Loading...
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.