Loading...
March 27, 2007 Agenda ORDERS OF THE DA Y FOR TUESDA Y. MARCH 27. 2007 - 9:00 A.M. PAGE # ORDER 1st Meeting Called to Order 2nd Adoption of Minutes - for the meeting of March 13, 2007 3rd Disclosure of Pecuniary Interest and the General Nature Thereof 4th Presenting Petitions, Presentations and Delegations DELEGATIONS: 9:00 A.M. Helen LeFrank, General Manager, Elgin Community Development Corporation, ElginConnects Portal 11 :45 A.M. Brian Masschaele will introduce Michael Baker, the new County Museum Curator to County Council. 5th Motion to Move Into "Committee Of The Whole Council" 2-86 6th Reports of Council, Outside Boards and Staff 7th Council Correspondence - see attached 87-91 1) Items for Consideration 92-99 2) Items for Information (Consent Agenda) 8th OTHER BUSINESS 1) Statementsllnquiries by Members 2) Notice of Motion 3) Matters of Urgency 9th In-Camera Items (see separate agenda) 10th Recess 11th Motion to Rise and Report 12th 2007 Composite Budget - binders circulated separately - please bring your binders to the meeting 13th Motion to Adopt Recommendations from the Committee Of The Whole 100-108 14th Consideration of By-Laws 15th ADJOURNMENT I lUN~.H VV,LL BE PROVIDED I REPORTS OF COUNCIL AND STAFF March 27, 2007 Councillor Reports - (ATTACHED) 3 Councillor Wilson - Correspondence from Debbie Robertson, Municipal Clerk, Municipality of Grey Highlands, with an invitation to attend a meeting and provide input regarding the Joint Police Services contract in Elgin County. Staff Reports - (ATTACHED) 4 Director of Information Technology - ElginConnects Portal Management 16 Payroll & Benefits Coordinator, Director of Human Resources - Annual Benefit Renewal - 2007 20 Manager, Administrative Services - Amendments to the Fees and Charges By-Law - Summary Report 22 Ambulance & Emergency Management Coordinator - Bayham Ambulance Correspondence 33 Ambulance & Emergency Management Coordinator - 911 Central Emergency Reporting Bureau (CERB) OPP Contract Renewal 37 Manager, Economic Development - Economic Development Plan - Selection of Consultant 40 Manager, Economic Development - 2010 International Plowing Match and Rural Expo 44 Director of Cultural Services - VisuallAudio Image Release Form 47 Director of Senior Services ElM - Annual Compliance Review - Elgin Manor 48 Director of Senior Services ElM - Attending Physicians Agreements in the Homes Director of Senior Services Bobier Villa - Complexity of Care for Homes Residents Director of Engineering Services - Fire Panel Upgrade at Elgin Manor (to be faxed) 50 Director of Engineering Services - Municipal Infrastructure Agreement 55 Director of Engineering Services - Accident Review - 2005 64 Manager of Road Infrastructure - 2006 Lower-Tier Operations Cost Summary 68 Manager of Road Infrastructure, Purchasing Co-Ordinator - Capital Projects Tender Awards 71 Purchasing Co-ordinator - Cell Phone Collection Program 73 Purchasing Co-ordinator - Semi-Annual Information Report - Contract Awards (Aug 1/06 to Dec 31/06) and Director Negotiation Expenditures (Jan.-Dec. 2006) 79 Chief Administrative Officer, Director of Financial Services - St. Thomas-Elgin General Hospital - Grant Request Chief Administrative Officer - POA and 401 81 Director of Financial Services - Budget Comparison - December 31,2006 85 Director of Financial Services - G.S.T. Audit MAR-14-2D01 11:45AM FROM-MUNICIPALITY OF GREY HIGHLANDS +519-985-3B43 T-046 p. 001 F-344 .... " u.ni.ci.p(.~litq ).'\j~ - ~ Clerks Department ..I"J~II't~: 'l~~~!ll~I., Gre~ Hignlands Please respond to~ Debbie Robertson Municipal Clerk the place for all seasons... in the heart Of the Beaver Valley March 14, 2007 Mayor John Wilson Fax: 519-268-:3617 Dear Mayor Wilson: On behalf of Mayor Brian Mullin. I would like to extend an invitation to attend a meeting being organized to discuss the possibility of Joint Police Services within Grey County. Five lower tier municipalities are meeting on March 28th, 2007 at 7:00 p.m. at the Grey Highlands Municipal Council Chamber (directions attached) to discuss the possibility of a Joint Police Contract and Board. We understand from talking with both Nfnspector Ryan Cox and yourself that Elgin County, upon amalgamation, chose to proceed with a group contract. We believe your attendance at the meeting would allow those in attendance to ask questions on your experiences in this regard. A couple of items of interest that may be discussed are how representatives are appointed to the Board and how the costs of the contract are apportioned. Trusting this information is of assistance. We would appreciate confirmation that you, or a designate, are able to attend. Should you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact the undersigned. Yours truly, (J]R~uY Debbie Robertson, AMCT Munioipal Clerk 206 Toronto Street South, Unit 1, Community ServiC9$ Centre, P.O. Box 409, Mar!cdale, ON. NOC 1 HO Telephone: 519-986-2811 - Fax: 519-986-3643 - www.greyllighlands.ca REPORT TO COUNCIL FROM: AI Reitsma Director of Information Technology DATE: March 27, 2007 SUBJECT: ElginConnects Portal Management CORPORATE GOAL(S) REFERENCED: 1. To ensure fiscal responsibility and accountability 2. To promote Elgin as ''The Place to Live" 3. To forge community partnerships 4. To provide innovative and collaborative quality service 5. To recognize and seize opportunities for improvement INTRODUCTION: Elgin Community Futures Development Corporation (ECFDC) currently owns and operates the ElginConnects Community Portal. ECFDC's mandate was to create and operate a self-sustaining portal until September of 2007. On February 12, 2007 the County of Elgin received a request from ECFDC to take ownership and management of the portal (see Appendix A). This report will recommend that, although the County of Elgin plans to retain a presence on the portal, it should not accept the offer to become the owner and operator of the portal. DISCUSSION: ECFDC has been successful at creating a community portal that delivers: Y" Park and Recreation facility booking Y" Electronic service delivery (ESD) Y" Common, searchable community calendar Y" Business directory Y" Social Services directory Y" Electronic data management (LaserFiche) Y" Mapping (Refer to Appendix B for a detailed list of benefits delivered by the portal). The following table of visits per month to municipal and city sites within the portal demonstrates that the portal is being used: St. Thomas 6,101 9,309 9,857 5,978 8,702 7,978 Count of EI in 2,254 3,321 3,051 1,994 3,239 2,858 Sa ham 1,124 933 1,220 545 752 732 Malahide 541 780 1,390 437 588 568 Almer 575 667 644 345 548 405 Central Elgin 1,317 1 ,499 2,266 1,013 1 ,431 1,302 Southwold 507 830 791 377 617 539 Dutton/Dunwich 353 473 561 304 484 417 West EI in 351 476 694 318 438 465 Total 13,123 18,288 20,474 11,311 16,799 15,264 (* Source: WebTrends Analytics: ElginConnects Web Site Analysis) Note: Vists are defined as all the activity of one visitor's browser to a web site, within certain time constraints. A visit is a series of page views, beginning when a visitor's browser requests the first page from the server, and ending when the visitor leaves the site or remains idle beyond the idle-time limit. Hits are defined as a request for a file by a browser. Since "file" refers to images, styles, and many other elements besides .html pages, a single web site page view can involve dozens of hits. Because t he number of hits is so heavily influenced by the complexity of a page, hits are a far less helpful measure of site traffic than visits or visitors. The hits statistic is somewhat useful in assessing the load experienced by a web server. For example the number of hits on the Elgin County portion of the portal for Feb '07 was 9,332 It is noteworthy that site visits are split approximately 50:50 between the City of St.Thomas and the combined county and municipal sites. Although the portal has provided benefits to the County and municipalities there are concerns. These include: · the fact that the portal is not self sustaining, . the complexity of the current platform that is used to create and maintain the portal, . not all municipalities have the resources required to maintain an up-to-date web site and · legal concerns. The portal is currently not self-sustaining; it does not generate enough revenue to cover the cost of operating the portal. The portal has been operating on grants received from several levels of government including $200,000 in grants from the County of Elgin. The number of staff working on the portal has decreased as funds have diminished. At this time there is only one part-time technical resource working on the portal. The following table identifies the fees currently collected: EFA Serenit House Bereavement Council YWCA HUB Sirs Centre United Wa ECFDC WECHC Edison Museum Total $180.00 $180.00 $180.00 $180.00 $180.00 $180.00 $800.00 $800.00 $800.00 $800.00 $4280.00 A review of four other municipal portals in south-western Ontario revealed that none generated revenue and all were publicly funded. These portals are staffed by from 1 to 4 full-time Information Technology staff. Operating the portal would require resources to · promote the portal · provide training · provide technical support · review content At a minimum one staff member would need to be added to the county's Information Technology Department to provide the services required. Assuming the addition of one staff person the annual cost of operating the portal is estimated to be $80,000 to $100,000 annually. This estimate does not include the cost of promoting the portal. Vignette, the current platform used to develop and maintain the portal, is expensive and difficult to use for content management. The complexity of the current platform has caused one local municipality and one organizations to discontinue using the portal. There are several alternatives to Vignette that are available. For example, the purchase price for VentureLabour's ContentServer is approximately $20,000 with an annual maintenance fee of $7,000. The product has been reviewed and is much more user friendly and provides many of the functions and features currently being used in Vignette. Having the County of Elgin take ownership and management of the portal raises legal concerns. The County of Elgin needs to consider the legal implication of content that is posted on sites that would be housed in the portal but not managed by the County of Elgin in that content may: . violate copyright laws, · inappropriate/illegal (Le. considered pornographic) · be considered libellous or slanderous Discussion with legal council has indicated that liability can be mitigated by removing objectionable content posted by non-County participants in the portal as soon as the County is made aware of the material. Liability resulting from content can only be avoided by the County, municipalities and city if the portal housed only the sites for those entities. If other entities were allowed sites within the portal risk could be mitigetod if all content were reviewed before being posted. This would add a significant burden to county staff and raise the possibility that the County could be seen as censoring content. Any site that is housed within the portal could be considered to be an organization which the County of Elgin supports causing potential negative backlash. In a similar way denying inclusion in the portal for an organization could be interpreted as declining support for the organization. If the County of Elgin does not take ownership of the portal one of the following scenarios is possible: 1. ECFDC finds another organization to take ownership of the portal. This mayor may not be acceptable to the County. The County currently has influence over the direction of the portal and that influence would be lost if it were taken on by another organization. 2. ECFDC does not find another organization to take ownership. If this occurs the portal mayor may not continue to operate as is. No new sites or functionality would be added to the portal. Each organization would be responsible for maintaining its own site. County of Elgin staff could be asked to provide limited technical support. The worst case scenario is one where the portal ceases to operate. In this case the County would need to create a County web site. Creating the web site would require 2 to 3 weeks work assuming access to current portal content. CONCLUSION: The ElginConnects community portal has been able to simplify how people find and share information about the municipalities, cities, towns and organizations within the county. It has been successful at connecting people with information and expertise. Although the portal has been successful it is not without its problems. The Vignette platform is not user friendly and is expensive to maintain. Research has shown that a replacement platform is available that provides much the same functionality at far less cost. Municipalities within the County realize the need to have a web presence. A combined site or portal provides some financial benefit and economies of scale. There are a number of applications, such as electronic permit application, that could be purchased or developed once and used by all municipalities. There are intangible non-financial benefits to a portal the most significant one being that the portal is seen as a valuable tool for economic development. The current portal infrastructure is complicated and costly and should be replaced if the County were to take ownership of the portal. To date the Town of Alymer has moved away from the portal because of the complexity of the current portal platform and lack of support. Although there are benefits to existence of the ElginConnects portal, there are significant legal and financial concerns with the County of Elgin taking ownership and management of the ElginConnects portal. Operation of the portal would be better suited to a private business that does not have the political and legal limitations that would be faced by the County and has the skill set required to operate a portal. RECOMMENDATION: That the County of Elgin declines the offer to take ownership and management of the ElginConnects portal. Respectfully Submitted t/f:2d::=- AI Reitsma Director of Information Technology Approved fo ... Mark nald Chief Administrative Officer Appendix A - Request from ECFDC ELGIN Community Futures Development Corporation February 12, 2007 AI Reitsma Manager ofInformation Technology County of Elgin 450 Sunset Drive 5t. Thomas, ON N5R 5Vl Dear AI: Re: EleinConnects Further to our phone conversations this past week and our preliminary meetings in the late fall of 2006, I wish to formally confirm that the Board of Directors of Elgin Community Futures Development Corporation recommends that the management and ownership of the EIginConnects project be transferred to the County of Elgin. As you may know the overall Mission Statement for this program was "To promote and enhance the quality of life and opportunities for community economic development through partnerships and information communication technology within the City of 8t. Thomas and the County of Elgin." The main project objectives were two-fold. a. To build adequate infrastructure (both wireless and fibre) so that the majority of Elgin County has access to high-speed connectivity. b. To build a portal platform with the view to having one electronic gateway for the County of Elgin, the City of St. Thomas, as well as public institutions and community groups. The City of St. Thomas, County of Elgin and Elgin CFDC, as lead, were the three main partners in this 4-year project. We now believe that our role is completed. The infrastructure and portal are in place. We believe that, provided the County of Elgin approve, it would be a fitting solution.it your IT department could assume the management of the portal and provide tec~upport to the users. ..llli1IlliiI'~ AI_ .IIl1lIlIIIl.. 4"'" IYlIIIII1rt.. . ... , I 300 South Edgcwa,c Rd I St. lhoma" ON N 5 P 4 Ll . lei 51 ?-6$3-7597 . Fax email ladmi:l1@elgil1cfdC.OI1.ca . www.elgil1cfdc.ol1.ca 519 - 633-5070 ELGIN Community Futures Development Corporation Our intention would be to transfer ownership of all hardware and software to the County (most of which is already housed in the County's server room) at no cost. Currently, we are waiting for the final payment from the Province of Ontario and, we would donate the remaining balance to the County of Elgin. We estimate that amount to be $20,000 _ $25,000. It is our hope that this donation would help you with the needed changes to the Vignette software. I have enclosed a list of assets from our audited statements and we believe the final 10% holdback will be available to us by the end of February. We have shared our intention to transition this program to the County with the City ofSt. Thomas. The senior management team agrees with the transfer as they recognize that you have a well-developed IT department that can continue to provide the technical upgrades and support for those of us using the portal. I would be pleased to attend County Council in support of this transition if you desire and will provide any further information that you might require. May I take this opportunity to thank the County for your ongoing guidance and commitment to the successful completion of Elgin Connects, in particular Cathy Bishop, who has been on our steering con1tnittee since its inception. You s . ncerely e1enLeFWa..JL-- General Manager ffildw Enclosure Copy Mark McDonald Chief Administrative Officer County of Elgin .<.... J:V.'~::... .\f.tj;iU!t~~ .P.illiWi!1!,1l, ~~ _Wi;. AM Jll& K"''' ,fill.. .. 'So. Appendix B - High-level Summary of Portal Benefits (provided by ECFDC) . Provides a single location that aggregates the websites of municipal governments as well as community stakeholders thereby creating the true community portal . Content Management o ease of content storage and management o allows flexible workflow process for publishing o no need for technical resources to update content o delegated model of administration allows for each site within the portal to manage and publish their own content . Citizen-centric approach to design through ease of navigation and common look and feel throughout the portal while still maintaining uniqueness of municipal site imagery . Personalization (Need this?) o Create personal pages to place preferred content o Include / exclude content as made available o Edit bookmark preferences for website addresses . Intelligent Search Engine to search for content within the portal and wi thin external stakeholder sites (You decide) . Parks and Recreation Facility booking - for municipalities - online booking and/or payment for municipal facilities fashioned after the #1 municipal program (CLASS). We own this program and are therefore able to make changes and edits as we grow and refine it. This MUST be operational end of next week I learned today--- working with Dutton/Dunwich - we already have their facilities entered Recreation program booking - A custom created program to suit our needs was again fashioned after CLASS but enable our community organizations to also allow registering and payment of their programs. Again, MUST be operational by end of next week - can be adjunct to DuttonlDunwich but YW also inquiring . Electronic Service Delivery (ESD) transactions with payment processing capability: pet license renewals, facility booking and program registration are the first forms of online payments to be able to occur. (Just now starting to populate and pilot) DITTO - working with Malahide . Creation of a common, searchable community calendar to reside in the portal, with integrated program registration for participating municipalities. The community calendar feature will contain a participating communities' events, thus giving a broad overview for ease of planning as well as publicizing the areas' events. The calendar will permit different user groups access to different information. o Guest User - will have view access to events posted on the calendar o Registered User - can post events directly with a status of "pending". These events will be posted once approved by the appropriate Admin group o Admin User - can approve events. Will be allowed to modify information about a posted event and remove events. · Business Directory accessible and searchable through the portal - the only directory county and city-wide and now contains over 3200 entries- businesses can submit their updated information in order to ensure timely information · Social Services Directory accessible and searchable through the portal - the only directory of social services and is county and city-side. Automated file transfer to backend financial systems as required? - not in use · The electronic data management project was completed with the County of Elgin taking the responsibility. The County purchased the Laserfiche software and Elginconnects provided the web access software to enable the documents to be accessible by the public. The county has completed the transfer of by-laws, minutes and agendas from 1852- 2005 and this is now accessible to allow easier municipal service delivery and community engagement. This past summer of 2006 Elginconnects provided the human resources to also enable most of the municipalities to participate. West Elgin - minutes from 2000 forward Dutton/Dunwich - minutes from 1998 forward; by-laws from 1990 forward Southwold - by-laws from 1990 forward Central Elgin - minutes form 1998 to 2005; some b-Iaws Bayham - minutes from 1996-2005; by-laws from 1197- 2006 (Check with Brian for accuracy) · Mapping - citizens requesting a locational mapping for facilities and services. We have created an application to be integrated with our GPS lat and long on a Google map. A goggle map is easy as it clicks and drags', shows larger areas without refreshing the screen and the zooming functionality is tremendous. The first example is the Eat Fresh! Buy Local! Map which shows the categories of direct farm marketing and farm markets. The icons are in the correct map position and when one clicks on the icon the personal or business information is shown and a web link is possible to their site. Other layers are: - museums, accommodations, dining, points of interest, trails etc. These layers can be viewed singly or together. This will encourage 'trip-tiks' for consumers and encourage local economic development. Other Functionality Available and Easy to Deploy with the Portal software: . Basic calculator . Discussion boards . Suggestion Box . Task List - users can add, delete and prioritize tasks . Today's PolI- users can submit a response, view previous poll results, and suggest a question for future polls . Webconnector - integrates content from web sites or applications so that users may access it through the portal. This provides for efficient and timely integration of external websites and applications. For example, it could take a table from another website and make it viewable to the user through the portal, without the user having to go to the external site. (screen-scrapes) . Allows for a great deal of flexibility in site designs - controversial for branding - only content styles . Site wizard to create new sites quickly leveraging existing site functionality . Portal framework can handle multiple languages as required Future Expansion Capability: . Expand the portal to include more community stakeholder groups and businesses, further allowing one window to the broader community from a citizen's perspective. . Integrate with applications such as a mapping tool. Elginconects has already GPS'd infrastructure of the town of Aylmer, villages of West Lome and Rodney; created a database connected to all farms in Elgin with a 911 number; and GPS'd every 911 sign in the areas outside of Central Elgin can be integrated with other maps . Integrate with municipal back-end systems (ie. accounting/financial systems) . Develop additional Electronic Service Delivery transactions to expand e-services to citizens and reduce over-the-counter costs and inconvenience. Technical Benefits of the Portal: A leveraged solution with... .Common infrastructure .Common hosting .Common technical resources 1. Provides a shared services platform that enables functionality to be easily and efficiently deployed -- reducing costs and increasing service benefits to communities, A world-class, standards-compliant portal product means that services and content can be deployed quickly and efficiently. Portlets can be quickly and easily implemented into the portal meaning there is a minimal amount of effort required to add significant functionality to the site. This removes the need to invest in technical resources, thus delivering good service to the public and saving dollars on implementation costs. It takes less time and budget to provide more up to date and timely information to citizens. 