CARRIED

DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST

No declarations of interest were filed.

OTHER BUSINESS

Prior to moving to the regular agenda, Chair Chiarelli provided an information briefing on the Request for Proposals (RFP) for the expanded convention centre. The Chair stated the funding partnership was in place providing $400,000 toward the development of a business plan. He noted the Province of Ontario, the higher contributor, was taking the lead on the RFP process. A meeting was scheduled for 20 January 1999 with a number of interested bidders.

Chair Chiarelli referenced the spectacular re-development of the downtown core which was currently underway through many projects with others in the near future. He reviewed examples of many activities, as follows:

With respect to the RFP document for the expanded convention centre, Chair Chiarelli stated it had been made available to Councillors. All questions were to be directed to the Provincial Manager, Carol Hancock, at (416) 325-6055. The Chair commented the Province had requested that any questions with respect to potential funding be placed on hold until the business plan came forward.

Councillor Hume was Acting Chair for the discussion of this report.

Councillor Stewart thanked staff for the briefing on the SCADA program previously held. She stated many of her questions and concerns with regard to timing and cost had been answered, and she now recognized the need for the upgrade at this time.

Councillor Stewart referenced Recommendation No. 3 of the report, the award for Contract CA9603 to CRA Contracting Services, a Canadian branch of CRA Services. The Councillor inquired how long the Canadian branch had been incorporated. J. Miller, Director, Engineering Division, confirmed the incorporation date was 1992, however, was not sure if that was specifically for the Canadian branch. Mr. Miller explained CRA Services consisted of one holding company and three components: (i) consulting engineering in the American area (ii) consulting engineering in the Canadian area, and (iii) contracting firm providing the design-build project management capability. Mr. Miller stated staff have reviewed the assignment and were confident the consultant had the experience and would complete the project on time.

Councillor Stewart referencing the number of consultant appointments required. Mr. Miller stated the program involved many components, such as suppliers, process controls, separate equipment, etc., all which would require a team approach. He stated under some projects, it was required for a firm to bring in a number of sub-contractors. In this case, the Region was contracting with CRA Contracting Services and the sub-contractors were obligated to them.

Mr. Miller provided clarification for Councillor van den Ham regarding the project authorities, specifically the remaining balance of $2 million. Mr. Miller indicated there would be additional equipment to purchase, and negotiations were underway with suppliers. He agreed to provide members of Council with a summary of the three accounts and the remaining balances.

The Committee then considered the staff recommendations.

Councillor Hume was Acting Chair for the discussion of this report.

Mr. Greg Geddes, Director, Year 2000 (Y2K) Project Team, provided a presentation to the Committee. (Copy of the presentation is included in Committee Report No. 30 and is on file with the Committee Co-ordinator.) Upon conclusion of the presentation, Mr. Geddes responded to questions.

Councillor Holmes stated Y2K community organizations were being formed and referenced region-wide emergency planning. The Councillor inquired if staff were going to liaison with these organizations. D. Brousseau, Director, Emergency Measures Unit (EMU), stated they intended to meet with the Chief Administrative Officer to develop a plan on this matter. However, Mr. Brousseau noted the Region did not have the mandate to provide leadership in the community in the area of emergency preparedness. He added the EMU responded to emergencies through the co-ordination of bringing the responding partners together. Councillor Holmes stated there were community volunteers interested in working with the Region and hoped staff would be able to assist them.

Councillor Holmes referenced Ontario Hydro and inquired about their readiness. Mr. Geddes reported they had met with Ontario Hydro in November. He stated Hydro did not expect to see any major system failures. If there was a disruption, it would be minor such as several hours - up to a day, or other conservation measures may be taken.

In closing, Councillor Holmes inquired if the Team was prepared to provide presentations to the community on the Region’s plans. Mr. Geddes confirmed presentations had been held in 1998, and would continue in 1999. Mr. Geddes reported plans were in progress to arrange 11 sessions through the area municipalities in March - April. These sessions would provide updates on the Region’s program, the respective area municipality’s program and may include the appropriate public utilities/ other agencies, noting the numbers of organizations involved.

