2009/04/27 Special MtgSPECIAL COUNCIL
MEETING
Monday, Aprii 27, 2009
Order of Business
and Agenda Package
a) General Purposes Budget
b) Municipal Utility Budget
Background Material:
PRAYER: Councillor loannoni
ADOPTION OF MINUTES: Council Minutes of April 6, 2009
c) Capital Budget
SPECIAL COUNCIL MEETING
April 27, 2009
DISCLOSURES OF PECUNIARY INTEREST
Disclosures of pecuniary interest and a brief explanation thereof will be made for the
current Council Meeting at this time.
2009 BUDGET MATTERS
Recommendation Report: CPS 2009 -02 Municipal Utility Budget, Fees and Charges
for Water and Sewer
REMINDER: PLEASE BRING YOUR OPERATING AND CAPITAL BUDGET BINDERS
-2-
FUTURE MATTERS
NOTE: As staff appreciates, the report below is extensive, detailed and technical. We
do not expect Council or the public to have digested the report by Monday, April 27 th
Staff wanted to get the report out so that it will provide a starting point for discussion.
As indicated, staff is recommending the report be circulated and is NOT expecting
Council to make a decision or debate the merits of the report at this time. Public
Information sessions will follow.
1. Chief Administrative Officer CPS 2009 -03, Water and Sewer Rate Structure
CONSENT AGENDA
THE CONSENT AGENDA IS A SET OF REPORTS THAT COULD BE APPROVED IN ONE MOTION OF
COUNCIL. THE APPROVAL ENDORSES ALL OF THE RECOMMENDATIONS CONTAINED IN EACH OF
THE REPORTS WITHIN THE SET. THE SINGLE MOTION WILL SAVE TIME.
PRIOR TO THE MOTION BEING TAKEN, A COUNCILLOR MAY REQUEST THAT ONE OR MORE OF THE
REPORTS BE MOVED OUT OF THE CONSENT AGENDA TO BE CONSIDERED SEPARATELY.
1. F- 2009 -23 Grassybrook/Garner Road Pumping Stations Financing
2. F- 2009 -25 Development Charges 2008 Financial Information
3. F- 2009 -26 Year End CIP Reserve Balances
4. MW- 2009 -29 Tender #2009 204 -08 McLeod Road Watermain Replacement
from Drummond Road to Ailanthus Ave.
5. MW- 2009 -32 Tender #2009 166 -06 Road Reconstruction Underground
Services Sinnicks Avenue, St. Mary's Street and Orlando Dr.
6. MW- 2009 -34 Tender #2009 -04 Asphalt Patching City Wide
7. MW- 2009 -22 Contract #2009 -197 Fourth Avenue Services Extension and
Road Reconstruction, Bridge Street to 430m North of Hamilton Street
3
INFRASTRUCTURE FUNDING MATTERS
1. Memo and Chart from Staff on possible projects to be forwarded for the
Infrastructure Stimulus Fund and the second intake of the Building Canada
Fund
BY -LAWS
The City Clerk will advise of any additional by -laws or amendments to the by -laws
listed for Council consideration.
2009 -69
A By -law to amend By -law No. 2007 -161, being a by -law to regulate the
supply of water and to provide for the maintenance and management of the
waterworks and for the imposition and collection of water rates.
2009 -70 A by -law to adopt, ratify and confirm the actions of City Council at its special
meeting held on the 27 day of April, 2009.
NEW BUSINESS
April 27, 2009 CPS 2009 -02
His Worship Mayor Ted Salci
and Members of the Municipal Council
City of Niagara Falls, Ontario
Members:
Re: CPS- 2009 -02
2009 Municipal Utility Budget, Fees and Charges for Water and Sewer
RECOMMENDATION:
1) That the 2009 Municipal Utility Budget be approved,
2) That the 2009 Schedule of Fees and Charges for Water and Sewer be approved
and made effective May 1, 2009.
BACKGROUND:
Niag araJ tills
The Municipal Utility Budget provides for the revenues and expenditures of the City's water
and sanitary sewer systems.
2009 Municipal Utility Budget Expenditures
Regional Charges
There are recent changes in the Region's billing for water supply. The Regional water
billing will change from a total volumetric rate to a partial fixed and partial volumetric
charge. This change resulted from a review that focussed on the shortfall of Regional
water revenues. The review determined that many of the Region's water costs are fixed,
and that a fixed charge would help offset the Region's risk of revenue shortfalls. Regional
Council Reports CSD 57 -2009 is attached for your information to better understand the
billing change for water supply.
Staff has reviewed the City's history of water and sewer flows and the expected Regional
billings. Compared to the 2008 estimates, Regional water billings are expected to increase
by 11.5 and 1.8% for sewer billings. In total, the Regional charges are expected to
increase by $1.25 million.
Canada .L2E 6X5 905- 356 -7521 www.niagarafalls.ca
Corporate Services Departmei
Finance
April 27, 2009 2 CPS- 2009 -02
In 2008, the City experienced a significant shortfall in sewer consumption revenue. The
2008 year experienced significant rainfall which impacted the use of water. Since the
sewer consumption revenue is based on water usage, the City's revenues were not
sufficient to pay the Regional fixed charges for sewer treatment.
For 2009, Staff is recommending a revenue stabilization amount of $678,700. The
stabilization will help offset the risk of revenue shortfalls when paying the Region's water
and sewer billings.
Wages and Benefits
Staff has reviewed the expenditure for labour to ensure that sufficient budget is allocated
to implement the recommendation from the Environmental Services Delivery review. For
2009, staff has also included a portion of the Infrastructure Services personnel, to reflect
the dedicated use of their time for water and sewer projects. The allocation of
Infrastructure Services transfers approximately $323,000 from the General Purposes
Budget. The total increase for labour costs is approximately $485,000.
As Council will recall, the Service Delivery Review for the Water/ Waste Water section
(CAO- 2008 -04) recommended four union positions, to facilitate uninterrupted preventive
maintenance, and one new management position, Environmental Services Coordinator,
to plan and coordinate the staff and to monitor and maintain performance measurement
data and statistics. The increased complement was recommended to reduce the reliance
on contracted services at an estimated cost savings of more than $400,000 per year.
Debt Principle and Interest Payments
During 2009, the payments of interest and principle will be maintained at $236,300. In the
capital program, should any of the water and sanitary sewer projects require debt
financing, the servicing of the new debt would begin in 2010.
Materials and Contracted Services
The total increase for materials and contracted services are approximately $520,000. This
increase includes the additional expense ($94,900) for the billing and receipting services
provided by Niagara Peninsula Energy. Also included are increased expenditures for
asphalt patching ($145,000), engineering services ($187,500), system inspections, leak
detection, repairs and rehabilitation programs.
Rents and Financial Expenses
This expenditure includes Tenant Deposit Interest, Uncollectible Accounts, and the
Senior's $100. Rebate Program. In 2008, this account included Regional charges for debt
servicing; these fixed charges were separate from the Region's billing for water and sewer.
For 2009, these fixed charges will not be billed separately. The costs of approximately
$289,700 have been moved from this account to the Regional Charges account.
April 27, 2009
Capital Contribution
3 CPS- 2009 -02
Capital Contribution provides funding for waterworks and sanitary sewer system
construction and maintenance. The same amount of transfers as in 2008 has been
included. The water capital contribution is $4,500,000 and the sewer capital contribution
is $4,645,000. Staff has developed the 2009 Capital Projects Budget based on a total
capital contribution of $9,145,000.
Expenditures Summary
For 2009, the total water and sewer costs are estimated at $39,678,600, an increase of
$2,557,500 or 6.9% over the 2008 Municipal Utility Budget expenditures. Almost half of
the increase is due to Regional Charges. The remaining increase results from the new
stabilization amount, labour increases, the transfer of Infrastructure Services, and an
increase in contractual services.
The Committee may want to consider reducing certain expenditures. Suggested expense
items are the stabilization amount, the capital contribution, and contracted services. Such
reductions would have an impact on revenue security, capital projects, and annual
maintenance programs. For example, a $1,400,000 reduction in expenditures would
effectively hold a homeowner's water and sewer bill to a 5% increase over last year.
2009 Schedule of Fees and Charges for Water and Sewer
Water and Sewer Consumption Rates
The consumption rates are intended to raise sufficient revenues to pay the Regional costs
for water supply and sewer treatment. Due to the change in the Region's billing, staff has
also included a revenue stabilization amount to help offset the risk of a consumption
revenue shortfall.
For 2009, the City's water consumption rate would increase to $0.7602 per cubic metre,
and the sewer consumption rate would increase to $0.9612 per cubic metre. The following
chart shows a history of previous years' consumption rates for water, sewer, and the 2009
proposed consumption rates per cubic metre.
Water Sewer Combined Increase
Rate Rate Rate
2005 $0.5610 $0.8780 $t4390 2.42%
2006 $0.5780 $0.8780 $1.4560 1.18%
2007 $0.6024 $0.8544 $1.4568 0.05%
2008 $0.6493 $0.8760 $1.5253 4.70%
2009 $0.7602 $0.9612 $1.7214 12.86%
April 27, 2009 4 CPS- 2009 -02
Monthly Service Charges
The monthly service rates are intended to raise sufficient revenues to pay the City's costs
to maintain, repair and improve the water and sanitary sewer distribution systems. Both
Water and Sewer monthly service charges are calculated by dividing the total costs for
each of the distribution systems by the number of water meters. The calculation also
factors the meters according to their size, so that a larger meter has a greater monthly
charge than a smaller meter.
For 2009, the Base monthly water service charge would increase to $23.38, and the sewer
service charge would increase to $21.39. The following chart shows a history of previous
years' and the 2009 Base monthly service charges.
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
15mm
15mm
16mm
16mm
25mm
37mm
50mm
75mm
100mm
150mm
200mm
250mm
Water
Rate
$20.44
$19.56
$20.07
$21.49
$23.38
Sewer
Rate
$11.96
$13.82
$18.58
$20.41
$21.39
For comparative purposes, the following chart shows several examples of how the
proposed water and sewer rates would impact various ratepayers by meter size and
quantity of water used.
Meter Estimated Average Annual 2009
Size Volume of Water Consumption
Estimated Annual Water and Sewer
Charges Residential
10 cm /month or 120 cm /year
15 cm /month or 180 cm /year
20 cm /month or 240 cm /year
25 cm /month or 300 cm /year
Estimated Annual Water and Sewer
Charges Commercial
100 cm /month or 1,200 cm /year
200 cm /month or 2,400 cm /year
360 cm /month or 4,320 cm /year
1,000 cm /month or 12,000 cm /year
2,200 cm /month or 26,400 cm /year
10,000 cm /month or 120,000 cm /year
13,000 cm /month or 156,000 cm /year
15,000 cm /month or 180,000 cm /year
743.86 685.77 58.09 8.47
847.14 777.28 69.86 8.99
950.43 868.80 81.63 9.40
1,053.71 960.31 93.40 9.73
2,602.95
5,743.19
10,660.12
27,104.05
57,264.81
229,131.42
308,831.69
366,263.57
Combined
Rate
$32.40
$33.38
$38.65
$41.90
$44.77
2008 Change
2,333.00
5,168.75
9,605.39
24,335.49
51,326.00
204,140.69
275,638.93
327,326.39
increase
8.62%
3.02%
15.79%
8.41%
6.90%
269.95 11.57
574.44 11.11
1,054.73 10.98
2,768.56 11.38
5,938.81 11.57
24,990.73 12.24
33,192.76 12.04
38,937.18 11.90
April 27, 2009 5 CPS 2009 -02
Other Fees and Charges
Revenue from other fees and charges will be reduced by $375,000. The reduction resulted
from the expiry of the funding from OPG ($100,000), and the canceled transfer of General
Purpose funding for Fire Hydrant maintenance. Other fees and charges may experience a
slight increase due to the proposed rate increases.
Revenue Summary
For 2009, the total water and sewer revenues are estimated at $39,678,600, an overall
increase of $2,557,500 or 6.9% over the 2008 Municipal Utility Budget revenues. Most of
the increase is the 12.9% increase in volumetric rates for water and sewer to pay the
Regional billings. The remaining increase is in monthly service charges, 8.8% for water and
4.8% for sewer. The service charge increases are to make up for the reduced revenues
from OPG and the General Purposes Fund and to payforthe increased City costs. Attached
to the report is the 2009 Schedule of Fees and Charges for Water and Sewer, and the 2009
Budget Statements.
Recommended by:
Recommended by:
Ken Burden, Executive Director of Corporate Services
Ed Dujlovic, Executive Director of Community Services
Schedule "A" to this amending By -Law No. 2009
CITY OF NIAGARA FALLS
SCHEDULE OF RATES, FEES AND CHARGES
After Before
1. Service charges: Due Date Due Date
15 mm meter 24.55 23.38 monthly
18 mm meter 24.55 23.38 monthly
25 min meter 24.55 23.38 monthly
37 mm meter 73.65 70.14 monthly
50 mm meter 147.29 140.28 monthly
75 mm meter 294.59 280.56 monthly
100 mm meter 540.08 514.36 monthly
150 mm meter $1,031.06 981.96 monthly
200 mm meter $1,841.18 $1,753.50 monthly
250 min meter $2,577.65 $2,454.90 monthly
2. Water rates: After Before
Due Date Due Date
0.7982 0.7602 per cubic metre
3. Flat rates for a private water service not metered by choice or other determination of the
City:
After Before
Due Date Due Date
48.49 46.19 monthly includes
30m3 of usage
4. Flat rates for a private water service not metered because of refusal of owner:
After Before
Due Date Due Date
145.48 138.57 monthly
5. Billing period:
Minimum of one month.
6. Service deposits:
Two times the estimated billing for a billing period with a minimum of the amount of
$230.00.
7. Sewer rates:
(a) Service charge as set out in section 1: 91.5%
(b) Water rates as set out in section 2: 126.4%
(c) Flat rates as set out in sections 3 and 4: 108.7%
3 x the rate
8. Charge for Installation of Water Service:
(a) 3/4" Service: $1,650.00
(b) Over 3/4" Service Actual cost Deposit required based on estimated costs.
9. Charge for shutting off or turning on supply of water:
(a) During normal working hours:
(b) Outside normal working hours:
55.00
165.00
Note: For the purpose of this by -law, normal working hours shall mean Mondays to
Fridays (exclusive of holidays) between 8:00 a.m. and 4:00 p.m.
10. Charge for meter removal or reinstallation:
(a) During normal working hours:
(b) Outside normal working hours:
40.00 per hour /per city employee
100.00 per hour /per city employee
11. Charge for Testing Meter Consumption: At cost with a deposit of $75.00
12. Bulk carrier rate for City stand -pipe:
(a) For Water .95 per cubic metre
Cost plus 25%
(c) Bulk water card purchase
13. Use of Water for Construction Purposes:
(a) Per transaction fee of $22.00
-3-
(b) Service deposit: Based on estimated charges for two billing periods,
minimum of $500.00.
$10
(a) At rates shown in sections 1 and 2 together with the cost to supply and install a
meter.
(b) Service Deposit: based on estimated charges for two billing periods; minimum of
$500.00.
