West Orillia Sports Complex

On April 9^th Council met to decide some of the elements to be included in the new West Orillia Sports Complex.

Council decisions include:

Two NHL sized ice surfaces. There was a concerted effort by Minor Hockey to make one of the rinks Olympic size, which is the same length as an NHL rink but 15 ft wider. The additional cost for the Olympic-sized ice surface was $550,000. I originally proposed and continued to support the two NHL rinks as recommended by staff. In my opinion there is no trend towards Olympic sized ice in Ontario despite having been an active consideration for twenty years. Olympic ice is appropriate to consider only after you have satisfied all categories of skaters from the very small to the adult skater and should be looked at as a Community's 4^th or 5^th rink. I concede Minor Hockey's point that there would be an ability to hold more effective half-ice practices but this one upside does not offset the negative impact it may have on all other uses. I still play hockey and my conversations with adult hockey players who will be expected to carry the freight financially, indicate that there is very little interest in Olympic sized ice.Logistically I also believe that you may have a problem attracting tournaments if teams are forced to play on a surface that they have had no experience with.

700 seats in one arena and 200 in the other:

There was a move to reduce the seating but it went nowhere as there was no significant cost savings. There was no real science to my original proposal of 700 seats other than it represents an appropriate response to our current experiences. The facility will be built to last 50 years; somewhere within that time frame 700 seats will be useful.

One playing field will be artificial turf:

This was unanimously approved, I think, and represented an additional expenditure of $500,000. The turf will be the same type of surface as BMO field and will require significantly less maintenance ($40,000/yr less approx). It will also provide increased revenue from increased availability. This should give us a fairly quick pay back on our investment. These fields stretch the season by 2 to 3 months and are not vulnerable to the same weather cancellations as natural turf. A high quality natural turf surface is still the best to play on but our climate has to be acknowledged.

Washroom and Change-room servicing the playing fields:

This was a great inclusion proposed by staff. Besides providing service to outside facility users, the element will save space in the Twin Pad and allow the building to be closed and unmanned during the off season when only the tennis courts and playing fields are in use. It will also avoid the inevitable appearance of the aesthetically challenged and aromatically threatening portable toilet.    

April 13/09 

___________________________________________________________________________ 

Woolco Building

I have been involved in the Library Project since day one, now almost nine years ago. I sat through all the feasibility studies, program evaluations and site discussions. At some point in that nine year process and I can't put an exact date on it, the Committee discussed the idea of buying an existing building and converting it to our needs. The discussion included the Woolco building but never went too far beyond the philosophical. We as a group decided that Orillia was building a Library for the next 50 years and it should be a signature building that demonstrated our civic pride. It was also viewed as an opportunity to redevelop the Market Square/Opera House area into a significant gathering place. I have not changed my opinion. The debate currently underway is centered around cost and potential savings. I am sure that if audited our opinion of costs could contain a margin of error and I am sure that the opinion of cost presented by the Woolco building proponents could also contain that same margin of error. I am satisfied that in the end there is not enough of a price difference to sway me from my original vision at this time. 

The debate has also been about design. I was a proponent of a more neo-traditional design for the new Library. I voted against the hiring of Shore Tilbe based on previous experience and I voted against the design concept as presented. The majority of Council decided to go in a different direction and I deemed that issue lost. I am still hopeful that the Architects picked up on the concern that many of us expressed and the final design will be somewhat more sympathetic than originally planned. 

As for the Market Square space issue I have some concerns about how it is going to work. To that end I have requested that Shore Tilbe present their interim drawings. I am also on record as being willing to close West St. to accommodate a larger Saturday morning Market.

As to Parking, I  am a long time member of the Parking Advisory Committee and am on record as doubting that there will be an unsolvable parking shortage. During six months of the year for 4 hours each Saturday Morning there certainly will be some pressure but nothing that I see as warranting the sacrifice of other elements of this project. 

I accept our legal opinion of title and view the ultimate anticipated cost augmented by the $4 million grant as appropriate. If, when we get final design and costing, I find that the project has become unworkable, then at that time I may look to alternatives but at this time I am committed to the course we are on and am hopeful that we can produce something everyone will be proud of. 

Mar.5,09

_________________________________________________________________________________________

Budget Report 2009

Your Committee is pleased to report and recommend as follows:

1.                     THAT             the 2009 operating budget, excluding the Farmers’ Market Management Committee budget, be approved as submitted, subject to the following changes:

a)            reducing the Council Expense budget by $7,000 by eliminating the 2009 remuneration adjustment for Council members;

b)              reducing the Public Works transit budget by a net $15,000 due to enhanced Saturday transit service;

c)             increasing the Culture and Heritage Department budget by $15,000 for the second annual grant to Ontario’s Lake Country;

d)              increasing the City Manager’s Office budget by $43,000 for the addition of a full-time Health and Safety Officer position;

e)              increasing the Treasury Department budget by $33,000 for an additional full-time Systems Support Technician position; by $3,000 to link remote offices to the City's network; and by $3,000 for a backup Internet link;

f)              increasing the Public Works Department budget by $1,000 for upgrading the Waste Diversion Site scalehouse software; by $4,000 for map/GIS viewing software; and by $18,000 for street line painting including crossing lines at trails;

g)              reducing the Public Works Department budget by $1,000 and increasing the waterworks budget by $11,000 to cover increased membership fees for the Severn Sound Environmental Association;

h)              increasing the waterworks/wastewater budget by $1,000 for the        utility’s share of map/GIS viewing software;

i)              increasing the Library budget by $37,000 for replacement of the integrated library system; by $3,000 for Saturday janitorial service; and by $13,000 to restore the Director of Children’s Services position to full-time;

j)              increasing the Planning and Development Department budget by $41,000 for the addition of a permanent Building Inspector position; by $23,000 for the acquisition of a building permit software system and associated hardware; and by $12,000 for a permanent part-time clerical support position;

k)              increasing the Parks and Recreation Department budget by $31,000 to provide scheduled evening and weekend coverage in parks and facilities; by $30,000 to enhance turf management practices; by $10,000 for the purchase of three special event tents; and by $1,000 to fund a partnership with First Baptist Church for an outdoor ice rink;l)              increasing the Fire Department budget by $6,000 for the acquisition of a hydrostatic fire hose test machine; and by $118,000 to cover the hiring of two firefighters on July 1 and two firefighters on October 1;

m)              increasing the Legislative Services Division budget by a net $3,000 for the acquisition of a new parking ticket database system and associated hardware; and by a net $2,000 for the addition of a part-time meter repair/coin collection position, with an associated net increase in the surplus available for contribution to the Parking Reserve of $2,000;

n)              increasing the Grants budget by $13,000.

