June 8/05 Report
Start time: 9:38 a.m. Adjournment: 11:45 a.m.

Attendance:

• Councillor Braden, (Chair) (in 9:25)
• Councillor Bruckler (in 9:35, out 10:25, in 10:59 - total time missed: 34 min.)
• Councillor Collins (in 10:15, out 10:39, in 10:42 - total time missed: 40 min.)
• Councillor Ferguson (in 9:37, out 9:43; in 9:45, out 10:25, in 10:32 - total time missed: 9 min.)
• Councillor Pearson (in 9:35)
• Councillor Samson (Vice Chair) (in 9:30)

Also Present:

• Councillors Whitehead and McHattie,
• C. Graham - General Manager, Human Resources,
• P. Barkwell - City Solicitor,
• G. Peace - City Manager,
• J. Rinaldo - General Manager, Finance & Corporate Services,
• J. Spiler,
• M. Amorosi - Director, Employment & Client Services,
• K. Christenson - City Clerk,
• C. Biggs - Clerk's Office.

Media:

• CHML (Mann - 5 min. only)
• CFMU (Maggie)

CATCH: Roberts

1. CHANGES TO AGENDA

Item 8.5 Request to appear from Roger Trull, Vice President, McMaster University, - respecting Development Charges - McMaster University Student Residences and Athletic Centre.

Request to appear from George Radulovich, J. W. Sheldrick Sanitation Ltd. (a Division of Modern Corporation), respecting the contract award of RFP C11-11-05 - Waste Collection Services.

Item 7.1 Distribution of power point presentation - City of Hamilton Human Resources Annual Report for 2004 (second part)

4. DELEGATIONS REQUESTS

As above
CARRIED

Committee passed motion to hear delegations after Consent Items #6 on Agenda

6. CONSENT ITEMS

6.1 Minutes of Various Citizen Committees

(a) Advisory Committee for Persons with Disabilities - April 5, 2005
http://www.city.hamilton.on.ca/clerk/agendas-minutes-reports/
corporate-administration/2005/Jun08/Advisory%20Committee%20
for%20Persons%20with%20Disabilities%20-%20Minutes%20
-%20Apr%205%2005.pdf

(b) Committee Against Racism - April 26, 2005
http://www.city.hamilton.on.ca/clerk/agendas-minutes-reports/
corporate-administration/2005/Jun08/Committee%20Against%20Racism
%20-%20Minutes%20-%20Apr%2026%2005.pdf

6.2 Tax Applications Processed under Section 358 of the Municipal Act, 2001 (FCS05059) (City Wide)

http://www.city.hamilton.on.ca/clerk/agendas-minutes-reports/
corporate-administration/2005/Jun08/FCS05059%20Realty%20Tax
%20Applications%20processed%20under%20Section%20358.pdf

Refund of approximately $61,000 in taxes because of exemptions or overpayments.

6.3 Monthly Status Report of Tenders and Requests for Proposals for April, 2005 (FCS05023(c)) (City Wide)

http://www.city.hamilton.on.ca/clerk/agendas-minutes-reports/
corporate-administration/2005/Jun08/FCS05023(c)%20April%20
Tenders%20and%20Requests%20for%20Proposals.pdf

6.4 Vacant Beach Lot Landscaping/Beach Rescue Unit Capital Improvements (FCS05067 )

http://www.city.hamilton.on.ca/clerk/agendas-minutes-reports/
corporate-administration/2005/Jun08/FCS05067%20Beach%20Blvd
%20Landscaping%20-%20Beach%20Rescue%20Capital.pdf

" a) That the Beach Committee approved landscaping improvements for the city-owned lot on the west side of Beach Boulevard (in the estimated amount of $30,000) and the Beach Rescue Unit Capital requirements (in the estimated amount of $60,000) for the total cost of $90,000 be approved"

6.5 Hamilton Beach Rescue Unit Capital Reserve Payment Request (FCS05069) (City Wide)
http://www.city.hamilton.on.ca/clerk/agendas-minutes-reports/
corporate-administration/2005/Jun08/FCS05069%20Hamilton%20
Beach%20Rescue%20Unit%20Capital%20Reserve.pdf

"That the Hamilton Beach Rescue Unit be provided a payment of $76,650, which will be used towards purchase of new boat, motor and trailer, funded from the Hamilton Beach Rescue Unit Capital Reserve."