14. Charge for private water service account transferred to tax account:
CITY OF NIAGARA FALLS
Budget Report By Function
Account Code
15
123010
3
132015
3
133005
3
142015
3
431000
3
15 -3- 431000 010000
15 -3- 431000 010013
15 -3- 431000 020000
15 -3- 431000 030000
15 -3- 431000 030005
15 -3- 431000 030007
Account Description
CITY WATER FUND
AUDITING SRVS
EXPENSE
15 -3- 123010- 040000 CONTRACTED SERVICES
INSURANCE CLAIM SRVS
EXPENSE
15 -3- 132015 030000 MATERIALS INSURANCE CLAII
INSURANCE CLAIM SRVS Surplus /Deficit
REVENUES AND RECV
EXPENSE
EXPENSE
EXPENSE
15 -3- 142015 030000 MATERIALS
15 -3- 133005 040000 CONTRACTED SERVICES
Total EXPENSE
AUDITING SRVS Surplus /Deficit
Total EXPENSE
Total EXPENSE
REVENUES AND RECV Surplus /Deficit
WSIB HEALTH SAFETY SICK SRVS
Total EXPENSE
WSIB HEALTH SAFETY SICK SRVS Surplus /Deficit
SYSTEM MAINT WATERWORKS
LABOUR
EMPLOYEE BENEFITS ALLOCA"
LONG TERM INTEREST
MATERIALS
PERSONNEL DEVELOPMENT
ELECTRICITY
2008
ACTUAL
VALUES
5,000
5,000
5,000
9,524
9,524
9,524
700,135
700,135
700,135
61,000
61,000
61,000
2008 2009
FINAL BUDGET FINAL BUDGET
BUDGET BUDGET
VALUES VALUES
5,000 5,000
5,000 5,000
5,000 5,000
0 0
0 0
0 0
631,164 726,077
631,164 726,077
631,164 726,077
61,000 61,000
61,000 61,000
61,000 61,000
1,283,082 1,510,420 1,648,471
293,965 306,216 395,633
27,088 27,488 21,967
323,584 427,559 312,292
0 16,646 18,000
15,734 10,000 16,500
GL5280
Date Mar 26, 2009
Page 1
Time 4:26 pm
CITY OF NIAGARA FALLS
Budget Report By Function
Account Code
15 -3- 431000 030009
15 -3- 431000 030011
15 -3- 431000 030015
15 -3- 431000 030017
15 -3- 431000 030018
15 -3- 431000 040000
15 -3- 431000 050000
15 -3- 431000 070000
15 -3- 431000 080002
15 -3- 431000 090000
4
15 -4- 431000 710000
15 -4- 431000 710014
15 -4- 431000 710015
15 -4- 431000 710016
15 -4- 431000 710017
15 -4- 431000 710018
15- 4- 431000- 770000
15 -4- 431000 790000
SYSTEM MAINT WATERWORKS Surplus /Deficit
432000
3
15 -3- 432000 040000 CONTRACTED SERVICES
15 -3- 432000 050000 RENTS AND FINANCIAL EXPEN:
REGIONAL CHRGS WATERWORKS Surplus /Deficit
433000
3
15 -3- 433000 010000
15 -3- 433000 010013
15 -3- 433000 030000
15 -3- 433000 040000
Account Description
WATER
NATURAL GAS
ADVERTISING NEWS RELEASE
INSURANCE PREMIUMS SYSTI
CONFERENCES /CONVENTIONS
CONTRACTED SERVICES
RENTS AND FINANCIAL EXPEN;
LONG TERM DEBT PRINCIPAL
TO CAPITAL HOLDING
INTERNAL RENT
REVENUE
EXPENSE
EXPENSE
Total EXPENSE
USER FEES
WATER CONSUMPTION FEES
WATER SERVICE FEES SYSTE
WATER FLAT RATE FEES SYS
WATER STAND PIPE FEES SY:
WATER TRANSFER AND SHUT
SALES
OTHER REVENUE
Total REVENUE
REGIONAL CHRGS WATERWORKS
Total EXPENSE
WATER SYSTEMS RESEARCH DEVMT
LABOUR WATER SYSTEMS RE
EMPLOYEE BENEFITS ALLOCA"
MATERIALS WATER SYSTEMS
CONTRACTED SERVICES WA1
Total EXPENSE
2008
ACTUAL
VALUES
5,457
161
4,650
68,138
6,048
362,652
13,159
99,018
4,500,000
208,555
7,211,291 7,907,535
146,800
8,330,564
7,889,347
53,363
52,653
28,620
43,232
16,124
16,560,703 17,611,149
9,349,412 9,703,614
8,469,430
27,467
2008
FINAL BUDGET
BUDGET
VALUES
8,496,897 9,006,450
8,496,897 9,006,450
0
0
0
0
0
2009
FINAL BUDGET
BUDGET
VALUES
2,000 6,000
1,000 1,000
26,530 27,486
69,820 70,867
0 0
409,610 501,645
296,002 131,200
98,718 104,463
4,500,000 4,500,000
205,526 207,418
0
9,006,450
8,165,005
0
0
-25,000
50,000
364,694
9,006,450
0
GL5280
Date Mar 26, 2009
7,962,942
0
10,244,433
8,798,447
0
55,024
25,000
0
90,000
19,212,904
11,249,962
10,244,433
0
10,244,433
10,244,433
0 111,655
0 26,797
0 60,000
0 15,000
0 213,452
WATER SYSTEMS RESEARCH DEVMT Surplus /Deficit 0 0 213,452
Page 2
Time 4:26 pm
CITY OF NIAGARA FALLS
Budget Report By Function
Account Code Account Description
2008 2008 2009
ACTUAL FINAL BUDGET FINAL BUDGET
VALUES BUDGET BUDGET
VALUES VALUES
Total CITY WATER FUND 76,856 0 0
GL5280
Date Mar 26, 2009
Page 3
Time 4:26pm
CITY OF NIAGARA FALLS
Budget Report By Function
Account Code Account Description
16 CITY SANITARY SEWER FUND
132015 INSURANCE CLAIM SRVS
3 EXPENSE
16- 3- 132015- 030000 MATERIALS INSURANCE CLAII 749 0 0
INSURANCE CLAIM SRVS Surplus /Deficit 749 0 0
142015 WSIB HEALTH SAFETY SICK SRVS
3 EXPENSE
16 -3- 142015 030000 MATERIALS 23,500
WSIB HEALTH SAFETY SICK SRVS Surplus /Deficit 23,500
411000 SYSTEM MAINT SANITARY SEWER
3 EXPENSE
16 -3- 411000 010000 LABOUR 633,743 658,287 529,658
16-3-411000-010013 EMPLOYEE BENEFITS ALLOCA 153,065 117,046 127,118
16- 3- 411000- 020000 LONG TERM INTEREST 23,768 24,047 19,255
16 -3- 411000 030000 MATERIALS 97,636 255,901 85,000
16 -3- 411000 030017 INSURANCE PREMIUMS SYSTI 83,260 86,200 87,493
16 -3- 411000 039000 SEWER REBATE MATERIALS 1,484 0 0
16 -3- 411000 040000 CONTRACTED SERVICES 1,306,620 1,471,787 812,500
16 -3- 411000 050000 RENTS AND FINANCIAL EXPENt 670 319,853 194,900
16 -3- 411000 070000 LONG TERM DEBT PRINCIPAL 85,862 85,861 90,583
16 -3- 411000 080002 TO CAPITAL HOLDING 4,645,000 4,645,000 4,645,000
16 -3- 411000 090000 INTERNAL RENT 50,010 91,943 141,779
4 REVENUE
2008 2008 2009
ACTUAL FINAL BUDGET FINAL BUDGET
VALUES BUDGET BUDGET
VALUES VALUES
Total EXPENSE 749 0 0
23,500 23,500
Total EXPENSE 23,500 23,500 23,500
23,500 23,500
Total EXPENSE 7,081,118 7,755,925 6,733,286
16 -4- 411000 650000 GRANTS 20,000 0 0
16 -4- 411000 710000 USER FEES 10,510,354 11,730,523 12,423,041
16-4-411000-710010 SEWER SERVICE CHARGES S 7,462,289 7,649,425 8,012,691
16 -4- 411000 710011 SEWER FLAT RATE CHARGES 60,678 0 0
16-4-411000-710012 SEWER LATERAL CLEANING 8 28,767 30,000 30,000
16 -4- 411000 790008 OPG SEWER REVENUE SYSTE 117,441 100,000 0
Total REVENUE 18,199,529 19,509,948 20,465,732
GL5280
Date Mar 26, 2009
Page 1
Time 4:27 pm
CITY OF NIAGARA FALLS
Budget Report By Function
Account Code Account Description
SYSTEM MAINT SANITARY SEWER Surplus /Deficit 11,118,411 11,754,023 13,732,446
412000 REGIONAL CHRGS SANITARY SEWER
3 EXPENSE
16 -3- 412000 040000 CONTRACTED SERVICES 11,594,428
REGIONAL CHRGS SANITARY SEWER Surplus /Deficit 11,594,428 11,730,523 12,423,041
413000 SANITARY SYSTEMS RESEARCH DEVMT
3 EXPENSE
2008 2008 2009
ACTUAL FINAL BUDGET FINAL BUDGET
VALUES BUDGET BUDGET
VALUES VALUES
11,730,523 12,423, 041
Total EXPENSE 11,594,428 11,730,523 12,423,041
16 -3- 413000 010000 LABOUR SANITARY SYSTEMS 0 0 148,875
16- 3- 413000 010013 EMPLOYEE BENEFITS ALLOCA- 0 0 35,730
16 -3- 413000 030000 MATERIALS SANITARY SYSTE 0 0 65,000
16 -3- 413000 040000 CONTRACTED SERVICES SAN 0 0 1,030,000
16 -3- 413000 090000 INTERNAL RENT SANITARY Sl 0 0 6,300
Total EXPENSE 0 0 1,285,905
SANITARY SYSTEMS RESEARCH DEVMT Surplus /Deficit 0 0 1,285,905
Total CITY SANITARY SEWER FUND 500,266 0 0
GL5280
Date Mar 26, 2009
Page 2
Time 4:27 pm
REPORT TO: Chairman and Members of Committee of the Whole
SUBJECT:
Niagara'��Sf Region
CSD 57 -2009
PWA 34 -2009
March 26, 2009
2009 Water and Wastewater Rate Setting and Cost Recovery
Review, and Uniform Wholesale Rates and Area Municipal
Requisitions Update from March 5 2009 Referral
RECOMMENDATIONS
That the Recommendations presented in Report CSD 40- 2009 /PWA 19 -2009 be
approved with the following revisions:
1. That Recommendations A) 2. and 3. be deleted and replaced with;
A) 2. That 25% of 2009 and 2010 Regional water costs be recovered
from area municipalities based on their proportional share of the
Region's prior year water flows;
A) 3. That 75% of Regional water costs be recovered from area
municipalities based on actual metered water flows in 2009 and
2010 multiplied by the Region's annually set uniform water rate for
the respective year;
A) 4. That an increase in fixed apportionment be considered when
setting the rate structure in 2011;
2. That Recommendation B) in total be deleted and replaced with;
B) 1. That the uniform rate charged to the area municipalities for actual
consumption of water be established at $0.472 per cubic meter for
the period March 1, 2009 to February 28, 2010;
B) 2. That the area municipal water consumption charge be billed
monthly based on actual monthly volumes;
B) 3. That $10,198,612, representing 25% of Regional 2009 water costs,
be apportioned to each area municipality based on their
proportionate share of the Region's prior year's water flows as
detailed in recommendation "B4
B) 4. That the following 2009 apportionment of Regional water cost be
requisitioned to the area municipalities as follows;
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
2009 Water Requisition
Niagara Falls 2,593,065
Port Colborne 507,282
St. Catharines 3,012,769
Thorold 417,726
Welland 1,233,474
Fort Erie 795,230
Grimsby 425,893
Lincoln 385,401
NOTL 463,234
Pelham 249,778
West Lincoln 114,760
Totals $10,198,613
CSD 57 -2009
PWA 34 -2009
March 26, 2009
B) 5 That the Regional water cost identified in Recommendation "B4" be
requisitioned to the area municipalities in twelve equal monthly
billings effective March 1, 2009.
At its meeting of March 5 2009 Council referred Report CSD 40- 2009 /PWA 19 -2009
`2009 Water Wastewater Rate Setting and Cost Recovery Review and Uniform
Wholesale Rates and Area Municipal Requisitions' back to staff. Directions included:
1) To meet with the Area Treasurers and Public Works Directors for further discussion;
2) Inclusion of the spreadsheet;
3) Review a Tong -term plan;
4) Prepare a utility model that would address how Niagara Region could strengthen the
model (e.g. a single deliverer of water and /or billing at one level to address the 11 billing
practices now in place);
5) A three year rolling average; and
6) Regression model.
Also discussed was the potential of phasing in the recommended rate structure and
deferring implementation of the 2009 rates by one month.
Based on referral discussions and analyses, the recommendations of Report CSD 40-
2009 /PWA 19 -2009 remain as outlined within the original report with the exceptions of
those recommendations pertaining to water requisitions.
It is recommended that the Region implement a 25% fixed and 75% variable rate
structure in 2009 and 2010 versus the proposed 2009 50% fixed and 50% variable
approach recommended in Report CSD 40- 2009/PWA19 -2009. It is further
recommended that an increase to the fixed apportionment be considered for
implementation in 2011 thus phasing in the proposed rate model. The volumetric rate
will be determined from a linear regression model versus the historical 5 year averaging
2 of 15
used in the previous rate calculations or the 3 year averaging for the 50% variable
recommended in Report CSD 40- 2009 /PWA 19 -2009.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS
CSD 57 -2009
PWA 34 -2009
March 26, 2009
As noted in CSD 40 -2009 /PWA 19 -2009, for 2009 the Region must recover $40.8
million for water and $57.7 million for wastewater system costs, representing a cost
increase of 3.4% over the 2008 budgeted requirement.
To the extent that these costs are recovered based upon volumes supplied to area
municipalities, the general trend in declining annual volumes will cause a rate increase
greater than 3.4 For example, the recommended regression model for forecasting
2009 volumes results in a "notional" water rate increase of 13.5 or a combined
"notional" water and wastewater rate increase of 8.3% in order to fund a budget
increase of 3.4
It should be noted that the volume reduction being forecast is based upon a relatively
simple regression based upon prior years, and actual volume reductions may in fact be
greater, which would cause an even greater increase in rates than the impact noted
above.
Since the majority of the Region's system costs are fixed, in the event that actual
volumes are less than the forecast, the Region will incur a "requisition deficit" because
billings :to area municipalities will be inadequate to fund the Region's system operating
and capital costs. Over the past five years these "requisition deficits" have totaled
approximately $18 million, which has been subsidized from capital revenue funds. This
situation is not sustainable.
A move to a fixed component for billing of water will have the effect of eliminating a
proportional share of any requisition deficit that would otherwise occur. The 50% fixed
component recommended in the earlier report would have eliminated one half of any
future requisition deficits, and the 25% fixed component recommended in this report
would address one quarter (25 of the Region's risk exposure on required revenue.
In spite of the fact that both Regional and Area Municipal costs tend to be largely fixed
(ie independent of volume), area municipalities advise that they face considerable
resistance in passing on a larger fixed cost component to consumers.
Therefore the resolution of cost recovery for 2009 requires careful forecasting of 2009
volumes for purposes of setting an appropriate rate as well as a balancing or phasing of
fixed costs to achieve longer term sustainability against affordability concerns.
PURPOSE
This report addresses the referral issues and concerns raised during the March 5th
2009 deliberation of Report CSD 40- 2009 /PWA 19 -2009 respecting 2009 Water
3 of 15
BACKGROUND
1. Three Year Rolling Average
Three -Five Year Averaging Analysis
CSD 57 -2009
PWA 34 -2009
March 26, 2009
Wastewater Rate Setting and Cost Recovery Review and Uniform Wholesale Rates and
Area Municipal Requisitions. Six specific areas were identified for further information
and analysis and findings are presented as follows.
Past water rate calculations had been based on a five year rolling historic average to
estimate future water production. The volumetric rate calculation was such that the
annual required requisition was then divided by the estimated production (the 5 year
historical average) resulting in a cost per cubic meter.
Based on a historical downward trendline in water production and sales, the 5 year
average resulted in overly optimistic water sales projections which then resulted in
revenue shortfalls and significant operating budget deficits for Regional water and
wastewater services. The Region does not have a rate stabilization reserve therefore
these revenue shortfalls, in addition to unrealized Development Charge (DC) revenue
and reserve shortfalls were replaced by funds set aside in the capital reserve fund. In
effect, operating revenue shortfall was replaced by planned capital funds.
While Development Charge recoveries are currently under review by the Regional
Development Charges Task Force, the rate recovery methodology is the subject of this
report. It should be noted that the rate recovery methodology in this report does not
account for nor cover Development Charge shortfalls for new growth extensions. It also
does not propose recovery of previous or anticipated revenue shortfalls which could be
recovered by one -time, year -end reconciliations or factored into future recoveries.
For comparison purposes, the previous rate recovery model would result in the following
volumetric change:
2009 Requisition /5 year average (Jan -Dec) $0.599 cubic meter
Based on historical trends, it is extremely unlikely that water production will be at the
level projected by the 5 year historical average, i.e. 68,093ML. For comparison in 2007,
a dry year, 67,993ML of water was produced. In 2008, an extremely wet year,
60,792ML of water was produced. The 5 year average exceeds both examples.
Recalculation based on the 3 year average would be;
2009 Requisition /3 year average (Jan -Dec) $0.627 cubic meter
A 3 year average (65,065ML) versus a 5 year average (68,093ML) is believed to be a
more representative estimate in that it reflects Local Area Municipal attempts at water
loss reduction and conservation. That said, there remains a substantial element of risk
4 of 15
Municipality
NIAGARA FALLS
2008
Consumption
15,456,905
of Total
25.4%
3 Year Rolling
Average (Jan-
Dec)
15,914,895
of Total
24.5%
Allocation, Based
on One Year
(2008)
5,186,130
Allocation
Based on Three
Year (2006
2008)
4,989,123
Differe
($197
PORTCOLBORNE
3,023,840
5.0%
3,429,745
5.3%
1,014,564
1,075,183
$60
ST CATHARINES
17,958,703
29.5%
19,224,453
29.5%
6,025,538
6,026,628
$1
THOROLD
2,490,007
4.1%
2,742,019
4.2%
835,452
859,589
$24
WELLAND
7,352,569
12.1%
8,170,935
12.6%
2,466,948
2,561,487
$94
FORT ERIE
4,740,255
7.8%
4,889,835
7.5%
1,590,459
1,532,903
($57
GRIMSBY
2,538,691
4.2%
2,854,411
4.4%
851,786
894,822
$43
LINCOLN
2,297,325
3.8%
2,493,003
3.8%
770,803
781,525
$10
NOTL
2,761,277
4.5%
3,017,959
4.6%
926,469
946,093
$19
PELHAM
1,488,891
2.4%
1,600,284
2.5%
499,556
501,669
$2
W. LINCOLN
Total
684,070
60,792,533
1.1%
100.0%
727,952
65,065,490
1.1%
100.0%
229,520
20,397,225
228,204
20,397,225
$1
CSD 57 -2009
PWA 34 -2009
March 26, 2009
due to variable weather conditions. Impacts to the Industrial, Commercial, and
Institutional (ICI) Sector are also unknown, i.e. with the economic downturn it is
anticipated that demand will be less for the ICI sector.
The original recommendation of Report CSD 40- 2009 /PWA 19 -2009 included a
methodology currently used by the local Area Municipalities; a fixed and variable cost
recovery mechanism. A 50% fixed allocation based on 1) a 3 year average and 2)
based on prior year actuals were presented to the Joint Area Municipal and Regional
Water and Wastewater Cost Recovery Methodology Review Working Group (Working
Group). It was the preference of the Working Group that the prior year consumption be
used to allocate the fixed apportionments. The previous year was seen by the Working
Group to reflect real time efforts towards conservation and water loss mitigation. The
remaining 50 the volumetric analysis, was recommended to be estimated on the
three year average.
