HomeMy WebLinkAboutCS 13-04P CKERING
REPORT TO
EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE
Report Number: CS 13-04
Date: June I, 2004
Gillis A. Paterson
Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer
Subject:
Municipal Performance Measurement Program - Provincially Mandated
Public Reporting of Performance Measures
Recommendation:
It is recommended that Report CS
Treasurer be received for information.
13-04 from the Director,
Corporate Services &
Executive Summary: The City is mandated by the Province of Ontario to report on
the cost of specific key services areas. The collection and reporting of these measures
is not in any way associated with the City's annual audit. This report is a part of the
Financial Information Return filed by the City and both were filed on the deadline set by
the Province of May 31, 2004. These measurements are being submitted and reported
by the Treasurer under the direction of Provincial authority. We will continue to review
and adjust these measures, as is permitted by the Province, in preparation for release
to the public by the September 30 deadline.
Attached are the Municipal Performance Measurement Program results for 2003
together with a supplemental information package, a comparison to the 2002 Measures
and a copy of the Public Notice that will appear in the News Advertiser at the end of
September.
Financial Implications: None
Background: Attachment ~t is the information mandated by the Province to be
reported to the public by September 30, 2004. Comments pertaining to the compilation
and interpretation of the data have been included to aid in the explanation and
understanding of what is being reported. The Province has made provision for these
comments and encourages their inclusion, as many municipalities do.
With this being the fourth year of Performance Measurement reporting, one must bear
i~q mind that these measures are still evolving as feedback from municipalities are
received and are takerl into consideratior~ by the Province in determinin~ and the
Report CS 13-04 Date: June 1,2004
Subject: Municipal Performance Measurement Program - Provincially
Mandated Public Reporting of Performance Measures
Page 2
development of the Performance Measures to be reported upon. In Year I, 2000, data
was collected for 35 measures of which 16 were required to be publicly reported. Of
these only 14 applied to the City. In Year 2, 2001,25 measures were required to be
completed and publicly reported. Of these only 15 performance measures were
applicable for the City of Pickering. For 2002 40 measures were required to be
completed and publicly reported, but only 19 applied to the City. In 2003, 40 measures
were required to be filed of which only 20 applied to the City.
The feedback received from municipalities after the first three years has resulted in
refinements to the way measures are defined and calculated which leads to improving
the measures to better serve the interests of the public and municipal needs. In
addition the Province's Financial Information Return (FIR) is also evolving which is the
basis of the data used in the calculations for Performance Measures. For example for
2001 the methodology for reporting General Government costs was significantly
changed. In that year municipalities had the option of using the same method as in
2000, which was the case in Pickering pending further information, or the new method
for reporting General Government costs resulting from the CAO's benchmarking study.
The~ method for reporting General Government costs based on the CAO's
benchmarking study was mandatory for reporting in 2002. This change alone
significantly affects the comparability of results from one year to another. For the year
2003 further refinement was done to what we report on for the specific categories. I
must strongly emphasize that all of the foregoing together with the fact no two
municipalities are identical in their geography nor (eg number of unpaved roads)
level of service, making municipality-to-municipality comparisons relatively
meaningless. It will only be through continuing efforts, ongoing experience, further
clarifications from the Province and consistent reporting formulas that year-to-year
comparisons within the municipality and across municipalities will start to become
meaningful.
Attachment 2 is a table highlighting the comparability, or lack of it, of the 2003 and 2002
results of this program. Attachment 3 provides a comparison of the results for the two
years.
According to the Provincial mandate the City has the following options for public
reporting:
1. Direct mail to taxpayers/households
2. insert with the property tax bill
3. Public "advertising" in local newspapers
4. Posting on the Internet
in the interests of efficienC)r¢ and expediency, City staff has opted for the fourth option.
..The information will be posted on the City's website, as was the case last year, and a.
r~otice ~:o this effect wil! be inciuded in the "Community Page" of the local newspaper,
Report CS 13-04 Date: June I, 2004
Subject: Municipal Performance Measurement Program - Provincially Page 3
Mandated Public Reportin9 of Performance Measures
Attachment 4, The information will also be available to anyone wishing to pick it up at
City Hall.
Attachments:
2.
3.
4.