2.                     THAT the Farmers’ Market Management Committee budget be approved as submitted.

3.                     THAT the Downtown Orillia Management Board budget be approved as submitted.

4.                     THAT the Couchiching Point Canal Committee budget be approved as submitted.

5.                     THAT Clauses 26 and 27 of Council Committee Report 2008-17 be adopted.

6.                     THAT as recommended in a report dated January 7, 2009 from the Manager of Legislative Services, the rates for monthly parking permits be increased in accordance with the report;

AND THAT Chapter 454 of the City of Orillia Municipal Code be amended accordingly.

7.                     THAT as recommended in a report dated January 7, 2009 from the Manager of Legislative Services, the rate at all on-street and off-street parking meters be increased to $1.00 per hour;

AND THAT By-law Number 2007-55 be amended to reflect the rate and time change.

8.                     THAT as recommended in a report dated January 7, 2009 from the Manager of Legislative Services, staff be directed to apply to the Regional Senior Justice of Ontario to increase the fines for parking at an expired meter to $8.00 early payment and $10.00 set fine.

9.                     THAT as recommended in a report dated January 20, 2009 from the City Treasurer, Council establish a Reserve Fund for Park Development to provide funding for development and redevelopment of the City’s extensive park system;

AND THAT a 2.0% tax levy be used to fund the reserve on the following schedule:

0.25% tax levy be set aside in 2009 and subsequent years, and

an additional 0.25% tax levy be set aside in 2010 and subsequent years, and

an additional 1.0% tax levy be set aside in 2011 and subsequent years, and

an additional 0.5% tax levy be set aside in 2012 and subsequent years;

AND THAT this reserve be permitted to borrow funding from other reserve sources, at the discretion of the City Treasurer, to allow construction of the Couchiching Beach Washroom to proceed.

10.                   THAT as recommended in a report dated January 27, 2009 from the City Treasurer:

1.         Those Multi-residential, Commercial, and Industrial properties which were at CVA taxation in 2008 be removed from the capping program;

2.         Those Multi-residential, Commercial, and lndustrial properties which have crossed from an increasing property in 2008 to a decreasing property in 2009, or a decreasing property in 2008 to an increasing property in 2009 be removed from the capping program;

3.         The capping protection for properties increasing in taxation beyond the annual limits set by Council be funded from the general levy;

4.         The Multi-residential tax ratio be set at 1.60 for the 2009 tax year;

5.         The New Multi-residential tax ratio remain at 1.1 for the 2009 tax year;

6.         The Industrial tax ratio be set at 1.85 for the 2009 tax year;

7.         The Commercial tax ratio be set at 1.98 for the 2009 tax year;

8.         The Pipeline tax ratio be set at 2.637446 for the 2009 tax year;

9.             Graduated tax rates for 2009 remain on two bands of Commercial

assessment; the first band from $0 to $7,000,000 of assessment, and the second band being all assessment above $7,000,000;

10.       For 2009 the low band Commercial tax rate remain at 58% of the high band Commercial tax rate.

11. (i)               THAT Council reconsider Resolution 2008-285 regarding deferral of the 1% tax levy increase for police contract costs in 2009;

and, if such reconsideration passes:

(ii) That Council reinstate the 1% tax levy increase for police contract costs in 2009 and reduce the $400,000 contribution to the 2009 operating budget from the Policing Services Reserve to $30,000.

 12.                   THAT, with respect to the Envirosave Program, the Class 1 - Verification only fee of $25 (Item 20 of Schedule “A” of Chapter 459) be waived for properties that have been the verification process in the previous 12 months.

13. (i)               THAT Resolution No. 2008-320 regarding inclusion of the sidewalk at Notre   Dame School in the 2010 capital budget requests be reconsidered;

and, if this reconsideration passes:

(ii)                    That the sidewalk at Notre Dame School be included in the 2009 Capital Budget with a project budget of $13,000            funded out of the Capital Tax Levy.

14.                   THAT the 2009 Capital Budget attached to this report be approved, consisting of a total investment of $23,787,000.

15.                   THAT, further to the City Treasurer's report dated January 22, 2009, the major capital facilities funding schedule attached to the report be endorsed;

AND THAT the priorities continue to be reviewed annually as part of the budget process.

Complete Budget Available through City Hall Link

                                                                         _______________________________________________________________________________

Arena Closure

At 4:00 p. m. January 14^th the City of Orillia closed the Community Centre. Here is the series of events that lead to the closure. 

Beginning in 1976 the Ministry of Labour required that all arena (and swimming pool) facilities have a structural inspection at least every five years.  The inspection certificate for the Orillia Community Centre was valid until the end of 2008.

October 2008                                     Staff contracts Tacoma Engineers to undertake structural              inspection of the Orillia Community Centre

November 17 and 18^th, 2008 Tacoma conducts the onsite inspection

December 12, 2008 Staff receives email from Tacoma - their very early review indicates that it may be possible to keep the facility open until September 2009

January 12, 2009 Staff receive a draft version of the structural report indicating that the facility should be closed

January 14, 2009 (10:38am) Staff receive the final report indicating that the facility should be closed

January 14, 2009 (1:00pm) Copy of the final report given to the Chief Building Official

January 14, 2009 (2:34 pm) Received clarification email from Tacoma that the expectation was that the facility should be closed now and not after Friday’s planned meeting

January 14, 2009 (2:45 pm) Met with staff and Chief Building official. All were in agreement that the facility should be closed immediately

January 14, 2009 (4:00 pm) Closed the Orillia Community Centre. The decision was made by staff to close based on the structural report and the opinion of the Chief Building Official.  Staff felt that proactively closing before being forced to close by either the Chief Building Official or the Ministry of Labour was the best option.

