Corporate Administration Committee

Councillor Braden : First page of the report says the East/West portion is $2 million. Why would we be still spending money on the East/West - $2 million?

Joe Rinaldo : . during the budget process, we identified we have outstanding expropriations of land, and you approved the report in camera of increasing the payment of an expropriation relating to that -

Braden : That's what it is, that particular one? Rinaldo : Yes.

Braden : On the next page of that 5.5 report . page 2, it talks about $83 million (should have said $83 thousand) for an action against the federal government. Can you distinguish, even if it's going to the same firm, between actual legal advice and lobbying? Or do we put that whole thing in the same category?

Rinaldo: I'm looking for Peter (Barkwell, city solicitor); he's not here. As far as I'm concerned, the lobbying aspects are probably not in the legal costs. . I'll double check with Peter to make sure . ( Rinaldo speaks with someone on the side) . disbursement . when I look at the disbursements of $80,000 that wouldn't be out of line. That wouldn't be for lobbying or anything like that, it would likely be for expenses, direct costs that they incur.

Braden : I'm a little bit sensitive about the lobbying issue and I would like to suggest that it be - when we are given reports or there's discussions between ?Bill? and ourselves, that he differentiate between what is actually legal advice and what is a different kind of advice.

Rinaldo: I'll confirm that there is no lobbying in that particular aspect, I don't believe there is, but I'll confirm that in an email after I consult with Peter (Barkwell).

5.6 FOI Quarterly Report (January 1 to March 31, 2006) (CL06006) (CityWide)

Councillor Bruckler mentions that in these reports, that a column indicating the length of time spent on each request has been added and thanks staff.

(At this time Councillor Whitehead asked a question relating to the East/West portion of the Red Hill Expressway - see item 5.5)

Whitehead : Right now we have the mountain storm management study underway and I've heard from a lot of residents in Ward 8 that a lot of their experiences, in regards to the flooding, started after the building of the East/West, the Linc. So the question . is there a significant problem with the design or the storm water management that's obviously coming off the Linc. Is that a cost that is associated to the expressway account, or would that be a different account?

Rinaldo : . I'm virtually sure they are not included in East/West.

( 06:18 )

7. STAFF PRESENTATIONS
(Pearson/Mitchell - Carried)

Duncan Gillespie , CEO of HECFI re: Financial Results for the 1 st Quarter (Added agenda item) (Copy handed out)

From the report Background:

As of March 31, 2006 , HECFI is showing a Budgetary Surplus of $79,235. This compares favourably to the $218,629 Budgetary Deficit from March 31, 2005 . The favourable results are primarily due to higher than anticipated revenues being generated at Hamilton Place and at Copps Coliseum. Successful, well-attended events were booked at these two facilities -. Revenues at the HECFI facilities are extremely volatile and it appears likely that activity levels for the second quarter of the year will be below budget.

Please note that the City of Hamilton does not charge HECFI for utility and related overhead charges. Accordingly, these financial results do not reflect these costs.

Whitehead - is on the board - moving in right direction - more marketing going on with hospitality side - more efficiencies - impressed board and staff thinking outside the box - congratulates everyone.

Collins - thanks staff and board members for update - increased communications give committee and council better understanding of HECFI's operations on on-going basis - report is positive - Asks if year end numbers going to be around what is budgeted? Gillespie : Imprudent to give numbers at this time, 2006 difficult and transitional and more likely scenario is there will be a deficit.

Councillor Pearson - thanks for the information - hope it continues.

Councillor Samson questions if report is needed in July. Rinaldo informs he will provide a Corporate Management report at end of May and it will have an update on HECFI included at that time. Collins states the Corp. Management report will suffice and asks that his request (for July report) be taken off outstanding business list (item "S").