6.6 Quarterly Investment Update to March 31, 2005 (FCS05060) (City Wide)
http://www.city.hamilton.on.ca/clerk/agendas-minutes-reports/
corporate-administration/2005/Jun08/FCS05060%20%20Quarterly
%20Investment%20Update%20MAR%202005.pdf

"The City's investment portfolio (comprised of reserves / reserve funds, capital account balances and unused operating funds) returned 4.47% for the past 12 months and 6.27% for the 12 months ended December 31, 2004."

6.7 Hamilton Future Fund March 31, 2005 Quarterly Investment Update (FCS05061) (City Wide)

http://www.city.hamilton.on.ca/clerk/agendas-minutes-reports/
corporate-administration/2005/Jun08/FCS05061%20%20Hamilton
%20Future%20Fund%20March%2031%202005%20Quarterly%20
Investment%20Update.pdf

"The total fund value at March 31, 2005, was $133,009,079. The actual earning rate (excluding realized and unrealized gains) for the year was approximately 4.24%."

6.8 Master Trust Pension Investment Performance 2004 (FCS05064) (City Wide)
http://www.city.hamilton.on.ca/clerk/agendas-minutes-reports/
corporate-administration/2005/Jun08/FCS05064%20Master%20Trust
%20Pension%20Investment%20Performance%202004.pdf

6.9 Chronic Offenders - Parking and Traffic Infractions (FCS05053/PD05133) (City Wide) Note: Referred from Corporate Administration Committee on June 9, 2004
http://www.city.hamilton.on.ca/clerk/agendas-minutes-reports/
corporate-administration/2005/Jun08/FCS05053%20PD05133%20
Chronic%20Offenders%20Write%20Off%20Report.pdf

6.10 2005 Freedom of Information Requests - Quarterly Report (CL05011) (City Wide)
http://www.city.hamilton.on.ca/clerk/agendas-minutes-reports/
corporate-administration/2005/Jun08/CL05011%20FOI%20Quarterly
%20Report(%20Jan1-Mar.3105).pdf

No discussion on Consent Items.

(Pearson/Ferguson)
CARRIED

5. DELEGATIONS

5.1 Roger Trull, Vice President, McMaster University, - speaking re Item 8.5 respecting Development Charges - McMaster University Student Residences and Athletic Centre, speaking only on part "c" of the Recommendation in the report: "That the development charge treatment of student residences remain unchanged as prescribed within the City's current development charge By-law 04-145. . The by-law states the following in relation to development by a university:

"development by a university.where such development is used for the academic or teaching purposes of the university . is exempt from development charges under this By-law save and except the Transit Charges component."

Mr. Trull asks that the new student residences be exempted from development charges of $921,072. He states that the residences at McMaster do not make money, and the business model for the new residences did not contemplate development charges. In the past McMaster has not paid development charges for any of its construction, so the university was not aware of the new by-law which does include development charges for student residences. "This particular by-law change was clearly made in order to implement development charges for educational institutions in this city, was done so with absolutely no consultation." The residences are being built for 2 reasons - the first reason is to be competitive with other universities across Canada and offer students with an average of 80% or better a place to stay on campus. The second reason is "to relieve the pressure on west Hamilton" i.e. to help balance the number of full time residents and "absentee landlord owned homes occupied by student renters."

Rob Payne (sp?), President of the Ainslie Woods - Westdale Neighbourhood Association (AWWNA) next spoke on behalf of the McMaster project. The AWWNA is the largest neighbourhood association in Hamilton, with over 500 dues paying members, and has been working with McMaster University with regards to "developing housing intensification for students on campus. . any residence development that's intensified and safe will free up residential housing in the Westdale area and the west end community." Furthermore, he states that the association opposes any barriers to development of student residences - "for intensification reasons, safety reasons, and . parking/traffic reasons."

Mr. Trull then introduced legal counsel for McMaster university who has assessed the development charges bylaw, and asks "does your exemption for the university not include student residences?" He states the by-law and its exemptions (see by-law above) and stresses the words where such development is used for the academic or teaching purposes of the university or school. He continues "I'm here to tell you today with respect to the opinion that you have received from your Toronto lawyers.the way your bylaw is presently drafted, we believe that student residences are for the academic purposes of the university," and points out case references and questions the applicability of these charges. He mentions rights of appeals in regard to those by-laws including Ontario Municipal Board, and urged that the charges be reconsidered and recognize that the "core academic purposes of the university do include student residences."