On January 16^th Staff met with Tacoma Engineers to review their structural report on the Orillia Community Centre.

Clearly they indicated that there is not an immediate solution that can get the facility operational for the remainder of this ice season.  Although the scope of their contract was just for a structural inspection they did take a preliminary look at remedial options.  Although they have not advanced the concept into a design, that they could verify would work, they do believe that there may be an option that could have the building open for the 2009-2010 ice season.  They estimate that this type of remediation work would extend the life of the building by 2 to 3 years. They are preparing a work-plan and the cost to undertake the work and will submit it to staff early next week.  At this point they were not able to give an estimate for the cost of any remedial work.   They did stress that if the design is viable all stages of the process from design to construction would have to proceed expeditiously in order to meet a fall 2009 deadline. 

On January 19^th Council engaged Tacoma Engineering to do the above mentioned work and as well, directed staff to explore other options that could satisfy our ice needs in 2009. We expect that report in the second week of February.

This development is unfortunate and the hockey / figure skating community should be congratulated for their spirit of co-operation. In hindsight this structural review should have been done last spring so that the City would have had time to deal with the result -however unexpected- with as little disruption as possible. This was a failure of the Corporation and I, as a director of that Corporation accept full responsibility.

Going forward Council has indicated that they will be acting on the recommendations contained in the Ad Hoc Alternative Strategies Committee report brought forward on the 19^th of this month.(see Plan B) There have been reports of a facility being ready in November of 2009. Closer inspection of this optimistic timeline would reveal some challenges. Democracy cannot move at the same pace as the private sector and I believe some of the optimism is predicated on immediate responses. Staff is currently looking into these options so we will see. The tough question will be; how much do we spend to have ice by September 2009? and what is a reasonable timeline for the construction of a twin pad without compromising quality?

Posted Jan.29, 09

________________________________________________________________________

Plan B

As a member of the Ad Hoc Alternative Strategies Committee considering the problem of what to do next in regards to the City’s recreational needs and the viability of the proposed MURF project this is the position I have arrived at.

Planus Timalauerabus

I believe we should modify our plans for 255 West St. and continue to pursue a Certificate Of Use from the MOE. The amount of money and time invested by this Community in the MURF project merits final resolution. I believe the work that  Shaheen & Peaker has done to date should be subject to a third peer review before going forward.

In the interim I believe Council should immediately address the needs of the Soccer/Football/Rugby/Field Lacrosse/Hockey/Figure Skating/Running and Tennis user groups.

To that end, a mini complex should be constructed on the City owned land located directly across from Lakehead University on West Ridge Boulevard.

The Complex could include

      *    a design-built twin pad Arena for a cost of $14/16 million

• playing fields- including an artificial pitch with 2 additional full sized pitches, at a cost of $2,500,000

• an eight lane rubberized track at a cost of $300,000

*    4 to 8 tennis courts at a cost of $1 million

The twin pad arena would be built to accommodate field activity/tennis change rooms. Fitness rooms or meeting rooms could easily be added cost permitting. The artificial field and rubberized track would be fenced and abut the arena. Access to the one artificial pitch would be controlled through the arena, by arena staff.

Rationale

No matter what scenario in regards to our present recreation facilities plan eventually plays out, I believe the above mentioned needs are pressing and can be addressed without necessarily compromising the building at some point of a multi-use facility in the City core. 

Location- this greenfield location is ideal for this kind of complex. The Lakehead University development will ensure services in the area and the City has already committed to provide public transit. Lakehead does not anticipate developing their own recreational facilities until at least phase three which could be 10/15 years from now. In the interim Lakehead could be our best customer for off-prime hours. The location will also serve Georgian College and the OPP as it will be a five-minute drive across Line 15 from the Memorial Ave. Campus and the OPP Headquarters.

Financial- The primary concern is that if we build a stand-alone twin pad as well as a twin pad as a part of the MURF, we risk being over supplied. I believe that our growing student population, the growth of women’s hockey and the availability of more prime-time ice hours will off-set this concern. At worst it could mean a phasing in of the MURF ice component until demand exceeds supply or converting an excess rink to an indoor field facility which have proven very popular in other communities. As we go forward and resolve the end use of the West St. site, we will get a better feel for how fast our post secondary institutions are going to expand.  I believe the 2010 in-coming Council will be in a better position to assess and respond to our recreational needs.

Economics- A, modest-by-comparison, development like this will allow the Municipality to answer our most pressing recreational needs while buying time for Council to ascertain what kind of economic pressures our taxpayers are going to be facing in the near future. As to Economic Development this strategy will help our post- secondary schools provide better recreational services that will improve there chances of success. The argument that we are losing Industrial/Commercial land is valid but a complex of this size will probably require only 15/20 acres which will still leave well over 100 acres for industrial development. It could be argued that meeting the needs of our recreational community could be a more significant factor in Economic Development than the availability of land.

Future Options- As mentioned above, building now will give us the option in the future of modifying the MURF plan if deemed necessary. It would also allow us the ability to use the complex as the base of a MURF if the West St. site is deemed unworkable. With some design consideration the pool and gymnasium could be added later. This however is not a plan I would support as I am committed to locate any multi-use facility in the City center, however if Council in their wisdom wished to relocate the entire project this would be, at present, the best location.

Playing Fields

In my opinion, the provision of decent playing fields is as pressing a need as the need for an arena. Currently field lacrosse is without a permanent home, flag football is being played on fields without end zones and the quality of soccer/rugby fields is ready to be taken to the next level.