( 17:58 )

8. DISCUSSION ITEMS

8.1 2005 Transition Ratios (FCS06052) (City Wide)

8.2 2006 Provincial Grants Allocations (FCS06042) (CityWide)
(Pearson/Collins Carried)

Braden : The $20 million in "a" (" That the one-time Provincial Contribution of $20 million be utilized for the future development of the North Glanbrook Industrial Business Park in accordance with the 2006 approved budget and be deposited to a new capital reserve - 108042 North Glanbrook Industrial Business Park Reserve") can someone give me an idea of how far it will go - the problem is, I believe, in very general terms, we need to do some extensive servicing both locally in order to get the services to the park. Is $20 million enough if we spend it, have it, so that I can buy property in there, get a permit and go ahead, or is this only part of it?

Rinaldo : North Glanbrook Industrial Park has a total, if you look as the last budget which was approved, $20 million was coming from the province and I just don't remember our contribution from development fees and so on . so there are other contributions in there, but what the $20 million assures us in fact is there will be another shortfall because we were making those assumptions as part of the North Glanbrook, but the total cost is more than the $20 million over a period of time.

Braden : So can I have the other part of that question answered which is, if there are other contributions ?where? we have this, two things, one is how long is it going to take ??? to spend, to spend the money with the contributions. We have been waiting for this - 15 or 20 years I think - I want to know when we're going to get some action? (someone in the background says 30) - oh, 30 years in the past, but are we going to have it ready in 30 years. I'm being facetious. Can you answer that question?

Rinaldo : I will get you that information. . we will forward it to all members of the committee, an email answering that question: how long will it take. We expect we will have the industrial park up and running.

Braden : Up and running so that there can be some building for which we can then get the benefit of the assessment and the employment. That's what I -

Rinaldo : I understand from Glen ( Peace ) that Lee Ann (Coveyduck) is coming forward with the servicing report on the Glanbrook Industrial Park , now that we got all the financing in place. So I would expect that you will see that coming through the planning and development committee in the next cycle or two. So you will get a report on that.

Braden : Are there some other places where we could use a small fraction of that money, where we could get shovel ready land much faster? The first question is North Glanbrook Park, if we got the money, when will it be ready? This question is if we had much less money than that, presuming we can convince the province to move the money, for instance let's say Ancaster, could we spend that money much better or in a way to get land ready faster?

Rinaldo : I can't answer your question directly. What was absolutely clear to us from the province that this $20 million was for the North Glanbrook Industrial Park and even though they technically gave it to us as an unconditional grant because they wanted to flow it to us by March 31 st , they made it very clear that if we don't use these funds, the next time we ask for funds for anything else, we're not going to do it, so I would strongly urge you not to reallocate these funds anywhere. . we made a major pitch on the importance of the North Glanbrook Industrial Park and to change it, I would think we would run a risk of in the future when we ask them for funds they may turn around and say, well, we gave you 20 but you didn't do it that way so, you know, from my point of view . I would not recommend that we reallocate these funds. If we have some other areas that we want to push, certainly we can talk to the province about doing that directly.

Braden : Is the $35 million actually sitting in one of our bank accounts?

Rinaldo : I couldn't believe it. March 31 st we got close to $80 million from the province of Ontario . Braden : Thank you.

Councillor Mitchell mentions attending a recent meeting in his ward (11) and remarks about the interest there in getting the roads and services in so that businesses can locate there. At the meeting he was asked "if he had a list of companies that were ready to purchase there." Although he couldn't answer, he knows through Planning and Development that there is "a great interest."

8.3 Award of Tender C12-01-06 for the Supply and Delivery of Various Janitorial, Sanitary and Food Services Supplies (FCS06047) (City Wide)
(Pearson/Bruckler) Carried
Opposed: Whitehead, Mitchell

Braden states that often contracts are divided, and asks if the city itself had been contacted and asked to bid on this. Rinaldo answers that this is not the contract but the supplies. Bruckler remarks that it is a 3-year contract with 1-year extensions, and asks if there is an escalation clause (for prices) for each of the 3 years. Rick Male (staff) answers that price is fixed only for the first year and increases will only take place with evidence of manufacturers price increases, and that this would apply to others who bid also.

