Loading...
AGENDA - General Committee - 20150303GENERAL COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA TUESDAY,MARCH 3,2015 7 P.M. COUNCIL CHAMBERS AURORA TOWN HALL PUBLIC RELEASE February 27,2015 TOWN OF AURORA GENERAL COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA Tuesday,March 3,2015 7 p.m. Council Chambers Councillor Thompson in the Chair 1.DECLARATION OF PECUNIARY INTEREST AND GENERAL NATURE THEREOF 2.APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA RECOMMENDED: THAT the agenda as circulated by Legal and Legislative Services be approved. 3.DETERMINATION OF ITEMS REQUIRING SEPARATE DISCUSSION 4.ADOPTION OF ITEMS NOT REQUIRING SEPARATE DISCUSSION 5.DELEGATIONS 6.PRESENTATIONS BY THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE CHAIR 7.CONSIDERATION OF ITEMS REQUIRING SEPARATE DISCUSSION 8.NOTICES OF MOTION (a)Councillor Kim pg.60 Re:Multicultural Festival General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday,March 3,2015 Page 2 of 5 9.NEW BUSINESS/GENERAL INFORMATION 10.CLOSED SESSION RECOMMENDED: THAT General Committee resolve into a Closed Session meeting to consider: 1.Personal matters about an identifiable individual,including a Town or Local Board employee;Re:Report No.LLS15-022 –Appointments to the Aurora Appeal Tribunal 2.A proposed or pending acquisition or disposition of land by the Town or Local Board;Re:Report No.PR15-007 –Purchase of Lands at 100 Vandorf Sideroad, Formerly Hallmark Cards 11.ADJOURNMENT General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday,March 3,2015 Page 3 of 5 AGENDA ITEMS 1.BBS15-004 –Request for Sign Variance to Sign By-law No.4898-07.P for pg.1 the McDonald’s Restaurant at 2 Allaura Blvd. RECOMMENDED: THAT Report No.BBS15-004 be received;and THAT a variance to Sign By-law No.4898-07.P be approved to permit two (2) menu board signs for the McDonald’s drive thru facility located at 2 Allaura Blvd;and THAT a second variance to Sign Bylaw No.4898-07.P be approved to permit each menu board sign to have a sign area of 5.2m2. 2.IES15-011 –Northern Six Waste Collection Contract,Tender Preparation pg.8 Update RECOMMENDED: THAT Report No.IES15-011 be received;and THAT the principle of renewing a waste contract as a partnership with the Northern Six Municipalities be endorsed;and THAT staff be directed to update the Memorandum of Understanding between the Northern Six Municipalities to provide governance and direction during the next Waste Collection Contract period;and THAT staff report back with opportunities to harmonize all Waste Collection By-laws in the Northern Six Municipalities with the aim to improve efficiencies in the Contract Administration and customer service;and THAT staff report back to Council for direction with respect to opportunities for improvements in the service level(s)provided,range of services provided, opportunities for further waste diversion and cost efficiencies. 3.IES15-012 –Speeding Concerns on Cousins Drive and Multi-Way Stop pg.14 Control Request at the Wells Street and Cousins Drive Intersection RECOMMENDED: THAT Report No.IES15-012 be received;and General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday,March 3,2015 Page 4 of 5 THAT the request for a three-way stop sign control at the intersection of Wells Street and Cousins Drive be denied;and THAT notice of Council’s decision be sent to area residents. 4.IES15-013 –Durham York Energy Centre Status Report pg.24 RECOMMENDED: THAT Report No.IES15-013 be received for information. 5.IES15-014 –Clear Bag Program for Waste Collection,Follow-up Report pg.28 RECOMMENDED: THAT Report No.IES15-014 be received;and THAT staff undertake two additional open-houses and two additional public on-line surveys to occur in advance of each of the voluntary and full transition dates;and THAT a Clear Bag Program for waste collection to replace black opaque bags for waste collection be approved;and THAT the voluntary Clear Bag Program start date be June 5,2015,to coincide with the United Nations Environment Day;and THAT the Clear Bag Program full transition date be October 19,2015,to coincide with Canada Waste Reduction Week,after which compliance measures will be implemented;and THAT staff bring forward an amendment to By-law Number 5590-14,“BEING A BY-LAW for the collection of solid waste and recyclable materials in the Town of Aurora”that includes the replacement of black opaque bags with clear bags for the setting out of garbage. 