Artificial pitch- These facilities are becoming more and more popular as they are perfectly suited to our climate. The turf allows continuous use from early in the morning until late at night with little maintenance or deterioration. The season is expanded by several months as the technology permits use from immediately after the snow melts until snow-cover settles in for the Winter and rain outs are a thing of the past. The lighting would allow showcasing of High School football on Friday nights and the facility could also act as the home field for the Lakehead Varsity Soccer team.

Rubberized Track- The rubberized track, although not discussed in previous plans is a perfect fit for the artificial playing field. The drainage system that services the playing field can be easily extended and the lighting that services the field will do double duty for the track. Currently there are few rubberized 8 lane tracks in the Province and currently Orillia’s most promising running athletes go elsewhere to train. A track of this quality would allow the City to host major running events while providing an excellent training facility for our own, ever-growing running community.

Tennis, as mentioned in the AHAS report, is in need of immediate attention. Locating it here would be the simplest solution

Summary

The above strategy addresses the Community’s most pressing recreational needs while allowing for the most options going forward. At the same time this interim move will buy Council time to deal with the on-going risk assessment and the developing economic climate. I think if we don’t panic we have a chance to build something that will be progressive and prudent, not just reactive.

If Council decided to move ahead aggressively, construction could begin this summer and all facilities would be operating by the fall of 2010 which is how I prefer to end this term of Council. The $18,000,000 when added to the Library budget and the Police Services facility would allow us to keep our total immediate expenditures under $50,000,000, $25,000,000 million of which is already in reserve.

Posted Jan. 20th/09

_______________________________________________________________________________

Library

Council tabled for two weeks, the recommendations that were brought forward from a special meeting of Council held on November 12^th to discuss the Library design. Council wanted to have the soft cost estimate before they sent the project off for final design. Council also wanted to give the public an opportunity to comment on the second design direction which would see some elements introduced that would be more sympathetic to the heritage downtown. To that end a public meeting was held on November 27^th at 6 in the Council Chambers. I am completely sympathetic to proponents of the Library who are understandably anxious to move the project along. As a Councillor who has been involved in this project literally from day one, some 8 years ago, I also am looking forward to going ahead asap. Unfortunately in this case asap can not override the process. I haven’t spent $20,000,000 lately and as the type of consumer who takes a year to buy a television, I can not in good conscience circumvent the process of due diligence. I look forward to moving ahead once we have the costs and are relatively comfortable that the design we are choosing represents a building that a majority of Orillians can support The real go–no-go date however is not until the building is tendered in the spring and the final price is known. At that time I do not want lack of process, lack of due diligence or any surprises to be part of the discussion. As for my opinion on the building, I am fine with the location; I feel that underground parking is not practical; I like option A as it represents a reasonable compromise, increasing the Market space and maintaining enough parking. Option A also allows for the flexibility of the Market expanding onto West St. and eventually when we lose our allegiance to the car we can eliminate parking altogether and make the space into a dedicated Civic Square. As to design I would rather see something with a neo-traditional front on Mississaga morphing into something more contemporary in behind. I believe that the proposed idea of etching words into the glass is a risk. Much like tattoos and labels on T-shirts – they all end up stale. These design opinions are of course not based on science and I respect that everyone will have their own vision. Hopefully as stated above we can arrive at a consensus.

Nov. 30th/08

_____________________________________________________________________________

Waterfront Land use Options

Council received a report from EDA Collaborative Inc. outlining land use options for Couchiching and Centennial Park. (See complete report on City Hall link). The report was produced as a result of a request I put forward asking for some options in regard to improvements we may be able to carry out in the waterfront area between Brant St. and Mississaga St. At the core of the discussion is whether or not the City wants to operate a boat launch and provide unlimited free trailer parking. The report contains an option that would see Centennial Drive moved to the west and the Terry Fox Circle closed and a new Park entrance created off of Brant Street.                                                                                           As mentioned above, it has been at least 8 years since I first requested a simple redesign of the above mentioned area. The boat launch as it is presently configured is dangerous and much too intrusive, the trailer parking along the old rail bed is a complete waste of valuable parkland and the aesthetics of the back of the Front St. buildings need to be addressed. Since that time and in response to that request Council has commissioned an overall Waterfront Plan and this new more focused study. Both I suppose are necessary but both contain options that are currently out of reach financially. I hope that Council will not be paralyzed by yet another Master Plan and will look to find some affordable, doable options that they can act on now. We could close the boat ramp at no cost; we could flatten and landscape the old rail beds, we could create a buffer along the back of the Front St. businesses; we could improve access from Neywash St., We could create an express trail through the west end of the Parks; we could create some washroom facilities in a more central location; if the boat ramp stays we could organize a user pay parking lot off site for trailers and limit the size of boats. All these things could be done now and not break the bank. Staff will be bringing back some options at budget and it is my hope that they will be practical and affordable.

Nov. 30th/08

 _______________________________________________________________________

Ward 4 Meeting

Ward Four Meeting hosted by Councillor Lauer and Evans on Saturday November the 15^th at the Couchiching Golf Club. 10a.m. to 12 p.m.. If you have questions about the 2009 Budget, recreation, the Library Project. The University or the road-construction-summer-from-hell please join us. This is an informal chance for Don and I to get your thoughts so please plan to attend.

Post meeting notes: We had a good turnout with lots of civil discussion about the Library, MURF, Assessment, the future Hillcrest School and ODCVI, and Hazel McCallion. Thanks to everyone who attended. Councillor Evans and I will be hosting another session in the spring.

Nov. 30th/08

_____________________________________________________________________________

We are back.

All meetings are now entered and I apologize for the delay. It has been a busy summer personally and the Website I guess got moved to the back burner. I am looking forward to the Fall term and hope that we can move the Library and the Lakehead projects along as well as coming up with a solution to our recreational needs. The Plan B Alternative Strategies Committee continued to meet all summer and I will be reporting to Council in the near future with an interim report.

As for road work, it has been a nightmare in Ward 4 all summer as our aging roads have received significant attention and getting around has at times been problematic. In the end it will be well worth it. For residents of Jarvis St. and Tecumseth, I apologize for the length of the disruption as we have experienced several problems with the Contractor doing the improvements.

