REFERRAL
RENVOI
CITY COUNCIL
CONSEIL MUNICIPAL
1. OFFICE OF THE AUDITOR
GENERAL - 2008 DETAILED AUDIT REPORTS: AUDITS REFERRED TO CORPORATE SERVICES AND ECONOMIC
DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE FOR REVIEW
Bureau du vérificateur général - RAPPORTs DE
VÉRIFICATION DÉTAILLÉs 2008: VÉRIFICATION RENVOYER AU COMITÉ DES SERVICES ORGANISATIONNELS ET DU DÉVELOPPEMENT
ÉCONOMIQUE POUR
REVUE
ACS2010-CCS-CPS-0002 CITY
WIDE / À L'ÉCHELLE DE LA VILLE
Councillor Wilkinson questioned why the Information Technology (IT) and Hospitality and
Ethics reports were not listed as part of this report. Alain
Lalonde, Auditor General,
believed these two audits had been completed in early 2009, but that the audits currently before
Committee were those tabled at
Council in November 2009. He offered to report on the IT and Hospitality
audits at the next meeting. Councillor Wilkinson requested that an update
be provided at the CSEDC meeting in March.
Responding to questions from
Councillor Wilkinson with respect to the Grants and
Contribution audit, Steve Kanellakos, Deputy City Manager, City Operations, explained that half of
the recommendations had already been
implemented and those remaining
will be coordinated with a project officer who will work on the various
departmental grants and contributions, to
apply the same policies that were applied elsewhere. In addition, a
consolidated list will be implemented this year and will be accessible to the public as well as internal staff.
In reference to the
acquisition of tickets for certain events, Mr. Lalonde advised that the audit had shown that the City was inconsistent in requesting tickets, which amounted to an issue of monitoring, and he
recommended that procedures be implemented. Mr. Kanellakos exclaimed that
this practice is now occurring, in that staff are monitoring and
recording the tickets on file.
For subsidized housing, Councillor Wilkinson inquired if there is a
process to monitor changes to
residents’ incomes, to ensure that units become available to those who are on
the waiting list. Mr. Kanellakos advised that the social housing audit
will be considered at the Community and Protective Services Committee and
suggested that the question may be out of order at present.
Regarding sick leave management, Councillor Wilkinson suggested
that the duration of average
sick leaves were on the rise and she expressed concern with the
fact that Human Resources staff were
not managing it, but rather, were placing the onus on
managers. Mr. Kanellakos pointed
out that on average, sick leave usage has gone down over the years as noted in the following annual
statistics between 2004 and 2008:
·
2004 – 11.02 days
·
2005 – 10.27 days
·
2006 – 10.07 days
·
2007 – 10.64 days
·
2008 – 9.91 days
Mr. Kanellakos explained the matter in this audit relates to control
and monitoring aspects to ensure
compliance. The approach taken speaks
to the manager’s responsibility to monitoring staff sick leave and to
follow the Attendance Management Program. He recognized that Human
Resources should have the role of collecting the overall data through the Occupational Health and
Wellness Group. He added that staff acknowledged that there have
been issues with consistency in the
application of this program across the whole Corporation, but noted that
Ottawa’s sick leave usage is equal to that of most major
municipalities in Ontario. Toronto had been cited as a model, although its Transit Commission operations
were not included in that city’s audit.
In response to a question by the Councillor regarding “moonlighting”, John Manconi, General Manager, Public Works,
advised that a proposal was sent to the IBM Efficiency Program to look at
royalties on all City assets.
Currently, he believed the only patent in place was on the push buttons at pedestrian signals, but said he would confirm if the City receives royalties for
this. In addition, Mr. Kent
Kirkpatrick, City Manager,
advised that he was not aware if other municipalities have been able to market
their technologies. He offered to follow up with Councillor Wilkinson on the issues of proprietary information, intellectual corporate property,
innovations and other areas.
Councillor Wilkinson confirmed that the labour relations issues have been dealt with.
Mr. Rick O’Connor, City Clerk and Solicitor, advised
that he will be reporting in April on the revised Employee Code of Conduct.
On the subject of staff web
logging (blogging) on City time, Mr. Kanellakos clarified
that one case had been investigated,
as a result of a Fraud and Waste hotline complaint, but that filters and
security on the system would no longer
allow employees to blog, access Facebook,
Twitter or any other kinds of blog sites. Councillor Wilkinson felt that staff should be able
to blog under certain
circumstances such as health (i.e. H1N1). Mr. Kanellakos advised
that Guy Michaud, Chief Information Officer and Chris Day, Chief Corporate
Communications, are of the view
that the City has to move into
this area, but he noted, as did
the Auditor General, that there
are possibilities of abuse in these areas. From Communications’ perspective, he concurs with both Senior Officers
that the City needs to move in this
area if the City wants effectively
communicate with a generations that uses this as its main stream of communication. He noted that Mr. Michaud
will be actively reviewing this area in 2010.
Councillor Bloess asked if staff would be reporting, confidentially, on the issue regarding
an employee who was trying to help manage sick leave. Mr. O’Connor
offered to report on this issue either
at the current meeting or at
Council’s meeting of 24 February, given that this issue had been raised at a previous Council meeting.
Councillor Bloess noted that moonlighting and corporate risk issues had raised a great deal lot of negative
attention and discussion. He
recalled discussions on
selling systems or equipment and services to other municipalities, which were not included in the
report. Mr. Lalonde advised that no evidence was found that the City
received revenue or benefits from
City-developed technology. Mr. Manconi confirmed that staff are currently in negotiations with the National Capital Commission (NCC) regarding a request by the NCC asking that the City take control of the
system on the Champlain Bridge, which will provide the City with a revenue-generating opportunity. Preliminary discussions have
begun with Gatineau and Quebec City with respect to the City’s system, and staff are
currently reviewing the mechanisms currently
in place.
Councillor Bloess clarified that
aside from the issue of employees “moonlighting” for personal benefit on City
time, he was referring to the issue of the City benefitting from the sales of
its technological systems under which it was obliged to be involved,
contractually, with other municipalities. Mr. Manconi said he was not aware
of arrangements where revenue from any activities were being benefitted from.
Councillor Desroches spoke of the sick leave management report and
its recommendations for additional oversight but asked about methodology,
noting that there seems to be a narrow scope of comparisons. Mr. Lalonde
explained that the sick leave management report was reviewed by management for
approximately nine weeks. He noted that this issue had been raised by the City Manager and Deputy City Manager a few weeks earlier, but he felt that is should have been raised earlier still, allowing him an opportunity to
adjust the report accordingly. He said
he would have compared Ottawa
with the City of Toronto, excluding its Transport Commission. He confirmed that this will be done for future audits.
Councillor Desroches pointed
out that it had taken several years for
Ontario Municipal Benchmarking Initiatives (OMBI) performance
measures to become precise and useable. He hoped that future work with staff involving comparators would allow for enough time to ensure
they are precise. In terms of human
resources’ performance measures the
Councillor asked if he could be provided with performance measures in regard to
the annual City report publishing positions within the City.
