
has posted on its website the principles developed by this group when the LHINs were
announced.
. Ontario Health Providers Alliance (OHPA) - OANHSS continues to actively participate in
this Alliance of approximately 19 associations. The current topic of interest is the LHIN
structure and how it will impact on associations. Invited to the next meeting is the incoming
president of the Alberta Long Term Care Association to share experiences from outwest.
LEADERS RESPONDING TO SENIORS' NEEDS
ONTARIO ASSOCIATION Ot--iII0N-PROFIT HOMES AND SERVICES FOR SENIORS
After this discussion, we should have more information to begin looking at the impact of
LHINs for our own Association.
. Ontario Partnership on Aging and Developmental Disabilities (OPADD) - At the last
meeting of OPADD, hosted the Deputy Minister of Community and Social Services and
shared perspectives on the needs and issues related to services to those with
developmental disabilities who are aging. Also advised members of opportunities to host
regional workshops on this topic. This initiative is aimed at bringing together the two sectors
to plan for the current and future needs of those with developmental disabilities who are
aging and to establish innovative methods and models of care and services.
. Registered Practical Nurses Association of Ontario (RPNAO) - Met to discuss a variety
of initiatives and developments as they relate to RPNs and long term care.
. University of Waterloo - We supported research being conducted by U of W related to at
strengthening assessment across the health care continuum. OANHSS was contacted
about two projects, one focusing on community/housing settings and one focused on long
term care homes. All members were informed about this work and encouraged to
participate as pilot sites.
12. Continuing Care E-Health Council
The state of readiness report was shared at the last CCE-Health Council meeting, indicating a
much higher state of readiness in the community sector than anticipated.
Long term care is well poised to move forward in the area of secure messaging. Momentum
appears to be picking up in this area and we are being contacted to work with public health in the
area of a public health information and technology strategy that is focused in the immediate on
connecting with organizations in the health care sector for emergency communication.
THRIVING MEMBER ORGANIZATIONS
13. Life Lease Members Meeting
OANHSS hosted a well-attended meeting of member life lease providers in early February. There
was a tremendous amount of information and idea sharing and participants expressed the great
value they received from getting together.
A key item of interest was creative redemption models for the resale of life lease units.
Specifically, several members shared various alternatives to the "traditional" life lease model (i.e.
selling the life lease at market value) that respond to the needs of the community and in particular
the varying financial means of potential residents. Examples included:
. One Toronto-based project that has a mix of rental and life lease units - they have the
ability to switch units back and forth from rental to life lease depending on demand - can
offer people the option to rent if they do have the capital to purchase a unit.
. A project outside Ottawa that uses a "flexplan" approach which incorporates two ways of
reducing the cost to potential residents. The first feature, which can be described as
"prepaid rent", allows people to pay as much as they can afford to purchase the life lease
LEADERS RESPONDING TO SENIORS' NEEDS
ONTARIO ASSOCIATION OF NON-PROFIT HOMES AND SERVICES FOR SENIORS
(e.g. from a minimum of $10,000 to a maximum of $90,000). Those that pay the maximum
amount will only pay a small maintenance fee for the duration of their stay in the
community. Those who pay a lower capital amount are required to pay a higher monthly
fee based on a formula. The second feature of this model is that the value of the resident's
capital contribution declines over time based on a predetermined formula. At some point
(e.g. 15 years) the value is reduced to nothing. This feature is referred to as "declining
balance."
. A sponsor group has used surplus funds to purchase some units in the life lease project to
rent to low income seniors.
The question of what type of redemption model will work best for any given charity or non-profit
group depends on a number of factors, including the objectives of the sponsor, market conditions
and the preferences and demands of potential purchasers. Some groups are looking to raise
equity through the life lease to support other related projects run by the charity (e.g. long term care
facility). Some housing markets may not be able to support a home ownership model where prices
are higher. Others may want to immediately respond to the need for more affordable housing
options in their community and are looking for variations on the traditional life lease such as the
above examples.
In looking at the models which try to reach lower income seniors, it was recognized that, in many
cases, charities would not have the means to cover the costs and offer more affordable options to
seniors at the outset. Sponsor groups need to take a longer term view and add creative
alternatives once mortgage costs are paid down.
OANHSS members were some of the earliest pioneers of the life lease housing form and it is
exciting to see members taking this success and expanding the concept to incorporate options that
respond to seniors with varying incomes.
14. Member Survey
The 2005 Member Value and Satisfaction Survey was emailed to all full members on February 8.
15. ORDS Support to Members
The OANHSS Resource Development Service (ORDS) continues to support all categories of
OANHSS members in a variety of areas. Most recently and in response to requests from
CEOs/Executive Directors/Administrators and Boards of Directors of member organizations,
assistance is now being provided in the recruitment of CEOs/Executive Directors/Administrators
and in funding reviews for supportive housing and community services. These services are added
to the ongoing advisory services related to operational benchmarking, long term care project
financing, development project planning, strategic planning and related educational sessions for
boards and senior staff of member organizations.
LEADERS RESPONDING TO SENIORS' NEEDS
~
CONESTOGA-ROVERS
& ASSOCIATES
1651 Colby Drive, Waterloo, Ontario, Canada N2V 1C2
Telephone: 519.884.0510 Facsimile: 519.884.0525
www.CRAworld.com
February 28, 2005
Reference No. 000721-10
Mr. Mark G. McDonald, CAO,
County of Elgin,
450 Sunset Dr.,
St. Thomas, ON N5R 5V1
Dear Mr. McDonald:
Re: Green Lane Landfill Optimization Environmental Assessment
Draft Environmental Assessment Reuort
Conestoga-Rovers & Associates (CRA) is the Technical Consultant to Green Lane Landfill, a
division of St. Thomas Sanitary Collection Service Limited Partnership, in connection with
Green Lane's waste management environmental assessment planning process leading to the
optimization of the landfill located on parts of Lots 21, 22 and 23, Concession III, Southwold
Township, County of Elgin.
We have completed a draft Environmental Assessment Report. It is now released for public and
review agency comment and for that purpose you will find enclosed 2 copies of the following
documentation, one copy for your review and one which we ask that you make available for
public viewing at an appropriate location in your offices:
. February 2005 Draft Environmental Assessment for the Optimization of the Green Lane
Landfill, Volume I - Text, Figures and Tables, issued by Conestoga-Rovers & Associates
(CRA) in February 2005;
. February 2005 Draft Environmental Assessment for the Optimization of the Green Lane
Landfill, Volume II - Appendices, issued by CRA in February 2005;
Two copies of the following documents will be forwarded to you for the same purposes during
the next few days:
. Design and Operations Report for the Optimization of the Green Lane Landfill Site, issued
by CRA in November 2004;
. Hydrogeologic Investigation Report for the Optimization of the Green Lane Landfill Site
Volume 1 of 2 - Text, Figures and Tables, issued by CRA in November 2004; and;
. Hydrogeologic Investigation Report for the Optimization of the Green Lane Landfill Site
Volume 2 of 2 - Appendices, issued by CRA in November 2004.
REGlSTEREDCOIIPANY
ISO 9001
E""'U"RII,aOESIGN
Worldvvide Engineering, Environmental, Constructi~nr and IT Services
~
CONESTOGA-ROVERS
& ASSOCIATES
February 28, 2005
2
Reference No. 000721-10
The last three mentioned volumes, issued in November 2004, were prepared in support of an
Environmental Protection Act application for amendment to Green Lane's Certificate of Approval
for the proposed optimization. That application was submitted to the Ministry of the
Environment (MOE) in December of 2004.
As part of the public consultation process contemplated by the terms of reference approved
under the Environmental Assessment Act for this stage of Green Lane's environmental assessment
planning process, an open house is to be held at the Proponent's offices across the Third Line
Road from the landfill. The open house will be held on March 23, 2005 between 4:00 to 8:00 pm
and you are invited to attend.
In addition to having this material made available at your offices, copies of all of this
documentation will also be made available for public review at the following locations during
normal business hours throughout the review period:
The Proponent's offices,
The Shedden Public Library,
The municipal offices of the Township of Southwold,
The municipal offices of the Township of Middlesex Centre, and
The municipal offices of the County of Middlesex.
A copy of the Draft EA Report is also available on the Conestoga-Rovers & Associates' web site
(httu:/ /www.craworld.com/news events.asp).
We ask for public and agency comments as soon as possible and hope to have all comments and
suggestions by April 29th.
Thank you for your comments and for your co-operation in providing these materials for public
viewing.
Yours truly,
DJR/mw/7
Encl.
."B ._.. ...oM
World\Nide Engineering, Environmental, Construction, and IT Services
Canada
~ Ontario
DATE: February 15, 2005
FROM: COMRIF Management Committee Co-Chairs
TO: COMRIF Intake One Applicants
SUBJECT: An Open Letter to COMRIF Intake One Applicants
Thank you for your application to the Canada-Ontario Municipal Rural Infrastructure Fund
(COMRIF).
The first intake for COMRIF applications closed on January 10, 2005. The vast majority of
applications were received through the online application process, which speaks to the value of this
innovative tool. The availability of online information will greatly accelerate the application review
and approval phase.
There has been a great deal of interest amongst Ontario municipalities in Intake One. Some
350 applications have been submitted, requesting federal and provincial assistance of more than
$1.3 billion, for projects valued at over $2 billion. Staff in the COMRIF Joint Secretariat, established
to streamline operations, are currently hard at work assessing applications.
COMRIF is a competitive, merit-based program. Applications are being assessed against three
criteria: health and safety, value for money and public policy priorities, as outlined in the Intake One
Application Guidebook. We are proceeding with our due diligence as part of the rigorous and
complex evaluation process. It involves consultation with technical ministries and departments and,
in many cases, extensive federal and provincial environmental assessments.
The project review process will be completed as quickly as possible, with a view to announcing
approved projects in spring 2005, prior to the launch of Intake Two. This will allow municipalities to
plan for the upcoming construction season. Difficult decisions will have to be made during the joint
federal-provincial approval process, as the demand exceeds the funds available through COMRIF.
Intake Two will be launched in late spring 2005 through a public announcement and direct
Communication with eligible municipalities. Projects that are not funded under Intake One can be
re-submitted under Intake Two. Applicants whose projects are not funded will receive information
on how to re-submit their application prior to the launch of Intake Two.
COMRIF is a partnership between the Government of Canada, the Government of Ontario, and the
Association of Municipalities of Ontario. Through COMRIF, the governments of Canada and
Ontario are each investing up to $298 million over the next five years to improve public
infrastructure in small urban and rural municipalities throughout the province. With municipal
contributions, COMRIF is expected to stimulate up to $900 million in infrastructure investments.
COMRIF will help Ontario communities provide cleaner water, better sewage systems, improved
waste management and safer local roads and bridges.
Canada-Ontario Municipal Rural Infrastructure Fund
Fonds sur !'infrastructure municipale rurale Canada-Ontario
-2-
For additional information about COMRIF, or to access the program's selection criteria, please
contact the COMRIF Joint Secretariat at 1-866-306-7827, or visit www.comrif.cq.
Thank you for your continued efforts to improve the quality of life in the communities you represent.
Sincerely,
C:r-- ~
" ,...\
~~-t?~~
Marc Whittingham
Federal Co-Chair
Industry Canada
Christine Dukelow
Provincial Co-Chair
Ontario Ministry of Municipal Affairs and
Housing
Canada-Ontario Municipal Rural Infrastructure Fund
Fonds sur !'infrastructure municipale rurale Canada-Ontario
In Case of Transmission Difficulties, please Call 416-863-2101 or
1-866-309-3811
please Deliver To: County of Elgin
News Release
Communique
@ Ontario
Ministry of
Consumer and
Business Services
Ministere des Services
aux cons_......"'."urs
et aux entreprises
For Immediate Release
March 2, 2005
RETAIL CLOSINGS DURING EASTER WEEKEND
Ontario Government Reminds Consumers And Businesses Of Closings Under
Retail Business Holidays Act
TORONTO - Shoppers and merchants are reminded that under the Retail Business Holidays Act, both
Good Friday, March 25, 2005 and Easter Sunday, March 27, 2005, are among the eight days annually
when most stores must be closed.
The act, administered by the Ministry of Consumer and Business Services, exempts some retail
operations. Book or magazine stores under 2,400 square feet with a maximum of three employees,
pharmacies under 7,500 square feet, flower shops and gas stations are among exempted businesses.
Stores may be open on holidays if exempted by specific municipal bylaws for the development or
maintenance of tourism. Any questions about tourist designations or local hours of retail operation
should be directed to the municipal clerk's {)ffice in the specific jurisdiction.
Minimum fines for individuals opening on prohibited days of retail operation are $500 for a first
offence, $2,000 for a second offence and $5,000 for a third or subsequent offence. Retail outlets may
be :fmed up to $50,000 or the total amount of gross sales for the holiday, whichever is greater.
