Loading...
Additions to Council, January 24,2012 ADDITIONS TO COUNCIL, MONDAY, JANUARY 24, 2011 PLANNING MATTERS Public Meeting 1. Correspondence from Christopher Dunn. MISCELLANEOUS PLANNING MATTERS 1. PD- 2012 -08 - Appeal of Committee of Adjustment Decision, Minor Variance Application, Montrose Road. a) Request for Deferral from applicant. RESOLUTIONS 1. Request from Councillor Wing for support on two future resolutions. BUDGET 1. Copy of the 2012 Operating Budget power point presentation (1/24/2012) Dean lorfida - Fwd: PD- 2012 -09 Willoughby Drive Page 1 From: Janice Wing <janice_wing @cogeco.ca> To: Alex Herlovitch <aherlovitch @niagarafalls.ca >, Dean lorfida <diorfida @ni... Date: 1/24/2012 2:22 PM Subject: Fwd: PD- 2012 -09 - Willoughby Drive Begin forwarded message: > From: "Dunn, Christopher" <cmdunn9 @yahoo.com> > Date: January 24, 2012 12:09:55 PM EST > To: "janice_wing @cogeco.ca" <janice_wing @cogeco.ca> > Subject: PD- 2012 -09 - Willoughby Drive > Reply -To: "Dunn, Christopher" <cmdunn9 @yahoo.com> > I was surprised to see this planning matter on tonight's agenda. This was the first I read about this matter. > Despite the Municipal Works glossing over the drainage issue on p2 of the report, I think that this needs to be examined further. > I cannot reconcile the communications received from City Hall, regarding the request to spend thousands of dollars modifying the perfectly functional drainage system on my land (W of the hydro corridor along Willoughby Drive), to alleviate drainage issues elsewhere, with this development proposal. In appearance, one could interpret this as asking existing landowners to foot the bill to allow developers greater profit. > Additionally it is my understanding that during wet events (like yesterday) combined sewer overflow continues to be discharged untreated into the river near Sarah Street. Until this problem is completely rectified I cannot see how the city can permit further development, and further stress on the drainage system, in this area of Chippawa. > Thank you for your time listening to my concerns. > Regards, > Christopher Dunn (1/24/2012) Dean lorfida - Re: PD- 2012 -08, CofA Appeal Page 1 From: Alex Herlovitch To: Bob Bolibruck; Dean Iorfida CC: Sue Scerbo Date: 1/24/2012 12:37 PM Subject: Re: PD- 2012 -08, CofA Appeal Dean There is no problem with delaying this report until Feb 14 as I don't think a Board hearing will be scheduled between now and then. The appeal is probably chugging its way along at the Board in their usual processing time frame. If on Feb 14 Council decides to withdraw the appeal we can inform the Board at that time. Alex »> Dean Iorfida 1/23/2012 11:08 AM »> I spoke to John Ventresca, the applicant on the matter scheduled for Council tomorrow evening. Mr. Ventresca is requesting a deferral until the February 14th meeting, so he can have legal counsel (Rocky Vacca) available. I will notify the Mayor and Council through their additions and during the meeting. Sue, can you notify the appellant. Thanks Dean (1/24/2012) Dean Iorfida - resolutions for this evening Page 1 From: Janice Wing <janice_wing @cogeco.ca> To: Dean Iorfida <diorfida©niagarafalls.ca> Date: 1/24/2012 2:18 PM Subject: resolutions for this evening Hi Dean, Can you please help me finish preparing a resolution? I am seeking Council's support for two resolutions outlined below: 1) Requesting the Province (specifically, the Ministry of Consumer Services) to re- examine the 1999 VQA Act, particularly with regard to extending VQA benefits to other made -in- Ontario wines; the alternative of setting up a comparable regulator for other wine products produces 100% in Ontario from 100% Ontario products; and allowing 100% Ontario - produced fruit wines to be sold at farmers' markets. I offer the following points from a January 16th Financial Post article: http : / /business.financialpost.com /2012/01 /16 /the - forbidden - fruit/ Non -grape wines don't qualify and in addition to giving up the majority of the revenue they generate outside their own vineyards, those who fail to qualify for VQA status cannot put "made in Ontario" on their labels. There were 206 licensed wineries in Ontario as of Sept. 30, 2011 ... [of which only] (124) were members of the VQA ...