AGENDA - Special General Committee - 20051205SPECIAL GENERAL
COMMITTEE AGENDA
2006 OPERATING BUDGET 1ST DRAFT
2006 CAPITAL BUDGET 1ST DRAFT
NO.05-26
MONDAY, DECEMBER 51 2005
6:00 P.M.
COUNCIL CHAMBERS
AURORA TOWN HALL
PUBLIC RELEASE
02/12/05
TOWN OF AURORA
SPECIAL GENERAL COMMITTEE MEETING
2006 - 2008 Capital and Operating Budget - Draft 1
AGENDA
NO. 05-26
Monday, December 5, 2005
6:00 p.m.
Council Chambers
Mayor Jones in the Chair.
I DECLARATIONS OF PECUNIARY INTEREST
❑ APPROVAL OF AGENDA
RECOMMENDED:
THAT the content of the Agenda as previously distributed by staff be
approved as presented.
III DELEGATIONS
Mr. AI Wilson, Resident
Re: Draft 2006 Capital & Operating Budget
Special General Committee Meeting No. 05-26
Monday, December 5, 2005
Page 2
IV ITEMS REQUIRING SEPARATE DISCUSSION
1st Draft — 2006-2008 Capital and Operating Budget Plan
(Under Separate Cover)
- Recap of process to date
- Review of Reserve and Reserve Funds (attached)
- Public Works Capital Initiatives
- Library Budget
- Administration Building Budget
- Leisure Services Budget
- Memorandum requesting Special Council Meeting on
December 20, 2005 with the intent to adopt the
2006 Capital and Operating Budget (attached)
NOTE: To view a complete copy of the 15t Draft — 2006-2008 Capital and Operating
Budget Plan, please visit our website www.e-aurora.ca or visit the Aurora Public
Library or the Town Hall during business hours.
V ADJOURNMENT
SPECIAL GENERAL COMMITTEE — DECEMBER 5, 2005
��
oainmv'n 'o 0o ryrygngr'n „mombn—Oro O
q N m V1 O N - NO
r
q qm N VI V
a Y
^ r O m Po O
pm
`d'
W V� N r b
m
q V1 .+ O V Om V� n
b p
.. N O� �yy. .� 'O O P O
b
n•
N o
b
» �• n m
h 'O+1 M .-' m O n m
E
� r .-. T O b
m
Q
�l
s
0
0
r
0
n
O q
O q
rv'
� H
•
OO p
�
Q el'
N
�
m
q`
n
<
M
� o
nO P
m n om O O m r
S rm O y N
N d' LKdr
m'
P
q
•-' N N�
N
O—
4..
— N
�
YC C 9 F
q
hNIMAV.
ly µ�. u q �
s`AlC
faw
s-
�Y
U
w� a�
mm_-a u
e
F37
6'c.
71
N-E"�SP=�
U'G wu U3�
O,ZY
xV mwV3m m n.�ii 6
—1—
SPECIAL GENERAL COMMITTEE - DECEMBER 5, 2005
N O a0 O �O 00
M 00 O Op d' T 7 CO O
d' O �O
O1
m 0 Vl O N�
ao M N M l� O W I--: N n N 0 0
vt [n V1
�
� W V1 O V1 oO 00 �
O� M vi In N as d
O m Vl N M I� m O r N W
m�
m h 7
co
q o
O
W
z
�
O
q O
H
U
A C
u
C7
W
d
w
W
a v
�
o 0
o
U w
0
N
q
M P
L
O 1
qW
� u
w.l
'q C
'•�`.
V� N Vf � N w M
0
'n
t
a,
cn
'14
N
Lei 4v
C
OR M
v y a
I'"..Oar
�.
O
F'i .�.-y
E9 r�tl
N rn y U aCi
d
O':;'::
C rj
3t:wwmU3w�w
N q'
a
b
V V1
t 0 ao
�'},
LL
y
z 2
N N
N N
K �
M
M
O
O
i
r1
w
N
N
n
h
O
rn
p
a
on o 0 00 0 0 0
e o v o v c
N In M O O 7 0
o orom n oo ��oc rno ni r r` ro
00 Ir �O �q cO .M-I Vl O OO m n N O\ M O� 01 VI O �O
r•1 [r: 7 to N N O N y^ b N N of 1�,I �O V1 .tea 7 00 V1 R V1 rrt 00' 7 � r rr1
N I I
ab
a
`td o W
C
« y Cli U Nq p 0 0 dl
a
U 3 �
.7 a Uo a,
�a�F�nL]aaagdmW
VII
a
-2-
SPECIAL GENERAL COMMITTEE - DECEMBER 5, 2005
00'''�.
