HomeMy WebLinkAboutMay 9, 2016
For information related to accessibility requirements please contact Linda Roberts
Phone: 905.420.4660 extension 2928 TTY: 905.420.1739 Email: lroberts@pickering.ca
Executive Committee Agenda
Monday, May 9, 2016
Council Chambers
2:00 pm
Chair: Councillor Brenner
Anything highlighted denotes an attachment or link. By clicking the links on the agenda page, you can jump directly to that section of the
agenda. To manoeuver back to the agenda page use the Ctrl +
Home keys simultaneously, or use the “bookmark” icon to the left of your screen to navigate from one report to the next.
Executive Committee Meeting
Agenda
Monday, May 9, 2016
Council Chambers
2:00 pm
Chair: Councillor Brenner
For information related to accessibility requirements please contact
Linda Roberts
Phone: 905.420.4660 extension 2928
TTY: 905.420.1739
Email: lroberts@pickering.ca
(I) Disclosure of Interest Pages
(II) Delegations
1. Khaled El Dalati, Project Manager, Parsons Inc.
Re: 407 Transitway Project from Kennedy Road to Brock Road
Environmental Assessment (MTO Project) Preferred Solution
(III) Matters for Consideration
1. Director, Engineering & Public Works, Report ENG 08-16 1-5
Repair and Maintenance of Municipal Fences
Recommendation
1. That Council direct staff to prepare an asset management plan and
financial strategy for the maintenance, repair, and replacement of
municipal fences in 2016 for Council consideration;
2. That funding be considered through the annual budget process in the
Current Budget for the repair and maintenance of municipal fences along
road allowances and other City lands;
3. That a funding strategy for City fence replacement be developed and
implemented for future Capital Budgets based on the criteria of safety and
structural condition;
4. That City of Pickering staff initiate discussion with Region of Durham staff
on the responsibility and funding of maintenance, repair and replacement
of noise attenuation and screen/privacy fences along Regional Roads;
5. That Council direct City Development and Engineering & Public Works
staff to review the placement of fences in future developments, especially
the Seaton Community in order to minimize future costs; and
Executive Committee Meeting
Agenda
Monday, May 9, 2016
Council Chambers
2:00 pm
Chair: Councillor Brenner
6. That a copy of Report ENG 08-16 be forwarded to the Region of Durham
for information.
2. Director, Engineering & Public Works, Report ENG 10-16 6-19
Proposed All-way Stop Control, Liverpool Road and Wharf Street
Recommendation
1. That the attached draft by-law be enacted to amend Schedule "7" to By-
law 6604/05 to provide for the regulation of stop signs on highways or
parts of highways under the jurisdiction of The Corporation of the City of
Pickering, specifically to address the proposed installation of an all-way
stop control at the intersection of Liverpool Road and Wharf Street, and
2. That the appropriate officials of the City of Pickering be authorized to take
the necessary actions as indicated in this report.
3. Director, Corporate Services & City Solicitor, Report FIN 07-16 20-29
Cash Position Report as at December 31, 2015
Recommendation
That report FIN 07-16 from the Director, Corporate Services & City Solicitor be
received for information.
4. Director, Corporate Services & City Solicitor, Report FIN 08-16 30-37
2016 Tax Rates and Final Tax Due Dates for all Realty Tax Classes,
Except for Commercial, Industrial and Multi-Residential Realty Classes
Recommendation
1. That Report FIN 08-16 of the Director, Corporate Services & City Solicitor
regarding the 2016 tax rates be received;
2. That the 2016 tax rates for the City of Pickering be approved as contained
in Schedule A of the By-law attached hereto;
3. That the tax levy due dates for the Final Billing be June 28, 2016 and
September 28, 2016 excluding the industrial, multi-residential and
commercial realty tax classes;
Executive Committee Meeting
Agenda
Monday, May 9, 2016
Council Chambers
2:00 pm
Chair: Councillor Brenner
4. That for the year 2016, the City shall levy upon designated Universities
and Colleges an annual tax at the prescribed amount for each full-time
student enrolled in the University or College, as determined by the Minister
of Training, Colleges and Universities, payable on or after July 1st ;
5. That the attached By-law be approved;
6. That the Division Head, Finance & Treasurer be authorized to make any
changes or undertake any actions necessary to comply with Provincial
regulations including altering due dates or final tax rates to ensure that the
property tax billing process is completed; and,
7. That the appropriate City of Pickering officials be authorized to take the
necessary actions to give effect thereto.
5. Director, Corporate Services & City Solicitor, Report FIN 09-16 38-46
Investment Portfolio Activity for the Year Ended December 31, 2015
Ontario Regulation 438/97 under the Municipal Act, 2001
Recommendation
It is recommended that report FIN 09-16 of the Director, Corporate Services &
City Solicitor regarding Investment Portfolio Activity for the Year Ended December
31, 2015 be received for information.
(IV) Other Business
(V) Adjournment
2
ENG 08-16
Subject: Repair and Maintenance of Municipal Fences Page 2
asset management plan and financial strategy for municipal fences be prepared. This
will allow the staff to better prepare for the cost of future repair and replacement of
fences throughout the City through the annual budget process.
Financial Implications: There is a need to establish an asset management plan and
financial strategy to ensure that City fences are repaired and replaced in a consistent
manner. The estimated replacement value for fences adjacent to City roads and
property (parks and walkways) and fences abutting Regional Roads is approximately
$8.43 million.
The 2016 Budget report (FIN 05-16) recommendation 20c, asked Council to consider
adopting as a first step, a capital fence levy of 0.41% that equates to a funding request
of $240,000 in 2017. (The $240,000 represents an investment of $80,000 per ward on
average per year.) In future years, Council could consider increasing the fence levy to
accelerate the fence replacement plan. In addition, the consideration of a cost sharing
strategy between the City and the property owner would have an impact on future levy
increases. Depending upon the plan adopted by Council, the $240,000 levy may be
adequate to fund City fence replacement needs. Without this permanent funding source,
fence replacement will be conducted on an ad hoc basis due to high cost pressures to
replace and repair other existing major capital assets such as roads, bridges and
facilities.
Discussion: At present, there is approximately 13 kilometers of fences
along Regional Roads and 49 kilometers of fencing adjacent to City roads and property
(parks and walkways) with an estimated replacement value of $8,430,000. With the City
poised for future growth, the City's existing fence inventory will increase as pevelopment
proceeds. An Inventory Summary, containing fence descriptions, lengths ana
associated replacement value is contained within Attachment 1 of this report. This
inventory was compiled in late 2012 and needs to be updated as part of the asset
management plan.