Enforcement of the Retail Business Holidays Act is the responsibility of local police services.
To find out which types of retail operations are exempted by the act please call the ministry at
416-326-8800 or toll free at 1-800-889-9768.
-30-
Contacts :
Ref Store Openings
Ref Rates of pay and other labour-related issues
Public Inquiries:
416-326-8800 or 1-800-889-9768
Public Inquiries (Employers and Workers):
416-326-7160 Or 1-800-531-5551
Media Contact: Julie Rosenberg
Ministry of Consumer and Business Services
Tel.: 416-326-8558
Fax: 416-326-8543
Media Contact: Belinda Sutton
Ministry of Labour
416-326-7405
416-326-7406
Disponible en fram;ais
\\,,;v"'VV.cbs.Q"ov_on.ca
THE REGIONAL Mt::NICIPALITY OF HALTON
] ISl BRONTE ROAD
OAKVILLE, ONTARIO. CANADA L6;\1 3U
OFFICE OF THE CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER
LEGAL SERVICES DIVISION - OFFICE OF THE REGIONAL CLERK
Tel, (905) 825.6000, Ext. 7256 Fa" (905) 825-8838
Toll free: 1-866-4HALTON (1-866-442-5866)
February 9, 2005
Association of Municipalities of Ontario
393 University Avenue, Suite 1701
Toronto, ON M5G lE6
Dear SirlMadam:
Re: Benefits of Membership in the Association of Municipalities of Outario (AMO) - CH-OI-05
This letter will confirm that the Council of the Regional Municipality of Halton, at its meeting held Wednesday,
February 9, 2005, considered the above and subsequently endorsed the following resolution:
1. THAT Halton Regional Council recognize the benefits realized by municipalities via the united voice
that AMO presents to the Provincial and Federal Governments as set out in Report CH-OI-05.
2. THAT Report CH-OI-05 be forwarded to the area municipalities for endorsement and be circulated to
the Association of Municipalities of Ontario (AMO) and the Federation of Canadian Municipalities
(FCM) for information.
Enclosed please find a copy of Chairman's Report No. CH-OI-05 that prompted the above.
Should you require additional information, please do not hesitate to contact the Office of the Regional
Chairman at extension 6115.
Yours truly,
~6.
Pat Crirlmtins
Regional Deputy Clerk
cc. Regional Chairman Joyce Savoline
cc. Mayor Ann Mulvale, Town of Oakville
cc. Federation of Municipalities (FCM)
cc. Town of Oakville
cc. Town of Halton Hills
cc. Town of Milton
cc. City of Burlington
HALTON REGION
th
THE REGIONAL MUNICIPALITY OF HALTON
Report To:
Chairman and Members of the Administration and Finance Committee
Joyce A. Savoline, Regional Chairman
Ann Mulvale, Mayor, Town of Oakville
CH-OI-05
RECOMMENDATTON
1. THAT Halton Regional Council recognize the benefits realized by municipalities via
the united voice that AMO presents to the Provincial and Federal Governments as set
out in Report CH-OI-05.
2. THAT Report CH-OI-05 be forwarded to the area municipalities for endorsement
and be circulated to the Association of Municipalities of Ontario (AMO) and the
Federation of Canadian Municipalities (FCM) for information.
REPORT
Purpose
Given that the 2005 budget has recently passed, it is useful to review the return on investment of
membership in particular associations. This report will address Halton's participation in the
Association of Municipalities of Ontario (AMO) and will reaffrrm Halton Regional Council's goal to
advocate to other orders of government on behalf of Halton residents through representation on
partnership organizations such as AMO and the Federation of Canadian Municipalities (FCM).
Background
The Association of Municipalities of Ontario (AMO) was created in 1972 via a merger of the 'Ontario
Municipal Association' and the 'Ontario Association of Mayors and Reeves'. AMO continued to
evolve over the next decade as discussions with other bodies ensued until 1980 when an Association
Review Committee was struck. The findings of this Committee led to an AMO restructuring adopted
in 1982, which recognized the differences and subsequent positions, of the various municipalities in
its membership. AMO was formally incorporated in 1990.
-1-
AMO's mandate is "to support and enhance strong effective municipal government in Ontario. It
promotes the value of the municipal level of government as a vital and essential component of
Ontario's and Canada's political system."
AMO boasts membership from over 99% of the municipalities in Ontario. Halton Region has held a
membership withAMO since 1997 and paid its 2005 membership of $6978.41 on January 11th of this
year.
AMO's role is one of advocacy and that of a research, education and policy body. The effectiveness of
AMO in representing the collective interests of municipalities to the Provincial and Federal
Governments cannot be underestimated. Through the work of staff and member task forces focused
on issues of housing, homelessness, access, brownfields, social and community services, land use
planning and pesticides to name but a few, AMO has successfully effected positive change at the
Provincial leveL Major issues addressed by AMO in 2004 included the Planning Act and OMB
reform, the Municipal Act review and continuing work on revenue-sharing and new revenue tools for
municipal governments. AMO was also instrumental in making the case for municipalities to share in
fuel tax dollars and in addition to playing a key role in developing the formula for the award of the
Provincial fuel tax money, worked with FCM to determine the distribution of the Federal fuel tax
dollars and the GST rebate.
Memorandum of Understanding
One of the most prolific achievements of AMO has been the establishment of a Memorandum of
Understanding (MOD) between the municipalities and Government of Ontario. First established in
2001 for a three-year term and then revised and signed again in 2004, the purpose of the MOD is to
ensure consultation occurs between municipalities (via AMO) and the Provincial govemment prior to
new, or proposed legislative changes being brought forward. The principle of early, two-way dialogue
ensures representation of municipal interests with the opportunity to help shape legislative or
regulatory changes that could have [mancial impact and/or affect the role or performance of
municipalities.
The provision of an MOD assists the Province in making informed decisions and members from
Halton Regional Council have and continue to serve, on the AMO Executive Council affording them
direct access several times a year to the Minister of Municipal Affairs, his cabinet colleagues and
Ministry staff. MOD meetings are held at the call of the Province and are bound by confidentiality
agreements similar to the conditions governing Cabinet meetings. The practice of confidentiality
supports open and frank discussions that allow issues to be debated in fulL
That the MOD will be enshrined in legislation through adoption in the Municipal Act. This action
further speaks to the credibility and importance of this agreement which is unique to Ontario and
positions us to stand head and shoulders ahead of other provinces.
2
Significantly, one of the conditions outlined in the new MOD is a commitment from the Province that
they can no longer claw back money for federal programs. This clause in the MOD agreement ensures
that monies from the Federal Government dedicated to municipalities, are received intact and in a
timely manner.
The presence of the MOD has resulted in positive changes to the Provincial-Municipal relationship.
In a number of areas, particularly related to human services, certain outcomes can be directly
attributable to the presence of the MOD. The annonncement of a 3% rate change in social assistance
payments was accompanied by a provision that municipalities would not be expected to cost share in
that for the first year which could have cost Halton an estimated $170,000. Distribution of the first
allocation of the Federal Early Learning and Child Care Dollars also indicated that cost sharing by
municipalities of these funds was not required which would have cost Halton an approximate $63,000.
Resolution of the pay equity issue in childcare the prior year, was done in a similar fashion avoiding
approximately $100,000 in costs to Halton.
Across the board in human services, at the various tables where provincial and municipal staff are in
attendance and consulting with each other, the MOD is often referenced as a commitment made to
municipalities, that the province is bound to and will honour. Consultation is occurring more often in
earlier stages, and unlike in the past, the requirement for municipal cost sharing is optional or phased
in over a period of time to allow for proper planning, and respect for municipal processes.
The MOD has allowed Halton to participate directly in consultations with the Province on issues
related to the Social Housing Reform Act and regulations and administration of social housing
mortgages.
Advocacy
Halton Regional Council has made clear its support for participation in bodies that seek to better serve
the interests of municipalities through collaborative efforts. The 2004-2006 Strategic Plan articulates
this position citing Halton to "Maintain strong representation on a variety of organizations at both the
elected official and staff level such as the Federation of Canadian Municipalities Association,
Association of Municipalities of Ontario, the Regional Chairs and Single Tier Mayors of Ontario,
Ontario Municipal Social Services Association and the Ontario Centre for Municipal Best Practices."
Halton supports the advocacy role of AMO through participation by elected officials and staff on
advisory task forces and in providing resources in the areas of research and policy. In addition to the
Chairman's participation on the AMO Board, AMO Executive, and serving as Chair of the AMO
Regional and Single Tier Caucus as well as the AMO Social Assistance Task Force, political
representation from Halton includes: Mayor MacIsaac as the Chair of the AMO Planning Task Force
and Mayor Mulvale, past two-term AMO President and Chair of the AMO Affordable Housing and
Homelessness Task Force. It should be noted as well, that Mayor Mulvale through her role as
President was automatically granted a seat at the FCM Board; providing yet another opportonity for
Halton's voice to be heard and in this capacity, she chaired and participated on several committees.
3
AMO's function as a Provincial advocacy body offering a unified voice to municipalities, is
comparative to the role of the Federation of Canadian Municipalities (FCM) which represents a
collective voice for municipalities on a national level, providing qualitative and quantitative data.
A key success of the FCM voice has been the negotiation of the GST rebate estimated to have saved
Halton $4.1M (2004).
FCM is also a leader in researching and publishing data most notably, their Quality of Life report series
which has been useful in illustrating Halton's enviable standard ofliving relative to other areas of the
country. Halton is represented on FCM by Councillor Joan Lougheed who participates on the
Canadian Women in Municipal Government committee and the Standing Committee on Municipal
Infrastructure and Transportation Policy. In addition, both FCM and AMO offer learning and
networking forums as well as venues whereby municipalities may engage other orders of government.
A further example of AMO's collaboration with the Provincial Government and other stakeholders is
via the Ontario Centre for Municipal Best Practices. This organization is responsible for
collaboratively developing standards for municipal performance reporting in the Province. With
AMO's support for the Centre, municipalities have access to resources that examine results from the
Municipal Performance Measurement Program and other benchmarking initiatives to publish "best
practices" that can be shared across the municipal sector. As the Centre's catalogue of "Best Practice"
reports grows, it will become a primary resource for municipalities interested in identifYing, learning
about and adopting leading "best practice" models, and show how data like that available from the
MPMP program should be appropriately used.
FTNANCTAT.!PROGRAM TMPTJCATTONS
Halton's membership in AMO was included in the 2005 budget. Continued membership in this
organization provides a value to all municipalities that would otherwise need to support this advocacy
function.
RELATTONSHTP TO THE STRATEmc PLAN
The recommendations outlined in this report are in keeping with the Region's goal outlined in the
Administration and Finance Committee Plan, theme d. Goal One stipulates "Work toward ensuring
that other orders of government strengthen their partnership with the municipal order of government";
the related action is to "Work with the Association of Municipalities of Ontario (AMO) to ensure that
the Province enshrines in legislation the Memorandum of Understanding which formally recognizes
municipalities as responsible and accountable orders of government."
-4-
Conclusion
Halton Region embraces the principles of accountability, transparency and fiscal responsibility
and delivers programs and services that ensure our residents' well-being and quality of life.
Advocating to other orders of government for changes regarding policy, program or level of
investment is integral to maintaining Halton's enviable standard of living. Halton's participation in
organizations such as AMO and FCM that fosters beneficial relationships and allows for early
dialogue on issues clearly benefits the taxpayers of this community, far exceeding membership
dues or deployment of staff resources.
Respectfully submitted,
Joyce Savoline
Regional Chairman
I]'~ \\~
,J; i. ,
L\) ~ ,tJ. . ;
Ann Mulvale
Mayor, Town of Oakville
If you have any questions on the content of this report, please contact: A.B. Marshall
Alex Fuller
Rick Cockfield
Tel. # 6230
Tel. # 6149
Tel. # 7769
-5-
MAR 09 2005 12:50 FR
Ministry of Health
and Long-Term Care
"'
Assistant Deputy Minister
Acute Services Division
5th Floor, Hepburn Block
Queen's Park
Toronto ON M7A 1R3
Telephone: (416) 327-6655
Facsimile: (416) 314-5914
MAR - 9 2005
Mr Mark MacDonald
Chief Administrative Officer
The County of Elgin
450 Sunset Drive
St. Thomas ON N5R 5V1
Dear Mr MacDonald:
TO 915196337661
P.01/01
Ministere de la Sante
et des So ins de longue duree
~ Ontario
Sous~ministre adjoint
Division des services en matiere de soins actjfs
Edifiee Hepburn, 5 ttage
Queen's Park
Toronto ON M7A lR3
Telephone: (416) 327-6655
Teleeopieur: (416) 314-5914
As in the past, the Ontario Government is once again providing special grants for replacement of
medical diagnostic and treatment equipment.
I am pleased to inform you that in 2004-05, your organization is eligible to receive a special grant of
$41,822.