2. A shared platform allows for more efficient use of technical resources. One or two technical staff can support the County, St. Thomas, 7 local tiers and multiple stakeholders. 3. Provides a shared content management application; removes the need to involve scarce technical resources in the publishing process -- alleviating the need for technical resources and streamlining communications to constituents (and lowers liabilities as described below). This enhances timely delivery of updated information to citizens. 4. The portal framework also provides simpler methods to deploy electronic services, delivering services more efficiently and saving money on facilities and infrastructure. 5. The portal has a solid security model and can easily target content to a specific constituency (e.g. Aylmer and St. Thomas). Thus there is a savings to communities by using a single technology platform while still maintaining a distinct presence. 6. The portal software is based on industry-accepted standards (JSR168 is an industry standard for developing portal functionality). Efficiencies can be realized in a shared environment by removing the need to train on a number of separate platforms. This reduces support costs associated with multiple, disparate systems. 7. The portal software also has many features that support assistive technologies intended for people with failing sight or with mobility problems. The services deployed to serve an aging population are made easier through the portal, because it meets accessibility standards and provides an easy framework to deploy services. I don't remember how - I would need to review before being asked 8. Existing website address (URL) on current letterhead or business cards can be retained by simply redirecting a user to the new site within the portal. Appendix C - ElginConnects Portal Asset Inventory (supplied by ECFDC) Software Total Software Costs $171,193.19 $ 44,275.00 $2,024.12 $2657.93 $3,991.65 $13,281.70 $4,057.00 $17,045.45 $2,450.52 $13,845.00 $274,821.56 Vignette Application Portal v7.0 including Autonomy DRE Lite Vignette Application Portal Maintenance for Year 1 BEA Weblogic Express v8.1 (2) 1 year maintenance for BEA Weblogic Express Windows Server 2003 Standard (4) SQL Server 2000 Standard Edition WebTrends Professional with Essential Maintenance BizTalk Integration Engine Veritas Backup Exec Server v9.1 with accessories Laserfiche Web Access Hardware HP Proliant DL 380 G3 Xeon 3.2 GHz 1 Gb Server (M038LGPC32) HP Proliant DL 360 G3 Xeon 3.2 Server (M005LGPC34) HP Proliant DL 360 G3 Xeon 3.2 Server (EB44LDN42V) HP Ultrium L TO 200/400 GB tape backup (USE044202H) APC Smart UPS 300VA (YS0431222621) Cisco Catalyst 3550 EMI (CAT0837Y11 R) $11,017.78 $10,231.39 $8,647.22 $8,155.51 $2,129.82 $7,114,14 $47,309.72 REPORT TO COUNTY COUNCIL FROM: Dorothy Schaap - Payroll & Benefits Coordinator Harley J. Underhill - Director of Human Resources DATE: March 15, 2007 SUBJECT: Annual Benefit Renewal 2007 CORPORATE GOALCS) REFERENCED: To ensure fiscal responsibility and accountability. To be recognized as a desired employer. To forge community partnerships. To provide innovative and collaborative quality service. To recognize and seize opportunities for improvement. INTRODUCTION: On March 1, 2007 we received the annual renewal report for the County of Elgin and member municipalities from Mosey and Mosey, Benefits Consultants. The report summarizes their analysis of the group benefits renewal action required by Manulife, effective April 1, 2007. DISCUSSION: Please refer to the attached Executive Summary prepared by Dawn Hoskins, Vice-President of Marketing and Sales from the firm of Mosey and Mosey. Points of Emphasis: 1. Mosey & Mosey has a preferred arrangement with Manulife Financial due to their large block of business. As a result of this partnership, insured rates remain competitive and the clients' overall costs are reduced. 2. For rating purposes, the County of Elgin and member municipalities consortium plan have been regarded as one large group in order to attain the best rates, allowing 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 Extended Health Care benefit has a pooling arrangement currently in place designed as added insurance to cover against the possibility of catastrophic claims in excess of $10,000 per year per person for drug claims. Manulife normally charges 3.3% of premium for this pooling and once again, due to the large block of business Mosey has with Manulife, a fee of 1.5% of premium is reflected in the extended health care renewal rating analysis. This represents annual savings of approximately $13,000 for all the County of Elgin and member municipalities. This year there is a pooling credit of $17,740 due to claims exceeding the $10,000 limit. RENEWAL OVERVIEW The table below summarizes the 4-year history of renewal rate action, by benefit line: Benefit 2004 2005 2006 Renewal Renewal Renewal Life No change +5% +7% AD&D No change No change No change LTD No change +4.5% +13.0% WI No change No change EHC +3.3% +6.5% -5.6% Dental No change -11 % + -12.3% + + ODA fee ODA fee ODA fee increase guide guide increase Increase Overall +3.2% +2.9% -2.0% 2007 Renewal -4.2% No change -5.4% Not applicable 6.2% 2.1% 1.7% The approximate annual increase for the County of Elgin's plan is $1,199 monthly or $14,388 annually. A meeting with the member municipalities and Mosey and Mosey will take place on March 21,2007 to discuss the renewal in particular and other group benefit issues in general. CONCLUSION: Staff are pleased with the outcome of the renewal and recommend acceptance of the negotiated renewal rate adjustments with Manulife Financial effective April 1 , 2007. A copy of the report, in its entirety, is available at the County Administration Services Office on the first floor. RECOMMENDA liON: THAT staff recommend acceptance of the negotiated renewal rate adjustments with Manulife Financial for the County of Elgin and the Elgin Member Municipalities, effective April1, 2007. Respectfully Submitted Mark Mc Chief Administrative Officer IU -,-, '=l Dorothy Schaap Payroll & Benefits Coordinator County of Elgin Proposed Renewal Negotiated Renewal Current Monthly Rate Monthly Rate Benefit Renewal Premium Adjustment Premium Adjustment Group Life $5242 $5,741 9.4% $5,022 -4.2% AD&D $367 $367 0.0% $367 0.0% Long term disability $15,119 $14,304 -5.4% $14,304 -5.4% Total Pooled: $20,728 $20.412 -1.5% $19,693 -5.0% Extended Health Care 30,693 32,596 6.2% 32,596 6.2% Travel 557 557 0.0% 557 0.0% Dental Care 11,555 12,017 4.0% 11,798 2.1% Total Experience Rated: 42,805 45,170 5.5% 44,950 5.0% Total Overall: $63,533 $65,582 $64,643 8% PST $5,083 $5,247 $5,171 Overall Premium $68,615 $70,828 3.2% $69,814 1.7% $ Adjustment Over Current $ 2,213 $ 1,199 REPORT TO COUNTY COUNCIL FROM: Sandra Heffren, Manager, Administrative Services DATE: March 15,2007 SUBJECT: Amendments to the Fees and Charges By-Law - Summary Report Introduction: Each year staff review the fees and charges levied for administrative activities within each department to ensure costs are being recovered. Discussion: Departments have reviewed changes to the fees and charges levied for chargeable activities and the changes below are requested to reflect actual costs beginning April 1, 2007. ENGINEERING SERVICES (authority under the Municipal Act) Old Schedule No previous listing New Schedule Private Infrastructure Encroachment Agreements - Including Restoration Expenses Cost Recovery Basis - which may be added to the property tax roll for collection, on behalf of the County, by a local municipality HUMAN RESOURCES (authority under the Municipal Act) Old Schedule No previous listing New Schedule County Sponsored Training Programs - Participation by Public Partners on a Cost Recovery Basis LONG-TERM CARE HOMES (authority under the Homes for the Aaed Act) Old Schedule New Schedule Meals on Wheels for Community Clients No previous listing Meals on Wheels for Community Clients $6.50 per meal, at Elgin Manor (VON) $6.50 per meal, at Terrace Lodge (VON) $6.00 per meal, at Bobier Villa (WEHC) ($6.00 per meal to the Home for cost recovery) 2 Foot Care Throuah VON No previous listing Foot Care Throuah VON Market Rate, as established by VON Visitor Meal Service at All Homes Beginning 2007 - $7.00 per meal Beginning 2008 - $8.00 per meal Visitor Meal Service at All Homes Full Course Meals - Beginning 2007 - $7.00 per meal Beginning 2008 - $8.00 per meal Under the Age of 5 years - no charge Special Event Meals - Beginning April 1 ,2007 - $12.00 per meal Beginning April 1 ,2008 - $14.00 per meal Under the Age of 5 years - no charge Diners Club for Community Seniors - Beginning April 1, 2007 - $5.00 per meal Beginning April 1 , 2008 - $6.00 per meal Barber/Hairdresser at All Homes Men's Hair Cut $9.00 Ladies' Hair Cut $9.00 Wash & Set $11.00 Wash, Cut & Set $18.00 Permanent Wave $35.00 Barber/Hairdresser at All Homes Hair Cut $10.00 Wash & Set $12.00 Wash, Cut & Set $20.00 Permanent Wave $40.00 Conclusion: The increases to fees and charges requested by various departments should be implemented and the Fees and Charges By-Law amended to reflect current costs. Recommendation: That the increases to fees and charges contained in this report be adopted and the necessary by-law be prepared. Respectfully Submitted Approved for Submission <.J~J/,~ San Heffr Manager, Administrative Services. REPORT TO COUNTY COUNCIL FROM: Larysa Andrusiak, Ambulance & Emergency Management Coordinator DATE: March 15, 2007 SUBJECT: Bayham Ambulance Correspondence CORPORATE GOAL(S) REFERENCED: To ensure fiscal responsibility and accountability To forge community partnerships To provide innovative and collaborative quality service To recognize and seize opportunities for improvement INTRODUCTION: This report is in response to correspondence from the Municipality of Bayham, dated February 13, 2007, regarding Ambulance Service Response Times which is attached. DISCUSSION: The above referenced correspondence contains a resolution in three parts. 1. The first is: That the concerns of the Municipality of Bayham regarding the extended response times of ambulance to areas in Bayham be forwarded to Elgin County Council - this has been done by virtue of this report. Response Times The Ministry of Health Response Time Standard that Elgin County is held to for 90% of Code 4 calls is 15:14 (15 minutes, 14 seconds). In 2005, the 90% Response Time for Elgin County was 13:55. In 2006, it was 13:39. Clearly, Elgin County not only meets its mandated standard but also has performed significantly faster. In 2006, the Ministry of Health reported that in 2004, 36% of provincial ambulance services met their mandated response time standards and in 2005, 28% met those standards. Elgin County has been included in that minority percentage that has met its mandated response times in both those years. Response times are affected by various factors: distance to a call, weather, traffic, road conditions, call volume (with fewer calls, one long response can skew the overall response times for the period monitored), vehicle mechanical issues, etc. For the Quarters April 1 to June 30, 2006 and July 1 to September 30, 2006, response times for Code 4 calls for all ambulance stations have ranged from 11 minutes to 16 minutes 90% of the time. The anecdotally acceptable response times in the counties -rural areas has been around the 20-minute mark. That is why Fire Departments who choose to respond to medical calls are called to respond if CACC (Central Ambulance Communications Centre -ambulance dispatch) estimates ambulance arrival over 20 minutes for Code 4 calls. Improvements to Aylmer Base Response The Aylmer Base has a large response area to cover and reflecting that, its response times are the longest of all the bases. For the Quarters mentioned above, 50% of the Code 4 Aylmer Base calls have been responded to within 6 minutes, 75% of Code 4 calls within 10 to 12 minutes and 90% in the 16 to 18 minute range. Over the last several years, the following have been implemented to improve response times out of the Aylmer Base: . In 2002, Council approved additional staffed hours for the Aylmer Base of 12 hours staffed, and 12 hours on-call. . In 2003, Council approved 24 hours on-site staffing. . In 2004, the Emergency Coverage Agreement with CACC (dispatch) was revised to stop the Alymer vehicle from being pulled into S1. Thomas when its vehicles were all out on calls, to allow Aylmer to be available to respond in its response area. . In 2008, a new station is planned which is anticipated to decrease response times to the Bayham area by a further 1-2 minutes. Council, staff and Operator have been proactive in improving service in this area and throughout the county. Aylmer Base Call Data As outlined on page 2 of the attached Bayham Staff Report, 49% of Code 4 calls are located in the Aylmer area, with a further 21 % located in Malahide. Of all the Code 4 calls, 14% are in the Bayham area. In considering operational factors regarding placement of bases and ambulances, call volume area and geographic location are key considerations. The call data information validate the placement of a base in the Aylmer area. 2. The Second part of the Resolution: That the Municipality of Bayham requests the County to conduct a formal review of the County ambulance service and develop a strategic plan for ambulance service in the County. This is being done by virtue of the Ambulance Base Location Study, work which is being led by staff with input from municipalities regarding population and land development projections and the Operator regarding operational considerations. As well, the Ambulance Contract is up for renewal in 2008, which will necessitate a review of the provision of ambulance services in the County. 3. The Third part of the Resolution: That the County establish an Elgin County Ambulance Service Strategic Planning Committee with representatives from each Elgin municipality. Elgin County through its Council is responsible for the provision of ambulance services within the County. The County Council is representative of each municipality within the county. The Ambulance Administrative Coordinator through the CAO reports to Council. Council makes decisions regarding the provision of ambulance services. Impact to Fire Department: The above heading is located on the third page of the attached Bayham Staff Report. This section contains an analysis of medical calls that the Fire Department has responded to; there is discussion stating that if an ambulance was located in Bayham the municipality would benefit by the fire department responding to fewer medical calls; and under the heading Staff Comments there is discussion of the fire budget exceeding its budget for the last two year period. The Ambulance Program and County has no jurisdiction regarding fire departments. This is the jurisdiction of the lower tier municipalities. Ambulance dispatch (CACC) forwards Code 4 call information to fire departments through fire dispatch. All fire departments within Elgin County are notified of the following: motor vehicle collisions, delay of EMS over 20 minutes, and at the request of EMS. Depending on what Code 4 medical calls each fire department has indicated it will respond to, fire dispatch will dispatch to those calls. The choice and decision for fire departments to respond to any medical calls is a decision for the lower tier municipality to make depending upon their situation. There are a wide variety of fire department responses to medical calls within Elgin County. The Elgin County Fire Department Medical Dispatch Response sheet is made available to ambulance dispatch (CACC) and outlines the medical categories each fire department has decided to respond to. This information helps the paramedics to know what to expect as they arrive to a call. Staff has attached an analysis conducted by the Ambulance & Emergency Management Coordinator of fire medical calls requested by the Bayham fire department for Council's information. That analysis indicates that of the 43 fire calls reviewed, 7 fell outside the criteria for agreed upon response by the Bayham fire department. Bayham fire department recently revised its criteria for response to medical calls to include Chest Pain and Cardiac Arrest calls. The primary complaint of Chest Pain is the largest category of response by the ambulance service (a Base Hospital Report dated November 14, 2006 indicated that of Elgin- St. Thomas EMS calls analyzed, 45% listed Ischemic Chest Pain as the primary complaint) and accounts for 53% of the fire medical call responses of the 43 calls analyzed. It is suggested that a significant portion of the call volume increase that Bayham fire department has experienced is largely affected by the addition of response to Chest Pain and Cardiac Arrest calls and that this may playa significant role in the overbudget reported by Bayham fire department, rather than extended ambulance response times. CONCLUSION I SUMMARY: In summary, in answer to the first part of the resolution, Elgin-St. Thomas EMS exceeds the response time standards as prescribed by the Ministry of Health. Specifically, 50% of Code 4 Aylmer Base calls have been responded to within 6 minutes, 75% of Code 4 calls within 10-12 minutes and 90% by the 16 to 18 minute range. A formal review of the County ambulance service will be conducted in the run up to the contract renewal in 2008. In addition, a station location study is currently underway. Both of these initiatives should satisfy the municipality's request for a formal review. Finally, the Municipality of Bayham should be advised that Elgin County Council is the governing body and ultimate decision-maker for all strategies as they pertain to ambulance service. Therefore, there is no need to establish the recommended strategic planning committee since it already exists. RECOMMENDATION: That the report entitled "Bayham Ambulance Correspondence" dated February 19, 2007 be forwarded to the Municipality of Bayham in response to the various inquiries contained therein. Respectfully Submitted ~~~~~ Larys Andrusiak, Ambulance & Emergency Management Coordinator ;"'(> "'~r""" Municipality of . Bayham Op :o."-~ ~O,.tllnity Is ~o p.o. Box 160,9344 Plank Road, Straffordville, Ontario NO] 1 YO Tel: (519) 866-5521 · Fax: (519) 866-3884 email: bayham@bayham.on.ca F:" ~ 6 2007 ..,.... .. . February 13, 2007 Mark McDonald, Administrator County of Elgin 450 Sunset Drive St. Thomas, ON N5R 5Vl Dear Mark Re: Ambulance Service Response Times Please be advised that the Council of the Municipality of Bayham considered the attached report, prepared by Paul Groeneveld, Fire Chief/CEMC, and passed the following resolution: THAT the concerns of the Municipality of Bayham regarding the e:xtended response times of ambulance to areas in Bayham be forwarded to Elgin County Council; THAT the Municipality of Bayham requests the County to conduct a formal review of the County ambulance service and develop a strategic plan for ambulance service in the County; AND THAT the County establish an Elgin County Ambulance Service Strategic Planning Committee with representatives from each Elgin municipality." It would be appreciated if you would bring the concerns to the attention of County Council in regard to the delay in ambulance response to calls in Bayham for appropriate action at your earliest. Should you have any questions, please give us a call. Yours truly \~ ~ W ~y-mh,~J6 Mrs. Lynda Millard Clerk Ene. File: Pl6 C2007-011 8.1(c) Feb 1/07 Motion # 07- Ob'1 CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF BAYHAM TO: Mayor & Members of Council FROM: Fire Chief/CEMC/ By-law Enforcement Officer SUBJECT: Ambulance Service '- DATE: January 23, 2007 FILE: P16 ? NUMBER: P20~-003 Purpose Provide Council information regarding the building of an ambulance depot and impacts to the Fire Department and Straffordville Station. Backe:round Elgin Ambulance Service Elgin County manages ambulance services for all municipalities and residents in Elgin County. Elgin - St. Thomas Emergency Medical Services (EMS) provides ambulance services to residents of Elgin County. Facilities are strategically located across the county with the closest depot in Aylmer. The average response time from Aylmer to Pt. Burwell is approximately 15 minutes. Oxford Ambulance Service Oxford EMS provides emergency medical services to Oxford County. The nearest depot is on Concession Street in Tillsonburg. The ambulance and staff are housed in the Tillsonburg Fire Station. The average response time to Pt. Burwell is approximately 15 minutes. Aylmer Ambulance Depot The current ambulance depot is located at Parkview Heights and Chestnut Street. The Town of Aylmer recently co,mpleted construction oftheir new fire station. During planning stages Aylmer offered the County an opportunity to jointly construct and coexist in a combined Fire/Ambulance facility. Elgin County Council decided to decline the offer of coexisting with Aylmer Fire. In . addition Council decided to avoid entering into long-term lease arrangements for ambulance facilities in the future. As a result the County has decided to build a new ambulance facility at the east end of Aylmer adjacent to the long-term care facility on Highway 3. This location is expected to improve response times of an ambulance to Bayham. . In 2006 County Council analyzed 2005 call data from the existing Aylmer depot when looking at the new Aylmer location. In 2005 the Aylmer depot responded to approximately 1,328 calls. Further, the call data for the busiest tourist season (July - September) was also analyzed with the following results: · Of a total of 300 calls: o 187 Code 4 calls - 49% located in Aylmer o 75 Code 3 calls - 56% located in Aylmer o 38 Code 1 & 2 calls - 47% in Aylmer · Code 4 calls represented the following percentages by municipality: o Aylmer 49% o Bayham 14% o Central Elgin 5% o Malahide 21 % o Other 11% · Average response times for Code 4 calls during the period from July to September were as follows: o Bayham (9 calls) 12.8 minutes o Pt. Burwell (11 calls) 21.0 minutes o Vienna (5 calls) 23.8 minutes Ambulance Service - Provincial The Ministry of Health, Emergency Services Branch provides Standards for Ambulance Bases to assist in establishing and constructing ambulance facilities. Ambulance Service - County The County is in the initial stages of developing a strategic plan for ambulance services. Using the philosophy of the previous County Council the plan will include a long-term expansion plan; identify potential future depot sites and strategic placement of ambulance depots. The County will take into consideration statistical information on call volumes, response times, location options and municipal growth patterns to assist in development of a strategic plan. To date the County has not established a formal committee to undertake the development of a strategic plan for ambulance services. 