1. Existing Fence Repair and Maintenance Needs
The City does not have an aggressive program or the funds available to address the
level of current repair needs. A nominal amount of funding, approximately $20,000
annually, is carried in the Parks Current Budget to handle all minor repairs to fences.
Fence repair needs are assessed by staff on case by case basis. If the fence represents
a safety or liability issue for the City, the repair need is put on a list for the current or
following year. Repairs are addressed more promptly. if an immediate need is
recognized. Requests for repairs that fall into the category of aesthetics are given a
lower priority. All fence repairs are undertaken by City staff.
CORP0227-07/01 revised
ENG 08-16
Subject: Repair and Maintenance of Municipal Fences Page 3
2. Existing Fence Replacement Needs
The City has a program in place to undertake fence replacement projects. The 2015
Property Maintenance Capital Budget and the Four Year Capital Forecast (2017 -2020)
have approved and forecasted amounts ranging from $150,000 to $350,000 annually for
replacement projects. The projects include noise attenuation or screen/privacy fences
(along City road allowances) and divisional fences (between private property and City
property such as parks, open spaces and walkways).
Fence replacement projects will be undertaken only when necessarily required, until
such time as the City has an official policy on ownership, responsibility and cost sharing
arrangements. ·
3. Fences Along Regional and Provincial Roads
The inventory prepared in 2012 identified approximately 13 km of noise attenuation and
screen/privacy fences along roads under the jurisdiction of the Region of Durham. In
most instances the property adjacent to the Regional Road is privately owned. In such
cases, where there is no City property on either side of the fence, staff is recommending
that the City initiate discussions with Region of Durham staff with respect to
responsibility and funding. The Region of Durham's current position is that they will not
take on maintenance responsibilities.
Fences along Provincial Roads, specifically 400 series highways are maintained by the
Province and as a result there rs no concern regarding responsibility or funding for
repairs or replacement.
Attachments:
1. Inventory Summary
CORP0227-07/01 revised
3
ENG 10-16 May 9, 2016
Subject: Proposed All-way Stop Control
Liverpool Road and Wharf Street
Public Works staff recommend the placement of an all-way stop control at the
intersection of Liverpool Road and Wharf Street.
Page 2
Financial Implications: The installation of stop signs, advance warning signs, and
stop bar and pavement markings at the intersection of Liverpool Road and Wharf Street
can be accommodated within the 2016 Roads Current Budget.
Discussion: In January 2015 Engineering & Public Works staff received a request from
two area residents on Pleasant Street to investigate the installation of an all-way stop at
the intersection of Liverpool Road and Commerce Street. In April 2015 Engineering &
Public Works staff received a request from an area resident on Wharf Street to
investigate the installation of an all-way stop at the intersection of Liverpool Road and
Wharf Street. Another request from an area resident on Wharf Street was later received
in September 2015 to investigate an all-way stop at Liverpool Road and Wharf Street.
All residents have expressed safety concerns, specifically with respect to sightlines and
vehicle volumes.
In response to these concerns, Engineering & Public Works staff completed a review of
both the Liverpool Road and Wharf Street and Liverpool Road and Commerce Street
intersections, which included the following investigations:
• collection of vehicle and pedestrian volumes at both intersections in the spring and
summer months
• review of sightlines and road geometry for both intersections
• review of collision history for the previous five years for both intersections
• observations of vehicle volume and pedestrian activity on Liverpool Road from
Commerce Street to the southern limit during the spring and summer months
• community consultation with residents and businesses
The results of the review and recommendations are presented in the following sections:
An all-way stop control would not be warranted based on vehicular and
pedestrian volumes at either intersection
To determine if an all-way stop control is required at the intersection of Liverpool Road
and Wharf Street and the intersection of Liverpool Road and Commerce Street, staff
completed municipal all-way stop warrants, in accordance with the City's Safer Streets
Traffic Management Strategy. The City's All-way Stop Warrant calculates whether an
all-way stop control is required, taking pedestrian and vehicular volumes, reported
collision history and sightlines into consideration.
CORP0227-07/01 revised
7
8
ENG 10-16
Subject: Proposed All-way Stop Control
Liverpool Road and Wharf Street
May 9, 2016
Page 3
Eight-hour vehicle and pedestrian turning movement counts were completed at the
intersection of Liverpool Road and Wharf Street, and at the intersection of Liverpool
Road and Commerce Street on Tuesday, Apri128, 2015 and Wednesday, May 20, 2015
respectively. The specific time periods for the traffic count were 7:00am to 9:00am,
11:00 am to 1:00pm and 2:00pm to 6:00pm. The peak hour for both vehicular and
pedestrian traffic for the morning peak periods at the intersections were 8:00 am to 9:00
am. The afternoon peak period for the intersection of Liverpool Road and Wharf Street
was 3:15pm to 4:15pm, and for the Liverpool Road and Commerce Street intersection it
was 4:30 pm to 5:30 pm.
In addition to the eight-hour turning movement counts, 24-hour vehicle volume counts
were completed over seven days from Saturday July 18, 2015 to Friday July 24, 2015
using a mechanical vehicle counter classifier (road tubes).
It is also recognized that during the summer months (May to September) Liverpool
Road has increased vehicle and pedestrian activity and parking demand due to
Pickering's Nautical Village being located at the southern limit of Liverpool Road.
Pickering's Nautical Village is a popular tourist destination and features many summer
activities including free musical entertainment at Millennium Square on Thursday
evenings, playgrounds for children, the Waterfront Trail, dragon boats, sailing, as well
as many different shops, businesses and restaurants. This increased vehicle and
parking demand is evident as vehicle and pedestrian volume generally effects adjacent
streets due to the limitation of parking spaces at Millennium Square.
However, the City's warrants for all-way stop controls were not met, in accordance with
the City's Safer Streets Traffic Management Strategy, based on both the vehicle and
pedestrian turning movement counts and the 24-hour vehicle volume counts, with
Warrant 2: Minimum Vehicle Volume not being satisfied. The traffic counts did indicate
however, that of the two locations, the intersection of Liverpool Road and Wharf Street
had a slightly higher volume of vehicular traffic exiting than the intersection of Liverpool
Road and Commerce Street.