This grant is intended to improve patient care by upgradi.ng and enhancing existing medical
diagnostic and treatment equipment in your land ambulance service. This will ensure that Ontario
patients receive the services they need, expect and to which they are entitled. ,
,
!
You must use the grant money for the item(s) on the request list you recently forwarded to the
Emergency Health Services Branch. Please be advised that you may change the priority order of
the items on your submitted list.
Enclosed you will find a sign-back agreement detailing the terms and conditions for accessing the
grant money. Please clearly indicate on the sign-back agreement the item(s) you will be funding
with the grant money. The sign-back agreement must be returned to Mr. Malcolm Bates. Director.
Emergency Health Services Branch, 5700 Yonge Street, 6th Floor, Toronto ON M2M 4K5 by March
16,2005.
Thank you for you participation in this important initiative.
Sincerely,
~~
Mary Kardos Burton
Assistant Deputy Minister
Acute Services Division
Encl.
c: Warden Jim Mcintyre
Larysa Andrusiak, Ambulance Administrative Co-ordinator
** TOTAL PAGE.01 **
03/14/2005 15:09
5197850544
WEST ELGIN MUNICIPAL
PAGE 01
Zirlp.~~u~alit~ nf ~~zt ~ILl
March 14,2005
County of Elgin
450 Sunset Drive
St. Thomas, ON
N5R 5V1
Attn: Sandra J. Heffren
Dear Madame:
.' .
RE: FINANCIAL SHORTFALl!; OR FARMING COMMUNITY
Please be advised that the Coun il of the Municipality of West Elgin, passed the
following resolution at their meeting held on March 10,2005:
Properly Moved and Seconded:
RESOLVED that Council of the Municipafity of West Elgin is in support of a
resolution put forth by the County of Elgin requesting the Ministers of Agriculture
for Ontario and for Canada to move swiftly to address the financial shortfall faced
by Ontario farmers.. '
DISPOSITION: Carried.
Please circulate this letter, as you feel necessary.
Yours truly,
7~_ J4~~
Norma I. Bryant, HaSA. AMCT
CleJjl<
i
I
I
22413 Hqskins Line, Box 490, ROdney, Ontario NOl 2CO Tel: (519) 785-0560 Fax: (519) 785-0644
I
03/10/2005 14:55 FAX 519 769 2837
TO~NSHIP OF SOUTHWOLD
141001
TOWNSHIP OF SOUTHWOLD
35663 Fingal Line
Fingal, ON NOL 1 KO
Phone: (519) 769-2010
Fax: (519) 769-2837
Email;southwold@twp.southwold.on.ca
March 10,2005
DELIVERED BY FAX (519) 633-7661
Mark McDonald, Chief Administrative Officer
County of Elgin
450 Sunset Drive
Sf Thomas, Ontario
N5R 5V1
Re: Resolution in support of the extraordinarily difficult economic adversity facing
Ontario's farmers
Please be advised that Council at its regular meeting on March 7, 2005 passed the
following resolution:
"THAT this Council supports the resolution passed by the Council
of the Corporation of the County of Elgin passed on March 1, 2005
regarding the extraordinarily difficult economic adversity facing
Ontario's farmers and a copy of this resolution be sent to the
County of Elgin, and Steve Peters MPP."
DisDosition: Unanimouslv Carried
~hu~~
Deriise McLeod
Deputy Clerk
Cc: Steve Peters, MPP
The Corporation of the Municipafity of Centra[ 'Efgin
450 Sunset Drive, 1 st Floor, SI. Thomas, Ontario N5R 5V1
Ph.519.631.4860 Fax 519.631.4036
March 15th, 2005
Sandra J. Heffren
Manager of Administrative Services
County of Elgin
450 Sunset Road
SI. Thomas, ON N5R 5V1
rp'""" :''''''CEIVED
" ~<.~
~, :,. .::,~.
MAR 1 6 2005
COUNTY OF ELGIN
ADMiNISTRATIVE SERVICES
Dear Ms. Heffren:
Re: Ontario's Farmers
Please be advised that Council discussed your correspondence with respect to the above
noted matter at their meeting dated Monday, March 14th, 2005 and the following resolution
was passed:
THAT: The Council of the Corporation of the Municipality of Central Elgin supports the
correspondence sent to the Honourable Andrew Mitchell, Minister of Agriculture and Agri-
Food by the County of Elgin respecting adversity facing Ontario's farmers;
AND FURTHER THAT: A copy of this resolution be forwarded to Joe Preston M.P.
CARRIED.
If you have any questions or concerns respecting this information, please do not hesitate
to contact me at the municipal office.
Yours truly,
~r~
Dianne Wilson
Deputy Clerk
c.c. Joe Preston, M.P.
r
COUNTY OF ELGIN
By-Law No. 05-10-
"BEING A BY-LAW TO ESTABLISH A POLICY FOR THE PROCUREMENT OF GOODS
AND SERVICES FOR THE CORPORATION OF THE COUNTY OF ELGIN AND TO
REPEAL BY-LAW NO. 01-11"
WHEREAS pursuant to Section 271 (1) of the Municipal Act, 2001, S.O. 2001, c.25,
as amended, a municipality shall adopt policies with respect to its procurement of goods
and services; and
WHEREAS Council did previously pass By-Law No. 01-11 which codified
standardized procedures to ensure fair and equitable practices for the procurement of all
County goods and services; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 271 (1) of the Municipal Act, 2001, S.O. 2001, c.25,
as amended, it is necessary to establish procurement procedures in accordance with
legislation.
NOW THEREFORE the Municipal Council of the Corporation of the County of Elgin
enacts as follows:
1. THAT the County of Elgin Procurement Policy, attached as Schedule "A", be and is
hereby authorized as the standard to be followed for the procurement of all goods and
services for the County of Elgin.
2. THAT By-Law No. 01-11 be and the same is hereby repealed.
3. THAT this By-Law shall come into force and take effect upon its passing.
READ a first and second time this 22nd day of March 2005.
READ a third time and finally passed this 22nd day of March 2005.
M. G. McDonald,
Chief Administrative Officer
James McI ntyre,
Warden.
'"
I
January 2005
Renewal Report
County of Elgin and
Member Municipalities
Renewal Report
Effective March 1, 2005
Manulife Policy 26407
Prepared By
Buffett Taylor & Associates Ltd.
~._.._.______._."U_..__._.~
! RECEl\lED
MAR 1 0 2DDS
I
I
.
COUi'~TY OF ELGIN
HUMAN RESOURCES
___ . __uu'____.___ '_'n_,__ ___ ..... ." ___
Charter Member,
Wellness Councils of Canada
Benefits &
Workplace Wellness
Renewal Report 2005
County of Elgin
1
Contents
Introduction........................................................ .....................................................2
What Our Renewal Analysis Entails.......................................................................3
Insured Pooled Benefits................................................................................ 5
Life Insurance............................................................................................... 5
Long Term Disability.................................................................................... 6
Experience Rated Benefit Lines - Health and Dental............................................ 7
Insured Experience Rated Benefits............................................................... 7
Weekly Indemnity....................................................................................... 10
Extended Health Care .................................................................................11
Dental.......................................................................................................... 13
Renewal Summary ............................. ....................................................... ............ 14
Wellness Workplace Solutions .............................................................................16
Human Resource Solutions ...................................................................................17
I
l
Exhibit "A": Renewal Cost Illustration
Exhibit "B": Life Insurance Demographic Illustration Table - Graph
Exhibit "D": Long Term Disability Demographics - Graph
Exhibit "E": Extended Health Care Services Paid by Benefit - Chart
Exhibit "F": Paramedical Claims Breakdown - Chart
Exhibit "G": Dental Services Paid
[
L
L
l
Prepared by Buffett Tayior & Associates Ltd
March, 2005
Renewal Report 2005
County of Elgin
2
1: Introduction
Buffett Taylor & Associates Ltd. is pleased to present our 2005/2006-renewal report for
The County of Elgin (the County") and its member municipalities. This report details our
analysis and negotiation of the renewal adjustments applicable to your employee benefit
program effective March 1, 2005. Buffett Taylor's Wellness and Human Resource
initiatives are provided at the end of this report.
This renewal represents the second report for the County in which all benefits are
renewing under one insurer. The Life, Short Term Disability (STD) and LTD transferred
to Maritime Life September 1, 2003. Since that time the rates for these benefits have
remained under a rate guarantee. This guarantee will expire March 1,2005. As you are
aware Maritime Life was purchased by Manulife, for this renewal your program is being
renewed using the Maritime methodology. We have outlined the proposed rate action
effective March 1.
A sunnnary of the premium rate adjustments initially proposed, as well as the renewal
adjustments we have been successful in negotiating, is provided below.
Proposed Renewal Negotiated Renewal
Benefit Adjustment Adjustment
Basic Life +5.1 % +5.1 %
LTD +4.5% +4.5%
Short Term Disability 0.0 0.0
Extended Health Care +7.5% +6.5%
Dental -10.0% -11.0%
We were successful in negotiating a 1 % reduction under the Health and Dental benefits.
Under your Health benefits this reduction represents $6,670 in annual savings.
Regarding the Dental our negotiations produced $3,102 in savings.
We have enclosed cost illustrations indicating the originally proposed and negotiated
renewal position. We have also included Dental illustrations illustrating renewal rates
before and after the ODA adjustments. All these reports are contained in Exhibit "A".
l
I
L
L
Renewal Report 2005
County of Elgin
The following table sunnnarizes the 4-years renewal action by benefit line.
2002 2003 2004 2005
Benefit Renewal Renewal Sept 2003* Renewal Renewal
+5.1%
No change
+4.5%
No Change
-3.0% +10.0% -1.0% +3.3% +6.5%
-8.0%+ +13.0%+ -1.0% No change + -11%+
ODA fee ODA fee ODA fee ODA fee
guide guide guide guide
mcrease mcrease mcrease mcrease
Overall +1.8% +7.4% -7.0% +3.2% +1.1%%
* September 2003 rate action is applied to the 2003 renewal rates, which were implemented
April 1, 2003
Life
AD&D
LTD
WI
EHC
Dental
-11.2%
No change
-25.0%
No change
No change
No change
+5.0%
No change
+17.5%
-3.8%
No change
No change
2: What Our Renewal Analysis Entails
The information listed below is intended to give you an overview of some of the balances
and checks Pv,.;vuued during our renewal analysis.
Accuracy of the Information - What are the facts?
Ll Paid Premiums
Ll Adjusted Premiums
Ll Pooled Premiums
Ll Paid Claims
Ll Pooled Claims
Ll Changes to Reserves
Ll Census & Demographic Change
I
!u
Soundness of the Methodology - How did you arrive at that increase?
Ll Are the calculations of trend and IBNR's reasonable
Ll How much historical experience does it make sense to consider
Ll What makes sense in the weighting of experience periods
Ll How credible is your actual experience
Ll Do the assumptions used in arriving at projected claims figures seem reasonable
Ll Do calculations make sense mathematically
L
l
L
3
"
Renewal Report 2005
County of Elgin
4
Environmental Conditions - Is there anything not being considering?
o Are there claiming patterns not being recognized
o Were there plan changes that are not being reflected in the projection of costs
o Were there errors made in adjudication or exceptions made by the policyholder
affecting claims
o Were there any unusually large claims not likely to reoccur
Competitiveness of a Carrier's Financial Factors - Can we get a better deal?
o Are the insurer's trend and IBNR factors competitive
o Are the insurer's expense levels competitive
o Are the insurer's pooling charges competitive
Opportunities for Value - What else can we have?
o If you don't have to pay it back later, an under funded rate is preferred
o Can we get more coverage for the same price
o Can we get better financial or general policy terms for the same price
o Can we get more service for the same price
o Can we get more technology for the same price
Other Areas of Concern - Are things the way they should be?
o Are all policy administration happening in accordance with the requirements
o Has anything been overlooked
I
1-
L
l
Renewal Report 2005
County of Elgin
5
3: Insured Pooled Benefits
The County's Life, AD&D and LTD benefits are underwritten on a pooled basis,
effective March 1, 2005 the 27-month rate guarantee applicable to the Life and LTD
ends. Under a pooled rating approach the actual claims experience of the County is not
taken into consideration. Claims under these benefits tend to be infrequent, unpredictable
and of a large amount. It is due to this unpredictable nature that the actual claiming trend
cannot be utilized. Rates are a product of the demographic makeup of your group, and the
insurers overall profitability of the line of business. In sunnnary the "manual" rate is the
actual rate charged.
The demographic factors that impact the final rate are as follow:
o The age of each employee
o The gender of each employee
o The volumes of insurance for each employee
o The occupations of each employee
o The industry sector
Each of these factors plays a part in calculating your final rate. For example females
have a lower Life rate than males, conversely the Long Term disability rate is lower for
males than females. The resulting demographic rate is then modified to reflect the
insurer's overall experience under their entire pools of Basic Life insurance and L TD, and
adjusted to include an element for the insurer's administrative expenses. It is only in
extreme instances where your claims level will ever impact your rate, we at Buffett
Taylor would argue strongly against the insurer against this ever occurring.