The following table provides the financial impacts of the two `fixed' options originally
presented to the Working Group. It should be noted that this table has been updated to
reflect January to December averages, consistent with the regression analysis provided
later in the report.
For example, when the allocation of fixed costs is based on the previous year volumes,
Niagara Falls represents 25.4% of the overall 2008 Niagara water consumption. If
based on the 3 year historical average volumes, its allocation drops to 24.5 a
reduction of $197,007.
The analysis based on a 25% fixed apportionment is provided for reference.
2. Regression Model
Revenue Impacts for Water Using a Linear Repression Model
CSD 57 -2009
PWA 34 -2009
March 26, 2009
Staff was also asked to forecast water production based on regression models.
The models are shown in Appendix A, and were generated based on actual, previous
year production numbers. For purposes of rate setting, the linear regression based on
data from 1991 is being recommended. Revenue impacts from this 18 year trending is
presented in the following table.
While this analysis is based on historical data, other variants or considerations were
identified.
Growth the growth trends provided within the Growth Management Study indicate a
relatively straight line increase from 1991 to date. Water demands decreased even with
this growth.
Conservation the actual date of metering for each of the municipalities varies but Thorold,
Port Colborne, Fort Erie and Niagara Falls metering programs were implemented within
the timeline analyzed. The Ontario Building Code incorporation of low flow fixtures also
occurred during this time. Actual per capita consumption is unknown as customer records
are a retail matter at the local municipal level. The Region uses an estimate of 350L per
capita residential use in engineering studies and design. The average daily residential
water use per capita for Canada is estimated at 326L.
6 of 15
2008
Fixed
Municipality
Consumption
of Total Allocation 25%
NIAGARA FALLS
15,456,905
25.4% 2,593,065
PORT COLBORNE
3,023,840
5.0% 507,282
ST CATHARINES
17,958,703
29.5% 3,012,769
THOROLD
2,490,007
4.1% 417,726
WELLAND
7,352,569
12.1% 1,233,474
FORT ERIE
4,740,255
7.8% 795,230
GRIMSBY
2,538,691
4.2% 425,893
LINCOLN
2,297,325
3.8% 385,401
NOTL
2,761,277
4.5% 463,234
PELHAM
1,488,891
2.4% 249,778
W. LINCOLN
684,070
1.1% 114,760
Total
60,792,533
100.0% 10,198,613
2. Regression Model
Revenue Impacts for Water Using a Linear Repression Model
CSD 57 -2009
PWA 34 -2009
March 26, 2009
Staff was also asked to forecast water production based on regression models.
The models are shown in Appendix A, and were generated based on actual, previous
year production numbers. For purposes of rate setting, the linear regression based on
data from 1991 is being recommended. Revenue impacts from this 18 year trending is
presented in the following table.
While this analysis is based on historical data, other variants or considerations were
identified.
Growth the growth trends provided within the Growth Management Study indicate a
relatively straight line increase from 1991 to date. Water demands decreased even with
this growth.
Conservation the actual date of metering for each of the municipalities varies but Thorold,
Port Colborne, Fort Erie and Niagara Falls metering programs were implemented within
the timeline analyzed. The Ontario Building Code incorporation of low flow fixtures also
occurred during this time. Actual per capita consumption is unknown as customer records
are a retail matter at the local municipal level. The Region uses an estimate of 350L per
capita residential use in engineering studies and design. The average daily residential
water use per capita for Canada is estimated at 326L.
6 of 15
CSD 57 -2009
PWA 34 -2009
March 26, 2009
ICI usage it is anticipated that ICI consumption has and will continue to decrease as a
result of the economic downturn. Water production for January and February 2009
is lower than in previous years by approximately 3% to date. Water production at this
time of the year is not impacted by weather conditions so this early reduction may be
indicating a further downward trend in overall demand.
Price Elasticity the increase in volumetric rate in water and wastewater likely has the
effect of reducing water consumption. Price has a significant effect on choice and usage.
Precipitation annual rainfall, based on a linear regression model, has been increasing
from 1991 to date. 2008 was an extremely wet year with records indicating a 47%
increase over 2007. Summer weather conditions will impact water usage significantly.
The following chart illustrates precipitation records for the Region.
The linear regression model (Appendix A) is a simplistic analysis and further detailed
retail information such as per capita and ICI consumption would benefit future
regression type analyses.
In light of the concerns raised with the proposed 50% fixed plus 50% variable rate
methodology, and the increased risk transference to the local Area Municipalities, it is
recommended that the approach be phased in, starting with a 25% fixed component for
a period of two years. The remaining 75% variable component will be based on the
findings of the linear regression model. This regression approach should improve the
estimate and volumes of water production used in the notional volume rate calculation..
As per the analysis provided, the 2009 rate would be established based on the following
calculation;
7 of 15
CSD 57 -2009
PWA 34 -2009
March 26, 2009
75% Variable Requisition /estimated production $0.472 per cubic meter
The linear regression model based on 18 years of data estimates 2009 production at
64,896.80ML and at 25% fixed and 75% variable would representing a notional rate
increase of 8.3% when factoring in the wastewater increase.
3. Spreadsheet 2008 to 2009 Comparison
An analysis of 2008 actual billing to the proposed 2009 rate impacts had been
previously provided to the Area Treasurers. That spreadsheet is attached as Appendix
B and illustrates the difference between what was recovered (actual revenues) and
what was supposed to be recovered (budgeted revenues).
The wet weather conditions of 2008 exacerbated the shortfall in water production and
thus skewed the percentage of year over year increase when comparing 2008 Actual to
2009 Projected. While this situation resulted in a significant shortfall for the Region,
local Area Municipalities may have also experienced revenue shortfalls in 2008, each
with a different level of exposure contingent upon their fixed apportionments and their
estimated sales. Regardless of type of model used, other than that of a purely fixed
model, there is an element of risk for all municipalities. However, each area
municipality has the rate setting control in their jurisdiction to manage their respective
exposure to revenue shortfall.
4. Lona Term Plan
The Regional Municipality of Niagara, along with all other Ontario municipalities that are
responsible for the provision of drinking water, are required to meet the requirements
set out in the Financial Plans Regulations O.Reg.453/07. At this time the anticipated
deadline date for submission of the Financial Plan to the Ministry of Environment is July,
2010. The Financial Plan is a requirement of the Drinking Water Licensing Program
now in place.
Paragraph 4 of subsection 3(1) of the regulation requires that financial plans include the
following:
1. Details of the proposed or projected financial position of the drinking water
itemized by:
a. Total financial assets
b. Total liabilities
c. Net debt
d. Non- financial assets that are tangible capital assets, tangible capital
assets under construction, inventories of supplies and prepaid
expenses
e. Changes in tangible capital assets that are additions, donations, write-
downs and disposals
8 of 15
CSD 57 -2009
PWA 34 -2009
March 26, 2009
2. Details of the proposed or projected financial operations of the drinking water
system itemized by:
a. Total revenues, further itemized by water rates, user charges and
other revenues
b. Total expenditures itemized by amortization expenses, interest
expenses and other expenses
c. Annual surplus or deficit
d. Accumulated surplus or deficit
3. Details of the drinking water systems proposed or projected gross cash
receipts or gross cash payments itemized by:
a. Operating transactions that are cash received from revenues, cash
paid for operating expenses and financing charges
b. Capital transactions that are proceeds on sale of tangible capital
assets and cash used to acquire capital assets
c. Investing transactions that are acquisitions and disposal of investments
d. Financial transactions that are proceeds from the issuance of debt and
debt repayment
e. Changes in cash and cash equivalents during the year
f. Cash and cash equivalents at the beginning and end of the year
Regional staff, including Corporate Services and Public Works representatives, has
started the Financial Plan and will factor in the draft 10 -year capital sustainability
estimates generated last year. A report on this project will be presented to Council later
this year and may impact future billing proposals.
5. Utility Model
The Provincial Government in August 2004 established The Expert Panel on Water and
Wastewater Strategy to provide advice on the organization and long -term financing of
Ontario's water and wastewater systems. The Expert Panel's report Watertight: The
case for change in Ontario's water and wastewater sector, was released in 2005. The
report's key recommendations are:
Increasing the scale and capacity of water systems, including consolidating
smaller water systems in various parts of the province into larger regional
utilities;
Strengthening the governance of water services and increasing their
effectiveness by making municipally -owned utilities responsible for providing
services;
Phasing in cost increases over a seven -year period;
Creating an independent economic regulator— the Ontario Water Board
charged with reviewing business plans and proposed water rates;
Encouraging innovations in technology and training in order to reduce costs
and
9of15
Revitalizing the Ontario Clean Water Agency by revising its mandate to
include an arm's length relationship with the province and establishing a
business oriented board of directors.
It was generally understood that the Provincial Government would respond to the Panel's
recommendations. This has not happened to date, although PSAB and Financial Planning
requirements have been implemented as well as legislation put in place to permit alternate
governance and operational models. A Joint Optimization Group of Public Works Officials
within Niagara reviewed utility options in 2008 recognizing that next steps include a
detailed, financial audit and development of a business case. There have been several
attempts at staff levels to discuss a business planning review with limited success,
including those discussions in 2008.
Should staff be directed to proceed to a full, financial review of a utility model, Regional
and local Area Municipal Councils may wish to consider a Memorandum of
Understanding acknowledging and committing to full participation and disclosure of
operational and financial information for the review. It may be more timely and
economical to undertake the review after completion of all 12 Financial Plans within
Niagara.
A common rate structure for all 12 municipalities (1 wholesaler and 11 retailers) would
also provide consistent billing methodology and transparency to our consumers across
Niagara. This opportunity should be advanced to the local Area Muncipalities for
consideration. A Memorandum of Understanding may be a viable mechanism to
initiate this undertaking as well.
6. Local Area Municipal Treasurer and Public Works Review
There have been 5 Working Group meetings to develop the recommendations of the
previous report to Council. As directed, staff of the Region and local Area Municipal
staff met again on March 19 2009 to discuss and review the concerns from the
Council deferral and the contents and recommendations of this report.
Regional staff were asked to provide an updated version of the spreadsheet highlighted
in Item 3 to reflect the proposed 25% fixed apportionment. The updated spreadsheet is
provided in Appendix B. As highlighted in the previous text, the wet weather conditions
of 2008 exacerbated the shortfall in water production and thus skewed the percentage
of year over year increase when comparing 2008 Actual to 2009 Projected. The linear
regression may help close the 'gap' between projections (budgets) and actuals
(revenues), however, significant risk remains with the recommended rate model..
Minor points of clarification were requested and provided and the
Region was asked about date of implementation. While a number of local municipalities
have already set their 2009 rates, others have not and are waiting for the Regional
rates. A revision to the March 1, 2009 implementation date is not being recommended
as the proposed revised rate structure remains highly variable with risk of further
shortfalls in 2009 based on year to date trends.
10 of 15
CSD 57 -2009
PWA 34 -2009
March 26, 2009
Summary
While there is no water rate recovery model that mitigates volumetric risk, other than a
fully fixed cost recovery model. The recommended 50% fixed apportionment was
viewed to transfer too much risk to the local Area Municipalities. As alternate solutions,
a linear regression model and a phased in approach for a fixed allocation (25% versus
50% for 2009 and 2010) are recommended. It should be recognized that, should water
production be Tess than that estimated, it will be necessary to recover operating revenue
shortfalls from capital infrastructure reserve funds set aside for planned works.
The consequence of this situation is the reduction of the capital program and /or deferral
of planned capital water projects.
Submitted by: Submitted by:
Kenneth J. Brothers, P.Eng John Bergsma
Commissioner of Public Works Commissioner of Corporate Services
Approved by:
Mike Trojan
Chief Administrative Officer
This report was prepared by Betty Matthews- Malone, P.Eng., Director of Water and Wastewater Services, in
consultation with Gord Lockyer, Treasurer, Director Financial Management Planning':
11 of 15
CSD 57 -2009
PWA 34 -2009
March 26, 2009
Cr) CT) rn
c 0
00 0
CV N N
Ij -4- co
U
o
a)
Q
o
C
o N —cts
E((It
c
oa�
o L _C
(0 >,c m
L
<A. c o
L O O E
T (6 I M--' L
C a)
E N a)
a)
N 'U c U')
L
L
O 4 C C
C O' a)
L
C
a) C� O-
m) _O to
C C c t as
to U U (1)
L -p N
Q a as
O L (p C
O Y O
C
.0 .1..U2 3 U
(0 O O a)
j_C 0
-o fl..
L O ,C
—"O O� ns
OO 0 a) .0
n D E
t f6
L E O
L U 0
U o
a) W. U
a) cn N
LO.2 E E G
F— c6
CD
C d
-o c I a)
N v co
f/) f� .0 0
a)
7 U
C C E E
.o U U
C
-p O N 2
N -c
N o
o o
E c‘i cs" c
m ,4_ o
1— a) Q- o a
O
tf)
0 y (o
Ed
o 2
N tt)
a
c
2
.L]
0
0
I1
0
V
11
i
I
a
i
0
O
co
0
(0
0)
M
0)
0)
CO
6-
N
n
0
0)
c
(o
Z li
N
N
M
N
co
N
'Co
N
O
N
0)
CO
N
CV
Eft
0)
c
v
0
N
N
O
co.
N
(0
co
cu
w
V) 0
O
N
N
02
N
N
ti
N
a
6.
(n
ti M
(0 (D
69 CO
C
O (0
0
O
(0
N
02
O
d'
7
M
N
0
N
M
0
N
to
N
N
M
64
N
(D
(ft
O
CO.
N
02
0)
a)
N
0
co
N
In
M
O
00
co.
N
02
O
N
N
O
02
N
0)
ti
O
M
N
O
0?
N-
O
N
0)
0)
N
O
M
N
co
O
N
0 M
O
M
N
0
M r- o T 00 00
co
O N CO N 10
(I, O> M 00
vt co le (o
o e- T O T CO
(0 0) d'
N T T T V}
64 69
'c .0c E c
1.±.1 y m
L
1 1 0 z a
M
0
N
N
0
(0
O
co
N
N
p
N
N
U
as
fl-
E
1-
as
as
j
CU
.S]
I^
0
co
N-
t"
2
0
C
N
0
N
T
N
0
L()
NNTNNNN
0
0
cb
0
t
r-:
0
0)
(0
e.
co
O
r
N
r
O
O)
T
N
r
N
-o
N
a
II
0 0
N
O
r
j
0
T
L()
0
7
r
0
0)
N
0000
co
Ln
T
O
N(0
(o
0
rN
O
r
0
0
0
N.
(+7
0
.4-
c6
CD CD CD
O O O
N N N
M N
U
Ua
2
0)
c
0)
m
0
O
O
N
O
o o W (n 3
O r (a c N O
(V O L oZS p)1.=
c
0
I I
I I
0)
T
(Q
.0
I1
a
0
a_
U
2
0
N
0
0
1
co
LCD
N
(v
E
co o
.0
ZIid0
O
O
O
Ln
M
0
rn
0
N
N
0)
64
Ln
M
0
1-
O
ti
T
O
M
M
ti
rn
ti
CO
CO
O
O
0
C
(Q
1
LD
M
U)
N
Ln
N
M
0)
0)
CO
Ln
O
co
4
0
64
M
r
M
0
(O
0)
M
co
N
O
0
N
U
c
J
Ln
0
N
O
M
Ln
LA
J
0
Z
`‘.3
O
1
Ln
M
0
ti
CO
9)
1
CO N
fA r
0 T
ER ER
O
O
N
M LLD
0) O
Csi
LO
669 64
ti
O
4
co
64
co
O)
d3
E
as
O
O
'4)
M
0
CO
O
CO
M
O
Ln
O
O
U)
M
7
April 27, 2009 CPS- 2009 -03
Niagara
His Worship Mayor Ted Salci
and Members of the Municipal Council
City of Niagara Falls, Ontario
Members:
Re: CPS- 2009 -03
Water and Sewer Rate Structure
RECOMMENDATION:
That the proposed Schedule of Fees and Charges for Water and Sewer, based on the new
rates structure, and this report be circulated to the Stakeholders and General Public, and
That the Committee directs Staff to hold a Public Information Session to explain the new
rates structure and to gather Public responses.
BACKGROUND:
As staff appreciates, the report below is extensive, detailed and technical. We do not expect Council
or the public to have digested the report by Monday, April 27"'.
Staff wanted to get the report out so that it will provide a starting point for discussion. As indicated,
staff is recommending the report be circulated and is NOT expecting Council to make a decision or
debate the merits of the report at this time. Public Information sessions will follow.
The public process for reviewing the water and sewer rate structure is now in its third year.
What began as a complaint from a concerned City resident, has evolved into a complex
evaluation of water and sewer rates. Practically all sectors of the public have participated
in the public process by attending public information sessions and providing comments on
changing the rates structure. Their comments have ranged from formal presentations to
candid remarks. Regardless of the form, it is their response that has highlighted the
problems with the existing Water and Sewer Rate Structure.
Throughout the public process, various ideas have been considered for changing the rate
structure. However, it would appear that even a minor change to the rate calculations
would increase the costs for some ratepayers and others would pay less. Suffice it to say,
no matter how you slice it or dice it, all of the ratepayers will see themselves as either
winners (paying less) or losers (paying more).
Any change to distributing the water and sewer costs is just as unpalatable as increasing
the rates. Economic pressures have changed drastically since March 2007, when the
process began. Public tens' increased over the past two years from increased water
an prop s and from a to the rate structure. There is nevsr a good timA to
p p g
change the rules, kart im itable change must be based on sound principles.
agara Falls, ON Canada ,L2E 6X5'.905- 356 -7521 .www.niagarafalls.ca
Corporate Services Department
Finance
The report provided the following recommendations:
1. a business plan that allocates revenues to be derived from a two -part rate structure,
2. a two -part rate structure, i.e., a fixed component and a volumetric component,
3. a classification of water and sewer ratepayers,
4. a hump -back design for the water volumetric component, and
5. a single rate design for the sewer volumetric component with a maximum annual
charge for the residential and condo -unit class.