The all-way stop warrant analysis for the intersection of Liverpool Road and Wharf
Street, and for the intersection of Liverpool Road and Commerce Street can be found in
Attachment 1 and Attachment 2 respectively.
There are no reported collisions in the last five years at either intersection that is
correctable by the instal.lation of an all-way stop
In the previous five years, there were no reported collisions that would be correctable by
·the installation of an all-way stop at the intersection of Liverpool Road and Wharf Street
and at the intersection of Liverpool Road and Commerce Street.
The City's All-way Stop Warrant requires there to be an occurrence of three or more
reportable collisions per year, averaged over three years! correctable through the
CORP0227-07/01 revised
ENG -10-16
Subject: Proposed All-way Stop Control
Liverpool Road and Wharf Street
May 9, 2016
Page 4
installation of all-way stop controls. Therefore, an all-way stop control is not warranted
at either intersection based on collision history.
Vehicle traffic can be difficult to see when exiting from both Wharf Street and
Commerce Street when vehicles are parked on Liverpool Road
The on-street parking on Liverpool Road at Wharf Street and at Commerce Street make
it challenging for drivers to exit these streets onto Liverpool Road.
At Wharf Street specifically, on-street parking exists both north and south of the
intersection on both sides of the road. This makes it difficult for drivers on both
approaches of Wharf Street to see oncoming traffic on Liverpool Road, particularly in
the summer months. Sightlines are less than 50 metres at the intersection when
stopped at the stop bar, however, sightlines are improved to greater than 60 metres
when moving forward towards to the edge of the intersection.
At Commerce Street, on-street parking exists only on the west side of Liverpool Road
south of the intersection. This makes exiting Commerce Street difficult for drivers on
the west approach, particularly in the summer months .. When stopped at the stop bar
sightlines are impacted by on-street parking and a hedge on the southwest corner of the
intersection. Sightlines are less than 50 metres at the intersection when stopped at the
stop bar, however, sightlines are improved to greater than 60 metres when moving
forward towards to the edge of the intersection. City staff are currently looking into
options to improve the sightline at this corner and have had a discussion with the
business that has been parking vehicles on Liverpool Road at Commerce Street, and
will be speaking with the homeowner on the southwest corner about ttie partial removal
of the hedge that is on the corner.
Based on the above investigation by the City of Pickering staff, the vehicle and
pedestrian volumes and collision history at these intersections do not meet the
requirements for an all-way stop. However, the City of Pickering has installed all-way
stop control at intersections where sightline issues are recognized. It is recognized by
City Staff that there are sightline issues at both intersections when vehicles are parked
on Liverpool Road, which occurs routinely in the summer months.
Due to the close distance between Commerce Street and Wharf Street on Liverpool
Road, the City is recommending installing an all-way stop control only at one location.
Furthermore, because the sightline concern is more evident at the intersection of
Liverpool Road and Wharf Street and since the vehicle volume is slightly greater at
Wharf Street, particularly in the summer months, Engineering & Public Works staff
completed community consultation for a proposed all-way stop control at the
intersection of Liverpool Road and Wharf Street.
CORP0227-07/01 revised
9
1 0
ENG 10-16 May 9, 2016
Subject: Proposed All-way Stop Control
Liverpool Road and Whart Street Page 5
Feedback from residents received by City staff indicates that the majority of area
residents support an all-way stop at Liverpool Road and Wharf Street
A letter dated February 10, 2016 was sent to area residents, 944 homes, within the
area. The letter indicated that City staff was proposing an all-way stop control at the
intersection of Liverpool Road and Whart Street, and provided area residents an
opportunity to review and provide comments on the proposed all-way stop control, as
well as to indicate their support or opposition. The survey was also promoted on the
City's Facebook and Twitter accounts asking residents to complete the survey and
provide their feedback.
The letter and survey to residents generated 59 replies. A summary of those that were
in support and those that were opposed are as follows:
• 36 replies (61%) were in support of an all-way stop control at Liverpool Road and
Whart Street, 7 of which were in response to the Facebook and Twitter posts
• 23 replies (39%) were opposed to an all-way stop control at Liverpool Road and
Whart Street, 7 of which were in response to the Facebook and Twitter posts
Residents that were in support of the all-way stop control at the intersection of Liverpool
Road and Whart Street indicated the following: .
• better for sightlines especially for motorists turning off Whart Street as many
residents have reported having near misses
• an all-way stop will make crossing Liverpool Road safer for pedestrians
• will slow traffic making it safer for all users of the roadway
Residents that were opposed to the all-way stop control at the intersection of Liverpool
Road and Whart Street indicated the following:
• the upcoming development at the old school site at the northeast corner of Liverpool
Road and Commerce Street will bring more traffic at the intersection of Liverpool
Road and Commerce Street
• does not make sense to put a stop sign for a road that is not a through street
• the all-way stop would be better served at Commerce Street since it is a through
street and is impacted by sightlines
• the all-way stop would be better served at Ann land Street because it is frequented
by vehicles and cyclists that want to access the Watertront Trail and park
• a roundabout would be a better alternative to an all-way stop
City of Pickering staff also sought comment from the Durham Regional Police Services
(DRPS) regarding an all-way stop control at the intersection of Liverpool Road and
Whart Street. DRPS indicated that although unwarranted, they do not have concerns if
CORP0227-07/01 revised
ENG 10-16
Subject: Proposed All-way Stop Control
Liverpool Road and Wharf Street
May 9, 2016
Page 6
an all-way stop control is installed at the intersection of Liverpool Road and Wharf
Street to assist motorists with exiting from Wharf Street and to create a safe place for
pedestrians to cross. ·
In summary, based on the sightline concern, results from the community consultation
and to allow a safe pedestrian crossing for pedestrians due to the increased vehicle and
pedestrian volume from events at Pickering's Nautical Village, Engineering & Public
Works staff recommend the placement of an all-way stop control at the intersection of
Liverpool Road and Wharf Street.
The proposed all-way stop at the intersection of Liverpool and Wharf Street is illustrated
in Attachment 3.
The proposed amendment to the Traffic By-law 6604/05 is provided in Attachment 4.
Attachments:
1. All-way Stop Warrant, Liverpool Road and Wharf Street
2. All-way Stop Warrant, Liverpool Road and Commerce Street
3. Location map -Proposed All-way Stop, Liverpool Road at Wharf Street
4. Proposed By-law Amendment-Schedule 7, Stop Signs
CORP0227-07/01 revised
11
18
ATTACHMENT#-.!:L~ TO REPORT# Nt~ 10"-1 0
............,j,l_of 2_ -·
The Corporation of the City of Pickering
By-law No.