Basic Life Insurance
[
l_
I
L
l
L
The Life rate is coming off a 2-year rate guarantee effective March 1, 2005. The
generally accepted method of renewing Life benefit is to use a combination of plan
experience and a manual rate. Credibility is assigned to the plan experience, with the
level of credibility increasing the longer you, the client remain with the insurer. Due to
the volatile and unpredictable nature of Life claims an insurer requires time to determine
actual experience, so as each renewal is presented we can expect this credibility level to
increase. With the increase in credibility the Life rate becomes more of a function of
claims rather than a manual basis. For this renewal Maritime is renewing based entirely
on the manual basis. Maritime has proposed a 5% rate adjustment for the upcoming
policy period. This adjustment is due to the demographic shift of your employee
population over the past two years. We like to test the actual aging of our client's
employee population, however Maritime Life did not produce an age distribution at time
Renewal Report 2005
County of Elgin
6
I
of plan inception as a result we are unable to make a comparison. In future renewal the
aging will be verified.
There has been one death claim, benefit amount equaling $127,000. Your Life Insurance
contains a waiver of premium provision which provides that an approved, disabled
employee's Basic Life, insurance coverage may be continued, without the payment of
premium, to the earlier of age 65, or recovery from disability. The employee must meet
Maritime's definition of disability. In the event of contract termination, the liability for
approved waiver of premium claims remains with Maritime Life until the employees 65th
birthday. Currently there is also one individual on premium waiver, the amount of the
premium waiver reserve equals $9,563.
[-
Please refer to Exhibit "B" for a detailed comparison of the 2002 and 2004 demographic
composition of your group.
As a reminder, for any employee that is approved for disability benefits under your LTD
plan or from a provincial Workplace Safety & Insurance Board (WSIB) program, a
waiver of premium claim must be filed with Manulife for coverage to continue under the
Waiver of Premium provision. The time limit for this filing is 365 days from occurrence.
Long Term Disability
Long Term Disability is rated in the same manner as the Life benefit. Actual claims
experience does not significantly impact the final analysis. Like the Life, LTD is now
coming off a 2-year rate guarantee so it is logical to assume your employee group has
aged 2 years. Maritime Life did not perform a demographic rate assessment at inception
of this benefit, as a result we are unable to accurately evaluate the actual aging. We find
that a 4.5% adjustment for this benefit over a 27-month period is fair. Additional factors
that impact your rating are:
l
l
I
l
1-
o The incidence of disability claims being submitted and approved has increased.
o The nature of disabilities in today's environment are such that the duration is
longer and it is more costly for insurers to adjudicate and rehabilitate claimants
o The declining interest rate environment has negatively affected the levels of
disability reserve an insurer must establish and maintain to pay future disability
benefits.
o On average, L TD claimants are now recovering at a slower rate. This causes an
insurer's total disability claims paid to increase and requires that insurers increase
the levels of disability reserves held.
o The adjudication of Canada Pension Plan (CPP) disability benefits has become
more stringent. Consequently, privately insured disability plans are offsetting
CPP disability benefits less frequently, meaning an insurer's LTD benefit
payment is greater.
o Similar to the declining interest rate environment and worsened L TD recovery
rates, the lack of CPP benefit offsets also negatively impacts the level of an
insurer's disability reserves.
L
Renewal Report 2005
County of Elgin
7
The expected claim activity held by the insurance industry is 3 claims for every 1,000
lives insured. Over the last year, the County has incurred 5 claims, one claim remains
active. A complete sunnnary of all claims is included in the Exhibit "C".
Maritime Life is renewing your LTD rate based on their manual-rating basis, this has
produced a 4.5% adjustment.
Deluxe Travel Insurance
Maritime Life rates the Travel Benefit on a pooled basis. Employee demographics and
individual plan does not play a role in the calculation of final rates. The rates are a
product of the experience of Maritime Life's entire Emergency Travel business.
Maritime Life has proposed no rate adjustment for employees under age 65, however the
cost for employees over age 65 will be adjusted from 11.50 single, 23.00 family to 25.00
single, 50.00 family. This rate adjustment affects only those member groups with
individuals over the age of 65, included in this are: Central Elgin and Aylmer. We are
finding that many insurers are adjusting Travel rates for employees over age 65, the
reason being that this group has the highest incidence risk.
4: Insured Experience Rated Benefits
I
The Extended Health Care (EHC) and Dental benefits for The County are currently
underwritten on an experience-rated non-refund accounting basis. Under this method of
rating any financial surpluses generated by favorable experiences are not refunded,
conversely deficits are not recouped. The level of the policy claims is the determining
factor in setting rates for the upcoming policy year. In analyzing claims the most recent
claiming period is the best indicator of expected future claims, as a result the current
policy period is used for review with 100% credibility assigned to the financial results.
Claims are adjusted for expected increased in inflation and trend, in addition Maritime
Life factors in the cost of administration and premium tax.
In sunnnary the factors that determine the required renewal adjustments for these benefits
are:
I
l
o Paid Premiums and Paid Claims
o IBNR Claims Reserves (for Incurred But Not Reported claims)
o Trend Factors (for inflationary and utilization cost trends)
o Plan Administration Costs (the cost of the services provided)
Renewal Report 2005
County of Elgin
8
Plan Administration Costs
The administrative cost of The County's group insurance plan is added to the expected
incurred claims to determine the required renewal rates and premiums necessary to
adequately fund the benefit program throughout the forthcoming policy year. The
expected incurred claims, when expressed as a ratio to the anticipated renewal premium,
is typically referred to as the "Target Loss Ratio".
The total Plan Administration Costs, when expressed as a percentage of premiums, are
equal to 100% minus the Target Loss Ratio (for example: 100% of all Premiums - 80.0%
Target Loss Ratio = 20.0% Plan Administration Costs).
A higher Target Loss Ratio indicates a lower level of insurer expenses. This means a
greater portion of each premium dollar is available for the payment of claims. At Buffett
Taylor we ensure that the administration cost of the plan is the most competitive and we
provide our fmdings on this topic.
The following is an outline of administration charges for the health and dental benefit lines:
I
I Administration
I Premium tax
I Consulting Fees
I, $10,000 Pooling
, Total
HEALTH
11.66% of paid premium
2.0% of premium
1.75% of premium
3.3% of premium
18.71%
DENTAL I
11.66% of paid premium I
2.0% of premium I
1.75% of premium I
I
15.41 % II
Maritime Life initially proposed Administration cost of 12.32%. We felt these factors
were unjustified and argued against any increase in charges. We were successful in
reducing the charges to their former level 11.66%. This reduction in Admin charges
represents approximately $5,370 in direct savings. We will continue to monitor these
charges and argue with the insurer when we feel they are unjustified.
I
lu
The Target Loss Ratios (excluding pooling charges) applied to this year's renewal rate
setting are:
I
l
L
l
Extended Health Care
Dental Care
84.6%
84.6%
The makeup of the Elgin umbrella plan requires administration charges that are slightly
higher than what is considered normal for the level of premium. The reason for this is
your number of separate billing divisions. Given the complexity of this case additional
administration on the part of Maritime Life is required. With this increase in
Renewal Report 2005
County of Elgin
9
I
administration is a corresponding increase in charges. We do feel all charges are within
reason. The individual municipalities are unable to obtain charges this low on their own.
The overall plan is definitely a benefit to all participants.
Pooling Costs
In your 2002 renewal the Stop Loss charge was introduced. This charge is designed as
pure insurance to cover large catastrophic claims in excess of $10,000. At Buffett
Taylor we ensure all our clients have some form of large claim pooling, the intent is to
reduce risk exposure. With the introduction of new and more expensive drugs it is not
uncommon to find large drug amounts of $20,000 - $25,000 being charged to the plan.
These charges can present a financial burden to any size account especially since many
times the nature of these claims is ongoing. The charge for this pooling is currently 3.3%
and is consistent with similar charges from other insurers.
In addition to the large claim pooling, the Health rates indicated include pooling from
flIst dollar for all Out of Canada claims. The cost for this is $1.50 single, $3.00 family
for active employees, $25.00 single, $50.00 family for retirees. The charge for retirees is
increasing from $11.50 single, $23,00 family. We are seeing insurers increasing retiree
travel charges on many groups. The claim incidence among retiree groups is higher than
active and is therefore reflected in the rate.
Reserve Adjustments
Reserves are established in order to protect the carrier from the potential liability of
incurred but not reported claims (IBNRs), in case of cancellation of the policy. Insurance
companies are required to establish this fund to cover claims that have been incurred but
not sent to the carrier. This fund primarily pays claims in the event of policy termination,
where premium is not paid but claims incurred prior to termination continue to be
submitted. The level of reserves varies slightly between insurers, however this difference
is rarely more than 1.5%. The reserve requirements are as follow:
I
1_
[
l
Health 8% annual claims
Dental 8.5% annual claims
It is important to understand that only the change in the reserve is factored into each
year's renewal. These factors are competitive in the marketplace, and are in line with
other insurance companies.
l
l
Renewal Report 2005
County of Elgin
Inflation / Trend / Utilization Factors
Government cuts to health care, an ever-aging population and the development and use of
newer more costly medications all contribute to the rising cost of health care in North
America. Insurers will adjust your claims experience to reflect expected inflation for the
upcoming year. This factor normally incorporates both the trend (pattern of claiming)
and utilization (frequency of claiming) for a particular benefit. Coupled with increases in
claiming patterns, we also have delisting of services by ORIP. Recent delisting includes
removal of coverage for Chiropractic treatment and eye exams.
Typically, inflation/trend factors are expressed as a percentage (%) of your annual
premium. Similar to your administration charges, these factors differ between actual
benefits for example trend is lower for Dental than Health. Manulife has included an
additional 3% for the OHIP service delisting this has increased the factor for this year
only. We find the inflation factors applied to your renewal analysis to be slightly higher
than expected.. Your inflation/trend factors applied in the renewal analysis are as follow:
Health
17.36%
Dental
5.8% plus ODA adjustment, Current 4%, current less lyr4%
Current less 2 years 3.3 %
These factors are based on a l2-month period. The experience period under analysis
ended October 2004, your renewal rates become effective March 2005, therefore 16-
months inflation must be factored into the equation. The applicable factor for 16 months
is 23.2% for Health, 7.7% applicable to Dental.
Examples of why plan costs are anticipated to increase are:
I
I
I
[
l
1-
o New and/or more expensive drug therapies;
o The de-listing of services provided under provincial health insurance plans;
o Legislative changes affecting group benefits programs;
o An aging population; more people using more services particularly evident with
Chiropractor and Massage
o Annual increases in the provincial Dental Associations' Fee Guides;
o Increases in utilization of services under group benefit plans (e.g. drug and
paramedical services under EHC and periodontal services under Dental).
Weekly Indemnity
Exhibit "D" contains both Weekly Indemnity and L TD claim listings. This benefit is now at the
end of a 2-year rate guarantee. Maritime Life is renewing based on the manual rate. We
disagree with the approach of renewing on a manual rate basis. For an account of this size we
feel rates should be based on experienced, and approached Maritime and argued this point
however they were reluctant to change their approach. Your 2006 renewal rates will be based
on actual "loimo experience.
I
I
10
,=
I;;
j
Renewal Report 2005
County of Elgin
11
The period under review is November 1,2003 through October 31, 2004. The plan results for
this period are as follow:
Paid Premium
Paid Claims
Reserve Change 20% annual premium
Anticipated Claims
$92,828
57,798
30,523
88,321
Anticipated claims total $88,321, current paid premium totals $ 92,828 comparing these two
numbers we feel rates should be reduced 5%. Manulife has renewed based on the manual rate,
and proposed no change. We understand that Weekly Indemnity is a volatile benefit subject to
wide swings in claims, and realize this is the reason Maritime is renewing at the manual rate.
We have been told that next two years experience will be used to calculate rate. We will be
reviewing the renewal approach next year to ensure it's faimess. If experience remains
acceptable, at next renewal we will be lobbying for rate action that conforms to our analysis.
Extended Health Care
We have included a sunnnary of the past three years. From this we can see that your plan
experience has been good, with an incurred loss ratio never exceeding 73%.
Period
Nov Ol-Oct 02
Nov 02-0ct 03
Nov 03-0ct 04
Premium
540,705
610,271
680,813
Paid Claims
395,844
436,898
481,512
Loss Ratio
73%
71.5%
71%
I
I.
As illustrated the plan experience has remained relatively consistent 71-73%. At last renewal it
was determined a 5% rate adjustment was necessary to ensure premiums were sufficient to cover
the expected claims and administration. We now have the advantage being able to retroactively
assess how this renewal action impacted plan experience and compare to this year's proposed
action. Paid claims in comparison to premium last year produced a 68% loss ratio. With the 5%
implemented we frnd that this year paid claims are 70% of premium the increase has maintained
the plan in a healthy position. With the slight increase in this year's loss ratio the required rate
adjustment is now 7.5% this is consistent with last years rate action as determined by your
insurers factors.
