CARRIED

DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST

No declarations of interest were filed.

Mr. John DeVries and Mr. Serge Massicotte, Ottawa Construction Association, addressed the Committee. Mr. DeVries reported the Ottawa Construction Association represented over 700 builders, manufacturers and suppliers. The speaker referenced a letter dated 26 February 1999 from the Ottawa Construction Association advising that

after a detailed review by the Standard Practices Committee, it was felt the Region should proceed to negotiate with the successful proponents. Mr. DeVries reviewed the three options for Committee as outlined in the report. He pointed out that the Committee previously rejected the conventional design - tender - construct option, a decision the Association supported.

Moved by G. Hunter

Councillor Cantin expressed concern with the large increase in the contract due to unexpected soil conditions. The Councillor suggested the professional engineers should be familiar with the area and issues involved. M. Sheflin, Environment and Transportation Commissioner, stated with respect to soils investigation there was a balance between how much money is spent on the initial testing and drilling to determine the exact extent of contamination vs. the money spent on unit pricing. The Commissioner stated under the circumstances and difficulties around soil contamination, the increase was not an unreasonable amount, noting it was under 10% overall. Mr. Sheflin pointed out that through a review of the numerous projects, it was determined the 90% of the projects were completed under budget and 10% may require additional funding.

M. Beckstead, Chief Administrative Officer, also noted the reports and projects that came before Committee were those requiring additional funding. He referenced the many projects that were approved and completed within or under budget.

Councillor Stewart expressed her support for the principle of saving money through timely road maintenance. However, she inquired why the requirement of increases in authority did not come forward as part of the 1999 budget process, in order to allow Council the ability to make allowances for the expenditure at that time rather than having to debenture for it mid-year.

M. Sheflin, Environment and Transportation Commissioner, explained it had been standard practice to allocate a fine limit in the budget which was followed by a detailed analysis during the year. The Commissioner added that in previous years funds from other projects or sources came about which assisted with the need for increased authority, however, that was not the case at this time. Mr. Sheflin referenced the downloading of the provincial highways and lack of capital funding. He stated that, on the basis of a best business decision, staff recommended that proceeding now, where necessary, would avoid higher costs later.

With respect to the budget for resurfacing, Mr. Sheflin confirmed the same amount had been allocated for the previous 6 - 8 years, with additional monies coming forward on an ad hoc basis. Mr. Sheflin stated the Region had not received the five year capital needs for transferred highways, as promised by the Province. In response to a question from Councillor Stewart regarding budgeting for future years, Mr. Sheflin stated it may be necessary to start allocating for the actual full amount up front due to the lack of funds being found elsewhere during the year. Councillor Stewart hoped in the future adequate funding would be placed in the envelope during the initial budget review.

Councillor Beamish did not support the staff recommendations and suggested the issues were known well in advance and should have been accounted for during the budget deliberations. The Councillor pointed out the money was not to be found elsewhere, but would be additional money issued in debt mid-year. Councillor Beamish referenced a road in his ward that was in serious disrepair, however, would not be fixed for a number of years. Councillor Beamish did not support the method of budgeting for resurfacing and suggested it should have been discussed during the budget review in order to allow Council to prioritize it among all needs.

Councillor Beamish moved a Motion with respect to Agenda Item No. 9, 1998 Audited Operating Results. The Motion stated that rather than setting up two new Reserve Funds for the surpluses, those monies be used to cover the requirement in resurfacing, thereby eliminating the need to debenture.

Chair Chiarelli pointed out the $1.5 million surplus {Recommendation No. 3 of the 1998 Audited Operating Results report} came from the Social Housing envelope and the Community Services Committee had approved the allocation of $1 million of that surplus for purposes of homelessness. The Chair noted the potential for conflicting Motions from two Committees, to be considered by Council on 14 Jul. Chair Chiarelli suggested it may be appropriate to reserve the decision and allow Council to debate the issues.

After lengthy discussions on process, the Committee heard from D. Stewart, Social Services Commissioner, with respect to the $1.5 million surplus and the $1 million allocation to homelessness. Mr. Stewart confirmed $1 million had been approved to fund the Community Action Plan with respect to homelessness and would be considered by Council on 14 Jul 99. He added no specific commitments had been made for the $1 million as of yet, however, noted work was underway regarding the implementation of the Action Plan. The Commissioner stated if the funds were not available, it would seriously impact on successful implementation.