The Committee deferred the report and directed Staff to circulate it to the various
stakeholders. Three written responses are attached. The responses indicated cautious
support for the new rate structure but also requested more information. The three
Stakeholders needed the data to analyze the impact on their water and sewer costs.
One concern focused on whether the "Council's acceptable level of risk" would permit
yearly arbitrary decisions for the fixed rate component. This could lead to unpredictable
rate setting and create difficulties for multi -year planning. Another concern focused on
whether the hump -back volumetric rate would be uniform for all ratepayer classes, and
whether the meter size would continue to determine the monthly fixed charge.
Review of the Water and Sewer Rate Structure Recommendations
Each of the five recommendations is discussed to illustrate how they satisfy the eight
principles and the concerns raised via the Public Consultation.
1) A business plan that allocates revenues to be derived from a two -part rate structure
April 27, 2009 -2- CPS 2009 -01
On February 9, 2009, the Corporate Services Committee received Report CPS 2009 -01
which responded to the Committee's direction
"to prepare recommendations for a water and sewer rate structure that fulfils the
eight principles, considers the Region's review of water and sewer charges, and
responds to the concerns raised via the Public Consultation."
Council approved changes for the new Environmental Services that addressed the
new legislative requirements and the reorganization of the City forces,
Continuation of the change by focusing on a business plan that allocates revenues
to be derived from a two -part rate structure,
A business plan would not differentiate between City and Regional costs, or
between fixed and variable costs, for determining the two part rate structure,
The new plan would allocate revenue generation based on the Council's acceptable
level of risk, satisfying the principles of user pay, affordability, conservation, and
water use efficiency.
2) A two -part rate structure, i.e., a fixed component and a volumetric component
The two part rate structure is simple in design and familiar to ratepayers,
The structure is used by other utilities,
It satisfies the principles of practicality and simplicity,
The City will not incur major reprogramming of the billing software,
The fixed component generates the minimum amount of revenue that the Council
needs to satisfy the level of risk for revenue adequacy and security,
The volumetric component generates the balance of revenues required and puts the
ratepayer in control of this portion of the total billing.
)Ie Costs
Total
0
$17,689,842
50,497
$21,988,794
50,497
19
$39,678,636
is Charges
Total
67,205
58
$39,678,636
April 27, 2009 -3- CPS 2009 -03
3) A classification of water and sewer ratepayers
Classification would help address the unique circumstances of ratepayers,
It would help maintain community values and be sensitive to ratepayers,
It promotes fairness and user pay between various kinds of ratepayers,
Three classes of ratepayers:
A residential and condo -unit class includes homeowners who have individual water
metered services.
A multi residential and condo complex includes buildings which have individual
water metered services for a number of dwelling units, and,
A class for Institutional, Commercial, and Industrial water metered services.
4) A hump -back design for the water volumetric component
The hump -back design is only for the water volumetric rate,
The design creates a peak charge that encourages conservation for lower
consumption ratepayers,
It offers large consumption ratepayers a reduced rate to reflect the economy of
scale in the provision of water services, and,
It promotes conservation and economic development by ste pping the rates in a
fashion that meets the purpose for the use of water services.
5) A single rate design for the sewer volumetric component, with a maximum annual
charge for the residential and condo -unit class
The single rate design would continue for the sewer volumetric rate
The maximum charge addresses the principle of fairness, and the concern about
paying for a service that is not used, and,
Only applies to the residential and Condo -unit class.
The City would continue the sewer rebate program for ICI ratepayers who can
demonstrate that their water use did not result in a discharge to the sewer system
This program satisfies the principle of economic development.
Allocating Revenues to Fixed and Volumetric Components
The first recommendation for a new rate structure is that a business plan be developed that
allocates revenues to be derived from a two -part rate structure. The allocation would be
based on the Council's acceptable level of risk, satisfying the principles of user pay, afford
ability, conservation, and water use efficiency. A quick reference to the 2009 water and
sewer costs will help demonstrate the impact of allocating revenues.
Report CPS 2009 -02 outlined the 2009 Municipal Utility Budget. The report explained the
annual expenditures and revenues which are summarized in the following chart.
2009 Municipal Utility Budget Summa
2009 Expenditures
City Costs
Region Costs
Total Costs
2009 Revenues
City Billings
Fixed Costs
$17,689,842
$14,538,297
$32,228,139
Fixed Charges
$16,811,431
81
42
ry
Varia
$7,4
$7,4
Volumet
$22,
Percent
Allocation
Fixed
Revenue
Monthly
Charge
Percent
Allocation
Volumetric
Revenue
Volumetric
Rate
0%
$0
$0
100%
$39,679
$2.9442
10%
$3,968
$10.33
90%
$35,711
$2.6498
20%
$7,936
$20.66
80%
$31,743
$2.3554
25%
$9,920
$25.83
75%
$29,759
$2.2082
50%
$19,839
$51.65
50%
$19,839
$1.4721
75%
$29,759
$77.48
25%
$9,920
$0.7361
80%
$31,743
$82.64
20%
$7,936
$0.5888
90%
$35,711
$92.97
10%
$3,968
$0.2944
100%
$39,679
$103.30
0%
$0
$0
April 27, 2009
-4- CPS 2009 -03
The chart shows the 2009 expenditures which are 81% fixed costs and 19% variable costs,
The chart also shows the 2009 Revenues which are 42% fixed charges and 58%
volumetric charges. There is an obvious difference between the fixed /volumetric
percentage allocations of the expenditures compared to revenues.
Prior to 2008, there was no difference in the percentage allocations. Why the change
The costs for water purchases and sewer treatment used to be billed from the Region on
a volumetric rate. The costs were variable, so the City used a volumetric rate. But now
the Regional billing is mostly a fixed cost, and the City is still using volumetric charges.
The City could adjust the rate calculation so that all of the fixed costs are collected from
the fixed revenues. The fixed revenue component is collected by using a service charge
or a flat rate that is billed on a regular frequency such as monthly. Generally there is
minimal risk of revenue shortfalls with this revenue component.
Before the City simply changes the rate calculation, the Committee needs to understand
the dynamic of the change. The following chart shows the dynamic of allocating the
revenues between the fixed component and the volumetric component. Using the 2009
revenues, water volumes, and number of accounts, the example shows how the respective
fixed and volumetric rates change as the revenue allocation changes.
Percent Allocation Between F
Total revenues of $39,678,636 multiplied by the percent allocation, (000's)
Monthly Residential charge includes both water and sewer rates
Volumetric rate includes both water and sewer rates
The revenue allocation between the fixed and volumetric components does impact the
water and sewer billings to ratepayers. The impact depends largely on the quantity of
water that the ratepayer uses. Generally, a high volumetric allocation benefits a low
volume user, and a high fixed allocation benefits a high volume user. To illustrate the
relative impact on a residential and a commercial ratepayer, the following chart shows how
quickly their annual costs change as the revenue allocation changes between the fixed and
volumetric components.
Fixed Revenue
Component
Volumetric Rev
Component
v. i
Residential Annual
Billing
v vul V JGI J
Commercial Annual
Billing
0%
100%
$707
$353,307
25%
75%
$840
$277,996
50%
50%
$973
$202,686
75%
25%
$1,106
$127,376
100%
0%
$1,240
$52,065
April 27, 2009
-5-
Allocation Impact on Residential and C
CPS 2009 -03
Based on a 15 mm meter and using 240 m3 per year
Based on a 150 mm meter and using 120,000 m3 per year
The risk of a revenue shortfall does increase with a higher allocation to the volumetric
component. The risk increases as the volume of water billed fluctuates. Weather plays
an important factor on the use of water. A rainy summer will result in Tess water used and
billed to ratepayers. And since the costs are mostly fixed, the City could incur a revenue
shortfall.
The Council's acceptable level of risk depends directly on the City's appetite on gambling
for an excess or a Toss. Not unlike many of its business oriented ratepayers, the
Committee should consider taking a business plan approach. Forecasting revenues and
costs.over several years can help smooth any unplanned financial fluctuations, and provide
relative consistency in setting water and sewer rates.
The first decision then is choosing an allocation of revenues to be derived from a two -part
rate structure: fixed and volumetric. And the choice should be made for the long term.
Classification of Water and Sewer Ratepayers
The Public Consultation was very informative on the unique circumstances for various
ratepayers. Homeowners who enjoy gardening felt unfairly charged for sewer consumption
costs since the water used for gardens did not enter the sanitary sewer system.
Condominium -unit owners also felt unfairly charged. Their individual water and sewer
billings are based on separate services, but similar owners pay less due to the shared
billing of a single service.
Business owners are concerned about the cost of the City's infrastructure expenditures and
how the funds are collected from ratepayers. The expenditures are annual contributions
toward capital projects for maintaining the City's water and sewer systems. The funding
is collected from ratepayers through the fixed charges in the water and sewer billings. For
2009, the total annual contribution is $9,145,000 which accounts for nearly 71% of the total
revenues collected from monthly fixed charges. Business owners who use large meters
pay monthly charges that are many times the residential rate.
Three classifications are suggested to address the unique circumstances.
Residential and condo -unit class includes homeowners who have individual water
metered services. This classification would be restricted to 15mm and 16mm water
services for only residential uses.
Multi- residential and condo complex includes buildings which have individual water
metered services for a number of dwelling units for only residential use.
Meter
Size
Meter
Factor
Residential and
Condominium-
Unit
Multi- residential
and Condo-
complex
Institutional,
Commercial and
Industrial
$11,631,301
$511,192
$4,668,645
15mm
1
$35
$70
16mm
1
$35
$70
25mm
1
$70
37mm
3
$151
$210
50mm
6
$302
$420
75mm
12
$840
100mm
22
$1,540
150mm
42
$2,940
200mm
75
$5,250
250mm
105
$7,350
April 27, 2009
-6- CPS 2009 -03
An ICI classification which includes Institutional, Commercial, and Industrial water
metered services. This classification includes all sizes of water services that are for
non residential use.
Assuming that the Committee has completed the first decision, Classification provides a
basis to allocate the fixed revenue component. Each classification is assigned a share of
the total fixed revenue required, then each water service is assigned a share of fixed
revenue within their respective classification.
The Committee may want to consider various options on allocating the fixed revenue
component to the three classes of ratepayers. Consideration on how each option satisfies
the eight principles would influence the allocation. The options could include using the
property assessment of major property classes, the property zoning of the water service
area, or simply allocating equal portions of the fixed revenue component to each of the
three classes.
For example, using the fixed revenues from the 2009 Municipal Utility Budget, the following
three charts illustrate the allocation of the fixed revenues among the three classifications,
and the impact on the monthly fixed charge by meter size.
Using Pro
ors are a mu o the 15 mm rate
Meter
Size
Meter
Factor
r
Residential and
Condominium-
Unit
V
Multi- residential
and Condo-
complex
11-1'_"J
Institutional,
Commercial and
Industrial
$13,448,910
$1,176,780
$2,185,448
15mm
1
$40
$33
16mm
1
$40
$33
25mm
1
$33
37mm
3
$348
$99
50mm
6
$696
$198
75mm
12
$396
100mm
22
$726
150mm
42
$1,386
200mm
75
$2,475
250mm
105
$3,465
Meter
Size
Meter
Factor
Residential and
Condominium-
Unit
vc
Multi- residential
and Condo-
complex
iuc�
Institutional,
Commercial and
Industrial
$5,603,152
$5,603,152
$5,603,152
15mm
1
$17
$84
16mm
1
$17
$84
25mm
1
$84
37mm
3
$1,656
$252
50mm
6
$3,312
$504
75mm
12
$1,008
100mm
22
$1,848
150mm
42
$3,528
200mm
75
$6,300
250mm
105
$8,820
April 27, 2009
-7-
Usin Pro p ert
Usin Equ al Po rtions to Allocate Fixe R
CPS 2009 -03
Each chart shows the dynamic influence of the allocation method. Other important
variables, which have been kept constant for these illustrations, are the number of water
meters and the meter factors.
April 27, 2009
-8- CPS 2009 -03,
The second decision then is choosing an allocation basis to collect the fixed revenues from
the three classifications of ratepayers. The Public Consultation has shown that any choice
should be implemented for the long term, and that the Committee avoid changing the
allocation basis from year to year. Consistency in the use of an allocation method helps
ratepayers to forecast their water and sewer costs for the long term.
Hump -Back Rate Design for Water Usage
The fluctuation of water volumes is a key factor in the calculation of a volumetric
component. The existing rate calculation currently uses a rolling average of the past three
years' of actual water flows to estimate future usage. Over the past five years, the City
has experienced a steady decrease in the annual amount water flows.
The volume of water purchased from the Region is more than the volume billed to the
Ratepayers. The difference is usually called unbilled water flows or unaccounted for water
flows. These water flows are the result of unmetered uses, such as Fire usage, system
flushing and leakage. The City has worked diligently to maintain the water pipe system.
However, the unbilled water flow continues to average at 15% of regional purchases.
The fluctuation of water volumes and the unbilled water flows must be factored into the
calculation of a volumetric component since the component uses volume to charge the
Ratepayer.
In comparison to a single volumetric rate for water usage, the hump -back design provides
three volumetric rates or stepped billing. The rates are applied as the increasing volume
of water is billed. The first step is intended to bill for economic residential water use. The
design next creates a peak rate that encourages conservation by charging more for water
usage. The final step charges a marginal value rate to large water users.
The calculation of a volumetric rate depends on the fluctuation of water flows and the
amount of unbilled water flows. The calculation of the hump -back design also considers
the increasing volumes of water use by a ratepayer. For example, residential water use
can range from ten to forty cubic meters per month, whereas commercial water use can
range from several hundred to thousands of cubic meters.
The hump -back rate design provides an economic rate for low volume users. The
economic rate is targeted at residential use to provide a basic amount of potable water at
an affordable price. The average residential use in Niagara Falls is approximately 231 per
year or just under 20 m3 per month. The economic rate could be used to bill the first 20
m3 of water use in the month of billing.
The hump -back rate design provides a peak rate to promote conservation and water use
efficiency. By utilizing a peak rate for water use greater than 20 m3 per month, this higher
volumetric rate could be used to bill water use that ranges from 21 to 63 m3 per month.
Due to the higher rate, many users will effectively reduce their usage to reduce their costs.
However, the higher rate may be seen as an unfair rate, especially by users who regularly
choose to use more water. There are about 500 water accounts that average more than
231 and Tess than 1000 m3 per year.
The hump -back rate design encourages economic development by providing a marginal
value rate to reflect the economy of scale in the use of water. The marginal value rate is
calculated to be nearly equal to the City's marginal cost of purchasing water from the
Hump back Rate Steps
Range
Volumetric Revenue
Meter Size
Average Annual Volume
of water billed
Hump Back Rate
Annual Billing
Single Rate
Annual Billing
15mm
231
$193
$188
16mm
537
$576
$437
25mm
1,253
$1,345
$1,021
37mm
2,338
$2,126
$1,906
50mm
4,427
$3,630
$3,609
75mm
11,504
$8,724
$9,378
100mm
27,370
$20,146
$22,312
150mm
128,441
$92,901
$104,702
200mm
159,890
$115,539
$130,339
250mm
190,100
$137,286
$154,965
Hump back Rate Steps
Range
Volumetric Revenue
Rate per
cubic meter
Economic rate
0 240 m3
$5,683,389
$0.8373
Peak Rate
241 1000 m3
$1,232,423
$1.2657
Marginal Value Rate
1000+ m3
$4,446,909
$0.7198
Single Rate
$0.8152
Regional Rate
$0.6363
April 27, 2009
-9- CPS 2009 -03
Region. This rate essentially passes on the Regional charge per cubic meter to the high
volume user, without any additional City costs. The high volume user could be charged
the marginal value rate for unlimited usage greater than 63 m3 /month.
The following rate schedule shows an illustration of the hump -back rate design.
This next chart shows the impact on the water volumetric billing for various meter sizes.
Billing Comnarisnn of Hi►mn
Large volume users benefit greatly from having a reduced rate for their usage. However,
the trade -off is charging the peak rate to those users who regularly use Tess than 1,000 m3
per year. Some of these users may aggressively pursue conservation measures to reduce
the amount of water billed at the peak rate.
The third decision is to choose whether the hump back or the single rate design should be
used to calculate the water volumetric charge.
April 27, 2009
Here is a sample rate schedule:
-10- CPS- 2009 -03..
Single Rate Design with Annual Maximum Charge for Sewer
For some users, the existing sewer rates are unfair. Many homeowners use water for
gardening and lawn watering. These uses incur sewer charges even though the water
used does not discharge into the sanitary sewer system. One suggestion from the Public
Consultation requested a maximum charge for residential sewer discharge.
A maximum charge transfers the collection of revenues to other sewer billings. Although
the transfer appears to penalize non- residential ratepayers, the transfer only affects those
services that are of the same size meter as Residential. There are approximately 500 non-
residential water services that have a 15 or 16 mm meter size. These services would not
be eligible for the maximum sewer charge. However, the rates are constructed to provide
a marginal value rate for the MRC and ICI classes.
Single Rate Desig with
The following chart shows how a maximum residential charge would impact sewer
volumetric billings using the 2009 SewerVolumetric Revenues, and includes a comparison
to the average billing using a single volumetric sewer rate.