Mr. Kanellakos confirmed that Human Resources provides a
dashboard of indicators to managers showing
how this is being managed by
departments and by branches. He
noted this information is not provided other than in an
OMBI context and for human resources benchmarking
initiatives comparing Ottawa to
other cities, but he noted that this
could be an improvement for staff.
Councillor Desroches believed there is a need for improved oversight, although he said he was pleased to hear that these numbers were being tracked at a management level. The Councillor suggested that
a report be provided to CSEDC in order to examine trends, and to ensure they are going in the right direction.
Mr. Kanellakos noted that the Auditor General had raised a good point in terms of the responsibility of shared
services from a governance or monitoring perspective
to provide management with appropriate assessment tools and to have access to the information required. He added that
automated sick leave improvements will be implemented.
Councillor Chiarelli indicated that audit reports often reveal
negative issues conducted by a minority
of staff, and although such matters are important to address,
he believed the reports were
created to find structural issues that could be evaluated and converted into
savings for taxpayers. He questioned if the Terms of Reference
could be amended in order to review
such things as departmental structure, different employee functions and if
necessary, find alternate ways
of performing such functions in ways that would provide better
value for money. Mr. Kirkpatrick opined that the Auditor General’s office performs well against its Terms of Reference,
adding that staff concur with most of his
recommendations. He indicated that the Auditor General will update the
Committee later this year on follow-up
audits on how management has
done, and expressed confidence
that the report will outline that
management has done well,
because he noted the
recommendations are taken seriously. He concluded that if Council feels the
Terms of Reference should be reviewed, an external process would be in
order.
Mr. Lalonde then
outlined the process that would be required to change the Terms of Reference through this Committee, which would ultimately change
the By-law governing the Office of the Auditor General
(OAG). He offered to meet with Councillors individually, through a
direction from Committee, to propose recommendations to the
mandate. He reflected that the mandate of the OAG is to ensure compliance with policy and assess value for money, noting he had
submitted proposed savings to Committee and Council in the past.
Councillor Chiarelli thanked Mr. Lalonde and advised that he will follow up
with the Auditor General off-line.
In reference to the Summary of Key Findings, Councillor McRae expressed concern that the accounting
for the funding programs was inconsistent, and she asked if
cost savings and increased
accountability could be found by having accounting systems in
place. Mr. Lalonde clarified that this related to the grants audit in
terms of the various accounting systems in
place. He advised that there is
room for improvement to facilitate accounting the grants within the financial
statements. He also recommended implementing
an “at a glance” system to see where money was being spent, how much was being allocated and what criteria were involved. During the audit, Mr. Lalonde commented that
it was difficult to collect the necessary
information, as it was scattered
in different accounts. He added that without interfering with the
organization, there needs to be a way
of ensuring that the people receiving the money are managing the grants
properly.
Councillor McRae recalled that this same issue had been discussed during the 2003,
2004 and 2005 audits. She
asked if there are opportunities for more accountability or cost savings by
putting better measures in place. Mr. Lalonde agreed, adding that a
better understanding of where
the money is going will be achieved
if a general approach is put in place for all grants. He explained that
the grants issue appears to be divided in two, with the Community Funding
aspect being better managed than the rest of the grants within
the Corporation.
Mr. Lalonde also
believed that staff are in support of his
recommendations. Councillor McRae believed that Councillors should be
made aware immediately if projects are not in compliance, rather than waiting to see the results in an audit report.
She asked how this will be monitored.
Mr. Lalonde reiterated Mr. Kanellakos’ earlier comments that the OAG will
prepare a yearly follow-up to
provide information on the status of
previous audits. He added that staff have
followed up on all audits since 2005.
Councillor McRae noted that managers agreed with most of the
recommendations within the audit reports to date but suggested that a conclusion should be included in the
reports as well. Mr. Kirkpatrick commented that management was not
proud of this audit, in terms of its response and offered that as City Manager, he should possibly
have found other ways to manage
it. He indicated that the Council Audit Working Group had been created for the purpose of
tracking and reporting on areas of
non-compliance on a quarterly basis, with a status report to highlight such areas.
With respect to community grants, Councillor McRae asked what
mechanisms could be put in place to
identify misused funds. Mr. Lalonde had determined that in some
cases, agreements had not been properly completed or
signed. He felt that an audit clause should be included on the agreement form, to indicate both the
amount and the purpose for which money is being allocated. He also suggested that active monitoring be
conducted by reviewing the
minutes of the organizations’ meetings.
Councillor McRae recalled
that a motion had been passed
during the last budget to include an audit clause in every community
grant. Mr. Lalonde advised that some grant applications did not contain
an audit clause.
In summary, Councillor McRae commented that both the City and the
organizations have an obligation to follow
through with an agreement and said she
did not think staff should be expected to continuously review and monitor groups’ activities at all times.
Councillor Desroches advised that Treasury Board has a centralized
policy on grants and contributions, in
that regardless of where a grant is allocated, all departments have to
respect the terms and references set in policy. Although some
organizations may be small and
may not have the administrative resources to accommodate a cumbersome agreement process, the Councillor felt
that the City should be
accountable to the taxpayer to ensure that
funds are properly allocated.
As a result of this audit, he asked if there will be a centralized policy for
all branches to follow on proper accountability policies.
Mr. Kanellakos pointed out that the audit clause is included in all
recent grant applications. The portion of the grants
and contributions on Cultural and Community Funding
have a follow-up and involve an annual reporting process before additional grants can be allocated. In addition, there are mechanisms in place to review the financial
statements and Board Minutes for larger grants but smaller amounts are unlikely to involve a follow up mechanism.
He rationalized that some are difficult to track because of the social nature
of the contracts, given that some of the money goes towards core funding for operational costs and less around
outcomes, depending on the type of funding agreement. He maintained that
since 2003, Community and Cultural funding have implemented all recommendations
put forward by previous and current
Auditors General.
Referencing Community Funding
grants, Councillor El-Chantiry felt that not all applicants should be labelled the
same way. He explained that some grants are given to rural community
centres that run their own
programs and facilities with City grants. He wanted to ensure that
volunteers did not feel they would
have to spend money to hire a lawyer or an auditor to review all grant application forms. He
advised that he was not in support with centralizing the policy.
Mr. Kirkpatrick did not believe that the Auditor’s recommendations
were implying such an unbalanced
framework and assured that
management would have an
appropriate balance. He advised that staff will carefully review the framework
for all City grant programs.
In response to a question from Councillor El-Chantiry, Mr.
Kanellakos acknowledged that
filling out forms is a burdensome
problem for smaller
organizations, but speaks to a
balance between accountability and the ability of organizations to access
money.
Councillor Cullen noted that issues of accountability have always
been a part of the requirement
for giving out contributions and grants. While acknowledging that accountability is required, the
Councillor noted that services
also need to be delivered.
Acknowledging this was a balancing act,
he suggested that smaller organizations depending on volunteers could
not be expected to have dedicated
staff on hand to satisfy the City’s bureaucratic need for oversight.
In light of the foregoing,
Councillor McRae requested clarification that Mr. Lalonde’s recommendations were not to encumber smaller
organizations with bureaucracy. Mr. Lalonde referred to the annual
report, noting that the
conclusion states: “these areas should be examined bearing in mind the small
size and limited resources of the organizations and the desire to avoid
over-burdening it with bureaucracy and inflexible rules”.