Being a by-law to amend by-law 6604/05
providing for the regulating of traffic and
parking, standing and stopping on highways
or parts of highways under the jurisdiction of
the City of Pickering and on private and
municipal property.
Whereas, By-law 6604/05, as amended, provides for the regulating of traffic and parking
on highways, private property and municipal property within the City of Pickering, and
Whereas, it is deemed expedient to amend Schedule 7 to By-law 6604/05 to establish
an all-way stop control at the intersection of Liverpool Road and Wharf Street.
. Now therefore the Council of The Corporation of the City of Pickering hereby enacts as
follows: ·
1. Schedule 7 to By-law 6604/05, as amended, is hereby further amended thereto
by the following:
Schedule 7
Stop Signs
Column 1 Column 2
Highway Compulsory Stop Facing Traffic
Add
Liverpool Road @Wharf Liverpool Road, northbound and southbound
Street ~
ATTACHMENT# Lf TOREPORT# fNf7!0-f{p ~ ~ -" Page2 By-law No. XXXX
2. This By-law shall come into force on the date that it is approved by the Council of
the City of Pickering and when signs to the effect are installed.
By-law passed this 16th day of May, 2016.
David Ryan, Mayor
Debbie Shields, City Clerk
19
FIN 07-16 May 9, 2016
Subject: Cash Position Report as at December 31, 2015 Page 2
decrease in cash of $12,618,896 over the last three months of the year. Note however,
that comparison of the increase or decrease in cash over the same period in prior years
may not be relevant due to the timing differences of receipts and disbursements each
year depending on the tax payment due dates. Therefore, it does not, in any way, imply
that the City is in a worse or better cash position as compared to the same period in
prior years. The City implements prudent cash management strategies to ensure that
funds are always available to meet cash requirements.
Continuity of Taxes Receivable: Attachment 2 summarizes the tax related transactions
from September to December 2015 and provides the outstanding taxes receivable as at
December 31, 2015. The total amount represents all three levels of taxes billed for the
City, Region and School Boards. It includes the total amounts owing for 2015 and prior
years.
Outstanding Investments: Attachment 3 reflects the short-and long-term investments
for both Current and Reserve Funds outstanding as at December 31, 2015. The total
investment portfolio is approximately $112.6M, with $4.5Mfrom internal loans and
$108.1 M from general investments. Total investment amounts differ year over year
depending on the timing of collection and remittance of development charges and
supplementary taxes.
Development Charges Collected: The City is responsible for the collection of
development charges on behalf of the City, Region and School Boards. Attachment 4
shows a total collection of $1,215,883 from September to December 2015, with
$1,097,273 for the City, $85,790 for the Region and $32,820 for the School Boards.
Note that development charges collected, as reported under Sources of Funds on
Attachment 1 , does not match the remittance amounts to the Region and School Boards
indicated under Use of Funds, also in Attachment 1. This variance is a result of: (a)
timing differences in payments to the Region and School Boards as monies become
due 25 days following the month of collectiqn; and (b) the City portion not being
reported as a line item under the Use of Funds in Attachment 1.
Other Development Contributions: Attachment 5 is provided to show other relevant
development contributions received in the last quarter of 2015.
Multi-Year Receipts: The balance of the Attachments shows multi-year, annual receipts
of the City's portion of development charges presented in a bar chart from 2001. The
total collection of $2.9M in 2015 is the second lowest in the last five years (2011 -4.3M,
2012-$3.4M, 2013-$3.6M, 2014-$2.9M). Similarly, the 683 building permits issued
in 2015 is the lowest in the last five years (2011 -782,2012-842,2013-861, 2014-
733).
21
City of Pickering
Other Development Contributions
for three months ending December 31, 2015
CONTRIBUTIONS:
Cash -In -Lieu of Parkland $395,394
TOTAL CASH-IN-LIEU $395,394
.. ,1,~.>
~:,l
~-1 )>
() ::r:
:;{
f11 z ·-1
:j::!::
ICh\
·--~ 0
;:;o rn "'U 0 ;;;o -1
::f.!: ~~
r-\,
N ~
I -.I
1;1'-
N
CD
City Portion of
Development Charges Collected
2001-2015
Iii City Portion
5,000,000 .--~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~-
4,500,000 -l~----------------~-~~~----~~--'-'='~o:=._-~---~--~--
4,000,000 +------------:c-=-=-:,.--:-::-::--------------------
3,500,000 +----~~~~~~~-
yt 3,000,000 -!-~~~~----'"'""'-'~"=-........ c 5 2,500,000 +---------
~ 2,000,000 +------
1 '500' 000 +---''------'-------
1 ,000,000
500,000
0
Year
()
N c.o
Building Permits Issued
2001-2015
liiJl No. of Permits
2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
Year
FIN 08-16 May 9, 2016
Subject: 2016 Tax Rates and Final Tax Due Dates for all Realty Tax Classes, Page 2
Except for Commercial, Industrial and Multi-Residential Realty Classes
Financial Implications: Adoption of the recommendations and passing the By-law
will allow staff of the Finance Division to bill the Final 2016 levy for all properties except
for the industrial, commercial and multi-residential tax classes which will be dealt with
later this year. Passing of the by-law will assist the City of Pickering to meet its financial
obligations and reduce any borrowing costs. This levy also raises taxes for the Region of
Durham and the School Boards.
. Discussion:
components:
The 2016 final tax billing process will consist of two separate
1. Residential and residential-related (farm, managed forest) properties; and,
2. Commercial, industrial and multi-residential realty classes.
Later this year, a report will be presented to Council asking for Council's approval to bill
the non-residential tax classes. The non-residential tax classes are subject to tax
capping and Pickering's staff, in conjunction with the other lower tier municipal tax staff
and the Region's finance staff, will be working on the tax capping calculations during the
next few months.
City's Net Tax Levy and Tax Rate Increase
The City's 2016 budget provided for an average property tax increase of 3.99% and was
adopted by Council through Corporate Services Report FIN 05'"16. The 2016 Council
approved budget levy of $57,999,981 plus assessment growth of $546,000 translates
into a total property tax levy of $58,545,981. The Region's tax increase for Pickering is
1.65% and the School Board increase is zero, resulting in a total average residential
increase of approximately 2.07%.