In response to a question from Councillor Cantin, Mr. LeBelle reviewed the reasons for the surpluses as outlined in the 1998 Audited Operating Results, Agenda Item No. 9. Mr. LeBelle explained the $1.5 million surplus in the Region Wide General Fund related to a lower than anticipated billing from the Province with respect to local services realignment costs. Mr. LeBelle stated there would be a need for future funding in the Social Housing program and staff recommended this $1.5 million be set aside for that purpose. He stated staff did not over budget in this area, as the determination was made from the published figures provided by the Province of Ontario. The Finance Commissioner confirmed Social Housing was now a Regional program at a cost of $62 million per year.

Councillor Cantin expressed his support for the Beamish Motion. The Councillor referenced the necessity to repair roads at the appropriate time. On a separate matter, Councillor Cantin requested the Environment and Transportation Commissioner to communicate with the Minister of Transport regarding the concerns with overloaded trucks, newly approved larger trucks and ineffective operation hours for the Ministry’s weight scales. Councillor Cantin stated these factors would contribute to the disrepair of the roads.

Councillor Hunter expressed concern with increasing the debt for maintenance and operating requirements, not capital requirements. Councillor Hunter referenced the expected high pay back that will be required on the proposed debenture issue. He stated the objective was to eventually lower taxes because of reduced debt, not add new debt in other areas.

Mr. LeBelle stated consequences from provincial downloading had been felt in the first two years and would continue to manifest itself through increased pressure and lack of financial resources to service the capital program. Mr. LeBelle explained it was necessary to ensure debt was issued for projects that had a life as long as the debt for which it is issued. The Finance Commissioner stated the reality that there was not enough pay-as-you-go contribution in the Region Wide Fund to support the minimal capital program. In response to a question from Councillor Hunter, Mr. LeBelle confirmed staff would attempt to find ways to get back on track with pay-as-you-go, however, added it was under substantial pressure.

Councillor Hunter pointed out it was not possible to issue debt for ongoing programs, only for capital projects. Mr. LeBelle acknowledged this restriction, however, stated of the $1 million in the Social Housing envelope, much would involve capital grants for the construction of facilities. He added there was also some uncertainty in the new legislation that governed municipalities in what they can issue debt for, stating this would require clarification, however, was a practice previously exercised by the Region and other municipalities.

J. Potter, Special Advisor, Social Housing, explained a report that would be considered by Council on 14 Jul described the proposed role for the Region in housing. She stated the report identified two major requirements, one being to look after the administration of the ongoing stock, which involved associated risks, noting there were no capital reserves for public housing maintenance/repairs. Secondly, Ms. Potter explained there was a need to take some component of money to attempt to create more affordable housing in the community and issues around homelessness.

Councillor Hunter expressed his support to use monies that were available and generated from the Region-wide taxpayer to reduce the requirements to issue debt on existing problems that required immediate resolution. The Councillor did not believe it was an issue that conflicting Committee recommendations would be placed in front of Council for consideration, noting this had occurred in the past.

Councillor Hume referenced the risks associated with the existing housing stock and inquired on the proposed strategy in the absence of Federal and Provincial programs. Ms. Potter explained the $1 million would be used to try to lever additional funding from the private sector and other orders of government in an attempt to create a large funding package for new additional housing and the required support. Ms. Potter reviewed a similar program in Calgary where a community initiatives fund of $6 million was established through partnerships and contributions.

Chair Chiarelli referenced Agenda Item No. 6 and the need for increased authority for resurfacing. Mr. LeBelle stated the recommendation was the best professional recommendation to Council, noting there was not enough cash in the reserves to accommodate the increases. The Finance Commissioner noted the Corporation was well within its debt capacity and agreed the recommendation would represent borrowing in the normal course of doing business. He pointed out the 1998 and 1999 resurfacing programs were debentured.

Chair Chiarelli reviewed the situation. The Chair stated within the Social Services Department, $1.5 million had been identified as surplus and it was decided to transfer $1 million to programs to assist homelessness, a very serious problem in the community. Chair Chiarelli did not support intertwining the $1.5 million surplus with the regular Corporate business to debenture for resurfacing programs. Chair Chiarelli expressed his support for the staff recommendations outlined in Agenda Items 6 and 9.

In response to a question from Councillor Beamish regarding provincial funding and local services realignment, Mr. LeBelle stated there was lack of clarity around transferred roads. He explained in the case of social housing, it was based upon a specific invoice that came from the Province. However, in the case of roads, the Province had downloaded an entire system, leaving the Region with the responsibility to maintain that system. Mr. LeBelle stated the Province should have transferred a reserve value for the road system. Councillor Beamish pointed out the payments for social housing and the resurfacing programs came from the same Region Wide Fund, noting one had been under estimated thereby creating a deficit, and one had been over estimated thereby creating a surplus.