[The Province should] consider broadening its membership criteria to include other made -in- Ontario wines such as fruit wines. Those frustrated with such statements go beyond Ontario's 27 licensed fruit wineries [and include a producer of] maple syrup -based wine. "The playing field for wineries in Ontario is not level. There are rules that apply to the influential wineries and rules that apply to everybody else." [Alternately, the Province could] create an Ontario fruit wines regulator comparable to the VQA [such as the already - developed] certification process called FWQC or Fruit Wine Quality Certification ... completely and absolutely based on VQA. [Additionally] in late 2009, a Progressive Conservative private members bill that would have allowed fruit wines to be sold at farmers markets was shot down at the committee level despite making it through two of three necessary readings and four other provinces already allowing the practice. The defeat of Bill 132 was due to "political game playing" and was "strictly vengeance," one Liberal MPP said at the time ... [Currently such producers can only] sell their wines at their production sites and to bars and restaurants (provided they can afford to give most of that revenue to the LCBO). [In a province grappling with high unemployment, the current restrictions are unsupportable:] "I'm in a situation where I have lots of product to sell and lots of people to buy, but no way to sell it ... by law we have to use 100% Ontario fruit so we are 100% Ontario product. Why aren't we given the same privileges? ... If we had, for example, the ability to sell our wines in Peterborough, Toronto, Ottawa, London or Kingston, how much more wine would we sell? ... "How much more fruit, Ontario fruit, would we purchase and how much more tax would we pay ?" [Ontario needs to give solid consideration to the leadership of] other provinces including Alberta and British Columbia [which] have liberalized their alcohol control laws to make them more attractive to all aspiring winemakers — grape -based and otherwise. (1/24/2012) Dean lorfida - resolutions for this evening Page 2 i I see opportunities here for further strengthening and growing our local /regional Agricultural sector. Niagara being one of only three areas in all of Canada which has the soils and climate needed to support a tender fruit industry, it is an innate advantage that we, regionally, should capitalize on further. I am considering the indirect manufacturing sector and agri- tourism benefits as well as the direct opportunities this might open up. 2) I would also like to send a resolution in support of Federal Private members' bill C- 311and call upon the federal government to remove the trade restrictions which prevent Ontario - produced wines and beers from being sold in, or even shipped to, other Canadian provinces as outlined in this October 1, 2011 National Post article: http:/ /news. nationalpost.com /2011 /10/01 /b -c -mp- takes - aim -at- prohibition- era - wine -law/ Conservative MP for Okanagan - Coquihalla Dan Albas' private member's bill, "a modest proposal" [to amend an] "antiquated law," [namely] The Importation of Intoxicating Liquors Act, passed in 1928 to clamp down on bootlegging, [which makes it] illegal to ship wine to other provinces unless the wine is exported by their liquor boards. [The bill seeks to permit Canadians] to be able to enjoy wines from the different provinces they visit [and enjoy] a general exemption for personal use. Thanks! janice Ni;igardJUU1Is City of Niagara Falls 2012 Operating Budget January 24, 2012 Budget Process to Date { [ Department Budget's prepared based on: • Maintaining Core Service Levels • Reviewing Expenditures from bottom up • Preliminary reductions in expenditures made • Include new expenditures on operational needs • Budget Binders 1 Proposed Review Process .;; ;,;,.,,,, • Discussion will focus on Operational Expenditures • Review Categories: Labour, Materials & Debt Services • Departmental Review — by Responsibility Centre • Discuss Non -Tax Revenues • Discuss Tax Levy Impacts 2007 -2011 Budget Expenditures 100 95 Atageir Afffnr fa6.to 02 al MU 90 f90.to Millions 85 $4212 80. 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2 2011 Expenses by Department Total Expense for 2011 $95.1 million ■City Cau,dI, Commllt.s Bo.rda 8 S.rvlce. - $sg mllllon 199% p Adminslrelive SeMC.e - S25 2 mllllon 9.l!% 627% - 11.4Y4 - ■ Flr. S.MCCa and Bullding S.rvic.c - S20 3 ■; 4 2 71 2 pal Works, Parke 8 C.mulerlee 821.2 mlIRen ■TransparUiwn- St1]milllon n 29% JR.er.adan & Gulhue -89.9 mlklon 21. J Pla nning S.MC.. and Bui.n... DevelapmeM - 41.9 mllllon Budget Inclusions Niaga • Increased Operating Expenditures for Gale Centre • Increased Insurance & Risk Management Expenditures • Increased Debt Servicing Charges • Maintain Level of Capital Funding • Initial Cost of V.T.S (Visitor Transportation System) • Full Cost of I.M.T. (Inter - municipal Transportation System 3 Budget Exclusions `'`'Pa'J' • Increased Expenditure for Road Patching & Overlay • Implementation of New Transit Plan • Increases in Capital Funding • New Salary Positions Other Related Budget \,:, -� Initiatives • 10 Year Capital Needs • Debt Management Strategy 4 Next Steps ",, j ' .F, 1 January 31St - Review Expenditures by Category February 14th - Continuation of Expenditure Review February 28th - Review Non -Tax Revenues and Impacts on Levy %1 g:u of.t11 Questions? 5