Councillor McRae inquired of Mr. Kanellakos whether, as part of his follow-up, there would be a proposed grant threshold to trigger a review by the Auditor
General or a Committee to ensure that audited statements are expected.
Mr. Kanellakos noted that the threshold is currently $25,000 for the Community Funding grants,
where it is expected that anything above that amount will have audited statements from the requesting organization. He added that the issue was primarily one involving smaller,
volunteer-based recreation-type association grants.
At the end of the meeting, Committee moved in-camera at 2:40
p.m. to further discuss the item.
Moved by
R. Bloess,
That the meeting of the
Corporate Services and Economic Development Committee move In Camera pursuant to Section
13 (1) (b), personal matters about an identifiable individual and (d), Labour relations or employee
negotiations.
CARRIED
That the Corporate Services and Economic Development Committee receive and review the
following Audits, as included in the Auditor General’s 2008 Detailed Audit
Reports and as referred by Council at its meeting of 25 November 2009;
·
Grants and Contributions
·
Year-End Spending 2004-2007
·
Sick Leave Management
·
Moonlighting and Corporate Risk Issues
– Traffic Operations Division
·
Allegation of Blogging on City
Work Time
·
2008 Annual Report on the Fraud
and Waste Hotline
·
Incremental Costs of the Transit
Strike
and report back to Council at its
meeting of 24 February 2010.
RECEIVED
DIRECTION TO STAFF :
1.
The
Auditor General to provide an update on the IT and Hospitality audits at the 3 March
2010 Corporate Services and Economic Development Committee meeting.
2. The City Clerk and Solicitor and the Deputy
City Manager of City Operations to further discuss the financial records of the
groups receiving grants from the City.
CITY MANAGER’S OFFICE
BUREAU DU DIRECTEUR MUNICIPAL
finance
department
SERVICES FINANCIERS
2. SINKING
FUND LEVIES
taxes aux fins du fONDS D'AMORTISSEMENT
That Corporate Services and Economic Development Committee and
Council receive this report for information.
RECEIVED
3. Status Report - Provincial Offences Act Defaulted Fines
RAPPORT D’
éTAPE - AMENDES IMPAYéES ENCOURUES EN VERTU DE LA LOI SUR LES INFRACTIONS PROVINCIALES
ACS2010-CMR-FIN-0007 CITY WIDE/À L'ÉCHELLE DE
LA VILLE
As Chair of the Ottawa Police Services Board, Councillor El-Chantiry
informed the Committee that the City of Toronto and its Police Services Board
contacted him regarding the collection of fines, noting that Ottawa was doing a
great job in this area. The Councillor
asked if there was a collective effort from all the municipalities to work with
the Province in order to receive more power in allowing to collect unpaid
fines, and highlighted that other Provinces, such as Quebec, have greater power
than Ontario in this area. Ken Hughes,
Deputy City Treasurer, Revenue advised that there had been some communication
with the Toronto Police Services Board (TPSB) and some of the province-wide
organizations on a collective effort to identify some of the changes they would
like to see in the legislation.
Councillor El-Chantiry pointed out that the call from the TPSB initially
looked at requests from other municipalities in asking the Province to
negotiate data transfer agreements with other Provinces on their license
database. He highlighted that the City
of Ottawa is seeking over and above the additional enforcement options, such as
the ability to stop a vehicle if there are significant unpaid fines on the
vehicle.
In response to a question by the Councillor about the staff increase
in the Collections Unit, Mr. Hughes recalled that additional Full Time
Equivalents (FTEs) were approved in the last two budgets and their collections
efforts were above that anticipated. He
added that another group of FTE’s approved this year will be hired to fill the
new positions and will be assigned to carrying out the collection strategy on
parking tickets, which was piloted in 2009.
Councillor El-Chantiry asked for clarification on separating the
traffic parking violations versus the Highway
Traffic Act (i.e. speeding). Mr.
Hughes noted that the staff report only deals with provincial offenses, such as
speeding fines, trespassing of property, failure to provide proof of insurance,
and liquor license offenses. He
clarified that the purpose of the report was to remove uncollectible fines,
which amount to $12 million, from the database.
In response to further questions, Mr. Hughes confirmed that if
individuals neglect to pay the fines within the ninety day period, it is the
City’s responsibility to collect. He
noted that smaller fines are given to a collection agency, whereas larger ones
are done internally.
In terms of the outstanding provincial offences totalling $51
million, Mr. Hughes explained that the City is able to locate individuals that
are responsible for fines totalling $24 million. He added that certain procedures are
periodically used when individuals cannot pay, such as ceasing assets,
garnishment of salary, or a third party demand on their bank account.
In response to a question from Councillor Monette, Mr. Hughes
indicated that there are fines that are issued under approximately 70 Provincial Acts, which would include
fishing without a license, liquor license, and speeding, the latter being the
most significant. At amalgamation, the
Province downloaded $24 million outstanding provincial offence fines that the
City initiated collection action on.
Mr. Hughes also added that the first 25 cents of every dollar is
collected by the Province for the victim fine surcharge fund, and the remaining
money is provided to the municipality.
Councillor Monette confirmed that staff are
asking to dismiss the uncollectible fines.
Mr. Hughes clarified that under the Provincial Offences Act, these fines would
always be attached to the person and will continue to be tracked. The report is asking to remove the fines from
the overall total so that they no longer appear in the annual report. When staff provide
performance reports, it will be measured against the true amount of fines that
are outstanding and collectible.
With regard to the $12 million of uncollectable fines, some date
back to 1970 and not enough detail is provided to allow staff to locate these
individuals. Mr. Hughes added that if
any of the individuals commit another offence and a fine is issued, then those
fines that have been struck off the list will be brought back and staff will
attempt collection.
Councillor Monette wondered why the City cannot collect from the
estate when a person is deceased. Mr.
Hughes noted that under the limitation clauses, if staff
determine that someone has passed away and the estate has been settled,
there are no longer options to collect.
Additionally, processes are available where newly deceased individuals
are identified but the City has no claim on the estate of the individuals that
passed away between 1970 and 2001.
In terms of individuals who moved to other provinces such as Quebec,
Mr. Hughes reported that there is an agreement with the Province of Quebec that
allows Ottawa staff to access their database and their collection records. He added that agreements are not in place
with the United States and most other Provinces due to economics with the
exception of Provinces adjacent to Ontario.
Councillor Monette asked if it would be worth looking at involving all
Provinces in Canada and what it would cost to implement. Mr. Hughes explained that staff
have the ability with some Provinces under access to information to
apply and retrieve the ownership information.
That has been successfully done in the past.
In further response to Councillor Monette, Mr. Hughes assured fines
are levied against an individual and they remain for life, adding that the
Ottawa Police have access to the City’s database.