Volumetric Revenue
Rate per
cubic meter
Residential and
Condominium -unit (RC)
$6,315,941
$1.0007
Maximum RC Charge
(240cm)
$88,142
$240.17
MRC and ICI
$5,732,466
$0.7715
Single Rate
$0.8788
Regional Rate
$0.6892
April 27, 2009
Here is a sample rate schedule:
-10- CPS- 2009 -03..
Single Rate Design with Annual Maximum Charge for Sewer
For some users, the existing sewer rates are unfair. Many homeowners use water for
gardening and lawn watering. These uses incur sewer charges even though the water
used does not discharge into the sanitary sewer system. One suggestion from the Public
Consultation requested a maximum charge for residential sewer discharge.
A maximum charge transfers the collection of revenues to other sewer billings. Although
the transfer appears to penalize non- residential ratepayers, the transfer only affects those
services that are of the same size meter as Residential. There are approximately 500 non-
residential water services that have a 15 or 16 mm meter size. These services would not
be eligible for the maximum sewer charge. However, the rates are constructed to provide
a marginal value rate for the MRC and ICI classes.
Single Rate Desig with
The following chart shows how a maximum residential charge would impact sewer
volumetric billings using the 2009 SewerVolumetric Revenues, and includes a comparison
to the average billing using a single volumetric sewer rate.
April 27, 2009
Billing Comparison of Single Rate with Maximum RC Charge
CPS 2009 -03
Meter Size
15 mm
16mm
25 mm
37 mm
50 mm
75mm
100 mm
150 mm
200 mm
250 mm
Average
Annual
Volume of
water billed
231
537
1,253
2,338
4,427
11,504
27,370
128,441
159,890
190,100
Residential and
Condominium -Unit
Annual Billing
$231
$240
MRC and ICI
Annual Billing
$178
$414
$966
$1,803
$3,415
$8,875
$21,115
$99,092
$123,355
$146,662
Single Rate
Annual
Billing
$203
$472
$1,101
$2,055
$3,890
$10,110
$24,053
$112,874
$140,511
$167,060
Large volume users again benefit greatly from having a reduced rate for sewer. And
residential users will enjoy a maximum charge. However, the trade -off is charging a higher
rate to some users rather than a single rate for all users.
The fourth decision is to choose whether the maximum residential charge could be used
or just keep a the single rate for the sewer volumetric charge.
Schedule of New Water and Sewer Rates
Two schedules are attached to this report that show the new water and sewer rates. Using
all of the suggested factors in this report, the schedules show the fixed and volumetric
rates for water and sewer services. The factors used in the calculation include:
a business plan that allocates revenues to be derived from a two -part rate structure,
a two -part rate structure, i.e., a fixed component and a volumetric component,
a classification of water and sewer ratepayers,
a hump -back design for the water volumetric component, and
a single rate design for the sewer volumetric component with a maximum annual
charge for the residential and condo -unit class
The Stakeholders and the General Public may want to compare their existing water and
sewer costs. So, the new rate schedules show what the 2008 rates would have been using
the new rate structure. When the 2009 Municipal Utility Budget is approved with its rates,
then the comparison can be continued.
For future planning purposes, the new rate schedules also show what the 2010 to 2012
rates would be assuming that Regional and City costs continue to increase.
Class
Meter
Size
Average
Volume by
Month/Year
Existing
2009 Total
Charge
New
2009 Total
Charge
Difference
RC
15 mm
20/240 m3
$950
$877
$73
16 mm
25/300 m3
$1,054
$953
$101
MRC
37 mm
200/2,400
$5,743
$10,016
($4,273)
50 mm
360/4,320
$10,660
$18,874
($8,214)
ICI
15 mm
20/240 m3
$950
$765
$185
16 mm
25/300 m3
$1,054
$887
$167
25 mm
100/1,200
$2,603
$2,612
($9)
37 mm
200/2,400
$5,743
$5,159
$584
50 mm
360/4,320
$10,660
$9,160
$1,500
75 mm
1,000/12,000
$27,104
$22,888
$4,216
100 mm
2,200/26,400
$57,265
$48,154
$9,111
150 mm
10,000/120,000
$229,131
$195,323
$33,808
200 mm
13,000/156,000
$308,832
$261,520
$47,312
250 mm
15,000/180,000
$366,264
$308,684
$57,580
April 27, 2009
-12- CPS- 2009 -03,
Regional billing will continue to change from volumetric to fixed, and the Regional costs for
water purchases and sewer treatment will also escalate. City costs will continue to
increase at the rate of inflation, however, some costs such as debt servicing may decrease,
The future rates are intended to provide an estimate for ratepayers who desire this
information for longer term planning of their water and sewer costs.
To take a peak at how the new rate structure compares to the proposed 2009 water and
sewer charges using the existing rate structure.
The chart shows the winners (paying Tess) and losers (paying more). What really stands
out is the large increase in the Multi- residential and condominium complex class. Their
billings almost double. 'Why Because this class is now responsible for a larger share of
the fixed revenue component. Notice though the reductions in the other classes.
Caution This comparison is only a sample, based on average uses for each class of
ratepayer and meter size. With four decision points to work through and each decision
affecting every ratepayer, the resulting impact cannot be simply illustrated in a chart. You
would need to examine hundreds of charts to show the number of possible variations from
the quartet of decisions.
April 27, 2009 -13- CPS 2009 -03
SUMMARY
Now in its third year, the Public Process for reviewing the water and sewer rate structure
may be concluding. The participants have expressed their concerns and the Committee
has graciously extended the open consultation. Many ideas have been distilled into five
recommendations based on the eight principles. The recommendations are now quantified
into a rate structure, and appended to this report is a set of new water and sewer rates.
To implement the new rate structure, the Committee would make four decisions for the
Tong term. But before the Committee can consider implementation, the public process
must have regard for the participants. That is why this report recommends:
That the proposed Schedule of Fees and Charges for Water and Sewer, based on the new
rates structure, and this report be circulated to the Stakeholders and General Public, and
That the Committee directs Staff to hold a Public Information Session to explain the new
rates structure and to gather Public responses.
Recommended by:
Recommended by:
Ken Burden, Exec; we Director of Corporate Services
Ed Dujlovic, Exe tive Director of Community Services
N
O
N
d' O r
CO O
N �d�'00
646969
O
O
N
0)
O
O
N
OD
O O CO N
O to r N
N
O T a)
E
C
CC2 >m
v
O
0 C
OY C 0
CC Q CO
E
CO N- N
T 0) I.
OtiOOO
T T O
64 Ea- 64
CO N. c1
O CO N
0) 0
64 69- 69
CO CO
C)((0 r-
CO N N.
69 6969-
N-N CO
69 69 69
a)
N
N Cn E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E
d EE EE EEEEEE
O T (D 4) r CD CO LO N N. L 0 10 0 10
N r N N
2
O
0 0
N 1-
O N
t
O
O
CO O
N N
0 0 CO 10 LO L0 (0 d CO T N d' CO LO LO LO C) CO 00 CO L() O CD LO d: CO
O O N d C) N: d N
N N CO- CO r LO O (3) d CO f■
H}69 N LO 69696963 T N Cr) N- (0 00
69 Ea 69. 69 69 69 r
E9 69
0) 0)
CO 00
00 00
64 69
co co
0 O N N N (0 CO CO I- 0 0 d'
r d. 0 0 0 0 N d 0) (O N
T O C Td d "4' COC
Ef}64 N
69 69 6969 Ea 6964 0 d'
T
0) 0 0 0 r N d CO d' 0)
LO O LO (0 CO CO 0 0 0 0 CO CO
0)) 0000 LO TNp OD di*
N 10 69- 69 69 r N d N- CO 0)
6469 «6969 69 r
O O co co M (1) CO CO
C N cc; O CD d 0) C) CO 0 CO N
N LL) 64 69 fg 69- 69- T CO CO N N-
69 64 ER E9 EH r T
CO CO 0 0 O 0) CO (D CO (D LO c}
00 N CO CO CO 03 L0 1.0 N
r C0 L6 Ln L6 10 r O (D N Imo- CO
d 00 r r d• 0) CO C0 d' f O
N(- 64(f}E964E9 EA6T (O
CO N LO
O O Ln
N CO 0 q
CD C\J
EA EA
co o
(.D
LO
CO O
CA- EA- EF}
0) CO L0
N NO (D
0
O LO
O 0
N
Cp (D 0 0) L0 LO O CO CO CO O 0 O CO 0 CO CO
O CO CO CO CO N L1) ID LC) (D N d CO 0 (A
N
N. 0
N 10 r L() 6 6 6 N4
'cf' O CO �J' L() (D C)
O O C V b4 EH N d' 64 64 64 69- EA r (Y) (D r (p
EA EA EA EA 69- Ef- 69 69- r r
a)
0 0 CO CO I's r N Cr) N r 0 N-
CO CO CO N- CO CO C) O O O I• r N
O O 0 CO (O N 00 N L i Ln
N N N LO LO 0 r CO .1' N LC)
E A EA- 04 1 C EH EH 6 9 64 EH N69 CO r---• CO CO
T N N N N 0 N LO C CO CO
CO CO N d' N o3 N O (O
r T
N. 4 r LL) 0 0 N O O
64 EF} N LO 69- E9 EA Ef} r N CO N N CO
E9- EA 64 EA EA EA T T
N N CO 0 0 0 N d CO 0 O d am
O 0 CA (O (O 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 O
CD CV LO EH EA N 64 EA EA r0 N 007 0 N LO
ER 69- EA EH EH EF} r
N N d' I. Q) 0) 0) O CO 0) I- L0 LO CO
I� CO N N N N CO I` L0 d 07 0 CO
00 00 f- L() O (O (O (x I- Ln co 4 N
L0 T r T •4 O) O LO CO N
EA Ef} EA E9 (f EA EH E9 CA- 69- r r
a)
N
E
E E E
a) MLco f NM6r 0 L O La
r r N N
2
City of Niagara Falls
Attention: Mr, Ken Burden
4310 Queen Street
PO Box 1023
Niagara Falls, ON L2E 6X5
Sent via Electronic Submission to:
kbu rde n @n iaga rafa lls.ca
Subject: Water Sewer Rate Structure Review
Mr. Burden,
Yours t
For G
Lorne Cosgrove, Director of Finance
Great Wolf Lodge
Ripley's Niagara Water Park Resort LP
cosgrove @ripleys.com
GREAT
WLF
L ODGE
4k NIAGARA FALLS. CANADA
Voted #1 "Best for Families, Canada" by Trip Advisor
FINANCE. DEPT.
MAR 0 3 200
Please accept this letter as our expression of interest in being part of the solution and wish to continue to be key player
in supporting the changes.
The "Hump -Back Rate Design" appears to be the preferred or recommended solution per your report CPS 2009 -01;
however, it fails to address the fee structure. This obviously is will have a major impact on any decision that stakeholders
will have including Great Wolf Lodge.
Our recommendation and request at this point would be to provide all stakeholders with the actual or planned "Mil
Rate" for consumption of water, so an informed decision regarding any method be included in that decision making
process.
3950 Victoria Avenue, Niagara Falls, ON L2E 7M8 Ph 905.354.4888 Fax 905.354.5588 www.greatwolfca
Great Wolf Lodge, Niagara Falls, Canada is owned by Ripley's Niagara Water Park Resort, LP, a Jim Pattlson Group company, through a license from Great Wolf Resorts,Inc.
February 27, 2009
Via email
Councillor. Victor Pietrangelo, Chair
and Members of the Corporate Services Committee
City of Niagara Falls, Ontario
Dear Sirs:
RE: CPS- 2009 -01
Water and Sewer Rate Structure Review
Niagara Casino Comments
Having reviewed Stairs report regarding the framework for a new water and sewer rate
structure, and the corresponding recommendations to the Committee that a revised rate
structure be adopted by the City, we respectfully submit the following preliminary
comments.
1. The report essentially outlines marl concepts for modifying the current water and
sewer rate structure, but without setting out the actual rates and thresholds which trigger
various contingencies, there is no way to assess the impact of this structure on any user
2. The report outlines a "new business plan which would not differentiate between City
and Regional costs. or between fixed and variable costs. The new plan would allocate
revenue generation based on the Council's acceptable level of risk.' (Page 3) Ibis would
seem coneeining in that it appears that arbitrary decision making is still part of the rate
setting process. versus consistent application of a set standard. As a large user. this is
concerning; as budget /capital planning becomes quire difficult if the standard is constantly
adjusted
Subject to being provided with the actual rates and thresholds which trigger various
contingencies, we are initially supportive of a hump back volumetric rate structure that
"creates a peak charge that encourages conservation for lower consumption ratepayers,
and offers large consumption ratepayers a reduced rate to reflect the economy of scale in
the provision of water services
r,Stio .111 I{i,l :i.t_.ir.t I'•i?I> i1u!.iv; 1. 11,1,11 I 't;
Inott ?our limii.Itl,it tti4 it!
Questions:
1. Will the rates assessed in the hump -back design differ by classification or are the
rates set for all users across all classes?
2. Will meter size still be used as the determining factor in assessing the fixed rate
portion of water billing?
In order to provide truly meaningful comment on the proposed framework for a new
water and sewer rate structure, Niagara Casinos requires further consultation 'with City
Staff
Trusting the above is satisfactory, 1 remain,
Yours truly,
Paul A. Pingue
Legal Counsel
7
/071 'Ken Water Sewer Rates CPS- 2009 -01 #2.doc
rikM
yiial�{af £rt *sot a
February 28, 2009
City of Niagara Falls
Attention: Mr. Ken Burden
4310 Queen Street
P.O. Box 1023
Niagara Falls, Ontario
L2E 6X5
Re: CPS 2009 -01 Water and Sewer Rate Structure
Dear Mr. Burden:
Thank you for providing the Chamber of Commerce Niagara Falls, Canada
with a copy of report CPS 2009 -01 Water and Rate Structure.
As you know, the Chamber of Commerce, in cooperation with several
partners, engaged BMA Management Consultants to review the Water and
Sewer Rate Structure Review developed by R.M. Loudon Ltd. for the City of
Niagara Falls. We are again submitting our review developed by BMA
Consultants and presented to the City of Niagara Falls, Corporate Services
Committee on Monday, November 17, 2008. We are disappointed CPS
2009-01 does not address the concerns and recommendations made in our
report. Further, we believe CPS 2009 -01 does not provide sufficient
information to determine how to comment at this time. In our view, a public
meeting should take place so community stakeholders may attend to learn
what is actually being recommended in your report CPS 2009 -01.
The Chamber recognizes report CPS 2009 -01 is recommending that the
nine recommendations contained in the R.M. Loudon Inc. report not be
implemented. We further recognize that staff will now develop
recommendations for new water and sewer rates for Council consideration.
We request an opportunity to comment on those recommendations prior to
Council approval and look forward to your response regarding a public
meeting to provide information on CPS 2009 -01 and how it relates to our
November 17"' presentation.
Sincerely
Carolyn A. Bones
President
C.C.
Mayor Ted Salci
Members of Council
Board of Directors, Chamber of Commerce
Page 1'
April 27, 2009 F- 2009 -23
His Worship Mayor Ted Salci
and Members of the Municipal Council
City of Niagara Falls, Ontario
Members:
RECOMMENDATION:
1.)
BACKGROUND:
Niag araails
CANADA
Re: F- 2009 -23
Project Funding Final
Garner Southwest and Grassybrook Sanitary Service Areas
That the Council authorize staff to request the Regional Municipality of Niagara
issue a debenture on behalf of the City for the unfunded balance from the two
capital projects, and
2.) That the City include the debt servicing costs of this debenture in the 2009
Development Charges Study.
The two mentioned capital works projects require final funding to close out the projects.
Council provided direction to staff to utilize internal sources of financing to complete the
projects. As the projects are at a stage that requires final funding, staff recommends the
Council authorize a debenture for the unfunded balance. The balance required will be
determined at project completion and is estimated at approximately $12,500,000.
The requirement to seek long term financing of this nature is due to the fact that interim
financing cannot be maintained for the period of time: required to collect the funds
necessary to close the projects. The internal source of funding utilized to undertake the
project are required for the purposes that the reserves were originally established.
The 2009 Development Charges Study has been developed on the basis that future
development charge rates will be collected to offset the expenditures made on these
projects. As a result, the debt s costs will be made from the collection of these
fees.
ueenStreet P:0 Box 1023�Ntagara Falls ON, Canada L2E 6X5 905 356 7521 www.niagarafalls.ca'
Working Together to Serve Our Community
Corporate Services Departmen
Finance
April 27, 2009 2 F- 2009 -23
Staff recommend that the use of external debentures funded by future development
charges revenues be undertaken. The continual use of internal sources of cash is not
viable in the long term as the City will require these funds in the future. Since the revenue
stream from development charges matches directly with the debenture costs, this action
results in the most effective strategy.
Attached is report CPS 2008 -06 which provides background on these projects.
Recommended by:
Approved by:
c r
Todd Harriso Directo of Financial Services
Ken Burden, Executive Director of Corporate Services
Jun$ 9, 2008
Councillor Victor Pietrangelo, Chair
and Members of the Corporate Services Committee
City of Niagara Falls, Ontario
Members:
Re: CPS- 2008 -06
Garner Southwest and Grassy Brook
Sanitary Service Areas
4310 Queen 5tieet; P.O. Box 1023, Niagara Falls, ON Canada L2E 6X5 905 356 -7521 www.niagarafalls.ca
RECOMMENDATION:
That the interim funding of the Garner Southwest and Grassy Brook Sanitary Service Areas
projects continue from reserve funds until development charge revenues have been
received for these projects.
