August 11, 2004 Report – Part 2
9:30 am (9:37 am)

(Continued from Part 1 that ended at Item 7.2 "Staff Presentations")

7. Staff Presentations (continued starting with 7.3)

7.3 Niagara-Hamilton WastePlan - Environmental Assessment Terms of Reference
Note: Due to bulk, the appendices are available for perusal in the Office of the Clerk
(Councillor Collins discusses a motion he wants to bring forward about this, but does so after Item 10.1 later on in the meeting.)

McCarthy (as Deputy Mayor and Acting Chair) : "Thank you. Moving right along. Item 7.3 Niagara Hamilton Waste Plan environmental assessment terms of reference . And, I'm going to call on Pat Parker and just for committee's edification, Niagara will be entertaining these same recommendations."

Pat Parker - Acting Manager - Solid Waste Planning : "I'm pleased to be here this morning to present the proposed Environmental Assessment Terms of Reference for the Hamilton Niagara Waste Plan Study, and to take an opportunity to provide you with a brief update on the study process to date. As a result of discussions between the regional Municipality of Niagara and the City of Hamilton during the latter half of 2003, an agreement to undertake a joint study of waste disposal alternatives was approved by both councils in early 2004 and an agreement was executed in March . The waste plan represents a logical partnership from, for the two municipalities in that they both have approved long--term master plans for solid waste . They both have targets for 65% diversion of waste for disposal. We have limited landfill space and we both have a desire to manage their residual waste in both municipalities without depending on exports."

"Just wanted to remind you of who represents Hamilton in the waste plan process. The joint working group member include Councillor Dave Braden who is the co-chair of the joint working group, Councillors Bruckler and Mitchell and Councillor Ferguson as an alternate and there's a vacancy as a result of Councillor Powers departure. So, we'll probably after the summer looking to fill that vacancy. David Hart Dyke is the public representative from the Waste Reduction Task Force . The staff team includes Beth Goodger, the Director of Waste Management, Dennis Guy who is our Program Manager of Community outreach and me. The consultant team includes Earth Tech Canada , MacViro and Jacques Whitford and Steve Pyce (?) is here from Jacques Whitford this morning."

"In Ontario, any new and expanding waste facilities with a capacity of more than 40,000 cubic metres requires approval under the Environmental Essessment Act. There are 4 basic steps in the environmental assessment process: including the development of terms of reference for the environmental assessment process. For the waste plan project, we're nearing the completion of step 1. Once complete, step 2 is to submit the terms of reference to the Minister of the Environment for approval. Step 3 is the actual undertaking of the environmental assessment stay and step 4 is the approval of the environmental assessment study, by the provincial Minister of the Environment."

"A series of public consultations was held from January to April this year to invite the public to participate in the development of the terms of reference . The consultations included an introductory series of open houses and three series of workshops. Every series included a function in Hamilton and in Niagara, as well. The draft terms of reference was issued at open houses on April 20 th and 21 st of 2004. The terms of reference were circulated and made available to the public for comment in late April and the commenting period ran from late April to the end of June. Following the commenting period, the comments were reviewed and responses and amendments were developed by the staff working group. The Draft Terms of Reference for the Environmental Assessment study was discussed at the Solid Waste Management Master Plan steering committee and the Waste Reduction Task force in July. And the Draft Terms of Reference with amendments was endorsed by the joint working group on July 22 nd of 2004."

"The summary of all the comments that were received and staff responses and amendments that are included in the proposed EA terms of reference are included in appendix 3 of the documentation that you received. The nature of the amendment undertaken related to clarification and consistency of wording throughout the sections of the document, re-structuring of some of the sections, a little more detail in some cases and changes to the evaluation criteria. Just to review the scope of the terms of reference. Basically what's included in it identifies the proponents and the proponents being Niagara and Hamilton. The scope also states the purpose of the environmental assessment study and the purpose of the undertaking that will result from the study, which for the waste plan is to manage the residual waste that will remain after at sourced waste diversion program and the small portion of post diversion commercial waste that's expected to be managed by both municipalities in the long term. The scope also identifies the types of alternatives to be evaluated and there's a general description of the environment that could potentially be affected by the undertaking."

"The scope of the terms of reference goes on to describe the methodology to be used in the evaluation and include the alternatives to and alternative methods. The 'alternatives to' refer to the selection of preferred approach or technology and the alternative methods relate to the site selection following the selection of an alternative technology."

"There's a description of the public consultation plan that will be undertaken through the EA process. And, part of the submission, although not part of the terms of reference formally, will be the background reports for documentation supporting the terms of reference, and the record of the public consultation process that was undertaken during the preparation of the EA terms of reference."

"In considering the alternative that will be evaluated for the purpose of managing the residual waste they're underlying principles to be looked at. And, these are: the systems that are comprised of one or more potential components including additional diversion, alternative disposal processing facilities and landfill are part of the evaluation. The component of considering landfill only for the management of all residual waste will be part of the alternative system at some level depending on the residual matter left after the processing is determined."

"So, at the present time we have a schedule of meetings that's been established to facilitate the approval and submission of the environmental assessment terms of reference to the Minister. Yesterday the terms of reference was presented in Niagara to the Niagara Region Public works committee, and I'm advised that it was unanimously recommended to council for approval. And so, the next step was for us to come here this morning and make the presentation of the terms of reference to you, after which it will, would come to Council tomorrow. We did the slide before Council got changed so it still says the 11 th . Then regional council would be dealing with it on August 19 th .On August 20 th we would give the Ministry of the Environment the required notice of our intent to submit the terms of reference and we need to give them 14 days notice. So, the terms of reference would then be submitted to them on September 3 rd ."

"So, the next step in the process included the notice of submission officially and the official posting on the environmental bill of rights site and the submission of the Environmental Assessment Terms of Reference to the Ministry by Sept. 3 rd , following which there's a 30-day public and agency review period. So, that would take us to the first week of October, approximately October 4 th . And, after which the Ministry has 3 months to review that public and agency input and to make a decision on the approval of the terms of reference. I just would like to note however that the Ministry of the Environment review period can be extended pending the outcome of the public and agency comments, and that amendments - up until the time that the approval is granted by the Ministry of the Environment, amendments to the document can be made by the Joint Working Group, or by Hamilton/Niagara and also by the Minister."

"So, what happens after we get approval of the terms of reference? The approval of the terms of reference are expected to take place by the end of this year. And then from January to October we'd be starting the undertaking study of the Environmental Assessment study and specifically from January to October the selection of the preferred alternative or the technology."