Councillor Desroches claimed that people are not happy to pay fines,
but would be more upset knowing that some individuals are getting away with not
paying. He questioned if there was a way
to cross reference the fines to other areas such as tax bills or permit
applications. Mr. Hughes advised there
are limitations that are placed on the City by the Municipal Freedom of Information and Privacy Protection Act (MFIPPA)
legislation. He highlighted that when
the Ministry of the Attorney General sent an auditor to review the records, and
in looking at how staff were complying with the
agreements, it was noted that the collection results on the transfer of fines
were the best rates in the Province. As
mentioned at the outset, the additional enforcement options that were requested
will help to ensure that as many people as possible pay their fines.
Councillor Brooks noticed that third party collection agencies are used
and asked what percentage is paid to these agencies. Mr. Hughes stated that three collection
agencies are used, which were hired through a competitive process, and the
arrangements are different with each agency.
As well, the costs associated with collection and court
are added to the amounts that have to be remitted by the offender.
Councillor Brooks’ final question was about the success to date of
Paytickets.ca. Mr. Hughes announced that
Ottawa is one of the first municipalities to use this service and it has been a
successful way of collecting payment for outstanding fines.
That the Corporate Services and Economic Development Committee
recommend Council approve ceasing collections activity on the uncollectible Provincial Offences Act defaulted fines identified in this report pursuant to
directives from the Ministry of the Attorney General.
CARRIED with Councillors Monette and Chair Jellett dissenting.
4. GENERAL
ACCOUNTS – WRITE OFFS 2009
COMPETES GéNéRAUX – RADIATIONS POUR 2009
ACS2010-CMR-FIN-0006 CITY
WIDE/À L'ÉCHELLE DE LA VILLE
That Corporate Services and Economic Development Committee and Council
receive this report on 2009 general accounts written off as required by Schedule A, section 21 and 23 of the Delegation of Authority By-law
2009 - 231 for information.
RECEIVED
REAL ESTATE PARTNERSHIP AND
DEVELOPMENT OFFICE
BUREAU
PARTENARIATS ET DÉVELOPPEMENT EN IMMOBILIÉRS
Moved by R.
Chiarelli
That the Corporate Services and Economic
Development Committee approve the addition of the above-noted item for
consideration by the Committee at today’s meeting, pursuant to Section 84(3) of
the Procedure By-Law.
CARRIED
5. RFP PROCESS - EXPOSITION HALL FACILITY
PROCESSUS DE DP - ESPACE D’EXPOSITION
ACS2010-CMR-REP-0009 CITY WIDE/À L'ÉCHELLE DE
LA VILLE
Councillor Desroches raised a Point of Order
with respect to the urgency of this report being considered at this
meeting. He raised the fact that
commitments were made previously to engage the industry in the consultation
process and by considering the report at this meeting would not provide an
opportunity for delegations to be heard, given the lack of time the report was
distributed. He suggested that Committee
hear the presentation from staff and then return in March to consider the item.
Gord MacNair, Director of Real Estate Partnerships and Development
Office explained that the Lansdowne Partnership Plan was approved in November
2009 with a staff direction to prepare a two-step process in order to receive an
expression of interest and then the RFP process upon approval by Committee and
Council in June 2010. Staff realized
that there was insufficient time to proceed with a two-step process; therefore,
staff have recommended a one-step process in order to
make the June deadline. A full
explanation is provided on page 7 of the staff report.
Chair Jellett asked if the Ottawa Association
of Exposition Managers (OAEM) were aware of this change in process. Mr. MacNair advised that they consulted with
OAEM, who are in favour of the one-step process and were present at the meeting.
The Committee agreed to proceed with the item
and heard from staff on the PowerPoint presentation, which is held on file with
the City Clerk and Solicitor. Also in
attendance were Chris Cope, Manager of Economic Development, Rick Haycock, Program Manager of Lansdowne Park, Ben Swanson and Howard
Grant, Procurement Consultants with PPI.
Councillor Brooks referred to page 11 which states
that there are no financial implications; however, he pointed out that on page
7 under 2.4 Financing, the second paragraph states that
there are financial implications. Mr.
MacNair advised that the financial implications are tied into the mandatory
criteria, which is part of the process. In
June 2010, the successful proposal that will include the financial implications
will be determined. For clarification
purposes, Mr. MacNair referred to the PowerPoint presentation, noting that there
are currently not enough funds to cover the costs of construction, operation
and management of the facility. He noted
that the City could consider subsidizing the facility.
Councillor Brooks wondered if the City was
getting into a practice of regularly subsidizing when large projects are
undertaken. Kent Kirkpatrick, City
Manager responded that it is not staff’s perspective on that issue, noting that
it is a unique situation with each project.
The City Manager reminded the Committee that Council directed staff to
provide a report, which assessed the value of the industry that would provide
support and growth with a new facility, and that would provide Council context
in order to consider whatever financial commitment may be proposed by the lead
proponent.
Councillor Brooks agreed with the City Manager
but he encouraged his colleagues to look at all the projects and how they fit
in financially. He understood that the
City has the flexibility to debt-finance many projects but considered that it
may not be the best way. Mr. Kirkpatrick
recommended that Council needed to have a longer term understanding of what its
capital priorities are and what it meant in terms of its current ability to
finance a capital program of that size.
On the issue of timing, Chris Cope, Manager of
Economic Development noted that the Economic Development Department
commissioned a study, which is currently underway that will consider the direct
and indirect benefits to the City on a project such as this. The study will look at economic uplift as
well as social benefits and this study will be presented as part of a report to
Council in June, in order to consider what would be developed through this RFP
process in the context of the benefit to the City and the community.
In response to questions from Councillor
Wilkinson, Mr. MacNair advised that the intent would be a lease facility for 30
years, depending on how the proposal is structured. Mr. Haycock added that these types of
facilities are generally publicly owned, noting the privately owned facilities
are scarce and tend to be located in larger metropolitan areas, such as
Toronto.
In reference to the LRFP and earlier comments
by Councillor Brooks, Councillor Wilkinson highlighted that the City tends to acquire
new projects that are not part of the original LRFP. Although these projects are likely to be
debt-financed, she noted her concern was with how much the City was getting
into. Mr. Kirkpatrick emphasized that in
most cases, staff provide Council the financial implications in a staff report,
including Council’s fiscal policy framework or the LRFP. Upon entering the fourth year of this term of
Council, Mr. Kirkpatrick realized that some of the framework was dated,
and as time lapses, there are more initiatives or requirements identified that
were not known or included in the LRFP originally.
Mr. Kirkpatrick proposed a suggestion that
Council recommend to the new Council in 2010, the final review of governance
issues and include the LRFP, which is currently part of the government’s
framework, and it would provide them with context for setting their priorities
for their term of Council. At mid-term
of Council, Mr. Kirkpatrick advised that Council could re-visit the plan mid-term
and ensured that the 10-year framework remains current for the decisions and
the priorities that Council has set in the last second half of its mandate.
Councillor Wilkinson thought initially that the
LRFP would be refreshed annually. She reiterated
her concern with the City’s commitment to huge projects. She asked if it was clear in the RFP that there
is a possibility of not building a facility.
If Council decides not to approve it, she asked what that meant legally
for the City. Mr. Kirkpatrick assured Committee
that it will be clear in the report and added that the RFP was also tied into
the Lansdowne future project.