2003 Provincial Performance Measurement Program - Public Reporting
Comparability Table - 2003/2002
Comparison of 2003 and 2002 Performance Measures
Public Notice to be included in the Community Page of the News Advertiser
Prepared By:
Shanty'~amoutar
Senior Financial Analyst
Prepared / Approved / Endorsed By:
~..~,~-------~ -~ -*~,~_~.~ _.___..~
'-G~i"s A. Paterson
Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer
GAP:vw
Attachments
Copy: Chief Administrative Officer
Director, Operations & Emergency Services
Director, Planning & Development
Solicitor for the City
City Clerk
Recommended for the consideration of
Pickering City Council
T,d'o~rrf~; ,~. QuCn, Ch~'~Jf Admin"~.ative Oflrice~'
C~TY OF PICKERING
YEAR 2003 PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT REPORT
OVERVIEW
As required by the Ontario Government's Municipal Performance Measures Program
(MPMP), the Treasurer of the City of Pickering, as part of its 2003 Financial Information
Return (FIR) package, has submitted financial and related service performance
measurements to the Province.
This program was announced in 2000 by the Ontario Government, which requires
municipalities to collect and report data to the Province and the Public in the form of
performance measurements on key service areas.
The objective of the Province is: to enhance accountability by reporting to taxpayers; to
increase taxpayer awareness; and, to improve service delivery by sharing best
practices with comparable municipalities. In keeping with enhancing accountability to
taxpayers, the Province accepted new categories for reporting General Government
costs recommended by the Ontario Municipal CAO's Benchmarking Imitative (OMBI).
Commencing for 2002 reporting all municipalities were required to use the new General
Government categories developed by OMBI and the City has implemented this change.
As municipalities change and grow, its citizens expect to receive quality, cost effective
services. Performance measurements are a means of benchmarking these services.
The City is committed to refining and developing new methods of collecting data so as
to have more efficient and effective benchmarking tools.
The benefits of this program will not be seen immediately, as municipalities in
conjunction with personnel of the Ontario Government's Municipal Performance
Measurement Program work towards standardizing information collected in calculating
the related measures which will ultimately allow for fairer comparisons from year to year
and across municipalities.
In addition, a comparability table has been provided that highlights which results are
comparable within the municipality's own measures and includes comments explaining
why any are not comparable.
Each measure is also accompanied by comments regarding aspects of the
measurements. The comments are an integral part in the interpretation of the
performance measure results. These results should not be compared across
municipalities without consideration of the comments that impact on interpreting and
understanding the results, in addition, influencing factors in the collection of data or
refinements while the measures are still evolving could affect the results and
comparability of same year over year.
CITY OF PICKERING
YEAR 2003 PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT REPORT
LOCAL GOVERNMENT
OPERATING COSTS FOR LOCAL GOVERNMENT
2003 2002
5.80% 6.06%
Efficiency Measure
Operating costs for governance and corporate management as a percentage of total
municipal operating costs.
Objective
To determine the efficiency of municipal management.
General Comments
The following factors can influence the above results:
· The extent that cost centers within municipalities directly relate to the functions
included under the governance and corporate management categories
Detailed Comments
2003 is comparable with 2002 as the same methodology was used in the calculation
of these results.
CiTY OF PICKERING
YEAR 2003 PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT REPORT
FIRE SERVICES
2.~ OPERATING COSTS FOR FIRE SERVICES
2003 2002
$1.24 $1.26
Efficiency Measure
Operating costs for fire services per $1,000 per assessment.
Objective
Efficient municipal fire services.
General Comments
The following factors can influence the above results across municipalities:
· Emergency response times
· Number and location of fire halls
· Urabn/rural mix of properties as well as density of buildings.
Detailed Comments
Assessment value does not necessarily correlate to operating cost for fire services.
The higher the assessment value, the lower the cost per $1,000 assessment.
Conversely the urban/rural mix of the community will affect the results as will the size
and type of commercial/industrial establishments.
Number of households, response time and urban/rural mix of the municipality are
factors that determine the need for fire services not the property value.
CITY OF PICKERING
YEAR 2003 PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT REPORT
ROAD SERVICES
4.~ OPERATING COSTS FOR PAVED ROADS
2003 2002
$663.82 $432.10
Efficiency Measure
Operating costs for paved (hard top) roads per lane kilometre
Objective
Efficient maintenance of paved roads.