Councillor Ferguson inquires if there is "any iniative for downtown student residences?" and Mr. Trull replies "not at this time." When questioned further about the campus in Burlington, he replies that McMaster sees it as an expansion and explains that the City of Burlington did a request for proposal across Canada inviting universities to locate there. McMaster, rather than have competition come in, such as University of Guelph or University of Toronto, and draw students away from McMaster, opted to expand their campus into Burlington.

J. Rinaldo : ".we've identified for you some options and we've highlighted for you what other university towns do in terms of DC's (Development Charges). We have a mixture where some like London do charge and some don't. In our case, we have recommended to do that. As you know the development charge process is a public process that we went through last year which was advertised. We didn't actually contact the individuals directly, but we did have a stakeholders group/committee to deal with all of these issues, but we have provided you with two options in addition to that, if in fact the committee wants to take a look at them. But staff recommendation is that we apply the by-law accordingly. If you decide to make a reduction, you will require an amendment. You will have to go - if you go for the 50% reduction, you will have to go through a process of amending the by-law. which we would have to go through a public process and we would undertake to do that. The other option is a straight grant milieu (?) and as you know, for hospitals and universities, this city receives very little tax revenues to help us provide the costs of these services. And that's one of the reasons we have made some recommendations not to charge not the direct academic component of the university but the student residence component. That's in the summary of our report.

Ferguson remarks that McMaster is an integral part of the community and he is concerned about this issue. He recommends that Committee accept part "a" of the report and defer parts "b" and "c" for 2 weeks so that the ward councillor (Brian McHattie) and staff can meet with McMaster and come up with a compromise.

Councillor Pearson agrees with Ferguson 's recommendation but would like to add that the Stakeholders Committee reconvene and be included in this meeting.

Rinaldo informed the committee that the province is in the process of amending the (D.C.) Act which will possibly be this fall. He stated that other municipalities in Ontario are having problems defining a "unit" and it's possible the group may have to come back. "One of the options, if we are going to look at amending the by-law, . utilizing the Stakeholders Group would probably be appropriate. But in fairness, this is an interpretation of the by-law and this is administering the existing by-law. The Stakeholders Group - that was not the purpose of that group. But it's up to you as a Committee and Council as to how you want to proceed. We will deal with the Stakeholders Group on this specific matter. If we deal with the other matters we'll never come back."

Councillor Bruckler asks if the language of the by-law was somewhat different from the intent of the staff report.

Rinaldo : "While I appreciate the comments made by the solicitor from McMaster, we respectfully disagree with him on that. . we had it reviewed twice: once by internal legal and once externally. We understand his issues. There are other facts and when we come back we can expand on it at that time."

Bruckler was also on the Stakeholders Group and supports having another meeting to take a look at the charges, because there may be some services within these charges that might not apply to McMaster.

Councillor McHattie supports holding a Stakeholders Group meeting, since McMaster is in his ward, but he hasn't as yet held a discussion with McMaster re these charges. "McMaster is looking at September 2006 occupancy for this building, so there may be some discussions on that as well." McHattie mentions the difficulty of trying to set up a meeting within the next two weeks, and agrees it is a critical issue for West Hamilton in terms of the impact on the neighbourhoods and absentee landlords.

Rinaldo : "During that period of time we'll also examine the issue of delaying the building permit, see if we can find a way around it so that we don't run into this problem. I'll ask Mr. Fisher's office to look at it and find a way to get this legitimized in terms of the building permit, with the understanding that whatever - if we can get an agreement with McMaster, that whatever decision Council makes - they have a process. They can appeal it to the Ontario Municipal Board. We can't prevent them from doing that. .but maybe there's a way to write it up that allows us to proceed with the building permit and deal with that. Mr. Fisher's gonna look at that."

McHattie appreciates that and looks forward to meeting with McMaster and city staff and Stakeholders Group over the next 2 weeks.