In addition, the City Manager highlighted that
in the P3 realm, Council’s motion was to direct staff to commence an RFP for
the construction, operation and finance of a trades and consumer show
facility. Mr. Kirkpatrick indicated that
the comment in the report advising of no financial implications is related to the
process only, but noted that Council had consented in November of the notion
that there will be a financial demand from the winning proposal. He concluded that the RFP will be clear in that
the City is not obligated to accept one or any of the proposals that will come
through this process.
The first paragraph under Facility Location and
Site Requirements in the staff report refers to the location of the facility
and how it should be within the Greenbelt.
Councillor Wilkinson felt it reflected negatively towards Ottawa being
one City and suggested removing the paragraph.
Chair Jellett highlighted that the report states “if possible” and does
not rule out other areas. Mr. MacNair
turned the Committee’s attention to the fourth paragraph of the same page,
highlighting that staff’s intent was to keep it open. Mr. Kirkpatrick indicated that OAEM suggested
to staff that the facility be located if possible in that portion of the City. He then apologized for the lateness of the report,
which has caused some of the confusion.
He suggested that what is important is knowing how
it will be determined where the best location will be. The Procurement Consultant advised that the
best locations will be based on the criteria with respect to closeness to
arterials roads, main roads, industrial or residential areas. Chair Jellett confirmed that there all
locations in Ottawa are acceptable if a proposal meets all the criteria. Mr. MacNair responded affirmatively.
Councillor Wilkinson asked what percentage of
the evaluation would go on location.
Staff noted that they are currently in the process of developing the
evaluation process. Mr. Kirkpatrick
recommended that in addition to the information provided on page 16 of the
report, staff will develop and provide more information about this one aspect
prior to Council’s consideration of the matter.
Additionally, Mr. MacNair offered to ensure that the RFP not mention the
reference of the greenbelt that is outlined in the first paragraph.
The Committee recessed at 12:30 p.m. for a
lunch break. Upon return, the Chair
asked that Committee resume with questions to staff.
Councillor Desroches noted his support for this
project and reflected that the proposal would essentially put a kind of
partnership in place. Mr. MacNair
confirmed that is what staff are currently looking at. Councillor Desroches added that there are
events that are often hosted over many days and they need to have the
infrastructure and hotels to sustain it.
He felt that if a partner were to maintain and operate it, the City would
have to allow them flexibility without too many conditions to ensure this
venture is a success financially.
In response to a question by Councillor
Chiarelli, Mr. MacNair advised that by approving this report at Committee and
Council would result in moving forward with an RFP process. Language would need to be added in the RFP
process to ensure that it is tied into the Lansdowne Partnership program. He reiterated that there will be some
financial implications in terms of what is being proposed. He felt that the work being done with
Economic Development will create opportunity where there can be growth and hopefully
the facility could be self-sustaining in the future.
Responding to further questions from the Councillor,
Mr. Kirkpatrick indicated that the cost of running the process to date was
approximately $50,000. In terms of the
possibility of litigation, Carey Thompson, Deputy City Solicitor confirmed that
in the request for proposals documentation, it will be made very clear that
this is a unique process given that Council approved the project in principle,
the Lansdowne Partnership Plan (LPP) and so it will reserve the right to the
City to either go through with the process, should Council approve the LPP or
alternatively, not go through with it and not be financially responsible to any
proponent for either any claims for damages or the cost of preparing any of the
proposals to respond.
Chair Jellett said that the fact the facility
is tied to the LPP, he wanted assurance that the City would not be responsible
if Lansdowne goes ahead and Council determines that because of financial
reasons, the City will not proceed with this project. Mr. Carey confirmed that the City would not
be responsible financially.
In following this point, Councillor Deans
reminded staff of the motion that she moved at Council that said as a condition
of developing the park, the trade shows would be accommodated. Mr. Kirkpatrick confirmed that the direction
from Council was that the trade shows would be accommodated as a condition of
the redevelopment of Lansdowne Park. Mr.
Kirkpatrick requested that Committee allow him to review the motions that were
approved in November in order to provide further details to the Councillor.
Committee consented and in the interim, Councillor
Deans noted that it seemed that this was not a cost of developing a trade show
facility in Ottawa. Rather, it was in
relation to a cost associated with the redevelopment of the park. The facility will be displaced, which is a
key use from an economic development perspective and it should be retained. She added that it is being displaced as a
result of Lansdowne Park, which is very much integral to the redevelopment of
the park.
The Councillor noted that in any business plan,
a key component would be the parking revenue.
She mentioned that she was recently at the old exhibition grounds in
Toronto and noticed that every car that came into the major trade show was
paying substantially to park and she thought that the business plan for this
site would be predicated on something similar.
Mr. MacNair advised that parking had not yet been analyzed given
that it will be part of the proposals that the proponents will put
forward. His recollection in terms of
Lansdowne is that out of the $2 million that was mentioned earlier, as far as
gross revenue, $1.2 represented the rental revenue and approximately $800,000
from parking revenues.
In reference to the evaluation criteria in
document 3 of the report, Councillor Deans gathered that the technical evaluation
took precedence, and each proponent would have to score 75 per cent to get to
the next phase which would be the financial evaluation. She added that if the proponents met the 75
per cent test, then the whole task from that point on was about money. She asked if that made the most sense in
terms of an evaluation criterion because that did not lead to the overall
proposal. In her opinion, those two
elements should be considered together.
Mr. Kirkpatrick believed the Councillor was
correct in her assumption, prompting Mr. Grant to further respond. Mr. Grant explained that the threshold was
put very high at 75 per cent given that the City’s standard is 70 for a passing
grade. In essence, any organization that
passed the threshold is deemed able to meet the requirements. At that stage, if the financial and technical
portions were blended, there may be a request for significantly more dollars
for a very small incremental to the City.
In her opinion, Councillor Deans did not think 75
per cent was high and would necessarily lead to the best ultimate
selection. Staff felt that this strategy
will give the best proposal with regards to awarding the proposal.
In terms of the guaranty to the industry about
uninterrupted service, Councillor Deans recalled that Council heard from a
large number of professionals involved in trade shows that disrupting their
spring and fall agendas would be problematic since it is their busiest
seasons. She asked what kind of guaranties
would be offered to this sector. Mr. Kirkpatrick
said that the approach taken, through the Steering Committee meetings on
Lansdowne Implementation and Project Plan, was to consider the earliest
reasonable date that staff felt successful proponents could build and be
ready. What has been discussed at the
steering committee level is how staff can ensure that during that period of
time, Lansdowne can continue to support the trade show industry, bridging through
to that date when the new facility is ready.
In terms of funding issues, Councillor Deans
wondered if a multi-tiered approach could be considered as was done for the
construction of the Congress Centre facility.
Mr. Kirkpatrick thought that it was worth exploring. If approved, staff could speak to the federal
and provincial counterparts to identify what grant program currently are
accepting applications and if this could be eligible for.
Moved by Councillor D. Deans
That
City staff be directed to seek upper tier funding for the development of future
trade show spacing in Ottawa.