General Comments
The following factors can influence the above results across municipalities:
· Use of the roads by heavy equipment.
· The municipality's standard for road conditions in comparison with comparable
municipalities.
· Kilometres of paved roads in the municipality.
· The allocation of operating costs used in the determination of the numerator
when there is not a separate cost centre.
Detailed Comments
At the present time the City of Pickering does not maintain a separate cost centre to
track costs that directly relates to paved roads. However, direct costs attributable to
this function have been identified. The costs for administration and other related
costs have been allocated to the cost for paved roads based on management's best
estimate of the proportion of responsibility dedicated to the road functions such as
maintenance of paved and unpaved roads and winter control
The identified costs attributable to this function include employee wages & benefits,
asphalt, program support, rental of heavy equipment and shoulder maintenance.
The City maintains 719 paved lane kilometres.
Note: To keep up with maintaining deteriorating roads the City undertook an asphalt
patching program for 2003. This program was not in place in 2002.
C~TY OF PICKERING
YEAR 2003 PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT REPORT
ROAD SERVICES
4.2 OPERATING COSTS FOR UNPAVED ROADS
2003 ~ 2002
$6,456.69 $6,035.56
Efficiency Measure
Operating costs for unpaved (loose top) roads per lane kilometre.
Objective
Efficient maintenance of unpaved roads.
General Comments
The following factors can influence the above results across municipalities:
· Use of the roads by heavy equipment.
· The kilometres of unpaved roads in the municipality in comparison with
comparable municipalities.
· Locations of the unpaved lanes.
· The allocation of operating costs used in the determination of the numerator
when there is not a separate cost centre.
Detailed Comments
At the present time, the City of Pickering does not maintain a separate cost centre to
track costs that directly relates to unpaved roads. However, direct costs attributable
to this function have been identified. The cost for administration and other related
costs have been allocated to the cost for unpaved roads based on managernent's
best estimate of the proportion of responsibility dedicated to the road functions such
as maintenance of paved and unpaved roads and winter control.
The operating cost of maintaining the City's unpaved roads includes employee
wages & benefits, granular materials, administering calcium programs, program
support, rental of heavy equipment, grading, culvert and shoulder maintenance.
Due to the geographic location of the City's rural boundaries, commuter traffic using
Hwy 407 are using these unpaved roads to connect to a continuously developing
Durham Region. These roads now require continuous maintenance to keep up with
the increased volume of traffic..
The City maintains 244 unpaved lane kitometres.
CITY OF PICKERING
YEAR 2003 PERFORIViANCE MEASUREMENT REPORT
ROAD SERVICES
4.3 OPERATING COSTS FOR WINTER MAINTENANCE OF ROADS
2003 t 2002
$1,385.46 $768.90
Efficiency Measure
Operating costs for winter maintenance of roadways per lane kilometre maintained in
winter.
Objective
Efficient winter control operation.
General Comments
The following factors can influence the above results:
· The municipality's standard service levels for road conditions.
° The kilometres of paved and unpaved roads in the municipality in comparison with
comparable municipalities.
· The allocation of operating costs used in the determination of the numerator when
there is not a separate cost centre.
Detailed Comments
At the present time, the City of Pickering does not maintain a separate cost centre to
track costs that directly relates to winter control. However, direct costs attributable to
this function have been identified. The costs for administration and other related costs
have been allocated to the cost for winter control based on management's best
estimate of the proportion of responsibility dedicated to the road functions such as
maintenance of paved and unpaved roads and winter control.
The operating cost of the City's winter control maintenance includes employee wages
& benefits, salt, sand, program support, equipment rental, culvert thawing
The City maintains a total of 963 lane kiiometres.
Note: in 2003 the City responded to more winter control events due to the unusual
weather conditions that were prevalent.
CiTY OF PICKERING
YEAR 2003 PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT REPORT
ROAD SERVICES
4,4 CONDITION OF PAVED ROADS
2003 2002
75.10% 75.10%
Effectiveness Measure
Percentage of paved lane kilometres where the condition is rated as good to very good.
Objective
Provide a paved lane system that has a pavement condition that meets municipal
standards.
General Comments
The following factors can influence the above results:
· The municipality's standard service levels for road conditions.
· The kilometres of paved and unpaved roads in the municipality in comparison with
comparable municipalities.