Councillor Hunter referenced the recent Council Motion regarding the delay of the ambulance service transfer by one month. Mr. Geddes stated he believed the main objective of the delay was the need to avoid added complications around 31 December 1999.

With respect to Ontario Hydro’s statement, Councillor Hunter referenced the procurement of generators and questioned its necessity. Mr. Geddes reported through the Ice Storm experience, it was determined in some cases back-up generators were not adequate, and some facilities did not have a back-up. He explained generators may be required for critical services such as police stations, the 9-1-1 system, homes for the aged. Mr. Geddes referenced the concern of the additional number of people in the Capital on
31 December 1999 for millennium celebrations.

Councillor Hunter referenced software that was found to not be Y2K compliant, yet not considered critical and there was a manual way around the problem. Mr. Geddes confirmed this type of situation was considered a "nuisance" problem and was low priority. He stated the current focus was on critical and high priorities. Low priorities would be considered at a later date, however, under the current fiscal environment, staff may have to learn to adapt to "nuisance" but manually fixable problems.

Councillor Hunter stated it may be beneficial to include in a future report a discussion on the various strategies to be used to overcome the problems, whether it was discarding and replacing software, or manually overriding the problem.

In response to a question from Councillor Hill, Mr. Brousseau reviewed the EMU staff component and their responsibilities, which included the management of the corporate radio system, 9-1-1 system and various EMU responsibilities. Councillor Hill believed the EMU should be preparing for the possible emergency situations, including the loss of public utilities, that may occur on 31 December 1999.

On a point of clarification, Mr. Geddes noted the budget was within authority. He believed there was confusion surrounding the budget summary slide and the estimated $10.6 million for 1999 expenditures. Mr. Geddes stated there was authority for Year 2000 and expenditures above 1999 would be drawn against that authority. Mr. LeBelle reiterated the budget slide was presented on a year to year basis and assured Committee the project would come in on budget. Mr. Geddes reported the U.S. Government budget was originally $1.6 billion and had now increased to $6 billion.

Further to comments made by Councillor Holmes, Councillor van den Ham suggested an area within Window on the Region could be designated for information on Y2K issues, preparedness and status updates.

Councillor Loney commended staff for their excellent presentation, however, wondered if Committee required the extensive quarterly reporting. He acknowledged the information was originally requested by Council. However, he believed as the critical areas had been identified, Council was most interested in projects budget issues. The Councillor moved a Motion regarding the quarterly reporting. After lengthy discussion, the Committee agreed to continue to receive the Quarterly Reports as they were supplied to numerous outside agencies, Management and Corporate Issues Committees, and were an essential part of the official documentation on the Region’s steps for Y2K preparation. In addition, the material was placed on the Region’s web-site and was widely accessed, thereby saving a great deal of time in responding to inquiries. Councillor Loney withdrawn his Motion.

Moved by Councillor Loney

That the reporting for the balance of 1999 be on the basis of exception and a result of difficulties arising in the project. That an updated financial report continue to be provided on a quarterly basis, and a final report be provided upon the conclusion of the project.

MOTION WITHDRAWN

The Committee then considered the staff recommendation.

K. Kirkpatrick, Deputy Finance Commissioner, introduced the report. He stated on
18 December 1998, Royal Asset was given to Bill 79, the Fairness to Property Taxpayers Act. Mr. Kirkpatrick noted there were remaining important issues with the 10-5-5 capping program that were yet to be formalized through regulations expected in the near future.

With respect to the Act, Mr. Kirkpatrick explained it provided the following:

Mr. Kirkpatrick explained the provisions in the Act required Council to make two decisions, as follows:

The Deputy Finance Commissioner reported staff recommended that the decisions made by Council on 12 August 1998 regarding 1998 policy not be changed due to the significant analysis and public consultation that was undertaken. In addition, he noted the policy issues that were dealt with as part of that process had not changed.