CARRIED
Mr. Kirkpatrick referred to the motions
approved in November and highlighted that Recommendation 2A was the approval of
the LLP tabled, including the options presented. Recommendation 2A4 was amended, which is the
motion in the report before committee, approving the implementation plan,
direct staff to begin negotiating the comprehensive project agreement
framework, subject to conducting a process to identify potential proponents to
build an operating finance and trade show facility. The City Manager emphasized that there was
nothing in the motion binding Council in accepting a proposal. His interpretation of this was that Council’s
approval to move forward with negotiating a project agreement and framework
subject to all the work that was directed, was not
conditional upon Council in the end approving a proposal for the new trade show
facility.
Councillor Deans clarified that she was
referring to a motion that she moved earlier that said as a condition of moving
forward with the Lansdowne Park redevelopment that the City would expand and
enhance the trade shows space. Mr.
Kirkpatrick suggested that Legal Services provide a response from a procedural
perspective. Chair Jellett confirmed
that staff provide, prior to the Council meeting, a statement from the City
Clerk and Solicitor in this regard.
Touching on the financial aspect, Councillor
Bloess felt that something was missing.
When the delegations presented before Council during the Lansdowne Live
debate, the exposition managers spoke of the great revenue streams this was
going to be. With this kind of revenue, the
Councillor indicated that the City should not be financially responsible at all. He believed that the City should be looking
at making it a municipal capital facility.
He asked if the revenue stream matches or exceeds the expenses of
housing these events.
Mr. Haycock advised that for 2008-09, the
records show that the net operating surplus from expositions at Lansdowne Park
would be between $1.2 and $1.5 million annually. That takes into account all the direct
revenues such as rent, parking, concessions but he added that it only accounts
for the direct expenses, such as labour, security, consumable products,
materials and supplies that relate specifically to the shows. Not included, are provisions for overhead,
contribution for the life cycle, utilities as their financial reporting system
does not allow the extraction of those costs and apply them directly to the
corresponding direct revenue.
As an accounting exercise, Councillor Bloess
felt that if a percentage is taken from overhead costs, it would change the
bottom. Marian Simulik, City Treasurer
agreed with the Councillor and reiterated that it did not include any
depreciation of the facility, which would be equivalent to what the mortgage
payment would be for the successful proponent.
In addition, a high level analysis could be done to show what clause
would have to be included and what change would be on the present bottom
line. Mr. Thomson considered that for this
type of facility to get the municipal capital facility designation (i.e. tax
exemption), there has to be reversionary interest at the end of the long term
lease in favour of the City. The
designation is conditional upon any preferred proponent identifying and
agreeing to do that in favour of the City.
Secondly, Mr. Thomson pointed out that in the assessment of the
proposals, staff would look at it overall to ensure the proposal fits in the
municipal capital facility designation as far as the different rights and
benefits that are being proposed to the City.
As a result of the Deputy Solicitor’s comment,
Councillor Bloess confirmed that Council could be amenable to ensuring that
this type of arrangement is in place. In
response to a follow up question, staff responded that there are no taxes
currently being paid at Lansdowne. Councillor
Bloess advised that he would be commenting at Council that staff should be showing
the true cost of housing anything at Lansdowne, including overheads,
depreciation, etc.
Councillor Monette echoed Councillor
Wilkinson’s comments with respect to the location of the facility and requested
that the reference paragraph be removed from the report. Mr. Kirkpatrick advised that staff could
strike the paragraph from the report.
The Councillor asked if there was a possibility
of locating the CCEA on Albion Road. Mr.
Kirkpatrick advised that they had a series of discussions with the CCEA Board
Members and their consultant on their redevelopment vision, which included a
similar type facility. As reported in
September and November, his view is that they did not have and staff could not
develop a viable business plan for that redevelopment vision. He suggested that CCEA could make a
submission for this proposal. In
accordance with Council’s decision in November, staff have
been working with the CCEA to look at how to facilitate their move from
Lansdowne to their site in order to secure the continued existence of the fair.
Councillor Monette recognized the great work
that staff were doing, and suggested the Albion site be kept in mind as a
possible option for future discussion.
Moved by R. Chiarelli
That the Corporate Services and Economic Development
Committee approve the addition of the above-noted item for consideration by the
Committee at today’s meeting, pursuant to Section 84(3) of the Procedure
By-Law.
CARRIED
That the Corporate Services and Economic
Development Committee recommend that Council:
1.
Approve the Request for
Proposal (RFP) process for the design, construction, operation, and financing
of an Exposition Hall facility in Ottawa
as outlined in this report;
2.
Approve the outline
specifications for the Exposition Hall facility as set out in Document 1
attached to this report;
3.
Approve the evaluation
criteria for the RFP for the Exposition Hall facility as outlined in Document 2
attached to this report;
4.
Approve the evaluation
matrix for the RFP for the Exposition Hall facility as outlined in Document 3
attached to this report; and
5.
Approve the composition
of the evaluation team for the RFP for the Exposition Hall facility as outlined
in this report.
6.
Direct staff to seek
upper tier funding for the development of future Trade Show Space in Ottawa.
CARRIED
as amended
DIRECTION TO STAFF:
In the staff report, CSEDC requested that the
first paragraph under 2.2 Facility Location and Site Requirements be
removed prior to Council consideration.
Staff to develop and provide more information about the location
criteria prior to Council’s consideration of the matter.
Legal Services to provide a
response from a procedural perspective with respect to Councillor Deans' motion
that was approved in April 2009 with respect to enhancing the trade show space.
CITY
OPERATIONS
OPÉRATIONS MUNICIPALES
organizational development and performance
6. QUARTERLY PERFORMANCE REPORT TO COUNCIL, q3: JULY 1
- SEPTEMBER 30, 2009
rapport TRIMESTRIEL SUR LE rendement présenté au conseil POUR LE 3E TRIMESTRE,
1ER JUILLET AU 30 SEPTEMBRE 2009
1. That the Corporate
Services and Economic Development Committee receive the attached report and
refer it for review and discussion at the following standing committee
meetings:
·
Transportation Committee – February 3, 2010
· Community and Protective Services Committee – February 4, 2010
·
Planning and Environment Committee – February 9, 2010
·
Transit Committee – February 17, 2010
2. That Council receive the report for information on February 24, 2010
once it has been reviewed by standing committees.
RECEIVED
MOTIONS OF WHICH NOTICE HAS BEEN GIVEN
PREVIOUSLY
MOTIONS DONT AVIS A ÉTÉ DONNÉ ANTÉRIEUREMENT
7. MOTION - PAN AM GAMES
MOTION – JEUX PANAMÉRICAINS
ACS2010-CMR-CSE-0001 CITY
WIDE/À L'ÉCHELLE DE LA VILLE
That the
Corporate Services and Economic Development Committee recommend Council direct
staff from the Economic Development Branch to work with local stakeholders,
such as Ottawa Tourism, to approach the game organizers to pursue opportunities
for the City of Ottawa to host some satellite events in Ottawa.