BACKGROUND:
Niag araJ
CANADA
Questions Raised by Council on April 28, 2008
Under new business, at the April 28, 2008 Council meeting, questions were raised by
Councillors regarding the two development projects located in the Garner south area. The
questions focused on staffs use of interim funding, development charge funding and the
possible use of debenture funding for the projects. Council directed staff to bring back a
report on the facts of the financing of the Garner Southwest and Grassy Brook Sanitary
Service Areas projects.
History of Reports to Council
Staff has prepared a chart of the reports relating to the Garner Southwest and Grassy
Brook Sanitary Service Areas projects (attached). These reports show the date, report
number, title, recommendation, contract amount and cumulative total for each project. All
of the reports state that the funding for the projects would be received through
Development Charges.
Working Together to Serve Our Community
CPS 2008 -06
THIS MATTER DEFERRED BY COUNCIL
Corporate Services Departanent
June 9, 2008 2 CPS 2008 -06
Explanation of Process for Interim Funding of Capital Projects
The decision making authority of the Treasurer for the payment of accounts is found in the
Municipal Act under Section 286. This section explains the main duties of the Treasurer.
The Treasurer manages the cash flow of the municipality and makes the best possible use
of the available sources of cash for the payment of accounts, including capital projects.
The Treasurer has the responsibility to report to Council on the financial payments of the
Municipality. In addition, the Treasurer provides annual reports on Capital Projects,
Reserve Funds, Financial Leases, and Long Term Debentures.
Fora general description of the City's cash flows, please see the diagram (attached) entitled
Cash Flow. This diagram shows the inflows of cash, the availability 'of cash in the City's
bank account or from short term borrowing, and the out flows of cash. It is important to note
that the use of short term borrowing only occurs, as needed.
Each year the Treasurer brings forward the annual Borrowing By -law. This By -law provides
for a source of short term borrowing, from the City's financial institution, if there were
insufficient cash for operating expenditures, i.e., if the budget has not been approved or
taxes have not been received. The Borrowing By -law authority is found in Section 407 of
the Municipal Act.
Section 405 of the Municipal Act allows the municipality to borrow in the short term for
specific Capital Works. Capital Works, referred to in this section, are large capital projects,
whose required funding will be in the form of long term debt. This section requires Regional
approval of the required long term debt before approving an S.405 Short Term Borrowing
By -law.
For example, the Region has approved the $29.5 million in Tong term debenture funding for
the Bob Gale Complex. This project has already expended $4.8 million which the Treasurer
has paid by using internal sources of cash. The Treasurer has presented an S.405 Short
Term Borrowing By -law for specific capital works, namely the construction of the four -pad
arena complex. The By -law will provide sufficient short term borrowing, from the City's
financial institution, for this specific capital project.
Legality of the interim Borrowing By -law
Council directed staff to prepare a report on the legality of the Interim Borrowing By -law and
that the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing be contacted. The City Solicitor is
preparing this report (L- 2008 -15).
Explanation of the Protects inclusion in the 2004 Development Charges Background
Study
The Development Charges Background Study was prepared in 2003/2004. At that time,
the Manager of Development was asked to prepare a list of development projects that may
be constructed within the subsequent 2004 -2014 ten -year planning period to accommodate
growth. Considerable interest had been received from the Grand Niagara Resort developers
in the Grassy Brook west area. There was a desire to extend sewers to facilitate their
project which included the golf course, hotel and conference centre, timescale and
condominium units. The extension of sewers would require a pumping station and other
June 9, 2008
Funding Plan for the Projects
3 CPS 2008 -06
related infrastructure. Relying on knowledge of the Northwest Sanitary Sewer Service Area,
the cost was estimated at $1.5 million for each of the Garner Southwest and Grassy Brook
service areas, for a total of $3 million. We now know these costs have escalated to $15.9
million.
When the 2004 Development Charges Study estimates were determined, it was based on
the best information available at the time about the Garner South Service Area. The City
contracted Philip's Engineering Ltd., in August 2004, to complete a Municipal Class
Environmental Assessment and to determine how best to service this area. The consultant
advised that the deep sewer construction in tight clay soils would add significant costs.
Other issues that were not known previously included impacts from a high water table,
having to directionally drill across a water course and the Welland River, and that the
Region had implemented a new design criteria for pumping stations.
The consultants work (Associated Engineering (Ont.) Ltd. Garner Southwest; Philips
Engineering Limited Grassy Brook) addressed significant issues due to the expansion of
the sewer services.
the Ministry of the Environment's order to Grand Niagara Resort permitting a
temporary holding tank,
the substandard private sewage system at E.S. Fox,
the expansion of Minacs that was limited by the Regional Health Unit
the unavailable services for the Montrose Business Park, and
a holding zone to be placed on the Heartland Forest Project.
The reports for the Garner Southwest and Grassy Brook Sanitary Service Areas projects
state that the funding would come from Development Charges. These projects have
already expended $11.2 million which the Treasurer has paid by using the City's reserve
funds, as an interim source of funds. Also, the Treasurer is using Development Charge
revenues to payback the interim use of the reserve funds. To -date, $1.1 million has been
paid back. No debenturing has been used for these projects. Staff did not become aware
of the fact that the Development Charges fund would be insufficient to fund all Development
Charge eligible projects upon completion, until the Fall of 2007. At that time, debenturing
was considered, as an option, and referenced in the Capital Budget detail sheets for the
most expensive projects, as opposed to a number of smaller projects.
Explanation for including the Garner Southwest and Grassy Brook Sanitary Service
Areas Projects in the 2009 Development Charges Background Study
Staff has started the process of gathering the information for the 2009 Development
Charges Background Study. Since the two sanitary sewer projects were near completion,
and since the areas would be developed in the future, staff requested Cam Watson,
Watson and Associates Economists Ltd., to comment on the inclusion of these two projects
in the 2009 Background Study.
Mr. Watson confirmed that these projects would qualify for inclusion in the 2009
Development Charges Background Study. Mr. Watson stated that the projects would open
those areas to future development and thus qualify in determining future Development
Charge rates. The future Development Charge rates would also include any interim
financing costs while the Development Charge revenues are collected to fund the projects.
June 9, 2008 -4 CPS 2008 -06
Mr. Watson stressed the importance of explaining the large cost variance between the
estimated project cost ($3 million) and the current cost ($15.9 million). The explanation
must address the reasons for the increase, particularly in terms of the size, scope, and the
benefitting area.
Conclusion
The Garner Southwest and Grassy Brook Sanitary Service Areas projects were included
in the 2004 Development Charges Background Study at an estimated cost of $3 million.
Due to significant issues that impacted the servicing of the areas, the actual cost is $15.9
million. The projects are eligible for inclusion in the 2009 Development Charges
Background Study. Future Development Charges revenues will be used to pay for these
projects.
Staff is already reviewing a number of administrative issues based on the concerns raised,
including cash flow /management plans for each capital project, a front -end agreement
policy and a development charge credit policy. Council also directed the preparation of an
inventory of developed and serviced land which is forthcoming.
Finally, the Treasurer is responsible for the payment of accounts, managing the cash flows,
and the short term use of borrowing. The Treasurer has undertaken these responsibilities
in accordance with applicable legislation and past practices.
Staff recommends that the interim funding of the Garner Southwest and Grassy Brook
Sanitary Service Areas projects continue from Reserve Funds until Development Charge
revenues have been received for these projects.
The status of completion is as follows:
Grassy Brook Project is fully operational and was commissioned on May 14, 2008.
Garner South Project (Brown Road) is nearing the completion of the wet well and
yard piping and is awaiting installation of pumps, electronics and mechanical system.
Commission is expected in July /August 2008.
Recommended by:
Respectfully submitted:
en, Executive Director of Corporate Services
Ken Bu
MacDonald, Chief Administrative Officer
Date to Council
Report
Amount
Description
Funding Source
October 18, 2004
MW -2004 -156
$59,960.00
Hiring Associated Engineering to complete
Environmental Assessment
Development Charges Reserve
Fund
December 5, 2005
MW- 2005 -145
$0
Environmental Assessment Approval
Development Charges Reserve
Fund
October 16, 2006
MW- 2006 -119
$273,192.00
Consulting Service Agreement with
Associated Engineering
Development Charges Reserve
Fund
July 23, 2007
MW- 2007 -85
$35,490.00
Increase to Consulting Service Agreement
with Associated Engineering
95% Development Charges
5% Garner SW Sanitary Sewer
Area Account
October 15, 2007
MW- 2007 -123
$2,699,690.02
Gibbons Contracting Ltd. Hired
Gravity Sewers and Watermains
95% Development Charges,
5% Capital
November 26, 2007
MW- 2007 -129
$254,256.00
Associated Engineering engaged to
provide inspection services for the
construction.
95% Development Charges,
5% Capital
November 26, 2007
MW -2007 -130
$3,679,742.39
Gibbons Contracting Ltd. Hired
Pumping Station and Forcemain
95% Development Charges,
5% Capital
TOTAL
$7,002,330.41
Garner Southwest Sanitary Service Area
Chronology of Reports to Council
CPS 2008 -06
Date to Council
Report
Amount
Description
Funding Source
August 16, 2004
MW- 2004 -123
$57,093.00
Environmental Assessment engaging
Philip's Engineering Ltd.
Development Charges Reserve
Fund.
August 5, 2005
MW- 2005 -104
$0
Environmental Assessment Approval.
Development Charges Reserve
Fund.
February 6, 2006
MW- 2006 -11
$262,543.00
Consulting Services Agreement
Philip's Engineering Ltd. to prepare
detailed engineering design.
Development Charges Reserve
Fund.
April 3, 2006
MW- 2006 -38
$1,950,000.00
Amendment to Consulting Services
Agreement with Philip's Engineering Ltd.
to include geotechnical services.
Development Charges Reserve
Fund.
October 30, 2006
MW- 2006 -133
$195,000.00
Philip's Engineering Ltd. Hired
Inspection services for Watermain
Sanitary Sewer Construction.
Development Charges Reserve
Fund.
December 11, 2006
MW- 2006 -142
$146,140.00
Earth Tech Hired to provide inspection
services for the Pumping Station and
Forcemain Project.
Development Charges Reserve
Fund.
January 22, 2007
MW- 2007 -04
$884,610.00
Baiocco Construction for construction of
Sanitary Sewer.
95% Development Charges,
5% Capital
January 22, 2007
MW 2007 05
$2,054,442.50
V. Gibbons Contracting Ltd. for
construction of Pump Station and
Forcemain.
95% Development Charges,
5% Capital
February 5, 2007
MW- 2007 -06
83,284,480.00
Baiocco Construction for construction of
Sanitary Sewer.
66.5% Development Charges,
33.5% Capital
April 16, 2007
MW- 2007 -35
$30,000.00
Consulting Fee Amendment Philip's
Engineering Ltd., to include design of
services not anticipated at design stage.
Development Charges Reserve
Fund.
TOTAL
$8,864,308.50
Grassy Brook Sanitary Service Area
Chronology of Reports to Council
CPS 2008 -06
INFLOWS OF CASH
1. Taxes
2. User Fees
3. Grants
4. Debentures
5. Development Charges
6. Billings
CASH FLOW
Bank Account
Short Term Borrowing
-a
CPS 2008 -06
OUTFLOWS OF CASH
1. Payments to Vendors
2. Payments to Authorities
3. Payroll
4. Refunds, Rebates
5. Debt
Treasurer
286. (1) A municipality shall appoint a treasurer who is responsible for handling all of the
financial affairs of the municipality on behalf of and in the manner directed by the council of the
municipality, including,
(a) collecting money payable to the municipality and issuing receipts for those payments;
(b) depositing all money received on behalf of the municipality in a financial institution
designated by the municipality;
(c) paying all debts of the municipality and other expenditures authorized by the municipality;
(d) maintaining accurate records and accounts of the financial affairs of the municipality;
(e) providing the council with such information with respect to the financial affairs of the
municipality as it requires or requests;
(f) ensuring investments of the municipality are made in compliance with the regulations made
under section 418. 2001, c. 25, s. 286 (1).
Deputy treasurers
al The municipality may appoint deputy treasurers who shall have all the powers and duties of
the treasurer under this and any other Act. 2001, c. 25, s. 286 (2).
Not required to be an employee
A treasurer or deputy treasurer is not required to be an employee of the municipality. 2001, c.
25, s. 286 (3).
Liability limited
al The treasurer or deputy treasurer is not liable for money paid in accordance with the
directions of the council of the municipality unless the disposition of the money is expressly
provided for under any Act. 2001, c. 25, s. 286 (4).
Delegation
The municipality may delegate to any person all or any of the powers and duties of the
treasurer under this or any other Act with respect to the collection of taxes. 2002, c. 17, Sched. A,
s. 47.
Continuation despite delegation
Le The treasurer may continue to exercise the delegated powers and duties, despite the
delegation. 2002, c. 17, Sched. A, s. 47
Temporary borrowing for works
405. (1) A municipality may authorize temporary borrowing to meet expenditures made in
connection with a work to be financed in whole or in part by the issue of debentures if,
(a) the municipality is an upper -tier municipality, a lower -tier municipality in a county or a
single -tier municipality and it has approved the issue of debentures for the work;
(b) the municipality is a lower -tier municipality in a regional municipality and it has approved the
work and the upper -tier municipality has approved the issue of debentures for the work; or
(c) the municipality has approved the issue of debentures for another municipality or a school
board under section 404. 2001, c. 25, s. 405 (1).
Use of proceeds
ai The proceeds obtained under subsection (1) shall be applied to the approved work but the
lender is not responsible for ensuring the proceeds are used in this manner. 2001, c. 25, s. 405
Security
.(3l For the purposes of this section, a municipality that has approved the issue of debentures but
not sold them may authorize another municipality or school board to use the debentures as
security for temporary borrowing. 2001, c. 25, s. 405 (3).
April 27, 2009 F- 2009 -25
His Worship Mayor Ted Salci
and Members of the Municipal Council
City of Niagara Falls, Ontario
Members:
Re: F- 2009 -25
Development Charges
2008 Financial Information
RECOMMENDATION:
Niag araj
CANADA
That Council receive and file the attached financial statements regarding Development
Charges for the 2008 fiscal year.
BACKGROUND:
It is a requirement of the Development Charges Act to file with Council a statement
disclosing the receipt and application of all development charges collected under the
authority of Part II of the Development Charges Act, 1997. The required content for this
financial reporting is as follows:
Balance as of January 1
The development charges reserve fund balances as reported on the audited
financial statements for the preceding year.
Development Charges Received or Receivable
These development charges are to be allocated to the specific service to which
they are to be applied.
Development Charges Refunded
The total of all refunds of development charges, including the interest on the
refund calculated on the basis of the provisions of section 13 of Ontario
Regulation 725/89.
The total refunded amount is to be credited to the specific service to which the
original charges tdb applied.
Canada L2E 6X5 905 -356 -7521 www.niagarafalls.ca
Working Together to Serve Our Community
Corporate Services Department
Finance
April 27, 2009
Accrued Interest
The total interest earned on all reserve fund investments will be shown, as well
as the apportionment of such interest earnings among the various services.
Transfers to Capital Fund
The total of all amounts transferred to the capital fund including all interest
earned on such funds as at the date the amounts are transferred.
The total of the amounts transferred are to be credited to the specific service
to which the original charges had been applied.
Amounts Allocated to Other Services
Indicate the amounts which Council has determined are to be transferred from
the service originally allocated to another service.
Balance at Year's End
The development charge reserve fund balance or balances as reported on the
audited financial statements of the current year.
A summary of the financial statement follows:
2 F- 2009 -25
Balance as at January 1, 2008 $11,955,424
Received Development Charges 2,931,001
Refunded Development Charges (2,389)
Interest Earned 661,515
Transfer to Capital Projects (4,450,293)
Transfer to Operating (43,500)
Balance as at December 31, 2008 $11,051,758
As required by the development charges legislation, capital projects that receive funding
from development charges are required to report the other sources of funding. A summary
of the sources for this total funding is as follows:
New Development Charges By -law $4,897,418
Ontario Grant 1,605,759
Operating Revenue Fund 617,753
Reserve Fund 340,375
Capital Liability Accounts 4,238,332
Debenture 0
Outside Billings 550,000
Special Purpose Reserves 39,420
Total Funding $12,289,057
History of Deve opment Charge Reserve Funds
Development
Charge Revenue
Disbursements
Interest
Earned
Year End
Balance
2003
$17,781,639
2004
$1,602,164
(5,689,407)
$557,811
$14,252,207
2005
$2,523,939
(658,577)
$486,469
$16,604,038
2006
$1,334,196
(587,869)
$534,030
$17,884,395
2007
$1,776,969
(8,381,671)
$675,731
$11,955,424
2008
$2,931,001
(4,496,182)
$661,515
$11,051,758
April 27, 2009
3
Historical Trend of Development Charges
F- 2009 -25
The amount in the reserve funds at a point in time is a product of amounts collected,
amounts used to fund capital projects and interest earned in the reserves. Ultimately, the
purpose of development charges is to collect adequate amounts that can be used to fund
growth related projects. The chart below summarizes the historical year end balances.
As this shows, development charges received in 2008 were greater than the previous year
while amounts used for funding in 2008 was the third highest of the last eight years.
Interest income was slightly less than the previous year. It is important to recall that while
development charges reserves in aggregate totaled $11,051,758 as at December 31,
2008, individual reserves are held for specific expenditures, such as fire, roads, water,
sewer, etc. in the future.
The year end balance of $11,051,758 can be broken down as shown in the attached
Development Charges Financial Statement. The attached summary illustrates the
available amounts for each service area. It should be noted that these reserves are
designated to be used in the areas that these pertain to and have been collected based
on the current Development Charges Study.
During 2009, Council will be required to develop a new Development Charges By -law. The
carry forward balances will be accounted for in this study and will impact the new
development charge rates. Staff has developed a five year continuity schedule as part of
the 2009 capital budget process. The continuity schedule is a financial planning tool which
identifies the use of development charge reserves for funding identified projects annually.