"At the same time, we'd be undertaking Phase 2 of the emissions research study . The selection of the preferred site would take place after the alternatives to process starting in 2005 and into 2006. And after that would start the competitive process for the vendor for the preferred technology would be undertaken from 2006 to 2007. In 2007 and 2008 the site specific study from the concept design and the operations plan for the facility or facilities would be undertaken, and in 2008-2009 utilizing the study and the site-specific study in the concept plan, the documentation would be submitted to the Minister in accordance with the EA process for approval, and the expected approval would then take place in 2009 including both the approvals under the Environmental Assessment Act and the Environmental Protection Act. With implementation in the schedule for 2009-2011."

"So, with that update, the recommendations in the report that are before you this morning are that the joint study environmental terms of reference in the appendix be approved and that those terms of reference be submitted to the Minister of the Environment for approval."

"Madam chair, that concludes my presentation. If there are any questions, I'd be pleased to answer them."

McCarthy (as Deputy Mayor and Acting Chair) : "Thank you. Thank you Pat. Councillor Collins, you've got a question?"

Collins : "Madam Chair, it's related to the issue of the waste accepted by either municipality. And, we've had the discussion of the issue related to - possibly looking at a zero sum gain in waste accepted by our municipality excluding the blue box material. So, if we're looking at residual waste and compost material, how do we ensure through this process that one municipality or the other - understanding it's a partnership - we equally share in the amount of waste that's going in or coming out or either municipality and I don't know if that's part of the EA process and the terms of reference and we built that in as an assumption. How do we move forward on that issue? Is that an issue that's raised later in the process. Can I ask through you to staff to comment on that?"

McCarthy (as Deputy Mayor and Acting Chair) : Councillor Collins has been consistent about his concern about taking other people's garbage. Right?"

Pat Parker - Acting Manager - Solid Waste Planning : "Through you, Madam Chair. That would be an issue that would be addressed through the Environmental Assessment study process. When we were dealing with the alternative methods, we will be reviewing the residual waste that expected and there would be discussions about how that would be dealt with from both municipalities."

Collins : "Is it possible going into the process to determine that as sort of a ground rule that our objective is, through this process, to ensure that one municipality isn't disadvantaged over the other? With EA process working towards a system where one or the other is receiving an equal amount of tonnage of compost material or residual waste?"

Pat Parker - Acting Manager - Solid Waste Planning : "I don't know that it's in the terms of reference at this time that such a statement -"

McCarthy (as Deputy Mayor and Acting Chair) : "Scott, go ahead."

Scott Stewart - Director (Capital Planning & Implementation) CPI, Public Works : "Through you, Madam Deputy Mayor, I think maybe, Councillor Collins, it could be a guiding principle as opposed to dictated in the EA component at this stage, because again, a lot of the tonnages going in are best guesses, so to put a number on what would be shared later on a best guess, then, would be subject to change. And, then you're back in front of the Minister again. But, maybe it could be incorporated as direction to us to make sure it's a bit of a guiding principle that we equally share at the end of the implementation or at the beginning of the implementation stage."

McCarthy (as Deputy Mayor and Acting Chair): "Councillor Collins, do you want me to come back to you for a Motion?"

Collins : " . . that process though - I guess my concern would be, there needs to be teeth at the end of the day. So, for instance, if in fact this council decides to accept 80% of the waste, and Niagara's getting 20 and I as either a councillor or a private citizen want to take this to the next level, if it's not included in the EA Terms of reference or in the EA process, legislatively I would have little recourse other than to appeal to this Council . So how can a citizen or a councillor, then, build this into the process where it has some teeth? Is there something beyond the guiding principle, through you, Madam Chair, that Scott can suggest, or Pat, in that regard?"

Scott Stewart - Director (Capital Planning & Implementation) CPI, Public Works : "Again, through you, Madam Deputy Mayor, the negotiated contract would have to be brought back here. But again, we're talking at 2009 type of terms. Maybe if you just give us an opportunity just to turn our mind to that and we'll come back to council if we can address it. Or, if we can address it, we'll do it through a bit of a project update which is how we'll incorporate it."

Collins : " - with some kind of appeal mechanism beyond council."

Scott Stewart - Director (Capital Planning & Implementation) CPI, Public Works : "Yes."

Collins : "If possible."

McCarthy (as Deputy Mayor and Acting Chair) : "Mr. Clerk, do you want that ratified in a Motion? Councillor Collins, I'll look to you for a Motion. Thank you. Is there any other questions coming forward from Council? Councillor McHattie?"

McHattie : "Thanks Madam Chair, just maybe along the same lines, expanding it a bit further. We've got 2 municipalities involved in this process. I believe there, maybe it was along in discussions sometime in the past, we were talking about other municipalities possibly bringing their waste into this system as well.

If it is, in fact, an incinerator or something along those lines which tends to be something you need to feed with a certain quantity of garbage to keep it up to a certain temperature or whatever it might be - whatever the technology requires - there is a potential for other municipalities to be feeding their waste into Niagara or Hamilton, depending on where this facility resides. I'm just wondering how the, if I can ask through you, how the EA terms of reference addresses that point and then maybe along the lines of what Councillor Collins has just been asking about, can we incorporate those kinds of concerns, as well?"

Pat Parker - Public Works - Waste Management Division : "Thank you, Madam Chair. The terms of reference are structured such that it doesn't address external waste. It does address additional sources but internal waste, for example, from the IC and I sector (Industrial, Commercial and Institutional sector) if required. So those things would be considered when we were evaluating the technology and the siting."

McHattie : "I guess I would have some concern, then, that we we're in a position that we may be moving in the direction of technology that may open this right up that we're requiring other municipalities' waste. I think if I can ask again or, just to get clarification - can we put something in the EA Terms of reference that specifically says that we won't be looking at other municipalities' waste beyond Niagara and Hamilton?"

Mc Carthy : "Councillor McHattie, perhaps that can be incorporated in Councillor Collins' Motion. You'd like to respond to this? [? background talk ?]. If you'd like to make any changes to that, you have the ability when we present the Motion."

McHattie : "Because, I think Councillor Collins was talking mainly about Niagara and Hamilton - not one municipality taking the majority of the waste" [?background dialogue?] "External as well? Okay - that's fine."

McCarthy (as Deputy Mayor and Acting Chair) : "Thank you.. I've got Councillor Mitchell and then Councillor Bruckler."