I;;
l_
I
L_
In reviewing the benefit program one year of premium and claims is used in the analysis. The
intent is to establish rates that are sufficient to cover expected future claims and administration.
The most recent claiming period is the best indicator of future claims, and as such Maritime
utilizes, the most recent policy year claims and premiums. Claims are adjusted to include
changes in the reserve requirements, and expected increases due to inflation and trend.
I
[
Renewal Report 2005
County of Elgin
12
Outlined below is an illustration of our cost projection:
The period under review is November 1,2003 through October 31, 2004. The plan results for
this period are as follow:
Adjusted Experience Rated Premium
$ 688,009
Paid Claims
Less Pooled Claims
Reserve Change
Anticipated Claims adjusted for 20% inflation
481,512
-848
3,501
580,998
Claims adjusted for 15.41 % administration
And 3.3% pooling charge
This produces the required premium
714,722
Current paid premium totals $ 688,009 therefore we feel rates must be increased 4%, Maritime
Life proposed a 7.5% adjustment the difference is due to our view of the inflation factor. We
feel that actual inflation/trend is lower than projected by your insurer. We discussed our
approach with Maritime Life and convinced them to reduce the adjustment to +6.5%.
As outlined total claims for this renewal period equal $481,512 and represent a 10% increase
over last year. Actual paid premium increased 11.5%, however rates were adjusted 5% at last
renewal this explains part of the premium increase. The actual number of insured lives has
increased 2% this year, from 364 to 372. The difference in the increased premium can be
possibly explained by a change in the single, family enrollment compositions.
Exhibit "E" contains a breakdown of paid claims by benefit. As expected, drugs make up the
largest benefit component, this is consistent with other clients. Total dollar cost equals $369,884
89% of overall cost. Health services and equipment comprise $45,740 11 % of costs, Vision 10%
at $41,000 and Hospital 6% with total claims $25,085.
[
L
Addressing Health benefits in isolation we fmd that Orthotics make up the largest benefit
component with $19,000 in claims. It should be noted that insurers have determined abuse on
the part of providers in this benefit is growing. We have included a breakdown of paid benefits
for each municipality group. Orthotics average bout 5% of total health claims, this is very low in
comparison to our other clients. At present there is no abuse within your plan. To reduce your
risk and limit any potential abuse you may wish to consider implementing plan changes. Your
plan currently pays for custom-moulded orthotics fabricated using raw materials, when
prescribed by a Physician, Podiatrist or Chiropodist, to a maximum of 2 pairs annually. Properly
made foot Orthotics will last 5 years, and the need for 2 pairs each year can be considered
excessive. Consideration may be given to including a maximum of 2 pairs every 5 years, or
including a maximum benefit of $375 annually. While there is no large immediate savings in
your rate basis for these changes, the cost savings will materialize over time in the form of
reduced claims and a lower required premium
[
L
l_
_1111_1 ,11111
Renewal Report 2005
County of Elgin
13
All remaining benefit components are within expected norms for claiming patterns and amounts.
Extended Health Care Pooling
Manulife charges a separate rates for pooling of catastrophic claims as indicated in the rate
exhibits. All Drugs claims per individual in excess of $10,000 are removed from the plan
experience. This year $848 drug claims exceeded the 10,000 pooling limit, and were removed
from your plan experience. In addition all Out of Canada, Private Duty Nursing and Accidental
Dental claims are fully pooled from first dollar. Manulife is not adjusting the cost for this
pooling, it will remain at 3.3% of premium.
In addition to large amount pooling all Out of Canada claims are pooled from first dollar. The
cost for this is $1.50 single, $3.00 family for active employees, $25.00 single, $50.00 family for
retirees. These charges have not changed from last year.
Dental
Your Dental benefit is renewal on the same basis as the Health. One year financial results are
used and assigned 100% credibility, again given the size of your group we agree with this
approach, as it is a standard among our clients similar in size to you. Dental claims in
comparison to Health tend to be more consistent from year to year and therefore future claim
levels are more easily predicted. Like the Health the most recent year of experience is used to
predict future claim levels.
I
-
'I
A trend of 7.7% has been applied to the plan experience, we feel that trend of 5% is more
appropriate and common among the insurers that we deal with. In addition to the 7.7%
utilization trend Manulife is factoring in the cost for the increase in the ODA schedule. This cost
increase varies by each municipality in relation to the schedule in place. The following are the
applicable charges:
Current ODA +4.0%
Current less one-year +4.0%
Current less 2 years +3.3%
[
L
l
I
I
l
I
L_
L
-
Renewal Report 2005
14
County of Elgin
Outlined below is an illustration of our cost projection:
The period under review is November 1, 2003 through October 31, 2004. The plan results for
this period are as follow:
Adjusted Experience Rated Premium
$ 291,665
Paid Claims
Reserve Change
Anticipated Claims adjusted for 5.5% utilization
201,460
11
212,551
Claims adjusted for 15.41 % administration
This produces the required premium
251,273
Current paid premium totals $ 291,665 therefore we feel rates must be reduced 14%. Maritime
has proposed a 10% reduction to the rate basis. Upon further negotiations with Maritime rates
were reduced 11 %. The difference in our final results is our interpretation of what the actual
Dental trend is, Maritime feels 7.7% is correct we feel 5.5% is a1'l-'Wl'~;ate.
Outlined below is The County's three years experience history:
Period
Nov 01-0ct 02
Nov 02-0ct 03
Nov 03-0ct 04
Loss Ratio
85.2%
83.8%
69.2%
Premium
200,175
238,042
288,449
Paid Claims
170,485
199,586
199,711
As illustrated the Dental plan experience has improved this past year. While claims have not
increased in dollar amount, it is the 21 % increase in premium that contributed to the improved
performance. Last year's renewal required no adjustment to the rate basis based on plan
experience, rates were increased an average 3.2% for the fee guide change. Actual current
monthly premium totals $25,926 based on current census, last year the projected premium
equaled $22,390 (including fee adjustment). The difference in premium can be explained by an
increase in employees from 330 to 340 a change in the single family composition and rate
increases as a result of improved plan designs. What these numbers tell us is that your group has
actually experienced a reduction in claiming patterns or negative utilization.
Exhibit "F" contains a breakdown of Dental claims by service. There is nothing abnormal with
this distribution. On the surface Major Restorative may appear to be low, however not all
member municipalities have access to this benefit.
Renewal Report 2005
County of Elgin
15
We recommend that the County of Elgin continue to insure its member municipalities
with Maritime Life. All participants of this consortium program share in reduced
administration expense levels. These expenses are not available to the plan members on
a stand-alone basis, as such the total cost of providing the benefit plan is maintained at
the lowest level possible.
We do not suggest any major plan design changes, however as explained in this report
consideration may be given to reducing exposure under the Orthotics benefit. We will
continue to monitor all benefits to ensure no emerging abuse.
We have provided an Executive Sunnnary of this report for submission to Council for
approval.
Renewal Report 2005
County of Elgin
16
6: Wellness & Workplace Solutions
Worksite Wellness
Traditional health programs have focused on minimizing and managing employee ilIness or
injury reactively. More recently, researchers have focused on the power of worksite health
promotion as an effective method to enhance employee health and well-being. Worksite
Wellness is a term that refers to a proactive and preventative approach to employee health that is
woven into the organizational culture. The integration of this concept influences employees to
take charge of their own lifestyle and health determinants through positive behavioural change.
What To Consider
We urge you to take a few minutes to think about the health-related issues your employees are
facing today and are likely to face tomorrow. Consider how these health-related issues may
affect your productivity levels and ultimately your bottom line:
o Rising Disability Costs
o Increasing Employee Accidents
o Employee Stress/Depression Issues
o Increasing Employee Absenteeism
o Employee Attraction and Retention Issues
o Changing Employee Demographics
o Increasing Drug Costs and Utilization
o Substance Abuse
o Aging Workforce
o Increasing Employee ll1ness Trends
Studies have confirmed that healthy employees working in positive work enviromnents
experience less absenteeism, fewer short-term disability claims and fewer worker compensation
claims. Good health also enhances productivity, as vital and energized employees can give more
to their jobs and have a greater sense of well-being. As well, organizations that reduce the health
risks of their workforce reduce their overall health and disability costs.
I
, -
Our Approach
Our Wellness Consultants work in partnership with clients in order to review the specific health
issues faced by their employees and their families. We gather a wide variety of data for analysis
including benefits information and occupational health indicators. Our experience with this
process, coupled with our familiarity with general population health trends, allows us to advise
and customize the most cost-effective health promotion strategies for your organization. Once a
partnership has been developed, we will work together to design a comprehensive wellness plan
based on identified issues and detailed data analysis. We implement and evaluate proven health
measures to ensure you are satisfied with your return on this valuable employee investment.
Overwhelmingly, current research continues to support our view that time and time again, well
designed and implemented wellness initiatives are dollars well spent.
For further information on our wide array of employee wellness initiatives and "Building
WelIness" for your organization please contact us.
Renewal Report 2005
County of Elgin
171
. .
.
Human Capital
Without a committed and productive workforce, the success of all types of organizations is at
risk. At Buffett Taylor & Associates, we recognize the importance of human capital to your
business success and strive to offer integrated services that:
o Reduce your overall labour costs
o Enhance the effectiveness of your workforce/workplace
o Provide "early detection" mechanisms to ensure employee issues are managed before
they possibly become major barriers to the success of your organization
What We Do
Based on a solid understanding of your operating environment, our Human Resource Consultants
review both broad and/or targeted workforce processes and systems. We then identifY cost-
effective strategies to ensure your staff can meet current and projected business demands.
Our Approach
We gather a variety of internal and extemal data to support our recommended approaches and
benchmark company results with your industry sector and "best practices". We strive to
understand your working environment to ensure that after careful diagnostic review, you embark
on customized initiatives that will result in long-term savings and enhancements to your "bottom
line." Seasoned in both private and public sector environments, our staff offer a variety of
approaches to our service delivery including partnering with your existing internal human
resource staff and/or providing direct human resource service provision to your management
team and employees.
Our Solutions
We offer a wide variety of human resource solutions and pride ourselves on our depth of
specialty in the following areas:
o Innovative and Comprehensive Attendance Management/Absenteeism Initiatives
o Innovative Human Resource Policy Development
o Strategic Human Resource Consulting Services
o Organizational Health Initiatives
o Winning Recruitment/Retention programs
L
,
l
Buffett Taylor & Associates can develop and/or assist organizations with any and all of these
important issues.
I
,
In
For further information about our various Human Resource solutions for your organization
please contact us.