Detailed Comments
The City's staff uses their best estimates to establish the % of roads that are rated as
good. The City's road patrols, the public and employees are another source for
providing feedback on road conditions. As existing roads are reconstructed the rating
will move up to a higher level.
CITY OF PICKERING
YEAR 2003 PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT REPORT
ROAD SERVICES
4.5 WINTER EVENT RESPONSE
2003 2002
100% 100%
Effectiveness Measure
Percentage of winter events where the response met or exceeded locally determined
road maintenance standards.
Objective
Provide an appropriate response to winter events.
General Comments
The following factors can influence the above results:
· The municipality's standard service levels for road conditions.
· The frequency and severity of the winter weather.
· The kilometres of paved and unpaved roads in the municipality in comparison with
comparable municipalities.
Detailed Comments
Roads are cleaned and cleared within 24 hours of a snowfall. The City did not
experience a winter event which staff was not able to meet or exceed road maintenance
standards.
CiTY OF PICKERING
YEAR 2003 PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT REPORT
CONVENTIONAL TRANSIT
5.1 OPERATING COSTS
2003 2002
$4.08 $3.59
Efficiency Measure
Operating costs for conventional transit per regular service passenger trip.
Objective
Efficient conventional transit services.
General Comments
The following factors can influence the above results:
· The service hours of the transit operations, for example the level of weekend or
holiday service provided.
· The population distribution and the geography of the service area.
· Service levels required to accommodate passenger trips transferred from outside of
the City's boundaries.
· Unexpected events that may be included in operating cost that has no correlation to
service levels.
· The urban/rural mix of the service area.
Detailed Comments
The 2003 results reflect 100% of APTA's operations even thought the Transit Authority
is jointly owned by the City of Pickering and Town of Ajax.
In 2001 Ajax and Pickering operated separate transit departments. These two
departments were amalgamated for 2002 resulting in some one-time transitional costs.
In 2003 under the provincial reporting program, the allocation of program support costs
incurred by each municipality changed substantially. This resulted in a formula driven
increase in the amount allocated to APTA, for reporting purposes, not an actual
increase in operating costs.
Trips deemed as transfers are excluded from the denominator of passenger trips.
However, the costs would be impacted to ensure that appropriate service levels are
provided to accommodate these additional passengers.
For 2002, the number of passenger trips excluding transfers was £,I 87,442 and in 2003
it was 2,248,265 an increase in ridership of approximately 2.8%. The number of trips
including transfers was 2,465,950 for 2002 and 2,54@,390 for 2003, an increase of
approximatei.v 3,4%.
CITY OF PICKERING
YEAR 2003 PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT REPORT
CONVENTIONAL TRANSIT
5.2 PUBLIC TRANSIT USE
2003 2002
13.47 13.52
Effectiveness Measure
Number of conventional transit passenger trips per person in the service area in a year.
Objective
Maximum utilization of municipal transit services,
General Comments
The following factors can influence the above results:
The service hours of the transit operations, for example the level of weekend or
holiday service provided.
The population distribution and geography of the service area.
The percentage of the service area to the total municipal area.
Detailed Comments
The 2003 measure is based on a combination of the population of the service areas in
the City of Pickering and the Town of Ajax.
Note: In 2002 the population of the service area was 161,750. In 2003 the population
of the service area increased by approximately 3.1% to 166,602.
C~TY OF PICKERING
YEAR 2003 PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT REPORT
STORM WATER
, 7.1 OPERATING COSTS FOR URBAN STORi~ WATER MANAGEMENT
2003 2002
$1,196.59 $1,482.17
Efficiency Measure
Operating costs for urban storm water
disposal) per kilometre of drainage system.
management (collection, treatment, and
Objective
Efficient storm water management.
General Comments
The following factors can influence
management:
The geography of the City
the efficiency rate of urban storm water
The extent and age of the drainage system
Detailed Comments
Operating costs include salaries and benefits, contracted services and materials,
storm pipe cleaning, flushing, video inspection, catch basin/manhole repairs storm
pipe repairs, cleaning of specialized oil and grit separators.