Mitchell : "I can appreciate where my councillor colleagues are coming from with that and would ask them to consider possibly at this point in time doing a Notice of Motion only because that group is a good working group and everybody's getting along very, very well and going forward. And, I would suggest this issue timing - we've probably got maybe a year before that type of an issue is going to get clearly debated. And with everything going so well with that group, I'd rather not have us in Hamilton incite something into it that can be confrontational at this point in time. I know Councillor Bruckler may want to speak on it too. But, a Notice of Motion would be there to state we have these concerns - and they do as well, but incited in right at this point in time when things are going so well with that group, I think the timing might be just a bit off. But, if it's a Notice of Motion, through Public Works and Chad chairs that, we can stay on top of it - that committee, and Councillor Braden's the chair it's my own feeling at this time to instill something like that in, the timing's not appropriate."

Mc Carthy : "And, Scott - you'd like to respond?"

Scott Stewart - Director (Capital Planning & Implementation) CPI, Public Works : " . . .I think Councillor Mitchell is on to something. And, again we'll feed it back through the steering committee and maybe if I could just allay some concerns to Councillor McHattie - again this facility would be sited based on the 35% that's left over from both municipalities, only. So that's the size of the facility. Any additional requests or add-ons would be after - so i.e pick a municipality that would come on and want to participate in later, that would be done after this process, so that would be subject to the whole EA itself. And so we're not building in other partnerships outside of Niagara and Hamilton at this time, although some are sitting at the table watching the process - it's just a Hamilton / Niagara situation so far."

McCarthy (as Deputy Mayor and Acting Chair) : "Councillor Collins on that issue?"

Collins : "Just on that point, Madam Chair, the concern that I have is that we already have the foot in the door for accepting external waste from other municipalities with the compost facility and the new MRF. And so, we've already entertained the idea of as a revenue source accepting refuse whether it's recyclable or reusable or not from other municipalities and if that's sort of our step 1 with that facility then I think it probably lends to the idea that we're probably going to follow the same track with the incinerator, or energy from waste facility that we're looking at [ interruption ] - just to clarify - excuse me. We have had discussions with Niagara in regards to trading compost material and recyclables - is that not correct? which has been part of this group - this discussion and so forth.

Scott Stewart - Director (Capital Planning & Implementation) CPI, Public Works : "That's correct that component has to be discussed."

Collins : "So, I think that's really the concern that we're looking at - is becoming or not becoming the sort of dumping ground for South Western Ontario."

Scott Stewart - Director (Capital Planning & Implementation) CPI, Public Works : "Again, maybe just to try and add some clarity to that. Councillor Collins, I think we can address your appeal process on the sharing of the residual that's left over after it goes through the FW, It's just our waste from 2 municipalities Niagara and Hamilton clearly that's on the table. We've not entertained sizing this facility to include Halton, Brantford any other municipalities. If that wasn't clear, it should be very clear now. This is really just Hamilton/Niagara and I think to speak to Councillor Collins', what may be a motion, I think we can accommodate that within the process that deals with the residual, then, that comes out of the energy from waste processes."

Collins : "Okay, from the perspective of process then, how will we deal with the whole issue of approving the terms of reference today. And, if we do this through committee at a later date, how are they incorporated when this Council and another Council or regional council will pass the same terms of reference - there's no opportunity at that point in time to reconsider - it makes it all that more difficult to incorporate whatever Motion we're presenting at a later date? Is that not correct? I mean - then you're looking for 2/3 support to reconsider the terms of reference that you've already passed and that just becomes, I think procedurally problematic for those people trying to change the wording in whatever shape of form."

Scott Stewart - Director (Capital Planning & Implementation) CPI, Public Works : "Through you, Madam Deputy Mayor, I think what you're really suggesting to us is that the agreement part that whatever's left in the form of ash that we share equally. And, if I'm getting that wrong, then somebody clarify that for me, but I think that's why I'm having some ease with this because that really is the guiding principle in this EA and if you wanted to lay a Motion on to speak to that I don't really see a concern at this stage given that's something that we have to work out as opposed to - let's say Niagara suggests that 100% of the ash that's left over comes back to Hamilton when our position is that it should be 50/50 - that would be a deal breaker and we'd bring that back to council so if it's that, I think we're on the same page and if it's something else, maybe we just need another opportunity to come back to this."

Collins : "Instead of holding this up Madam Chair, maybe what I could do is - this is probably going to be a day-long meeting so I would suggest that maybe Councillor McHattie and I could work on this over the lunch hour with Scott and staff and present something maybe later this afternoon on the same issue, and then we can debate at that time. so if I can ask to table the recommendations associated with this after you've received all the questions from council, then I would suggest doing it that way."

McCarthy (as Deputy Mayor and Acting Chair) : Okay. Is there any other questions on this issue? Okay Councillor Bruckler."

Bruckler : "Just fairly quickly, just further to that, it might be worthwhile, perhaps, for Councillor Braden, or Mitchell or myself, perhaps to speak with Chad as well as. And, being members of the committee, it's a long , very complex approach that we're going through with the EA and with the terms of reference, I think the concerns that are shared here are exactly those that are shared around the table with the joint committee. I think what we don't want to do, perhaps, is to corner ourselves and put us in position where we don't have options in the future. So, I think if there's some, a little bit of openness at this point in time, as we go through this process in the future, we have, I suppose we would at that point in time, the opportunity, to determine the size of the facility which gets built at that point in time. So by being very definitive at this point it doesn't give us the kinds of options - I don't know we're looking at, we've been talking about partnering with other municipalities whether it's MRF or whether we're the MRF provider or some other municipality. And so, I don't think we should eliminate any of the future options that we might have with respect to how we deal with waste within this community."

McCarthy (as Deputy Mayor and Acting Chair) : "So, there's a Motion, presented by Councillor Collins and seconded by Councillor Bruckler to stand this down until the later part of the agenda, until such time as the interested councillors get an opportunity to speak to staff. Moved and seconded. All in favour of that? (Hear Councillors say carried ) Carried."

7.4 2004 Tax and Rate Operating Budget Variance Report to May 31, 2004 (FCS04098) (City Wide)
(http://www.hamilton.ca/Clerk/agendas-minutes-reports/
committee-of-the-whole/2004/Aug11/
FCS04098%20May%20Budget%20Variance%20Report.pdf)

McCarthy (as Deputy Mayor and Acting Chair) : "Let's move on to item 7.4. This is the 2004 tax and rate operating budget variance report and it's going to be presented by Joe Rinaldo. And this is from council's request. And I have Councillor Merulla and Councillor McHattie speaking to this item."