2 Impact to Fire Department In 1995 the municipality constructed the Straffordville Fire Station with the potential for an ambulance depot to coexist in the station. To house an ambulance the station would have to undergo renovations to establish a separate and secure area for each of the ambulance and fire operations. In 2006 the department responded to 61 medical emergency incidents where an ambulance also attended; representing 41 % of all emergency incidents in the municipality. Twenty- three (23) ofthe 61 responses were due to the Delay of EMS. Year to Date Incidents By Type - 2006 Other (11) 8% Fire (34) 26% -MVCl'4) 18% Medical (61) 48% An ambulance located in Bayham or close proximity where the response time for EMS is significantly reduced will benefit the municipality through the fire department responding to fewer medical assist emergencies. Staff Comments In 2005 and 2006 firefighter salary and wages exceeded the allotted budgets by approximately $8000 and $4000 respectively. The municipality would potentially realize a financial benefit through reduced firefighter salary and wages. The County Ambulance Coordinator has advised staff that ambulance response times for the Aylmer depot meets the provincial requirements. The analysis is based on all response times of ambulance responses regardless of municipality and location. Development of a strategic plan for ambulance service may provide information to support an ambulance facility in closer proxim~ty to Bayham. 3 ~ 00 Cl) s Cl) ...... 0 ~ ~ 00 ....... s:1 ::i o ..o~ ~ Cl) ~ ~ Cl)C+-o "2 0 Cl)~ ~ Cl) Cl) S Cl) 0... o 0 ~o p ~ ..0"0 ~ .S oos:1 s:1 .sa ...... ...... "E t';! ~ as 00"0 Cl) ...... l-< 00 00 s:1 e 8 CI.) l-< gcS 0....... o ...... o ~oo S 00 ~u .a- 0 '2 s ::i 0 ::;8 U . Cl) B ~ .s~o.. "0 Cii 0 l-< ,.!:l '51> ~ ~ Cl) ~ a:l "ta o 0 b ~ ...... 00 - s:1 C+-o . 5h C+-o 0 ....... 00 o ~ ~ Cl) 00 .2 s:1 .::: Cl)> CI:l"ta SCl)l-<...c:...... .~ .:: cS.~ 5 Cl) t';! ....... 00 oo~~.ge s:1 l:: ....... ...... 0... o o 0...00 Cl) 0... <+=l 0 Cl) l-< ~ ~ '5h 0 .s l-< t) Cl) s:1...... "OCl)"ta::i~ .ggt5~3 2 l-< t';!.s'~ ~]~t)S 0. ~ ~ ~ .s ~ Cl) 0" u gfS[eoo ...... 0 0 s:1~.s:1 "EUoo~ ~ > .~ 00 0 Cl) ...... eS"O:gJ5: 00 0 Cl) ~ 0 5 U ~ ~ '& gB~~"ta 8~8S~~ ~oo ~ 'E 8 8 ~ ~ &5 ~] 'E .a- t';! Cl)...... CI.) 0 ,a-.S 0 .S r/.l .~ . 'Eo ~ ~ Cl) 8 d Cl).......Os:1l=i ::i l-< ::i'~ CI:l s:1 ::;8 ~..o !:. p '5h 0~Cl)",....... Cl)......Ciioo8~ .s808~.c= ]~g~o~ ~..o~..oSS &~.s~8~ N "t:S = ~ 'tf Q,l .== Q,l U Q,l - Q,l ,Q Q,l U 'E Q,l r/.l Q,l U = ~ - = "S < bO .S "t:S - ~ bO Q,l - ('t') = = t!. = = M ~ ::u: = 1:: o 0 .... 1:1. ~ Q,l ..a - =:= Q,l ~ s.... e': o ~ u..cl Q,lE-t ~:: Q,l =.c~ O=I,..,C..cl 1:1.=0=;';::: ~8=sa: - Q,l U Q,l "t:S Q,l d ~, Q,l Q,l ..cl .. - :t: "t:S .... 1:I...cl .~ ... u.l 0 ..... ....... -.... ~ u.l Q,l u.l ~ Q,l > Q,l 0 ~ &~ &U .cl Q,l Q,l Q,l ..., -;w-..cl-- bO"t:S.... =""S d = "t:S 0 = .;;0 ~ = ~ = "2=~~.!! ~UQ,l"t:S~ bO == 'Eu ~ u Q,l .... _ 0 = bO u.lUQ,l~~ S.o~i-~ u===r/.l:: =S~SQ,l . 8 u -= U ,uE .c u.lo.cQ,l := "' ....S..clQ,l~ .os ~....V).~ ~ ~ c,S Q,l .~ ..cl ... Q,l U = 1:I.;;.;,...u== 'C3~='~~d 'a~8s:.-=" = d Q,l ~ ~ .S ~ .;;0 ..cl .. bO ~u.l""'~....,04~ Q,l~I,..,="""'- ..cl Q,l 0 ~ >"..cl .... - :> _ .... U u.l ~ ~ = = ~ "t:S 0 .~ .c = Q,l _....~dOd ~Q,lQ,l=u.. ~u-'" 0 i:.. =e; -.S~ c.S.!!dc.S..!2Pu.l =.. ,-, Q,l =.c-=-> ~sc.S.!!=~ =~~I:I.~~ o '""" .... .~ ..cl = U 0 U bO:S ~ ~~-9~~e ..cl a ... _ .... 1:1. E-t~8~~e '-',-- " " October 17,2006 450 SUNSET DRIVE ST. THOMAS, ONTARIO N5R 5V1 PHONE (519) 631-1460 FAX (519) 633-7661 WNW. elgin-county .on.ca landrusiak@elgin-county.on.ca LARYSA ANDRUSIAK AMBULANCE and EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT COORDINATOR Fire Chief Paul Groeneveld Municipality of Bayham P.O. Box 160 9344 Plank Road Straffordville, ON NOJ 1 YO 'Since 1852' "RE: Tiered Fire Medical Call Response Analysis Dear Fire Chief Groeneveld, This correspondence is in regard to the 43 medical fire response call sheets you provided to me for further analysis. As background, London Central Ambulance Communication Centre (CACC) tiers fire response in Elgin County upon designating a call as a Code 4 (most medically urgent). At that time St. Thomas Fire Dispatch is notified of the call and provided call information. St. Thomas Fire Dispatch then tiers fire response according to the Medical Dispatch Response criteria developed and agreed to by each municipal fire department. According to the Elgin County Fire Department Medical Dispatch Response sheet developed for use by St. Thomas Fire Dispatch, all Fire Departments within Elgin County respond to the following: all motor vehicle collisions; delay of EMS of over 20 minutes; and at the request of EMS. In addition Bayham Fire Department also responds to VSA (Vital Signs Absent), Chest Pain and Cardiac Arrest calls. Of the 43 call sheets you provided representing the time period of February 11 th to October 1st, 2006 (approximately an 8 month period): 8 calls were at or above the 20 minute response time. 4 of the calls were at the request of EMS. 20 were Chest Pain calls (some were noted as such in the lower right side of the sheet under Life Threatening section). 3 of the calls were listed as Heart Problems or Heart Attack 1 call was for a VSA. 36 of the above calls fall within the criteria for fire tiered response by Bayham Fire Department. 7 calls did not meet the criteria for fire tiered response call out. Of those, 5 appear to be CACC ambulance arrival time estimation errors and 2 appear to be Fire Dispatch errors. These 7 calls represent approximately 16% of the calls analyzed. The average response time of the calls provided was 17 minutes, with a range of between 5 minutes to 31 minutes. As per our telephone conversation earlier today, it was agreed that I would bring to CACC's attention the need to be as precise as possible in assessing ambulance arrival times to avert unnecessary fire tiered response call outs for delay of EMS. As well, it was agreed to monitor fire tiered response call outs in Bayham over the next several months. Sincerely, n. I . . -(~ ~~ (Acwrc- Larysa Andrusiak, Ambulance & Emergency Management Coordinator cc. Mark McDonald, CAO REPORT TO COUNTY COUNCIL FROM: Larysa Andrusiak, Ambulance & Emergency Management Coordinator DATE: March 15, 2007 SUBJECT: 911 Central Emergency Reporting Bureau (CERB) OPP Contract Renewal CORPORATE GOAL'S) REFERENCED: To ensure fiscal responsibility and accountability To recognize and seize opportunities for improvement INTRODUCTION: The current Agreement for the Provision of 9-1-1 C.E.R.B. Services between the Ontario Provincial Police and the Corporations of the County of Elgin and the City of St. Thomas expires December 13, 2007. This report discusses the further renewal of this Agreement DISCUSSION: During the previous renewal process in 2004, a Letter of Understanding extending the original Agreement was signed by all parties, confirming the inclusion of all terms, with the possible exception of costs. It should be noted that the 2004 renewal contained a reduction in the annual per capita cost from $0.575 to $0.561 as a result of a re-evaluation of the OPP CERB Services cost formula. The renewal options available to the County and City continue to include renewal for a further 3 year term by way of six months written notice (due June 2007). Correspondence has been received from the OPP Contract Policing Bureau indicating that upon renewal, the annual per capita rate for the provision of CERB services would be unchanged at $0.561. Based on the Municipal Property Assessment Corporation Population Report as of February 22, 2007 for the County of Elgin of 44,975 and the City of St. Thomas of 32,486, with a total county population of 77,461, the annual cost would be $43,455.62 for the three year term. City and lower tier municipalities are billed the per capita rate based on their population annually. The OPP is mandated to provide CERB services on a non-profit basis, and to ensure against a financial loss the maximum CERB contract term is three years. Periodically, an examination of the 911 CERB cost formula is conducted and may result in future cost amendments. History: In 2001 Elgin County and the City of St. Thomas were paying Bell $107,915 per year for the provision of 911 Primary Answering Service. When Bell provided notice of withdrawal of the provision of this service, the County initiated an RFP for this service. Three bids were received: -Seaway (bid for enhanced 911 was $96,567; however did not have adequate backup system and no access to multi-lingual services -deemed not to meet requirements ). -911 ER (bid $58,957) -OPP (bid $44,003.60) These bids were received in 2001, and one may assume that costs have risen and expect current bids to reflect that. The 911 Steering Committee (list of members attached) met March 6, 2007. None of the stakeholders identified any issues or problems with the existing 911 CERB services. 911 call volume and efficiency reports were reviewed and contract options were discussed. The Committee voted unanimously to recommend to County and City Councils that the Agreement for the Provision of 9-1-1 C.E.R.B. Services with the OPP be renewed for a further three year period. CONCLUSION: The current Agreement for the Provision of 9-1-1 C.E.R.B. Services between the Ontario Provincial Police and the Corporations of the County of Elgin and the City of St. Thomas expires December 13,2007. Under the current Letter of Understanding exists the option of renewing the Agreement for a further three year period at the same annual per capita rate of $0.561. Based on the latest Municipal Property Assessment Corporation population figures of 77,461 for the County and City, the annual cost will be $43,455.62. The 911 Steering Committee met and recommends to County and City Councils the renewal of the Agreement for an additional three year period. RECOMMENDATION: THAT County Council approve the renewal of the existing Agreement with the OPP for the Provision of 911 CERB (Central Emergency Reporting Bureau) Services, as provided for in the Letter of Understanding dated June 9, 2004, and as per the renewal clause in the existing Agreement, for a further term of three years, on the same terms and conditions, at an annual per capita cost of $ 0.561 and annual cost of $43,455.62, THAT County Council direct staff to provide notice of such within the time period stipulated in the Agreement, THAT City Council be encouraged to concur with these recommendations, and, THAT this Resolution of Council be affixed to the renewal contract as required. Respectfully Submitted Approved for ~~ ~;:L Larysa ndruslak, Ambulance & Emergency Management Coordinator 911 STEERING COMMITTEE 2007 Wendell Graves, St. Thomas City Clerk Dave Warden, St. Thomas Council Jim Mcintyre - Elgin County Council Ryan Cox - Elgin County OPP Mark Traichevich, Jeff Driedger, Darrell Pinnell (St. Thomas City Police Representative one of the above) - St. Thomas City Police Bill Segui - Aylmer Police Chief Bob Barber - St. Thomas Fire Chief Michael Rozario - Southwold Fire Chief Paul Groeneveld - Bayham Fire Chief Peter Barber - Malahide Fire Chief Don Crocker - Central Elgin Fire Chief Kim Charlebois - London CACC Manager Larry Breen - Bell Canada 911 Mary-Helen Ramerth - Amtelecom Jim Malik - Elgin-St. Thomas EMS REPORT TO COUNTY COUNCIL FROM: Alan Smith, Manager, Economic Development DATE: March 2th, 2007 SUBJECT: Economic Development Plan - Selection of Consultant Corporate Goals: . To promote Elgin as "The Place to Live" . To forge community partnerships . To provide innovative and collaborative quality service . To recognize and seize opportunities for improvement Introduction: During the December 14th, 2006, County Council meeting, the Manager of Economic Development presented Council members with an overview of current and future initiatives that will form the foundation of the County's economic development program. One of the key projects that were discussed was the undertaking of an Economic Development Plan. Staff explained that this strategic document would guide the economic development activities of the County for the next five years. The document will also contain a detailed implementation plan that will provide the County's new Economic Development Office with specific action steps in achieving an environment that is conducive to attracting and retaining new and diverse investment that will create employment, increase tax assessment, and generate wealth throughout the County. This Plan will also form the background for the development of a marketing plan/initiatives that will be undertaken in the fall of 2007. In order to assist staff with completing this important planning project, the presentation also contained a review of a Request for Proposal (RFP) that would be issued in February 2007 for the retaining of consulting services. This report provides information on the selection process and staff's recommendation(s) for engaging of a consulting firm to work with the Manager of Economic Development and the County of Elgin Economic Development Advisory Committee (CEEDAC) to complete an Economic Development Plan. Discussion: A RFP for consulting services to complete an Economic Development Plan for the County of Elgin was advertised in the Economic Development Council of Ontario (EDCO) website on January 26th (for a three week time period) and in the London Free Press on January 2th. In addition, invitations to submit proposals were given to thirteen (13) consulting firms for their consideration. Five submissions were received on the RFP closing date of February 20th, 2007 (most submissions contained at least two collaborating firms). This type of partnering is quite common and was expected given the magnitude of the project. The Manager of Economic Development and a "selection" subcommittee of CEEDAC consisting of Committee Chair Jim Bundschuh, Warden Lynn Acre, and Deb Mountenay evaluated the submitted proposals on the following criteria: . Creative and innovative approach to the project (25%) . Team experience, qualifications, and successful completion of similar projects (15%) . Demonstrated understanding of the project and scope of work (15%) . Personal suitability and fit (20%) . Completeness/thoroughness of proposal, ability to meet project specifications (15%) . Fee structure and timeframe to complete the project (10%) Upon review of the submissions and the completed evaluation forms, two consulting teams were granted interviews on March 5th, 2007. The proposal by Millier, Dickinson, Blais, consisting of principals Lauren Millier, Brock Dickinson, and Paul Blais was unanimously selected to undertake the project. They clearly demonstrated the most impressive skills and expertise to produce an economic development plan for Elgin County. Their methodology relies on a strong community consultation process and a flexible and creative approach to plan development. This approach should lead to the required community input to complete a plan that is reflective of the aspirations of our stakeholders and public. Unlike the other submissions, Millier, Dickinson, Blais, also recognized the need to review our delivery of economic development. In other words they stressed a governance structure should be developed that will result in the best delivery of economic development services to Elgin County stakeholders. This includes the need to identify what economic development activities the County should be involved with in relation with the lower tier governments. Addressing the governance issue is important which was missing in the other submissions. Furthermore, the County will receive the experience and backgrounds of all three principles of this firm as they are all dedicated to working on this project. Their strong enthusiasm to complete a successful economic development plan for the County of Elgin was quite evident during the interview. All three principals of this firm are highly regarded in the economic development profession. This reputation was echoed based upon the comments received from the several references that were contacted by the Manager of Economic Development. A good working relationship with the recommended consulting firm is anticipated. Millier, Dickinson, Blais, have indicated they will be able to complete the project by the specified date of August 31 st, 2007, at a cost of $59,913.00 (excluding taxes). The approved budget for this project is $60,000.00 (excluding taxes). The County of Elgin will be receiving 50% funding dollars from the Community Transition Program for this project. It should be noted that during the March ih CEEDAC meeting, Members agreed with the subcommittee's recommendation for retaining the consulting firm Millier, Dickinson, Blais, as the following resolutions were adopted: 1. "That the selection subcommittee's recommendation for the retaining of Millier, Dickinson, Blais, to complete an Economic Development Plan be accepted; and 2. That CEEDAC recammends Caunty Cauncil engage the cansulting firm Millier, Dickinsan, Blais, to. camplete an Ecanamic Develapment Plan far the Caunty af Elgin." Conclusion: The Caunty af Elgin requires an actian based and innavative ecanamic develapment plan that the lawer tier gavernments, stakehalders, and the residents af Elgin Caunty can embrace. In arder to. accamplish this task requires the retaining af experienced individuals with a creative and flexible approach to. plan develapment. After reviewing the submitted propasals and interviewing the shart-listed candidates, Ecanamic Develapment staff and the CEEDAC are canfident that the cansulting firm Millier, Dickinsan, Blais, have the experience and planning approach to. assist Ecanamic Develapment staff create the required Plan. The project is expected to. begin in mid April 2007 and be campleted by August 31St, 2007. Recommendation: That the cansulting firm Millier, Dickinsan, Blais, be engaged to. develap an Ecanamic Develapment Plan far the Caunty af Elgin at a cast af $59,913.00 (excluding taxes) as described in the March 2th, 2007, Caunty Cauncil repart submitted by the Manager af Ecanamic Develapment. Respectfully Submitted ItH Nam: Alan Smith Pasitian: Ecanamic Develapment Manager Approved fa Mark G. Mc , Chief Administrative Officer. REPORT TO COUNTY COUNCIL FROM: Alan Smith, Manager, Economic Development March 2ih, 2007 DATE: SUBJECT 2010 International Plowing Match and Rural Expo Corporate Goals: · To promote Elgin as "The Place to Live" . To forge community partnerships · To provide innovative and collaborative quality service Introduction: The Ontario Plowmen's Association (OPA) is a not-for-profit organization that was Incorporated in 1911 as a provincial organization. The OPA's mission is to advance interest and involvement in agriculture by promoting new technologies, environmental and safety issues, and by preserving the history of soil cultivation. The OPA is also the parent host of the International Plowing Match & Rural Expo (IPM). Each year, it is within the OPA's mandate, that the OPA partners with one local organizing committee to host the IPM. During the March 13th, 2007, County Council meeting, a delegation from the OPA was received requesting financial support in the amount of $100,000.00 for hosting the 2010 International Plowing Match in Elgin County. The delegation indicated that if this support were not received the OPA would not pursue hosting the event in Elgin County. Although the delegation presented benefits to hosting the IPM, a number of concerns where raised that led Council to make the following motion: "That the Manager of Economic Development prepares a report to Council on the implications of hosting the International Plowing Match in 2010." Discussion: In 2010 the OPA is proposing to host the IPM in the County of Elgin. The March 13th, 2007, OPA delegation informed County Council that in order for this to transpire would require a financial commitment of $100,000.00. The overview provided by the OPA delegation highlighted a number of benefits or positive outcomes that previous host communities have experienced: .:. Increased tourist activity .:. Enhanced community relations .:. Returning visitors .:. Improved infrastructure .:. Financial returns (Perth County estimated $12 million impact) .:. Creates a living legacy for the agricultural community .:. Increased volunteerism The delegation however did indicate that although a financial contribution of $100,000.00 is being requested, hosting the IPM could place demands on other resources of the local community and organizations such as human and logistics. The implications these demands will have on the County's resources, financial and nonfinancial, are unclear and require further investigation. Furthermore, given the magnitude of this event, there are a number of other questions or concerns that must be addressed that could have substantial ramifications for the County and the lower tier government in which the event is situated that was not covered during the OPA 's presentation: .:. What are the specific roles, responsibilities, and expectations of the County, OPA, and host municipality? .:. If a profit is not realized, what is the status of the original loan of $1 OO,OOO.OO? Who pays? .:. Not including the original $100,000.00 request, are there other cost implications for the County? If so, what are they and how much? .:. The IPM requires a gOO-acre site. In order to accommodate the site and associated infrastructure requirements may place a strain on the resources of the host township/municipality (Le. roads, water, workforce etc.). Will the host municipality be prepared for such a large undertaking? If infrastructure upgrades are required, like roads for example, will the host municipality expect the County to contribute? .:. What are the health, fire, and security implications? .:. Undertaking this event will also have insurance and legal implications? How and who will address them? The County? .:. Hosting the IPM will require commitment by County staff? Will County departments have to hire more staff? Will this require the hiring of a County IPM Coordinator? .:. Is nutrient management planning required? If yes, by whom and at what financial cost? Although not exhaustive, the above list of questions does raise some of the