6.LLS15-011 –Questions on the Ballot –2014 Municipal Election Results pg.41 RECOMMENDED: THAT Report No.LLS15-011 be received;and THAT Council provide direction with respect to the 2014 Municipal Election Questions on the Ballot. General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday,March 3,2015 Page 5 of 5 7.LLS15-012 –Civil Marriage Solemnization Services pg.50 RECOMMENDED: THAT Report No.LLS15-012 be received;and THAT the Town’s services be enhanced to include civil marriage solemnization services;and THAT a by-law to authorize the Town Clerk to provide civil marriage solemnization services be enacted;and THAT the fees for civil marriage solemnization services as set out in Report No. LLS15-012 be approved;and THAT a by-law be enacted to amend Schedule “C”of By-law Number 5680-15 (being the Town’s Fees and Charges By-law)to include fees for civil marriage solemnization services. 8.Memorandum from Mayor Dawe pg.56 Re:Finance Advisory Committee Member Appointments RECOMMENDED: THAT the memorandum regarding Finance Advisory Committee Member Appointments be received;and THAT the following Members of Council be appointed to the Finance Advisory Committee: Mayor Geoffrey Dawe Councillor Harold Kim Councillor Michael Thompson 9.Memorandum from Mayor Dawe pg.59 Re:Proposed Revision to the Council Meeting Calendar RECOMMENDED: THAT the memorandum regarding Proposed Revision to the Council Meeting Calendar be received;and THAT the Council meeting currently scheduled on Tuesday,May 12,2015 be rescheduled to Monday,May 11,2015 at 7:00 p.m.to accommodate the 2015 York Regional Police Appreciation Night. GENERAL COMMITTEE REPORT No.BBS15-004 SUBJECT:Request for Sign Variance to Sign By-law No.4898-07.P for the McDonald’s Restaurant at 2 Allaura Blvd. FROM:Techa van Leeuwen,Director of Building and Bylaw Services DATE:March 3,2015 RECOMMENDATIONS THAT Report No.BBS15-004 be received;and THAT a variance to Sign By-law No.4898-07.P be approved to permit two menu board signs for the McDonald’s drive thru facility located at 2 Allaura Blvd;and THAT a second variance to Sign Bylaw No.4898-07.P be approved to permit each menu board sign to have a sign area of 5.2m2. PURPOSE OF THE REPORT To evaluate the applicant’s request and make recommendations on variances to Sign By- law No.4898-07.P,as amended. There are two variances requested.The first variance is to allow this restaurant to have two menu board signs for the drive thru facility whereas the Sign Bylaw No.4898-07.P restricts the number of menu board signs to one per drive thru facility. The second variance is to permit the two proposed drive thru menu board signs to each have a sign area of 5.2m2 whereas Sign By-law No.4898-07.P permits a maximum sign area of 4m2 for menu board signs. BACKGROUND Building and Bylaw Services is in receipt of a sign variance application from McDonald’s Restaurant to install two menu boards that exceed the maximum sign area for their drive thru facility.This McDonald’s,built in 1978,is located at the north-east corner of Allaura Blvd and Yonge St.The property is bordered on the north by The Aurora War Memorial Peace Park and commercial properties to the east,west and south.The entrance to the property is from Allaura Blvd. This restaurant is enhancing the drive-thru facility by creating a second stacking/ordering lane.The current drive thru facility is serviced by a single stacking lane that has one menu board sign.The alteration of the stacking drive thru lane into two stacking lanes was subject to a Site Plan Exemption review and has been approved by Planning and Development Services. TOWN OF AURORA General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday,March 3,2015 Item 1 Page -1 -1 - March 3,2015 -2 -Report No.BBS15-004 The applicant is proposing to install menu board signs reflecting their corporate drive thru designs installed at other McDonald’s restaurants. COMMENTS The second stacking lane and menu board sign is to provide greater customer service. The applicant has advised staff that the second lane and the ability to order while in that lane is for improved customer service.The additional stacking lane will increase the speed in which customers can order.To accomplish this increase in customer service,the additional stacking lane requires a menu board sign. The additional stacking lane requires a menu board sign. The proposed drive-thru access will be arranged such that customers enter the drive thru facility through a single lane located on the east side of the building.At the rear (north side)of the property,the single lane will split into two stacking lanes.Each stacking lane is proposed to have its own menu board sign incorporating a customer order communication feature.This requires that a variance be granted for the number of menu board signs.The change to the stacking lanes was subject to a Site Plan Exemption process and has been