Mitchell states that "he would like to pay a little more, not necessarily the lowest tender" in order to use a local business. Peace : "We're not allowed to do that . and we can't give preference to incumbents." Mitchell : "Not always the lowest one picked here is necessarily the best. That's all."

Pearson asks staff if the winning bid ("The Cleaning House") is located in Hamilton and staff responds that they are not sure, since they weren't involved in this particular tender. (Note: Reported in Hamilton Spectator that The Cleaning House is located in Hamilton .)

Councillor Whitehead informs of a complaint from G. T. French, (one of the bidders which he thinks is moving to Burlington ), of previous dealings with the city, but sees nothing this time, and asks if staff are aware of it. Rinaldo does not recall any complaints this time. Retention of business policy is mentioned by Whitehead and wonders about the loss of a tax base from a business not awarded a contract, because of not having the lowest bid. Rinaldo once again says this is supplies, not a service. Once a tender is offered "you are legally obligated to go with the lowest acceptable tender. . the city has experienced this in the past and ran into legal problems on these kind of issues." Whitehead wonders how the loss of taxes, e.g. G. T. French, "benefits the community in regards to the way we word the tender." Rinaldo once again mentions the constraints of awarding tenders and offers to have discussion again when legal staff are present.

Both Bruckler and Councillor Pearson agree that they would not like to see the tendering process "manipulated" (through the purchasing policy) in order for a local business to be awarded a contract. Whitehead states that other communities have a point system that favours local firms, and feels that "there should be some recognition for their commitment they have made to this community by locating and employing people here and paying taxes ." Rinaldo will have comparative municipalities policies in his report.

(38:07)

8.4 City Twinning (FCS06049) (City Wide) - Referred from Corporate Administration Committee on March 23, 2005
(Whitehead/Pearson) Carried and deleted from Outstanding Business List.

Councillor Collins , in noting the budget for mundialization, asks staff Jane Lee "if there are travel costs associated in travelling to and from some of our sister cities?" Lee : "There haven't been any visits to our sister cities."

Whitehead remarks that some relationships are more active than others. Lee says there is ongoing requests for new twinning, but there is not strong support from the community here and that they are trying to find "new ways to retain (present) relationships." Bruckler mentions that (in Stoney Creek ) the Battlefield Park Museum was twinned with a state museum just outside Moscow and has "been beneficial."

(45:03)

8.5 GRANTS SUB-COMMITTEE REPORT 06-005 Thursday, May 11, 2006

Items 1-6 Moved, seconded and Carried (No discussion)

Collins/Bruckler) Carried
Item 7 Allocation of One-time Bingo Emergency Funding (GRA06004) (City Wide)

(a) That the one-time emergency bingo fund of$100,000, which is being held in the Tax Stabilization Reserve (110046), be allocated as per Appendix "A" attached to Report GRA06004;
(b) That the allocated funds be used in a manner consistent with the bingo license guidelines;
(c) That organizations be advised that the funds are provided on a one-time

Braden asks question off mic. Samson : It's one time, made very clear in relation to bingo situation, one of the bingo halls going under, specific to that particular bingo hall, it's not for any other bingo. I guess you'd say it's bridge financing really. It's for these various organizations to - Braden continues off mic. Samson answers "No, no - it's a one way bridge. (laughter)

Bruckler explains this was a special fund of $100,000 to help those who depended on this particular bingo hall for funds and that the $100,000 has been expended. He comments re last page of report which contains list of names of those not receiving funds, shown as "Application sent - no response" and is surprised at this. Assumes everyone was notified. Samson informs that staff assures that there was a procedure and it was followed.