Merulla : "Just quickly Madam Chair, with respect to an issue that came up at one of our previous committees - I believe it was the audit committee - there was a winter control issue surrounding salt and we had requested a report or an update on clarification on the $2 million deficit associated with that. There was a misunderstanding, or some uncertainty, of where that $2 million actually ended up. I'm just wonder, through you to Mr Rinaldo, what's the status of that report at present?"

Joe Rinaldo - General Manager, Finance and Corporate Services: "I'm pleased to present to you, that in fact the Variance Report that we are projecting a favourable surplus of $400,000 for the tax-supported budget even though the Variance report covers the end of May, we do a projection to year end and the rate-supported budget is estimated at about $1.7 million. That's in the context of about a $1.1 billion budget so it's about a 1% Variance."

"Here's some of the highlights in terms of some projected savings, favourable balances: the non-winter control activities and roads about $3.2 million; some savings in debt charges; the opportunity bonds - the province has delayed issuing those and we expect to have some savings there; our housing program is expected to have savings as a result of the lower mortgage rates and some lower fees for the activity or various providers have been sending us the bills. Our supplementary taxes are projected to be about $1.1 million over and above what we budgeted for in our residential loan program for the, is in fact, is expecting - because low interest rates again - about $700, 000 surplus. In terms of the negative sides: the winter control program is about $5 million. At this time, if we assume a normal winter, or a normal winter for the balance of the year in November and December our PILs - our Payments in Lieu of taxes are unfavourable about $1.6 million - again the Province is continuing to appeal all of their properties and as a result of that, we're finding that the revenues there will be short - we estimate by $1.6 million. As identified in the Report, Risk Management Insurance claims - primarily insurance claims that deal with prior years, and you saw a few of those reports come to you over the last few months - are, in fact, again our cost of claims have gone up and we're estimating it to be around $850, 000.. You will probably also note that we've been assigned a retroactive payment fee for the former Town of Dundas, of about $178, 000 because the Town of Dundas according to a reciprocal agreement, a reciprocal agreement calls for any retroactive adjustments because claims are higher than projected, that the municipalities that participated in that, actually have to pay it. We're in a process of investigating that matter, and we'll be reporting to Committee, shortly, as soon as we get an outcome, we're meeting with the various, with the, with OMACs" ( not sure what acronym stands for ) "to determine whether or not we need to pay that amount of dollars. In terms of facilities there's still about a negative variance of about $600, 000."

"In terms of the rate budget we're projecting that our debt charges again, because of the OMEIFA" (Ontario Municipal Economic Infrastructure Financing Authority) "be as low or about $3.4 million. As favourable, our non-rate revenue we're generating about $400,000 more and because of the heavy . . . rainfalls this summer, what we're finding is that our rate revenues have actually declined and our slow costs - our sewer and waste water plants have actually gone up, and as a result of that we're experiencing higher costs due to flows and higher costs due to energy costs. But overall the rate budget is down. Sorry, Madam chair, I was going to cover both reports 7.4 and 7.5, if that's appropriate. Or, if you, wish I'll be more than happy to stop now before I go to the next one."

McCarthy (as Deputy Mayor and Acting Chair) : "Thank you. Councillor McHattie."

McHattie: (ask questions on the first one) ". . .Through you, Madam Chair, just several things here. The Payment in Lieu of Taxes" (PILs) "In your report, you make a comment that - and we know about the existing property appeal that's already been through. We've heard about that a couple times around here - but it talks about further pending assessment appeals as well that we feel that will result in an additional loss of revenue to approximately 1.6 million in 2004. Can you explain Joe, through you Madam chair, what the nature of those are and whether that's something we, in fact, need to talk to the province about at a political level - something we should be concerned about in this council and making representation about?"

Joe Rinaldo - General Manager, Finance and Corporate Services : "Payment in lieu of taxes, for all Members of Council, is an amount the province pays for us in lieu of paying property taxes. They are not, Federal and Provincial governments are not required to pay taxes. Since the restructuring of the tax of the LSR" ( not sure what acronym stands for ) "in 1998, the Province no longer issues, as you know, did not collect - Or, the Boards of Education no longer collect our taxes. Historically the Province has always allowed the municipalities to keep the educational component of the payments in lieu of taxes and apply it against the municipal tax revenues - that's across the whole province. What they're doing now is, they're actually saying, 'no' - we are actually appealing that and we no longer want to pay. A good example of that happened in the court house, the court house down on Main and John and we're finding the same thing on 119 King Street - which is a . . . provincial property. So, they're actually raising that - we have raised that a number of times with the Province, but they seem to be going in that trend of making sure the municipalities no longer keep the educational component of it even though historically they have."

"What we can do is, perhaps, develop a further report for Council - we had highlighted that last year, at the end of last year as well and perhaps make some recommendation on some action on that. Beyond the fact actually, from their point of view, they're taking the funds that really belongs to them but historically they have always allowed municipalities in Ontario to retain those - the educational component - and now they're actually taking it away . . . and that's why our reductions in Payment in Lieu of taxes are occurring."

McHattie : "Madam Chair - Joe, does AMO" ( Association of Municipalities of Ontario ) "have a position on this as well, that you're aware of?

Joe Rinaldo - General Manager, Finance and Corporate Services : "Not that I'm aware of. I know I've raised with my counterparts across the province the number of times. Some are not as affected as others, you know, because they don't have a lot of provincial properties like that. But, we can certainly raise that and make those recommendations through AMO, as well. And, we can provide the Corporate Administration Committee a report with some recommendations to start addressing some of those. In addition to that, just to clarify, they're are also looking at the values that have been assigned to their properties and if, in fact, they feel that they're higher; they're not appropriate, they're appealing them to reflect current market value of those properties. A good example of those would be in the downtown areas where they know that the values are probably overstated."

McHattie : "Madam Chair, I would appreciate a report from Joe on that, because I think we need to watch that and then take action if needed around this council table to talk to the MPPs or whoever it might be."

McCarthy (as Deputy Mayor and Acting Chair) : "Would you like to put that in the formal motion, Councillor McHattie?"

McHattie: "Sure. I'd ask for a motion on this trend with the province appealing the PILs on their properties and what the options might be for us on that and that we can decide what to do with that, here, around this table."

McCarthy (as Deputy Mayor and Acting Chair) : "And, that's been Moved by Councillor McHattie; seconded by Councillor Merella (someone in background says, 'Merulla.'). And, Councillor Whitehead, on that issue?"