CARRIED
8. CENTRE
PAULINE-CHARRON – EXEMPTION FROM ZONING CHANGE APPLICATION FEES FOR PARKING LOT
EXPANSION
CENTRE PAULINE
–CHARRON – EXEMPTION DES DROITS DE DEMANDE DE MODIFICATION DU ZONAGE EN VUE DE
L’AGRANDISSEMENT DU STATIONNEMENT
ACS2010-CMR-CSE-0002 CITY
WIDE/À L'ÉCHELLE DE LA VILLE
That the Corporate Services and
Economic Development Committee recommend Council exempt the Centre
Pauline-Charron from the zoning change application fees noted within the
report.
CARRIED
POINT EN HUIT CLOS*
Committee approved this item on consent, thereby eliminating the need to
move In Camera.
POINTS SUPPLÉMENTAIRE
Moved by M. Wilkinson
That the Corporate Services and Economic
Development Committee approve the addition of the above-noted item for
consideration by the Committee at today’s meeting, pursuant to Section 84(3) of
the Procedure By-Law.
CARRIED
9. 2012 NHL ALL STAR WEEKEND
Chair Jellett ceded the chair in order to move a
motion. At the request of Acting Chair
Desroches, Councillor Jellett on behalf of Councillor Qadri,
introduced the motion to support the All Star Weekend in 2012.
Councillor Qadri indicated that it would be
beneficial for businesses and the economy by supporting
the request for assistance from the Senators Sports and Entertainment to host the All Star weekend. He added that in 2012, the Ottawa Senators
will be celebrating their twentieth anniversary as a hockey franchise in the
City, plus it will be the anniversary of the opening of the Rideau Canal, which
will be part of the activities for this event.
Councillor McRae asked staff for clarification
on the second last paragraph of the motion regarding providing a maximum of up
to $110,000 to subsidize the pageantry program and in-kind services, which she was
supporting, but questioned if the City would be providing $110,000 cash in
addition to in-kind services or was it a maximum of $110,000. She felt that $110,000 was not sufficient to
cover in-kind services such as buses and police.
Nancy Schepers, Deputy City Manager of
Infrastructure Services and Community Sustainability explained that the motion
was worded so that $110,000 in cash is provided in addition to in-kind services. She advised that staff had not sufficient time
to review the process of negotiations or the types of services that would be required
and part of the in-kind services. Having said that, she felt that staff would likely be back before
the Committee to request more funding.
Councillor McRae recalled that during the
Stanley Cup event, the policing and surface operation costs were nearly $1 million
in which the City absorbed. She asked if
Committee could endorse the NHL all star weekend so that there is no need for a
report to come back to Committee. Acting
Chair Desroches asked if Councillor Jellett would be amenable to amending the motion
given the points previously raised.
At this juncture, Councillor Wilkinson asked
for a point of order noting that it was being suggested that the wording of the
motion be changed. Acting Chair Desroches clarified that he was
not suggesting the essence of the motion be changed, but that the motion be
endorsed.
Councillor Qadri suggested increasing the
amount to $200,000, including in-kind service.
Ms. Schepers supported the change in the amount as it would allow staff more
flexibility. Councillor Jellett welcomed
the wording as a friendly amendment and changed the wording accordingly.
Councillor Bloess understood the quick
turnaround time and was aware of the request sent by Mr. Leeder in an
e-mail. He emphasized that there had
been partnerships in the past with the Senators and the National Capital Commission
in terms of promoting high profile events that bring attention to the
City. The Councillor recalled when the
pageantry program was developed and asked if there was an annual budget or if it
would be part of the festival funding.
Chris Cope, Manager of Economic Development confirmed that it would be
funded through the Economic Development funding envelope. In response to a follow up question from the
Councillor, Mr. Cope confirmed that the $200,000 referred in the motion would
be withdrawn from the regular funding envelope.
Councillor Wilkinson felt this was an ideal
opportunity to showcase the City. She
would like to separate the money and the in-kind services given it is listed
separately in the budget but suggested that this could be done through the 2012
budget process.
Councillor Monette asked for clarification in
terms of defining the in-kind services.
Ms. Levesque listed services that would be included as in-kind
services such as police escorts, access to the highway and transitway and
permits. Councillor Monette speculated
that the above did not amount to $100,000.
Ms. Levesque reiterated that staff did not have an opportunity to
consider the costs or have any in-depth conversation on this issue. She explained that the Senators Sports and Entertainment
noted their
intentions of doing this and asked for the City’s support. In a follow up question, Ms. Levesque
confirmed that staff were also looking at other
funding partners.
At the request of Councillor Monette asking to
receive a breakdown of expenses, Ms. Levesque confirmed that she would
provide the Committee with this information.
Councillor Monette stated his support of the
motion because in his opinion, the economic benefits of such an event would
exceed $200,000. He believed that the
economic impact could be over $30 million into the local economy and 7,000
hotel rooms, stating that weekend events could bring in well over 3.5 million
viewers.
Councillor Jellett agreed with the Councillor’s
comments, stating that the City could not buy that kind of advertising for the
money that was being committed. The
Councillor pointed out that Ottawa is the only Canadian NHL city that has not hosted
the All Star Game, and thought this would be a tremendous opportunity to tie
this event in with the 20th anniversary of the Ottawa Senators return
to the NHL. He spoke on the positive impact that the Senators Sports and
Entertainment had when they hosted the World Junior’s Championship in Ottawa and
what that meant to the City.
Moved by Councillor Jellett,
WHEREAS the City of Ottawa has successfully
hosted numerous national and international major events to the benefit of the
local economy;
WHEREAS the bid deadline
of February 8th does not allow for a staff report to Committee and
Council for consideration;
AND WHEREAS local hotel
and conference facilities and ScotiaBank
Place will be in a position to host the 2012 NHL
All Star Weekend;
BE IT RESOLVED that the
City of Ottawa formally support the bid by Senators
Sports and Entertainment to host the 2012 NHL All Star Weekend, scheduled for January 28-29, 2012;
BE IT
FURTHER RESOLVED that the City support the request for assistance from Senators Sports and Entertainment; specifically that the City provide up to a
maximum of $200,000 in cash and in-kind services to subsidize the pageantry
program;
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED
that staff report back to Corporate Services and Economic Development Committee
on any significant funding needs over and above the current City of Ottawa contribution to
the 2012 NHL All Star Weekend.
CARRIED
10. 2016 FEDERATION OF CANADIAN MUNICIPALITIES (FCM) ANNUAL CONFERENCE
AND MUNICIPAL EXPO
Councillor Wilkinson introduced her motion and reminded Committee
that the FCM Conference had not been held in Ottawa for many years. She explained that the costs listed in the
motion are usually handled by sponsorships, and given the event is six years
away, there would be sufficient time to
arrange for sponsorships. Councillor Wilkinson believed that such a conference
could bring in over 2,000 people with a large trade show that would benefit the
City and community.
Chair Jellett noted that the Committee had waived the rules due to
the deadline for submission.
Councillor McRae remarked that this type of event is good for the
City, but expressed concern with approving a blank cheque, given that there is
no money attached to the events outlined in the motion. She asked staff about
approaching corporate sponsors for help in offsetting the costs to host these
events. The Councillor also voiced her
concerns with designating an employee for 18 months, considering that the
branch is already short-staffed.
Ms. Schepers admitted that at first glance, staff felt it would be
too costly to host such a large event.