The property tax rates are calculated based on the budgets of both Pickering and
Durham Region. The tax rate itself is defined under section 306 of the Municipal Act and
it is to be calculated to eight decimal points. The City's 2016 residential tax rate is the
lowest of all of the Durham Lakeshore municipalities and Pickering has had the lowest
tax rate for 19 years.
Tax Due Date Instalments
Recommendation 3 provides for the due dates for the payment of residential taxes being
June 28,2016 and September 28,2016. The table below lists the tax instalment due
dates for the last three years.
31
32
FIN 08-16 May 9, 2016
Subject: 2016 Tax Rates and Final Tax Due Dates for all Realty Tax Classes, Page 3
Except for Commercial, Industrial and Multi-Residential Realty Classes
Year 1st Instalment 2nd Instalment
2016 June 28, 2016 September 28, 2016
2015 June 25, 2015 September 25, 2015
2014 June 26, 2014 September 26, 2014
2013 June 27, 2013 September 27, 2013
2016 Reassessment Cycle (2017 to 2020 Taxation Years)
Municipal Property Assessment Corporation or MPAC has already started work on the
next reassessment cycle which updates the property valuation date from January 1, 2012
to January 1, 2016. MPAC has established June 20th as the mailing date for the
Pickering residential Assessment Notices. (Commercial and industrial notices will be
mailed in the fall.) One of the new changes in the reassessment cycle is that the
application deadline for the "Request for Reconsideration" process is changed from
March 31, 2017 to 120 days from the Assessment Notice issue date. In other words, if a
Pickering resident has a concern regarding their property's assessed value, they will
have until October 18th (assuming a June 201h mailing date) to file a request for
reconsideration. If they miss this date, they will have to wait until January 1,
2018. Current Provincial regulations do not permit an individual to file an assessment
appeal unless they have gone through the "Request for Reconsideration"
process. Information regarding the changes to the Request for Reconsideration process
will be included in the City's 2016 property tax brochure.
Communication Strategy
In addition to mailing the tax bills, the City will advertise the tax instalment due dates on
the City's webpage, the Pickering News Advertiser and any other communication
channels deemed appropriate, prior to each tax due date.
Other
Recommendations 2 and 3 provide for the levying of all tax rates on all classes of .
property, except for the non-residential properties. For non-residential properties, the tax
rates will be set and the property taxes will be billed at a later date because the "claw
back" percentages have not yet been determined. Staff will bring a separate report to
Council for the non-residential billing in June. Staff's preliminary estimate for the final
non-residential tax due date is September 28, 2016.
Recommendation 4 provides for the levying of an annual tax for institutions designated
under section 323 of the Municipal Act. In the fall of 2013, the Ministry of Training,
Colleges & Universities· implemented a new enrolment system for colleges which resulted
in the Durham College of Applied Arts and Technology being reported under the City of
Pickering. Each year the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing provides a listing of
institutions and their respective capacity figures as of December 31st of the prior year.
34
P,TTACHi'1Ef\lT#__L_ TO REPORT#I.J1L9?r) (, The Corporation of the City of Pickering --
By-law No.
Being a by-law to adopt the estimates of all sums required to be
raised by taxation for the year 2016 and to establish the Tax Rates
necessary to raise such sums and establish the final due dates for
the residential, pipeline, farm and managed forest realty tax
classes.
Whereas it is necessary for the Council of The Corporation of the City of Pickering,
pursuant to the Municipal Act, 2001, S.O. 2001, c25, as amended, to pass a By-law to
levy a separate tax rate on the assessment in each property class; and,
Whereas the property classes have been prescribed by the Minister of Finance under the
Assessment Act, R.S.O. 1990, ch.A.31, as amended and its Regulations; and,
Whereas it is necessary for the Council of The Corporation of the City of Pickering,
pursuant to the Municipal Act, to levy on the whole ratable property according to the last
revised assessment roll for The Corporation of the City of Pickering the sums set forth for
various purposes in Schedule "A", for the current year; and,
Whereas the Regional Municipality of Durham has passed By-law No. 05-2016 to
establish tax ratios, and By-law 07-2016 to adopt estimates of all sums required by The
Regional Municipality of Durham for the Durham Region Transit Commission, and By-law
08-2016 to set and levy rates of taxation for Regional Solid Waste Management, and By-
law No. 06-2016 to set and levy rates of taxation for Regional General Purposes and set
tax rates on Area Municipalities; and,
Whereas the Province of Ontario has provided the 2016 education tax rates for the realty
classes; and,
Whereas sub section 342(2) of the Municipal Act, 2001, S.O. 2001, c25, as amended,
permits the issuance of separate tax bills for separate classes of real property for 2016;
and,
Whereas an interim levy was made by the Council of The Corporation of the City of
Pickering (pursuant to By-law No. 7 465/16 before the adoption of the estimates for the
current year);
Now therefore the Council of the Corporation of the City of Pickering hereby enacts as
follows:
1. For the year 2016, The Corporation of the City of Pickering (the "City") on March
29, 2016, approved Council Report FIN 05-16 and corresponding schedules and
attachments as presented, resulting in a taxation levy of $58,545,981.
By-law No. Page 2
2. For the year 2016, the City shall levy upon the Property Classes set out in
Schedule "A", the rates of taxation as set out in Schedule "A", for the City of
Pickering, the Region of Durham and for Education purposes on the current value
assessment as also set out in Schedule "A". Where applicable, taxes shall be
adjusted in accordance with Bill 140, as amended and its Regulations.
3. The levy provided for in Schedule "A" shall be reduced by the amount of the
interim levy for 2016.
4. The Tax Levy due dates for the Final Billing be June 28, 2016 and September 28,
2016 for all classes excluding the non-residential tax classes (commercial,
industrial and multi-residential).
5. The Treasurer is hearby authorized to accept twelve monthly electronic payments
commencing January 1st and ending December 1st inclusive. Failure by'the
taxpayer to pay any one monthly part payment, will invoke the late payment
charges as outlined in the Municipal Act and confirmed by the City through By-law
every year.
6. The Treasurer is hearby authorized to accept twelve monthly electronic payments
commencing January 8th and ending December 8th inclusive. Failure by the
taxpayer to pay any one monthly part payment, will invoke the late payment
charges as outlined in the Municipal Act and confirmed by the City through By-law
every year.
