Collins : 8.1 Next on the revised agenda we have the report on the Implementation of the TkMC Fleet Operational Review Recommendations (PW03147a )

(tape picks up in mid sentence).2003 We came to Committee of the Whole Council (COW) with recommendations from our TkMC overview of our fleet operations. The direction of the Committee Council at that time was to take away the recommendations of that of the TkMC report and for staff to report back in terms of how and what can be implemented in regard to that. This is the overview of what we were given and where we're going with it, ???.

Staff (not introduced): Thank you. With us today is Chris Hill and ??? from Central Fleet and between Chris Hill and I we will walk you through Central Fleet Strategic Plan. Just by way of contents, the presentation will provide a little background, Peter is showing a little bit already here as to how we got to this stage.We'll talk about some of the objectives of the Strategic Plan.

Staff : Then I'll turn this over to Chris and he will talk more specifically about the strategy in developing this Strategic Plan and some of the tactics as we move to implement it. - (The presentation was made from the report, PW03147a: Report on Implementation of TkMC Fleet Operational Review Recommendations)

Collins : Thank you gentlemen. Questions? Comments?

C. Jackson : Thanks Chris (Hill) and John. Central Fleet Advisory Committee, who will be on that?

Hill: There is quite a broad list of city divisions and departments that are currently represented on this - Public Works, Water, Waste -

Jackson : Is this strictly a bureaucratic committee? Will there be any political representation on there? This is strictly a staffing committee?

Hill : It's a staff committee at this point.

Jackson : So the committee will, I understand, cross interdepartments, that's excellent. I just want to make sure, as much as possible, that any measures to prevent any form of, to avoid, some of the dilemmas we ran into last term, aren't done by this committee, so I appreciate interdepartmental communications representatives across the departments on there. Is it a germane thing that even the chairman of the committee or designate will even be, if you will, exofficio on this committee. I'm not trying to intrude upon Staff and the work Staff does, but I'm just trying to keep the link with the political body.

Staff - (John ?): Certainly that's up to the decision of committee or council I would suggest. The idea of the Central Fleet Advisory Committee is to open up those lines of communications with our users and try and make sure the fleet is not driving it, so to speak, so that the operators have their input heard on a regular ongoing basis.

Jackson : Ok, so maybe, depending on other comments from my colleagues, or even just maybe even the fact that the chairman or designate, you are informed if you will, when the Central Advisory Committee, how about that, ??? when the meetings occur, at least our Chairman and Vice Chairman are informed of it. I feel comfortable but the rest ??? that's fine. Alternative fuels, is this at all touching on that issue at all? John or Chris - the whole aspect, last ??? at council, we encouraged, I think a motion came from this floor about encouraging looking at alternative fuels to save taxpayers money down the road. We had delegations and in the past. Is this touching on that at all or is that a different matter?

Hill : We did refer to a ??? transition plan in the strategic plan that will look at all the alternative fuel technology and alternative vehicle technologies out there that have the potential to reduce emissions and also reduce fuel consumption in an affordable and sustainable way. This report we will bring back to Council this year. It will build on the operations updates that we had previously issued on the hybrid electric vehicles which the city's been a leader in since 2002. Also on the topic of bio-diesel which has become extremely widespread in its usage particularly amongst municipal operations in the past years and continue the work that the City had started on the use of natural gas for our fleet as well as any other technologies that are becoming more commercially available and more affordable.

Jackson : Chris, since you're relatively new since that delegation came in last year, could I just ask that you supply number 1 ???(a delegate name - Felice?) and I believe there was another gentleman - you're aware, you're consulting with him, that's fine, I just didn't want - they went out of their way to appear before a committee at Council last term, and in courtesy I want to give them the benefit, at least we are consulting and following up what their ideas, and so, but Chris you're already aware of that delegation?

Hill : Yes, I am. There have been some financial changes to the picture since then due to the loss of some government incentives about that -

Jackson : OK

Hill : - we want to look at the impact of those and bring back further report to Council.

Jackson : So, you're keeping in touch with those gentlemen. They kind of spurred the debate, if you will, and got us moving in this exploratory direction. Thanks Chris.

Ferguson : .to Chris or John. What's the status of transit, is it in or is it out? I see it's out?

Staff : The ??? transit is separately managed right now, with a separate director, Mr. ??? (Hull?)

Ferguson : Is it the intention to bring him back into the fold?

Staff : Through the reorganization within Public Works and some of the work was ??? TkMC review, what we've done is taken the Transit Fleet and put it under the Direct Service provision, mainly under Transit so the whole Transit Fleet maintenance repair and procurement is done within the Transit Division as part of the delivery of their program.

Ferguson : So Transit will not lease the buses from fleet?

Staff : No they will not.

Ferguson : What will Fire, Police and ??? utilities ???

Staff : Yes, at this time there is no plan to bring any of those operations into Central Fleet.

Other Staff : Excuse me, Councillor, they all have representatives that sit on the Central Fleet Advisory Committee, so we do meet every month, and they've been extremely helpful to us in terms of chairing best practices.

Ferguson : One of the big bugaboos is fuel sites. I believe what we do we should do well, and given the regulations that have come down within the last 10 years about fuel depots, a lot more strict, a lot more stuff is coming, I know you discount 'cause the volume, is anybody exploring the pricing of buying in bulk vs. buying at local gas stations at a discount rate?

