CARRIED

DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST

No declarations of interest were filed.

REGULAR ITEMS

Councillor Cantin stated there were a number of millennium/community economic development initiatives that may deserve funding. He believed it was appropriate to establish a fund for millennium celebrations and promote economic development for

Ottawa-Carleton. Councillor Cantin commented tourism was an area where the Region had in the past provided seed funding, noting the funds were matched on different occasions.

Councillor Cantin moved an amendment to his Motion that the budget be funded from the sale of surplus land, such as the Beaver Barracks property as one example.

Councillor van den Ham inquired if funding for this project was included in the 1999 budget. J. LeBelle, Finance Commissioner, stated it was not and if the Committee approved to pursue the concept, he would like time to consult with the Chief Administrative Officer in the context of other budget priorities.

Councillor van den Ham stated he could not support the Motion. He acknowledged initiatives were being undertaken by the Federal government, National Capital Commission, and possibility the City of Ottawa. However, Councillor van den Ham referenced the 1999 budget deliberations and debate that had occurred in order to achieve a balanced budget. In closing, the Councillor stated if the Motion was approved, he hoped staff would consider projects that had Region-wide significance.

Councillor Munter did not support the amendment to use funds from the sale of surplus land. The Councillor expressed concern with the recent ad hoc nature regarding the sale of lands, and suggested the need to develop a policy regarding this issue. Speaking specifically on the Beaver Barracks property, Councillor Munter stated the property should be used for affordable rental housing. Speaking to the millennium/community economic development fund, Councillor Munter did not support its present format with no definitive criteria.

Councillor Cantin pointed out the Motion stated each project would have to come before Committee and Council for consideration. The Councillor referenced previous similar funds and noted this was one-time around millennium initiatives and involved other partners.

Councillor McGoldrick-Larsen concurred with Councillor van den Ham’s comments. She reminded Committee of the serious funding situation around the transportation network, safety concerns and the shortfall on the capital projects.

Councillor Hume believed the proposed Fund may be a worthwhile idea, however, suggested it required further evaluation. The Councillor moved a Motion to refer the concept and Motion to The Ottawa Partnership (TOP) which would report back with a recommendation in conjunction with the Strategic Economic Development Plan (SEDP).

On a point of clarification, Councillor Hume stated TOP would review the concept and recommend if it had merit or not. He added if TOP was to recommend establishment of the fund, they could provide suggestions on community economic development initiatives to consider.

Councillor Stewart agreed with the Hume Motion if the Region had $1.5 million surplus to allocate to a project of this nature. She questioned the Regional mandate for millennium projects when health care and safety issues were a priority and concern. The Councillor did not support the Motion as the funds were not available.

Councillor Beamish referenced a Millennium Tourism Marketing Strategy that involved the Federal government, Ontario and Quebec governments, the Outaouais government and the private sector. He stated the Region may be expected to contribute funds to that initiative.

Councillor Beamish inquired on the status of TOP. He questioned how long it would take for this initiative and perhaps the Tourism Marketing initiative to be considered by TOP.

Chair Chiarelli reported the first founding meeting of TOP was recently held to initiate procedural matters. He stated the membership was now being considered and would be discussed at the next TOP meeting. In addition, the agenda would involve discussion of the process and nature of the SEDP, with the agencies and the Region filing with TOP a list of all economic development projects that were presently underway. Chair Chiarelli stated under Other Business, he could bring to the attention of TOP any matters referred to it. In closing, Chair Chiarelli stated the Cantin Motion and consideration of the project referenced by Councillor Beamish was a function and intention of TOP. He added any recommendations TOP would make to Committee and Council were recommendations only for consideration.

YEAS: D. Beamish, R. Cantin, B. Hill, P. Hume, R. Chiarelli … 5

NAYS: A. Loney, W. Stewart, R. van den Ham … 3

The Cantin amendment Motion regarding the source of fund was not considered as the referral Motion was approved.

Vice-Chair Hume chaired the remainder of the meeting.

Councillor van den Ham stated it was his understanding that regional staff were at times required to remove trees from regional roads, in particular in the rural areas, for safety reasons. The Councillor inquired where the 2000 trees would be located.