possible implications that must be answered in order for County Council to make an informed decision to host the 201 OIPM. Given that this project, if undertaken, may substantially impact the County and the Economic Development Office, the Manager of Economic Development is recommending that the OPA request be referred to the County of Elgin Economic Development Advisory Committee (CEEDAC) to review the above implications and other issues pertaining to the hosting of the 2010 IPM. Economic Development staff with CEEDAC will have completed an Economic Development Plan by August 31St, 2007, and a Marketing plan/initiatives by early 2008. These undertakings will prioritize economic development strategies and projects over the next five years. It would be preferable to review the IPM request in the context of these planning projects. However, the timelines provided by the OPA does not allow for this inclusion. Therefore, the decision to participate in the IPM may not be based on the strategic priorities that are developed as a result of both planning projects. Therefore to accommodate the OPA, staff is recommending that CEEDAC submit their recommendation(s) to County Council for June 2007. If a decision to host the 2010lPM is not to be made until June 2007, staff is also recommending that $33,000.00 of the $100,000.00 requested amount be secured during the 2007 budget deliberations as a gesture of good faith toward the OPA. Those funds would be reallocated based on the recommendation(s) of the Chief Administrative Officer if County Council denies the request by the OPA. During this time frame, staff recommends that the County encourage the OPA to approach the City of St. Thomas for financial support for Elgin County hosting the IPM. Although the IPM would be situated in a municipality within Elgin County, the City of St. Thomas could receive economic benefit(s) from the associated activities of the event- accommodation, dining, services, etc. Conclusion: There are a wide variety of implications both financial and nonfinancial when considering the request by the Ontario Plowmen's Association to hold the 2010 IPM in Elgin County. In order for County Council to make an informed decision, the Manager of Economic Development is recommending that CEEDAC review the possible implications of the OPA's request as highlighted, but not limited to, those issues indicated in this report. In order to meet the timelines of the OPA, CEEDAC would have until June 2007 to submit a recommendation to Council. In order to show a gesture of good faith and that the OPA's request is being seriously considered, approximately 1/3rd or $33,000.00 of the requested $100,000.00 be allocated during the 2007 budget deliberations. Given that the City of St. Thomas may also benefit from Elgin County hosting the IPM, the OPA will be encouraged by Economic Development staff to discuss possible funding arrangements with City Council. Recommendation: 1. That the request by the Ontario Plowmen's Association for the County of Elgin to contribute $100,000.00 for the hosting of the International Plowing Match & Rural Expo be referred to the County of Elgin Economic Development Advisory Committee with a recommendation that considers, but is not limited to, the implications discussed in the March 2ih, 2007, Council report submitted by the Manager of Economic Development; and 2. That the County of Elgin Economic Development Advisory Committee's recommendation in response to the Ontario Plowmen's Association March 13th, 2007, request be submitted to County Council no latter than June 2007; and 3. That $33,000.00 of the requested $100,000.00 be allocated during the 2007 budget deliberations with the understanding if the request to hold the International Plowing Match & Rural Expo is denied by County Council, the allocated funds will be redirected as per recommendation by the County's Chief Administrative Officer; and 4. That the Manager of Economic Development encourage the Ontario Plowmen's Association to approach the City of St. Thomas to assist the County of Elgin with funding of the 2010 International Plowing Match & Rural Expo. Respectfully Submitted A,an4# Manager of Economic Development Approved for .ssion Mark G. McDon , Chief Administrative Officer. REPORT TO COUNTY COUNCIL FROM: Cathy Bishop Director of Cultural Services DATE: February 19, 2007 SUBJECT: Visual/Audio Image Release Form CORPORATE GOAL'S) REFERENCED: 1. To ensure fiscal responsibility and accountability 2. To provide innovative and collaborative quality service 3. To recognize and seize opportunities for improvement INTRODUCTION: The County of Elgin does not have an official Visual/Audio Image Release Form. This form grants permission to the County of Elgin and its employees to take and use images of public and staff alike for web sites, publications, promotions, broadcasts and advertisements. The form releases the County of Elgin from any claims, damages or liability. It can help avoid lawsuits for libel, invasion of privacy or even copyright infringement. DISCUSSION: Cultural Services would like to raise their profile by promoting the services they offer and the importance of the library within our communities. Staff has contacted Fanshawe College in London who has agreed as part of their course to do a free 5 to 7 minute video and 3 public service announcements. The announcements will highlight three specific areas. 1. The Library Card - "One card can change everything" 2. Library Programs for all ages 3. Who we are and what we can do for you Based on the above, staff would like to suggest that the County of Elgin approve the attached Visual/Audio Image Release Form. This form has been reviewed and approved by the County's solicitor. Anyone under the age of 18 must have a parent or guardian sign on their behalf. CONCLUSION: The County of Elgin requires a Visual/Audio Image Release Form for their protection against any claims, damages or liability that may occur in connection with the taking of use of the images or printed materials. Staff is recommending that the Visual/Audio Image Release Form be adopted by County Council. RECOMMENDATION: THAT the attached Visual/Audio Image Release Form be adopted by County Council for use in all County departments. Respectfully Submitted ~~ ~ Cathy Bishop Director of Library Services Visual/Audio Imae:e Release Form I grant permission to the County of Elgin and its employees, to take and use visual/audio images of me. Visual/audio images are any type of recording, including photographs, digital images, drawings, renderings, voices, sounds, video recordings, audio clips or accompanying written descriptions. The County of Elgin will not materially alter the original images. I agree that the County of Elgin owns the images and all rights related to them. The images may be used in any manner or media without notifying me, such as web sites, publications, promotions, broadcasts, advertisements, posters and theater slides. I waive any right to inspect or approve the finished images or any printed or electronic matter that may be used with them. I release the County of Elgin and its employees, including any firm authorized to publish and/or distribute a finished product containing the images, from any claims, damages or liability which I may ever have in connection with the taking of use of the images or printed material used with the images. I am at least 18 years of age and competent to sign this release. I have read this release before signing. I understand its content, and I freely accept the terms. Printed Name Date Signature Telephone and e-mail address Parent or Guardian If under 18 years of age Address Project Name: Photographer's Name Signature Date: REPORT TO COUNCIL FROM: Melissa Lewis, Elgin Manor Director of Senior Services DATE: March 15, 2007 SUBJECT: Annual Compliance ReView - Elgin Manor CORPORA TEGOALS REFERENCED: · Nurture and support dignifie<i long'"term care · Recognize and seize opportunities for improvement INTRODUCTION: The Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care is responsible to conduct an annual inspection of aU long-term homes in the province. Annual inspections, combined with follow-up inspections, specialized referrals and compliant investigations, form the basis of the Ministry's compliance system. DISCUSSION/CONCLUSION: Standards and criteria are detailed in the. Long-Term Care Program Manual, and include close to 500 requirements regarding the care and services provi<ie<i to residents. During the Annual Compliance Review our policies, procedures and. practices within the home are evaluated inthe context ofthese Ministry stan<iards by a Compliance Advisor. The annual review for Elgin Manor was completed from March 6 to 9, 2007. A debriefing meeting with our Compliance Advisor Was open to all staffoftheHome, who were encourage<i to attend and participate as part of the process. The managemeht team aIthe home will be completing an action plan for the Ministry to expand the quality improvement program to include a mail-out satisfaction survey, three fire drills in each month and a streamlined process to document hot water temperatures. RECOMMENDATION: THAT the report titled Annual Compliance Review - Elgin Manor be received and filed. Respectfully Submitted '?;::::;:;:;'~7^'^'''- ---~.-'",.~ . ~--"'''" -.., Melissa Lewis. Elgin Manor Director of Senior Services REPORT TO COUNCIL FROM: Melissa Lewis, Elgin Manor Director of Senior Services DATE: March 15,2007 SUBJECT: Attending Physicians Agreements in the Homes CORPORATE GOALS REFERENCED: · Nurture and support dignified long-term care · Provide innovative and collaborative quality service INTRODUCTION: Each of the Elgin County Homes have an established agreement with a Medical Director, and this position supervises the medical programs of the Home and the care of each Attending Physician. In accordance with the Ministry Long-Term Care Program Manual, all individual Attending Physicians who are given privileges to provide medical care to residents must have a written agreement with the Home. DISCUSSION/CONCLUSION: It was identified during a recent contract review at Elgin Manor that one of the attending physician agreements is due for renewal. The purpose of a written contract with each physician is to ensure mutual understanding and agreement regarding roles and responsibilities of the position. Details outlined in the agreement include the term of appointment, assessment and documentation requirements, regular reviews and signing of orders, integration of medical care into the interdisciplinary care team of the Home. The provincial associations for long-term care in Ontario have established a standard sample attending physician agreement for the use of all Homes. This agreement includes Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care requirements related to medical services in long-term care and should form the basis for all physician agreements in the Elgin County Homes. A review of the standard physician contract should be undertaken by the County solicitor to ensure the agreement is up-to-date and continues to be appropriate within our Homes. RECOMMENDATION: THAT the Warden and CAD be directed and authorized to enter into a renewal Attending Physician Agreement with Dr. Ken Morrison for Elgin Manor, AND THAT the Homes Directors request the County solicitor provide a legal review of the standard Attending Physician contract document. Respectfully Submitted ~= Mar . rvtcDon Chief Administrative Officer ,-'/-..._--~ , ----.. Melissa Lewis, Elgin Manor Director of Senior Services REPORT TO COUNTY COUNCIL FROM: Clayton Watters, Director of Engineering Services DATE: January 12, 2007 SUBJECT: Municipal Infrastructure Agreement CORPORATE GOALS: To build and maintain an efficient, affordable, effective and safe transportation network that accommodates the diverse needs of our communities and is able to support economic development and sustainable growth. To provide innovative and collaborative quality service. INTRODUCTION: The County of Elgin presently has a number of agreements with municipalities to permit the installation and maintenance of waterlines on County Roads. The oldest agreement was with the Village of Dutton to construct, use and operate works required for the transmission of water which was signed in 1963, which has since been extended for another 20 years. The most recent agreement is with the Municipality of West Lorne which was signed in 1993 and will expire in 2013. Since the original agreement in 1963 and the latest agreement in 1993, 16 municipalities have entered into agreements with the County. The County of Elgin is interested in signing new agreements with our lower tier partners. The most important issue is municipalities are using the County road system for an additional use - municipal sewage infrastructure of which there is no agreements in place and also the amalgamations within the municipalities. The only exception is Yarmouth that has an agreement for the Lynhurst area. The agreements will clearly define roles, responsibilities and expectations of each party DISCUSSION: The County of Elgin permits the use of the road allowance for many purposes. The road system was and is used by the provincial and local governments, public and private monopolies and local individuals. The governments use the system for: water and sewage systems and utilities: public and private monopolies use the system for energy transmission, utilities and water systems; and local individuals use the systems for water and sewage transmission. Appendix 'A' lists the municipalities that had or presently have agreements for water infrastructure and Appendix'S' lists the municipalities that presently have agreements for sewage infrastructure. Staff is in agreement with the municipalities to permit the use of the County road right- of-way for the collection or transmission of water and sewage systems but agreements must be in place in order that the interests of both parties are protected. The present agreement is made up of the following parts: grant the right to install water line (and its successors), works shall be installed in accordance with good engineering practice, the municipality has the right alter to the works, limitation period of 20 years and hold harmless and indemnification (both parties). In essence the new agreement will look similar to the existing agreement and will include the provision for sewage systems, recognize the new municipal entity and standardize the agreement to permit the use of the County road for local municipal infrastructure. The County solicitor will be required to review the present agreement, make appropriate changes and then circulate to our municipal partners. Once our municipal partners have reviewed and provided comments, a report will be presented to County Council for approval. CONCLUSION: The present agreements with our municipal partners are for the use of the County road system for the installation of water systems - only. There is no mention of sewage systems. Staff is in agreement to include sewage systems in a new agreement but the solicitor for the County of Elgin will review the present agreement and make appropriate changes. Once complete our municipal partners will be requested to review the new document and provide comments. Those comments will be reviewed by County Council so that a 'Municipal Infrastructure Agreement' can be formulized with our partners. RECOMMENDATION: That the solicitor for the County of Elgin prepare an 'Municipal Infrastructure Agreement' for the municipalities to comment on, and; That the comments be reviewed by County Council for final approval and circulation to the municipalities for signature. Respectfully Submitted ~ ~ Clayton Watters Director, Engineering Services Appendix A Agreements for water service Municipality Ag reement Date of Expiration West Eloin Rodnev Expired Januarv 2002 West Lome October 2013 Aldborouah No aareement Dutton I Dunwich Dutton Mav 2013 Dunwich October 2012 Southwold Southwold Expired February 2000 Central Elgin Belmont September 2013 Port Stanlev March 2012 Yarmouth Februarv 2013 Malahide Sprinofield No Aoreement South Dorchester No Aareement Malahide February 1993 Avlmer Avlmer February 2006 Bavham Vienna Expired March 1993 Port Burwell No aareement Bavham Expired December 1992 St. Thomas St. Thomas January 2011 Southwest Middlesex Strathroy No aareement City of London City of London No aoreement Appendix B Agreements for sewage service Municipalitv Agreement Date of Expiration West EIQin Rodney No aQreement West Lome No agreement AldborouQh No aQreement Dutton I Dunwich Dutton No agreement Dunwich No aQreement Southwold Southwold No agreement Central EIQin Belmont No aQreement Port Stanley No agreement Yarmouth Expired Februarv 2006 Malahide Sprinafield No Agreement South Dorchester No AQreement Malahide No agreement Aylmer Aylmer No aQreement Bayham Vienna No aQreement Port Burwell No aQreement Bayham No agreement St. Thomas St. Thomas Januarv 2011 REPORT TO COUNTY COUNCIL FROM: Clayton Watters, Director of Engineering Services DATE: January 12, 2007 SUBJECT: Accidents Review - 2005 CORPORATE GOALS: To promote Elgin as "The Place to Live", To recognize and seize opportunities for improvement, To build and maintain an efficient, affordable, effective and safe transportation network that accommodates the diverse needs of our communities and is able to support economic development and sustainable growth. INTRODUCTION: The County has been compiling accident statistics on County of Elgin roads for many years. This information is used for a variety of reasons: a request from Council to review a location, a staff review before a reconstruction is contemplated or addressing a ratepayer concern. In the Province of Ontario few counties proactively complete a thorough review of accidents on a yearly basis. The exception is the Region of Waterloo who has a full time technician that reviews their road system accidents and reports that information to their Council. The most recent full year of data the County has is 2005 and therefore this initial review utilises 2005 data to determine if any preventive measures are required on our road system to reduce the severity or number of accidents. DISCUSSION: The County has been keeping police collision reports that occur on County roads for more than 20 years. Staff, has used collision history information when completing capital project planning (i.e. traffic signal warrants, road reconstruction) but only at specific areas. Over the past few years staff has entered the collision report data into an electronic database. Now that the data can be ana lysed and sorted, staff is better able to review trends and identify areas that may benefit from improvements. In an attempt to understand motorist behaviours and address potential areas of concern, staff will be disseminating accident statistics annually and making recommendations to Council (if any) periodically. The statistics of importance for 2005 are: . Total accidents on County roads: 530, . Accidents per million kilometres driven (county average) 0.96, (provincial average 1.81), . Day of the week with the most accidents: Friday 101 (Wednesday 94, Thursday 85, Saturday 73, Sunday 66, Tuesday 59 and Monday 52), . Time of day with most accidents: dark 266, daylight 232, dawn 16 and dust 16, . Accidents from November 15 to March 15 (winter control season): 221, . Accidents at intersections or intersection related: 102, . Accidents at intersections where vehicle failed to stop 20 . Accidents involving deer 190; and, . Fatalities: 8. Appendix "A" lists the accidents in 2005 per road. Of importance to the County is the number of accidents per million kilometres driven, which is the last column in the appendix. The accident rate per million kilometre driven is simply the length of the road times the average annual daily traffic (AADT) of that road divided by one million. This number is the benchmark commonly used by the provinces to determine and compare accident rates. This number is important to use as a comparison, otherwise, lower volume roadways would always appear to be "safer" than higher volume roads which typically have more collisions. Staff is using the 2005 statistics due to the fact that the Ministry of Transportation takes nearly 12 months after the year has ended to forward all the information to the County. That information, when received, is transferred to our database so that we can disseminate the information. Appendix B lists the accidents at all intersections on County roads and Appendix C lists all intersections with three or more accidents. Appendix Band C are important because this information is used when analysing multi year accidents at intersections, which could trigger improvements such as signalized intersections, flashing beacons etc. Staff has reviewed all County roads with accidents above the provincial average of 1.81 accidents per million kilometres driven, at intersections with 3 or more accidents and finally all the remaining accidents. Through that review no proactive action is required. As an example, Southdale Line (the highest collisions per one million) has three accidents: in one accident the vehicle stopped at the stop sign and another vehicle slides on icy road and collides with first vehicle, for the second accident one vehicle attempted to pass another vehicle but made contact with the vehicle while he was attempting to pass and the third accident involved a. vehicle making contact with a utility pole. All of these accidents are driver error and not related to engineering design. Another instance is on Richmond Road, the accident rate is 3.08 accidents per million kilometres. Of the six accidents: three were deer collisions, two were collisions with gUide rails and one the vehicle left the roadway and then entered the ditch. Therefore, if the three unavoidable deer collisions are removed the rate would be half or 1.56 or less than the provincial average. Additionally staff, has reviewed the accidents for 2005 with the St. Thomas detachment of the OPP. Staff from the OPP gave valuable insight from their perspective due to patrolling the roadways and observing the system during all environmental conditions and days/nights of the year. The meeting concluded that no roadway required additional attention, but further information is required on John Wise Line between Sunset Road and Imperial Road. This is due, in part, to the fact that four of the ten intersections that have three or more accidents per year are on John Wise Line. County staff will install smart counters at these locations to determine if speed is a factor in the collisions and that information will be forwarded to the OPP for further consultation. Of significance to county staff is the occurrence of a fatality on a County road. At all accidents where fatalities have occurred, staff reviews those particular locations for any deficiencies in the engineering design or maintenance deficiencies of the roadway. To date as a result of these reviews from an engineering perspective no changes have been made. CONCLUSION: The County of Elgin accident rate for the year 2005 is 47% less than the provincial average. Our rate is 0.96 accidents per one million kilometres driven verses the provincial average of 1.81. The collision rate using the provincial average would see 916 accidents but the County had only 530 accidents. Therefore, Elgin County roads are safer than the provincial average. The County of Elgin has been accumulating accident statistics for more than 20 years. This information is now entered into a database for review, comparison and sorting. Staff will disseminate this data annually and report to County Council periodically regarding our findings and any recommended improvements to the road system in an attempt to reduce the severity or number of collisions that occur on County roads. ~ RECOMMENDATION: That this report be received and filed. Re~ Clayton Watters Director, Engineering Services Approved for Su 'ssion Mark G. Chief Administrative Officer At't't:NUIJI. 