Staff : We have presently under development right now, a tender to replace our existing bulk fuel contracts which expire the end of October this year. In parallel with this, we also have a fuel rationalization study that is going on, we have consolidated for example, fuel sites with Fire Dept. They have decided they don't want to be in the fuel business. They have therefore closed their sites and they're obtaining fuel from other Central Fleet sites. This has reduced the number of fuel sites that we have in the City and of course the associated risk of having underground tanks or above ground storage tanks which may develop leaks or other sorts of hazards.

Ferguson : How many fuel sites does the City have right now?

Staff : Presently within Central Fleet there are 20 and the Police Dept. has 6 and I believe Fire has 1.

Ferguson : What departments do they serve - Fire, Police, Public Works?

Staff : They primarily serve Public Works, but in addition to that Police and Fire have access to all Public Work sites currently operated by Central Fleet, as does Hamilton Hydro.

Ferguson : Do you have any idea of the annual costs to maintain these sites? Staff : Off the top of my head I don't.

Other Staff : I might add through a tender process we could certainly explore the possibility of obtaining all fuels off site as well, so that's certainly something we can do.

Ferguson : I would like to issue an RFP (Request for Proposal) for the supply of gasoline off site, not on our own sites, at a gas station, and the RFP would ask for what accounting and security processes they can offer, I would suggest, for a fire truck to go across town to one of the City owned depots is less efficient than going to a local gas station to fill up. And that gas station, I believe, has the technology to list the vehicle, the timing, ??? to the dollar value. I think it's a lot more efficient, I think they can do it a lot cheaper than we can. We don't have the liability, I mean the capital costs to maintain these sites, so I would really like to see a cost benefit of all those sites vs. buying locally, let them maintain the structure.

Staff : We could certainly do that as part of the tender process as we obtain fuel supply later on this year, so I think it could be included in that process.

Ferguson : Are we right up to snuff on all the regulations in terms of spillage, explosions, that kind of stuff at our fuel sites?

Staff : ??? environment management system. These are areas we are updating ourselves on, in terms of our legislative requirement, in terms of our obligations under technical standards safety authority, so yes, we believe we are in tune with all the applicable regulations right now. They're tough ??? (2 people talk at once) represent a risk for the City to continue to manage its own fuel sites. At the same time we have some obligations under the Emergency Measures Act to be able to ensure secure source of fuel in the event of emergency and bulk fuel also allows us to explore our options, such as low sulphur diesel fuel, bio diesel fuel, things that may have additional environmental benefits that may not be offered at retail as well.

Ferguson : I think you'll find from accounting/security point of view they're very very sophisticated as well in terms of what vehicle gets what. I would like to see that as part of the tender process for this October.

Staff : We'll include that in our tender process. Our current internal system right now is a computer automated system -

Ferguson : - we maintain it, we have to pay for it. Let them do it.

Collins : Just to be clear on that. That would be an option you could include or just to do a cost comparison?

Staff : We'll set up the RFP so we can compare both our off-site management of our fuel and ??? both through that RFP process so that we have something that we can quantify and compare.

Collins : With the flexibility of change -

Staff : ??? yes.

Bruckler : Pleased to see my recommendations contained in the report. Some brief questions of it. It would have been easier to read if it had been devoid of some of the jargon and got into some of the nuts and bolts. I particular appreciate the customer service approach to it and that's certainly the aspect that ??? can bring to better customer service. . How do you overcome customer service approach giving priority to specific service areas? I'm not sure that within the actual operation of the fleet from a maintenance perspective if there are priorities given to certain areas in which case some would have a lesser priority, which would hamper their operation in the community. How do you deal with that?

Staff : Seasonal needs, in particular the winter program, when we have a snow storm, we already have a procedure in place where the shop schedule at central garage.8 hour shift to a12 hour shift, we bring in employees so they are standby in the event we have any problems with our winter control fleet.

Bruckler : Is there something built into the system whereby when you have those kinds of situations on a priority basis that you would be able to go outside so that the other department/division is not hampered by the delay or the lineup?

Staff : Yes, we currently have an overflow procedure that's set up where we have rush situations we can't handle.at the central garage, we can either shift it to one of our satellite garages, but generally speaking, the procedure here is to send it to outside commercial shop that has the capacity to do it, get the vehicle back in service vs. leaving it out of service for an extended period of time until we can deal with it with our own Staff .

Bruckler : The report addresses and speaks to performance standards and bench marking, and certainly moving it forward in a very efficient manner. Talks about making municipal comparatives. Is there also the intent to do some private sector comparatives to see how other municipalities may chalk up?

Staff : We're looking at the types of work that have already been done by other organizations such as the American Public Works Assoc., which has a very large number of members that operate in the same field that we do in the City. We've been looking at the types of things that we can benchmark against, recognizing people measure different things in different ways. For example if you're looking for the labour rate in your shop, some organizations may include the cost and billing itself at that rate, others may exclude it, so there's some degree of challenge in doing this type of benchmarking. There is a group of municipal fleet managers across the country which gets together on a regular basis; we're included in that group and we have opportunities to discuss benchmarking performances with them.

Bruckler : I'd certainly like to see that comparison with the private sector as well. I think it gives a better understanding of the efficiency of the operation. There may be some differences between the public operation in types of equipment, but I think if we could get some sampling of that, that would perhaps let us know how much we are in line with those figures. . The rental rates we talked about, daily rental, is that based on usage or availability, so there's a piece of equipment that might be there and not utilized, what happens to it on a daily basis, in that respect?

Staff : Thank you for that question. The initial discussions we've had with our user groups confirm that it'll be based on availability. The equipment and usage is something that Central Fleet cannot really control, once we turn over the case to the user group; it's pretty much out of Central Fleet's hands.