Councillor Cantin did not support the concept of reserving money for a possible expenditure and borrowing money for a real expenditure. He believed it was more appropriate to deal with the definite need of resurfacing at this time. He stated should funds be required for a project later, than Council could consider debenturing at that time.

M. Beckstead, Chief Administrative Officer, pointed out that the fact the Region may issue debt did not necessarily mean it was issued to a third party. He stated it may be brought through the reserve funds, representing an internal exercise. Mr. LeBelle added that the Region often issued debt directly to the reserve funds, which represented an advantage of having those funds. Councillor Cantin suggested it was more appropriate to issue debt at a later time, if necessary.

Councillor Loney stated the necessity and reality to issue debenture for some projects. The Councillor urged Committee to support the staff recommendations as presented. He referenced the good track record of Finance to regularly review the debentures. Councillor Loney also pointed out that although authority may be provided, it did not necessarily mean the debenture would actually require to be issued. Mr. LeBelle stated the actually debenture would not be issued until after the work was complete, noting as late as 2000 - 2001.

Councillor Loney referenced the need to accurately reflect the adjustments and expenditures for resurfacing, and other programs, at the end of 1999, noting the final 1999 budget documents were recently issued.

Councillor Loney acknowledged the obligation to deal with social housing and issues around homelessness, referencing the need for partnerships and senior government co-operation. He expressed his support for the staff recommendations for Agenda Items 6 and 9.

That debenture authority for $2.3 million be established for the resurfacing projects and that the remaining $1.5 million come from the Region Wide Capital Reserve Fund.

The Committee then considered the Beamish Motion to amend Agenda Item No. 9, 1998 Audited Operating Results, as follows.

Moved by D. Beamish

That no new debenture authority be approved for resurfacing (Agenda Item No. 6), and that the surpluses in the Region Wide General Fund and under expenditures in Corporate Fleet (Agenda Item No. 9) be transferred to the appropriate accounts to allow for necessary road resurfacing.

LOST

NAYS: R. Cantin, P. Hume, A. Loney, R. Chiarelli …. 4

YEAS: D. Beamish, B. Hill, G. Hunter, W. Stewart … 4

Councillor Hunter moved the following Motion.

Moved by G. Hunter

That 1998 surplus of $1.5 million in the Region Wide General Fund (Agenda Item No. 9) be contributed to the 1999 resurfacing program (Agenda Item No. 6) and the required debenture authority be reduced accordingly.

DECLARED

OUT OF ORDER

The Committee then considered the staff recommendations.

YEAS: R. Cantin, P. Hume, A. Loney, W. Stewart, R. Chiarelli … 5

NAYS: D. Beamish, B. Hill, G. Hunter … 3

Councillor Cantin inquired about the necessity to pre-approve the 2000 budget in advance. G. Geddes, Director, Year 2000 Program, explained the request was based on the fact they were into the home stretch of the program. He stated the anticipated spending was to 31 March 2000. Mr. Geddes reported there was a need to ensure timely approval of expenditures that may go beyond 1999 and to avoid the problem of shortage of funds in the fall. J. LeBelle, Finance Commissioner, pointed out the authority was required at the time of approving the contracts, not just when the invoice was to be paid.

Mr. Geddes stated they had been able to, for the most part, hold the rates on the standing offer prices and stated it was a supply and demand issue. He indicated it would become more difficult to obtain qualified consultants close to the end of 1999, and reviewed the issues around the contract terms.

PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT APPROVALS

- Planning and Development Approvals Commissioner’s report dated 23 Jun 99

Councillor Cantin stated when reviewing the real estate market, houses of this size had increased in price. He inquired why the sale of the Alenmede properties continued to remain at the same price while others in the market increased in value.

R. Ennor, Director, Property Services, reported the properties had been listed for some time. He stated the price requested was reasonable, recognizing the condition of the property. Mr. Ennor explained the property being sold was not the same as what was previously brought, therefore, resulting in a reduced price. Mr. Ennor referenced limitations such as easements and the location of the property. He stated properties under those limitations did not increase in market value at the same rate as others.

Councillor Stewart expressed concern with the loss on this sale. She stated the property should be of more value, noting the intersection and commercial potential. R. Ennor, Director, Property Services, stated approximately 30% of the property was retained by the Region including the deletion of the house. Mr. Ennor stated there were associated entitlements under the Expropriations Act. Mr. Ennor confirmed the property was listed through the Real Estate Board, was offered to the original owner and the property was zoned residential.