Mitchell states he was at the grants committee meeting but left before the meeting was over. After seeing the names of groups of those on the list "not responding" is quite surprised and knows some of them quite well "and how many hours they put in to working bingos." He can't understand why they didn't send in their request. "It puzzles me . something went wrong . they raise massive amounts from bingo . we're going to be hearing about it - open for criticism - really puzzling."

Samson asks for clarification from staff. (No one present from Grants Committee) Rinaldo answers his understanding is "they were all notified."

Whitehead notes that from those receiving grants, all but 4 have an alternative bingo hall. He asks how much these groups would be losing, since they already have an alternative bingo hall for fund raising. Rinaldo replies he doesn't have the details, but will have the information sent to Whitehead via email. Whitehead : "I'd really rather help the ones in real need as opposed to ones who haven't lost much at all."

Bruckler asks Rinaldo to include in his email, the time the applications went out and the return date.

Braden asks if these groups have been informed that this was just a one-time funding. Collins "It was in the motion."

Whitehead asks if any of those receiving funding from grants have other revenue sources. Collins informs that they raise funds from other sources along with bingo, such as membership fees, lotteries, etc. "$117,000 was lost as a result of the closing of the bingo. They were looking to replace that as many has set their . 2005 operating budgets. Unexpected closure late in the year caused many of them to have budget shortfalls. That's why they had requested council to investigate one-time funding to assist."

Samson requests that the committee receive the staff report which will answer a lot of their questions. "It was done transparently as possible."

Mitchell asks for clarification on "what is our tax stabilization reserve and what all can it be used for?" Rinaldo responds that it is money set aside to deal with items such as this. "It is set up to deal with unexpected events."

(Braden/Collins - Carried)
Item 8. Catholic Family Services - Interim Service Provider

(a) That the correspondence dated May 4, 2006 from Catholic Family Services outlining their services provided for April 2006 be received;
(b) That the Catholic Family Services be approved as an interim service provider for the Credit Counseling and Community Counseling programs previously delivered by Family Services;
(c) That the Catholic Family Services provide monthly invoices for their community counseling programs, approved by their Board of Directors, for payment;
(d) That any amounts funded as per recommendation 8(c) be funded from Community Partnership Program - Category F Unallocated, up to a maximum of $56,925.

(Collins/Pearson Carried)
Item 9: Grant Advance - Family Services Hamilton
That the 2006 advance in the amount of $11,385 provided to Family Services be funded from the Unallocated Category F: Access to Support in Times of Crisis.

Whitehead asks if any staff have met with Mac Carson . as he believes there should be a forensic audit done. We've got a number of letters from many organizations that believe there should be a forensic audit done. I've asked this question before. I can't imagine that an organization that's been around as long as Family Services with the significant shortfalls, how they found themselves in trouble, that we don't try and learn from this and determine if monies were misappropriated. Peace : I think this question's been asked at another committee and the answer is there's no basis for forensic audit and I know that you used an individual's name but my understanding is that person does not support that statement and has indicated in fact that there's no basis to go forward with that investigation.

Whitehead : I actually met with Mac Carson. He believes there is merit, and he believes there is a smoking gun. I just had a conversation with him last Thursday, so I don't know where the information is getting lost, because I had that direct discussion with him. And I've had a discussion with a number of people who have been directly impacted by this agency. And the questions becomes what do you need to trigger a forensic audit? Peace : I suggest that if the individuals at hand certainly had a complaint and if they formalized that complaint to my office I would move it to police and certainly to our staff for a full investigation.

Whitehead : The question I'm asking is what do we need - we provide significant dollars, as one of the funders, towards this organization - what do we need, what is the trigger for a forensic audit, what is the fear of a forensic audit. Is it the cost? . I don't understand. Peace : This isn't one of our organizations. It's a private organization. If it's criminal issues then we need to have a complaint. I've already been in communication with the chief of police and I'm receiving different information than you are. So I would ask once again that if there is some basis, that I receive a formal complaint. I will then take it to the chief of police and I will take it to our staff for a full investigation. Whitehead : I appreciate that. Again, how much have we funded over the last 4 years? Peace : I'm not clear, but this is not our organization. We have no authorization to do an audit.