approved through Planning and Development Services.Without the menu board sign the second lane is ineffective and may reduce customer service by creating confusion. The new menu board signs are designed to integrate a communication panel increasing the overall sign area. The existing menu board sign for this McDonald’s has a separate menu board and communication panel.McDonald’s have redesigned their menu board signs to integrate the customer order feature with the menu board.The overall size of the menu board has been increased to accommodate this change.They propose that this will reduce the visual clutter of the drive thru by reducing the number of different components required to show the menu and communicate between the customer and staff.The updated menu boards will have three rotating panels and a customer order feature (2 way communication)panel. At 1.08m2 per panel the area of three rotating panels is less than the 4m2 that is permitted by the Sign By-law.The inclusion of the communication panel brings the total area to 5.2m2.See attachment 2. The menu board signs are situated to reduce their visibility from off-site. The proposed menu board signs are to be located at the rear (north side)of the property. The signs are visually buffered by an existing row of trees along the north property line. The signs would not be visible from the front of the property (south side)which faces Allaura Blvd.The signs would be partially obstructed from Yonge St to the west by the McDonald’s parking lot.To the east of the property are other commercial establishments. General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday,March 3,2015 Item 1 Page -2 -2 - March 3,2015 -3 -Report No.BBS15-004 The menu board signs match the standard McDonald’s menu boards. The proposed menu board signs are designed to meet the standard McDonald’s menu board signs installed at other restaurant locations. The following table compares the proposal to the Sign By-law No.4898-07.P: Drive-thru Facility Menu Board Signs Attribute Sign Bylaw Provision Proposed Illumination Shall not create a hazard or nuisance;light deflected from residential premises. Located at rear of property and will not create a hazard or nuisance.Property is not adjacent to residential premises. Number of menu board signs 1 sign per drive thru facility 2 signs per drive thru facility Menu Board sign area 4 m2 5.2 m2 Height of menu board signs 2.5m 2.23m Table note:Bold,underlined font represents areas of non-compliance As the above table demonstrates,a variance is required for the number of menu board signs and for the overall sign area of each menu board signs. The following table provides the criteria for assessing sign variance approvals. Table for Evaluating Sign Variance Criteria Criteria Comment 1.Physical difficulties Where due to special circumstances,pre-existing condition of the building,layout or topography of the subject land,it is difficult to comply with the provisions of the Sign By-law. n/a 2.Consistency with the architectural features of the building Where the proposed sign blends well with the architectural features of the building and granting the sign variance will result in a more aesthetically pleasing visual appearance of the building for the community. n/a General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday,March 3,2015 Item 1 Page -3 -3 - March 3,2015 -4 -Report No.BBS15-004 3.Consistency with the character of the neighbourhood Where the Sign Variance,if granted,will not alter the essential character of the neighbourhood and will have no adverse impact on the Town's cultural heritage This is an existing restaurant that is expanding its drive-thru facility to enhance customer service.The additional signs and sign area will not alter the essential character of the neighbourhood and will have no adverse impact on the Town’s cultural heritage. 4.No adverse impact to the adjacent property or general public Such adverse impact may include but is not limited to:illumination,obstruction of other signage,obstruction of natural light,distance to the adjacent buildings and properties,etc. This McDonald’s restaurant has existed since 1978.The proposed menu board signs are to be located at the north side of the property. The property abuts the Aurora War Memorial Peace Park to the north and is surrounded by other commercial properties.There is no adverse impact to the adjacent property or general public. 5.Adherence to Corporate Branding Where not granting a Sign Variance results in a conflict in corporate branding requirements such as updated/new logos or trademarks. The proposed menu board signs are in keeping with the standards McDonald’s applies to new menu board signs. 