'A' 2005 C II" . M'II" o ISlons per I Ion Kilometers driven Januarv 21 07 Total Traffic Collisions Per Year Per One Rankina Road # Road Name Lenath AADT on Road Collisions Million 1 7 Clachan Road 4.74 800 1 384 080 0 0.00 2 11 Clinton Line 2.00 350 255 500 0 0.00 3 17 South del Drive 1.37 650 325 033 0 0.00 4 21 Warren 0.40 2450 357.700 0 0.00 5 34 Willsie Bourne 2.46 1600 1,436 640 0 0.00 6 39 Chatham Street 1.32 600 289,080 0 0.00 7 41 Fulton Street 0.66 400 96.360 0 0.00 8 50 Victoria Street 0.56 1000 204,400 0 0.00 9 51 Fruit Ridae Line 1.50 400 219 000 0 0.00 10 55 Elain County Road 14.62 450 2 401 335 0 0.00 11 119 Mill Road 5.85 650 1 387 913 0 0.00 12 46 Culloden Road 8.52 1050 3 265 290 1 0.31 13 13 Shackleton Line 8.97 850 2 782 943 1 0.36 14 6 Johnston Line 9.58 650 2 272 855 1 0.44 15 25 Wellinaton Road 5.86 10900 23314010 13 0.56 16 37 Avon Drive 15.87 850 4 923 668 3 0.61 17 26 St. Georae Street 1.36 3250 1 613 300 1 0.62 18 18 Third Line/Southminister Bourne 18.52 700 4.731.860 3 0.63 19 8 Currie Road 19.73 1500 10.802.175 7 0.65 20 104 Oueens Line 6.81 600 1,491,390 1 0.67 21 40 Sorinafield Road 17.83 1350 8 785 733 6 0.68 22 103 Furnival Road 21.70 1600 12.672.800 9 0.71 23 76 Graham Road 16.03 2150 12.579.543 9 0.72 24 54 Pia ram Road 2.82 1350 1 389 555 1 0.72 25 42 Nova Scotia & Lake Shore Line 22.97 1100 9 222 455 7 0.76 26 4 Sunset Drive 13.55 7600 37 587 700 29 0.77 27 35 Sorinawater Road 9.11 1150 3 823 923 3 0.78 28 74 Belmont Road 14.09 3850 19799973 17 0.86 29 52 Ron McNeil Line 29.18 2900 30 887 030 28 0.91 30 31 Dalewood Road 1.54 1900 1067,990 1 0.94 31 73 Imoerial Road & John Street 19.18 8200 57.405.740 56 0.98 32 30 Hiahburv Avenue 5.75 13650 28.647.938 28 0.98 33 28 Centennial Road 4.78 3500 6 106 450 6 0.98 34 3 Talbot Line 50.55 2350 43.359.263 44 1.01 35 20 Union Road 24.09 1500 13.189.275 14 1.06 36 53 Beech & Elm Street 1.37 3600 1,800 180 2 1.11 37 56 Elm Line 4.92 1500 2 693 700 3 1.11 38 16 Finaal Line 28.01 1600 16 357 840 19 1.16 39 44 Eden Line 7.01 600 1 535 190 2 1.30 40 27 Soarta Line 12.94 1100 5 195410 7 1.35 41 19 Plank Road 19.90 3050 22 153 675 30 1.35 42 22 Fairview Road 8.31 2900 8 796.135 12 1.36 43 23 East Road 2.34 2550 2.177.955 3 1.38 44 36 Ouaker Road 12.41 1400 6.341510 9 1.42 45 45 John Wise & Calton Line 50.48 1950 35929.140 51 1.42 Total Traffic Collisions Per Year Per One Ranking Room # Road Number Lenath AADT on Road Collisions Million 46 38 Heritaqe Line 13.77 1650 8 292 983 12 1.45 47 24 Dexter Line 16.48 1020 6 135 504 9 1.47 48 5 Dunborough Road 11.23 600 2 459 370 4 1.63 49 47 Putnam Road 8.35 1100 3 352 525 6 1.79 50 32 Glencolin Line/ Hacienda Road 5.80 1550 3 281 350 6 1.83 51 14 lona Road 13.71 1200 6 004 980 11 1.83 52 15 Miller Road 1.20 1200 525 600 1 1.90 53 48 Lvons Line 29.59 650 7 020.228 14 1.99 54 2 Pioneer Line 18.26 1700 11.330.330 24 2.12 55 49 Whittaker Road 2.76 450 453.330 1 2.21 56 9 Stalker & Duff Line 27.79 250 2 535 838 6 2.37 57 43 Richmond Road 10.66 500 1.945.450 6 3.08 58 57 Southdale Line 1.02 2500 930.750 3 3.22 Totals 687.44 505.944.787 530 0.96 Appendix 'B' Accidents at Intersections 2005 March 9, 2007 Road Intersection # of accidents # of accidents of other intersectina County road 3 lona Road 1 3 John Street 1 4 Southdale Line 3 1 4 John Wise Line 3 4 Gore Road 1 4 Maiors Line 1 4 Stone Church Road 1 8 Talbot Line 1 8 Main Street 1 14 Fifth Line 1 15 Main Street 1 16 lona Road 1 16 John Wise Line 2 18 Southdel Line 1 19 Calton Line 1 19 Vienna Line 1 20 Fingal Line 1 22 Fruit Ridqe Line 1 22 John Wise Line 3 1 22 Soarta Line 2 24 Waneeta Road 1 25 McBain Line 1 25 Ron McNeil Line 2 1 25 Talbot Line 1 27 Yarmouth Centre Road 1 28 John Wise Line 1 2 30 Femuson Line 2 30 Ron McNeil Line 2 3 32 Hacienda Line 1 32 Springfield Road 1 40 Calton Line 1 1 40 Vienna Line 1 42 Sorinqfield Road 1 43 Vienna Line 1 45 Calton Line John Wise Line 1 45 Richmond Road 1 45 Sprinafield Road 1 1 45 John Wise Line Centennial Road 2 1 45 Fairview Road 1 3 45 Quaker Road 1 45 Springwater Road 3 47 Avon Drive 1 47 Lvons Line 1 1 47 Wilson Line 1 48 Putnam Road 1 1 52 Belmont Road 1 2 52 Hiqhburv Road 3 2 52 Wellington Road 1 2 52 Yarmouth Centre Road 2 56 Centennial Road 1 57 Sunset Road 1 3 73 Avon Drive 1 73 Lyons Line 2 73 Ron McNeil Line 2 73 Glencolin Line 1 73 Dexter Line 1 73 Harvev Street 1 73 Beech Street 1 73 Chestnut Street 1 73 Forest Street 1 73 Proaress Street 3 73 Pine Street 1 73 South Street 1 73 Svdenham Street 3 73 Dine Street 1 74 Ron McNeil Line 2 1 74 Union Street 1 76 Marsh Line 1 103 Johnson Line 1 103 QUeens Line 1 Appendix 'e' Intersections with more than three accidents March 9, 2007 Road Location Notes 4 (Sunset Road) 57 (Southdale Line) Daytime 3 , night time 1 Rear end 2, sideswipe 1, other 1 Intersection signals installed in December 2006 Caaital imarovements reauired nfa 4 (Sunset Road) 45 (John Wise Line) Daytime 2, night time 1 Rear end 2, other 1 Intersection signals installed in 2000 Canital improvements reauired nfa 22 (Fairview Road) 45 (John Wise Line) Daytime 4 Angle 1, sideswipe 1, animal, turning movement Caaital improvements reauired nfa 25 (Wellington Road) 52 (Ron McNeil Line) Daytime 2, night time 1 Angle 1, rear end 2 Intersections signals installed in 2004 Capital improvements reauired nfa 28 (Centennial Road) 45 (John Wise Line) Daytime 2, night time 1 Angle 1, other 2 Caaital improvements reauired nfa 30 (Highbury Road) 52 (Ron McNeil Line) Daytime 4, night time 1 Rear end 2, turning movements 1, animal 1, approaching 1 Intersections signals installed in 2000 Caaital imarovements reauired nfa 45 (John Wise Line) 35 (Springwater Road) Daytime 3 Turning movement 1, angle 1, animal 1 n Capital improvements reouired fa 52 (Ron McNeil Line) 74 (Belmont Road) Capital improvements required Daytime 2, night time 2 Angle 2, turning movement 1 nfa 73 (John Street) Progress Street Daytime 3 Rear end 2, angle 1 Intersections signals installed in 2004 Caaital improvements reauired nfa 73 (John Street) Sydenham Street Daytime 3 Angle 2, turning movement 1 Caaital improvements reauired nfa REPORT TO COUNTY COUNCIL FROM: Peter Dutchak, Manager of Road Infrastructure DATE: March 10,2007 SUBJECT: 2006 Lower Tier Operations Cost Summary Corporate Goal(sJ Referenced: To forge community partnerships, To provide innovative and collaborative quality service and To build and maintain an efficient, affordable, effective and safe transportation network that accommodates the diverse needs of our communities and is able to support economic development and sustainable growth. Introduction As directed by Council this annual report summarizes the local maintenance activities and costs expended in 2006 as provided to the County by the lower tier municipalities. Road maintenance funding is allocated for the repair and maintenance of road infrastructure in order that it functions as it was designed and it is maintained at its current state. The County as part of its capital program completes all improvements to the infrastructure. Municipalities can request capital improvements to reduce maintenance activities in identified areas. These projects are funded by the Capital Budget and in the Preventative Maintenance Projects Account in which $100,000 is allocated annually. Discussion In 2001 Council amended the maintenance payment allocations for the lower tier and payments are now based on the number of kilometers maintained and roads with higher traffic volumes receive more compensation. In 2002 the compensation formula was once again adjusted to reflect additional urban maintenance responsibilities. In 2006 the allocations were increased by 10% to more accurately reflect equipment rates understanding that the County equipment provided to the municipalities at amalgamation was being replaced. The compensation is also increased annually by the Consumer Price Index. The County inspects the road system quarterly and identifies any deviations from the County's Minimum Maintenance Standards and reports these to the municipality. The municipality is then requested to rectify the specific condition and sign and date when the work was completed and return the notice back to the County of Elgin. Staff also hosts monthly road supervisor meetings to discuss capital planning and operational issues. An annual capital account in the amount of $100,000 is established and expended on areas requiring on-going maintenance activities. These small preventative maintenance projects are requested by the local road supervisor and completed in partnership with local forces. The following table examines expenditures per municipality and their surplus for maintenance activities during 2006 as they have reported to the County and are not audited. Municipality 2006 Allocation 2006 Variance % Number of Expenditure Spent Kilometres (as reported) Maintained Aylmer $ 16,124.42 $ 12,002.73 $4,121.69 74% 4.07 Bayham $ 354,764.52 $ 247,518.72 $107,245.80 70% 97.421 Central Elgin $ 511,074.89 $ 451,811.20 $59,263.69 88% 136.089 Dutton I $ 350,404.00 $ 302,945.35 $47,458.65 86% 96.787 Dunwich Malahide $ 541,641.52 $ 338,229.35 $203,412.17 62% 146.135 Southwold $ 392,569.42 $ 302,365.96 $90,203.46 77% 106.593 West EIQin $ 362,509.18 $ 249,144.00 $ 113,365.18 69% 99.453 Totals $2,529,087.95 $1,906,023.31 $625,070.64 686.548 Every municipality reported surpluses for 2006 and collectively had a surplus of $625,070. This positive variance is most likely due to the mild winter storm conditions experienced during this reporting period. The following table summarises the total expenditures by each municipality for the last 9 years and the cumulative differences. Summary of 9 year (1998 - 2006) Maintenance Expenditures Municipality Total Amount Total Amount Total % of 9 year Spent OVER Spent UNDER Allocation to Allocation Maintenance Maintenance Municipality Spent Allocation over Allocation over over last 9 the last 9 years the last 9 years years (as reported) (as reported) Aylmer $1,685 $96,180 102% Bayham $142,638 $2,735,746 95% Central Elain $276,260 $3,827,370 107% Dutton I Dunwich $53,803 $2,825,710 98% Malahide $17,528 $4,032,165 100% Southwold $203 $3,088,826 100% West Elgin $250,588 $2,758,370 Total $276,260.00 $322,122.00 $19,364,367 Collectively, the municipalities under spent their allocations by $4S,862 (or by 0.2%) since 1998. Over this period, the municipalities have been paid approximately $19.4 Million to maintain the County Road system. Winter Maintenance Winter maintenance activities typically exhaust SO - 60% of the maintenance allocations. In 2006, mild weather and a reduction of winter storm activity created positive variances for all maintenance budgets. Each year the winter control minimum maintenance standards are met and exceeded by all municipalities. New technologies, training, techniques and the County's Salt Management Plan all help to reduce costs while increasing the level of service provided. Funding Principle The Elgin maintenance model operates under the assumption that the lower-tier municipalities control costs and may retain any surpluses for purposes deemed fit by their councils. The understanding is that a fixed allocation is granted by the County and the service is designed around the funds available. To formalize this principle a resolution was adopted by Council and states the following: THAT the lower tiers closely monitor the level of service they are providing to limit maintenance expenditures and to work within the approved yearly allocation, and, THAT, as a general funding principle, the yearly maintenance allocation not be exceeded given the latitude available for each participant to control costs and the level of service provided. This funding principle is especially important in years of positive budget variances. Municipalities are encouraged to reserve any excess maintenance funds to offset years with extraordinary expenses. Equipment Reserves In 2006 maintenance allocations were increased by 10% to more accurately reflect true equipment rental rates. These "charge out" rates cover the costs of equipment operation, housing and replacement. Every municipality charges for equipment usage with similar rates. For example, one municipality charged $136,SOO of their allocation towards equipment usage in 2006. Although all municipalities charge similar equipment rates, some municipalities do not utilise equipment reserves for future replacement. Municipalities are encouraged to establish equipment reserves from their equipment rental rates to assist with expensive and inevitable equipment replacement. Conclusion Costs are managed and reported differently across the County. For example, supervision and patrol charges range from $10,000 to $80,000 between municipalities of similar size. One municipality reported outsourcing over $200,000 of their allocation to other service providers while others did not differentiate outsourcing costs. Given the latitude available for each participant to control costs and the level of service provided a funding principle exists that maintenance allocations not be exceeded. Last year the municipalities collectively under spent their Maintenance Allocations by $625,070. Since 1998, the municipalities have collectively under spent their allocations by $45,862 (or by 0.2%). Winter control can exhaust two-thirds of the maintenance allocations, and therefore, mild weather conditions experienced in 2006 translated into maintenance budget surpluses for all municipalities. Municipalities control maintenance costs and may retain any surpluses for purposes deemed fit by their councils. Municipalities are encouraged to reserve surpluses for use during years with extraordinary costs and to establish equipment replacement reserves. Recommendation THAT this report be received and filed. RESPECTFULL Y SUBMITTED APPROVED FOR SUBMISSION ~ Manager of Road Infrastructure OJM~-W Clayton Watters Director of Engineeri Mark Mc Chief Administrative Officer REPORT TO COUNTY COUNCIL FROM: Peter Dutchak, Manager of Road Infrastructure Sonia Beavers, Purchasing Co-ordinator DATE: March 10, 2007 SUBJECT: Capital Projects - Tender Awards Coroorate Goa/(s) Referenced: To build and maintain an efficient, affordable, effective and safe transportation network that accommodates the diverse needs of our communities and is able to support economic development and sustainable growth. Introduction As part of the approved 2007 Capital Budget, three capital projects were advertised as per the County's purchasing policy and were received until March 8, 2007. Discussion The following projects were tendered per the County's purchasing policy and closed on March 8, 2007: 1. Engineering Services for Road Survey and Detailed Design - Talbot Line - West Elgin 2. Graham Road Culvert Slip-Lining 3. New Sarum Bridge Replacement (COMRIF Intake #2) The following tables list the tenders received from lowest to highest price for each of these projects. Engineering Services- Talbot Line - West Elgin Submitted rice $ 122 960.00 $ 126987.47 $ 145 294.20 $ 145 220.00 No Bid This project forms part of the Talbot Line Rehabilitation project scheduled over a four year period and to be completed in 2010. A reserve has been established utilizing the Move Ontario Provincial Grant and Federal Gas Tax Revenue to fund this project. The lowest bid is within budget estimates. Graham Road Culvert Slip-Lining Inc. Ltd. Submitted rice $ 44,414.00 $ 46,502.20 $ 67,310.00 This project involves the lining of an existing steel culvert on Graham Road. The existing culvert is damaged and must be slip-lined to protect the roadway and the existing watermain located above the culvert. $50,000 has been included in the approved 2007 Capital Budget, therefore, the lowest price received is within budget estimates. New Sarum Bridge Replacement (COMRIF Intake #2) Com an Facca Inc. McLean Ta lor Construction Submitted rice $ 1 292589.44 $ 1 385,500.00 The County of Elgin was successful in receiving two-thirds funding for the replacement of the New Sarum Bridge through the COMRIF Intake #2 initiative. The lowest tender received plus the cost of engineering and inspection is within the $1.5 Million budget allocation. Conclusion Three tenders were advertised per the County's purchasing policy and received until March 8, 2007. The lowest tenders for each project were each within their budget allocations. Recommendation THAT Westlake Inc. be selected to complete Engineering Services for Talbot Line - West Elgin, at their total tender price of $ 122,960.00 inclusive of taxes; and, THAT Alexman Contracting Inc. be selected to complete the Graham Road Culvert Lining, at their total tender price of $ 44,414.00 inclusive of taxes; and, THAT Facca Inc. be selected to complete the Replacement of the New Sarum Bridge, at their total tender price of $ 1,292,589.44 inclusive of taxes; and, THAT, the Warden and Chief Administrative officer be directed and authorized to enter into agreements with these companies to complete these projects. RESPECTFULL Y SUBMITTED APPROVED FOR SUBMISSION ~ Peter Dutchak Manager of Road Infrastructure (Th)~~ Clayton Watters Director of E . Mark Chief Administrative Officer REPORT TO COUNTY COUNCIL FROM: Sonia Beavers, Purchasing Co-Ordinator DATE: March 15, 2007 SUBJECT: Cell Phone Collection Program Corporate Goals: To ensure fiscal responsibility and accountability. To forge community partnerships. INTRODUCTION Over the years, the County of Elgin has accumulated surplus cell phones. In the past, surplus items have either been discarded or returned to Bell Mobility who in turn donate the cell phones to Women's shelters. DISCUSSION I CONCLUSION: There is a new program called "Pitch-In Canada's National Cell Phone Collection Program". This Program pays community groups, schools, businesses and local governments for every cell phone collected. In addition to raising money for local projects, by collecting cell phones the County is a) protecting the environment (cell phones contain hazardous and toxic materials which should not go into landfill), b) re-using (millions of cell phones can be refurbished or remanufactured for reuse in emerging countries where they rely on wireless communication), c) recycling (cell phones and batteries that cannot be re-used can be recycled to recover materials). If the County applies to be part of the program, the County will receive a free start up kit (which includes instructions, posters, prepaid shipping labels, promotional materials). Each department will publicize the program by putting up posters that are provided free of charge. Each department will need to make up a collection box. The Administration Building's collection box will be located in Cultural Services. During regular duties, the Driver Maintenance for Cultural Services will pick up the surplus cell phones from each location and store the surplus cell phones in the surplus storage room. Once fifty cell phones have been collected, the United Way Committee will package and ship the cell phones to the Collection Program using prepaid FedEx stickers provided by the Collection Program. The National Cell Phone Collection Program will pay $1.00 for every cell phone collected and received by Phoneback Canada. The County of Elgin has an obligation to protect the environment and when possible to assist community initiatives. Staff therefore recommend that the County of Elgin consider this venture with all proceeds collected going to United Way, (a way of giving back to our community). This program will be made available to all staff and the public. RECOMMENDATION: THAT, the United Way Committee be authorized to register with Pitch-In Canada's National Cell Phone Collection Program; and THAT, the program is open to all staff and public; and THAT, all proceeds collected will be donated to the United Way Campaign. Respectfully Submitted ~&1\.Lr"- ~~~ Soma Beavers Purchasing Co-Ordinator REPORT TO COUNTY COUNCIL FROM: Sonia Beavers, Purchasing Co-ordinator DATE: March 16, 2007 SUBJECT: Semi-Annual Information Report - Contract Awards (August 1, 2006 to December 31, 2006) and Direct Negotiation Expenditures (Jan. - Dec. 2006) CORPORATE GOALCS) REFERENCED: To ensure fiscal responsibility and accountability. INTRODUCTION As per the County of Elgin's Procurement Policy 10.1; " an information report containing the details relevant to the exercise of delegated authority for all contracts awarded that exceed $5,000 including amendments and renewals is to be prepared and reported to Council on a semi-annual basis". In addition, the County of Elgin's Procurement Policy 3.14 states; "Any expenditure exceeding $50,000 for a one time purchase or over an annual basis must be reported to Council". DISCUSSION I CONCLUSION: The Council of the Corporation of the County of Elgin delegated authority to the Directors to award contracts as follows; Value Report Status Greater than No report to Council required if within 10% of the $5,000 but less approved budget allocation than $50,000 Greater than No report to Council required if within approved $50,000 but less budget than $100,000 However, Council also approved that a semi-annual information report would be brought forward containing details of the award of contracts including amendments and renewals. The details of the award of contracts is attached as Appendix A. The Council of the Corporation of the County of Elgin delegated authority to the Directors to purchase goods and selVices using the Direct Negotiation method. The Policy states as long as an attempt to purchase the required goods and selVices has been made in good faith, the goods or selVices can be purchased using the Direct Negotiation method. Purchases made using the Direct Negotiation method will be reported to Council on an annual basis. In addition, any expenditure exceeding $50,000 for a one-time purchase or over an annual basis must be reported to Council. The details of the Direct Negotiation, one time purchases and purchases exceeding $50,000 over an annual basis are detailed in Appendix B. RECOMMENDATION: THAT the Semi-Annual Information Report - Contract Awards, and Direct Negotiation Expenditures Report be received and filed. Respectfully Submitted k-c, ~.r1AJ() /,) Sonia Beavers Purchasing Co-Ordinator Approved for Submission /~~ Linda Veger :E~dl~ Chief Administrative Officer ------ APPENDIX A Purchases greater than $5,000 but less than $100,000 August 1, 2006 to December 31, 2006 Department Budget Project Award Bid Price Allocation (includes taxes) Administrative Operating Annual Monitoring Grey Island $ 7,872 Services Service - Systems Ambulance Bobier Villa Donation Dining Room Goudies $ 8,699 Account Suite Bobier Villa MOHL TC High Low Air