Whitehead : Is it a legal issue, because just because we supply significant funds to this organization, and just because it's not our organization, we're not entitled to demand a forensic audit? Peace : That's correct. That's my understanding.

Samson instructs Whitehead that if he wants to "take the information back to the individual and if he wants to pursue it, it's been outlined."

( 01:00 )

11. GENERAL INFORMATION/OTHER BUSINESS

(1) Braden mentions a politician is already advertising in the newspaper . "Am I wrong in thinking that you can't advertise for votes until after the campaign starts?." Rinaldo : "I'll have Kevin (Christenson, City Clerk) respond in terms of what the process is." Someone speaks off mic and Braden asks "yes, that's right? You can spend money to advertise? . I'll accept that as an answer. You don't need to look."

(2) Braden : If climate change is going to create the need to revisit existing standards, like storm, sewage, . size of the pipes, absorption capacity and all that stuff, what committee would that go to, as climate clearly is not public works, but storm sewage is, so where would we raise the issue to reconsider whether or not the standards are appropriate?

Rinaldo : Because you are asking the implication on storm water management and responsibility, that may mean we change the standard, we do have an expert panel, but in my view, change in standard lies with the public works committee. Braden : Thank you.

Samson informs that Rinaldo and staff have items to bring forward.

(3) Rinaldo reminds that a tax-capping by-law was passed by the city and that the province is "tweaking" the wording, so a minor amendment to the by-law is needed. "It's not a significant amount" and still within budget. . This by-law will be sent to council at next meeting.

Larry Friday : In 2005, the province had allowed municipalities to move the capping - this has to do with commercial capping and claw back - up anywhere from 5 - 10% . At the same time they put in an option of $250 threshold of your full taxes payable vs. a capping scenario. . The claw back portion fund those commercial, industrial and multi res groups of properties that aren't paying their full taxes. There's obviously a shortfall in revenue that has to be funded, so we claw back from those that are going down. We looked at the legislation, that if you were going down by more than $250, you would contribute to the claw back. The province's interpretation of it is it's after we apply our claw back percent. So, if you are going down $250, and your claw back percent is 10%, then it's only $25 we are clawing back and they are interpreting then that we have to move you to full current value assessment.

So in order to capture as many of the businesses that are going down to contribute to the claw back, to keep the % of claw back down for everybody, we're recommending that that threshold be lowered to $45 on the claw back side, and remain at $250 on the capping side. . That will keep our claw back at 18.5% this year.

Collins asks Friday to confirm that the budget doesn't change and Friday responds that it's the by-law, the threshold that we have to change.

Rinaldo answers an off mic question by Whitehead that the bill will come to council at the next meeting.

In answer to Bruckler 's question, Friday responds: If you're being capped, so if you're taxes are going up and you're capped at a 10% increase because of the assessment change, but you're going up by less than $250, we move you to full taxes. If you're going down, --

Rinaldo : - before you do that (referring to L. Friday ) -- technically speaking, we could charge you more than the 10% if you're within the $250. You may be up 15%, but because it's only $250, it's not significant dollars, so we're allowing us to go to the full 15%, because you're within $250.

Friday : (continuing) - so then if you're going down, and you're decrease is more than $250, we're going to claw back 18.5% of that. So if it's less than 45, you get your full decrease, if it's more than 45, you contribute to the funding of the capping people.

Collins asked if rates were kept the same as they are presently, would there be budget savings? Friday : No budget savings. If we keep things the way they are, and if we follow the province's recommended way to do this, it would cost us $180,000. Collins : Okay.

( 01:08:43 )

(4) Catherine Graham - Non-union staff's termination approval process:
"Further discussion to that report will be at the June 21 st CAC meeting."

13. ADJOURNMENT : Standing vote requested - all supported adjournment.
( 01:09:53 )