D. Brousseau, Director, Mobility Services Division, acknowledged trees in the rights-of-way were occasionally removed if considered a hazard. However, he reported staff were reluctant to do so unless absolutely necessary. B. Beveridge, Director, Infrastructure Maintenance Division, explained the sugar maple planting project would replace others at the end of their life cycle and would be planted at or about the fence line at the outer limit of the road allowance.

Councillor van den Ham referenced the Federal matching funds and inquired what the average cost would be. Mr. Beveridge reported the trees provided by the nurseries for the recent tree adoption program averaged at a cost of approximately $44 each and were larger in size than what was anticipated. He expected the stock supplied for this project would be similar and would have an excellent chance of survival. Mr. Beveridge confirmed the $53,500 budget would come from the approved tree capital account and was not additional money.

Councillor Stewart referenced the proposed downtown beautification program and its $500,000 budget. The Councillor stated the Forest Renewal Plan for Ottawa-Carleton was recently approved and included the urban greening plan to spend $200,000 over four years on trees for the urban areas. Councillor Stewart pointed out the subject report referenced the urban area as a hostile environment to grow trees.

Mr. Beveridge reviewed the difficulties associated with the downtown core and the limited number of areas where trees would survive. He stated an option for the beautification program was flower boxes, such as the portable structures used by the National Capital Commission. Mr. Beveridge explained part of the process would be to determine locations, with emphasis on Albert and Slater Streets as the main transitway corridor through the core area. He added support would be solicited from the landowners and business community along the designated routes to repeat the planting in future years, indicating the budget was only front end to initiate a millennium project.

Councillor Stewart acknowledged the benefits of a beautiful downtown core. However, she referenced the current budget constraints and questioned whether the projects were within the Regional mandate. The Councillor expressed concern with spending funds approved for the Forest Renewal program on the proposed downtown beautification project.

Councillor Loney inquired why the downtown beautification project involved local streets and was not possibly restricted to regional roads or properties. Mr. Brousseau referenced a fund entitled the Ontario Millennium Fund, however, explained it was only available to the lower tier municipalities. He stated staff hoped to work with the lower tier to obtain some of this funding and pursue the possibility of a joint project.

In response to a question from Councillor Loney regarding the Trans Canada Trail,
N. Tunnacliffe, Planning and Development Approvals Commissioner, confirmed the Region’s rights would be preserved through an official arrangement. He added this included a clause allowing the Region to retain the Regional segments of the trail for transportation purposes.

Councillor Beamish suggested the need to partnership with the Business Improvement Areas (BIAs) and the format of matched funding for the downtown beautification program. The Councillor believed this would encourage the BIAs to take ownership of the structures, and would result in better long-term commitment to the program. The Councillor moved a Motion in this regard.

Councillor Holmes expressed her support for the staff recommendations, including the Beamish Motion to partner with others such as the large business owners, municipalities and BIAs.

Councillor Hill suggested the option to expand the program to the urban centres of all Regional wards, including the rural townships.

With regard to the Beamish Motion, staff concurred with the expansion of the beautification program to be region-wide and include partners throughout. Councillor Beamish amended his Motion to read "Regional" Beautification Program.

Councillor Stewart reviewed the objectives of the Forest Renewal Project, and the priority of the preservation and protection of the Regional forest coverage as identified in the Regional Official Plan. In response to a comment from Councillor Stewart regarding the questionable connection to the Forest Renewal program and budget, Mr. Beveridge stated the beautification project was a greening initiative that fit within the Re-Greening Plan and philosophy.

Councillor Hume commented the Beamish Motion amended the program to allow matching funding and stated any residual funds would return to the Urban Green Program.

Mr. Beveridge confirmed staff did not intend to plant trees in a hostile environment as they would not survive. Mr. Brousseau confirmed the proposed $500,000 for the beautification project was not surplus, but was an option provided for Committee’s consideration. He reported staff intended to continue with the urban tree island program, however, it would be on a smaller scale should Council approve the option of the beautification project. In response to a question from Councillor Stewart regarding if the remaining components of the Forest Renewal Program would continue with adequate funding, Mr. Beveridge confirmed they would.

Councillor McGoldrick-Larsen reviewed the challenges of the 1999 budget and expressed dismay the Committee would consider identifying the proposed projects as a Regional priority. She urged Committee to consider the calls received from constituents requesting other priorities that were safety orientated.