Good luck to Bruce Stanton, Steve Clarke, and Valerie Powell in the up-coming Federal election. I have known all three candidates for a long time and no matter who wins Simcoe North will have excellent local representation.

September/08

_____________________________________________________________________________  

Plan B Committee

I see this Ad Hoc Committee as an exercise in contingency planning. I believe that recent revelations in regard to the City’s on-going Risk Assessment/ Risk Management Submission have muddied the waters. If Council is to manage this project properly, it is imperative that Council have a full appreciation of the situation and all the specifics about possible alternative strategies.

Council needs a better idea of the current timetable. Shaheen & Peaker have indicated that they can’t meet the Ministry’s June date. The M.O.E. has agreed to extend that deadline but Shaheen & Parker have given no target date for completion.

Council needs more details on the Appeal Process. Council should have an assessment of the likelihood of an appeal being made, the nature of that appeal and what kind of time delay we can expect in the event an appeal is filed.

Council needs to have a full appreciation of the proposed Gas Ventilation System. As I understand it, this technology has never been used under a Recreational Facility. If Council is to plunk a $65,000,000 project down, on a piece of contaminated land they should have every assurance that the system will be reliable and predictable for the life of the building as well as understanding the M.O.E requirements going forward.

Council needs to understand the cost implications of the recent comments and subsequent delays. The cost of the new M.O.E. requirements (gas ventilation system under parking lot) and the anticipated construction cost increases due to inflation should be identified.

After answering the above questions I believe Council will be in a position to ascertain whether or not any alternative action is required and if so what alternative strategies would be appropriate.

Should Council revisit the idea of completely remediating the DNAPL hot spot? Previously Councils had not seriously considered the idea based on the ballpark work estimate of $20,000,000. After investigation, if the current delay is going to cost another 5 to 10 million in inflationary costs; if full remediation would eliminate the anticipated $4,000,000 of off-site costs; if full remediation would eliminate the need of expensive gas ventilation systems; if full remediation would make it more likely that the Federal and Provincial Governments would provide Brownfield funding and if Council wished to erase all environmental doubts for the 50 year life of the building then Council would be wise to look more closely at that option.

Can Council proceed on some smaller projects that will not compromise the grander vision of a true Multi Use Facility while relieving some of the pressures currently being experienced by certain groups in our recreational community. Even the most optimistic cannot see this facility opening much early than 2011, a full ten years after the process started. This decade has seen significant growth at Georgian College, the arrival of Lakehead University, the purchase of the Horne Farm, the availability of the HRC, a proposed new use for Kitchener Park, the proposed closing of possibly 4 schools and a new set of pressures on our recreational needs.

And finally, based on the City Managers report dated March 26^th 08, Council should identify and develop a contingency plan that would allow Council to react in a timely manner if the present site is deemed unworkable. 

Apr.27/08

______________________________________________________________________________ 

M.O.E. Comments on MURF 

The City, as reported here in February received correspondence from the M.O.E. Assessment Reviewers outlining 14 areas that needed clarification. Shaheen & Peaker responded and subsequently the M.O.E. responded with 22 pages of outstanding issues. The initial reaction of the Consultants was surprise and dismay at the extent and possible impacts of the M.O.E. comments. The M.O.E. has expressed the opinion that all outstanding issues are manageable. 

Council on a 5-4 vote decided to ask Shaheen and Peaker to report back on the implications of the M.O.E. comments. I voted in the negative as I think we should take a look at the Engineering firms performance before asking them to do any thing more.

Council did however approve my request for a meeting dedicated to assessing our situation, deciding how to get the information we need and planning next steps. That meeting will be held April 15^th 2008 at 6 p.m.-City Hall.

An additional motion was put forward by Councillor Spears to meet with the M.O.E. Minister. I voted against this action. Although I understand Councillor Spears’ intention I do not think we have sorted out where we are going yet so any meeting would be premature. The motion was lost.

(For What It’s Worth- I believe we have to recognize that all Ministries have now been what I call Walkertonized. The Provincial Government has learned through the tragedy at Walkerton that liability will eventually end up at their door and with that in mind there is no way a Provincial Minister is going to use his or her influence to circumvent due process involving an issue of Health and Safety. Further to the lobby issue and for the same reasons; anybody who thinks that our approval delays are the result of undue political pressure coming from citizen groups is also misguided. We are dealing with very tight legislation and a Ministry that will not allow itself to be accused of negligence.)

We have not as a Council assessed the true magnitude of the M.O.E. concerns but a cursory look by the Consultants as reported verbally at Monday’s meeting indicates that we will now be required to engineer and install a gas ventilation system under the large parking lot currently located over the VC hotspot. Also revealed in the report was that “the acceptance of the Risk Assessment is not necessarily the final step as interested parties can seek leave to appeal the resultant Certificate of Property Use to the Environmental Review Tribunal”.

The report from the City Manager and the Manager of Special Projects suggested 7 alternatives ranging from status quo to abandoning the site (see entire report at City Hall link).

As stated at the meeting I feel Council needs more information before going forward.

Firstly we need to make some sort of evaluation of the level of performance we are receiving from our Consultants.

Secondly we need some indication as to time lines and costs involved in continuing on our present course.

Thirdly in light of the appeal process that we are now just being made aware of, we need to know to what extent that process could delay the construction start. Given the significant concern for the environmental issues surrounding this site it would be very surprising if the final decision was not appealed. Remembering the 9% increase recently added to the project budget, we also need to know the potential inflationary impact of these potential delays on construction costs.

Lastly Council needs to be re-informed on alternatives and assess public opinion.

After getting a handle on the above concerns Council will then have to take a thorough look at what should be the next steps.

Important to remember that we can not walk away from this property without dealing with some of the environmental issues.

(For What It’s Worth-There was a great Editorial in the Packet the other day that pointed out that almost everyone is in agreement that we need to spend some significant dollars on new recreational facilities. The Editorial went on to point out that the debate is about where, and at what cost yet the arguments seem to be framed by a ‘for-or-against’ mentality. I think it is time to take off the blinkers, take a good look at the project and be good managers.)