Loss KCI $ 6,000 Intensity Needs Mattresses Bobier Villa MOHL TC High Low Air Loss KCI $ 6,000 Intensity Needs Mattresses Bobier Villa Capital Budget 19 - Beds and Stryker Canada $ 67,716 mattresses Elgin Manor Capital Budget Security System RMB $ 13,602 Terrace Lodge Capital Budget Furniture The Brick $ 6,389 Terrace Lodge MOHL TC High Low Air Loss KCI $ 6,000 Intensity Needs Mattresses Terrace Lodge MOHL TC High Low Air Loss KCI $ 6,000 Intensity Needs Mattresses Terrace Lodge MOHL TC High Low Air Loss KCI $ 6,000 Intensity Needs Mattresses Information Capital Hardware Protek $ 35,255 Technology Information LT. Operational Hardware CDW $ 6,840 Technology Information LT. Operational Software update Autodesk $ 13,613 Technology for autocad Information LT. Operational Licensing for Protek $ 6,958 Technology veritas and citrix Information LT. Operational HR Software Info HR $ 6,371 Technology license fee Information LT. Operational Block Agreement Protek $ 11,400 Technology for future consulting services Information LT. Operational Virus protection Protek $ 13,193 Technology annual renewal APPENDIX A Purchases greater than $5,000 but less than $100,000 August 1, 2006 to December 31, 2006 Department Budget Project Award Bid Price Allocation (includes taxes) Information Operational 5 year Protek $ 9,918 Technology maintenance Information Operational License for Insight $ 13,997 Technology Insight software program Information Operational Accpac Database Protek $ 8,481 Technology Access Cultural Services Ministry of Hardware Protek $ 10,516 Culture - Literacv Fund Cultural Services Operational License Fee Micromedia Pro $ 6,567 Quest Engineering Capital Install roof and 4" Flynn Canada $ 20,617 insulation Engineering Capital Supply and install RMB $ 31,144 card access system at Bobier Engineering Capital Washroom CD Drywall $ 7,539 CeilinQs TL Engineering Operational Safety Service Electrical Safety $ 6,157 Programs for Authority Homes, Sewage Treatment Plant and Adm Engineering Capital Wire card access Barnes Electric $ 9,572 at Bobier Villa Engineering Capital Sprinkler System Canadian $ 16,782 - Elgin Manor Irrigation Engineering Capital Led conversion Erie Thames $ 5,300 overhead and Services pedestrian traffic signal heads APPENDIX A Purchases greater than $5,000 but less than $100,000 August 1, 2006 to December 31, 2006 Department Budget Project Award Bid Price Allocation (includes taxes) Engineering Capital Heat Pump Carrier Sales and $ 16,389 Replacement Adm Distribution biding Engineering Capital Ductwork Climate Control $ 7,208 changes - Front Office - TL Engineering Capital Premarking KDN Pavement $ 5,507 various roads Engineering Capital Equipment Johnson Controls $ 7,597 replacement due to lightening stri ke Engineering Capital Repairs to upper CD Drywall $ 5,789 and lower south TL Engineering Capital Millwork and G&S $ 18,176 Cabinetry for TL Woodworking office Engineering Capital TL Front Office Pro Electric $ 17,497 Reno. Electrical Work APPENDIX B Expenditures exceeding $50,000 for a one time purchase or over an annual basis January 1, 2006 to December 31, 2006 Department Goods or Service Supplier Total Purchased Expenditure Homes Incontinent Products SeA - Futuremed $ 106,444 Homes Raw Food SYSCO $ 590,251 Homes Linen Service London Hospital Linen $ 252,190 Service Homes Nursing Supplies Futuremed, Medical $ 94,392 Mart and Stevens All Office Supplies Lyreco $ 68,637 Departments REPORT TO COUNTY COUNCIL FROM: Mark G. McDonald, CAO Linda B. Veger, Director of Financial Services DATE: March 14, 2007 SUBJECT: St. Thomas - Elgin General Hospital - Grant Request CORPORATE GOAl(S) REFERENCED: To ensure fiscal responsibility and accountability. INTRODUCTION: At County Council Session, March 13, 2007 the St. Thomas-Elgin General Hospital made a grant request in the amount of $1 million spread over a four year period. The presentation highlighted the positive impacts the hospital has on communities including the County of Elgin. DISCUSSION: The Province continues to download healthcare onto the property taxpayer. The County experiences this with the funding required for ambulance services, the Elgin St. Thomas Health Unit, and the Homes for Seniors Services. The Province will fund 90% of the bricks and mortar for a hospital expansion but expects the community to furnish the building with much needed but very expensive, up-to- date medical equipment. Council has a difficult decision and must weigh the hard reality of County needs against the impacts this hospital expansion has on the community. The following list of County needs is by no means all inclusive but does highlight what Council must consider in future budgets: . Replacement of Terrace Lodge with an estimated price tag of $33 million. . Roads needs estimated at $140 million. Construction costs are escalating by 5% each year. . Future loss of OMPF funding - $3.25 million . At Terrace Lodge - upgrades to the elevator, an additional elevator, fire upgrades, and a sprinkler system. In order to maintain a safe environment for residents requires at least $1 million over the next three years. . New ambulance base in the Aylmer area - $500,000. . Reserves are dwindling. . And the list goes on. CONCLUSION: Council has, in the past, been very generous when considering grant requests from the hospital. Since 1950, a total of $3.235 million has been funded by County taxpayers. However, Council is always cognizant of the taxpayer. This may be an instance where Council could say no. The increase to the budget currently sits at 3.95%. This assumes that the estimated 401 revenues of $150,000 will stay as a budget item thereby reducing the overall increase. However, staff has suggested that the $150,000, or a portion thereof, be set aside in the Terrace Lodge replacement reserve. Doing so will increase the budget to 4.71% and the $250,000 each year suggested by the Hospital will increase the budget to 6.01 %. It is difficult to argue against the local hospital's request for financial assistance. As a major employer, and a community based hospital with a solid reputation of service, it is vital to the Elgin-St. Thomas community. However, healthcare is supposed to be a provincial responsibility whereby sales, income, and other tax revenues are used to fund the service. The property tax was never meant to fund healthcare, a service area beyond the jurisdiction of municipal governments. Furthermore, the list of municipal needs outweighs the County's ability to finance its mandated programs. RECOMMENDATION: THAT Elgin County Council object to the provincial government's capital funding policy as it applies to hospital improvements and infrastructure needs and strongly encourage the McGuinty government to fully fund such worthy projects using provincial coffers instead of local municipal taxes; and further, THAT the matter of providing a $1 million grant to the St. Thomas Elgin General Hospital be deferred to 2008 pending a response to this resolution from the Minister of Health for Ontario. Respectfully Submitted Approved for Submission ~ldJ Chief Administrative Officer /~~ Linda B. Vege~ Director of Financial Services REPORT TO COUNTY COUNCIL FROM: Linda B. Veger, Director of Financial Services DATE: March 7, 2007 SUBJECT: Budget Comparison - December 31,2006 Corporate Goal Referenced: To ensure fiscal responsibility and accountability. Introduction: Attached is the preliminary budget comparison to December 31, 2006 for the County operating departments. The audit is not complete however most adjustments have already been recorded. Discussion: The departmental totals are, for the most part, favourable to the end of the year. The overall surplus will be approximately 600,000 coming from: . Interest income 133,879 . Homes for Seniors Services 179,670 · City of St. Thomas/County of Elgin 146,100 Shared programs . Health Unit - refund of surplus 93,317 . Plus a number of smaller over and under expenditures. The 600,000 is a significant number, however to put this into perspective, it equates to only 1.3% of the total budget. As indicated to Council on several occasions, 2006 was a tight budget year. Engineering Services - positive variance - 63,557 - Maintenance payments for the lift bridge and to Chatham Kent lower than budgeted along with revenues higher than budgeted. Overall the three Homes are in a positive position. The increases in revenues started flowing in April and positive variances are showing there. Terrace Lodge and Bobier Villa had some difficulty with wage lines. Contributing factors included construction projects, infection control, and difficulty attracting and retaining registered staff. This has lead to significant overtime hours that were not anticipated at budget time. The Bobier Villa wage lines were under- budgeted for 2006. Ongoing problems with attracting and retaining staff will be addressed in the 2007 budget. Information Technologies - positive variance - 52,591 - Consulting fees and support and maintenance lower than anticipated. Provincial Offences and Collections - Revenues in both areas may be down due to the time officers have spent in other jurisdictions. Recommendation: THAT the report titled Budget Comparison - December 31,2006 and dated March 7, 2007 be received and filed. Respectfully Submitted Approved fo . sion ~~~~ Linda B. Veger Director of Financial Services COUNTY OF ELGIN Departmental Budget Comparisons For The Year Ending December 31,2006 Total YTD YTD Variance %OF Budget Budget Actual 0 Budget Warden & Council Wages 173,320 173,320 171,611 1,709 Benefits 6,692 6,692 6,776 (84) Operations 66,560 66,560 60,742 5,818 Total 246,572 246,572 239,130 7,442 96.98% Administrative Services Wages 251,848 251,848 252,457 (609) Benefits 51,866 51,866 54,678 (2,812) Operations 13,914 13,914 14,190 (276l Total 317,628 317,628 321,325 (3,697 101.16% Financial Services Wages 292,905 292,905 291,171 1,734 Benefits 70,004 70,004 67,083 2,921 Operations 14,490 14,490 14,459 31 Total 377,399 377,399 372,712 4,687 98.76% Human Resources Wages 293,000 293,000 289,210 3,790 Benefits 64,500 64,500 68,319 (3,819) Operations 13,900 13,900 13,524 376 Total 371,400 371,400 371,054 346 99.91 % Administration Building Wages 155,100 155,100 141,612 13,488 Benefits 40,300 40,300 30,721 9,579 Operations 64,800 64,800 91,423 (26,623~ Total 260,200 260,200 263,756 (3,556 101.37% Corporate Expenditures Insurance 253,750 253,750 235,095 18,655 Telephone 24,000 24,000 29,167 (5,167) Legal & Professional 87,000 87,000 97,550 (10,550) Retiree Benefits 38,000 38,000 23,853 14,147 Other Expenditures 73,315 73,315 85,472 (12,157J Total 476,065 476,065 471,137 4,92 98.96% Engineering Wages 255,000 255,000 257,157 (2,157) Benefits 58,000 58,000 55,894 2,106 Operations 79,300 79,300 35,811 43,489 Maintenance 2,564,295 2,564,295 2,544,175 20,120 Total 2,956,595 2,956,595 2,893,038 63,557 97.85% Agriculture Fees Revenue 0 0 (790) 790 Operations 29,423 29,423 29,101 322 Total 29,423 29,423 28,311 1,112 96.22% Elgin Manor Revenues (4,440,167) (4,440,167) (4,480,840) 40,673 Wages 3,876,131 3,876,131 3,839,520 36,611 Benefits 1,037,703 1,037,703 952,278 85,425 Operations 897,979 897,979 953,634 (55,655) Total 1,371,646 1,371,646 1,264,592 107,054 92.20% Terrace Lodge Revenues (4,970,489) (4,970,489) (5,048,844) 78,355 Wages 4,009,168 4,009,168 4,130,231 (121,063) Benefits 1,059,288 1,059,288 1,027,201 32,087 Operations 919,634 919,634 885,597 34,037 Total 1,017,601 1,017,601 994,186 23,415 97.70% Bobier Villa Revenues (2,829,670) (2,829,670) (2,862,388) 32,718 Wages 2,588,097 2,588,097 2,734,155 (146,058) Benefits 617,894 617,894 602,080 15,814 Operations 730,880 730,880 584,150 146,730 Total 1,107,201 1,107,201 1,057,997 49,204 95.56% Pioneer Museum Wages 81,275 81,275 66,874 14,401 Benefits 20,725 20,725 11,801 8,924 Operations 19,400 19,400 33,552 (14,152J Total 121,400 121,400 112,227 9,17 92.44% Library Wages 1,065,258 1,065,258 1,065,993 (735) Benefits 261,048 261,048 240,121 20,927 Collections 233,000 233,000 262,987 (29,987) Operations 112,019 112,019 79,543 32,4 76 Total 1,671,325 1,671,325 1,648,643 22,682 98.64% Archives Wages 139,514 139,514 151,279 (11,765) Benefits 36,273 36,273 30,204 6,069 Operations 48,800 48,800 37,157 11,643 Total 224,587 224,587 218,640 5,947 97.35% Land Division Wages 58,015 58,015 54,457 3,558 Benefits 9,035 9,035 9,467 (432) Operations (67,050J (67,05OJ (62,152J ~4,898~ Total 1,77 1,773 0.00% Emergency Measures Wages 5,150 5,150 5,150 (0) Benefits 1,340 1,340 1,340 (0) Operations 9,000 9,000 6,397 2,603 Total 15,490 15,490 12,887 2,603 83.20% Information Technologies Wages 183,255 183,255 190,147 (6,892) Benefits 38,900 38,900 42,972 (4,072) Operations 324,500 324,500 260,945 63,555 Total 546,655 546,655 494,064 52,591 90.38% Provincial Offences Grant (73,000) (73,000) (36,551 ) (36,449) Fines Revenues (650,000) (650,000) (558,507) (91,493) Shared Revenues - Municipal 343,842 343,842 241 ,418 102,424 Wages 142,100 142,100 139,024 3,076 Benefits 31,250 31,250 32,760 (1,510) Operations 177,975 177,975 149,706 28,269 Total (27,833) (27,833) (32,149) 4,316 115.51 % Ambulance Services Province of Ontario (2,013,030) (2,013,030) (2,265,219) 252,189 City of S1. Thomas (1,789,703) (1,789,703) (1,494,867) (294,836) Contractor Payments 6,270,996 6,270,996 6,201,290 69,706 Wages 65,560 65,560 64,665 895 Benefits 17,373 17,373 13,957 3,416 Operations 29,800 29,800 59,782 (29,982J Total 2,580,996 2,580,996 2,579,608 1,38 99.95% Collections Revenue (305,000) (305,000) (253,228) (51,772) Shared Revenues - Municipal 144,291 144,291 154,530 (10,239) Wages 45,255 45,255 44,897 358 Benefits 11,947 11,947 11,431 516 Operations 51,600 51,600 24,190 27,410 Total (51,907) (51,907) (18,181) (33,726) 35.03% REPORT TO COUNTY COUNCIL FROM: Linda B. Veger Director of Financial Services DATE: March 13, 2007 SUBJECT: G.S.T. Audit CORPORATE GOAL(S) REFERENCED: To ensure fiscal responsibility and accountability. INTRODUCTION: Revenue Canada performed a g.s.t. audit in January. Their findings resulted in additional taxes for the years 2004 to 2006. DISCUSSION: In 2004 municipalities were legislated to receive a 100% refund of g.s.t. paid, up from 57.14%. In March of that same year the following change was enacted: "Most sales, leases, and other supplies of real property made by a municipality and most supplies by a designated municipality of real property that is designated municipal property of the person, are taxable supplies." In short, the County should have been charging tenants g.s.t. on their leases but was not. Staff has since requested a thorough review of the standard County lease by Mr. Gibson's office. In 2003 the Tax Recovery Group (now represented by True Tax) performed an audit on the county's behalf to ensure all available tax credits were being claimed. In 2004, on their advice, the county claimed an input tax credit (ITC) of $41,745 based on taxable usage of floor space. A portion of that credit has now been disallowed. A recovery of 50% of the disallowed credit, interest, and penalties will come from True Tax. Assessment Total County Share True Tax Share G.S.T. - Leases 14,295.00 14,295.00 G.S.T. - Not charQed 1,182.00 1,182.00 ITC - disallowed 34,529.00 17,264.50 17,264.50 Penalties 5,921.42 3,230.73 2,690.70 Interest 2,907.07 1,603.08 1,304.03 Total 58,834.60 37,575.31 21,259.23 The g.s.t on leases has been charged back to the administration building budget for 2006 and the 2007 budget has been adjusted to reflect g.s.t. charges that are not included in current leases. This leaves a balance of $22,098.31 outstanding. CONCLUSION: The g.s.t. audit revealed a shortcoming in the current leases that is being addressed. True Tax will refund the County a total of $21,259.23 leaving a balance, after the g.s.t. chargeback to the administration building, of $22,098.31. This is a one-time expense and staff suggests it be funded through the anticipated 2006 surplus. Also, True Tax is reviewing whether or not the county can receive some relief from the imposed penalty. RECOMMENDATION: THAT, as a result of the 2004 to 2006 g.s.t. audit, the balance of the reassessment in the amount of $22,098.31 be funded from the 2006 anticipated surplus. Respectfully Submitted ~~ Linda B. Veger Director of Financial Services CORRESPONDENCE - MARCH 27. 2007 Items for Consideration 1 . Debra Seabrook-Page, Secretary, The Elgin Military Museum, with a request to borrow the original Victoria Cross awarded to Ellis Sitton for a special exhibition on April 9, 2007. (ATTACHED) 2. Hon. Jim Bradley, Ministry Responsible for Seniors, with a nomination form for the 2007 Senior of the Year Award. (ATTACHED) PA TRON: THE EARL OF ELGIN AND KINCARDINE TELEPHONE (519) 633-7641 THE ELGIN MILITARY MUSEUM 30 Talbot Street, St. Thomas, Ontario N5P I A3 1=; 1"1 E"""~ :l ,~ ~ \.~~\'2~ t; . March 14, 2007 MAR 1 5 2007 O~ .'.'"'~~W"'iE~. -~ f\!H~~~U~~fMpt!~\~r-- -;.;f~\1 U\1~~ ~~U7R:~~\te ,~~~ \I ~.. I> v >' . Ms. Cathy Bishop, Director of Cultural Services, County of Elgin, 450 Sunset Drive, St. Thomas, Ontario N5R 5V1 Your Ms. Bishop; April 9, 2007 will mark the 90th anniversary of the Battle of Vi my Ridge, and will also be the opening of a major exhibit at the Elgin Military Museum, relating to that battle and its significance in Canadian military history. At the Museum Executive Committee meeting of March 13,2007, the Committee unanimously agreed to approach the Elgin County Museum to request the loan of the Victoria Cross awarded to Ellis Sitton for a special exhibition on April 9,2007. The Museum is fortunate in having a large number of items relating to L1Sgt. Sitton, ranging from his identity disc and notebook to a testament given to him on his departure for overseas by the Bishop of Huron. Also included in the collection is a series of over 60 letters sent home to his sisters from the time he enlisted to just days before his death on the slopes of Vi my Ridge. As part of our exhibition, the Museum will be publishing a small book containing a number of his letters home, along with historical information and photographs drawn from the war diaries and unit history of the 18th (Western Ontario) Battalion, the battalion in which Sitton served. The release of this publication is scheduled to coincide with the official opening of the new exhibit on Monday April 9,2007, the 90th anniversary of the battle and the day Sitton won his award at the cost of his life. To make the day especially memorable, the Museum would like to request the loan of L1Sgt. Sitton's medals from the Elgin County museum, for exhibition at the official opening. As you are aware, our Museum is fully capable of providing the appropriate conditions and security, and indeed, did provide the overnight security and storage for the medals when they were exhibited at the former Pioneer museum site (when we loaned you our Sitton artefacts for your exhibit). With your assistance and cooperation, the medals can be the 'piece de resistance' of a fitting tribute to the only person from Elgin County ever to be awarded the Victoria Cross. While the Museum has replica medals, we hope that you will agree that it is appropriate for the public to have the opportunity to view the originals on the 90th anniversary of the date of the battle. Upon receipt of your favourable response, our staff can make the necessary arrangements with you, for the completion of loan documents, etc. As we understand that the loan of an artefact of this significance may require the approval of County .Council, a copy of this letter is also being sent to the Warden and Council for their information, in the hopes of assisting to expedite this approval. We hope that you will look favourably upon this request, and will join with us in commemorating this landmark event in Canadian history. ~strul~ ~C:Y-0 ebra Seabrook-Page, Secretary cc. Lynn Acre, Warden County of Elgin Minister Responsible for Seniors 6th Floor 400 University Avenue Toronto ON M7A 2R9 Tel.: (416) 585-7000 Fax: (416) 585-6470 Ministre deh!guee aux Affaires des personnes agees 6e etage 400, avenue University Toronto ON M7A 2R9 Tel. : (416) 585-7000 Telec. : (416) 585-6470 R', 'ECEf.~'& tI ,t,,;,. ~. ~ 'l' t:: ~ ~ Ontario March 2007 MAR t 9 2001 COUNTY OF' ELGIN ADIINISTRAnve SERVICES Dear Mayor and Members of Council: Each year the Government Ontario designates June as Seniors' Month to celebrate the countless experiences, accomplishments and contributions of seniors. Across the province, community organizations and local governments host special events to recognize seniors and the countless contributions they make to Ontario's way of life. It is with great pleasure that we invite you to participate in the 2007 Senior of the Year Awards. This annual award was established to give each municipality in Ontario the opportunity to honour one outstanding local senior. Recipients are individuals, who after age 65, have enriched the social, cultural or civic life of the community, without thought of personal or financial gain. The certificate, provided by the Ontario Government, is signed by: the Honourable James K. Bartleman, Lieutenant Governor; the Honourable Jim Bradley, Minister Responsible for Seniors; and the local Head of Council. The Government of Ontario is proud to offer this important initiative. You may wish to consider involving local MPPs in your selection process or presentation ceremony. Please fax the name of your municipality's Senior of the Year Award recipient, on the attached form by April 30, 2007. For additional information, please contact the Ontario Honours. and Awards Secretariat at (416) 314- 7526. Ontario's seniors deserve special recognition for their outstanding accomplishments. By working together with municipalities, we can ensure they are honoured ina meaningful way. Sincerely, ~i~ Jim Bradley Minister Responsible for Seniors 0126 rf/~o/Ik Award Nominating Municipality/Township (please print municipality name in full as this will be transcribed onto the recipient's certificate): ............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................. Contact Name: ............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................. Address: ............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................. Q.tdI<?.Y.::'.r:!.:.. ................ ...... ...... ....... ................... .... ..... ...... ...p.~.9.y.i.~.s:.~.: .......... ... ... ....... ... ................. ...... ..........p.S?~t~.I.. .~9.9.~:............................. ... .... ...... ......... .... .... I~.I.~p.~.9.~.~:........................................................................f9.~:................................................................................................................................................................. .~.~m~..~f..~~.~Jp~.~~~..(~~~t..9.~..~?y~~.~?...9.f.~.g.~..9.~.9..I.g.~.~):.................................................................................................................................... I~.I.!..~~..9.rj.~.f!y. .~.9.9..~.t..Y.9.~.~.r.~s:.lp[~~t:. ...... ........ ... ................ .......................... ... .... .............. ..... .......... ... ........ .................... ........ ................... ..... .... ...... ....... ........ ............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................. ............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................. ............