In response to a question from Councillor Cantin, R. Ennor, Director, Property Services, reported the transaction represented the completion of an existing commitment under a 1982 agreement with the City of Ottawa.

With respect to the land reserved for possible future road widening, Mr. Ennor reported the Official Plan requirements had been retained.

This report carried during the consent agenda with the noted dissents.

In response to a question from Councillor Cantin regarding the reference to Bowesville Road in the report, R. Ennor, Director, Property Services, stated that under an old plan there was a section entitled Bowesville Road. He added this was not the current situation and cause for confusion.

This report carried during the consent agenda with the noted dissents.

That the Corporate Services and Economic Development Committee approve a lease renewal for 6909.50 sq.ft. of office space at 179 Clarence Street with the City of Ottawa Non-Profit Housing Corporation, for one year and seven months from June 1, 1999 to December 13, 2000, at an annual cost of $ 134,873 plus GST.

That the Corporate Services and Economic Development Committee approve a lease renewal for 16,582 sq.ft. of office space at 1590 Scott Street with Holland Cross Inc. for five years from October 1, 1999 to September 30, 2004, at an annual cost of $ 374,114 plus GST.

Councillor Hume moved two Motions (1) to hold a 50% ownership in the property and (2) the requirement for proper signage acknowledging the Region’s contribution. Councillor Hume stated the acquisition represented the Region’s attempt to fulfil a condition of the Official Plan. He believed it was a basic principle that the Region should retain 50% ownership and proper signage should be erected on the property.

Councillor Stewart agreed with the Official Plan objective to acquire waterfront open space, however, did not support the Hume Motions. She stated to retain 50% ownership may result in the Region being responsible for 50% of the operating and management fees. She believed this was an opportunity to support the City of Gloucester and their initiative, and did not support the action of two tier territorial disputes.

Councillor Cantin acknowledged acquiring lands of significant concern, such as the Marlborough Forest and Petrie Island. However, the Councillor wondered about the action of purchasing park land. Councillor Cantin agreed with the condition of a prominent sign indicating the Region’s contribution.

Councillor Loney referenced the need for Regional and City staff to review the issues in greater detail should the Hume Motions be successful. Councillor Loney indicated he may move a Motion that the entire matter be referred back to staff to further examine the issues.

Councillor Hume referenced the principle used in the Kanata Y Camp project and retaining a 50% ownership. The Councillor pointed out the Region was going to fund 50% of the acquisition costs, therefore, it was appropriate they should retain 50% ownership in the land, based on the models of the Kanata Y Camp and the airport lands acquisition. With respect to the signage requirement, Councillor Hume believed it was a recognition for the substantial contribution to be made.

Councillor Hunter reviewed the three parcels. He pointed out one parcel did not have any water front and the others had very little. The Councillor did not believe the action represented protecting waterfront, but was one of increasing the size of a local recreational park. Councillor Hunter did not support the acquisition or the report.

 Chair Chiarelli stated the process with the City of Kanata regarding the Y Camp worked well. He supported the concept of a similar process for this acquisition and agreed with the Motion for joint ownership. Chair Chiarelli stated the Region had an obligation to create / preserve open spaces, parks and forests whenever possible, referencing applicable policies. In closing, the Chair referenced the Council decision on the donation of land to the City of Nepean for the creation of Ben Franklin Park. He stated the same courtesy should be provided to the City of Gloucester.

 Moved by P. Hume

CARRIED

YEAS: R. Cantin, P. Hume, G. Hunter, A. Loney, R. Chiarelli … 5

NAYS: D. Beamish, B. Hill, W. Stewart … 3

Moved by P. Hume

That the Region’s participation in this waterfront open space acquisition be subject to the following signage requirements:

and that this condition be subject to the satisfaction of the Chief Administrative Officer.

LOST

NAYS: B. Hill, G. Hunter, A. Loney, W. Stewart … 4

YEAS: D. Beamish, R. Cantin, P. Hume, R. Chiarelli … 4

Moved by A. Loney

That the report on Land Acquisition - City of Gloucester be referred back to staff for a further report that looks further at the ongoing relationship with this property (similar to the format of the Y Camp project with Kanata).

MOTION WITHDRAWN

The Committee then voted on the staff recommendations as amended.