6.Impact on safety,traffic and accessibility The proposed Sign Variance,if granted,will not increase fire or traffic hazard or otherwise endanger public safety or negatively impact accessibility. The signs will not increase fire or traffic hazards or otherwise endanger the public safety.The signs will be at the rear of the property for the dedicated use of the drive thru facilities. 7.Result in greater convenience to the public Granting of the variance will result in greater convenience to the public in identifying the business location for which a sign variance is sought. Granting this variance will result in the public being able to be served more quickly resulting in greater convenience to the public. Variances requested: 1.A variance is requested to permit the drive thru facility to have two menu board signs whereas Sign By-law 4898-07.P permits one menu board sign per drive thru facility. 2.A variance is requested to permit the drive-thru facility to have menu board signs that are 5.2m2 in sign area whereas Sign By-law No.4898-07.P permits a maximum sign area of 4.0m2 per menu board. LINK TO STRATEGIC PLAN Approving the requested variance to Sign By-law No.4898-07.P supports the Strategic Plan goal of Enabling a Diverse,Creative and Resilient Economy through its accomplishment in satisfying requirements of the objective supporting small business and encouraging a more sustainable business environment. General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday,March 3,2015 Item 1 Page -4 -4 - General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, March 3,2015 Item 1 Page - 5 - 5 - March 3, 2015 -5-Report No. 88S15-004 FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS N/A AL TERNATIVE(S) TO THE RECOMMENDATIONS 1. Council could approve the request to vary the number of menu board signs but impose the provisions of Sign By-law No. 4898-0?.P regarding the size of the menu board signs. This would require a redesign of the menu board signs that may or may not be able to integrate a communication feature. 2. Council could approve the request to vary the size of the menu board signs but impose the provisions of Sign By-law No. 4898-0?.P regarding the number of menu board signs. This would essentially make the second stacking and ordering lane ineffective. 3. Council could deny the requested variance and impose the provisions of the Sign By-law No . 4898-0?.P. The impact of the alteration is stated in option 1 and 2 above . CONCLUSIONS Staff determined that the variances being sought are in keeping with the general intent of the By-law. For reasons outlined in this report staff is recommending that Council approve the requested variances to allow two menu board signs to have a sign area of 5.2m2. ATTACHMENTS Attachment No. 1 --Site Plan Attachment No. 2 -Elevations of the menu board signs PRE-SUBMISSION REVIEW Executive Leadership Team-February 19, 2015 Prepared by: Dale Robson Manager of Code Review and Inspections-Ext. 4319 ~ _tty_ Techa van Leeuwen Neil Garbe Director of Building and Bylaw Services Chief Administrative Officer March 3,2015 -6 -Report No.BBS15-004 Site Plan Attachment 1 Location of proposed Menu Board signs N Allaura Blvd General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday,March 3,2015 Item 1 Page -6 -6 - March 3,2015 -7 -Report No.BBS15-004 Front of menu board Back of menu board Menu Board Signs Elevations Attachment 2 Communication Panel General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday,March 3,2015 Item 1 Page -7 -7 - TOWN OF AURORA GENERAL COMMITTEE REPORT No.IES15-011 SUBJECT:Northern Six Waste Collection Contract,Tender Preparation Update FROM:Ilmar Simanovskis,Director of Infrastructure and Environmental Services DATE:March 3,2015 RECOMMENDATIONS THAT Report No.IES15 -011 be received; THAT the principle of renewing a waste contract as a partnership with the Northern Six Municipalities be endorsed;and THAT staff be directed to update the Memorandum of Understanding between the Northern Six Municipalities to provide governance and direction during the next Waste Collection Contract period;and THAT staff report back with opportunities to harmonize all Waste Collection By- laws in the Northern Six municipalities with the aim to improve efficiencies in the Contract Administration and customer service;and THAT staff report back to Council for direction with respect to opportunities for improvements in the service level(s)provided,range of services provided, opportunities for further waste diversion and cost efficiencies. PURPOSE OF THE REPORT The purpose of this report is to provide Council with an update with respect to the