Whitehead: "Through you, Madam Chair, I was going to ask the same question. Can we also understand through staff what the inventory of provincial buildings are in this community, so we can have a thorough understanding of what the net impact will be? I think we're looking at 1.6. The other thing to understand from staff is: this is an appeal. So, who hears the appeal?"

Joe Rinaldo - General Manager, Finance and Corporate Services : "The Province has set up - the Ministry of the Attorney General has set up an appeal process for that. It's not the assessment office. They have set that up independently. So, it's through the Ministry of the Attorney General they've set up an assessment appeal process where they've actually undertaken - and they hear that appeal."

Whitehead : "If I may use baseball terminology, are they batting 1000 at this point?"

Joe Rinaldo - General Manager, Finance and Corporate Services : "My understanding they're doing extremely well across the whole Province."

Whitehead : "Thank you."

McCarthy (as Deputy Mayor and Acting Chair) : "Joe, do you have the intent of that motion? Or, is it going to be formalized by Councillor McHattie? Are you formalizing it in written?"

McHattie: "Ya, I've got that form here."

McCarthy (as Deputy Mayor and Acting Chair) : "Okay, and I'll come back to you in a moment. Councillor Collins, you had a question."

Collins : "Madam Chair, can I just ask the two lines related to Winter Control and Non-Winter Control Road activities. There is an unfavourable and a favourable balance in both of those lines. Can staff just point out the $3.2 million in non-winter control road activities, what savings we - where we're getting those savings within the organization?"

McCarthy (as Deputy Mayor and Acting Chair) : "Through you to staff. Brian."

Staff (Brian ?): "Through you, Madam Chair. The 3.2 is comprised , essentially, of reductions in 2 programs. First, the asphalt program which includes base repair, asphalt overlay and hand patching on various locations within our street system. That relates to about a 40% level of program activity, as compared to what was budgeted for. The other aspect is the concrete repair program which relates largely to the concrete sidewalk - removal and reconstruction - where surface overlay or a leveling by hydraulic jacking. And, again, that's about a 40% reduction or 60% function of performance of budgeted activities."

Collins : "Okay. So, I guess the concern that I would have in that regard is that it's reducing the level of service in an area where we've already been criticized across the community for not providing the appropriate level of service. So, it's not actually a savings in that we're under budget for the work we undertake, it's a service level reduction. Is that correct?"

Staff (Brian?): "Through you, Madam Chair. Yes, in a one time context, if you will, it's recognizing that we're at a point in program delivery thus far that these savings could be achieved and applied to the mitigation efforts, if endorsed by Council."

Collins : "And, are there other tax budget savings that are service level reductions rather than

Actual savings that are included on that list?"

McCarthy (as Deputy Mayor and Acting Chair) : "Through you, to - "

Joe Rinaldo - General Manager, Finance and Corporate Services : "Generally speaking, the other programs - I won't speak to the Road program, I'll let Brian speak to that - generally speaking, the other ones are not usually - are not savings or program delivery areas, they're essentially lower interest rates, the timing of these kinds of items. So, generally speaking no, but I'll leave Brian to answer the one on the road program, because that's his - "

McCarthy (as Deputy Mayor and Acting Chair) :."Over to you, Brian -"

Staff (Brian): "Yes, Madam Chair, they are all inclusive - my earlier comments. And, those are the reductions related to the 3.2 savings, if you will. So, those are the only reductions in service level related to the roads program."

Collins : "Madam Chair, I don't see those as actual variances to the budgets that were approved - that's actually a service reduction and as such I would refer that issue to the Committee for the appropriate debate. I don't think this is the forum. I believe it would need a report - what's the impact going to be? I mean, we've had, as you know, a lot of attention placed on those activities, not just this calendar years, but in prior budget years. And again, I'm surprised to see that it's part of a variance report because it's a service level reduction, rather than a service that's come in under whether it's contractual or are labour costs. So, from that perspective I would just move to have that taken out of this report. I would assume that in the interim our staff would be operating at 100% service levels until council makes the decision to cut back in that area or in any other areas. So, if I could give that direction. And, I hope we're working under that assumption until such time as Committee and Council makes the reduction."

McCarthy (as Deputy Mayor and Acting Chair) : "Mr. Clerk, how do you want to handle this and what section has to be removed in order to move the report?" (some talking off microphone) "Can I call upon Scott Stewart to respond to this first, please?"

Scott Stewart - Director (Capital Planning & Implementation) CPI, Public Works : "Through you, Madam Deputy Mayor, really a time and place within our budget cycle that again we haven't cut service. I want to be clear on that. We haven't cut service without coming forward to Council, here, that's one of the intents today. Then this becomes a bit of a time issue for us and Brian can speak to this with a little greater detail. So again, we're at a point where we need to mitigate our issue on budget and service - you'll see below on the unfavourable line on winter control - again we've had a heavy January, February, March. We've done a lot of ice issues. So, we've over spent there to match our service levels. And then, to mitigate that now with the time situation, when you see that the non-winter control road activities are there. It is a priority are for us. But again, we're bringing that forward as just as an item that given the time constraints if we go much beyond that and continue this practice, this opportunity removes itself for this one-time saving this year for us to keep this year's budget - for us to live within our means for the very bottom line for public works. And then, we would be back at it - full 100% next year. And, that may be just a little bit of clarity on that. It wasn't our intent to cut it without anyone's knowledge."

McCarthy (as Deputy Mayor and Acting Chair) : "And, Brian want to speak to this as well. Brian is ... no, no? Okay, Councillor Collins."

Collins : "As we've already incorporated into our current budget a phase-in and a reduction of

materials and public works-related activities. So if you recall, for the last 2 years now, we've had a phased-in approach of reduced sidewalk, reduced road maintenance. This would be in addition to what we've already cut out of the budget. So, if we're looking to compensate for areas that are over budget, I would hesitate to suggest that our asphalt and concrete programs are going to be the sort of, or are going to make up for those budget expenditures. I really don't believe that's the area of the organization to search for savings, as we've already cut it. So, that being the case, I would suggest we refer it to Committee and if Committee in Council determine at the end of the day that that's the area, then that's the area. But, that's a pretty big debate and I would hesitate to say that we're prepared to debate it with all the information this afternoon."

McCarthy (as Deputy Mayor and Acting Chair) : "Do I call upon you for that motion?"

Collins : "I would move that the $3.2 million non-winter control road activities be referred to committee for discussion."