7. The Treasurer is hearby authorized to accept twelve monthly electronic payments
commencing January 16th and ending December 16th inclusive. Failure by the
taxpayer to pay any one monthly part payment, will invoke the late payment
charges as outlined in the Municipal Act and confirmed by the City through By-law
every year.
8. For the year 2016, the City shall levy upon designated Universities and Colleges
an annual tax at the prescribed amount for each full-time student enrolled in the
university or college, as determined by the Minister of Training, Colleges, and
Universities, payable on or after July 1st in accordance with section 343 of the
Municipal Act.
9. If any section or portion of this By-law or of Schedule "A" is found by a court of
competent jurisdiction to be invalid, it is the intent of Council for The Corporation
of the City of Pickering that all remaining sections and portions of this By-law and
of Schedules "A" continue in force and effect.
10. This By-law comes into force on the date of its final passing.
35
By-law No. Page 3
By-law passed this 16th day of May 2016.
David Ryan, Mayor
Debbie Shields, City Clerk
36
2016 Budget Tax Levy 56,545,9811 Schedule A-2016 Calculated Tax Rates
2016 . City Region Education Total Pickering• Region Education TOTAL
RTC CVA. Tax Rate Tax Rate Tax Rate Tax Rate Billing Billing Billing BILLING
Property Class-Taxable
RT Residential 11 ,545,243, 762 0.00379015 0.00699130 0.00188000 0.01266145 43,758,206 80,716,263 21,705,058 146,179,527
RD Resldentiai-Educ only (Legion) 467,000 0.00000000. 0.00000000 0.00188000 0.00188000 0 0 878 878
FT Farm 147,480,000 0.00075803 0.00139826 0.00047000 0.00262629 111,7.94 206,215 69,316 387,325 n Managed Forest 3,142,700 0.00094754 0.00174782 0.00047000 0.00316536 2,978 5,493 1,477 9,948
PT Pipelines 27,237,000 0.00465961 0.00859510 0.01180000 0.02505471 126,914 234,105 321,397 682,415
MT Muiii-Residential 81,765,000 0.00707432 0.01304927 0.00188000 0.02200359 578,431 1,066,974 153,718 1,799,123
CT Commercial 826,108,622 0.00549572 0.01013738 0.01135490 0.02698800 4,540,060 8,374,577 9,380,381 22,295,017 cu Commercial -Excess Land 8,056,200 0.00384700 0.00709617 0.00794843 0.01889160 30,992 57,168 64,034 152,195 ex Commercial Vacant Land 24,798,000 0.00384700 0.00709617 0.00794843 0.01889160 95,398 175,971 197,105 468,474
XT Commercial (New Construction) Full 39,338,544 0.00549572 0.01013738 0.01135490 0.02698800 216,194 398,790 446,685 1,061,669 xu Commercial (New Construction) Exc Land 2,034,173 0.00384700 0.00709617 0.00794843 0.01889160 7,825 14,435 16,168 38,429
XX Commercial (New Construction) Vacant 2,265,000 0.00384700 0.00709617 0.00794843 0.01889160 8,713 16,073 18,003 42,789
ST Shopping Centres 550,371,660 0.00549572 0.01013738 0.01135490 0.02698800 3,024,687 5,579,327 6,249,415 14,853,429 su Shopping Centres Excess Land 995,900 0.00384700 0.00709617 0.00794843 0.01889160 3,831 7,067 7,916 18,814
ZT Shopping Centre (New Construction) 34,140,490 0.00549572 0.01013738 0.01135490 0.02698800 187,626 346,095 387,662 921,383 zu Shopping Ctr Exc Land (New Construction) 968,850 0.00384700 0.00709617 0.00794843 0.01889160 3,727 6,875 7,701 18,303
DT Office Building 90,775,780 0.00549572 0.01013738 0.01135490 0.02698800 498,878 920,229 1,030,750 2,449,857
YT Office Building (New Construction) 7,929,780 0.00549572 0.01013738 0.01135490 . 0.02698800 43,580 80,387 90,042 214,009
IT Industrial 146,075,720 0.00856498 0.01579894 0.01500000 0.039.36392 1,251,136 2,307,842 2,191,136 5,750,113
.IT Industrial (New Construction) . 10,332,801 0.00856498 0.01579894 0.01180000 0.03616392 88,500 163,247 121,927 373,675
IU Industrial Excess Land 1,539,455 0.00556724 0.01026952 0.00975000 0.02558676 8,571 15,809 15,010 39,390
IX Industrial Vacant· Land 13,067,000 0.00556724 0.01026952 0.00975000 0.02558676 72,747 134,192 127,403 334,342
JU Industrial Excess Land (New Construction) 2,186,000 0.00556724 0.01026952 0.00767000 0.02350676 12,170 22,449 16,767 51,386
LT Large Industrial 57,591,630 0.00856498 0.01579894 0.01500000 0.03936392 493,271 909,887 863,874 2,267,032
LU Large Industrial · Excess Land 1,694,000 0.00556724 0.01026952 0.00975000. 0.02558676 9,431 17,397 16,517 43,344
KT Large Industrial (New Construction) 17,665,000 0.00856498 0.01579894 0.01180000 0.03616392 151,300 279,088 208,447 638,836
KU Large lnd Excess Land (New Construction) 0.00556724 0.01026952 0.00767000 0.02350676 0 0 0 0
Total 13,643,270,067 55,326,962 102,055,953 43,708,787 201,091,702
Property Class-payments In Lieu
RF Residential 130,502,500 0.00379015 0.00699130 0.00188000 0.01266145 494,624 912,382 245,345 1,652,351
RP Residential-Tax Tenant 44,091,300 0.00379015 0.00699130 0.00188000 0.01,266145 167,113 308,256 82,892 558,260
RG Residential · General 59,807,600 0.00379015 0.00699130 0.00000000 0.01078145 226,680 418,133 0 644,813
RH Residential-Full Shared PIL 75,000 0.00379015 0.00699130 0.00188000 0.01266145 284 524 141 950
FF Farm 97,705,500 0.00075803 0.00139826 0.00047000 0.00262629 74,064 136,618 45,922 256,603
FP Farm-Tax Tenant 31,201,800. 0.00075803 0.00139826 0.00047000 0.00262629 23,652 43,628 14,665 81,945
CF Commercial Full 113,627,170 0.00549572 0.01013739 0.01135490 0.02698800 624,463 1,151,882 1,290,225 3,066,570