Bruckler : Talk about balancing the surplus or deficit for a particular vehicle, I'm not quite sure what balancing meant. Would that be sort of assigned to that particular account in the event it was replaced, or as a surplus it would come up. (tape turned to side E)

Staff (in mid sentence): we would 'true up' with the user at a periodic point to ensure they pay for exactly what they use.

Other Staff (Peter): Just to clarify that, one of the things we are looking at, I'll use a chipper as an example, where there may be some spare capacity of that equipment, as far as Central Fleet is concerned, they're going to charge the forestry operation for the total expected annual cost of that chipper. If there's some spare capacity that another department might be able to use to avoid buying another chipper, we're looking at the possibility of creating rental rates, so that Parks for example, could charge it out to different departments, to minimize the impact of buying another chipper, . giving high utilization of the equipment. It's one of the things we're going to look at.

Bruckler : It also talks about a long term procurement/supplier agreements. Will that report come back to this Committee before any decisions are made, with respect to that?

Staff : Yes, we would follow all the standard procedures with that.

Mitchell (unannounced): In regards to what C. Jackson mentioned, I support that, C. Jackson having chaired on that Committee, I think it's a good communication tool for Committee and Chair being informed and Councillors can take it there if there's something heard from the public so I would move that amendment. I do have some concerns, what it looks like.but when I read here 'Central Fleet owns the vehicles and the equipment', that's just a little different mindset than what's been in the past from what I was used to. The area owned the equipment, the people owned the equipment, the employees felt like the equipment was theirs and they looked after it. Now it's all in somebody's else's hands and there's another bureaucracy of a department that may or may not know anything about that specialized equipment . Is fleet gonna own all the buildings too or who owns the buildings that fleet's working out of? Is that facilities department, they own all the buildings I take it, so workers and fleet that are working there, they don't have control over their building because we have to have some other department come to cut the grass or what not outside their facilities that fleet's working in. Is that the way it's going to be .

Staff : That's the way it is right now.

Mitchell : Well that doesn't make a whole lot of sense to me, to have somebody from Dundas driving down to Jones Rd. to do the whipper snipping outside. All these different departments owning everything is not necessarily the right way to go. Fire has their own equipment for a reason, Fleet has their own equipment for a reason. We gave HSR their specialized equipment back for a reason. When I look at this, the paper work and the finances and the back and forth wheeling and dealing with equipment and people sitting at desks, pushing paper from all the transfers does confuse me some rather than gittin' the job done. A couple pages over it says that anything under $5000 we're gonna give to that department, purchase price $5000. I'd be very much open minded . to change that from $5000 to $20,000, and that's replacement costs value. It should be $15,000 but I wrote down 20 here. Because to me that gives that lawn mowing equipment, that $15 - 20,000 equipment, to that department that deals with it everyday, that specialized in workin' with it, rather than having to put it on trailers and move it all over the City to get the Fleet Department to fix it. If we were patient enough we might get a Fleet Department set up to work ideally, like Vancouver or Calgary or something. But you can look at all those cities but they don't have the geographical layout or the differences that are here in Hamilton, i.e. 65% rural, escarpment, non escarpment, differences downtown, different areas. I have some concerns, I know we have to move forward. I don't know if there were some studies done on this. I much prefer the local front line workers to take some pride in their equipment that they feel is theirs. And when they have to pay rent from their department for it, and it doesn't get used for a day, and it sits there. I heard Mr. Crockett say they'd like to come up with a plan to better utilize that. That can also create a whole lot of paper work. Now we got Fleet Department renting, Parks Department and that, and when Parks Department doesn't need it they're going to re-rent it to somebody else, I know that's not going to happen. When that equipment's out there, our taxpayers, who are the real owners of this equipment, want to see it used, and they don't want to have to see all the paper work done to get it used, and I've lived and experienced that in the last couple years where people inside City Hall told me the equipment is out there being used and it wasn't. And then when they thought it wasn't being used, I headed out there, cutting grass and so on. Maybe one way of solving it is to increase that $5000 figure up to something a little higher to give that specialized equipment back to where it should be, because the operators using it are the very much the familiar ones that know how to repair it. I would move that - two recommendations, one with C. Jackson as far as . , and to increase the $5000 figure . to $15,000 - $20,000 (for those specialized lawnmowers). So I will move that at the appropriate time too.

Braden (unannounced): . On p.5 when it talks about the core businesses to acquire, maintain and dispose of the equipment. Did it also include determining what the needs are right across the board for the municipality?

Staff : No sir. Certainly the operating departments are the ones who know their business best. They know if they need 3 lawnmowers, 4 lawn mowers, 5 pickups. Picture us as a car dealership, and as a customer you come and tell me what you want.