McCarthy (as Deputy Mayor and Acting Chair) : "Seconded by Councillor Mitchell. All in favour of that Motion?" (faintly hear some councillor say carried.) "Can I hear that again, please. All in favour of that motion?" (Hear councillors say carried) "Carried. Councillor McHattie. Sorry, can we hold back on that." ('can we hold back on that' seems to be directed to someone else) "Go ahead."

McHattie : "Just, ya, sorry, thanks very much for that. Just, if I can ask through you, to staff, Madam Chair. What are the implications of holding it off until, I guess, September - public works Committee - in terms of timing and your process?"

Staff (Brian?): "Through you, Madam Chair, if the direction is to proceed with 100% service delivery, much of this opportunity will have been lost through implementation. As we are obviously in construction season and would need to proceed under the direction of 100% service delivery. So a further delay in dealing with the item as an opportunity reduces its ability in terms of its magnitude - which means another source of mitigation, if you will, would be required from some other program."

McHattie : "So, are you saying, through you Madam Chair to Brian, that if the amount we're looking at - $3.2 million or so - if we don't act on that now we would have difficulty finding that in the rest of the year. I'm just trying to understand, if we go to public works in September, I guess it would be, we lose that option altogether? If I can ask for any clarification as well to the mover Councillor Collins, what sort of report we are asking for. And, I just don't want to lose this if we're - I know we're all moving the meeting on, kind of thing - But, just to clarify"

McCarthy (as Deputy Mayor and Acting Chair) : "Councillor Collins."

Collins : "Madam Chair, obviously the longer we wait in the year to make a decision in regards to service reductions the less ability we have to obtain savings in any area of the organization. The issue from my perspective is that is this the area of the organization we want to take the reduced service. So, if council decides otherwise this afternoon, then they can go ahead with the reduction and we'll live with 40% levels of asphalt and concrete work. I don't believe that that should be the case and I -"

McCarthy (as Deputy Mayor and Acting Chair) : "I'm going to call the question on the Motion."

Collins : "I don't know if I'm answering his question properly -"

McCarthy (as Deputy Mayor and Acting Chair): "Yep, yep." (hear something off microphone)

It's carried. Okay. Thank you.

(MOTION - Re: $3.2 million non-winter control road activities be referred to Committee for discussion - Collins / Mitchell - CARRIED)

McCarthy (as Deputy Mayor and Acting Chair): "Joe, you wanted to present your second report. (hear someone say something off microphone) "I beg your pardon? Councillor Braden, go ahead."

Braden : "Thank you."

McCarthy (as Deputy Mayor and Acting Chair): "Councillor Braden, we've already voted on this issue - "

Braden : "I know - "

McCarthy (as Deputy Mayor and Acting Chair): " - I'm sorry. That's my mistake."

Braden : "Will you will indulge me just for a minute? I wanted to ask a question, in fact."

McCarthy (as Deputy Mayor and Acting Chair) : "Sure. Go ahead."

Braden : "Well, just in nobody's defense and not including mine - we're getting to the point where staff are sort of 'damned if they do and damned if they don't' and it highlights a problem that governing here is a real challenge. You know, they're going to catch hell from us if they overspend and they're going to catch hell from us if they don't do the job that we don't have the money to do. So, that's my background. It's not that I feel sorry for you " (Council and others in galleries laugh) "but we got to be able to communicate here and it isn't funny. So, what, the question that I was going to raise before Councillor Collins started was, you know: which one of these things is sustainable? Because that, to me, is the real key. Putting off road repair might look good in the bottom line but I don't think that's the direction we're giving staff and I don't think the staff are intentionally - and I need to know this; we'll hear this at the debate - trying not to do the repairs on purpose. But we need to be able to communicate so that was the first comment, Madam Chair. And, certainly it's the most important to me. I just want to also say, look, there are things that are coming through - we're getting some savings from interest, right, which is a real bonus. But, what you see coming is the interest rates are going this way and we're going to get hit. So, a little savings this year is going to be double the pain next year. So, if Joe wants to help me out because having extra problems next year through projected increases that we can see coming, energy costs and interests rates are going to make this more painful than this year."

McCarthy (as Deputy Mayor and Acting Chair) : "Thank you. And - "

Joe Rinaldo - General Manager, Finance and Corporate Services : "Through you, Madam Chair, can I just comment?"

McCarthy (as Deputy Mayor and Acting Chair) : "Sure."

Joe Rinaldo - General Manager, Finance and Corporate Services : "One of our issues is that we were given clear direction from Council before we actually overspent the budget to come forward to Council for approval. And, the resolution from Councillor Collins appropriate to you're asking for obviously for us to take another look at that and see if there's something we can do in those areas. But, the instructions that we have from Council is before we overspend the overall budget to come back to Council and that's what we're trying to do, here. So, that's our challenge. At the same time, trying to do it without minimizing the impact on services and that's what we've been trying to do. But, well unfortunately in our road program we had a $5 million unfavourable variance for winter control. And, with no reserves for winter control available for us."

McCarthy (as Deputy Mayor and Acting Chair) : "Thank you. Thanks, Joe. Councillor Morelli."

Morelli : "Just briefly, I want to make a comment. First of all, I want to say that I think we're moving in the right direction when we ask for this variance report. And, if I have one comment it would be that I wish and I'd hope that we can even get it sooner. So that's number one. I mean, I know that it's, this is as of May 31 st and we're into August. So I think we're moving in the right direction so far as that we're getting this - the other thing that, what I plan to do and I concur with Councillor Collins in the specifics. I notice as we're going through here that most of the savings, or most variances are due to gapping in interest charges. And so, I guess what I really want to focus on, through you to Joe, is - and I think there's more that probably we can discuss. But, how do we plan to deal with that. I mean like, for example, the interest charges. Who would have, who assessed the interest charges, initially? In other words did someone assume that the rates were going to go up considerably or drop considerably, or?"

Joe Rinaldo - General Manager, Finance and Corporate Services : "This is not a function of interest rates. This is a function of timing and when we issue debt."

Morelli : "Okay."

Joe Rinaldo - General Manager, Finance and Corporate Services : "And, what happened this year - the OMEIFA program which the province is controlling has taken longer for us to get the dollars in place. And as a result, the debt hasn't been issued. So, we don't have to pay the interest at a sooner rate. There's no question, in the future, we'll be looking at higher interest rates. As you know we . . ." (not sure what he said) "interest rates. So, that will impact more the 2205-2006 budget and that'll be a pressure for us in the future."

Morelli : "Okay, the other question is, through you Madam Chair, to Joe. When you're looking at the gapping, Joe, what are the plans? Are these people scheduled to come on; are they coming on; or, are they just approved and a buffer in the budget? What do we do there? Will that change as we move forward, or -?