(Ferguson/Bruckler)
Ferguson moves Recommendation "a" be passed, and moves item "b" and "c" be deferred for 2 weeks so the Development Charge Committee can convene, along with McHattie and McMaster University's appropriate staff. To come back in 2 weeks with a resolution.

CARRIED

5.2 George Radulovich, J. W. Sheldrick Sanitation Ltd. (a Division of Modern Corporation), respecting the contract award of RFP C11-11-05 - Waste Collection Services. (copy of letter circulated follows presentation below)

Ferguson asks for clarification on the process and asks if the proponent is presenting the proposal that was passed at PWIE (Public Works, Infrastructure and Environment Committee). He explains that Corporate Administration is strictly tied to the process and not evaluating the submission and Rinaldo confirms this. Ferguson then asks: "Was the process flawed?" Councillor Braden explains that this is a presentation and "this is a client that we know."

George Radulovich agrees with Ferguson and states that "we do want to speak to the issue of the process that the RFP was evaluated ." He then passes the presentation on to the president of their organization (Modern Disposal), Gary Smith.

Mr. Smith feels that the process was flawed as applied to their tender with a good number of pertinent facts not considered in the evaluation of the tender. One of the most glaring was points lost because of the number of vehicles the operation details. They received 203 points out of a possible 240, losing points because they didn't have enough vehicles, although they are presently covering the contract with the same number of vehicles. Because they have been in business for 40 years, they feel they know how many vehicles it takes to do a waste program. Mr. Smith explains that, if they had known at the beginning (of the process) that the present number of vehicles was not enough, they would have bid with new vehicles. Smith: "If indeed they had a specified number of vehicles that was gonna be the key to this, we should have been told that - we are confident the vehicles we bid will do the job." He refers to their long time experience and feels they are efficient at their work. He was told they had too few references, but Mr. Smith remarks that "they are doing the job, what better references, the experience you have with us on a day to day basis, compared to a contractor that you have never used?"

Another area in which the company lost points was on the facility, because they didn't submit a picture, although "it's the same facility we been using for the last 3 years and the proposal that was recommended doesn't have a facility, but has promised one," remarks Smith.

Mr. Smith feels "the process needs to be looked at, how the evaluation was conducted, and what the information was. I see it as completely flawed in this case." The letter below was then circulated. He questions the fairness of the evaluation and asks "If we're so incompetent that we can't pass a technical proposal, why are we doing your work now? . bottom line, we're doing your work, it's a $7 million difference, and I ask for your consideration. Thank you for allowing me to address this today."

(Letter circulated)

Dear Councilor

Your decision at the next Council meeting could save the City of
Hamilton several million dollars.

We are your current collection contractor, JW Sheldrick Sanitation Ltd. As you may know a recommendation was passed by the Public Works, Infrastructure and Environment Committee regarding the contract award of RFP Cll-ll-05. Our price proposal for this contract was not even opened because we were deemed unqualified by the evaluation team! Unqualified? Please consider the following:

• We are currently your collection contractor and all staff (as well as and especially residents) will agree that we are doing an outstanding job.
• We are currently doing the exact same work in the Niagara Region (in fact, it's a bigger contract that covers more households).
• We took over the last contract, which we won by over 5 million dollars, and on three months notice, secured the trucks, developed the routes, established the collection days, trained the drivers and crewmembers, all with very little disruption and with consummate professionalism.
• We submitted the exact same information on the previous tender in 2001/2002 and were deemed to be very qualified.

We are very capable of doing the work. In fact we may be the most capable proponent out there despite what a subjective and ultimately flawed process may say.

In addition to all of the above, according to our calculations, our bid is $6.975.327.52 dollars lower than the one suggested by staff! But staff didn't even look at our numbers.

Waste management costs for the City are going through the roof. The collection system is, as you know, changing radically with the addition of an organics component as well as changed bulky and leaf & yard schedules. Changing contractors will cause even more disruption. More complaints. More missed calls. . More side road/alleyway dumping. And, by the way, higher taxes! And even more importantly, can any municipality afford to by-pass millions of dollars in savings at little or no risk?

• We urge you to act in the best interests of the taxpayers of the City of Hamilton.
• We urge you not to squander millions of dollars because a flawed and highly subjective process deems your current collection contractor as unqualified.
• We urge you to send this staff recommendation back and ask them to consider our bid.

Millions of dollars are at stake. Please act accordingly.