C
V y
'E^ m
W
ub
P J
w
N p
[1 O
fry
� � �
O h d M
h O M1 d
OO
Vf Vt N Nm m
� � � l� M1
N M M1? b vt M1 m
O T b t�l O. ul m
nl
m� v M � M M
� N V1 N M N q d
g O U N m d O
g O O M1 v1 m
IM1�1 N d N m
VI O• O Vf vt �
U O cp b V,
N m O N d
Nm, v q N I'1
� b N O �
N
T
n
N
8
Vl
V (V M b M m N b
m M M1
O b
d
p
CI ^
M
G W
s
a
m
s
m
8
u°
e
S
o
S
pp
o
m
o
o
n
b
s
�
m
d
U
2
a
m O Vl O N W m� N M1 m O M M1 N O O vl m V1 N b b V C M1
b O •-. m' U mM1 q V1 O' M'. ��nn ' d Vl Q 0 d Tm M m W h d m
� v E
'v
E+ r h v u
O
E � W a •� �� U � 0 0 0 .a F
U W
'�, ••�^' d C 3
yw O zNz
Y `
O � N
3wwmv3m5v3 w ��t-.mq.7.7aac�¢m'w
-3-
SPECIAL GENERAL COMMITTEE — DECEMBER 5, 2005
z 9
"
U�
°n
.��
r( ry
mZf v
ry "
n•C.m
mm
o
E
FA
.O m
1'ry
N N
N
w
C
v�
LL N
zz
N' m
K ¢
'
8
8
�h
—4—
SPECIAL,,,mgENERAL
V
YocJre 1", Good cowtvAy
MEMORANDUM
To: Mayor and Members of Council
From: Director of Financial Services/Treasurer
Date: December 5, 2005
Re: Special Council Meeting December20, 2005
1 Municipal Drive
Box 1000, Aurora, ON L4G 611
www.e-aurora.ca
Director of FRinancial Services
Tel: 905-727-1375 Ext. 4111
With the conclusion of the Special General Committee meetings held November 24, 28 and December
5, 2005, staff requests that a Special Council meeting be held on Tuesday, December 20, 2005 at 7:00
p.m. with the intent to adopt the 2006 Capital and Operating Budget.
Director of Financial Services/Treasurer
—5—
ADDITIONAL ITEMS TABLED FOR
SPECIAL GENERAL COMMITTEE MEETING
Draft 2006 Capital & Operating Budget
Monday, December 5, 2005
➢ Delegation request from Ms Rebecca Beaton
Re: Draft 2006 Capital & Operating Budget
➢ PW05-033 — Funding for 10—Year Capital Plan
➢ PW05-034 — Staffing Considerations — 2006 Public Works
Budget
➢ Memo from the Director of Public Works
Re: Report PW05-035 — Waste Management 2006 Budget —
Consideration of Bi-Weekly Waste Collection
➢ PW05-035 - Waste Management 2006 Budget — Consideration
of Bi-Weekly Waste Collection
TOWN OF AURORA
GENERAL COMMITTEE REPORT No. PW05-033
SUBJECT: Funding for 10-Year Capital Plan
FROM: W. H. Jackson, Director of Public Works
DATE: December 6, 2005
RECOMMENDATIONS
THAT Report No. PW05-033 dealing with funding for the reconstruction of the Town's
roads be received;
That Council adopt the funding model recommended in Report PW05-033 for
funding of the 10-Year Capital Road Reconstruction Program to retain the Town's
current Pavement Condition Index over the period 2006 — 2015; and
THAT staff be directed to prepare and submit the 10-Year Capital Road
Reconstruction Program (2006 — 2015) based on the approved funding model.