Braden : Can I pick up on what C. Mitchell was saying, and I don't want always to be different, but it appears that's the case. We seem to have 2 cultures here that existed in the past and one was the sense of ownership of 'this is my truck'. And I'm under the belief that if the city worker says 'this is my truck', as opposed to somebody who doesn't, there's a good chance that person will look after the truck better. I haven't any evidence of this, but the people that work for me I want them to have pride in who they are, who they work for and what they do. So from a point of view of running a business, that's the kind of pride we want to instill in everyone. You can't pay enough money for that. So all we can do to make people feel like it's theirs I think is worth doing, but in the end, that's one of the cultures. And I think there's another culture that simply says: it doesn't matter whose truck it is; you're a City employee, right? You should do this well. So I'm asking you that you try and instill that and build on it where it still exists. We don't want to lose that. Right now, I think sincerely, we're losing that kind of commitment, and we don't want to lose it if we can help it. I had a meeting with the frontline truckers recently. The one thing they can't do, they can't do their own oil changes, they're not supposed to be ??? the chain saw, and they're not to fix the signs, even if they probably could. This is a little bit outside fleet, but you really can't do fleet and job descriptions at the same time. I'm suggesting very strongly, that if the staff we have, in order to protect their pride, and maybe even to protect their jobs, we give them the tools and the responsibility to do those things. When I drive behind a city truck, and he drives fierce and he drives fast, it's a sign that he's in need of help. If I were a constituent I would go crazy, and I get calls for that. It's just to me, I would call irresponsible, but it's not their job anymore, so I would encourage to broaden a little bit what their job is. I don't think it's a union issue; I think we have an ideology of specialization. Out where I am, a long way from here, to send a work force out with 2 chain saws from Dundas or something, is not acceptable to me because I'm aware of what the cost is. I'm urging you strongly to look at models that don't just work for an urban area, but work for a rural area, because they're completely different. To give a little history, when we were trying to do benchmarking, probably in 1996 and we were looking at streets, everybody in the former municipalities knew that Stoney Creek knew something that none of us did. They kept their roads ploughed cheaper than anybody else. . The Region would never put the cost of dealing with the roads on the table because we knew their costs were bad. Terry Cooke was there that day. They were just afraid to put the cost on the table. So I worry a little bit that some of the models we're following might be a hangover from worst practices as opposed to best practices. I've been black and white here which is too extreme, but I'm really worried that we're following the wrong examples. I want to know within this scheme if we can solve this dilemma. The dilemma is - the backhoe is somewhere in the Parks Department or it's in Central Fleet. The arena needs it because we've got a clogged drain. We need a backhoe for 4 hours. The backhoe is very close by, but the arena doesn't have enough money in their budget to pay for the backhoe. They end up renting a private backhoe even though they don't have the money, while the City backhoe is sitting there, . but because of budget restraints, somehow they can't use it. What I'm trying to say is we've got to have some cooperations within our departments. I think we have it at the top level where it works for ordinary people like me. If you hear the message - if we're going to cooperate and use that equipment usefully and cooperatively, then the case is over. But I hear these stories that sound - they're not entertaining - in which we are just not smart with our money. . With the frontline guys, the ones that want to change their own oil on rainy days should do it. When I hear, and they give me proof, that we have trucks that go 100,000 miles without an oil change, and that's Fleet, that's not acceptable. The little I know about cars, 100,000 miles without oil change is just not smart money. We need to solve this problem by empowering truckers. Sometimes we don't have a great idea about who truckers are, but these guys are telling me they want to look after their equipment and I think we should listen. You gotta hear the chain saw story. Here's a chain saw story - I stand to be corrected. In a former municipality, our guys had good chainsaw training from independent chainsaw operator X. New city comes along and says you can't operate the chainsaws unless you got a new certificate. We got a new program now to certify people with chainsaws. We're hiring the same person we had before to retrain them because the old certificate is not suitable. The same independent person. If that's true, this is unacceptable. So let's decide if we want to do the right thing. You know about the chainsaws. When a storm comes through here and you can't clean up all the wood - all the trees on the roads - department turns a blind eye and says just make the wood disappear. We need to know how to play this game straight up so that the employees know how to do this. You can have 2 standards if you need it, but they gotta make some sense. Enough said.

Whitehead : I notice under 17 you talk about if you outgrow Advantis you go to Peoplesoft. Everyone I talk to in the tech industry tell me Peoplesoft is a lemon. Is that something that is to be looked at at the time?

Staff: Peoplesoft is the financial system the City uses . Advantis is the Fleet management system that's currently used and ??? the communication between Advantis and Peoplesoft which deals with our labour and payroll and our general ledger. The issue is we need to improve the communication between Advantis and our Peoplesoft financial system. It's not a Fleet issue as far as Peoplesoft is concerned. Peoplesoft is the financial system of the Municipality of the Corporation.

Whitehead : Most companies use 'Just in Time' delivery. Has there been an analysis on whether or not leasing was ??? leasing the type of program we need with optimizing ??? but would in fact save us money?

Staff : Leasing is an alternative to ownership of vehicles. It is in fact one of the tactics we have proposed under our financial area, particularly for light duty types of vehicles where there's a well established commercial leasing structure available for us to consider.

Whitehead : So that would be small equipment. How about vehicles? For example we talked about tractors. I think this would be primarily focused on light duty vehicles, passenger cars, pickup trucks, passenger vans. The pickup truck, for example, is really the workhorse of our fleet, and there's certainly opportunities there we'd like to understand the financial implications of.

Collins : Can I ask a question in regards to overtime costs? Where do we sit with that? What changes are we making to reduce those figures? Calendar 2004?

Staff : We had very high overtime costs at the beginning of this year for the winter control program. Since the seasons have changed, our overtime has been below budget since the end of February. We've issued directions to the garage operations Staff that overtime is to be kept to an absolute minimum. This forces us to send some of the overflow to external outside services for work, but it does get it done in a timely fashion.

Collins : And the charge back systems. What's going on with those charges and what changes are you making. What's in the chart in terms of that, time wise?

Staff : We have presently implemented a charge back system for fuel, based on actual consumption back to January 1, 2004. We're currently working this through with Peoplesoft right now. We had a trial run on this earlier this month. We currently have all of our fuel statistics up to the end of May. Fuels of course is one the very high nails(?) in the Fleet budget in each of the operating departments, and it's the one where there is an opportunity to control the costs through the usage of the vehicles, which ??? the effect on consumption.