C~TY OF PICKERING
YEAR 2003 PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT REPORT
STORM WATER
7.2 OPERATING COSTS FOR RURAL STORM WATER MANAGEMENT
(NEW MEASURE~
2003
$238.51
Efficiency Measure
Operating costs for rural storm water
disposal) per kilometre of drainage system.
management (collection, treatment, and
Objective
Efficient storm water management.
General Comments
The following factors can influence the efficiency rate of urban storm water
management:
· The geography of the City, size and nature of the rural area.
· Land erosion control.
· The frequency and time devoted to the maintenance of the rural drainage system.
system
Detailed Comments
Operating costs include salaries and benefits, contracted services and materials,
storm canal dredging, culvert repairs and maintenance, ditching and other day to day
maintenance measures.
Note: This is a new measure for the year 2003. As the City does not maintain
separate records for rural storm water management expenditures, this measure was a
best estimate by management.
C~TY OF PICKERING
YEAR 2003 PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT REPORT
SOLID WASTE
9.~ OPERATING COSTS FOR GARBAGE COLLECTION
2003 2002
$59.60 per tonne $58.28 per tonne
Efficiency Measure
Operating costs for garbage collection per tonne or per household.
Objective
Efficient garbage collection services
General Comments
The following factors can influence the above results:
The number and frequency of collection and the extent of the yard waste collection
program.
Whether the service is provided internally or externally and if provided externally, then
the timing of the contract renewals.
The effectiveness of any 3R's initiatives and education/promotional efforts.
The urban/rural mix and size of the municipality.
Detailed Comments
The City of Pickering currently contracts out collection of residential waste. Contract costs
are based upon tonnes collected. Per tonne rate has an annual escalation cost and tones
collected each year will increase due to new housing development. Homeowners are
allowed a limit of 4 bags and 2 large items per week.
C~TY OF PICKERING
YEAR 2003 PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT REPORT
SOLID WASTE
9.3 OPERATING COSTS FOR SOLID WASTE DIVERSION (RECYCLING)
9.8 DIVERSION OF SOLID WASTE
2003 2002
9.3 - $179.06 per tonne 9.3 - $264.96 per tonne
9.8 - 11% of residential waste diverted 9.8 - 8.49% of residential waste diverted
Efficiency Measure
Operating costs for solid waste diversion (recycling) per tonne or per household.
Effectiveness Measure
Percentage of residential solid waste diverted for recycling.
Objective
Efficient solid waste diversion (recycling) services.
Municipal waste programs divert garbage from landfills and incinerators.
General Comments
The following factors can influence the above results:
The frequency of collection.
The type of materials included in the recycled program.
The promotion of the recycling program.
The participation in the program by residents.
Detailed Comments
The collection of recycling materials (blue box) is the responsibility of the Region of
Durham and results are not reported above.
The diversion rate reported above indicates the diversion of yard waste and white goods
(metal) collected as this is performed by the City. In 2002 the City did not report on metal
diversion.
The City of Pickering has adopted grass-cycling and does not collect grass clippings,
Therefore, grass clippings are not included in the diversion rate above.
The City's yard waste collection program results in diversion from landfill. Tonnes
collected per year vary due to gardening and yard work activity. Grass-cycling reduces
the amount of yard waste collected.
Late 2001, the City initiated a fully automated cart based three stream waste collection
pilot project in the Amberlea area within Ward 1 which consists of 520 homes. This
project ran for the full year of 2002 and the associated costs are included in the above
calculation. These costs are higher than traditionai collection methods used. It includes
leasing of specialized collection vehicles for a 3 months period in 2003, purchase and
leasing of specialized containers and bins and ongoin.q educational material. This
pro.qram did rtot continue in 2003 with the resultant decrease in costs.
The diversior, rate for the pilot proieci area was 52.7% for 2002.
C~TY OF PICKERING
YEAR 2003 PERFORIVIANCE MEASUREMENT REPORT
SOLID WASTE
9.5 COMPLAINTS FOR SOLID WASTE AND RECYCLING COLLECTION
2003 2002
31 28
Effectiveness Measure
Number of complaints received in a year concerning the collection of garbage and
recycled materials per 1,000 households,
Objective
Improved garbage collection services.
General Comments
The following factors can influence the above results:
· The types of calls received.
· The level of service provided.