BACKGROUND
At the Special General Committee of November 28, 2005, the Committee considered
Report PW05-028 (Town of Aurora Roads — Condition Ratings and Reconstruction
Funding) and recommended that:
The Town's road reconstruction program should be increased to the level necessary
to maintain the Town's road network at the existing average PC[ value of 65; and
Staff should submit a follow-up report dealing with funding of the program, and in
particular, with the implications of the Gas Tax funding thatwe are to start receiving
shortly.
1. Funding Requirements
As discussed in Report PW05-028, funding for road reconstruction projects needs to
increase from the currently planned level of $19.2M over the next 10 years to $27.OM in
order to maintain the average PCI level of the Town's road network at its current level of
65. This $27.OM is in addition to the other types of projects which are also funded as part
of the overall capital roads program for non -road projects such as the construction of
sidewalks and bikeways on Regional roads and a portion of the salaries of the Public
December 6, 2005 .2- Report No. PW05-033
Works staff involved in administering the capital works contracts. The total funding
required is as follows:
Table 1 — Fundinq Requirements. 2006 — 2015 Capital Plan
Road Reconstruction Fundinq $27.OM
Non -Road Projects (sidewalks, traffic $1.9M
calming, etc) and Salaries
Total: $28.9M
2. Gas Tax Revenues
The road reconstruction portion of the Town's capital reconstruction projects have
traditionally been funded from the general tax levy, with the watermain, sanitary sewerand
storm sewer portions of the projects being funded from the Water/Sewer and Storm Sewer
Reserves. However, on June 17, 2005 the Federal and Ontario governments, the City of
Toronto, and the Association of Municipalities of Ontario (AMO) entered into the
"Agreement for the Transfer of Federal Gas Tax Revenues under the New Deal for Cities
and Communities". This Agreement deals with the transfer of a portion of the federal
government's gas tax revenue to municipalities for the period 2005 — 2009. This funding
can be used for certain specific types of projects, and in Aurora specifically for the capital
road reconstruction program.
Before receiving any funding, the Town must execute a standard Funding Agreement with
AMO. The Agreement is under review by staff and will be presented to Council for
approval shortly. The Town must also submit a plan to AMO showing that the proposed
road projects have met the requirements set out for "Environmentally Sustainable
Municipal Infrastructure" projects
The Town is to receive the following funds under the terms of the current Gas Tax
Agreement:
Table 2 — Gas Tax Funding, 2005 — 2009
Year
Funding
2005
$391,615.50
2006
$391,615.50
2007
$522,095.69
2008
$652,575.89
2009
$1,305,151.78
Total 2005 — 2009
1 $3,263,054.36
December 6, 2005 -3- Report No. PW05-033
3. Road Reconstruction Funding Model
The funding model and allocations set out below are based on the following assumptions:
1) All Gas Tax funding can and will be allocated to the Capital Roads program;
2) The funding will continue in 2010 and future years;
3) Funding will increase in 2010 and future years by the rate of inflation (estimated at
The current funding model for the Capital Program is shown on the attached spreadsheet
(Appendix A, Scenario 1) and on Chart 1 below and would result in tax levy funding of
$19.1 M for road reconstruction projects and a total capital program expenditure of $21.OM
over the 2006-2015 period, resulting in a average PCI of 61 in 2015.
The revised funding model for the Capital Program is shown on the attached spreadsheet
(Appendix A, Scenario 2) and on Chart 1 below and would result in tax levy funding of
$16.01M, gas tax funding of $11.8M, and "other funding" of $0.97M for road reconstruction
projects over the 2006 - 2015 period. The total capital program expenditures would be
$28.8M over the 2006 — 2015 period and the average PCI of the Town's road network
would be maintained at its current level of 65.