IIIII
Renewal Report 2005
County of Elgin
18
MEMBER POLICY LISTING
1069 Central Elgin Union
1353 Central Elgin Non-Union
1439 Bayham
1551 Bobier Villa
1898 Malahide
19267 Dutton/Dunwich
2668 Aylmer
74180 Aylmer Full Time Employees
5541 Elgin County Elgin Manor
74181 Elgin County Non-Union
74182 Elgin County Roads
74183 Elgin County CUPE
74184 Elgin County ONA
74185 Elgin County Terrace Lodge
I 7052 Southwold
I
l
L
L
,COUNTY OF RU:;JN & MEMBER MUNICJPAJ.JTY __ PRRi\IJJJM AND CLAfMS RXPERJRNCE BY GROn~
Combined Combined
MHritime J,ife Nllvember 2003 _ O('tf\~~r ~~n4
ERC ERC Semi-Private Semi-Private Dental Dental Combined Combined Combined
~ 9!i!!!! Premium Claims Premium Claims Preminm Claims Ratio
1069 Central Elgin Union $47,251 $55,585 $8.015 $1,755 $24.030 $11,966 $79.296
1353 Central Elgin non-union $37,221 $20,677 $5,177 $0 $25,509 $10,700 $67,907
2668 Aylmer $30,270 $30,213 $3,907 $3.965 $12,430 $17,164 $46,607 $51,342
74180 Aylmer $32,998 $30,050 $4,702 $0 $13,996 $15.573 $51,696 $45.623
1551 Bobier Villa $40,707 $36,320 $0 $0 $19.661 $15,075 $60,368 $51,395
5541 County" Elgin Manor $66,186 $43,972 $12,196 $400 $42,746 $24,258 $121.128 $68,630
74181 County - Non-Union $117,034 $88,476 $19,663 $9,860 $33,299 $24,432 $169,996 $122,768
74182 County" Roads $419 $263 $0 $0 $0 $0 $419 $263
74183 County - CUPE $6,727 $1,595 $1,229 $0 $3,389 $2,623 $11,345 $4,218
74184 County - DNA $16,095 $11,984 $3,174 $600 $8.914 $8,424 $28,183 $21,008
74185 County - Terrace Lodge $74.857 $39.303 $13,343 $1,390 $45.681 $24,004 $133,881 $64,697
IOVERALL TOTA.LS COMBINED,
'~IEMIlER MUNICIP A.LITY,TOTA.I',
,--
I
,-
COUNTY OF ELGIN IIMBRELLA PLAN
SUMMARY.OF J-fEAl TH CLAIMS'" November 20QO'. October '2001 ' 'November 2001 - October 2002, " November 2002 ~ O~tober 2003 ' "November 290'3 . Oct~ber 29,Q4"
Total Paid , :Total Paid: ,Total Paid' 'Total p~id '
, "', ,#over' Saver ' , Claims'fo~all # over $:ov~r , C1a1rt:ls for all ' ,#,Qver $ over , ,Clail1ls for all # over:, ,$ over,:: , , Clahl'ls'for
'~iar:nEl: Marlti,:"e:~ '$1,090 $1,O~O Iive~ $1,900 $1,QOO ,jiv~s' $1,000 , $~.OOO, : Iiv~s", : $1,0.0 ' $j',.P,O ' all:Uv~s'::'
Central Elgin (Port Stanley) 1069 7 $22,337 $30,041 11 $34,759 $41,561 12 $39,937 $48,219 16 $25,869 $50,349
Central Elgin 1353 7 $11,595 $16,409 4 $5,828 $14,542 6 $9,369 $15,100 4 $2,241 $13,330
Bayham 1439 4 $6,425 $10,476 5 $12,665 $17,884 8 $15,741 $18,921 3 $5,084 $15,958
Bobier Villa (County of Elgin) 1551 9 $20,722 $29,882 2 $23,660 $28,713 13 $33,861 $39,828 12 $8,838 $31,578
Malahide 1898 9 $27,210 $32,693 9 $34,209 $38,037 12 $30,613 $33,149 8 $14,448 $27,642
Dutton/Dunwich 19267 6 $17,900 $20,742 9 $24,010 $28,032 8 $23,149 $26,897 11 $10,770 $28,214
Alymer 2668 9 $27,210 $31,087 9 $16,630 $20,947 9 $20,135 $24,785 8 $6,620 $30,446
Aylmer 74180 10 $15,503 $21,486 14 $29,594 $32,434 9 $18,648 $24,996 6 $7,505 $23,812
County of Elgin 5541 15 $24,871 $39,429 11 $23,741 $33,780 17 $29,482 $37,868 13 $9,295 $34,923
County of Elgin 74181 14 $30,503 $43,622 16 $37,484 $52,433 20 $48,979 $68,498 26 $28,545 $84,501
County of Elgin 74182 3 $4,688 $6,038 4 $7,115 $8,347 3 $5,054 $6,825 0 $0 $0
County of Elgin 74183 0 $0 $2,470 1 $1,153 $3,861 2 $2,665 $3,950 0 $0 $0
County of Elgm 74184 2 $4,264 $9,245 4 $8,613 $10,831 3 $4,646 $9,917 3 $1,956 $9,254
County of Elgm 74185 6 $10,767 $21,397 14 $33,553 $34,519 15 $30,475 $44,799 10 $8,360 $31,137
Southwold 7052 I $10103 $15683 ~ $15813 $20 250 ~ $16946 $20 752 I $5319 $19668
'i>A)lNO TOTALS 108 , ,$234,0$,8.. $3~~,7Q~ 122 $308,827' $386,171 146, S'329,7QO $424,505 ' 127, ~134,860' $400,8!2
: .. " "
"
"" ' ..
, ',', " ..
' ,
TOTALS FOR OOUNTY OF ELGIN 49, $95,815' $162,084, 0 52' $135,319 ':$172,484' 0 73 , $155,161, $211',686 ' 64 ' $56,994 $191;393
:TOTI\\-$ FOR OT~~R GROUT'S ,~ $122.779 Sa'57.131 Q ~ $1'43.914 ,$181.253 ,0, ~ ' $155,890 5187.824 .. ,g, '$70.361'::, $185,8,0'"
: 98 ,$218,5~5' , $309,215 ' 0 108, $279,233 $;153,737 ii 137 $311.052 , $39~,5,09 121, ,$127,345' $377,00Q'
.J
Renewal Report 2005
County of Elgin
I
II
I
EXHIBIT" A"
RATE ILLUSTRATIONS
Maritime Life 2005
Benefit Pre-Renewal Renewal Premium
Health $696,731 $742,317
Travel $12,240 $13,698
Dental $309,365 $286,182
NOTE:
t. Above premium totals exclude applicable taxes.
2. Above premium totals include experience rated benefits only
Pre-Renewal Z005 Renewal Rates
Policy Group Code Coveraae Lives - Premium Rate Premium %Chanl:ll'!
1069 Central Elgin Q Travel 5 5 $150 '8 $1.50 sa 0.0%
Union 18 F $3.00 $5' $3.00 $54 0.0%
1069 Central Elgin y Retiree Travel 0 $1150 $0 $1150 '0 0.0%
0 $23.00 $0 $23.00 $0 0.0%
1353 Central Elgin Y Travel 2 5 $150 S3 5150 $3 0.0%
non-union 18 F $3.00 $54 53.00 $5' 0.0%
1353 Central Elgin Z Retiree Travel 5 $11.50 '0 $25.00 $0 1174%
F $23.00 $23 $50.00 $50 1174%
1439 Bayham Z Travel 1 5 $150 $2 $1,,50 '2 00%
16 F $3.00 $48 $3.00 $48 0.0%
1439 Bayham M Retiree Travel 1 5 $11.50 $12 $2500 '25 117.4%
0 F $23.00 '0 $50.00 $0 117.4%
1551 Bobier Z Travel 6 5 $1.50 $9 $150 $9 0.0%
2' F $3.00 $72 $3.00 $72 0.0%
1898 Malahide Z Travel 1 5 $1.50 $2 $1.50 $2 0.0%
19 F $3.00 $57 $3.00 $57 0.0%
1898 Malahide K Travel 0 5 $1,,50 $0 $150 '0 0.0%
0 F $3.00 $0 $3.00 $0 0.0%
19267 DutlonlDunwich Z Travel 3 5 5150 $5 $150 $5 0.0%
" F $3.00 542 $3.00 $42 0.0%
2668 Aylmer Z Travel 0 5 $1.50 $0 $1.50 SO 0.0%
" F $3.00 $42 $3.00 $42 0.0%
2668 Aylmer Y Retiree Travel 1 5 $1150 $12 $25.00 $25 1174%
2 F $23.00 '46 $50.00 $100 117.4%
74180 Aylmer Y RelireeTravel 1 5 $11.50 $12 $25.00 $25 1174%
0 F $23.00 $0 $50.00 $0 1174%
74180 Aylmer Z Public Works Travel 1 5 $1.50 $2 $150 $2 0.0%
8 F $3.00 $2' $3.00 $24 0.0%
5541 County of Elgin Z Travel 7 5 $150 $11 $150 $11 0.0%
37 F $300 5111 $3.00 $111 0.0%
74181 County of Elgin Z Travel-Non-union 3 5 $1.50 $5 5150 $5 0.0%
46 F 53.00 $138 $300 $138 0.0%
74181 County of Elgin V Travel-Non-unionRetirees 0 5 $11.50 $0 $25.00 SO 1174%
0 F $23.00 $0 $50.00 SO 117.4%
74183 County of Elgin Z Travel- CUPE 0 5 $1.50 SO $1.50 '0 0.0%
, F $3.00 $12 $3.00 $12 0.0%
74184 County of Elgin Z Travel-DNA , 5 $150 $5 $1.50 $6 0.0%
7 F $3.00 $21 $3.00 $21 0.0%
74185 County of Elgin Z Travel-Terrace Lodge 6 5 $150 '9 $150 $9 0.0%
44 F $3.00 5132 $3.00 $132 0.0%
7052 Southwold Z Travel 0 5 $1.50 SO $1.50 $0 0.0%
17 F $3.00 551 53.00 $51 0.0%
NOTE:
1. Lives taken from Maritime Life renewal report
Z.RatesandpremiumexcludeappJicabletaxes
1069
1069
1069
1353
1353
1353
1353
1439
1439
1439
1439
1439
1551
1898
1898
1898
1898
1898
19267
I
l
19267
2668
2668
1-
L
1-
L
Policv
Code
Coveraae
A
Hospital
M
OtherEHC
K
OtherEHC
A
Hospital
E
OtherEHC
G
OlherEHC
M
EHC
A
Hospftal
E
OtherEHC
G
OtherEHC
OtherEHC
Hospital
E
AIIEHC
A
Hospital-Malahide
E
EHC-Malahide
F
EHC-Malahide-Seasonal
G
EHC - S. Dorchester
Hospltal-S. Dorchester
A
Hospital
E
EHC
A
Hospital
G
EHC
Lives
6
25
4
18
2
7
2
17
o
2
o
o
2
17
o
15
o
7
o
8
1
o
1
o
6
23
1
8
1
8
1
o
o
11
o
12
3
14
3
15
1
16
1
16
S
F
$1199
$23.89
Pre.Renewal
Rate Premium
7194
597.25
S
F
$50.29
$144.27
S
F
$51.52
$147.63
S
F
$1199
$23.89
S
F
$54.24
$154.87
S
F
$52.58
$150,19
S
F
$55.75
$158.90
S
F
$1199
$23.89
S
F
$56.64
$156.22
S
F
$41.22
$113.88
S
F
$5455
$15177
S
F
$1199
$23.89
S
F
$54.41
$146.68
S
F
$1199
$23,89
S
F
$52.16
$148.98
S
F
$4157
$118.78
S
F
$51.84
$148.12
S
F
$1199
$2389
S
F
$1199
$23.89
S
F
$5735
$163.06
S
F
$9.98
$19.95
S
F
$56.12
$155.85
201.16
2.59686
103.04
1033.41
23.98
406.13
0.00
309.74
0.00
0.00
111.50
2.701.30
0,00
358.35
0.00
1,093.54
0.00
911.04
5455
0.00
1199
0.00
326.46
3,373.64
1199
19112
52.16
119184
4157
0.00
0.00
1,629.32
0.00
286.68
35.97
334.46
172.05
2,445.90
9.98
319.20
56.12
2,493.60
$12.89
$25.68
2005 Proposed Renewal
~ Premium % Chanae
7.5%
75%
$54.06
$155.09
$55.38
$158.70
$12.89
$25.68
$58.31
$166.49
$56.52
$16145
$59.93
$170.82
$1289
$25.68
$60.89
$167.94
$44.31
$12242
$58.64
$163.15
$1289
$25.68
$58.49
$157.68
$12.89
$25.68
$56.07
$160,15
$44.69
$12769
$55.73
$159.23
$12.89
$25.68
$12.89
$25.68
$61.65
$175.29
$10.73
$21.45
$60.33
$167,,54
77.34
642.00
216.24
2.791.62
110.77
1.110.90
25.78
436.56
0.00
33298
119.86
2.903.94
0.00
385.20
0.00
1,175.58
000
979.36
58.64
0.00
12.89
0,00
350.94
3,626.64
12.89
205.44
56.07
1.281.20
44.69
0.00
0.00
1.751.53
0.00
308.16
38.67
359.52
184.95
2.629.35
10.73
343.20
60.33
2.680.64
7.5%
75%
75%
7,5%
75%
7.5%
75%
75%
0.00
0.00
75%
75%
75%
75%
7.5%
75%
75%
7.5%
75%
7.5%
7..5%
7.5%
7,,5%
7.,5%
7.5%
75%
7.,5%
7.5%
75%
75%
75%
75%
75%
7.5%
75%
7.5%
7.5%
7.5%
7,,5%
7.5%
75%
7.5%
7.5%
75%
2005 Negotiated Renewal