Detailed Comments
Solid Waste collection is contracted out and the Region collects recycling materials,
however, the City's manages complaints by assisting taxpayers directly. The total
number of complaints in the year was an estimate provided by the operating division, as
the City does not maintain a formal system for tracking complaints. In 2004 a formal
system will be implemented to track complaints. Changing regulations and methods for
waste collection influences the nature and frequency of complaints.
CiTY OF PICKERING
YEAR 2003 PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT REPORT
LAND PLANNING USE
10.'~GROWTF: AND SETTLEMENT PATTERN
2003 i 2002
1 O0% 100%
Effectiveness Measure
Percentage of new lots, blocks and/or units with final approval which are located within
settlement areas.
Objective
New lot creation is occurring in settlement areas.
Detailed Comments
The City of Pickering is responsible for approving all plans. All approved new lots were
located within settlement areas.
C~TY OF PICKERING
YEAR 2003 PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT REPORT
LAND PLANNING USE
10.2 PRESERVATION OF AGRICULTURAL LAND IN REPORTING YEAR
2003 2002
100% 100%
Effectiveness Measure
Percentage of land designated for agricultural purposes which was not re-designated for other
uses during 2003.
Objective
Preserve agricultural land.
Detailed Comments
No agricultural lands were re-designated in the year 2003.
C~TY OF PICKERING
YEAR 2003 PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT REPORT
LAND PLANNING USE
10.3 PRESERVATION OF AGRICULTURAL
LAND (RELATIVE TO 2000)
2003 2002
99.83 % 99.83 %
Effectiveness Measure
Percentage of land designated for agricultural purposes which was not re-designated for
other uses relative to the base year of 2000.
Objective
Preserve agricultural land.
Detailed Comments
This represents land that was re-designated during the year 2000.
CiTY OF PICKERING
YEAR 2003 PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT REPORT
LAND PLANNING USE
10.4
HECTARES AGRICULTURAL LAND (DURING REPORTING YEAR1
2003 2OO2
0 0
Effectiveness Measure
Number of hectares of land originally designated for agricultural purposes which was re-
designated for other uses during 2002.
Objective
Preserve agricultural land.
Detailed Comments
No agricultural lands were re-designated in the reporting year.
C~TY OF PICKERING
YEAR 2003 PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT REPORT
LAND PLANNING USE
10.5 CHANGE IN AGRICULTURAL LAND (SINCE 2000)
2003 2002
15 15
Effectiveness Measure
Number of hectares of land originally designated for agricultural purposes which was re-
designated for other uses since January I, 2000.
Objective
Preserve agricultural land.
Detailed Comments
These lands were redesignated during 2000.
Comparability Table - Reporting Year 2003
Operating costs for governance and corporate Comparable to 2002 t 2003 calculation is based
management as a percentage of total municipal~ on new General
operating costs Government's categories
developed by OMBI. This
methodology was used in
2002.
Operating cost for fire services per 1,000 of Comparable to 2002 The required data
assessment collection for this
measure did not change
in 2003.
Operating costs for paved (hard top) roads per Not Comparable to 2002 Refinement of the data
lane kilometre collected for this
measurement was
undertaken in the year
2003.
Operating costs for unpaved (loose top) roads Not comparable to 2002 Refinement of the data
per lane kilometre collected for this
measurement was
undertaken in the year
2003.
Operating costs for winter maintenance of Not comparable to 2002 Refinement of the data"
roadways per lane kilometre maintained in collected for this
winter measurement was
undertaken in the year
2003.
Percentage of paved lane kilometres where the Comparable to 2002 The percentage of paved
condition is rated as good to very good lanes was consistently
rated as good.
Percentage of winter events where the response Comparable to 2002 All roads met the required
met or exceeded locally determined road standards.
maintenance standards
Operating cost for Conventional Transit Comparable to 2002 The 2003 results
represent the operating
costs and service area for
the amalgamation of both
Pickering and Ajax transit
divisions.
~S,.~' ~ ' ~. ~ ;~.i~ ;?:. :~ :;~'". :, ,: ,::, ,:,
Number of conventional transit passenger trips Comparable to 2002 I The 2003 results
per person in the service are in a yearI represent the operating
costs and service area for
the amalgamation of both
Pickering and Ajax transit
divisions.
Comparability Table - Reporting Year 2003
Operating cost for urban storm water
management
Operating cost for urban storm water
ement
Not comparable to 2002
Not comparable (new)
This measure is not
comparable due to
changes in the collection
of the data.
