Loading...
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.