Joe Rinaldo - General Manager, Finance and Corporate Services : "The gapping primarily is staff turnover. Primarily that's what it is. You'll see the one example in the transit area. They were in the process of filling 10 vacancies probably through retirements or terminations and it took them time to do it. So that's what it usually is. It's not, I don't think it's that more complicated, I don't know if any of my fellow members from CMT" (Corporate Management Team) "has any other idea. But, generally speaking, that's what they are. It's just staff turn-over. As you know, we've had a fairly significant staff turn-over over the last year and that's what it's resulted in."

Morelli : "Without getting into all the specifics, Joe, the POAs" (Provincial Offences Act Administration - area of the Clerk's Office) "the variance in that area - how did you arrive at that, how did we arrive at that - through you, Madam Chair, to to..?"

Joe Rinaldo - General Manager, Finance and Corporate Services : "What's happening in the - POA as you know, is an operation under Kevin Christenson's operation What we're finding it that even though we're issuing a lot of the tickets, as we said in the report last summer, last spring, sorry, even though we're issuing the tickets, we're not collecting the tickets. What we're finding is the adjudication process, in fact, is handling less cases which means that the amount of timing and when we're collecting the dollars is much later. And, quite frankly, we're having a challenge in terms of collecting them. And so, even thought there's tickets issued, we're still projecting a $500,000 unfavourable variance based on the collections that we've done to date. I don't know if Kevin wanted to add any additional information on it but that's essentially what's been happening."

Kevin Christenson - City Clerk : "Through you, Madam Chair, we've got 2 collection agencies and our own staff trying to do collections on it and we're still not getting the collections that we wanted. In addition, the court cases, as Joe indicates are running behind and we're getting less and less action through the courts. There's a shortage of judges, as well. But, even the Ministry has advised us of the problem areas."

Morelli : "Okay. And, that's really a key point for me, Madam Chair, is that the purpose of this is obviously to recognize, you know, where we are off of budget and the reason why. And then, ultimately to bring forward issues like that so that we can now deal with how Council should pursue - how we might improve collections, and look to staff. I think it's serving its purpose and I'm encouraged by this first report and I really think that there's much more that I want to discuss and I will discuss it directly but with the department. But, in terms at looking at the payback or the feedback from doing this report I think it's a really good positive move and that's just one item that I think reflects that fact."

McCarthy (as Deputy Mayor and Acting Chair) : "And, we've got Councillor Ferguson and then I'm going to go to Councillor McHattie for his Motion. Councillor Ferguson, go ahead."

Ferguson : "Thank you, Madam Chair. Through you to Joe. Nineteen half" (referring to the $19.5 million from the Province) "is the cheque in the bank, cheque in the mail, or expected in the morning - what's the status on that?"

Joe Rinaldo - General Manager, Finance and Corporate Services : "My understanding is that it's received approval and the cheque is - we're expecting to see it shortly." (hear someone say something, not sure exactly who or what.)

Ferguson : "Fiscal 04?"

Joe Rinaldo - General Manager, Finance and Corporate Services : "This is for 04."

Ferguson : "But, we'll get it in 04?"

Joe Rinaldo - General Manager, Finance and Corporate Services : "Ya, we will receive it in August - I understand in August, September -"

Ferguson : "Thank you."

McCarthy (as Deputy Mayor and Acting Chair) : "Thank you, Councillor Ferguson. Councillor McHattie for your Motion."

(MOTION (as amended) - Re: Options for Council regarding Provincial appeal on PILs - McHattie / Merulla - CARRIED )

McHattie : "Thanks, Madam Chair. Moved by myself; and seconded by Councillor Merulla that we request a report on the Province of Ontario's initiative to reduce PILs on their properties in the City of Hamilton; the potential for additional reductions and possible actions that can be considered by City Council."

McCarthy (as Deputy Mayor and Acting Chair) : "And, on that Motion, it's been seconded by?"

McHattie : "Councillor Merulla. And, Councillor Whitehead on that issue."

Whitehead : "Ya, could I just ask that somehow we include AMO in that resolution as well?"

McCarthy (as Deputy Mayor and Acting Chair) : "Done. And, I'm going to call the question on Councillor McHattie's Motion, as well. And, I'm going to call the question on the combined reports that were brought forward." (someone says something to McCarthy off microphone) "Okay. And, on Councillor McHattie's Motion. It's been Moved and seconded. All in favour please?" (Hear Councillors say carried) "Carried. That Motion's carried. And, thank you. Joe, over to you for the next report."

7.5 2004 Overtime Variance Report (FCS04098(a)) (City Wide)
(http://www.hamilton.ca/Clerk/agendas-minutes-reports/
committee-of-the-whole/2004/Aug11/FCS04098a%20Overtime%20report.pdf)

Joe Rinaldo - General Manager, Finance and Corporate Services : "Through you, Madam Chair, as indicated during the budget process that we did indicate to you that we would report on overtime during the variance report. Basically, the 2004 overtime budget, as you know, was reduced $500,000 in 2004. On an annualized basis it'll be, is a $1 million, which will be the amount for 2005. Currently, we're projecting about a 1.4 unfavourable variance and I'll highlight that in a few minutes for you. However, what we're saying to you even with the additional overtime costs we're still projecting that the overall budget will be about a $2.1 million surplus.

Essentially where we're at today, or where we're at recently is that we had requested budget of $4.2 [million]; Council approved $3.7 [million]. Our spending to date is around - at that time - so it might be a little higher now about $2.2 million after we've gone through the spring season."

"I'm highlighting for you the bigger, the larger impacts and they're all summarized for you. The biggest impact is on roads and traffic and 95% of that is winter control of $480,000. As you know the overtime there we have very little flexibility in those areas and we've had times we were able to do that. Transit is another component. about 350,000 as the report indicates to you is just timing in terms of filling in their 10 vacancies they had and as a result because they didn't have the staff on board they were required to provide overtime. But, they had the approval for them - they just didn't have the - it was just the timing of filling in the vacancies. And likewise with EMS." (Emergency Medical Services) "So, that accounts for about over $1 million of the $1.3 million variance that we're projecting at this point in time. The rest of them, are essentially, again it's through gapping. It's staff turnover or sick time that we're trying to fill in of $1.4 million in negative variance."

"These are some of the examples of the overtime pressures that we're facing in the program and they're highlighted for you there: the after hours; the special event coverage; emergency repairs; the bulk collection. As you know this year we had an unus- the demand in bulk collection was unusually higher and as a result we had to experience some overtime."