Mr. Brousseau reiterated the $500,000 budget for the beautification project was not new money, but was part of the Forest Renewal Program approved with the 1999 budget. He stated the purpose of the report was to provide options for millennium activities associated with greening initiatives for the Committee to consider.

That a Regional Beautification Program be established on a matching 50 - 50 format with private businesses, Business Improvement Areas, and other partners, and that the ownership of all removable structures will be in the responsibility of the private partners, and that the upset limit for the program be set at $500,000.

Councillor Cantin inquired if the $500,000 program allowed for a business owner to approach the Region with a proposal to beautify the area in front of their property. Mr. Beveridge stated there had been several different communities come forward throughout the Region in the last two years, in which the Region did contribute to planting programs on a shared basis. He added it was an activity that had been very successful in those communities.

The Committee then considered the staff recommendations.

That the Corporate Services and Economic Development Committee recommend Council approve the:

1. Development of a Downtown Beautification Program;

LOST

YEAS: R. Cantin … 1

NAYS: D. Beamish, B. Hill, P. Hume, A. Loney, W. Stewart, R. van den Ham … 6

3. GLOUCESTER STREET WATERMAIN REHABILITATION

1998 URBAN WATERMAIN UPGRADES & EXTENSIONS

PHASE II, CONTRACT NUMBER CA 9482

- Environment and Transportation Commissioner’s report dated 12 Apr 99

Councillor van den Ham requested further information regarding the report recommendations. N. Tunnacliffe, Planning and Development Approvals Commissioner, reported the one large parcel had been declared surplus and was located in an industrial area. He explained the agreement involved the City of Gloucester to build the extension of Algoma Road which would then facilitate the development of an adjacent parcel. He confirmed Gloucester would install the services in the road resulting in the Region having two serviced parcels with road frontage. The Commissioner stated it was a win-win situation for both levels of government. R. Ennor, Director, Property Services Division, confirmed the value of the two properties would be enhanced, but not to the extent of the original acquisition costs.

Moved by R. van den Ham

RESPONSES TO INQUIRIES

7. SAME-SEX SPOUSE DEFINITION AND ITS RELATION TO

THE PENSION PACKAGE

(Response to Outstanding Inquiry No. C&E 4(98))

- A/Human Resources Commissioner’s report dated 26 Apr 99

Councillor Loney indicated the report stated that OMERS would revert back to the denial of the benefits should the appeal be successful. The Councillor believed ultimately the Supreme Court would favor the Ontario Court of Justice decision to pay same-sex benefits, however, moved the following Motion as a precaution.

(Response to Outstanding Inquiry No. C&E 6(99))

- A/Regional Solicitor’s report dated 26 Apr 99

That the Corporate Services and Economic Development Committee and Council receive this report for information.

Councillor Munter offered to provide a presentation on the report and respond to questions, if necessary.

Speaking to Recommendation No. 2, Councillor Munter requested the Finance Department review the issue of health regional development charges (RDC). The Councillor requested this issue and Recommendation No. 5 as presented in the Regional Government’s Role in Health Care Report dated May 1999 become part of the discussion in conjunction with the Regional Development Charge policy review report to be considered by Committee on 15 Jun 99.

There being no questions, the Committee considered the report recommendations as follows:

Moved by R. Cantin

That before additional funds are allocated to Health and Ambulance services, that an independent review be conducted of the Health Department’s structure, operations, efficiencies, mandate and provincial regulations, and that the Chief Administrative Officer prepare the Terms of Reference for such a review, including proposed cost and funding sources.

- Planning and Development Approvals Commissioner’s confidential report dated

28 Apr 99

Moved by R. van den Ham

CARRIED

Moved by R. van den Ham

CARRIED

The Committee considered Recommendation No. 4, as amended

Councillor van den Ham inquired if staff were considering holding an additional meeting, other than that proposed for the 15 Jun debate, on the Regional Development Charge Policy Review.

J. LeBelle, Finance Commissioner, reported staff were in the process of bringing together and reviewing the public submissions. He acknowledged the subject was extremely complex. Mr. LeBelle anticipated the 15 Jun meeting would also be advertised as a public meeting to ensure if there were new issues in front of the Committee, the meeting would have been properly advertised as such. He stated details were yet to be finalized, however, believed the 15 Jun meeting may begin early or a second meeting may be required.