Apr.2/08

_____________________________________________________________________________

Notes from the Murf Costs Meeting

1. There were some remarks made at the March 6^th meeting regarding the quality of legal advice Council received when considering the transfer agreement with Molson. The inference made and generally applauded was that we were not properly advised. I can assure everyone that we were and that our Legal Counsel would have first and foremost made Council aware of the repercussions of accepting environmental responsibility for the Molson property. The decision to sign may have been a bad decision but it was a fully informed, eyes-opened political decision and therefore rests squarely on the shoulders of Council- of which I was a member.

2. One small correction. The cost of the foundation that won’t be used (referred to as Footprint A in the circulated agenda) is already included in the original construction budget. Apparently the original estimate for the work was so over-stated that no adjustment was necessary to the construction budget.

3. We have certain proponents quoting the yearly cost of our Capital Facility strategy as $92 a year. This number is based apparently on a home assessed at $200,000 and factors in the 4 successive 1% yearly tax  increases currently being implemented. What is being left out of the equation is the original 4% increase imposed in 2002 and the 8% impact of the OPC interest/dividend payment. When these other revenue streams are factored in the cost quadruples. To people on fixed incomes, low incomes or just short of discretionary funds,  this may have a significant impact. The scary thing in this case, is that anyone could make a decision of this magnitude based on such faulty math. In the end however, I feel the cost issue is more about value, performance and lost opportunity than affordability.   

4.  The meeting was well chaired and well attended. I was hoping that the discussion would focus more on the cost issue with more discussion as to how people would scale back the project- what programs they viewed as less of a priority. Perhaps the questionnaire handed out at the end will answer that question.

5. Some of the statements about the severity of the contamination at the site need documentation      

______________________________________________________________________________

MURF Update

As of the end of January the City had heard back from the MOE with a list of 14 questions regarding our latest Risk Management submission. Those questions have been forwarded on to our Consultants and are currently being answered. The latest round of questions are not anticipated to cause any significant delay ( we’ve been wrong before) and the MOE is still reportedly working to the previously announced schedule which hopefully would see approval no later than April. Once approval is received Council has indicated that it will go to tender with no further discussions about cost. Once the tendered price of the project has been established Council has indicated that they will then review the cost of the project. In the 2008 Budget meetings Council approved a $5,500,000 contribution to the project to cover an anticipated 9% inflation of construction costs. This brings the project budget to approx. $63,000,000 (including $7,000,000 already spent) without landfill costs or off site VOC costs factored in. This budget contribution is best described as a pre-emptive move to soften any possible tendering surprises and to maintain the appearance that the project is on budget. Barring any significant surprises when the tenders do come in, proponents of the cost may have painted themselves into a corner and Council will not be able to significantly reduce the scope of the project without swallowing some pretty hefty redesign costs.

My concerns remain the same:

-As stated elsewhere on these pages I believe the design and programming is stale dated.

-As stated elsewhere on these pages I believe the 16 year capital facilities funding strategy is too aggressive and relies too heavily on the Orillia Power Corp contribution.We are building facilities that have a life expectancy of 50 years. A 16 year amortization puts extraordinary pressure on City Budgets in the short term; an impact quite apparent as one watches the present Council fighting with perceived tax increase ceilings, while watching the Municipality’s significant infrastructure deficit grow.In my opinion the overall capital costs should be passed further into the future and should not anticipate uninterrupted cash flow from the OPC.                                                                                               (I also question how the heavy reliance on the OPC funding  plays out in regards to their own levels of service. I have already heard the statement coming from their administration that if we ask for certain improvements in levels of service we can kiss goodbye to our dividend)

-Finally this is about wasted opportunity. Orillia for years was saddled with what has been described as bad debt. It took a tough decade and lots of sacrifice by this community to regain it’s current debt free status. We are now in a position to consider investing in our community. We have decided that we need a new Library; we need to improve our recreational facilities; we need a new Police and Fire Station, and we have been provided with the opportunity to partner in the development of our own University. According to financial norms of the day, the Municipality has a capacity for a certain amount of debt. We have one opportunity to invest that debt capacity as we see fit. No one knows what opportunities will present themselves in the future but I for one want to be in a position to take advantage of them. Anything we can save now will translate into future opportunities  We are continually told when the extraordinary price of the MURF project is questioned in relation to other projects in the Province, that we are not comparing apples to apples. This may be true, however, the question has to be asked; if all other Municipalities are getting by with apples why can’t we. 

______________________________________________________________________________ 

Budget 2008

This year’s Budget Meetings wrapped up on Thursday the 14th which qualifies it as the shortest Budget Meeting in my 11 years on Council. Much of the 5.3% tax hike was predetermined, with built in increases to accommodate the increased Police Service budget, capital facilities  funding, and our contribution to Lakehead University. The reported increase is only 4.3 % after the 0 increase on the Educational side is factored in; however the City’s budget over budget one year increase is 5.3%. I feel this is a reasonable increase given the importance of the projects and initiatives currently underway.

Budget Notes

I was pleased that Council endorsed my proposal to increase the Winter Control budget this year by $100,000. By the time we ratify the final 2008 Budget and receive a Winter Control report from Public Works in mid March, these funds should be sufficient to respond to any service improvements that are recommended for the remainder of this fiscal winter (Nov. & Dec. 2008). My hope is that we can come up with a strategy that will allow us to maximize use of existing equipment during major weekend storm events by having additional emergency crews working both the road and sidewalk plows.

I voted against an increase in our Grants Budget from $25,000 to $38,000. The Grants Budget is a budget the City uses to give small grants to non-profit organizations (sports, cultural, social). I am uncomfortable making charitable donations on the part of the taxpayer. I have lived with the current small scale donations but I am not interested in expanding the practice. If a group is addressing an essential need in the community (Lighthouse, Green Haven, Jubilee House), I am more than willing to consider significant direct funding on merit. The recommendation was passed.