Subsequently, staff were able to secure a
commitment from Ottawa Tourism and the Ottawa Convention Centre (OCC) as
partners for this event, with costs estimated at $100,000 above staff
estimates. She felt this cost was
reasonable and said that staff strongly recommend and support this initiative.
Responding to a question from Councillor McRae, Ms. Johanne
Levesque, Director of Community Sustainability, agreed
there is room for corporate sponsorship to play a role, as Ottawa Tourism and
the OCC are agreeable in partnering with the City to ensure that this event
takes place. Ms. Levesque stated that
the original cost to host this event had been estimated to be $450,000, but had
diminished to $100,000.
Councillor Wilkinson agreed to a friendly amendment to the wording
of the Motion to include an amount as suggested by Councillor McRae. Councillor
McRae also suggested that Economic Development staff seek guidance and advice
from the Protocol Office with regard to corporate sponsorships.
Councillor Deans expressed the view that this was a great
opportunity for the City of Ottawa to host the FCM conference. The Councillor voiced her concern with
regards to putting an upset limit of $100,000 in current dollar value, not
knowing what the inflation and interest rates will be by 2016. She asked that staff revise the motion to ensure
that the City does not inadvertently disqualify itself for the chance to host
the conference in 2016.
Ms. Levesque highlighted that the Economic Development branch would
likely not be the lead on developing the bid; rather, they would be a
partner. The Committee allowed staff to
reword the motion to reflect the above comments.
Moved by M. Wilkinson,
WHEREAS the City of Ottawa
has successfully hosted numerous national and international conferences to the
benefit of the local economy;
WHEREAS local hotel and
conference facilities will be in a position to host the 2016 FCM Annual
Conference and Municipal Expo;
AND WHEREAS the RFP
response deadline of February 12th does not allow for a staff report
to Committee and Council for consideration;
BE IT RESOLVED that the
City of Ottawa participate in the Request for
Proposal process in partnership with Ottawa
Tourism and the Ottawa
Convention Centre to host the 2016 FCM Annual Conference and Municipal Expo.
BE IF FURTHER RESOLVED,
that the City commit up to $ 100,000
(2010 dollars) to fulfilling the responsibilities laid out in the RFP,
mirroring its current commitment to the annual conference; specifically that
the City:
·
Organize study tours, including registration and transportation;
·
Organizing a companions’ program including transportation;
·
Host the Mayor’s Welcome Reception and Farewell Delegates Breakfast,
Board of Directors cocktail, daily continental breakfasts, and one Gala Dinner
event;
·
Provide local transportation where required;
·
Establish a local organizing committee two years in advance of the
conference;
·
Designate an employee of the host city as a co-ordinator 12 to 18
months in advance of the conference; and,
·
Provide staff and volunteers for various duties during the
conference.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED
that staff report back to Corporate Services and Economic Development Committee
on any significant funding needs over and above the current City of Ottawa
contribution to the FCM Annual Conference, and that staff seek out sponsorship
in order to cover costs where possible if Ottawa is selected as host.
CARRIED
DIRECTION
TO STAFF:
Staff to work with the Protocol Office in terms of receiving advice on
hosting the above-noted conference and working with corporate sponsors.
NOTICE OF MOTION (FOR CONSIDERATION AT A
SUBSEQUENT MEETING)
AVIS DE MOTION (POUR EXAMEN LORS D’UNE RÉUNION SUBSÉQUENTE)
Moved by
Councillor S. Desroches
WHEREAS on January 20,
2010, the CEO of Hydro Ottawa
wrote to the City Manager regarding a proposed pilot project for adaptive
street lighting technology;
WHEREAS the five year
Strategic Direction for Hydro Ottawa contemplates a growing relationship
between Hydro Ottawa and the City in order to reduce the costs of delivering
municipal services at the same time as enhancing energy-conservation efforts;
WHEREAS energy for outdoor
lighting is a significant cost to the City of Ottawa which consumes
approximately 300 Gigawatt hours of electricity per year with approximately $5
million consumed annually on street lighting energy costs;
WHEREAS Hydro Ottawa is
proposing to conduct a pilot of the LumenIQ adaptive
street lighting control system involving approximately 150 street lamps in a
single neighbourhood within the City of Ottawa;
WHEREAS the pilot project
would be funded by entirely by Hydro Ottawa,
with the City getting the benefit of associated energy savings;
WHEREAS Hydro Ottawa proposes starting
this project over the course of the winter in order to take advantage of the
longer daylight periods;
THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED
that the City Manager be authorized to participate in the pilot project in
suitable areas of the City of Ottawa in consultation with the affected ward
Councillors who have expressed an interest in supporting the pilot program,
THEREFORE BE IT ALSO RESOLVED
that the City Manager report back to the Corporate Services and Economic
Development Committee after one year on the results of the pilot.
Moved by
Councillor S. Desroches
WHEREAS the City of Ottawa 311 service is used as the front end call centre
for receiving all utility locate requests in the City of Ottawa;
WHEREAS in 2009, the City
of Ottawa
provided 32,157 locates in response to 5,152 locate requests;
WHEREAS the one-call “call
before you dig” concept is important for improving workplace safety, reducing
accidental infrastructure damage, and provides improved client-service for the
building and construction industry;
WHEREAS as part of its
Open for Business Initiative, the Province
of Ontario is committed
to support the development of a voluntary province-wide One Call to Dig System;
WHEREAS the Province of Ottawa would like to promote to One Call
Dig System province-wide but only 13 percent of municipalities participate in
the program at this time;
WHEREAS the Municipal
Health and Safety Association, and the Electrical Safety Association are some
of the organizations which support the one-call concept;
WHEREAS the City of Hamilton has determined
that the costs of participating in the province-wide one-call program are much
lower than the cost of providing the same operation internally;
WHEREAS there may be
advantages in the City of Ottawa’s participation in the province-wide One Call
to Dig System, including improved client service, greater internal efficiencies
and reductions to the growing number of calls to the city’s 311 Call Centre.
THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED
that, as part of the corporate efficiencies initiative, the City Manager review
the cost-benefit of participating in the One Call to Dig System and report back
to the Corporate Services Committee in Q3 of 2010.
Moved by Councillor M. Wilkinson
WHEREAS 2017 is the 150th
Anniversary of Canada;
and
WHEREAS, as the capital of
Canada, Ottawa will be the focal location for
celebrations in 2017; and
WHEREAS planning for
activities and the infrastructure for a year long celebration needs a lengthy
lead time;
THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED
that the City of Ottawa put together an organizing committee of community,
tourism and civic members to work together with additional representation from
Gatineau and the Federal and Provincial governments to prepare a plan for
activities in 2017 and report through CSEDC on a regular basis; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED
that staff report back on a proposed initial approach in early Q3 2010.
DEMANDE DE RENSEIGNEMENT
Councillor R. Bloess submitted the following two inquiries:
Why does the City withhold the proceeds from
property sales for outstanding taxes and why not pay interest on the balance
owing to the former owner?
Were any revenues derived by the City from
providing traffic controls and traffic systems to other cities and
jurisdictions?
LEVÉE DE LA SÉANCE
Committee Coordinator Chair