Rate Premium % Ch:mcre
$12.78 76.68 6.6%
$25.47 636.75 66%
$53.61 214.44 6.6%
$153.79 2.768.22 6.6%
$54.,92 109.84 6.6%
$157.37 1,101.59 6.6%
$1278 25.56 6.6%
$25.,47 432,.99 6.6%
$57. 82 0.00 6.6%
$16509 330.18 6.6%
$5605 000 6.6%
$160.10 0.00 6.6%
$59.43 118.86 6.6%
$169.39 2.879.63 6.6%
$12.78 0.00 6.6%
$25.47 382.05 6.6%
$60.38 0.00 6.6%
$166.53 1.165.71 6.6%
$43.94 0.00 6.6%
$117.D9 936.72 28%
$58.15
$16179
58.15 6.6%
0.00 6.6%
$12..78
$25.47
12..78 6.6%
0.00 6.6%
$58.00 348.00 6.6%
$15636 3,59628 6.6%
$1278 1278 6.6%
$25.47 203.76 6.6%
$55.60 55.60 6.6%
$158.81 1.270.48 6.6%
$44.31 44.31 6.6%
$126.62 0.00 6.6%
$55.26 0.00 6.6%
$157.90 1.736.90 6.6%
$1278
$25.47
0.00
305.64
6.6%
6.6%
$12.78 38.34 6.6%
$2547 35658 6.6%
$61 14 183.42 6.6%
$173.82 2,60730 6.6%
$10.64 10.64
$21..27 340.32
6.6%
6.6%
$59.82 59.82
$166.14 2,658.24
6.6%
6.6%
Pre-Renewal 2005 Proposed Renewal 2005 Negotiated Renewal
Policv ~ Coveraae ~ ~ Premium Rate Premium %Cha'!Ol:' ~ ~ %Cha,!oe
74180 A Hospltal-PublicWorks 2 S $9.98 19.96 $10.73 2146 75% $10.64 21.28 6.6%
21 F $19.95 418.95 $21.45 450.45 7,,5% $21.27 446.67 6.6%
74180 E EHC - Public Works 2 S $50.92 101.84 $54.74 109.48 7.5% $54.28 108.56 6.6%
19 F $141.34 2.685.46 $15194 2.886.86 75% $150.67 2.862.73 6.6%
5541 E EHC ,Elgin Manor 7 S $51.20 358.40 $55.04 385.28 7.5% $54.58 382.06 6.6%
37 F $145.98 5,401..26 $156.93 5,806.41 75% $155.61 5.75757 6.6%
5541 S Hospital 7 S $1199 83.93 $12.89 90.23 75% $12.78 89.46 6.6%
37 F $23.89 883.93 $25.68 950.16 75% $25.47 942,,39 6.6%
74181 E EHC-Nonunion 6 S $54.51 327.06 $58.60 35160 75% $58.11 348.66 6_6%
62 F $155.84 9,662.08 $16753 10.386.86 7.5% $166.13 10,300.06 6.6%
74181 S Hospital-Nonunion 5 S $1199 59.95 $12.89 64.45 7.5% $1278 63.90 6.6%
62 F $23.89 1,481.18 $25.68 159216 75% $25.47 1.579.14 6.6%
74183 E EHC - CUPE 0 S $49.59 0.00 $53.31 0.00 75% $52.86 0.00 6.6%
4 F $141.66 566.64 $152.28 609.12 7.5% $151.01 604.04 6.6%
74183 S Hospital - CUPE 0 S $1199 0.00 $1289 0.00 7.5% $12.78 0.00 6.6%
4 F $23.89 95.56 $25.68 10272 75% $25.47 10188 6.6%
74184 E EHC - DNA 4 S $50.13 200.52 $53.89 215.56 75% $53.44 21376 6.6%
7 F $143.31 1.003.17 $154.06 1,078.42 75% $152.77 1,069.39 6.6%
74184 S Hospital-DNA 4 $11.99 4796 $12.89 51.56 7.5% $1278 5112 6.6%
7 $23.89 167.23 $25.68 179_76 75% $25.47 178.29 6.6%
74185 E EHC-TerraceLodge 6 S $5195 311.70 $55.85 33510 75% $55.38 332.28 6.6%
43 F $14797 6,36271 $159.07 6,840.01 7.5% $15774 6,782..82 6.6%
74185 S Hospital 6 S $11.99 71.94 $12.89 77 34 7.5% $12.78 76.68 6.6%
43 F $23.89 1,027.27 $25.68 1,104.24 75% $25.47 1.095.21 6.6%
7052 A Hospital 0 S $1199 000 $1289 0.00 75% $1278 0.00 6.6%
17 F $23.89 406.13 $25.68 436.56 7.5% $25.47 432.99 6.6%
7052 E Other - EHC 0 S $45.39 0.00 $48.79 0.00 7.5% $48.39 0.00 6.6%
3 F $130.91 392.73 $140.73 42219 75% $139.55 418.65 6.6%
7052 G EHe 0 S $48.24 0.00 $51..86 0.00 7.5% $51.42 0.00 6.6%
17 F $139.15 2,365.55 $149.59 2,543.03 7.5% $148.33 2,52161 6.6%
l
1069
1353
1353
1439
1439
1439
1551
1898
1898
19267
2668
74180
5541
74181
74183
74184
74185
7052
Policv
Grouo
Code
Covera{Je
Lives
5
18
2
19
o
8
o
o
6
23
1
8
o
10
3
14
o
14
2
21
7
37
4
44
o
4
4
7
6
43
o
20
Pre-Renewal
Rate Premium
S
F
$45.81
$99.15
$206
$1,713
$55
$1250
$321
$3,670
$119
$2,826
$265
$4,100
$0
$1,490
2005 Renewal Rates
Rate Premium % Chanoe
$229
$1.785
$101
$2,084
$41.23
$89.24
$45,,32
$98,,71
$206
$1,606
$91
$1,875
$186
$1,542
$49
$1,125
$289
$3.303
$107
$2,544
$238
$3,690
$0
$1,341
10.0%
-10,0%
-10.0%
-10.0%
$0
$0
-10.0%
-10.0%
Negotiated Renewal Rates
Rate Premium % Chanae
$40,77
$88.24
$44.81
$97,62
$43,91
$95.67
$28,,20
$61,01
$39.19
$94.94
$18.48
$39.99
$30,62
$66,,29
$30,76
$66.47
$2850
$62,04
$26,65
$57,71
$24.42
$63.09
$24.42
$52,99
$40.84
$8827
$26.40
$57,16
$29,14
$63.39
$28,94
$68,22
$39,,26
$84,85
$30.67
$66.32
$204
$1.588
$90
$1,855
$184
$1,525
$31
$532
$0
$883
$49
$1,113
$286
$3,266
$106
$2,515
$236
$3,649
$0
$1,326
-11.0%
-11,0%
-11,0%
-11,0%
$0
$0
$28
$366
-11,0%
-11,,0%
-11.0%
-11.0%
Central Elgin
union
Central Elgin
Central Elgin
Bayham
Bayham
Bayham
Bobier
Malahide
Malahide
DullonlDunwich
Aylmer
Aylmer
County of Elgin
County of Elgin
County of Elgin
County of Elgin
County of Elgin
Southwold
L
Denial
S $50,,35
F $109.68
o
o
S $49.34
F $10749
$0
$0
$44.41
$96,74
$29 -10,0%
$370 -10.0%
$0
$768
-10,0%
-10,,0%
$0
$760
-11.0%
-11,0%
D
Dental
1
6
S $31.68
F $68,55
$32 $28.51
$411 $61.70
$0
$853
$39.63
$96,00
$18,68
$40.44
$0
$0
-10.0%
-10.0%
$0
$0
-11,,0%
-11,,0%
H
Dental
S $44.03
F $106,67
S
F
$20,76
$44,93
$0
$0
$30,96
$67.03
$35
$598
$0
$697
$31.10
$67,22
$28,82
$62,,74
-10.0%
-10.0%
$31
$538
-10.0%
-10,0%
-11,0%
-11,,0%
-11.0%
-11.0%
$0
$620
-11,0%
-11.,0%
D
Denial
S
F
$34.40
$74.48
$34,,56
$7469
$90
$908
$26,95
$58,36
$0
$627
-10,,0%
-10,0%
$80
$808
-11,,0%
-110%
H
Denial
S
F
S
F
$32,02
$69,71
$0
$992
$24,70
$63.80
$81
$817
$0
$893
-10.0%
-10.0%
-10.0%
-10.0%
-11.0%
-11,0%
-11.0%
-11,0%
-11,0%
-11,,0%
-11,,0%
-11,0%
$0
$254
-11.0%
-11.0%
K
Dental
S
F
$29.94
$64.84
$24,70
$53,59
$41,30
$89,,26
$26.69
$57,81
$0
$285
$29.47
$64,10
-10,0%
-10.0%
-10,,0%
-10,,0%
-10.0%
-10.0%
$0
$256
-10.0%
-10.0%
$116
$478
-11.0%
-11,0%
D
Dental
S
F
$27 44
$70,,89
$130
$537
$29,,27
$68,99
$117
$483
-100%
-10,,0%
-110%
-11,,0%
-11,0%
-11.0%
l_
D
Denial
H
Dental - S" Dorchester
D
Dental
D
Denial
D
Dental - Public Works
D
Denial - Elgin Manor
D
Dental-Non-union
D
Dental - CUPE
D
Dental- ONA
D
Dental - Terrace lodge
D
Dental
1-
NOTE:
1" lives taken from Maritime life renewal report
l_
1_
S
F
$27.44
$5954
S
F
$45.89
$99.18
S
F
$29.66
$64,23
S
F
$32,,74
$71,,22
S
F
$32.52
$76.65
S
F
$44.11
$95,34
S
F
$34.46
$74,52
$39.70
$85.81
$31,01
$67,,07
-10,0%
-10.0%
-10.0%
-10,0%
1069
1353
1353
1439
1439
1439
1551
1898
1898
19267
2668
74180
5541
74181
74183
74184
74185
7052
Policv
Grouo
Code
Lives
Pre-Renewal
Rate Premium
Covernoe
L
Dental
5 S $45.81
18 F $99.15
2 S $50,,35
19 F $109.68
o S $49.34
o F $107.49
$229
$1,785
$101
$2,084
$0
$0
$32
$411
$0
$853
$206
$1.713
$35
$598
$0
$697
$90
$908
$0
$992
$55
$1.250
$321
$3,670
$119
$2,826
$0
$285
$130
$537
$265
$4,100
$0
$1.490
NeQotlated Renewal Rates
Rate Premium % Chance
$40,.77
$88,,24
$44.81
$97.62
$43.91
$95.67
$28,,20
$61.01
$39.19
$94.94
$0
$0
$18.48
$39.99
$204
$1,588
-11.0%
-11.0%
InCludinQ ODA AdJ.:stment
Rate Premium - % Chanat:t
$42.40
$91.77
$46.60
$10152
$45,67
$99.,50
$29.13
$63.02
$40,,76
$98,,74
$18.48
$39.99
$31...84
$68,,94
$31.99
$69.13
$29.44
$64.09
$27.53
$59.61
$25.40
$65.61
$25..40
$55,,11
$42.47
$91.80
$27..46
$59.45
$30,31
$65.93
$30.10
$70.95
$40,,83
$88.24
$31,.90
$68.97
$212 -74%
$1,652 -7.4%
$93 -7.4%
$1,929 -7.4%
$0 -74%
$0 -74%
$29 -8,,0%
$378 -8.1%
$0 -74%
$790 -74%
$0 -11,,0%
$0 -11..0%
$191 -7.4%
$1.586 -74%
$32 -74%
$553 -74%
$0 -8,,1%
$641 -8.1%
$83 -8,0%
$835 -8.1%
$0 -7.4%
$919 -7.4%
$51 -74%
$1.157 -74%
$297 -7,,5%
$3,397 -74%
$110 -74%
$2,616 -7.4%
$0 -74%
$264 -74%
$120 -7.4%
$497 -74%
$245 -74%
$3,794 -74%
$0 74%
$1.379 -74%
Central Elgin
union
Central Elgin
Central Elgin
Bayham
Bayham
Bayham K
Bobier D
Malahide D
Malahide H
Dutton/Dunwich D
Aylmer D
Aylmer D
County of Elgin D
County of Elgin D
County of Elgin D
County of Elgin D
County of Elgin D
Southwo!d D
D
Denial
H
Dental
D
Denial
1
6
S $31.68
F $68.55
H
Dental
o
8
S $44,,03
F $106.67
Denial
o S $20.76
o F $44.93
Dental
6 S $34..40
23 F $74..48
1 S $34.56
8 F $74,69
Denial
Dental- S" Dorchester
o S $32,,02
10 F $69,,71
Denial
3 S $29.94
14 F $64.84
Dental
o S $2744
14 F $70,,89
Denlal-PublicWorks
2 S $2744
21 F $59.54
Dental- Elgin Manor
7 S $45,,89
37 F $9918
Dental - Non-union
4 S $29.66
44 F $64.23
Dental - CUPE
o S $32,74
4 F $71,,22
Denial - DNA
4 S $32.52
7 F $76.65
Dental- Terrace Lodge
6 S $44,,11
43 F $95 34
Dental
o S $34.46
20 F $74.52
l_
NOTE:
1. Lives taken from Maritime Ufe renewal report.
L
I
l
$30.62
$66.29
$30.76
$66.47
$28,,50
$62,,04
$26.65
$57.71
$24.42
$63,,09
$24.42
$52.99
$40.84
$88,27
$26.40
$5716
$29.14
$63.39
$28,,94
$68.,22
$39.26
$84.85
$30,,67
$66.32
$90 -11.0%
$1,855 -11.0%
$0 -11,,0%
$0 -110%
$28 -11.0%
$366 -11.0%
$0
$760
-11.0%
-11.0%
$0 -110%
$0 ~11..0%
$184 -11.0%
$1,525 -11.0%
$31 -11.0%
$532 -11...0%
$0 -11.0%
$620 -11.0%
$80 -11.0%
$808 -11.0%
$0 -11,,0%
$883 -11.0%
$49 -11.0%
$1,113 -11.0%
$286 -11.0%
$3,266 -11,,0%
$106 -11,,0%
$2,515 -11.,0%
$0 -11.0%
$254 -11,0%
$116 -11..0%
$478 -11..0%
$236 -11.0%
$3.649 -11.0%
$0 -11.0%
$1.326 -11..0%
Renewal Report 2005
County of Elgin
Exhibit "B": Basic Life Demographic Comparison - Table - Graph
$2,000
$1,500
"
b
0
0_
..