Chart 1 - 2006 - 2015 Capital Funding
$3,500 000
$3,000000 ��3���`Sfa�srau'y`Sb.R%��`42,£h �•rµ�{�h?1�u{ 4�{,.s �r3 ��r ,s3�� �k���`��'
�m
$2,500,000
$2,000,000
o $1,500,000 ^'
!�
$1,000,000
$500,000
2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
Date
+Funding Required to Maintain Current PCI
Scenario 1 - 2006 - 2015 Funding Using Current Funding Model
Scenario 2 - Recommended 2006 - 2015 Funding
—® Scenario 2 - Tax Levy and Other Funding
—�—Scenario 2 - Gas Tax Funding
December 6, 2005 .4. Report No. PWO5.033
Part of the basic philosophy behind the Gas Tax Agreement is that the funding cannot be
used to reduce or "subsidize" the tax rate. Because of the way the Gas Tax funding is to
ramp up over the next few years, and in particular when it doubles in 2009 to $1.3M from
$650K in 2008, the Town will need to utilize $970K in funding from other sources in 2007
and 2008 to ensure that the Tax Levy portion of the overall Capital Funding allocation does
not decrease in 2009 from what was allocated in 2007 and 2008. This "Other Funding" can
come from a variety of sources.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS
Under the current funding model for Capital projects, the Town will expend $21.OM of tax
levy funding over the 2006 —2015 period, with $19.1 M of that funding being used for road
reconstruction projects.
Underthe recommended funding model for Capital projects, the Town will expend $17.OM
of tax levy and other funding over the 2006 — 2015 period. When the expected $11.8M of
gas tax funding is included, the total funding for the Capital program will be $28.8M, with
$26.95M of that funding being used for road reconstruction projects. This will represent a
$7.85M or 41 %s increase in road reconstruction funding over the 10-year period.
It is noted that the recommended funding model includes the $3.26M set out in the current
Gas Tax Agreement and assumes the agreement is renewed for 2010 and following years.
with Aurora's revenues rising at the rate of inflation. A further $8.54M in gas tax funding
has been assumed for the years 2010 — 2015. Should the Agreement not be renewed in
2010, the Town would have to fund the difference from other sources or reduce the capital
reconstruction program.
OPTIONS
Council may decide to allocate the gas tax funding to other eligible areas, and more
specifically to water and/or wastewater.
CONCLUSIONS
Afunding model has been presented in Appendix A, Scenario 2 of this report that will allow
the Town to increase the funding for the capital reconstruction program to the point that the
current overall PCI level can be maintained over the 2006 — 2015 period.
LINK TO STRATEGIC PLAN
Goal "C" speaks to continuing the well -planned moderate,growth of the Town. This goal is
supported by the "Strategic Action" stating that Council will, "incorporate measures into
Town policies and programs which contribute to a safe living and working environment."
The Strategic Plan includes the action to "address matters affecting public safety, property
and the environment and will formulate specific measures to deal with them."
December 6, 2005 - 5 - Report No. PW05-033
ATTACHMENTS
Appendix A —Capital Program Funding Scenarios
PRE -SUBMISSION REVIEW
C.A.O. and Director of Finance— December 1, 2005
Prepared by. David Atkins, Manager of Engineering Services, Ext. 4382
W. H. Jacki4
Director of Public Works
Appendix A - Capital Program Funding Scenarios
Oct. 26, 2005
Revised: Dec. 1, 2005 -
Scenario 1 - Road Reconstruction Funding Using Current Fundina
Model (as
per 2004 - 2013 10-Year Plan with No Changes!