YEAS: D. Beamish, R. Cantin, P. Hume, A. Loney, W. Stewart, R. Chiarelli … 6

NAYS: B. Hill, G. Hunter … 2

Councillor Loney moved the procedural Motion to move In Camera. Councillor Hunter requested justification as to why the report should be discussed In Camera. R. Chartrand, Executive Director, Economic Affairs, explained the report represented negotiations with four other parties and addressed issues for leasing land for a long period of time. Councillor Hunter stated the issue was public knowledge and had previously been discussed in the public forum. Mr. Chartrand explained the report represented the framework under which the transfer would occur through a Memorandum of Understanding. He stated as a course of business, such matters were discussed in confidence. Councillor Hunter believed the report did not contain any information that the public did not have a right to know. Mr. Chartrand reiterated that the report involved four other parties. He agreed confidentiality may not be an issue if the report was approved by Committee and Council as presented. However, he believed a problem might arise if Council was not comfortable with the MOU terms, and further negotiations would have to continue, making the issues relevant.

Moved by A. Loney

That Agenda Item No. 1 of the confidential agenda be considered by the Corporate Services and Economic Development Committee In Camera pursuant to subsection 11(1) ( c) a proposed or pending acquisition of land for the purposes of the Regional Corporation, of the Procedure By-law.

LOST

NAYS: B. Hill, G. Hunter, A. Loney, W. Stewart …. 4

YEAS: D. Beamish, R. Cantin, R. Chiarelli … 3

As a result of the lost Motion to move In Camera, the Committee considered the report in open session.

Chair Chiarelli introduced the report by stating the process had been a very detailed and complicated transaction.

Mr. Chartrand provided a presentation to the Committee which outlined the following, specifically the framework which the MOU would be prepared. {A copy of presentation slides are on file with the Regional Clerk.}

Councillor Hunter referenced the financial commitments by the Region and inquired if project management costs and additional studies were included in those figures. Mr. Chartrand stated the project management costs would primarily be staff time, however, stated some expertise may be required. Mr. Chartrand noted report recommendation
no. 3 stated those costs would be allocated through the approved Convention Centre - Linkages budget.

With respect to the other parties, Mr. Chartrand stated he felt confident they were in the position to move forward, and referenced major national fund raising campaigns. With regard to the private sector partner, Mr. Chartrand stated that partner was yet to be determined and the next step may involve a call for proposals from the private sector. He believed it could take 6 - 8 months before a private sector partner and terms were established.

Councillor Hunter extended his compliments to the Chair and Mr. Chartrand for the work completed and protection of regional interests.

Councillor Stewart referenced the financial guarantees from the Sports Hall of Fame and inquired what would protect the Region from future risk. Mr. Chartrand explained this would be addressed during the next phase. He agreed there was a requirement for risk management, noting the length of the agreement, and stated the level of comfort would have to be high in order to proceed.

Councillor Stewart inquired if the funds in the budgets were sufficient to proceed. Mr. Chartrand confirmed the authority was in place and the approval by Committee would represent encumbering the required money for this project, noting the expenditures would not take place for two - three years.

In response to a question from Councillor Beamish regarding the authority, Mr. Chartrand pointed out a private sector partner was yet to be found and a long term agreement to be negotiated. He confirmed there were major hurdles yet to overcome, and it would be at least a year before Committee would formally approve the expenditure of the funds.

Councillor Beamish moved a Motion that contained text from within the report regarding the need for a private sector partner in order to proceed.

Councillor Loney inquired on the process to obtain a private sector partner. Mr. Chartrand explained the search for a partner would begin immediately upon Council approval. He hoped by the end of September there would be a sense of those interested and preliminary discussions started. Mr. Chartrand confirmed Committee would formally approve the partner, however, stated the selection process was not yet formalized.

Councillor Loney referenced the 40 year lease and inquired on a renewal clause. Mr. Chartrand reported the intention of the Federal Government was to divest itself from the property, however, referenced the difficulties around forfeiting the ownership due to the national interest land mass. Mr. Chartrand stated the long term lease would contain renewal clauses. Councillor Loney suggested the long term lease was necessary in order to attract a private sector partner and allow that partner the opportunity to recover their investment.

Councillor Stewart commended the Regional Chair and Mr. Chartrand for their work on a very complex issue and the success to date.

Moved by G. Hunter

Councillor Beamish requested this item be placed on the next Committee agenda
{07 September 1999}. M. Beckstead, Chief Administrative Officer, confirmed this was possible. However, he explained the desire to begin the process for the recruitment of a Regional Solicitor. Councillor Beamish and other Committee members did not express concern with starting this process in advance to the September meeting.