Jackson : I'd like to formalize on point 8.2, that Chairman and Vice Chairman be notified and invited to date, time, location of the Central Fleet Advisory Committee. And then it will be up to the Chairman or Vice Chairman if they wish to go.

Collins : On the amendment to the main motion. Moved by yourself, seconded by C. Merulla . All in favour? Carries. Thank you. .

Mitchell : my issue was 5,000 to 20,000. Maybe those figures are too extreme, but if we're passing this report today, could it be brought back, the idea that $5000 might be $8000 for one department and 12 for someplace else. It's got to make sense to the size of equipment that's out there. $5000 out of the blue doesn't always cut it, so a report back on that please.

Staff : The $5000 was a good starting point for us. If Council directs, we'll report back and then we'll work back on division by division basis and see whether or not it can be increased in certain areas. (2 people talk at once)

Collins : . bring it back to the Committee.

Staff : Yes. Collins : Thanks.

Mitchell : That flexibility needs to be there amongst our many different departments ., the specialty pieces of equipment stay there and they maintain it because it just makes sense. A little flexibility, that's what we want. Collins : Alright. On the main recommendation, renumbered 8.2, as amended. All in favour? Carries.

---

Collins :

Item 9.1: Turn Restriction - Terrace Drive and New Mountain Road (PW04072) - (Ward 9)

On the recommendation? Moved by Bruckler , seconded by Ferguson . All those in favour? Carries.

9.2 Intersection Control List , June 21, 2004 (PW04038(c))

On the list - C. Merulla : .after Ward 3, after consulting with C. Morelli ???, moved by myself, seconded by C. Jackson , that an all way stop be installed ??? and Spadina. Collins : On the motion. Moved by Merulla , seconded by Jackson . All those in favour? Carries.

9.3 Outdoor Boulevard Café - 306 King St. West, Hamilton (PW04071) - (Ward 2)

Collins : I have to ask if there is anyone here from the public who wishes to speak to this matter? (No) On 306 King St. W., moved by C. Merulla , seconded by C. Braden . All those in favour? Carries.

9.4 Tree Removal - 151 Kings Forest Drive (PW04073) - (Ward 6)

C. Jackson : I would change the word 'denied' to 'be approved' and delete the rest of the sentence after the word 'approved' and C. Mitchell will second my motion. Thank you. Collins : On the amendment, all those in favour? Carries. Any opposed?

C. Braden : I understand full well there are circumstances that are personal, that make this recommendation more plausible than it otherwise might be. However, we need in some way to draw lines for those things which are government responsibilities and those things which are not. So I agree that the direction put forth by the mover and seconder may well be appropriate from a humanitarian point of view.but . this is simply not appropriate. If we have a grant or some other source of money that is different from the origin of this, we should pursue that. Unfortunately this is just inappropriate. We can't have the government doing private business on private property -

Collins : It's a public tree, just to be clear.

Braden : Whatever it is .

Collins : Don't confuse you with the facts.

Braden : .We should not be doing it.

Whitehead : I have several pensioners in my Ward, including my next door neighbour who has 2 city trees and would like to have both of them removed, as they are aged and they can't do the work in their yards. My question is are we opening a Pandora's box here. Are we to continue doing individually because I have a lot of pensioners I've come across this last 3-4 months that are saying they can't keep up their trees because of their age and their health. So are we going to create a policy now that we can remove those trees in those situations?

Collins : ??? here, and you can bring anything to the Committee at any point in time that doesn't fit the policy. Do you have a question on the policy that you want to ask of the staff ?

Whitehead : The principles that are in place I support and if we need to revisit the policy so we can address these one offs as opposed to just walking on Council. I'm just worried that I'm going to get pressure from the very neighbour that's pushing me to have their trees removed, to do the same thing. All of a sudden we're going to get inundated with these requests and if we're dealing with a one off, where do you stop it? Either we change the policy or we're going to be dealing with a lot of one offs. I don't know what's the desire of this committee.

Merulla : On that same point. The same could be said regarding pedestrian crosswalks, stop signs, speed limits, zoning changes, at the end of the day, the parameters are there and each Councillor is permitted to bring forth a motion and can at least support or not support it. Let's just move forward with it. Thank you.

Whitehead : I have some concerns about the road we're going down on this, and if we're suggesting that we don't support the current policy that we put in place and that carte blanche we can start accepting applications as a Ward Councillor for individuals in the same circumstances come forward, I think that it's going to create a real problem, ??? when we're pushing re forestation of this community this is a step backward. Be careful because this is a door you may not want to open.

Mitchell : I see where C. Whitehead is coming from, but when a Ward Councillor has had 4 or 5 meetings with the family and had public health involved and had different social programs involved to try to accomplish something, we have to have an avenue for us to bring in our Council colleagues. I know C. Jackson has done everything in his power to get the family onside, to get students to help out and everything else, but some people just get old enough, it's not working and they don't want to remove them from their homes. On a one off like this, when the homework's been done, we have to have that flexibility to come to this committee and I'll support C. Jackson .

Bruckler : The ball's rolling already, because I have a similar situation with an elderly family, a tree, it's an Austrian Pine. They have asked to have the tree removed. They're having some real difficulties with this, so I guess we'll have to bring this forward in a one off situation.