CH Commercial Full -Shared PIL 41,128,040 0.00549572 0.01013739 0.01135490 0.02698800 226,028 416,931 467,005 1,109,964
CP Commercial Full-Tax. Tenant 2,413,810 0.00549572 0.01013739 0.01135490 0.02698800 13;266 24,470 27,409 65,144
CG Commercial General 47,913,390 0.00549572 0.01013739 0.00000000 0.01563310 263,318 485,716 0 749,035
cv Commercia! Full -Excess Land 817,000 0.00384700 0.00709617 0.00794843 0.01889160 3,143 5,798 6,494 15,434 cw Commercial General Excess Land 1,856,000 0.00384700 0.00709617 0.00000000 0.01094317 7,140 13,170 0 20,311
cz Commercial Gen-Vacant Land 1,963,000 0.00384700 0.00709617 0.00000000 0.01094317 7,552 13,930 0 21,481
CJ Commercial-Vacant Land Shared PIL 149,000 0.00384700 0.00709617 0.00794843 0.01889160 573 1,057 1,184 2,815
DH Office Building Full-Shared PIL 26,740,400 0.00549572 0.01013739 0.01135490 . 0. 02698800 146,958 271,078 303,635 721,670
IH Industrial Full-Shared PIL 15,527,460 0.00856498 0.01579894 0.01500000 0.03936392 132,992 245,317 232,912 611,222
IP Industrial Full-Tax Tenant 237,000 0.00856498 0.01579894 0.01500000 0.03936392 2,030 3,744 3,555 9,329
IK Ind. Excess Land-Shared PIL 8,793,800 0.00556724 0.01026931 0.00975000 0.0255865tj 48,957 90,306 85,740 225,003
IQ -Ind. Excess Land Tax Tenant PIL 217,000 0.00556724 0.01026931 0.00975000 0.02558655 1,208 2,228 2,116 5,552
IJ Industrial Vacant Land Shared PIL 2,710,000 0.00556724 0.01026931 0.00975000 0.02558655 15,087 27,830 26,423 69,340
LK Large Ind. Excess Land· Shared PIL 1,597,500 0.00556724 0.01026931 0.00975000 0.02558655 8,894 16,'405 15,576 40,875 u Large Ind. Water Intake· Shared PIL 10,286,000 0.00856498 0.01579894 0.01500000 0.03936392 88,099 162,508 154,290 404,897
LS Large Ind. Generating Station-Shared PIL 32,883,700 0.00856498 0.01579894 0.01500000 0.03936392 281,648 519,528 493,256 1,294,431
LN Large Ind. Non-Gen Stn-Shared PIL 42,177,100 0.00856498 0.01579894 0.01500000 0.03936392 361.,246 666,353 632,657 1,660,256
Total PILS 714,421,070 3,219,019 5,937,793 4,131,437 13,288,250
Grand Totals 14 357 691137 58 545 981 107 993 747 47 840 224 214 379 952
w Schedule A ......,
FIN 09-16 May 9, 2016
Subject: Investment Portfolio Activity for the Year Ended December 31, 2015 Page 2
Ontario Regulation 438/97 under the Municipal Act, 2001
Investments are undertaken as one consolidated pool of funds and interest earned is
credited back to the appropriate funds.·
The Treasurer of the City of Pickering is required under Provincial Regulation 438/97 to
report certain information and opinions to Council. The schedules to this report are
included as part of that Regulation's information requirements. The portfolio balance at
December 31, 2015 of $112.2 million (2014-$102.7M) is higher than the prior year.
Supplementary tax due dates in November and December and a net increase in the
obligatory Reserve Fund balances contributed to the increase in the investment portfolio
balance over 2014. In addition, the forecasted cash requirements at year end allowed
the City to transfer some funds from the general bank account to some short term
investments in attempts to earn a slightly higher rate of return. This led to a short-term
investment balance at the end of 2015 of $58.8 million (2014-$49.5M) and a long-term
investment balance of $49.0 million (2014-$49.2M).
The portion of the investment portfolio invested with TO Wealth primarily consists of
Guaranteed Investment Certificates (GIG). Although interest rates are higher than the
interest rates for Banker's Acceptances, GIG's are less liquid than these other
investment instruments. During the course of 2015, the City also entered into some
long-term holdings being bank bonds and deposit notes. The net performance on TO
Wealth's portion of the portfolio for 2015 was 1.18% (2014-1.45%).
The return on the portfolio maintained with Nesbitt Burns also decreased slightly in 2015
with a weighted yearly rate of return of 1.36% (2014-1.51 %) on the combined short-
term and long-term investments.
The slight decline for both was primarily a result of the unexpected interest rate drop in
early January 2015 of 0.5% which did not recover through the balance of the year.
Interest rates this low have not been seen in years and are not expected to increase
anytime soon. Hence the request for Council approval in January to enter the One
Investment Program -Corporate Bond Portfolio which allows municipalities to take
advantage of higher risk investments thus leading to increased rates of return.
Investment parameters are narrow due to the Municipal Act and Regulations limiting the
selection of qualified investments for municipal entities. Furthermore, staff's approach
tends to be conservative, given that they are investing public money. Notwithstanding
these restrictions, the annual returns from both Nesbitt Burns and TO Wealth
outperformed the annual returns for the CIBC World Markets 91-Day T-Billlndex
(0.64%) and the Morningstar Canadian Money Market Mutual Fund Index (0.32%).
These indices are deemed to be comparative benchmarks for reviewing the portfolio's
performance and are considered the standard for analysis of investment funds in the
industry.
The average return on interfund investments (internal loans) was 2.51% (2014-2.7%).