I voted against a grant to the Downtown Management Board of $65,000 for the purchase of a street sweeping machine. The DOMB believe the machine will provide a higher level of service while saving the City operational costs; a claim not supported by our Public Works Dept. I feel we are currently subsidizing the downtown adequately. We recently received a report from Treasury outlining the amount the City invests in the Downtown which was in my opinion substantial. Left out of the report was the City’s commitment to keeping the Library and MURF in the City core as well as investments in the Museum. I suggested the idea of lending the BIA an amount to cover the cost of the new machine with a 5 to 10 year amortization but was turned down. The motion to grant $65,000 was approved.

I voted against a recommendation to reduce the proposed $100,000 contribution to the Trail Reserve by $50,000. Trail development have been identified as a priority by this Council as well as every progressive community in the World. The Trails for Life Committee is currently working on a connection from West St. to Elgin St. that will connect the Millennium Trail to the as yet unnamed South Trail; it is also actively exploring new trails in West Ridge as well as a new connection to Scout Valley. These initiatives will all carry hefty price tags and to not contribute to a reserve indicates a lack of foresight and commitment. The Trail is Orillia’s number one summer recreation facility and deserved to be protected from future budget constraints. The motion to reduce passed which was puzzling after a clear majority of Council spoke in support of the original contribution.

Council agreed to grant Information Orillia  $25,000 to supplement their operational budget. I originally voted against this expenditure but changed my mind after re-reading the report and deciding their relationship with the Library should be tested before we actually design them into the new Library.

I lost an attempt to grant the Orillia Museum of Art and History $75,000 a year over the next 3 years. Staff had recommended no funding at all on the grounds that the City was already contributing to the upkeep of the building. I don’t understand the logic here as the City, by funding on-going exterior improvements, is simply investing in an asset they own and will obviously retain any return on capital invested. In the end Council decided that $50,000 a year for the next 3 years was adequate. OMAH is aggressively planning the second stage of their 2-part expansion which will see the development of the second and third floors as well as the installation of an elevator. I believe OMAH is providing an important service to the Community and we should encourage their continued growth. I will also be supporting future requests for funding as this proven Board proceeds with their next expansion. The last City contribution of $250,000 was turned into a million dollar renovation that defined the Sir Sam Steele Building as a downtown landmark.

Council approved a recommendation from Parks and Recreation that the present staff position that oversees our parks and facility be separated into two positions with a Manager of Parks and a Manager of Facilities. Given the expansion in our Parks (Scout Valley) and Trails inventory and the proposed addition of the Murf it makes sense to separate and focus identified skill-sets to each area of operations.

**There is a  public meeting at 6p.m. on Tues. Feb 19^th in Council Chambers which will provide the public an opportunity to express their views on the proposed 2008 Budget.

Next meeting – Council Feb.25/08

_____________________________________________________________________________

Snow Removal

On February 4^th at 6 p.m. Council is hosting a public meeting at City Hall. The purpose of the meeting is to hear your concerns or commendations for the way we handle our Winter Snow control. There will also be an opportunity for Council to discuss the issue with staff. My own concerns centre around our policy on weekends. I believe we should establish the costs of a more aggressive approach on weekends. A check of plowing activity during one December weekend storm indicated that we had only two plows on the road which I am sure were having enough trouble just keeping the arterials passable. I understand the staffing limitations and the rules and regulations governing shift and off- work times so I think we will have to be creative and certainly willing to spend some money. The timing of the meeting is planned so that the issue has some relevance. Too often Snow Removal is discussed in the off-seasons and if there ever was an- out of sight-out of mind issue -it is Snow Removal. The Feb. 4^th date also allows Council to hear from the public before our 2008 Budget Meetings.  

____________________________________________________________________________

Lions Oval- School

In a surprise reversal Council turned down the proposed sale of the Lion’s Oval to the Simcoe County School Board. Councillors cited procedural problems, the loss of Parkland and dissatisfaction with the overall Board facility strategy.

I supported the recommendation

                                                                                                                                                           In regard to this issue, as I see it, my job as a City Councillor is to assess the general public's position in regard to the partial loss of the Lion's Oval as public green space and whether or not a school is an appropriate use to justify that loss. The response before, during and since the last election indicates to me that most people are fine with the idea of selling the parcel as long as the outside playing fields are accessible to the public.Many people also pointed to the positive benefits of having such a vibrant neighbourhood activity remain in the center of town while others made note of the on-going neglect of the property. (It should also mention that, past Councils have actively pursued the idea of selling the 7 acre Lion's Oval for residential purposes and despite some of our best individual efforts, Council has steadfastly refused to invest any money in the site for recreational uses.)                                            My own feelings are these:                                                                                                                  I believe with or without a school, there will be ample parkland in the Patrick St./ Brant St. area. Victoria Park is a significant neighbourhood park located 1 block to the south. Immediately to the north is a Parkette running down from Dalton Cresent. When the school is built, the contract stipulates that there will be unimpeded public access to all outside green space. Combine this inventory with the High School playing fields located within 2 or 3 blocks of the site and the portrayal of this change-of-use as being a significant loss of green space, just doesn't wash. I also agree with the notion that this is a smart move in regard to urban planning and keeping the core of the City relevant. I make note as well, that the School Board has been very cooperative in accommodating adjoining uses. (Community Center, Guardian Angels School)

As for next steps - I will bring forward a motion on Monday night - not to immediately reverse the decision but to request another meeting in Closed Session with the School Board to review some of the issues. Given the weight that some Councillors are putting on the overall School Board strategy, and given some of the mixed messages delivered by  Board members I think some clarifications would be appropriate before we put this issue to bed.