Jackson : I didn't want to speak to this because of the long meeting we've had with several delegations. Let me just say that this is a couple who are seniors, lived in this house for approximately 40 years, looked after the property, this tree is a public tree, by the way C. Braden , it's not on private property. I won't do that. I know the difference. Secondly, I've tried to work with them. They're immigrant family. They're too proud to get social services through the City. I suggested that. This is causing greater hardship for them. She has had a couple strokes. He's been in and out of hospital with surgery. It's causing damage to their property, etc. I always thought, yes we have policies in this city, but if we're not going to bring individual circumstances to the table, we don't need 16 members of Council here. We can just let the bureaucracy run it, because they'll run it based on policy. We don't need to worry about any individuality in extenuating circumstances at all. That's why I'm doing this. I've worked for a couple years on this matter with forestry and it's just at the point now, family's not around. This couple has asked me. They want to stay in their home on their property. They simply cannot do what they did for many years prior to their ill health. Thank you.

Collins : I have no further speakers. I have a mover and a seconder. All those in favour? Opposed? Carries. Thank you.

9.5 on the report. Moved by Merulla , seconded by Ferguson All those in favour? Carries. Thank you.

9.6 Parkdale Park - Proposed Pedestrian Lighting (PW04070) - (Ward 4)

Collins : Moved by Merulla , seconded by Jackson . Question C. Bruckler .

Bruckler : I'm just questioning the amount of the budget, 11 lights. Are we looking at security lighting. Almost looks like sufficient lighting to light up a sports field. Can we get by with less? We don't want to diminish the value of what the intent is here, it just seems - we've lit sports fields for less than that amount of money, so I'd just like clarity to purpose.

Staff : These are just pedestrian lights.

Bruckler : May I ask about the high cost, or is it difficult getting service to that location . that's almost $10,000 a light, $9000 a standard.

Staff : This will be serviced out of the adjacent Parkdale Arena, so there'll be some horizontal boring and things like that.

Bruckler : ..What? Staff : The proposed pedestrian lighting would have to be serviced from the adjacent arena. It would include all the wiring into the arena itself which is quite complex.

Bruckler : I'm sure that a competitive bid will try to bring it down.it just seems unusually high for 11 secure lights.

Braden : Let me commend Staff for putting in the lights at ??? cost. They've been asking for a long time ??? that's the kind of thing we want to have in there. This is a little heavy. I want the staff' s professional opinion on whether this lighting is going to deal with the origin of complaints that are now on the table. I'm not especially threatened by people hanging out, so I want to know if this expense is going to achieve what those of us who vote on it want to see happen.

Staff : We ??? met with community, we've met with Councillor, we've had the police involved. It was one of their recommendations with this area was to light it up. Again, a lot of the activities, you know the police activities, this might be a jumping off point, so they're recommendation was to light this up. One of the important things here is to monitor this and come back and just indicate in C. Merulla 's office how we see the improvements. I think we'll hear that loud and clear from the neighbourhood that's come out to these various meetings. We looked at ??? is there another way to come at this, but from our perspective and from the police perspective, the neighbourhood perspective, lights seem to come across loud and clear as a ???.

Merulla : The first phase of the project was completed, the second phase included lighting. We just expedited the second phase which wasn't budgeted this year, but was being budgeted within the current money allocated for Ward 4. And also, with respect to the Red Hill Creek Expressway Fund, .(tape turned to side F)

Collins : .budgeted monies, '04 monies specifically for that area of the City to be reallocated to within the ward.

Whitehead : (to Merulla ) I know these are tough issues and I agree with Councillor that ??? trying to find solutions to mitigate concerns of the neighbourhood. I'm wondering about the cost value. I understand it's the second phase, but I also understand that the neighbourhood isn't sure if they're even happy with having continuation with or without lighting the current skateboard park there. So if the lighting doesn't mitigate the concerns of the neighbourhood, where will we be then? Would it be more prudent for us, if possible, to put in temporary type lighting, at the same level, that could address those issues and then could be removed.

Merulla : ??? long vision or short sighted vision. I see there are 2 options here. The first option is to allow us to move forward without dealing with the issue of the lighting and wait for the second phase to be completed. ??? (inaudible).also completing the second phase will also mitigate a number of these concerns and will attract a wide variety of our community, seniors, there will be paths, ??? so all we're trying to do is expedite the one component which the police services have highly recommended alongside myself. Unless someone around this table has more authority and knowledge about lighting than the police services do -

Collins : The lighting was planned as part of the park design. The issue that's come up recently from neighbors and skateboard facilities, that lighting is needed and is required sooner than it was budgeted for which looks like 2005 or beyond.

Merulla : (inaudible) .always planned.

Whitehead : I understand that and I'm supportive. My question was, it's my understanding that ??? from the Councillors comments that the number of people in that community prefer to have the skateboard park removed out of there completely, so in that context, you're trying to mitigate the type of activity that's probably taking place there ( Merulla talks at same time as Whithead) . the question that I have is how tenuous is the skateboard park relative to the activity ??? lighting is the answer to everything. Merulla : I guess there are a lot of people in Ward 8 that would like to see C. Whitehead not represent them as well ??? but work on behalf of everyone. I know a lot of people don't want to see the skateboard exist, but a majority ??? (inaudible)

Collins : These lights are happening whether the skateboard facilities are there or not. It's part of the original ??? -

Merulla : That's correct. Mover and seconder. Moved by Merulla , seconded by Jackson . All in favour? Carries.

9.7 Municipal Act Project - Sanitary Sewer on Hamilton Drive from Garner Road to 698.5 metres northerly and on Garner Road from Hamilton Drive to 485 metres easterly in Ancaster, (PW03165a/FCS03166a) (Ward 12) .