Referencing the other mitigation tools reviewed in 1998, Mr. Kirkpatrick stated staff continued to not recommend using those programs for the same reasons stated in Corporate Services and Economic Development Committee Report No. 18. In addition, staff did not recommend the amended rebate program. He believed the Province may consider this program only for areas where there were relevantly few properties and the cost of the program would be insignificant.

Mr. Kirkpatrick explained staff did not recommend the use of the phase-in program as it would not be effective, either alone or in combination with a rebate program, in achieving the performance standard set by the Act.

In closing, Mr. Kirkpatrick stated staff recommended the use of the 10-5-5 capping program as it was the superior alternative and would reliably produce the results required to meet the performance standard created by the Act.

Chair Chiarelli noted the significant impact Bill 79 had on the payments-in-lieu issue with the Federal Government that was not yet resolved. The Chair wished to reserve the option to approach the Province and believed the staff recommendations implied Council’s endorsement of the Bill. Councillor Loney moved a Motion stating the Region would continue to register its objections to Bill 79 as it affects payments-in-lieu of taxes.

Mr. Kirkpatrick reported that recently staff were made aware that the Province had agreed to forward to the Regional Municipality of Halton and the Regional Municipality of Hamilton-Wentworth the funding they had committed to in the fall in 1998 for the rebate programs approved by those Councils. He stated Ottawa-Carleton Council also approved a rebate program with a Provincial share of approximately $6 million. Mr. Kirkpatrick reported staff would be formally contacting the Minister requesting them to honour this commitment. He added that funding would be available to assist in mitigating the impact of a 10-5-5 capping program.

In response to a question from Councillor van den Ham regarding new 1998 tax bills for all commercial, industrial and multi-residential properties, Mr. Kirkpatrick confirmed new bills would be distributed in March 1999. He explained the Online Property Tax Analysis system used by the municipalities to assist with the administration of the 10-5-5 capping program should be available in February.

Councillor Hume referenced the revised deadline (28 February) for registration of vacant property space and how it would affect Ottawa-Carleton. Mr. Kirkpatrick reviewed the particulars around the commercial vacant class and commercial occupied class. He explained the deadline was extended because only a small percentage of the property owners had returned the registration forms. As a result, the Province recognized the need to ensure the 1999 data was more accurate and provided a deadline extension. He was not aware of the effect on Ottawa-Carleton.

Councillor Hill inquired about the frozen assessment listing. Mr. Kirkpatrick stated he believed the creation of the 1997 frozen assessment listing and the checking by the assessment office of omission and magnitude problems, would not assist with the situations in the rural townships.

Councillor Hume assumed the Chair as Committee Vice-Chair.

Mr. Tony Kue, President, Capital Parking and property owner in Toronto, Montreal and Ottawa, addressed the Committee on this matter. Mr. Kue reported that in comparing the taxes paid for similar properties in Toronto to Ottawa, he determined the amounts to be unfair with Ottawa’s being substantially higher. Mr. Kue reviewed examples of similar properties in the two cities and the amount of taxes paid. He blamed the unfair situation as a result of the numerous re-assessments completed in Ottawa-Carleton over the years, noting older Toronto (downtown) has not been reassessed for many years. The speaker referenced the outrage expressed by the business and ethnic communities in Toronto when taxes were going to increase. In closing, Mr. Kue urged the committee members, as Ottawa-Carleton representatives, to voice their opposition.

In response to a question from Councillor Hunter, Mr. Kirkpatrick confirmed that with the implementation of the Ontario Fair Assessment System effective in 1998, all Ontario properties, including those in Toronto, were assessed as of their current market value
30 June 1996. Mr. Kue stated the taxes for 1997 were based on 1988 values at which time the market values were much higher, thereby, creating the inequity.

The Committee thanked Mr. Kue for his submission. They then considered the Loney Motion and report recommendations, as amended.

Moved by Councillor Loney

CARRIED

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

RECEIVED

ADJOURNMENT