_____________________________________________________________________________   

Lakehead and the HRC

  Lakehead University and the City of Orillia have announced that the 140 acre Horne Farm has been selected as the site of Lakehead’s permanent campus. This ends a 5 year effort to locate the campus at the HRC grounds. In the end the Province of Ontario and Lakehead could not reach an agreement for the use of the HRC site. Lakehead has always had a very aggressive expansion timetable and in the end felt that they could not afford to wait any longer for the assurances they required. Although this is not the ideal result some of us were hoping for, the Horne property is a second choice with tremendous upside. It is a beautiful greenfield site with servicing  already in the planning stage. It will be across the road from a 228 acre park and has great access from HWY 11.

TThe partnership the City is developing with Lakehead is not unique in Ontario. McMaster is putting a new campus in Burlington, Wilfrid Laurier has been very successful in Brantford, the University of Waterloo is now in Cambridge, Kitchener and is about to locate in Stratford. In each of these cases the host Municipality has made significant financial contributions. Orillia should expect the same. Over the coming months we will be examining Lakeheads business plan and negotiating our involvement. During the last election I spoke of how the successful Municipality in the future will be the ones that not only seek out and grab opportunity but most importantly, invest*. This is one of those opportunities.

Assuming an agreement can be worked out, the establishment of a permanent campus will shape this community for years to come. We will lose a significant chunk of Industrial development land but our current projections for industrial growth indicate that there is still a sufficient inventory. Locating the University in our developing west end will also provide opportunities for partnering with Lakehead as we provide the recreational facilities which that West Ridge will eventually require. A review of our current recreational strategies would probably be in our best interest.  

As for the HRC lands, it remains to see what the Province will do. Georgian College and the OPP who are tied to the Government may have better luck. Perhaps the Province will rethink their decision to close the facility entirely. Perhaps another Ministry has designs on the property. As a Municipality we must continue to push the issue. What happened at the Edgar Facility can not be permitted to happen here

*( Teletech is the perfect example of how a community through their Municipal Government can be proactive in developing their economic and social base. The City invested 3 million dollars 6 years ago and in 4 or 5 months facilitated the construction of a state-of-the-art building which now supports 700 to 800 employees. We retain ownership of the building, collect rent and enjoy the benefit of millions of dollars being pumped into our local economy through the company’s payroll. Even if it all ended tomorrow, Orillia would be left with a very usable/saleable facility and have, in the length of the initial lease, put over 100 million dollars directly into the hands of area residents.)

Sept. 15th, 07

____________________________________________________________________________    Lions Oval- School Board Negotiations

We are currently negotiating with the Simcoe County School Board in an attempt to accommodate their desire to construct a new school on 5 acres of land located at the Lions Oval. The site is actually 7 acres and is home to Orillia’s historic Community Center. The Board has indicated that they are able to co-exist with the Community Center and the parking/bus pick-up requirements of Guardian Angels Church and School. Council agreed to proceed with negotiations after the fall election, with the intent of exploring a deal that would satisfy all stakeholders. Council is split on this issue with some members not interested at all in selling the asset, some that are gung-ho no matter what and some, like myself, that will only agree if they think a deal can be struck that makes sense to the taxpayer of Orillia. I was surprised when the school community indicated support for the idea of closing Mount Slaven, David H. Church and Hillcrest Public Schools as I have always felt that the public perceived smaller schools as much more efficient. The School board is now indicating that it may close all three schools regardless due to declining enrollment. Within the next month negotiations should be complete and Council will be asked to decide whether or not the ultimate offer to purchase/lease put forward by the Simcoe County School Board represents reasonable compensation for the loss of 5 acres of valuable parkland.

May 29^th,07

___________________________________________________________________  

Risk Assessment

More work Required By M.O.E.

The Risk Assessment submitted by the City to the Province has been returned as incomplete.

A summary of some of the comments on site characterization, the Human Health and Ecological Risk assessments and the Risk Management Plan include:

-Clarification on the extent and potential migration of DNAPL on the site.

-Assessment and justification for installation and spacing of key monitoring wells.

-Discussion of issues pertaining to groundwater modeling.

-Uncertainty in vapour modeling( and related risk estimates) from use of the geometric         mean as opposed to the maximum measured value of some substances. Use of Maximum concentrations is more appropriate.

-Additional analysis and discussion is needed regarding potential health risks posed by exposures to COCs.

-The potential subchronic and acute effects of exposure need also to be analysed and discussed for TCE, vinyl chloride, and related chemicals.

-inappropriate screening of contaminants of concern (COCs)

-Ecological risk characterization is inconsistent with the derivation of PSSs for several COCs.

-Justification for the proposed cover of 300mm is needed.

-Further details are needed regarding contingency measures and triggering levels for implementation of the contingency measures.

-Proposed monitoring and maintenance plans need to be revised.

-An overview of measures to control the source of DNAPL is needed, with sufficient detail to show that this viable. The Gartner Lee report dated may 2006 in Appendix 1 assess some options, but this was before the building was moved off the source area. moving the building may make more options viable for source control.

-The CPU for Part 2 should also include a condition that prohibits use of this area unless approval of the Minister is given under section 46 of the EPA.

Council is planning to meet with the Engineers, Staff and M.O.E. Representatives in the coming week to assess the implications of the M.O.E. comments.

May 20/07

Update: Council will not meet with Engineers, Staff and M.O.E. Representatives until probably early June.

May 22/07

Update: Council may receive informal word in June but the official response could take us into July.

June 4/07

____________________________________________________________

Shingle Bay ( taken from the Mar. 5th Council Meeting)

Shingle Bay located in front of the HRC property was the site of an impromptu visit by Pope John Paul II during his 2002 Canadian stay on Strawberry Island. I was one of Pope Paul the II’s biggest Presbyterian fans. We did not agree on all fronts but his efforts to embrace other Religions and his indomitable will to contribute right to the end in my opinion deserve our utmost respect. I also feel there was something beyond religion that happened on that unstaged and unrehearsed day in the City of Orillia that can be appreciated, by everyone, whatever your beliefs.  

There was some discussion as to what should be named in his honour; the thought being that a

School or a Park may be more appropriate and logistically easier than changing an existing name. I voted in favour of going forward in order to start the discussion. I will be very interested in hearing what the public thinks of this proposed name change.

5/3/07