"Basically what we project, we're recommending we, that Council gives the Department Heads the approval to proceed with the projected unfavourable variance, providing that they can absorb it within their overall budget. In the report, if Council does not want to go with that option, we have identified service reductions that would be required in order for us to achieve it. So, that's briefly a summary of the report and as I indicated we are going to do this, continue to do this when we come forward with the variance report for August which will probably be submitted in October."

McCarthy (as Deputy Mayor and Acting Chair) : "Thank you, and through - and Councillor Whitehead, you have a question?"

Whitehead : "I noted in the report that on our overtime relative to other municipalities that we're the low percentage in regards to how well we perform - which I think is complimentary in regards to our staff. However - and I recognize that we're in tough times and that you're doing the best with the resources you have and some of this overtime is very difficult as you've already identified. But, I guess the underlying issue is the fact that I don't know how those cities rank in regards to reserves and tax base and socio-economic issues relative to Hamilton. But, we have significant challenges budget-wise. So, I would just ask that staff - even understanding that we're doing well relative to other communities that not all . . ." (tape ended sorry - and I taped over the next part of this section, sorry. So, the following is just from my notes.)

7.6 2005 Budget Schedule (City Wide) (No copy) (also no tape - re-taped over with another part of the meeting by mistake, many sorries)

City Manager, Glen Peace, gave a presentation of the and "Integrated Corporate Action Plan" and the:

===========================

"2005 Budget Process Proposed Timeline" (copied from handout at COW)

June 14, 2004

• Develop timeframes for community consultation process and role of Standing Committees (Completed)

• Advise / discuss process with EMT including change to business plan approach (Completed)

• CMT Discuss framework for scan and roadmap gaps/refinements; preliminary tax impact/budget pressures (Completed)

July 19 (or as available)

• Distribute 2005 Budget & Salary Databases with 2004 approved Budgets to Business Administrators (BAs)

• COW - report on budget timelines and consultation process

• Prepare Salary and Benefit Costs and transfer into Budget Database. Enter all other costs and revenues based on the lower of Est. Actual or 2004 Budget

• Strategic Planning & Budgets Committee - roadmap and scan (including pressures) All Members of Council invited to attend

• General Managers (GMs) present to Standing Committees (pressures/priorities)

• Review preliminary 1 st Draft Budget with Directors and adjust a necessary (NOTE: In consultation with Council, information sessions will be held (community, unions, employees, stakeholders - including Council Advisory Committees))

• Submit Capital Budget detail sheets to Budgets

• Council discussions on Capital Budget policies
• Feedback from Standing Committees (pressures / priorities)
• Final review 1 st Draft Budget with Directors

• Review Draft Budget with GMs
• Discuss adjustments with Directors and finalize

October 15

• Submission of 1 st Draft Budget to Budgets

• Results from public information sessions and survey tabulated

• Presentation to Corporate Management Team (CMT) & CMT reviews

November 3

• Present results of public information sessions and survey to Strategic Planning & Budgets (SP&B) Committee (All members of Council invited)

November 15

• Rate Budget to Public Works, Infrastructure and Environment (PWIE) Committee

November 1 - 26

• Input CMT changes

November 17

• Rate Budget to Strategic Planning & Budgets Committee

November 24

• Rate Budget to Council

November 26

• Submit CMT changes to Budgets

December 8

• Budget to print shop

• Draft Operating and Capital Budgets to Council

January & February, 2005

• Review by Standing Committees
• Recommendations to Strategic Planning & Budgets Committee

• Final Budget Approval

==========================

• Glen Peace noted that the City was committed to continuous improvement and there was a goal to bring stability; that the City wanted to recruit and retain high level staff
• He mentioned that and suggested that this required short, medium and long term goals and that it was important that Council receive the information that it requires
• City Manager Peace presented "Integrated Corporate Action Plan - "Roadmap to Sustainabilty"

========================

Glen Peace (City Manager)

• City Manager Glen Peace noted that a draft of the proposal will brought to the Strategic Planning & Budgets Committee on September 8 (but invites all Members of Council to attend)
• He noted that the City is committed to continuous improvement and the goal is to bring stability
• That it is important that Council receives the information it requires to make decisions
• Noted that the City's document called "Right On" is still a core document, but that it could change (depending on Council)

McHattie

• Councillor McHattie noted that he wanted to have a session as Committee of the Whole before September 8, rather than as individual committees
• He suggested maybe a day or ½ a day to go through the budget as a Committee of the Whole

McCarthy (as Acting Chair)

• suggested to Brian to maybe make that into a motion

Glen Peace (City Manager)

• wasn't sure if people wanted to go through budget item by item, but if Council wishes to go to a meeting as Committee of the Whole, instead of just individual standing committees, that could be done
• there would be consultation in the current process

Bruckler

• Councillor Bruckler had a similar concern as did McHattie. Bruckler didn't want to rewrite the entire strategy, but thought that it would be good if Council met as a whole to discuss it

Braden

• Councillor Braden noted that when we (Council) start a process, we want to make some assumptions so that "we're on the same sheet."
• That, for example, one of the City's goals has been to grow the economy so, when we get started we have to get on the same assumptions and need to understand implications
• Come in with different ideas as to how to maintain standards
• Need a "philosophical day not to vent, but to get on the same track . . . respect between us."
• We need a meeting at the front end of this

Kevin Christenson (City Clerk) :

• noted that there would need to be a motion to approve this meting

McHattie

• Councillor McHattie put forward a motion to have Committee of the Whole discuss the Strategic Direction for the 2005 budget process before there was detailed discussion on the budget itself - this motion was seconded by Bruckler and CARRIED

Glen Peace (City Manager)

• City Manager Glen Peace noted that a meeting could take place after September 8 th before Council got into discussing the details of the budget

Whitehead

• Councillor Whitehead asked if staff could be asked to get information comparing other cities of similar size to Hamilton in terms of performance measurement

• Councillor Ferguson asked about the BMO (?) annual report that it put out these statistics

Joe Rinaldo (General Manager, Finance and Corporate Services)

• Joe Rinaldo said that that report comes out at the end of the year

Whitehead

• said that this was a matter of timing and he wanted information sooner

Glen Peace (City Manager)

• noted an opposition to this kind of comparison in that there was no real basis of relevance given property standards are different

Whitehead

• Councillor Whitehead acknowledging that, suggested that it would however give a high-level look and may be of some use

Continue with Part 3, Item #8 - "Discussion Items"