Year 2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
Totals
Funding Sources
Tax Levy Funding
$1,601000
$1711,000
$1821000
$1931000
$2041000
$2151000
.$2261000
$2,371000
$2481000
$2591,000
$20,960,000
Total Capital Budget
$1,601,000
$1,711,000
$1,821,000
$1,931,000
$2,041,000
$2,151,000
$2,261,000
$2,371,000
$2,481,000
$2,591,000
$20,960,000
Expenditures
Non -Road Projects and Salaries
$257,000
$227,000
$109,000
$192,000
$392,000
$142,000
$121,000
$124,000
$127,000
$130,000
$1,821,000
Road Projects
$1 344,000
$1,484 000
$1 712 000
$1 739 000
$1,649 000
$2 009 000
$2,140 000
$2 247 000
$2,354,000
$2 461.,000
$19,139,000
Total Expenditures
$1,601,000
$1,711,000
$1,821,000
$1,931,000
$2,041,000
$2,151,000
$2,261,000
$2,371,000
$2,481,000
$2,591,000
$20,960.000
Scenario 2 Road Reconstruction Funding as per Report PW05 028 and let Draft of 2006 Capital Budget Utiltzina Gas Tax Funding
Year
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
Totals
Funding Sources
Tar, Levy Funding
$1,152,000
$1,490,000
$1,530,000
$1,574,000
$1,613,000
$1,654,000
$1,695,000
$1,737,000
$1,780,000 "
$1,824,000
$16,049,000
Other Funding
$347 000
$626 000
$973,000
Sub -Total Funding - Tax Levy and Other
$1,152,000
$1,837,000
$2,156,000
$1,574,000
$1,613.000
$1,654,000
$1,695,000
$1,737,000
$1,780,000
$1,824,000
$17,022,000
Gas Tax Funding
$782 000
$522,000
$653 000
$1 305 000
$1 338,000
$1 371 000
$1 405 000
$1 440 000
$1 476 000
$1 513,000
$11,805,000
Total Capital Budget
$1,934,000
$2,359,000
$2,809,000
$2,879,000
$2,951,000
$3,025,000
$3,100,000
$3,177,000
4i3,255,000
$3,337,000
$28,827,000
Expenditures
Non -Road Projects and Salaries
$229,000
$236,000
$118,000
$201,000
$401,000
$151,000
$130,000
$133,000
$136,000
$139,0001
$1,874,000
Road
$1,705,000
$2 123,000
$2:6910
2,550,000
$2 874 000
$2 970 000
$3 044,002
$3,2120 0
$3,198,000
$26,953,000
projects
m, nne nnn
xo �cp nnn
R9
n
530D.000
$70$35000
6,026a
$3,337,000
$28,827,000
12:01 PM
E05 Budget/2006/10 Year capital Plan/Report033 -"Roads Projects Funding -charts and spreadsheetsxls 11/30/2005
TOWN OF AURORA
GENERAL COMMITTEE REPORT No. PW05-034
SUBJECT: Staffing Considerations — 2006 Pubic Works Budget
FROM: W. H. Jackson, Director of Public Works
DATE: December 6, 2005
RECOMMENDATIONS
THAT Report No. PW05-034 dealing with Public Works staffing considerations for
the 2006 Operations Budget be received for information.
BACKGROUND
At the Special General Committee meeting of November.28, 2005, staff was requested to
report on the financial impacts of the proposed staffing level adjustments within the Public
Works Department.
COMMENTS
As noted during the November 28, 2005 Special General Committee meeting, two new
staff positions had been removed from the Department of Public Works budget during the
initial internal budget review with the C.A.O. and Town Treasurer.
One position (Serviceperson) was the continuation of the "Outlook" projections of the 2005
Budget while the second position (Operations Technician) was a new request. Both of
these positions were placed in the first draft of the budget which was prepared in the early
fall of this year.
During the internal budget review mentioned above, all aspects of the budget are critically
examined. With respect to staffing requests, existing workloads as well as existing and
future level of service, are considered.
For the "Serviceperson" position, it was determined that for 2006 the main concern rests
with our ability to maintain level of service during the winter season. To this end, we have
been able to hire a number of seasonal employees (utilizing existing funds from vacant
positions) and consequently, could withdraw one Serviceperson position without adversely
impacting our operational abilities for 2006 but would include this position in our 2007
budget. It is noted that an additional Serviceperson position is still provided for in our 2006
Budget request.
December 6, 2005 - 2 - Report No. PW05-034
The additional Operations Technician position was to supplement an existing Operations
Technician. This position is responsible for administration of various maintenance
contracts, inspections and field surveys. When we examined the need for this additional
position critically, it was seen that the existing position is incurring an overtime component
of about 5% to 10%. We also noted, however, that certain aspects of this position had
been streamlined with the introduction of various processes and procedures thatwill make
undertaking this work in 2006 more efficient.
Although there are other matters that Public Works will wish to see undertaken in the near
future (mainly related to inspections and data management), it is felt that these can wait
until 2007 when we expect to have various computer programs and packages available to
assist us.