.f;
Q)
E $1,000
:>
~
$500
$0 .
.25
25-29
30-34
34-39
40-44
D August 2003
Age Bend
. August 2004
45-49
50.54
55-59
60-64
>64
I
i~
!=
,=
August 2004 August 2003
ge Male Female Total Male Female Total
and Lives Volume LIves Volume Lives Volume Lives Volume Lives Volume Lives Volume
<25 0 $0 0 $0 0
25-29 5 $263 17 $965 22
1_ 30-34 3 $155 19 $1,170 22
34-39 2 $105 21 $1,377 23
40-44 2 $102 30 $2,027 32
l 45-49 4 $34 21 $1,529 25
50-54 2 $212 35 $3,007 37
55-59 6 $775 11 $1,282 17
50-64 3 $249 4 $370 7
>64 0 $0 0 $0 0
$0
$1,228
$1,325
$1,482
$2,129
$1,563
$3,219
$2,057
$618
$0
o
3
3
2
1
3
2
6
2
o
$0
$150
$152
$101
$57
$255
$193
$713
$107
$0
o
19
13
22
34
22
31
7
4
o
$0
$1,077
$755
$1,339
$2,444
$1,503
$2,450
$865
$350
$0
o $0
22 $1,227
16 $907
24 $1,440
35 $2,501
25 $1,757
33 $2,643
13 $1,578
6 $457
o $0
otal 27 $1,894 158 $11,724 185 $13,618 22 $1,728 152 $10,780 174 $12,508
L
[
J
Renewal Report 2005
County of Elgin
Exhibit "C": Basic L TD Demographic Comparison - Table - Graph
$35,000
$30,000
$25,000
-
"
0
<::
"
5 $20,000
'"
.!:
'0
"
E
"
~ $15,000
$0
J-
~I
,p;l
~~.
;).}0.
$10,000
,-
$5,000
<25
25-29
30-34
34-39
40-44
45-49
50-54
55-59
60-64
Age Bend
01994.1995
1995 1994
Male Female Total Male Female Total
ge Live
and Lives Volume s Volume Lives Volume Lives Volume Lives Volume Lives Volume
L
<25 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0
25-29 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0
30-34 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0
34-39 0 $0 2 $6,843 2 $6,843 0 $0 2 $6,140 2 $6,140
40-44 0 $0 5 $14,509 5 $14,509 0 $0 6 $16,898 6 $16,898
45-49 1 $4,137 2 $7,601 3 $11,738 1 $3,586 2 $5,987 3 $9,573
50-54 1 $3,804 4 $18,398 5 $22,202 1 $3,355 3 $12,831 4 $16,186
55-59 1 $7,000 4 $16,555 5 $23,555 1 $7,000 4 $14,342 5 $21,342
50-64 1 $3,665 0 $0 1 $3,665 0 $0 0 $5,000 0 $5,000
otal 4 $18,606 17 $63,906 21 $82,512 3 $13,941 17 $61,198 20 $75,139
I
L
l_
Renewal Report 2005
County of Elgin
Exhibit "0" Weekly Indemnity & L TO Claims Listing
I
l
l
[
l
--~
-~
--
898
tOW!'lS\lll' Of ~ALA\llDF,
l'\l\d CI\l\\\lS S\1ll\tIlIlTY
L\te
ltev\eYll'enod.ot \l111112{l\)'3 to 3111 "12"M
~
~.r~bi1l!:.od~ ~
400\06015575 1956
~
l<I
__h" J 8, 2004
-.
.
.
~ ~ ~ ~ b!"olill!:. 1n\er~ l'a\dDa\&.
~ -
llel\\h !WIth ~ 20.Jan-2004
SUb9.c.rlb~ \4.Jao-2004 easlc \"e (em?lo~ee) 127,000.00 73.07
oroarlO 0\..Jao-2OO4 47
paid To\llIS: $\27,000,00 $73.07
Grand Totals: $127,000.00 $73.07
page J ofl
~-
.
.....---
---~
.
...
WI - Summarv
REPORTING PERIOD: November 01, 2003 to October 31, 2004
ELGN - COUNTY OF ELGIN
5541 . COUNTY OF ELGIN
ENCRYPTED ID
24742
38652540868
43055215385
40360318258
43015700987
39298422323
41347269073
41809253477
BIRTHYEARDlSABllITYDATEBENEflT STARnERMINATEDGROSS BEHEflTOffSETSHET BEHEfITSTATUS
1961 Aug 22,2004 Aug 23,2004 5,210.00 0.00 5,210.00 Active
1950 Aug 28,2004 Aug 3 t ,2004 Oct 29,2004 4,540.80 0.00 4,540.80 Closed
t966 Feb 13,2004 Feb 16,2004 Mar t 8,2004 2,088.00 0.00 2,088.00 Closed
t955 Aug 25,2004 Aug 30,2004 Sep 27,2004 312.60 0.00 312.60 Closed
1968 Apr 16,2004 Apr 19,2004 Jul 20,2004 6,120.00 0.00 6,120.00 Closed
1955 May 11,2004 May 14,2004 Oct 28,2004 820.80 0.00 820.80 Closed
t958 Nov 06,2003 Nov t 1 ,2003 Dec 04,2003 974.00 0.00 974.00 Closed
1964 Aug 23,2004 Aug 26,2004 4,822.20 0.00 4,822.20 Active
Summary for 5541 - COUNTY OF ELGIN (8 records)
GROSS BENEFIT 24,888.40
OFFSETS 0.00
NET BENEFIT 24,888.40
~ ------- - .....--
. . ...
WI- Summary REPORTING PERIOD: November 01, 2003 to October 31,2004
ELGN - COUNTY OF ELGIN
74185. COUNTY OF ELGIN - TERRACE LODGE
ENCRYPTED to BIRTHYEARDlSABllITY DATEBENEfIT STARnERMINATEDGROSS BENEFITOFFSETSNET BENEFITSTATUS
4t73t543572 1963 Feb 24,2004 Feb 25,2004 Apr 16,2004 2,052.00 0.00 2,052.00 Closed
36652540668 t950 Jun 02,2004 Jun 02,2004 Jun 09,2004 309.60 0.00 309.60 Closed
40915304102 1957 Apr 21 ,2004 Apr 24,2004 410.40 0.00 410.40 Active
86953 t958 Apr 29,2004 May 03,2004 208.40 0.00 208.40 Active
40943994142 1963 Sep 19,2003 Sep 23,2003 Feb 27,2004 871.20 96.78 774.42 Closed
39305221478 1953 Oct t 4,2003 Oct t 7,2003 Nov 14,2003 1,t61.60 0.00 t,t61.60 Closed
39305221478 1953 Sep 22,2004 Sep 22,2004 2,872.80 0.00 2,872.80 Active
42624346449 1961 Sep 28;2004 Oct 01,2004 Oct t 2,2004 104.20 0.00 104.20 Closed
42624346449 1961 Oct 06,2003 Oct 09,2003 Dee 01,2003 t ,850.60 0.00 t ,850.60 Closed
40360318258 1955 Mar t 8,2004 Mar 23,2004 Apr 08,2004 313.20 0.00 313.20 Closed
4t307923686 t962 Nov 1 t ,2003 Nov t 4,2003 Dec 04,2003 tt2.40 0.00 tt2.40 Closed
43632578321 1973 Nov 10,2003 Nov 13,2003 Dee 02,2003 385.60 0.00 385.60 Closed
40535329638 t955 Nov 05,2003 Nov 08,2003 Dee t t ,2003 974.00 0.00 974.00 Closed
44943064072 t960 Sep 16,2003 Sep t 9,2003 0.00 0.00 0.00 Declined
44328696449 1975 Jan 19,2004 Jan 22,2004 Feb 16,2004 876.60 0.00 876.60 Closed
44328696449 1975 Apr 06,2004 Apr 09,2004 Jul 28,2004 8,752.80 0.00 8,752.80 Closed
44804182064 1981 Mar 30,2004 Mar 29,2004 Jun 07,2004 3,862.80 0.00 3,862.80 Closed
43516370131 1969 Sep 17,2004 Sep 22,2004 0.00 0.00 0.00 Pended
3898722688t 195t Oct 2t ,2003 Oct 27,2003 Dee 15,2003 2,629.80 0.00 2,629.80 Closed
38987226881 t951 Oct 2 t ,2003 Dee 03,2003 Jun 07,2004 5,259.60 0.00 5,259.60 Closed
37792806742 t943 Jun 02,2004 Jun 07,2004 Sep 28,2004 0.00 0.00 0.00 Closed
37792806742 1943 Jun 02,2004 Jun 07,2004 Jul 20,2004 0.00 0.00 0.00 Closed
~-
---
.
.
~-
.
R€''''''''''' ,,'1\00' ...._ ". """ to -'" ".21>'"
---
---
---
~
~
--
llD - 59\\\\\\al1
ELGN _ COIJNIY Of ELG\N
",...coo.... of..... ._"".L(>OGE _~$I~~_IIIftIIISI"WS
~..-., '" """ "" .,""'~-'
"... "" ",>", "" """'" .. ,,'" ,; ,,; '" ,.'" """."" ""~
1951 oct 21 ,2003 Feb 17 ,2004 ' .
t\\C\\1fU.\\ '9
44328696449
38987226661
summar'! \O! 74186' coUll'\"'( 01' E\..GIll' ,.ERRACE \..OOGE \ 2
GROSS BEllEf'" 18,620.63
OffSE"S 0.00
llE" BEllEfI" 18,61.0.63
------ ..------ ,..............--
w
l19 - 5"",,,,an
E.LGN . COIJNi'< Of E.LG\N
7052. TOW\IIs\,\IP Of SOUT\'\WOLO
~-
~~
.~
-~.
.
~-
.
",.,>1"'" .",",0' .,,_ 01, "'" .. (>e<Ob~ ", "'"
~__SIIlt'__--~~llIS
"" "'" " "" ... ,,"'" '" ",,'" ,,' .,." "....." ,",,,,.oo~"""
9\t"1ftt" '"
37710107470
summal"/ tOf 7052. 'ToYlNS\tIP Of SOU'TtIYIOLO {1 f<!COfd)
GROSS BENEfl'T 16,743.66
OffSE'TS 6,680.66
NE'T BENEfl'T 10,063.00
Renewal Report 2005
County of Elgin
Exhibit "E" HEALTH CLAIMS BY BENEFIT PAID - CHART
November 2003 - October 2004
Vision
8%
Medical
9%
!=
,=
Semi-Private
5%
1m Drugs Q IVJedical . Semi-Private IIVision
I
1-
He S . October 2003 to " f T t I
ervlce November 2004 10 0 0 a
Drugs
Medical
$369,884
$45,740
$25,085
$40,806
76.8%
Semi-Private
9.5%
5.2%
Vision
8.5%
L
l
otal $481,515 100.0%
Renewal Report 2005
County of Elgin
Exhibit "F" PARAMEDICAL CLAIM BREAKDOWN
November 2003 - October 2004
[3 Chiropractor
50%
[J Masseur
25%
EI Masseur. Physiotherapy mJ Chiropractor
He S . November 2003 to " f T tal
ervlce October 2004 10 0 0
Masseur
25.0%
Physiotherapy
25.0%
i=
l
l
l
1111
I
Renewal Report 2005
County of Elgin
Exhibit "G" DENTAL CLAIMS BY BENEFIT PAID - CHART
November 2003 - October 2004
1%
2%
EI Basic. Endodontic/Periodontic IE IVIajor Restorative [] Orthodontics
. October 2003 to 0
ental ServIce November 2004 Vo of Total
8asic
Endodontic/Periodontic
otal $201,459 100.0%
$175,270
$20.146
$2,014
$4,029
87.0%
10.0%
Major Restorative
Orthodontics
1.0%
2.0%
,
I
L
-
I
!~
Renewal Report 2005
County of Elgin
Buffett Taylor & Associates Ltd.
I
I
605 Brock Street North, Suite 200,
Whitby, Ontario
LlN8R2
Phone: 905-666-1300
Toronto Line: 905-686-0335
Toll Free: 1-800-263-2670
Fax: 905-666-4887
Website: www.buffetttaylor.com Email: buffett@buffetttaylor.com
i~
Charter Member,
Wellness Councils of Canada
Benefits &
Workplace Wellness