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................. ............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................. ............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................. ............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................. The nomination form needs to be received no later than April 30th in order for it to be eligible for the current year. Mail or Fax to: Ontario Honours and Awards Secretariat, Ontario Ministry of Citizenship and Immigration, 400 University Avenue, 4th Floor, Toronto, Ontario M7A 2R9 Tel.: (416) 314-7526 Fax: (416) 314-6050 Personal information on this form is collected under the authority of the Ministry of Citizenship and Culture Act, R.S.O. 1990. cM.18, s.4 and will be used to determine eligibility and notify recipients of the Senior of the Year Award. For further information, please contact the Director, Ontario Honours and Awards Secretariat, 400 University Avenue, 4th Floor, Toronto ON M7A 2R9, (416) 314-7523. CORRESPONDENCE - MARCH 27, 2007 Items for Information (Consent Aaenda) 1. Hon. Steve Peters, M.P.P., Elgin-Middlesex-London, with copy of correspondence: 1) to the Honourable Greg Sorbara, Minister of Finance concerning Council's resolution regarding the Ontario Municipal Partnership Fund. 2. AMO Member Communication: 1) Notification Process for Permits Seized under MTO's Accessible Parking Permit (APP) Program; 2) HealthForce Ontario Recruitment Centre. (ATTACHED) 3. Tena Michiels, Deputy Clerk, Township of Southwold, supporting Council's resolution requesting the Federal and Provincial Governments to commit to a complete exit strategy for tobacco growers. (ATTACHED) 4. Norm Vocino, Special Assistant, Office of the Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food and Minister of the Canadian Wheat Board, acknowledging Council's resolution endorsing the exit strategy proposed by the Ontario Flue-Cured Tobacco Growers' Marketing Board. (ATTACHED) 5. Hon. Leona Dombrowsky, Minister of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs, with a copy of the 2007 edition of the Ontario's Rural Plan Update - "Strong Rural Communities: Working Together for Success... and Getting Results". (brochure available for viewing in Administrative Services) 6. Cynthia St. John, Chief Administrative Officer, Elgin-St. Thomas Health Unit, with an update on the West Nile virus Budget and a breakdown of the County of Elgin share of the virus activities 2007 funding. (ATTACHED) Ni ........ Ontario Steve Peters, M.P.P. Elgin - Middlesex - London <.; March 2, 2007 Honourable Greg Sorbara Minister of Finance 7tl1 Floor, Frost Building South 7 Queen's Park Crescent Toronto, ON M7A lY7 Dear Minister: Please find enclosed a resolution from the County of Elgin in regards to the Ontario Municipal Partnership Fund. As you will read, the County of Elgin is lobbying our government to place an "Additional Assistance" portion in relation to the existing OMPF allotment in a reserve for what it terms as "OMPF Replacement" and that your ministry removes the reference to lowered OMPF allotments in the coming years to essentially keep this funding at a constant level for the foreseeable future. Minister, I would appreciate your reviewing the resolution and responding directly to the County of Elgin. As always, thank you in advance for your time and consideration. Sincerely, ~\k:.. Steve Peters, M.P.P. Elgin-Middlesex-London Cc: County of Elgin 542 Talbot Street, St. Thomas, ON N5P 1 C4 T - (519) 631-0666 Toll free - 1-800-265-7638 F - (519) 631-9478 TTY - (519) 631-9904 E - speters.mpp.co@liberal.ola.org WW'W.stevepeters.com MEMBER COMMUNICATION ALERT NO: 07/013 393 University Ave, Suite 1701 Toronto, ON M5G 1 E6 Tel.: (416) 971-98561 Fax: (416) 971-6191 E-mail: amo@amo.on.ca Association of Municipalities of Ontario To the attention of the Clerk and Council March 12,2007 FOR MORE INFORMATION CONTACT: Laurel McCosham, Policy Advisor (416) 971-9856 ext 315 Notification Process for Permits Seized under MTO's Accessible Parking Permit (APP) Program Issue: Municipal parking authorities are being asked to notify MTO regarding any permits issued under the Accessible Parking Permit (APP) program seized for misuse Background: In January 2006, the Ministry of Transportation (MTO) introduced a new Accessible Parking Permit (APP) program, replacing the Disabled Person Parking Permit program. Designed to improve access for people who need permits, the new APP program makes it more difficult for individuals who attempt to abuse the system. Accordingly, APP permits are equipped with enhanced security features that help to reduce misuse and fraud. To ensure the success of the new program and to ensure that legitimate permit holders have access to designated parking spaces, greater coordination between local parking enforcement and MTO is required. MTO is asking municipalities and parking enforcement officials to notify the Ministry of any permits seized for misuse. Enforcement officers are entitled under Section 28(2) of the Highway Traffic Act to take possession of a parking permit when fraud is suspected or if the permit has expired. When this information is passed on to the Ministry it will place a warning flag on the permit holder's file. Depending on the outcome of the court appearance, the enforcement agency may advise MTO of the outcome of the court case. Under Section 26(3) and (4) of the Highway Traffic Act, the Ministry may cancel the permit. Action: Notification of seized permits as well as follow-up notification regarding the outcome of court appearances should be directed to the License Renewals Unit of MTO by either fax or mail: Ministry of Transportation License Renewals Unit - APP Section P.O. Box 9800 Kingston, ON K7L 5N8 Fax: 613-545-4678 The notification should include the name of the permit holder, permit expiry date, date permit seized, descriptive reason permit was seized, the municipality/enforcement agency providing the notification. Rather than send seized permits to the Ministry, municipalities are asked to destroy them once they are no longer required for court purposes. This information is available in the Policy Issues section of the AMO website at www.amo.on.ca. Association of A 1-1 Municipalities of Ontario ... 393 University Ave, Suite 1701 Toronto, ON M5G 1 E6 Tel.: (416) 971-98561 Fax: (416) 971-6191 E-mail: amo@amo.on.ca Association of Municipalities of Ontario MEMBER COMMUNICATION ALERT NO: 07/012 To the attention of the Clerk and Council March 12,2007 FOR MORE INFORMATION CONTACT: Laurel McCosham, Policy Advisor (416) 971-9856 ext315 HealthForce Ontario Recruitment Centre Issue: An update on the HealthForce Ontario Recruitment Centre and its initiatives to increase the number of practicing physicians and other health care professionals in the province. Background: Ontario continues to face a shortage of health care professionals that cannot be immediately redressed through normal domestic production. In response, the Province created the HealthForce Ontario Recruitment Centre in May 2006. Designed to encourage and facilitate the recruitment of qualified professionals to Ontario, the Centre is part of an overall strategy to increase the number of health care professionals practicing in the province. The work carried out by the Recruitment Centre consists of marketing and recruitment initiatives both within and outside of the province. Within Ontario, activities are focused on coordinating and integrating inter-professional recruitment through partnerships with health care organizations, employers and communities. Identifying local needs and supporting the "recruitment readiness" of communities with information, education and other resources is a primary focus. Outside Ontario, activities centre on strategic outreach that positions Ontario as the employer of choice for health professionals. This area of activity also includes relocation management to facilitate matters such as immigration, provincial and national certifications, and issues related to living in Ontario. The design, development and implementation of an individualized or case management approach to potential candidates is a key feature of this initiative. The Recruitment Centre is also involved in the Emergency Department Coverage Demonstration Project (EDCDP). The project is working on defining a supply of qualified Ontario physicians who can be matched to offer locum assistance in emergency departments which are in particularly dire straits. Action: For information. Municipalities interested in this initiative and how it can benefit local communities may wish to contact the Recruitment Centre directly at: info@healthforceontario.ca. This information is available in the Policy Issues section of the AMO website at www.amo.on.ca. 1-1 Association of Municipalities of Ontario TOWNSHIP OF SOUTHWOLD 35663 Fingal Line Fingal, ON NOL 1 KO Phone: (519) 769-2010 Fax: (519) 769-2837 Email: tmichiels@twp.southwold.on.ca March 13, 2007 Mt:,;-, ~ 4 2007 t, ,'" ,e,'"n ,. "'''l''!'')\1 <ifl~,"fe, iR;r.:~~\/ijf\,' fe{" ,',!.Jlv)\Nl~H'~j,~, HI~ ~~lf1, \~,;r,;;;:j Hon. Charles Strahl Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food Sir John Carling Building 9th Floor, 930 Carling Avenue Ottawa, ON K1A OC5 Hon. Leona Dombrowsky Minister of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs 77 Grenville St., 11th Floor Toronto, ON M5S 1B3 Dear Minister Strahl: Please be advised that the Council of the Corporation of the Township of Southwold at its Council meeting held on March 13th, 2007 passed the following resolution: "THAT this Council support resolution passed by the County of Elgin requesting Federal and Provincial Governments commit to and implement a full and complete "exit strategy", similar in principle and objectives of the program introduced by the OFCTGMB." Please contact the Township if you require any further information. Yours truly, ~Q 'f(H~ Tena Michiels Deputy Clerk Cc: Mr. Joe Preston, MP Mr. Steve Peters, MPP County of Elgin Ii? Office of the Minister Cabinet du ministre of Agriculture and de l'Agriculture et de Agri-Food l'Agroalimentaire and Minister for the et ministre de la Canadian Wheat Board Commission canadienne du ble Ottawa, Canada K1A DC5 MAR 9 - 1001 Quote: 732662 & 5 Z007 Mrs. Sandra 1. Heffren Manager of Administrative Services County of Elgin 450 Sunset Drive St. Thomas, Ontario N5R 5Vl Dear Mrs. Heffren: On behalf of the Honourable Chuck Strahl, I wish to thank you for your letter, also addressed to the Honourable Leona Dombrowsky, regarding the Council of the Corporation of the County of Elgin's resolution endorsing the exit strategy proposed by the Ontario Flue-Cured Tobacco Growers' Marketing Board. Minister Strahl appreciates receiving a copy of the resolution and has asked me to convey the following to you. Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada (AAFC) recognizes the acute pressures facing communities relying on tobacco production and remains committed to facilitating the development of solutions to help mitigate the difficulties experienced by Ontario tobacco growers. AAFC has received the Ontario Flue-Cured Tobacco Growers' Marketing Board's exit strategy proposal, and departmental officials are working closely with key federal departments, the Government of Ontario, industry groups and producers to determine how to address the needs of these growers. Again, thank you for writing to the Minister on this matter. Sincerely, Norm V ocino Special Assistant c.c.: Ms. Shelley Potter, Chief of Staff to the Honourable Leona Dombrowsky, MPP Canada Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs Ministere de I' Agriculture, de I' Alimentation et des Affaires rurales !Ii ~ Ontario Office of the Minister 77 Grenville Street, 11th Floor Toronto, Ontario M5S 1 B3 Tel: (416) 326-3074 Fax: (416) 326-3083 Bureau de la ministre 77, rue Grenville, 11" etage Toronto (Ontario) M5S 1 B3 Tel.: (416) 326-3074 Telec.: (416) 326-3083 March 9, 2007 RECEIVED Warden Lyne Acre County of Elgin 450 Sunset Drive St. Thomas, Ontario N5R 5Vl MAR 1 9 2001 COUNTY OF ELGIN -ADMINISTRA fiVE SERVICES Dear Warden Acre: I am pleased to provide you with the 2007 edition of Ontario's Rural Plan Update- Strong Rural Communities: Working Together for Success ... and Getting Results. The McGuinty government's plan for strong rural communities focuses on health care, education, infrastructure and economic development. The 2007 update profiles initiatives undertaken in 2006 that demonstrate our government's progress and our commitment to meet the needs of rural and northern communities. I also recognize that municipal governments are partners in this progress. This publication is a summary of inspiring initiatives and programs that rural Ontarians are putting to work with our government's support. It is my hope that this report will encourage other rural and northern communities to turn ideas into results of which they will be proud. If you would like further information about Ontario's Rural Plan, please visit our government's web site at www .0ntario.caJrural. Additional copies of the document can be ordered by calling 1-888-588-4111. Sincerely, :i::o~~1 Minister of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs Enclosure Ministry Headquarters: 1 Stone Road West, Guelph, Ontario N1G 4Y2 Bureau principal du ministere: 1 Stone Road West, Guelph (Ontario) N1G 4Y2 Pick Ontario Freshness Cueillez la fraicheur de l'Ontario ~~~-- \. elgin st.thomas health unit 99 Edward Street St. Thomas, Ontario N5P 1 Y8 Telephone: (519) 631-9900 Toll Free Telephone: 1-800-922-0096 Fax: (519) 633-0468 www.elginhealth.on.ca March 12, 2007 1'..0. 'f~~.'!l!. lm:( ~ ~j~ ~~ i'Ji bJ~ 1 5 2~07 Mr. Mark McDonald Chief Administrative Officer County of Elgin 450 Sunset Drive St. Thomas, ON N5R 5V1 Dear Mark, RE: West Nile virus Budget - 2006 I am writing to advise you that the 2007 West Nile virus budg,et has recently been approved by the Board of Health. This budget was not included in the mandatory program budget for the 2007 year as the timing and funding is different than the mandatory budget. As with last year, the Elgin St. engaged in West Nile virus activities that will include public education, surveillance, and other preparatory work. The total cost of this work is $68,375.01. At the March 2007 Board of Health meeting, the Board directed the Health Unit staff to implement the approved 2007 activity plan. The breakdown of funding including the County of Elgin's portion is noted below: Cost Shared West Nile virus Activities Ministry of Health and Long Term Care (75%) City of St. Thomas (41% of 25%) County of Elgin (59% of 25%) $51,281.93 $ 7,008.53 $10,085.45 The 2006 audited financial statements for the Health Unit will be not be approved until April 2007. At that time, we will notify you of any surplus/deficit owing. In the case of a surplus, a cheque will be sent to you promptly. Please forward the amount noted above at your earliest convenience. Page 2 If you have any questions regarding the above information, please contact me at 519-631-3159, ext. 202. Kind regards, Cynthia St. John Chief Administrative officer c. Laura McLachlin, Director, Health Protection Department Mary Ens, Accounting Supervisor IN-CAMERA AGENDA MARCH 27. 2007 Councillor Reports - (ATTACHED) 1. Councillor McIntyre - Shedden Library Negotiations - verbal Staff Reports: (ATTACHED) 1. Director of Cultural Services - Confidential - Staff requirements at the John Kenneth Galbraith Library (Dutton) 2. Director of Human Resources - Confidential - ONA Arbitration Award 3. Manager of Economic Development - Proposed Tourism Coordinator Contract Position (faxed out on Friday) Administrative Services Department Administration Building 450 Sunset Drive, St. Thomas, Ontario, N5R 5V1 Phone: (519) 631-1460 Ext. 156 Fax: (519) 633-7661 County of Elgin www.elgin-county.on.ca Fax To: Warden Acre and Elgin County Councillors Call Group From: Mark G. McDonald mmcdonald@elgin-county.on.ca March 23, 2007 including cover sheet Fax: Phone: Re: Additional Items for Council Agenda of March 27, 2007 Date: Pages: CC: Comments: CONFIDENTIAL Confidential In-Camera Staff Report: 1. Manager of Economic Development - Economic Development: Tourism Co-ordinator Position Staff Reports: 1. Chief Administrative Officer - POA and 401 2. Director of Senior Services Bobier Villa - Complexity of Care for Homes Residents 3. Director of Engineering Services - Fire Panel Upgrade at Elgin Manor Correspondence -Items for Information: (ATTACHED) 1. Hon. Leona Dombrowsky, Minister of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs, acknowledging Elgin County Council's support for a regional resolution with regard to an exit plan for tobacco growers. 2. Hon. Steve Peters, M.P.P., Elgin-Middlesex-London - with copy of correspondence to the Hon. Chuck Strahl regarding an exit strategy for tobacco farmers. 3. Hon. David Caplan, Minister of Public Infrastructure Renewal, announcing the funding grant to the County of Elgin of $1,500,000.00 under the Rural Infrastructure Investment Initiative (Rill). THE INFORMATION IN THIS FACSIMILE IS FOR THE NAMED RECIPIENT ONLY. IT MAY CONTAIN INFORMATION THAT IS PRIVILEGED, CONFIDENTIAL AND EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE UNDER APPLICABLE LAW. IF THE READER OF THIS MESSAGE IS NOT THE INTENDED RECIPIENT, OR RESPONSIBLE FOR DELIVERING THE MESSAGE TO THE INTENDED RECIPIENT, ANY DISSEMINATION, DISTRIBUTION OR COPYING OF THIS COMMUNICATION IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. IF YOU HAVE RECEIVED THIS COMMUNICATION IN ERROR, OR THERE ARE ANY PROBLEMS IN TRANSMISSION, PLEASE NOTIFY US BY TELEPHONE. REPORT TO COUNTY COUNCil FROM: Mark McDonald, Chief Administrative Officer. DATE: March 21,2007 SUBJECT: POA and 401 Corporate Goals: #6 To Forge Community Partnerships #7 To Provide Innovative and Collaborative Quality Service Introduction: Attached for Council's consideration is a report and recommendation from three western Municipalities in the County of Elgin, regarding the disposition of fines collected along a contiguous portion of Highway 401. Council will note that at its January 23rd, 2007 meeting the following resolution was adopted: "THAT the Municipalities located adjacent to Highway 401 consider their maintenance and other costs associated with Highway 401 and report back to County Council on a revenue-sharing proposal for these found monies". By extension, this resolution contemplated a revenue-sharing formula amongst all parties, including the County. However, the recommendation from the Municipalities does not envision the County sharing in the revenue other than recouping its cost of administration and the traditional 1 0% overhead. Revenue sharing is now confined to three Municipalities instead of four. The report claims that each Municipality is owed the fines issued by the Provincial Government's Highway Enforcement Action Team (HEAT) collected within their municipal boundaries. The main reason for this assertion is in reference to a cost- sharing arrangement made with the County for POA fines collected by "municipally paid" police forces. In addition, although not directly related to POA activity, each Municipality demonstrates certain costs for fire protection and road maintenance as a result of the presence of Highway 401. This report provides clarification on a number of matters related to this topic and recommends that the Dispute Resolution Mechanism be invoked to determine a fair and reasonable revenue-sharing apportionment amongst the County and the three participating Municipalities. (9 2 Discussion: By way of background, the County C.A.O. led the discussion and debate over the revenue- sharing agreement for POA fines collected within the Elgin-St. Thomas catchment area. A unanimous agreement was reached on the disposition of said fines with the County retaining actual costs plus a 10% administrative overburden. It is important to note that said agreement was premised on the principle that Municipalities shall be owed the revenue collected because municipally paid police forces generated the fines through enforcement. It is also imperative to remember that the agreement represents compromise and cooperation. In fact a dispute resolution mechanism exists should differences of opinion, such as this one, occur. The mechanism is also present in recognition of changing circumstances and new developments. There is little doubt that if the County was responsible for paying for police enforcement, then the Municipalities would have no claim to such revenues. This is similar to the present arrangement whereby the Province's HEAT enforces traffic offences along the 401 and said forces are not paid locally. It is also reasonable to assume that at the time the original agreement was negotiated no one envisioned an environment whereby fines would be issued by a Provincial Police Task Force and retained by a municipality. Therefore the claim that the existing agreement applies in this instance is subject to interpretation and dispute resolution. This situation is far different than that which existed at the time of the POA transfer. Additionally, the original agreement apportions costs based on activity within each Municipality. That is, fines are collected and reimbursed by municipality based on municipal boundaries as identified on the tickets issued. Costs are not split equally as suggested in the resolution from the Municipalities. Therefore, on one hand, the argument is that the strict wording of the original agreement shall be honoured, yet on the other hand, the cost apportionment aspect of that agreement is to be ignored. This may be a matter of convenience but appears slightly contradictory. Either the agreement is followed or it is not. Section 1.1 of the agreement has been quoted by the Municipalities as evidence that the County has no claim to these found monies. That particular section states that the County shall "utilize reasonable efforts to collect all fines". It can be argued that given the five year pursuit of these fines, the countless hours of meetings and negotiations and the commitment involved, "unreasonable efforts" have been advanced. Perhaps then, that Section has little relevance. Section 1.2 further states that "Notwithstanding the generality of the commitment set forth in Section 1.1... Elgin shall have and shall exercise full and unfettered discretion relative to the collection of fines..." This section may provide the County with some latitude. Moreover, where such disputes arise, the parties are compelled by the agreement to invoke Schedule C called the dispute Resolution Mechanism. Section 1 of said mechanism encourages the partners to "foster and participate in a cooperative approach to disputes and agree that all reasonable efforts will be made to resolve disputes informally (J) 3 and amicably at an early stage." Unfortunately this stage has been bypassed and the Municipalities have chosen to seek legal advice on a very narrow point of law. Further bolstering the claim that these found monies rightfully belong to the County is the fact that the County's Community Reinvestment Fund (CRF), otherwise known as Unconditional Grants from the Province, has been reduced because of the POA transfer. In fact, the County, not the Lower Tier, has had a major reduction in grants ($380,000 a year for four years) because of POA activity. The argument that this reduction was related to total POA activity does not lessen the fact that the County, not the three western Municipalities, lost $1.5 million in CRF grants due to POA while the Municipalities enjoyed increased revenue from the collections. The other salient factor being advanced by the Lower-Tier Municipalities is that they have costs associated with Highway 401 for fire protection and road deterioration from detours off of the Highway. There is no doubt that these costs do exist. However, how is traffic enforcement related to fire calls and road detours? Increased fire protection costs should be negotiated with MTO as well as road reconstruction costs. It is noted that some fire calls are eligible for reimbursement through MTO already. In essence, this cost is now being recommended to be funded from County coffers instead of the Provincial treasury - this could be interpreted as an "upload" from the Lower Tier to the County. Conclusion: The County has been pursuing the fines collected along Highway 401 in the catchment area for over five years. This particular challenge has formed part of the C.A.O.'s goals and objectives for that same time period. Finally, after meetings with Provincial ministers, Chatham-Kent officials and Ministry and O.P.P. representatives, the fines have been returned to the Elgin POA Court. Upon review of the matter, it is recommended that the new found revenue be discussed further because: 1) The spirit and intent of the original cost-sharing agreement was based on the principle that "those that pay shall benefit from the revenue collected". The Municipalities are clearly not paying for traffic enforcement along Highway 401. 