Likewise, the continuity schedule identifies estimated annual in flows of development
charges collected. This schedule ensures that staff is aware of immediate (current year)
and long term (2 -5 years) impacts of collections /disbursements of development charge
funds.
Recommended by:
Approved by:
Todd Harrisdn. Direc
r of Financial Services
Ken Burden, Executive Director of Corporate Services
co
O V O
'7)
(O M
U 00 a>
(C) 00 N
N N O
M M O
of O
O O O
o 0 0
osi
000
0) N. CO
CO 0 0
O O
o0
0 0
0
CO 0 CO
O T CO
C L )O 0)MN
O r) N- r
E co LO
O. <0 0 al
CO
O m_)) ch
I0
vi
(J) vi
O d Ws
D N
LL vi
0
U
W
W o m a)
W 'Z a
m
y w 4
Ili o c
r O
c a O
y
a W
0 0
I- =O N
w 0 0 w c a
0
a. d o c
wcn z
CD
0 0 0 0 0
000
cot'-o. =v 0)
m r- O c0 0)
-al co V<O N.
O OM CO O O
0') 0) 10 N.
...r cV
0) N 0 0) CO O
(O N� n CO CO N
(V r 0) 0)
NNONcOCO
N- t` O v CO
V' v N 0)
v
c-
CO 01
(t7 0) 0) N N+
U) 0) N. 0) N
0) (00) 0
0) 0)10 V N.
N r r
N` n (.0 (0 N-
NNM0) V'
N CO c r 0
(n
Cr) 0 M
0)(OCO 0) V'
V"
0
CO
CO
U
a)
c
c
I-- 3
(O
0)
O
N
N"
V'
CO
M
co Nr
O
0
Tr(or
N N(�'-
M N- 0) N
N V o
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
O CO CO CO
co N CO
a 0') r r co_ 0)
0) T M
r r M O
0) CO0 1
0 N
OOO(.0r.
r M h N
N CO O (C)
c6 (.6
0) 0 N
0, 0) (0 0)
c
a)
E
0)
c c
O `mz
W a) 0
w L. N
w c5
Z co i
m
cc
0
O
N
N
O
0)
N
O
0)
m
O
0)
O
O
l0
1 L1 7
0)
O
(v i
0
CO
M
N
0)
co r V' o co (o
00 r O O O O
N V' T (D U) r
N(10NNo 'd
0
r
co O O O O 0
00 00
O N O (C)
r co 0) 0) 0)
N- N O V'
N V 1-- co co
0 0 0 0 0
CO CO O V' V
10 CO CV
(')a70 V'h
r (0 00 00 (r
0
0) (0
(r) a)
w E
to)
c D
uwj a) 2
a
0 (u
o
H m o
co
0
0
O
N
M
0)
0)
co
0)
O
O
M
0)
(V
co
(76
O
o
c
0)
N
0)
Nn
CO
CO
0)
N
April 27, 2009 F- 2009 -26
Falls
SF CANADA
His Worship Mayor Ted Salci
and Members of the Municipal Council
City of Niagara Falls, Ontario
Members:
Re: F- 2009 -26
Year End Community Improvement Plan (C.I.P.) Reserve Balances
RECOMMENDATION:
To receive for information.
BACKGROUND:
The City of Niagara Falls established the incentive programs for stimulating reinvestment
in specific geographic areas within the City. Two programs, the Downtown C.I.P. and the
Historical Drummondville C.I.P. are for a specific area while the City -wide Brownfield
program encompasses all properties within the entire urban boundaries.
Over the past four years, the full amount budgeted has not been spent and special purpose
reserves for each C.I.P. have been identified. Council requested that staff report on the
reserve balances at the year end.
The balances in reserves at December 31, 2008 are:
Historic Drummondville 305,711
Downtown 946,190
City Wide 482,600
The balances have been set aside for specific purposes as the attached charts indicate.
Recommended by:
Approved by:
Todd Harrison, Director 6f Financial Services
Is, ON, Canada L2E 6X5 905- 356 -7521 www.'niagarafalls.ca
'rden, Executive Director of Corporate Services
Working Together to Serve Our Community
Corporate Services Department
Finance
Downtown CIP
SPR 229
Continuity Schedule
As at December 31, 2008
(overspent)
Unspent
Year Amount Unallocated Facade interest Land Acq
2003 $23,000 $23,000 $0 $0 $0
2004 $12,000 $12,000 $0 $0 $0
2005 $98,500 $13,500 $60,000 $25,000 $0
2006 $346,665 $0 $60,000 $190,000 $96,665
2007 $416,800 $0 $60,000 $190,000 $166,800
2008 ($170,775) note ($170,775)
2008 $220,000 IQ U $20,000 $200,000
SPR TOTALS $946,190 $48,500 $180,000 $254,225 $463,465
note amount used to fund downtown event costs in 2008
Historical Drummondville CIP
SPR 254
Continuity Schedule
As at December 31, 2008
(overspent)
Unspent
Year Amount Unallocated Incentives LLBF Land Acq
2005 $36,200 $36,200 $0 $0 $0
2006 ($22,489) ($22,489) $0 $0 $0
2007 $215,000 $0 $55,000 $10,000 $150,000
2008 $77,000 12 $77,000
SPR TOTALS $305,711 $13,711 $55,000 $10,000 $227,000
City Wide CIP
SPR 253
Continuity Schedule
As at December 31, 2008
(overspent)
Unspent
Year Amount consulting Incentives marketing Land Acq
2004 $0 $0 $0 $0
2005 $26,400 $26,400 $0 $0 $0
2006 $141,500 $0 $141,500 $0 $0
2007 $182,700 $50,000 $0 $0 $132,700
2008 $132,000 El IQ $32,000 $100,000
SPR TOTALS $482,600 $76,400 $141,500 $32,000 $232,700
April 27, 2009 MW- 2009 -29
His Worship Mayor Ted Salci
and Members of the Municipal Council
City of Niagara Falls, Ontario
Members:
RECOMMENDATION:
Niagaraaalls
C A N A D A
Re: MW- 2009 -29
Contract 2009 204 -08
McLeod Road Watermain Replacement (Phase 1)
from Drummond Road to Ailanthus Avenue
1 That the unit prices submitted by the lowest tenderer Provincial Construction be
accepted for the above noted contract;
2. That the Mayor and City Clerk be authorized to execute the necessary agreement.
BACKGROUND:
The existing watermain on the above noted street was added in 2006 to the Operational
Works List for the City's ongoing Watermain Replacement program. The watermain
replacement work on McLeod Road will be constructed in either 2 or 3 phases, with the
limits as follows:
Phase 1 from Drummond Road to Ailanthus Avenue
Phase 2 from Dell Avenue to the Ontario Power Generation (OPG) Canal
Phase 3 from the OPG Canal to Oakwood Avenue
The current contract is for the construction of Phase 1 only. The other phases are likely
to proceed to construction later this year.
The existing watermain is older Cast Iron pipe, but has been primarily identified for
replacement due to the frequent history of watermain breaks. Due to the amount of traffic
on McLeod Road and the fact that the existing watermain is predominantly located along
the centreline of the road, any repairs become a costly and highly disruptive exercise.
The Tender Opening Committee, in the presence of the City's Clerk, Mr. Dean lorfida,
opened tenders on Tuesday _ill '21st, 2009 at 1:30 p.m. for the above noted contract.
Queen Street PO °Box'1023 NiagaraiFalls ,ON Canada L2E 6X5 905- 356 -7521 www.niagarafalls.ca
Working Together to Serve Our Community
ommunity Services Department
Municipal Works
April 27, 2009 2 MW- 2009 -29
Tender documents were picked up by thirteen (13) Contractors and ten (10) bids were
received.
Listed below is a summary of the totaled tendered prices, excluding GST, received from
the Contractors. The tenders were checked and the corrected bids are shown bold and
marked with an asterisk
1. Provincial Construction
2. Demar Construction
3. Nexterra Substructures
4. Alfred Beam Excavating
5. Cotton Inc.
6. Vic Vatrt Contracting
7. Alfidome Construction
8. Centennial Construction
9. Condotta Construction
10. Peter's Excavating
Niagara Falls
Niagara Falls
Niagara Falls
Fort Erie
Niagara Falls
Welland
Niagara Falls
Niagara -on- the -Lake
Thorold
Fort Erie
438,738.20
438,804.80*
443,325.82
443,322.04*
443,709.00
447,364.00
470,536.50
481,498.50
480,498.50*
494,116.00
498,920.00
541,297.61
541,297.62*
564,404.00
The lowest tender was received from Provincial Construction in the amount of
438,804.80. This contractor has performed similar type projects for the City. We are of
the opinion, that this contractor is capable of successfully undertaking this project.
The engineer's estimate for this contract was 580,000.00. Analysis of the number and
the content of the bids received indicates fairly strong competition at this time for capital
projects of this type and size. Timing of tenders for construction, when the planned
schedule permits, can play an important role in how competitive the market will be, based
on prospective bidders' work loads.
Project Costs:
Awarded Contract (excluding GST) 438,804.80
Funding:
The funding for this project was previously approved as part of the 2008 Capital Budget.
The design and approvals were completed in August of 2008, but resource issues
prevented construction from starting last fall.
Mcleod Road Watermain Replacement W20
(Account No. 12 -3- 430020 030000) 438,804.80
This project is scheduled to commence construction in mid -May of 2009 and all work is to
carry through up to the scheduled 60 working days.
April 27, 2009
Recommended by:
Approved by:
3
Geoff Holman, Director of Municipal Works
Ed Dujlovic, Exa'itive i' ector of Community Services
K. Schachowskoj
S: \REPORTS \2009 \MW 2009 -29 Contract 2009 204 -08 McLeod Road Watermain Replacement Ph 1 .wpd
MW-2009-29
April 27, 2009 MW- 2009 -32
N iag r Falls
CANADA
His Worship Mayor Ted Salci
and Members of the Municipal Council
City of Niagara Falls, Ontario
Members:
Re: MW- 2009 -32
Contract 2009- 166 -06
Sinnicks Avenue, St. Mary's Street Orlando Drive
Road Reconstruction Underground Services
RECOMMENDATION:
1.
That the unit prices submitted by V. Gibbons Contracting Ltd. be accepted.
2. That the Mayor and City Clerk be authorized to execute the necessary agreement.
BACKGROUND:
The Tender Opening Committee, in the presence of the City Clerk's representative Mr. Ray
Miller, opened tenders on Thursday, April 16, 2009 at 1:30 p.m. for the above noted
contract.
Tender documents were picked up by 14 Contractors and 9 bids were received.
Listed below is a summary of the totaled tendered prices (corrected), excluding GST,
received from the Contractor.
1. V. Gibbons Contracting
2. Nexterra Substructures Inc.
3. Provincial Construction Ltd.
4. Trenchline Roads Inc.
5. Alfred Beam Excavating Ltd.
6. Centennial Infrastructure Inc.
7. Peter's Excavating Inc.
8. Alfidome Construction Ltd.
9. Demar Construction
Stevensville
Niagara Falls
Niagara Falls
Jordan Station
Fort Erie
Niagara -on- the -Lake
Stevensville
Niagara Falls
Niagara Falls
The lowest tender was received from V. Gibbons Contracting in the amount of
$1,043,120.85. This contractor hats previously performed similar type projects for the City.
We are of the opinion that -contractor is capable of successfully undertaking this
project.
Queen street
iagara'jalls l0N Canada L2E 6X5 :905- 356 -7521 www.niagarafalls.ca
Working Together to Serve Our Community
$1,043,120.85
$1,058,987.60
$1,088,550.63
$1,121,468.00
$1,141,396.10
$1,190,357.70
$1,190,570.00
$1,252,238.00
$1,353,433.82
Community Services Department
Municipal Works
April 27, 2009 2 MW- 2009 -32
The engineer's estimate for this contract was $1,452,300.00
Project Costs:
Awarded Contract (excluding GST)
Funding:
$1,043,120.85
Total $1,043,120.85
The funding for this project was approved as part of the 2008 Municipality Utility Budgets
and is available for use.
2008 Sanitary Sewer Services
(Account No. 12 -3- 410016 030000) 870,380.04
2008 Water
(Account No. 12 -3- 430015 030000) 172,740.81
Approved by:
Recommended by:
(du
C. McLeod
S: \REPORTS \2009 \MW 2009 -32 Contract 2009 166 -06 Sinnicks.wpd
Total $1,043,120.85
This project is scheduled to commence construction on May 25, 2009 and all work is to
carry through until October 1, 2009.
Geoff Holman, Director of Municipal Works
Ed Dujlovic, Executive Director of Community Services
•April 27, 2009
His Worship Mayor Ted Salci
and Members of the Municipal Council
City of Niagara Falls, Ontario
Members:
Re: MW- 2009 -34
2009 Asphalt Patching Contract City Wide
Contract #2009 -04
RECOMMENDATION:
NiagaraJalls
MW- 2009 -34
1. That the unit prices submitted by the lowest tenderer, Circle P. Paving, be accepted,
and;
2. that the Mayor and City Clerk be authorized to execute the necessary agreement.
BACKGROUND:
The Tender Opening Committee, in the presence of the Manager of Supply and Services,
Mr. Ray Miiller opened tenders on Tuesday, April 14, 2009 at 1:45 p.m. for the above noted
contract.
Tender documents were picked up by four (4) contractors and four (4) bids were received.
Listed below is a summary of the totaled tendered prices, excluding GST, received from
the contractors.
1. Circle P. Paving
2. Economy Paving
3. Rankin Construction Inc.
4. Norjohn Contracting Paving
Stevensville
Niagara Falls
St. Catharines
Niagara Falls
476,545.00
510,000.00
603,515.00
675,311.60
The lowest tender was received from Circle P. Paving in the amount of $476,545.00. This
contractor has previously performed similar type projects for the City. We are of the
opinion, that this contractocapable of successfully undertaking this project.
Falls ON, Canada..L2E 6X5 '905 -356 =7521 www.niagarafalls.ca
Working Together to Serve Our Community
Community Services Department
Municipal Works
April 27, 2009
The engineer's estimate for this contract was 588,000.00
Project Costs:
Awarded Contract (excluding GST)
Funding:
2 MW- 2009 -34
476,545.00
Total 476,545.00
The funding for this project is budgeted in the General Purposes and Municipal Utility
Budgets. As the budgets are not approved as of yet, the award of this contract requires
Council to preapprove spending from these budgets. The specific funding from each
budget is shown below.
2009 Paved Surface Asphalt Patching
(Account No. 11 -3- 311000 040000) 224,731.00
System Maintenance Waterworks
(Account No. 15 -3- 431000 040000) 159,082.00
System Maintenance Sanitary Sewer
(Account No. 16 -3- 411000 040000) 92,732.00
Recommended by:
Approved by:
Total 476,545.00
This project is scheduled to commence May 11, 2009 and all work is to carry through the
2009 season. Patching will be completed up to the budget amount utilizing the unit cost
in the contract.
Geoff Holrlan, Director of Municipal Works
Ed Dujlovic, Executive Director of Community Service
C. Anders
S: \REPORTS \2009 \MW 2009 -34 Contract 2009 -04 2009 Asphalt Patching Contract.wpd
April 27, 2009 MW- 2009 -22
His Worship Mayor Ted Salci
and Members of the Municipal Council
City of Niagara Falls, Ontario
Members:
RECOMMENDATION:
BACKGROUND:
y,
NiagairaJalls
C A N A D A
Re: MW- 2009 -22
Contract #2009 197 -07
Fourth Avenue Services Extension and Road Reconstruction
Bridge Street to 430 m North of Hamilton Street
1) That the unit prices submitted by the lowest tenderer be accepted,
2) that preapproval be granted for the contract amount from the 2009 Capital Budget,
and
3) that the Mayor and City Clerk be authorized to execute the necessary agreement.
The Tender Opening Committee, in the presence of the Manager of Supplies and Service,
Mr. Ray Miller, opened tenders on Tuesday, April 14, 2009 at 1:30 p.m. for the above
noted contract.
Tender documents were picked up by fourteen (14) Contractors and eight (8) bids were
received.
Listed below is a summary of the totaled tendered prices, excluding GST, received from
the Contractors:
1. Provincial Construction
2. Gibbons Contracting
3. Trenchline Roads
4. Demar Construction
5. Nexterra Substructures Inc.
6. Centennial Construction
7. Alfred Beam Excavating
8. Alifidome Construction Limited
Niagara Falls
Stevensville
Jordan Station
Niagara Falls
Niagara Falls
Niagara -on- the -Lake
Fort Erie
Niagara Falls
The lowest tender was r e a .e from Provincial Construction in the amoun
905 356 -7521 www.niagarafalls.ca
Working Together to Serve Our Community
$786,462.83
$798,208.35
$893,705.00
$902,488.74
$903,911.00
$908,272.50
$925,481.50
$953,533.50
Community Services Department
Municipal Works
April 27, 2009 2 MW- 2009 -22
This contractor has performed similar type projects for the City. We are of the opinion that
this contractor is capable of successfully undertaking this project.
The engineer's estimate for this contract was $963,325.
Project Costs:
Awarded Contract (excluding GST) $786,462.83
Total $786,462.83
Funding:
The funding for this project was approved in 2008, report R- 2008 -29, attached, indicating
that the cost to construct the site services for Fourth Avenue would be funded by the arena
construction project and the watermain related costs to be funded from the Watermain
Replacement Program.