Operating costs for solid waste diversion per
tonne
Number of complaints received in a year
concerning the collection of garbage and
recycled materials per 1,000 household
Not comparable to 2002
Comparable to 2002
This cost represents the
City's cost of yard waste
and white goods
collected. The Region is
responsible for collection
of Blue Box materials.
The amount of
complaints used for this
calculation was an
estimate provided by the
division.
Percentage of residential solid waste diverted
for recycling based on tonnes
Percentage of new lots, blocks and/or units with
final approval which are located within the
settlement areas
Percentage of land designated for agricultural
purposes which was not re-designated for other
uses during 2002
Percentage of land designated for agricultural
purposes, which was not re-designated for other
uses relative to the base year of 2000.
Number of hectares of land originally designated
for agricultural purposes which was re-
designated for other uses during the reporting
'ear 2002
Number of hectares land originally designated
for agricultural purposes which was re-
designated for other uses since January i, 2000
Comparable to 2002
Comparable to 2002
Comparable to 2002
Comparable to 2002
Comparable to 2002
Comparable to 2002
The results represent the
diversion rate related to
collection of yard waste
and white goods only.
The Region is
responsible for collection
of Blue Box materials.
100% of new lots, blocks
and/or units with final
approval by the City were
located within the
settlement areas.
No agricultural lands
were re-designated
during 2002
All agricultural lands were
preserved.
No agricultural lands
were re-designated
during 2002
No agricultural lands
were re-designated since
2000.
Performance Measurements
General Government - Efficiency
Operating costs for governance and corporate management as a % of total municipal
operating costs
Protection Services - Fire Services Efficiency
Operating cost for fire services per $1,000 of assessment
Transportation Services - Roadways Efficiency
Operating cost for paved roads per lane kilometer
Operating cost for unpaved roads per lane kilometer
Operating cost for winter control maintenance per lane kilometer
Tranportation Services - Roadways Effectiveness
Pementage of paved lane kilometer rated good to very good
Percentage of winter event response that met or exceeded
municipal road maintenance standards
Transit Services - Transit Efficiency
Operating costs for conventional transit per regular service
passenger trip
Tranist Servoces - Transit Effectiveness
Number of conventional transit passenger trips per person in the
service area in a year
Environmental Services - Sewer System Efficiency
Operating costs for urban storm water management (collection, treatment and
disposal) per kilometer of drainage system
Operating costs for urban storm water management (collection, treatment and
disposal) per kilometer of drainage system (URBAN) NEW
Operating costs for urban storm water management (collection, treatment and
disposal) per kilometer of drainage system (RURAL) NEW
Environmental Services - Solid Waste Management Efficiency
Operating costs for solid waste collection per tonne
Environmental Services - Solid Waste Management Effectiveness
Number of complaints in year concerning garbage collection and
recycled material per 1,000 household
Environmental Services - Recycling Efficiency
Operating costs for solid waste diversion per tonne
Environmental Services - Recycling Effectiveness
Pementage of residential solid waste diverted
Plannig and Development - Land Use Planning - Effectiveness Percentage of new lots approved which are located in settlement areas
Pementage of lands designated for agricultural purposes which was not re-designated
for other uses during the reporting year
Pementage of land designated for argicultural purposes which was not re-designated
for other uses relative to the base year of 2000.
Number of hectares of land originally designated for agricultural purposes which was
re-designated for other uses since January 1, 2000.
2002 2003
6.06% 5.80%
$ 1.26
$ 432.10
$ 6,035.56
$ 768.90
75.10%
100%
$ 3.59
13.52
$ 1,482.17
n/a
n/a
$ 58.28
28
$ 264.96
8.49%
100%
100%
99.8%
15
$1.24
$663.82
$6,456.69
$1,385.46
75.10%
100%
$4.08
13,47
n/a
$1,196.59
$238.51
$59.60
31
$179.06
11%
99.7%
I OO%
99.8%
15
KF..POK ~ #~
Performance IVieasures
The Performance Measures required to be reported publicly under the
Provincially mandated Performance Measurement Program will be available on
the City of Pickering's website cityofpickerinq,com as of September 30, 2004.
Copies are also available at City Hall, Cashiers Counter, 2® Floor.