Ferguson : (to staff ) Apx. C If I lived at 354 Garner Road, is it really going to cost me $74,000 to hook up to sewers?

Staff : Yes it is. The Garner Rd. piece is expensive because it is a trunk sewer and also because of the conditions of construction and the depth of the sewer.

Ferguson : Do you also think they're going to pay $74,000 to hook up to the sewer?

Staff : I think it depends on the circumstances of the owner and how their septic system is functioning and the ??? of the septic system. This section of Garner Rd. was financed by the developer, Millers Pond subdivision. It wasn't financed by the City, so we're merely acting as a banker to collect and repay the developer if the property connects. If the property owner doesn't connect, there's no payment to the developer. So the developer's out the money, not the City.

Ferguson : ??? Hamilton Dr. $9200?

Staff : That's correct. Because of the conditions of construction were significantly different and it's not a trunk sewer.

Ferguson : Something smells - not sweet. Who is responsible for, who did the bore tests on the pumping station, well not the pumping station, but the sewer. I understand that really went amuck. Why should the residents who have to live there pay for it - $800,000 as opposed to $100,000?

Staff : This was a project that was done through Development Engineering, not through Public Works, so it was done as part of the subdivision planning and development, through development planning and development engineering. The particular property that you refer to has 1000' of frontage, and that is significant as well.

Ferguson : Any residential properties on Garner are going to pay $65,000 more than the residents on Hamilton Drive. Is that a safe assumption?

Staff : Yes.

Ferguson : It is no longer development that contribute to this - I'm thinking ??? Miller Pond subdivision.

Staff : No. The apportionment is in accordance with our funding methodology for infrastructure extensions and our development engineering financial policies. Also, it's been apportioned the fairest way that we possibly could, although we do recognize that for people on Garner Rd. it doesn't appear to be fair.

Ferguson : I can't support this. So if you have a house and lot it's going to cost you $75,000 to hook up to sewer. We have to find another solution. Bruckler asks much the same questions and has same concerns as Ferguson . Staff replies that the funding was apportioned on a per lot basis as per policy, rather than frontage, and refers to a previous report that went before Council indicating it would be done on a per lot basis. Whitehead agrees with C. Ferguson , and to clarify, asks that if the property owner does not want to hook up to the sewer system, they don't have to, and the developer is "in the hole" for that.

Staff : Yes, that is correct.

Whitehead : How did we derive being the banker for the developer?

Staff : It would have been part of the development agreement, the City would have undertook best efforts to recover their cost for the services in the area they were developing, which included this ??? going past this area. Whitehead finds the costs "extreme" and remarks that people will be forced to remain on a septic tank system which are not reliable, and asks if at some time, will they be forced to hook up whether they want to or not.

Staff : We wouldn't see the province stepping in here to force the hand here. I think the only regulatory body or legislation would be through a Health Dept. If someone let the septic tank go, and then there were issues with outbreaks, but other than that I don't see anyone being forced through provincial legislation.

Braden : That $75,000 number sounds high. . in no way should anyone else pay that - the City is not going in there and subsidizing this cost. The development process has to pay for itself .You don't want to create a system, or feed it, in which people are so afraid of part of that number (not all of it), that they will put up with a system that's ineffective or inappropriate. The development has to pay for itself.If a big development paid for that, they can be the banker as opposed to us. That's maybe where we made the mistake - we don't want to be the bankers , either. Murray 's ( Ferguson ) point is good. You can't ask people for $75,000 to hook up to one pipe.

Collins : Maybe we need a report or a presentation on what's before us because we're kind of jumping back and forth between a couple issues here. Peter, you want to comment on where we sit with this and why it's here today?

Staff (Peter) : It's here simply because it's been around for awhile. We can bring it back in July if you would like to see a full presentation. . This is the result of a development agreement that requires the City to undertake best efforts to recover the costs for the sewer that goes past the frontage of these properties, paid for by the developer. And the recovery is for the developer. We have a legal obligation to identify what is the cost if a homeowner wants to connect, what our obligation is from a best efforts standpoint.

 

Ferguson : Isn't the real issue here is the thing ran amuck, they got in quicksand and the costs skyrocketed?

Staff : Yes, there were ??? conditions with respect to the trunk sewer, but ??? is 7 metres down below grade, it's a very deep trunk sewer, and so the cost to build it and connect into it are extremely high because of the depth of it.

Ferguson : . I wonder if this should be deferred to committee, to look at the policy. We can't expect 11 residents to pick up the cost of the project that really went south in a hurry because of conditions. Bruckler asks if the 2 residents at 389 and 424 will have to pay for the sewer even though they are not connected.

Staff : No. This is a pay on connection project.they did not request a drain from the sewer to the property line to facilitate a future connection, so they are not ever anticipating to connect to the sewer. Mitchell says he agrees with C. Ferguson 's recommendation to go back and look at the policy, and remarks that the "figures are ridiculous, real but ridiculous for any residents that have been there for 30 or 40 years."

Collins : (to staff ) The servicing agreement would have come through what committee? If it needs to be reconsidered

Staff : Planning and Economic Development is the committee that would address it. (inaudible off microphone comment)

Collins : Moved by Ferguson , seconded by Mitchell . All in favour? Carries.

Collins : We have 3 motions before us.

10.1 2 cents a litre gas tax

Merulla : Moved by myself, seconded by C. Jackson that the City of Hamilton's 2 cents a litre gas tax be used to improve the City's public transportation services, rather than to mitigate taxes.