2009 Fourth Avenue -Four Pad Arena Development 156,024.29
2008 Four Pad Arena Complex 630,438.54
RF9 -12 -3- 730009 030000
Total 786,462.83
Fourth Avenue Road Reconstruction has been included in the 2009 Development Charges
Study which is expected to receive Council approval by July 2009 with the following
development charges contributions:
Roads 77.9%
Sidewalks 57.0%
Storm System 57.0%
Sanitary System 12.0%
Watermain 12.0%
This project is scheduled to commence construction May 19, 2009 and the contractor has
been allotted 90 working days to complete the servicing.
Recommended by:
Approved by:
Geoff El man, Direct r of Municipal Works
Ed Dujlovic, Execu 've Director of Community Services
R.Volpini
S \REPORTS\2009 \MW- 2009 -22 Fourth Avenue Services Ext.wpd
Corporate Services Department
Clerk's Division
Inter Department Memorandum
TO: His Worship Mayor Ted Salci
Members of Council
FROM: Dean Iorfida
City Clerk
Ext. 4271
RE: Infrastructure Stimulus Funding
NiagarvaFalls
C A N A 1 A
DATE: April 27, 2009
As Council is aware the Federal and Provincial governments have announced two stimulus programs
to jump start the economy: the Infrastructure Stimulus Fund (ISF) and the second intake of the
Building Canada Fund (BCF).
The submission deadline is an aggressive May 1, 2009; therefore, Council has to make a decision
this evening on the four (4) projects they wish to submit for consideration.
As per the application parameters, three projects will be forwarded to the ISF and one project toward
the BCF. Staff will determine which of the projects to submit to which funding program.
Obviously, with a constrained time frame, staff was limited in the amount of analysis it could
undertake in preparation for tonight's meeting. Nonetheless, we have provided a chart for your
consideration, the projected costs, the impact on City funding and whether the project is achievable
within two (2) years, which is a requirement for program funding.
As a starting point, staff looked at the unfunded projects in the Capital Budget (i.e., tab 8).
Theoretically, all projects within the tab could be considered but staff eliminated projects that already
had major Development Charges funding. Some additional projects were added to the chart but by
no means is the chart an exhaustive listing.
At Council's May 4 meeting, formal resolutions will be brought forward based on Council's
preferred four projects (Note: resolutions can be submitted after the May 1s deadline).
Working Together to Serve Our Community
Clerks Finance Human Resources Information Systems Legal Planning Development
Canada
INFRASTRUCTURE STIMULUS FUND IN
ONTARIO
NOTICE TO MAYORS AND HEADS OF
COUNCIL
April 20, 2009
With the province -wide launch on April 14
of the Infrastructure Stimulus Fund, the
Governments of Canada and Ontario have
made some adjustments to the on -line
application guide.
Municipalities preparing to apply to the
Fund should consult the revised guide
before the May 1, 2009 deadline for project
applications. The guide is at
www.bcfontario.ca
For further information, please contact:
Canada- Ontario Infrastructure Secretariat
1 Stone Road West, 4th Floor NW
Guelph, Ontario N1G 4Y2
Phone: 1- 866 306 -7827
Fax: 519- 826 -4336
Email: BCF.CC@ontario.ca
Website: www.bcfontario.ca
Ontario
FONDS DE STIMULATION DE
L'INFRASTRUCTURE EN ONTARIO
AVIS AUX MAIRES ET ADMINISTRATEURS
PRINCIPAUX
Le 20 avril 2009
Suite au lancement provincial du Fonds de
stimulation de l'infrastructure, le 14 avril
dernier, les gouvernements du Canada et de
1'Ontario ont apporte des modifications au
guide de presentation des demandes, qui est
disponible sur Internet.
Les municipalites qui se preparent a
soumettre une demande de financement en
vertu du Fonds devraient consulter la
nouvelle version du guide avant le ler mai
prochain, date limite pour presenter une
demande de financement de projet. Le guide
est disponible a l'adresse suivante
www.bcfontario.ca
Pour obtenir davantage de renseignements,
veuillez vous adresser au
Secretariat de 1'Infrastructure Canada
Ontario
1, Stone Road West, 4e etage N. -O.
Guelph (Ontario) N1G 4Y2
Telephone 1- 866 306 -7827
Telecopieur 519 826 -4336
Courriel BCF.CC@ontario.ca
Site Web: www.bcfontario.ca
A
Mstxiallr,ti of r
MEMBER COMMUNICATION
To the attention of the Clerk and Council
April 15, 2009
200 University Ave, Suite 801
Toronto, ON M5H 3C6
Tel.: (416) 971 -9856 I Fax: (416) 971 -6191
E -mail: amo @amo.on.ca
ALERT N 09/023
FOR MORE INFORMATION CONTACT:
Craig Reid Senior Policy Advisor
(416) 971 -9856 ext 334
Component and Application Process for Infrastructure Stimulus Fund
Applications are due May 1, 2009
Issue:
Canada and Ontario Launch Intake 2 of BCF Communities
Federal and Provincial Ministers responsible for Infrastructure sent out joint letters today to heads of
council announcing the opening of intake 2 of the Communities Component of the Building Canada
Fund (BCF) and launched the application process for the Infrastructure Stimulus Fund. The deadline
for applying for both programs is May 1, 2009.
Background:
AMO has been advised that the application process for the Infrastructure Stimulus Fund is very simple
and that the application process for Intake 2 of the BCF Communities Component has been further
streamlined. Municipalities can apply for up to 3 projects under the Infrastructure Stimulus Fund.
Municipalities with populations under 100,000 can apply for the BCF Communities Component.
Note that for both programs, projects must be completed by March 31, 2011.
Municipalities will be required to attest that the projects would not have been built over the next two
construction seasons without the federal and provincial funding. Both programs require a one -third
municipal financial contribution.
A program guide and a very short application form for Stimulus Funding can be accessed at:
www.bcfontario.ca. You can also access application forms for the Communities Component of the
Building Canada Fund through this web site. Municipalities are encouraged to contact the Canada
Ontario Infrastructure Secretariat at 1- 866 306 -7827 to get a username and password to access the on-
line application form.
According to the letters, successful proponents will be notified quickly so that construction may begin.
Financial agreements will be signed between the Province of Ontario and municipalities. Prior to final
approval of funding and the conclusion of an agreement with the Province, the Municipality must
provide proof of Council support for the approved project and the municipal contribution.
Association of
1 Municipalities of Ontario
Eligible Categories:
The following are eligible project categories for Local Government Assets under the
Infrastructure Stimulus Fund:
Water and Waste Water Infrastructure
Public Transit Infrastructure
Local Road Infrastructure
Disaster Mitigation Infrastructure
Solid Waste Management Infrastructure
Brownfield Redevelopment Infrastructure
Cultural Infrastructure
Airport Infrastructure
Port and Cruiseship Infrastructure
Municipal Buildings
Parks and Trails
While new construction which can be completed by March 31, 2011 is eligible, the Governments of
Ontario and Canada advise that existing asset rehabilitation is the primary focus of the Infrastructure
Stimulus Fund program.
Under the BCF Communities Component Intake Two there are 18 project categories:
Brownfield Redevelopment
Collaborative Projects
Connectivity And Broadband
Core National Highway System
Culture
Disaster Mitigation
Drinking Water
Green Energy
Local And Regional Airports
Local Roads
Public Transit
Recreation *New*
Shortline Railways
Short-Sea Shipping
Solid Waste Management
Sport
Tourism
Wastewater Infrastructure
The "Recreation" category is a new addition under Intake Two of the BCF Communities Component.
Eligible municipalities with populations under 100,000 continue to be able to submit one application to
this program intake.
For further information, municipalities should review the web site www.bcfontario.ca or contact the
Canada Ontario Joint Secretariat at:
Building Canada Fund, Communities Component Joint Secretariat
1 Stone Road West, 4th Floor NW, Guelph, Ontario NIG 4Y2
Phone: 1- 866 306 -7827, Fax: 519 826 -4336, Email: BCF.CCna.ontario.ca
Action: For your information.
This information is available in the Policy Issues section of the AMO website at www. arno. on. ca.
Association of At
2 -2 Municipalities of Ontario
Impact on City Funding
Additional debentures reduced to $240,000
No impact on City funding -helps Club Italia
Eliminates City's $258,000 contribution
City funding reduced by $800,000 and
releases $800,000 for other projects
Additional debenture of $4 million eliminated
Additional debenture of $2.1 million
(eliminated
Additional debenture of $1 million eliminated
and releases $1.1 million for other projects
Additional debenture of $2.5 million
eliminated
Reduces City funding by $900,000
Reduces City funding by $200,000
;S03
1 700,000
1 000`000'Z
1 000'00£`Z
1,200,000
4,400,000
000`000`£
000`0017`£
000'000' I.1.
3,300,000
1,400,000
000'00
Achievable in 2 years?
seA
L seA
set
SBA
se,k
seA
s et
No, longer term project
seA
se,"
SOA
Project
'Fire Services
i
(Ly bd g gel) uolfe }S 01 suoltenoua >JI
'Municipal Works
Northwest Sanitary Service Area (Tab 3 pg. 62)
(Oakwood Drive Reconstruction (Tab 3 pg. 63)
Bridge Street Sewer Watermain- Victoria to Erie (Tab
3 pg. 85)
Desson Ave /Buchanan Ave /Slater Ave Storm
Separation (Tab 8 pg. All)
(Dixon Cul -de -Sac (Tab 8 pg. Al2)
Drummond Road Reconstruction (Tab 8 pg. A13)
(Morrison Street Rail Grade Separation (Tab 8 pg. A21)
Riall Street Sewer Separation (Tab 8 pg. A23)
Second Avenue Bridge Street to North Limit (Tab 8 pg.
A24)
Stanley Avenue (Somerville) Bridge Rehabilitation (Tab
8 pg. A25)
r
nfrastructure Stimulus Fund Potential Projects
1 Impact on City Funding
1 Additional debentures reduced to $500,000
Additional debentures reduced to $1 million 1
(Additional debentures reduced to $245,000
Additional debentures reduced to $2.5 million
Additional debentures reduced to $2 million 1
'Additional debentures reduced to $27,000
Additional debentures reduced to $100,000 1
'Additional debentures reduced to $165,000 1
'Additional debentures reduced to $300,000
'Additional debentures reduced to $70,000 1
Additional debentures reduced to $378,000 1
Additional debentures reduced to $60,000 1
Additional debentures reduced to $35,000 1
Eliminates City debentures of $313,000 1
Additional debentures reduced to $1 million 1
No impact on City funding
Additional debentures reduced to $1.4 million
;so3
000'00fi' l
L$ 3,100,000
735,000
7,500,000
000'006'9
000`08
000'00£
600,000
000`006
215,000
1,700,0001
175,000 1
100,000
1,500,0001
3,000,000 1
1,500,0001
000'00Z`17
Achievable in 2 years?
seA
Sa
S8A
seA
Yes, as per Boys Girls Club
set
SSA
SSA
saA
SSA
sa,
SBA
SSA
se,k
SeA
SSA
SO,k
;3alo.ed
'Transportation Services
Purchase of Transit Bus ITS Equipment (Tab 8 pg. A29)
'Transit Coaches -Coach Enhancement (Tab 8 pg. A31)
Transit Customer Connection Facility- Niagara Square
(Tab 8 pg. A32)
Transit Operations Facility (Tab 8 pg. A33)
'Parks, Recreation Culture
'Boys Girls Club (Tab 8 pg. A34)
I Garner Trail (Tab 8 pg. A41)
'George Bukator Park (Tab 8 pg. A43)
('v '6d 8 qel) at!S piellemeg eue1 s,Apun II
'Millennium Trail (Tab 8 pg. A45)
'Oakes Park Improvements (Tab 8 pg. A47)
'Patrick Cummings Sports Complex (Tab 8 pg. A48)
'Queen Street/PalmerAvenue Trail (Tab 8 pg.A49)
'Skate Park Facility (Tab 8 pg. A51)
'Museums
Lundy's Lane National Historic Site (Tab 8 pg. A56)
6 u!uueldl
'Sylvia Place Market Redevelopment (Tab 8 pg. A57)
'Additional Projects
Downtown Streetscaping
City Hall Additions /Old Courthouse Rehabilitation
A By -law to amend By -law No. 2007 -161, being a by -law to regulate the supply of water and to
provide for the maintenance and management of the waterworks and for the imposition and
collection of water rates.
WHEREAS Section 11 and Part III of the Municipal Act, 2001 authorize a municipality to pass
by -laws respecting matters within the sphere of jurisdiction of public utilities;
AND WHEREAS Section 391 of the Municipal Act, 2001 authorizes a municipality to pass by -laws
imposing fees and charges for the use of waste management systems, use of sewage systems or the
consumption of water.
THE COUNCIL OF THE CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF NIAGARA FALLS ENACTS
AS FOLLOWS:
1. By -law No. 2007 -161, is hereby amended by deleting the SCHEDULE OF RATES, FEES
AND CHARGES attached to it and substituting therefor Schedule "A" to this amending
by -law, being the Schedule of Water Rates, Sewer Rates, Fees and Charges.
2. Repeal By -law 2008-31
Passed this twenty- seventh day of April 2009.
DEAN IORFIDA, CITY CLERK R.T. (TED) SALCI, MAYOR
First Reading:
Second Reading:
Third Reading:
April 27, 2009
April 27, 2009
April 27, 2009
CITY OF NIAGARA FALLS
By -Law No. 2009 69
Schedule "A" to this amending By -Law No. 2009 -69
CITY OF NIAGARA FALLS
SCHEDULE OF RATES, FEES AND CHARGES
After Before
1. Service charges: Due Date Due Date
15 mm meter 24.55$ 23.38 monthly
18 mm meter 24.55$ 23.38 monthly
25 mm meter 24.55$ 23.38 monthly
37 mm meter 73.65$ 70.14 monthly
50 mm meter 147.29$ 140.28 monthly
75 mm meter 294.59$ 280.56 monthly
100 mm meter 540.08$ 514.36 monthly
150 mm meter $1,031.06$ 981.96 monthly
200 mm meter $1,841.18$1,753.50 monthly
250 mm meter $2,577.65$2,454.90 monthly
2. Water rates: After Before
Due Date Due Date
0.7982
3. Flat rates for a private water service not metered by choice or other determination of the City:
After Before
Due Date Due Date
48.49 46.19
0.7602 per cubic metre
138.57 monthly
145.48
4. Flat rates for a private water service not metered because of refusal of owner:
After Before
Due Date Due Date
monthly includes
30m3 of usage
5. Billing period:
Minimum of one month.
6. Service deposits:
3 x the rate
Two times the estimated billing for a billing period with a minimum of the amount of
$230.00.
7. Sewer rates:
(a) Service charge as set out in section 1: 91.5%
(b) Water rates as set out in section 2: 126.4%
(c) Flat rates as set out in sections 3 and 4: 108.7%
8. Charge for Installation of Water Service:
(a) 3/4" Service: $1,650.00
(b) Over 3/4" Service Actual cost Deposit required based on estimated costs.
9. Charge for shutting off or turning on _supply of water:
(a) During normal working hours: 55.00
(b) Outside normal working hours: 165.00
Note: For the purpose of this by -law, normal working hours shall mean Mondays to Fridays
(exclusive of holidays) between 8:00 a.m. and 4:00 p.m.
10. Charge for meter removal or reinstallation:
(a) During normal working hours:
(b) Outside normal working hours:
11. Charge for Testing Meter Consumption: At cost with a deposit of $75.00
12. Bulk carrier rate for City stand -pipe:
40.00 per hour /per city employee
100.00 per hour /per city employee
(a) For Water .95 per cubic metre
Cost plus 25%
(b) Service deposit: Based on estimated charges for two billing periods,
minimum of $500.00.
(c) Bulk water card purchase
-4-
$10.00
13. Use of Water for Construction Purposes:
(a) At rates shown in sections 1 and 2 together with the cost to supply and install a meter.
(b) Service Deposit: based on estimated charges for two billing periods; minimum of
$500.00.
14. Charge for private water service account transferred to tax account:
(a) Per transaction fee of $22.00
CITY OF NIAGARA FALLS
By -law No. 2009 70
A by -law to adopt, ratify and confirm the actions of City Council at its special meeting held on the
27 day of April, 2009.
WHEREAS it is deemed desirable and expedient that the actions and proceedings of Council as
herein set forth be adopted, ratified and confirmed by by -law.
NOW THEREFORE THE COUNCIL OF THE CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF
NIAGARA FALLS ENACTS AS FOLLOWS:
1. The actions of the Council at its special meeting held on the 27t day of April, 2009
including all motions, resolutions and other actions taken by the Council at its said meeting,
are hereby adopted, ratified and confirmed as if they were expressly embodied in this by -law,
except where the prior approval of the Ontario Municipal Board or other authority is by law
required or any action required by law to be taken by resolution.
2. Where no individual by -law has been or is passed with respect to the taking of any action
authorized in or with respect to the exercise of any powers by the Council, then this by -law
shall be deemed for all purposes to be the by -law required for approving, authorizing and
taking of any action authorized therein or thereby, or required for the exercise of any powers
thereon by the Council.
3. The Mayor and the proper officers of the Corporation of the City of Niagara Falls are hereby
authorized and directed to do all things necessary to give effect to the said actions of the
Council or to obtain approvals where required, and, except where otherwise provided, the
Mayor and the Clerk are hereby authorized and directed to execute all documents arising
therefrom and necessary on behalf of the Corporation of the City of Niagara Falls and to affix
thereto the corporate seal of the Corporation of the City of Niagara Falls.
Passed this twenty- seventh day of April, 2009.
DEAN IORFIDA, CITY CLERK R. T. (TED) SALCI, MAYOR
First Reading:
Second Reading:
Third Reading:
April 27, 2009
April 27, 2009
April 27, 2009