OPTIONS
Council may wish to reinstate the two originally proposed new additional positions, and.
accordingly, increase the 2006 Operations Budget.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS
The combined salary for the two deleted proposed new positions, including benefits, is
approximately $115,000. The costs are spread throughout a number of activities that
include tax based and rate supported accounts. The tax based portion of the two positions
would be in the order of $60,000.
The additional 5%-10% overtime that may be experienced by the current Operation
Technician is taken for the most part as time off in -lieu and as such, does not constitute a
significant financial impact. The time off is scheduled during the slower periods of the year.
CONCLUSIONS
Original Public Works staffing in the 2006 Budget included two extra Public Works
positions that were eliminated during the internal budget review process. Elimination of
these positions was agreed to upon a critical examination of Departmental operational and
efficiency considerations. The Department is satisfied that elimination of these proposal
additional staff for 2006 will notjeopardize our existing levels of service or cause significant
overtime costs.
LINK TO STRATEGIC PLAN
Goal A speaks to maintaining a well -managed and fiscally responsible municipality.
December 6, 2005 - 3 - Report No. PW05-034
ATTACHMENTS
None
PRE -SUBMISSION REVIEW
C.A.O. and Town Treasurer— December 1, 2005.
Prepared by: Peter Horvath, Manager of Operations Services, Ext: 3446
W. H. Jacks
Director of Public Works
Memo
To: Mayor and Members of Council
From: W. H. Jackson, Director of Public Works
CC: John Rogers, C.A.O.
Date: December 5, 2005
Re: Report PW05-035 — Waste Management 2006 Budget — Consideration of Bi-Weekly
Waste Collection
The above noted report is on the. December 6, 2005 General Committee agenda.
The report deals with, among other matters, the introduction of 3-stream waste (kitchen
organics) collection in the Town. Two scenarios are presented for the implementation of 3-
stream collection with the only difference being the time of implementation.
Under the option to co-ordinate implementation with the other "northern" York Region
municipalities, a recommendation regarding our existing contract was omitted. Accordingly,
the following recommendations should be added to Report No. PW05-035:
2.5 THAT Tender No. PW-1999-13 — Waste Management Services Collection Tender be
extended to May 1, 2007 with the same existing terms, conditions and unit prices
except that the unit prices be increased September 1, 2006 by the increase in the
yearly Consumer Price Index from September 1, 2005 to September 1, 2005 to a
maximum of 4%; and
2.6 THAT staff present to Council for approval the amended agreement with Miller Waste
Systems for the extension of Tender No. PW-1999-13 as described in
Recommendation No. 2.5 of Report No. PW05-035.
W. H. -a` kson
Director of Public Works
TOWN OF AURORA
GENERAL COMMITTEE REPORT No. PW05-035
SUBJECT: Waste Management 2006 Budget- Consideration of Bi-Weekly Waste
Collection
FROM: W. H. Jackson, Director of Public Works
DATE: December 6, 2005
RECOMMENDATIONS
1. THAT if Council wishes to implement the 3-Stream waste collection system in
2006, staff be requested to:
1.1 Report further on this matter to the January 24, 2006 General
Committee meeting specifically with respect to the waste collection
schedule and parameter aspects for Council's consideration; and
1.2 Retain the existing waste and recycling collection 2006 budgets as
submitted to the Special General Committee meeting of November 28,
2005.
2. THAT if Council wishes to co-ordinate implementation of the 3-stream waste
collection system with the other "northern" York Region municipalities, staffbe
requested to:
2.1 Report further on the matter of an amalgamated tender can for the
collection of green bin, recyclable and landfill materials with the
northern municipalities of York Region specifically with respect to the
timing for the tender call and implementation of the 3-stream collection
system;
2.2 Remove $200,000 from the waste collection budget as presented to
the Special General Committee meeting of November 28, 2005, -
2.3 Set aside $5,000 from the funds noted in Recommendation No. 2.2 as
Aurora's share to engage a consultant to prepare the necessary
tender documents in co-operation with the other northern
municipalities of York Region; and
2.4 Report further on the waste collection schedule and parameter
aspects for Council's consideration.
December 6, 2005 -2 - Report No. PW05 035
3. THAT report No. PW05-035 be referred to the December 13, 2005 Council meeting
for public input and the December 20, 2005 Council meeting for decision by
Council.