You will be saving the City of Hamilton from making a $6.975.327.00 mistake!

(end of letter)

(Ferguson/Pearson)
That we move to receive the delegation and to refer this to "in camera" because of legal contractual issues. (confirmed by staff C. Biggs ) (to go 'in camera' at end of agenda)

CARRIED

7. STAFF PRESENTATIONS

7.1 City of Hamilton Human Resources Annual Report - Human Resources Activity 2004 (HUR05010) (City Wide)
http://www.city.hamilton.on.ca/clerk/agendas-minutes-reports/
corporate-administration/2005/Jun08/HUR05010%20HR%20
Annual%20Report.pdf

" This report presents accomplishments and human resources activity indicators for each section in the Human Resources Department for the year 2004. Information is for all City departments, and includes Police, HECFI and the Library where these services are provided to those entities."

Report introduced by C. Graham ; presentation by M. Amorosi.

Powerpoint presentation covered their mission statement, departmental function, policies and programs responsibilities, highlights including activity and accomplishments, benefits costs, placement function, labour relations, health and safety, planned initiatives.

Councillor Whitehead asks about the trend regarding staff exodus and is it tracked. Amorosi responds that they do track staff turnover and it is included in the demographics report - 6.2% for regular full time staff exiting both voluntary and involuntary, with voluntary being 5% of that. This is slightly less than what is reported from various other municipalities.

Ferguson questions if staff is "settling down". Amorosi replies that after amalgamation there was a huge staff movement, and "overtime you do tend to see a little more stability.in some ways." Movement happens in part because of part-time workers, organizations competing for skilled employees, e.g. planners where there is major competition. Ferguson asks about degree of employee satisfaction. Amorosi explains that any answer he gives now will be anecdotal, but that the answer will be apparent when the employee survey takes place (March/April 2006), and that the survey will be a continuing effort every two years. Participation will be voluntary. Ferguson reminds him that employees' opinions have previously been solicited but not enacted upon and that the employee has to be assured of that. Amorosi explains how the employee consulting will be addressed and agrees with Ferguson that if not acted upon, "than when we go to re-survey, then we would expect the results to be worse."

Whitehead notes the number of vacancies in 2004 listed as 2548 and asks if that is high? "What is the total workforce?" Amorosi : "About 6500. . vacancies are also part-time, summer students, . no, the number does not seem particularly high or low." Whitehead asks about the struggle to hire qualified planners. Amorosi pointed out several positive initiatives they have taken in order to attract planners, stating that "there is a provincial shortage of planners" and gives some background for this.

Ferguson remarks on a program used in business of hiring high school students, and helping them with their education in various ways (apprenticeship, etc.) and when finished, having them commit to a 5 year term with the business. And he asks if the City has thought of doing anything like that.

Amorosi : ".We are placing a lot more attention on all our student initiatives . we hire summer students, we hire co-op students, there are internships, and the educational institutions are getting a lot more broad and flexible . and we need to get a little better in whom we are partnering with . and apprenticeships are part of that strategy. We don't . have the flexibility to commit to employment ." because of union connections. ". vast majority (of summer students) thought this was a great place to work."

Ferguson : "We need someway to hook 'em."

(Pearson/Samson)
Report received for information

8. DISCUSSION ITEMS

8.1 Sale of 127 and 106 Burton Street, Hamilton (FCS05062) (City Wide, Ward 3)
http://www.city.hamilton.on.ca/clerk/agendas-minutes-reports/
corporate-administration/2005/Jun08/FCS05062%20127%20&%
20106%20Burton%20St%20Sale.pdf

" That staff be directed to execute the agreement of purchase and sale in a form satisfactory to Corporate Counsel, for the .81 acre parcel of land known municipally as 127 Burton Street for $109,500, and the .17 acre parcel of land known municipally as 106 Burton Street for $41,500, to J. Beume Real Estate Ltd.; b) That staff be directed to initiate the process to vest the properties, and that the Treasurer be authorized to cancel the outstanding tax arrears of $413,054.08"

No discussion

(Pearson/Ferguson)

CARRIED

8.2 Purchasing Tender and RFP Fees (FCS05055) (City Wide)
http://www.city.hamilton.on.ca/clerk/agendas-minutes-reports/
corporate-administration/2005/Jun08/FCS05055%20Purchasing%
20Tender%20and%20RFP%20Fees.pdf

Excerpt from the report:

"RECOMMENDATION:

(a) That the proposed fee structure for Purchasing Tender and RFP fees be approved as follows:

(i) Basic Tenders $ 45.00 (GST included)

(ii) Complex Tenders $145.00 (GST included)

(iii) Basic RFP No Charge

(iv) Complex RFP $100 (GST included)

(b) That staff be authorized and directed to prepare the appropriate amending by-law."