Collins : Do you want to speak to that issue.

Merulla : Yes. The province is determining in incremental fashion how they're going to be flowing the 2 cents a litre gas tax to the municipality, . my understanding is the choice will be conditional, I want the City Council, the City of Hamilton, to acknowledge that public transportation, including DARTS transportation . is a priority and this particular motion would speak volumes to ensure that this Council is committed to that endeavour.

Bruckler asks what does public transportation include?

Merulla : Primarily for public transportation, HSR, DARTS, Go Transit - partially.

Collins : .I don't think it will be our interpretation of the legislation. Whatever comes forward we live with it.

Merulla : It's going to be conditional . we're basically saying in advance of that, this is what it should be . so we can't play games afterwards and try to mitigate taxes. I was at a presentation recently where that option was put into a presentation which I know the majority in attendance that day felt it was unacceptable.

Bruckler : I can't disagree with that . but if the province tells us that's what we have to spend it on we'll have to follow through with that.but if there were some latitude at the local level, then perhaps we could direct those to some of the areas which were exempt from development charges (provincial exemptions) because if this is money coming in to it, I think it might be a further erosion of our development charges in the future. That would be my only concern.

Merulla : Suppose they give us $10 extra, and we turn around and decrease the budget for HSR and DARTS by that same amount, it's really futile to even see the money. What I'm trying to get the City to commit to is that if they're giving us 2 cents a litre gas tax, that it actually be directed where it belongs, public transportation, and we will not be playing this shell game afterwards, at the expense of public transportation, including DARTS .I don't know anyone around the table who would argue that.

Bruckler : As long as it doesn't further erode what we're able to achieve though the development charges locally. .

Mitchell : Clarification. That we tie this money that we may or may not get, to improved service or capital infrastructure to the service, but not just lower the budget. We tie it to some sort of improved fares . basically spend it on improved service to the community, not lowering the taxes. That leaves it wide open for Council to choose, . that leaves a little flexibility there, maybe it could be spend on capital improvements.

Whitehead thinks it's great. He is concerned that the roads that public transit goes on are breaking down, that roads are "decrepit and falling apart" and mentions that because of the budget the roads are now on an 85 year life cycle, and used to be 25 year life cycle. He also mentions that maintenance on public transit will increase because of the condition of our roads.

Ferguson thinks that when the province comes up with the gas tax they'll tell the cities what to spend it on. His preference is to table the motion until that happens, but he doesn't have any problem with having the money go to the transportation system.

Collins : Is there a seconder for the tabling? OK, we have a mover and a seconder. All those in favour of tabling? The tabling motion is defeated. On the main motion I have no further speakers. It's been moved by Merulla , seconded by Jackson . All those in favour? Opposed? Carries. Thank you.

10.2 Pilot project to lower bus fares in a demographically lower income area.

Merulla : Moved by myself, seconded by C. Jackson that a pilot project be implemented to investigate the feasibility of lowering bus fares in a demographically lower income area to increase accessibility and measure any resulting increase in ridership. I'd like to speak on that motion. The intent of this motion is to evaluate where in the City you lower socially economical levels and low ridership whether decreasing the fares will increase ridership. If we're going to have a tangible benefit, not only to ridership members, but also opening up accessibility to find employment or training for those who couldn't previously afford the fare itself. . lead to more revenue . if 2 cent gas tax might be based on ridership.

Whitehead : . I would like to make sure, if this council commits, we understand what the game rules are in regards to what the criteria we set out in the pilot program so that we have something that's measurable. So I congratulate C. Merulla for bringing this forward.

Collins : Are you looking for a report on that, C. Merulla ?

Merulla : Yes (inaudible off microphone comment) He speaks about motion.

Mitchell remarks that in this year's budget, we didn't raise fees to cover costs, and now we're talking about lowering fees and raising our costs again.

Collins : It's open to interpretation, you can spin it anyway you like.

Mitchell : I'm just practicing what he ( Merulla ) does all the time (laughter).

Collins : Just to clarify C. Merulla 's intent, that Staff prepare a report to identify opportunities where a pilot project might be implemented. .

Ferguson : What are we investigating - the demographic or geographic?

Merulla : . Two areas have been identified through Environment Hamilton. One being the Durand area in Ward 2 and one in Ward 4, and those 2 areas have the criteria which was set out. I hope they will be in touch with staff so they can discuss it. (He repeats the two issues: low ridership, and low socio-economic conditions) .

Ferguson : So it is geographic.

Merulla : Ward 2 and Ward 4 are where I preferred to be focused in on.

Ferguson remarks about the difficulties in areas, riders going in and out.

Collins : Now we're getting into the substance of the report -

Merulla : . opportunity of creating a community bus pass -

Collins : I have a mover and a seconder on the motion,

C. Braden : (speaks without microphone, inaudible)

Collins : Any concerns the s taff might have in preparing this report, in regards to cost?

Staff : We'll report back on the cost to do it; I really don't know how we're going to undertake the study.we'll report back -

Collins : Knowing that there are community groups that already have a lot of information -

Merulla : .consult with TUG (Transit Users Group) who has already really got all -

Collins : or any other community groups -

Merulla : Yes Collins : Satisfied with that? Moved and seconded. All those in favour? Thank you.

Collins : 10.3 We have the WaterWatchers this morning and they want to present a motion through C. Merulla .

Merulla : Moved by myself, seconded by C. that all details of the water treatment contract be made public, (b) that contract include clauses.

(end of taping)

Return to Part 1