2) The County actually suffered a $1.5 million loss in grants because of POA activity while the Lower Tier gained revenue. 3) The cost incurred by the Municipalities such as extra fire calls and road deterioration due to traffic detours are best negotiated with the Ministry responsible, such as MTO. 4) The Dispute Resolution Mechanism contained in the agreement was never utilized and the three Municipalities now appear to be unilaterally claiming all of the fines. (f) 4 5) A strictly narrow interpretation of one clause in the agreement does not adequately describe the cooperative nature of the original agreement nor does it generate a willingness to compromise. Recommendation: THAT the Dispute Resolution Mechanism contained in the Memorandum of Understanding be utilized and a cooperative revenue-sharing agreement be developed by the County and local Administrators for consideration by the four participating Municipal Councils. ALL of which is respectfully submitted, Mark G. Mc Chief Administrative Officer. @ Provincial Offences Revenue Highway 401 On behalf of the three Lower Tiers Municipalities in the west end of Elgin County I would like to thank the County for the time to review this matter and to make this presentation. Historv As we are all aware this matter has been discussed at both levels of local government since the responsibility was transferred to Chatham-Kent by the Province in 2000. When the County and the Lower Tier Municipalities first discussed the possibility of taking over the P AO Court responsibilities, the figures that were provided to us by the province included all the revenues for tickets issued on Highway 401. It was only after the first year of operation that we become aware that the ticket number had been reduced dramatically. A2:reement We have reviewed the current agreement that was signed by the County of Elgin, the City of St. Thomas and the seven Lower Tier Municipalities in Elgin County. We have also obtained a legal opinion regarding this agreement. It is our opinion as well as our solicitors' that the current agreement is very clear. It covers all of the fines which are handled through the Elgin court. You will find attached for your information a copy of our solicitor's letter and a copy of the appropriate sections of the agreement. Cost Incurred All three of the Lower Tier Municipalities in the west end experienced significant expenses in the Fire Budget and Road Budgets as a result of services required for providing service for Highway 401. Over the last three years the three municipalities averaged 66 fire calls per year on Highway 401. Based on the average cost per call of $2,350.00 this totals $155,100.00 in annual costs. These costs are offset somewhat by fees that we can recoup from the MTO, however many of these calls are not eligible. Over the last three years the municipalities have collected an annual average of $46,900.00 in revenues. During the incidents when Highway 401 is closed and the EDR routes are activated the three municipalities also experience significant Road Department costs. These detours cost each of the municipalities involved a minimum of $1,000.00 to a maximum of $8,000.00 depending on length of time and the roads travelled. The maximum costs occurred when heavy truck traffic from 401 caused considerable damage to local roads. These detours also cause severe safety concerns and disruption for local residents. 6 CRF GI ant Calculation The tbr ~e Lower Tier Municipalities concede that the County did experience a reduction in the CRF grant entitlement do to the POA revenues. We wtUlld howeyer like to point out that the revenue loss was based OD the total POA revenne not just Highway "101. Although the Co': nty did experience this loss in grant all of the Lower Tier Municipalities gained based Oll their share of PO A revenue. The County also reeeived. to% of the POA revenues which offset a. portion of the grant Joss. Summation The thn~c Lower Tier Mnnicipalities a.re simply requesting that the COIIlnty of EI~ comply with the terms of the agreement tbat was adopted in good faith by all of the municiJlalitie.s and tha.t aU of the POA funds from 401 be transferred in accordance with Section 3 of the agreement To this regard we would request that the Coun<:iI of the C01lnty of Elgin Clobsider the follOwing resolution. THAT the Collection of Fines for Provincial Offences on Highway 401 that have gone througJI the Elein Court Ob or after January lit, 2006 be divided between tbe Township of South,",old! Muoicipality or DnttonlDunwich and Mllni~ipality of West Elgin equally after the normal collection. costs outlined in Section :2 of the Agreement h:ave been subtracted. oDnie Vowel, Mayor Municipality of DuttoDlDoDwic.h ~c ~~~ Grah Warwick, Mayor Municipality of West Elgin @ , , AND WHEREAS the functions transferred to Elgin include the right to collect Wlpaid fines levied in Provincial Offences Court at St. Thomas, Ontario, both before and after March 1, 2001; AND WHEREAS Elgin has made efforts to and has collected fines levied in Provincial Offences Court at St. Thomas, Ontario, both before and after March 1,2001; AND WHEREAS Elgin has reached agreement with West Elgin, DuttonIDWlwich, Southwold, Central Elgin, Malahide, Bayham, Aylmer, and St. Thomas as to distribution of the amount of such fines as collected by Elgin, less surcharge and expenses, and such municipal corporations wish to reduce such agreement to writing; NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of payment of the sum of ONE DOLLAR ($1.00) by each party to the others and the other commitments and covenants as contained herein, the sufficiency of which consideration is hereby acknowledged, the parties hereto agree as follows: 1.0 Collection of Fines 1.1 Elgin shall utilize reasonable efforts to collect all fines, including surcharges, levied as against accused persons and/or corporations in Provincial Offences Court at St. Thomas, Ontario (which term includes its predecessor or successor forums), both before and after March 1, 2001. 1.2 Notwithstanding the generality of the commitment set forth in Section 1.1 above, Elgin shall have and shall exercise full and unfettered discretion relative to the collection of fines and surcharges, including but not necessarily limited to the identity of accused and fines and surcharges to be pursued for collection, the method or means of such collection, and the determination of any uncollectability of a particular fine and surcharge from a specified accused. 2.0 Deduction from Monies Collected 2.1 Subject to that otherwise set forth below and from all monies collected in respect of any fine and surcharge accruing thereto as levied by the Provincial Offences Court at St. Thomas, Ontario, regardless of the date upon which such fine and surcharge was levied ot accrued, the following amount shall be deducted and paid to Elgin in the order set forth below: (1) the full amount of any surcharge accruing to such specified fine; (2) the full amount of any expenses, including but not limited to legal and/or collection fees and disbursements, as incurred by Elgin in pursuit of collection of such fine and surcharge; and (3) a cumulative administrative fee equal to ten per cent (10 %) of the total cost, including but not limited to employees' salaries and third party fees, disbursements, and expenses, incurred by Elgin in pursuit of collection of any such fine and related surcharge levied by Provincial Offences Court at St. Thomas, Ontario, such cumulative administrative fee to be calculated on a semi-annual basis prior to any distribution as set forth in Section 3 below. 3.0 Distribution of Net Revenues 3.1 For purposes of this section, "net revenues" means the amount of monies collected by Elgin as fines, including any surcharges accruing thereto, levied by Provincial Offences at St. Thomas, Ontario, less those deductions provided for in Section 2.0 above, save and except for the calendar year 2004, for which year net revenues shall be deemed to be the amount of TWENTY-NINE THO:USAND SIX HUNDRED SIXTEEN DOLLARS ($29,616.00), @ i . ,(, ''-",.-' 3.2 In respect of fines and surcharges levied by Provincial Offences Court at St. Thomas, Ontario, prior to March 1,2001, Elgin shall pay all net revenues to Elgin and St. Thomas apportioned on the basis of relative population. 3.3 In respect of fines and surcharges levied by Provincial Offences Court at St. Thomas, Ontario, after March 1,2001, Elgin shall pay net revenues to West Elgin, DuttonJDunwich, Southwold, Central Elgin, Malahide, Bayham, Aylmer, and St. Thomas in proportions equal to the proportion offines levied for offences within the boundaries of each such municipality to total fines levied by Provincial Offences Court at St. Thomas, Ontario, during the then most recent full calendar year. 3.4 The distributions referred to in Section 3.2 and 3.3 above shall be completed by Elgin on a semi-annual basis. 4.0 Miscellaneous 4.1 The within agreement shall remain in full force and effect until any party provides written notice of termination at least one hundred eighty (180) days prior to the desired date of termination. This agreement may be amended in writing at any time by the mutual consent of all parties hereto. 4.2 All parties hereto agree that each will pass enabling by-laws in order to confirm the terms and conditions of this agreement as well as to enable each such municipality to enter into the said agreement. 4.3 The parties hereto agree that, in performing the collection services as contemplated by or necessary to this agreement, any employee of Elgin shall remain an employee of Elgin. 4.4 Any notice required to be given by either party to the others shall be sufficiently given and sent by facsimile transmission or mailed by regular post addressed to the other at: Corporation of the County of Elgin 450 Sunset Drive St. Thomas, Ontario N5R 5Vl Canada (519)631-1460 (519)633-7661 (fax) Corporation of the Municipality of West Elgin 22413 Hoskins Line P.O. Box 490 Rodney, Ontario NOL 2CO Canada (519)785-0560 (519)785-0644 (fax) Corporation ofthe Municipality of DuttonIDunwich Box 329, 199 Main Street Dutton, Ontario NOL UO Canada (519)762-2044 (519)762-2278 (fax) Corporation ofthe Township of Southwold 35663 Fingal Line Fingal, Ontario NOL lKO Canada (519)769-2010 (519)769-2837 (fax) @ , ,> '-,i Corporation of the Municipality of Central Elgin 450 Sunset Drive St Thomas, Ontario N5R 5V1 Canada (519)631-4860 (519)631-4036 (fax) Corporation of the Township ofMalahide 87 John Street Aylmer, Ontario N5H 2C3 Canada (519)773-5344 (519)773-5334 (fax) Corporation of the Township of Bay ham Box 160 Straffordville, Ontario NOJ 1 YO Canada (519)866-5521 (519)866-3884 (fax) Corporation of the Town of Aylmer 46 Talbot Street West Aylmer, Ontario NSH 1J7 Canada (519)773-3164 (519)765-1446 (fax) Corporation of the City ofSt Thomas P.O. Box 520 St Thomas, Ontario N5P 3V7 Canada (519)631-1680 (519)631-9019 (fax) Any notice contemplated herein shall be conclusively deemed to have been given and received at the time of its facsimile transmission or at the time of its delivery by one party to the address of the other or, if service by regular mail, then on the fifth business day after the date of such mailing. 4.5 The provisions of this agreement shall not be assigned by any party without the prior written consent of all of the parties, such consent not to be unreasonably withheld. 4.6 This agreement embodies the entire consensus of the parties with regard to the matters contained herein and no other agreement shall be deemed to exist except as entered into in writing by all parties to this agreement. 4.7 This agreement shall be governed by and be construed solely in accordance with the laws of the Province of Ontario or, where necessary and applicable, the laws of the Dominion of Canada. 4.8 Any payments contemplated by this agreement shall be made in Canadian dollars. 4,9 If any Section or part of this agreement is held or rendered invalid or illegal, the remainder of the said agreement shall remain effective and in effect. 4.10 This agreement shall enure to the benefit of and be binding upon the parties hereto and their respective successors and permitted assigns. /!J MEMO TO: Mark G. McDonald FROM: Linda Veger DATE: January 29, 2007 SUBJECT: CRF Funding Mark: The following chart indicates the CRF funding from 1998 to 2005 including the POA revenues and POA reductions to the County grant. Year CRF CRF-POA Net POA Net POA Reduction Revenues - Revenues - County Municipalities 1998 6,221,000 1999 4,005,000 302,000 2000 4,798,000 302,000 2001 5,042,000 380,000 464,710- includes last payment of 302,000 from the province 2002 5,126,000 380,000 75,964 436,345 2003 5,740,000 380,000 28,488 359,285 2004 5,841,000 380,000 31,752 254,184 2005 5,841,000 - stable ? - not 29,695 378,513 fundinQ Quarantee indicated For the years 1999 to 2001 the County received $302,000 from the Province as our share of P.O.A. revenues. Starting in 2001, our CRF funding was affected by local services realignment. That calculation included a reduction to our funding of $380,000 for anticipated P.O.A. revenues. In 2005, our CRF funding was guaranteed to remain at $5,841,000. The Province did not include an analysis of the local service alignment adjustments for 2005. Thank-you, Linda @ REPORT TO COUNTY COUNCIL FROM: Pat Vandevenne, Director of Senior Services - Bobier Villa DATE: March 22, 2007 SUBJECT: Complexity of Care for Homes Residents Corporate Goals: #3 To nurture and support dignified long-term care Introduction: Over the past several years, Long-Term Care has seen a marked increase in the complexity of care required by residents being admitted. Discussion: Bobier Villa is no exception to this influx of heavy care. It is always a challenge to keep staffing ratios current to the care demands. As well as these heavy care demands, the Homes also must meet the challenge of the Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care Standards. Currently Bobier Villa has some 25 plus residents requiring two staff to assist with the use of mechanical lifting. The requirement for the two baths per week has stretched resources to a point that we must provide an increase of 4 hours of Health Care Aide time per day to meet this growing demand. The 2007 draft budget has anticipated the need and $35,000 has been included. Conclusion: The extra 4 hours per day of Health Care Aide time will provide the quality of care needed, as well as meet the Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care requirements. Recommendation: THAT County Council approve the addition of four hours of Health Care Aide time that has been included in this year's budget for Bobier Villa. ALL of which is respectfully submitted, Respectfully Submitted 12 Ut?a:-'<<( <. /::f-"" A 0 Pat Vandevenne, Director of Senior Services - BN. @ Mark ad, Chief Administrative Officer. REPORT. TO COUNTY COUNCIL FROM: Clayton Watters, Director of Engineering Services DATE: March 21, 2007 SUBJECT: Fire Panel Upgrade at Elgin Manor CORPORATE GOALS . To ensure fiscal responsibility and accountability. . To recognize and seize opportunities for improvement. . To nurture and support dignified long-term care. INTRODUCTION: A communications system to integrate nurse call, landline phones and wireless communications at Elgin Manor was included for $70,000 within the approved capital budget. This project was undertaken to correct identified issues with the nurse call and internal fire notification systems that were commissioned with the new Elgin Manor. DISCUSSION I CONCLUSION: During installation of the capital project for wireless communication at Elgin Manor, it was determined that the existing fire panel will not be compatible with the new wireless system. The fire panel was ordered in 2002 and this technology is now fifteen years old. The new wireless communication equipment requires a newer and compatible fire panel technology in order to communicate with it. Therefore, the existing fire panel must be upgraded at an additional cost of $20,000 so that the Home may utilize full functional capacity of the new communication system. RECOMMENDATION: THAT $20,000 be added to the Nurse Call Upgrade capital budget, and; THAT these funds be allocated from the 2006 capital surplus. Respectfully Submitted iW-ki~fw> . Clayton Watters Director, Engineering Services ~~U"'J-- Mark Mc Chief Administrative Officer @ Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs Ministere de l'Agriculture, de l'Alimentation et des Affaires rurales Office of the Minister 77 Grenville Street, 11 th Floor Toronto, Ontario M5S 1 B3 Tel: (416) 326-3074 Fax: (416) 326-3083 Bureau de la ministre &i ~ Ontario 77, rue Grenville, 1 ,. etage Toronto (Ontario) M5S 1 B3 Tel.: (416) 326-3074 Telec.: (416) 326-3083 MAR 16 2007 V' ;:") ?007 Mrs. S. 1. Heffren Manager of Administrative Services, County of Elgin 450 Sunset Drive St. Thomas, Ontario N5R 5V1 Dear Mrs. Heffren: Thank you for your letter of February 14,2007, expressing Elgin County Council's support for a regional resolution with regard to an exit plan for tobacco growers. I appreciate that you have taken the time to share council's views on this important matter with me. As you know, the Ontario Flue-Cured Tobacco Growers' Marketing Board has presented an exit proposal for tobacco producers to the Honourable Chuck Strahl, federal Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food, and to me as Ontario's Minister of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs. I have written to Minister Strahl to express my willingness to discuss an industry solution with him and industry representatives, and I can assure you that Ontario will be an active participant in federally-led talks to find a long-term solution for the tobacco growing region. Given the challenges facing Ontario growers, I have encouraged Minister Strahl to give the tobacco board's proposal for a nationally-funded exit program serious consideration. The concept of funding exit assistance through a national charge on tobacco products seems the most reasonable way to provide future support. .../2 Ministry Headquarters: 1 Stone Road West, Guelph, Ontario N1G 4Y2 Bureau principal du ministere: 1 Stone Road West, Guelph (Ontario) N1G 4Y2 {fJ Pick Ontario Freshness Cueillez la fraicheur de l'Ontario ~"Q ~~ .:t.~.:,.l:;' ~rs. S.J.lIeffren Page 2 Thank you, once again, for writing to me. Sincerely, ~;O~+ Leona Dombrowsky ~inister of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs (/}. UY ~'QP~ ......" Ontario Steve Peters, M.P.P. Elgin - Middlesex - London March 16, 2007 2 '(, 2007 Honourable Chuck Strahl Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food Sir John Carling Building 930 Carling Avenue Ottawa, ON KIA OC5 Dear Minister: I am writing to you today on behalf of tobacco farmers and the communities they live and do business in with the hope that your government will soon announce its strategy to assist tobacco farmers exit the industry ifthey so choose. As you are well aware, tobacco farmers have experienced a steady decline in their industry over the past several years and the situation has now come to the point where many farmers cannot sustain their operations. In 2005, in my then role as provincial Agriculture Minister, our government announced the $50 million program to assist farmers and their communities deal with their crisis. I believe it is now time for your government to do its part to assist farmers and their communities deal with the eventual end of the tobacco industry in Canada. This is not just a problem that the Province of Ontario must deal with because the existing tobacco farmers live and farm here. There are smokers from one coast to the other across this country and the burden of finding a solution to an exit strategy for our tobacco farmers should be shouldered by all of the provinces that have benefited from tobacco tax revenue. Please find enclosed some of the examples of correspondence my office has received from tobacco farmers, groups that represent them and municipal councils. Minister, I would appreciate your reviewing this matter and responding directly to the concerns expressed by those individuals who have contacted my office. Thank you in advance for your time and consideration. Sincerely, ~~~ Steve Peters, M.P.P. Elgin-Middlesex-London Cc: Honourable Leona Dombrowsky, Minister of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs 542 Talbot Street, St. Thomas, ON N5P 1C4 T - (519) 631-0666 Toll free - 1-800-265-7638 F - ) 631-9478 TTY - (519) 631-9904 E - speters.mpp.co@liberal.ola.org www.stevepeters.com From: David Caplan [mailto:ruralinfo@infrastructureontario.ca] Sent: Fri 3/23/2007 4:28 PM To: Mark McDonald Subject: Rural Infrastructure Investment Initiative March 23, 2007 The Corporation of The County of Elgin m mcdonald@elgin-county.on.ca Attention: CAOffreasurer Re: Rural Infrastructure Investment Initiative Dear CAOffreasurer: Thank you for your application under the Rural Infrastructure Investment Initiative (Rill). The Ontario Ministry of Public Infrastructure Renewal recognizes the contributions of County of Elgin to enhancing the state of rural infrastructure in order to improve the quality of life for the people of Ontario. There was a great deal of interest in the Rill. 358 Ontario municipalities submitted requests for more than $300 million in funding assistance. We are pleased to advise you of a grant of $1 ,500,000.00 to assist County of Elgin in continuing to serve the people of Ontario. We wish County of Elgin much success in its endeavours. Yours sincerely, David Caplan Minister ***********