Discussion around the "No Charge" proposal for Basic RFP's as recommended in the staff report. Councillor Samson asks staff to explain why there is "no charge" in this category, and staff explain that there is no fee because "of the large amount of work by proponents to respond to them." Committee discussed this further and concluded with their proposing a charge of $25 including GST.

(Ferguson/Samson)
Moved acceptance of recommendation in report with an amendment: item (iii) will have a Basic RFP charge of $25.00 GST included.
CARRIED

8.3 Policy for Business Travel, Seminars and Conferences - Amendments (FCS04065(a)) (City Wide)

http://www.city.hamilton.on.ca/clerk/agendas-minutes-reports/
corporate-administration/2005/Jun08/FCS04065%20(a)%20Policy
%20for%20Business%20Travel,%20Seminars%20and%20Conferences.pdf

" This policy outlines the expenses eligible for reimbursement and authorization requirement for attendance at business events, seminars and conferences by Elected Officials and City of Hamilton employees. Changes are being made in an effort to streamline the Policy for ease of understanding and administering the Policy."

No discussion

(Pearson/Collins)
CARRIED

8.4 City of Hamilton's Transitional Assistance Projects - December 31, 2004 Variance Report (FCS05051) (City Wide) http://www.city.hamilton.on.ca/clerk/agendas-minutes-reports/
corporate-administration/2005/Jun08/FCS05051%202004%20
Transition%20Report.pdf

No discussion

(Collins/Ferguson)
CARRIED

8.5 Development Charges - McMaster University Student Residences and Athletic Centre (FCS05063) (City Wide)

http://www.city.hamilton.on.ca/clerk/agendas-minutes-reports/
corporate-administration/2005/Jun08/FCS05063%20McMaster%
20University.pdf

" McMaster University has 2 development proposals before the City of Hamilton. There is a proposed athletic centre scheduled to commence construction shortly and a proposed student residence containing approximately 248 units scheduled to commence construction this July. . Initially, for the athletic centre, staff assessed a development charge liability of $331,510.39, assuming that some parts of the complex were not to be used solely for academic purposes. For the proposed student residence development, the approximate development charge liability would be $921,072. In a letter dated April 8, 2004, McMaster asserted that both developments were 100% dedicated towards academic purposes and therefore were not subject to development charges except for the transit component." Recommendation to except Athletic Centre except for transit charges of $18,799.

See Item 5.1 DELEGATIONS

This report to be discussed "in camera".

9. SUB-COMMITTEE REPORTS

9.1 Report 05-003 of the Grants Sub-Committee (May 26, 2005)
http://www.city.hamilton.on.ca/clerk/agendas-minutes-reports/
corporate-administration/2005/Jun08/Grants%20Report%
2005-003%20-%20Item%209.1.pdf

No discussion

(Ferguson/?)
CARRIED

12. GENERAL INFORMATION/OTHER BUSINESS

Outstanding Business:

Ferguson : ". given a Notice of Motion, I can't remember if Committee of the Whole or Corp. Admin. - about legal looking at an issue on ah - if firms are currently suing the City with forbidden for making quotes on RFP's or Tenders. Where's that at?

K. Christenson (City Clerk): That's at Committee of the Whole, and I think we're expecting to come back, I think, on the 24 th .

(Ferguson/Bruckler)
Change item "L" to Planning and Economic Development Committee

(Ferguson/Bruckler)
Remove item "T" - complete.

(Ferguson/Pearson)
Move to go in camera for:

(1) Added agenda Item Delegation George Radulovich, J. W. Sheldrick Sanitation Ltd. - in camera for contractural purposes

(2) Item 8.5 - Development Charges for McMaster University Student Residences

CARRIED.

ADJOURNMENT 11:45 a.m.