BACKGROUND
At the Special General Committee Meeting of November 28, 2005, staff was requested to
report on the potential cost saving that could be achieved by collecting waste every second
week as opposed to every week.
COMMENTS
1. 2006 Budget Implications Related to Implementation of 3-Stream Collection
The waste and recycling portion of the 2006 Operating Budget assumes implementation of
the 3-stream collection system (recyclable, kitchen organics, landfill material) on
September 4, 2006. The budget impacts related to implementation of the 3-stream
operation are:
purchase of the necessary green bins; and
additional collection cost.
The estimated cost to purchase the green bins is $400,000. In the 2006 budget, these
funds are proposed to come from the Municipal Capital Reserve with no direct impact to
the current levy.
With respect to collection, a "worst case" scenario has been assumed which incorporates
the weekly collection of recyable material, kitchen organics and landfill material. Collection
costs come directly from current levy and for2006, it is estimated implementation of the 3-
stream system will cost an additional $200,000 based on the "worst case" scenario.
If the landfill stream (garbage) could be collected on a bi-weekly basis, a representative of
our current collection company estimates we could save about 15% or $30,000 from the
collection costs.
2. 3-Stream Implementation Alternative
As Council is aware, to date within York Region, 3-stream waste collection has only been
implemented in the Town of Markham. All other municipalities have plans to implement 3-
stream collection sometime over the next two years.
As Council is also aware, the northern municipalities (Towns of Aurora, Newmarket, East
Gwillimbury, Whitchurch/Stouffville and the Township of King) are relatively small when
considering waste collection contracts. Accordingly, economies of scale may be realized in
December 6, 2005 - 3 - Report No. PW05-035
this area if various municipalities could jointly tender for waste collection. Discussions have
been held toward this end, and there appears to be general agreement among staff of the
northern municipalities to work toward a joint tender call.
The two items requiring further consideration (and Council agreement) are the start date
and the need to employ outside assistance in preparing the tender document. Given the
termination dates of existing contracts, a joint 3-stream tender call and implementation
could not occur until May 2007. Also, given the co-ordination required for a joint tender, it
is felt to be prudent to employ a consultant to undertake this task at a cost of $5,000 per
municipality. Further, it has been determined that a joint tender in this manner would not
preclude the various municipalities differing in their collection schedules (i.e. collect landfill
material weekly or bi-weekly) or collection parameters (i.e. bag limit).
OPTIONS
There are a number of options and they are presented in the Recommendations section of
this report. The options relate to the timing of implementation and the parameters under
which this program will operate and not as to whether there will be 3-stream waste
collection in Aurora.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS
If 3-stream waste collection is delayed until 2007, the current 2006 Budget estimate for
waste collection can be reduced by $200,000. In this scenario, it is suggested to encumber
the Municipal Capital Reserve by $400,000 for the future purchase of the green bins.
If 3-stream waste collection is to be implemented in 2006 and it is decided to collection
waste _(or landfill) material bi-weekly, then the 2006 budget estimate for waste collection
can be reduced by $30,000.
CONCLUSIONS
The Town of Aurora is planning to implement the 3-stream waste collection system.
Information has been provided with respect to the cost differences between weekly and bi-
weekly waste (or landfill) material collection.
Additionally, if Council wished to delay the Town's implementation of the 3-steam waste
collection system from September 4, 2006 to around May 2007, this would allow a co-
ordinated tender call for all of the northern municipalities within York Region. This has
obvious potential cost advantages because the larger contract should prove attractive to
more collection companies.
In consideration of the potential cost savings, it is felt that the best alternative would be to
tender the 3-stream waste collection system jointly with the York Region northern
December B, 2005.- 4 - Report No. PW05.035
municipalities which would mean a delay of our implementation of the 3-stream waste
collection system until 2007.
LINK TO STRATEGIC PLAN
Goal A — To Maintain a Well Managed and Fiscally Responsible Municipality
ATTACHMENTS
None
PRE -SUBMISSION REVIEW
C.A.O. and Town Treasurer— December 1, 2005
Prepared by. W. H. Jackson, Director of Public Works, Ext. 4371
W. H. JagK,6Dh
Director of Public Works