39
~
N CITY OF PICKERING INVESTMENT ACTIVITIES FOR 2015
Financial Purchase Maturity
Institution Instrument Cost Principal Yeild Term Date Date
Firstbank BA 6,261,468 6,271,000 0.646% 86 14-Dec-15 9-Mar-16
Bank of Nova Scotia BA 5,904,360 5,914,000 0.685% 87 22-Dec-15 18-Mar-16
Firstbank BA 7,499,268 7,507,000 0.672% 56 24-Dec-15 18-Feb-16
Firstbank BA 5,292,156 5,300,000 0.636% 85 30-Dec-15 24-Mar-16
TD Waterhouse TD Bank MTG GIC Short Term 2,008,576 2,008,576 1.600% 365 24-Jan-14 24-Jan-15
TD Bank MTG GIC Short Term 2,000,000 2,000,000 1.410% 182 25-Aug-14 23-Feb-15
Bank of Montreal GIC 2,059,700 2,059,700 1.710% 365 25-Aug-14 25-Aug-15
Royal Bank Of Canada GIC 2,040,968 2,040,968 1.350% 365 26-Jan-15 26-Jan-16
HSBC Trust Company GIC 2,015,803 2,015,803 1.350% 365 23-Feb-15 23-Feb-16
Bank of Nova Scotia GIC 2,059,700 2,059,700 1.200% 366 25-Aug-15 25-Aug-16
Bank of Nova Scotia GIC 35,220 35,220 1.200% 366 25-Aug-15 25-Aug-16
TD Bank GIC 20,000,000 20,000,000 0.980% 36 24-Aug-15 29-Sep-15
TD Bank 2,099,000 2,099,000 0.750% 12 6-Nov-15 18-Nov-15
Total Short-term 268,658,648 269,066,967
Long Term
Nesbitt Burns Bank of Nova Scotia Sr Deposit Note 1,890,060 1,848,000 2.242% 1,053 4-May-15 22-Mar-18
CIBC Deposit Notes 1,887,732 1,848,000 2.650% 545 13-May-15 8-Nov-16
Bank of Nova Scotia 4,088,764 4,006,000 2.740% 443 15-Sep-15 1-Dec-16
Bank of Nova Scotia Sr Deposit Note 2,518,250 2,437,000 2.750% 970 17-Dec-15 13-Aug-18
TD Waterhouse National Bank Step Up Deposit Note 2,000,000 2,000,000 2.700% 3,653 6-Nov-15 6-Nov-25
CIBC Step Up Deposit Note 2,099,000 2,099,000 2.500% 3,653 18-Nov-15 18-Nov-25
Total Long-term 14,483,806 14,238,000
Total External Investments 283,142,454 283,304,967
lnterfund Investments (Internal Loans) 1,482,000
Total Investment Activity 284,786,967
Long Term Dispositions
Nesbitt Burns BMO Fixed Rate Deposit Notes 1,906,137 1,895,000 3.930% 1091 1-May-12 27-Apr-15 Matured
BNS Sr Deposit Note 1,895,029 1,889,000 2.250% 695 12-Jun-13 8-May-15 Matured
Province Of Ontario 2,748,596 2,715,000 3.150% 1,362 16-Dec-11 8-Sep-15 Matured
Province Of Ontario 1,418,574 1,406,000 3.150% 1,236 20-Apr-12 8-Sep-15 Matured
Canada Housing Trust 2,562,771 2,542,000 2.450% 1,342 12-Apr-12 15-Dec-15 Matured
TD Waterhouse TD Bank S/A CB-15 4,106,148 4,000,000 4.970% 310 24-Dec-14 30-0ct-15 Matured
14,637,255 14,447,000
Page 2 of2
Portfolio Performance Review
'For comparison purposes we have included the following benchmarks that provide the closest representative
return data, There are three separate issues that should be taken into consideration when comparing the
representative rates of return. First, the guidelines set out in the Municipal Finance Statutes governing your
investment policy prohibit you from owning any fixed income investments that are not either government
guaranteed or issued by a major Canadian Chartered Bank, Canadian money market funds used to construct the
Morningstar Canadian Money Market Index contain a high percentage of higher yielding money market products
including investments such as asset backed securities, some of which your investment policy prohibits you from
holding. Secondly, your portfolio has a smaller percentage of qualified fixed income investments that are slightly
longer than the 1 year maturity period that typically defines money market investments.
Finally, in a lower interest rate environment, the portfolio may hold "Step-up Bond" investments which are
laddered coupon bonds that have an annual maturity, but are both extendible, and redeemable at the issuer's
option on the annual anniversary date. As such these investments can be classified as short term or longer term
using the longest final maturity date as the determinant.
Annual Account Return Benchmark Comparisons*
* Return Comparisons are derived from separate third party sources which are believed to be accurate but are
not guaranteed by BMO Nesbitt Burns Inc.
** Comparative benchmarks have been selected that are most reasonable to use for comparison purposes but
are not 100% specific to the investment guidelines followed by the representative account in question.
*** The Morningstar Fund Indices are the best available representation of the performance of aggregate dollars
actually invested, currently and historically, in Canadian money market mutual funds and/or segregated funds.
The indices measure the dollar weighted return of assets in Canadian funds. The return calculation does not
suffer from survivorship bias, as the impact of returns with funds that are no longer active are retained. Funds
that report returns before fees are excluded from Morningstar Fund Indices, Returns are rounded to 2 decimal
places.
45
46
In conclusion once again, I would like to highiight the following points;
a) Our investment parameters are much narrower than money market funds. Government legislation
governing Municipal Investments limits the selection of qualified investments.
b) Within the portfolio, we have successfully blended a small percentage of investments with a time horizon
exceeding 18 months.
c) The account maintains an active pattern of cash in-flows and out-flows as a result of the nature of the
cash-flow requirements of an entity like the City of Pickering. As a result, it can be difficult to execute a
specific investment plan that is not highly liquid and flexible.
d) While the current and anticipated interest rate environment is extremely important in shaping the
composition of the account portfolio, we endeavour to always attempt to avoid making decisions that
could be construed as market timing any changes in relation to Bank of Canada rate decisions.
Sincerely,
Andrew R. Geddes PFP, CIM, FCSI
Vice President, Portfolio Manager ·
BMO Wealth Management, BMO Nesbitt Burns Inc.
CIIvf ·,~
CHARTERED
INVESTME!NT·.MANAGE!R
FElLOW Of' CS!
ppp•
<~
f'EllSONAL
FINANCIAL PLANNER
BMO Nesbitt Burns Inc. ("BMO NBI") provides this commentary to clients for informational purposes only. The information
contained herein is based on sources that we believe to be reliable, but is not guaranteed by us, may be incomplete or may
change without notice. The comments included in this document are general in nature, and professional advice regarding
an individual's particular position should be obtained. •"BMO (M-bar roundel symbol)" is a registered trade-mark of Bank of
Montreal, used under licence. • "Nesbitt Burns" is a registered trade-mark of BMO Nesbitt Burns Inc. BMO Nesbitt Burns .
Inc. is a wholly-owned subsidiary of Bank of Montreal. Member-Canadian Investor Protection Fund.