preparation of the Northern Six waste collection contract tender and to seek Council guidance as it relates to contract priorities respecting levels of service,convenience to residents,and waste diversion. BACKGROUND In 2007 the Northern Six Municipalities (N6)of York Region being;The Towns of Aurora,East Gwillimbury,Georgina,Newmarket,Whitchurch Stouffville and Township of King collectively entered into a ten-year waste collection contract. General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday,March 3,2015 Item 2 Page -1 -8 - March 3,2015 -2 -Report No.IES15-011 This award winning contract was the first N6 initiative in which the municipalities collaborated with one another to leverage the economies of scale for the benefit of cost containment of municipally delivered services. The N6 was recognized at both the Federation of Canadian Municipalities (FCM) Sustainable Community Awards,and the Association of Municipalities of Ontario (AMO) Conference. Together the six municipalities accepted top honours in the waste management category for the Northern Six Joint Waste Collection Contract and Green Bin program at FCM and the AMO P.J.Marshall Certificate of Merit Award for excellence in innovation. The goal of the joint initiative was to maximize solid waste collection efficiencies, minimize solid waste system collection costs and introduce new waste diversion initiatives (e.g.a household organic collection program)with the aim to divert a minimum of 65%of waste from landfill as established through the 2006 Joint Municipal Waste Diversion Strategy. The 2007-2017 N6 contract not only implemented a new waste collection system but it shared a communication and public education program,joint customer service arrangement,and distributed over 70,000 organic collection containers. Collaborative savings of one million dollars per year was projected over the life of the contract.York Region conducted an audit on behalf of the municipalities and this audit confirmed that the 2008 savings were higher than expected. In addition to savings to residents,the project provides residents with an increased level of service with respect to waste and recycling collection services.The new waste collection program provides garbage collection every other week,weekly blue box collection,weekly household organic waste collection,and yard waste collection every other week between April and November. Building upon the successes of the 2007-2017 N6 waste collection contract,staff have initiated the preparation of the new contract with the intent of having tender documents prepared as early as 2015.The new waste contract will have to be awarded no later than the spring of 2016 to ensure the successful bidder has time to order trucks and equipment and put processes in place for a September 2017 start. COMMENTS Using the current N6 waste collection contract as a basis,staff will prepare the new contract taking into consideration the current contract performance,customer service levels,cost containment/savings,impact on the environment and implementation of new technologies.Staff will also incorporate such improvements as directed by Council for the benefit the residents of the Northern Six municipalities. General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday,March 3,2015 Item 2 Page -2 -9 - March 3,2015 -3 -Report No.IES15-011 Additionally,and where feasible,the SM4RT Living Plan and Integrated Waste Management Master Plan will be incorporated into this contract. As was done with the current waste contract,services of a consultant with the experience and expertise in these types of contracts will be retained to prepare the tender documents and undertake bid analysis.Sufficient funds have been requested through the 2015 budget deliberations to employ these services. Contract Priorities Providing the highest level of service at the lowest possible cost to residents is the key consideration for any publically provided service.Staff have identified the following priorities for the future contract and will evaluate bids accordingly: Cost containment Maintain current level of service Convenience to resident Diversion rates Staff identified early on in the tender preparation process that efficiencies and cost containment may be realized if the municipalities more closely align collection services. These aligned services are expected to help contain costs.Aligned services also provide the contractor flexibility in collection services,other efficiencies,and staff training. Acknowledging that each of the Northern Six municipalities may choose to offer differing levels of service as is done now,staff identified the following possible changes/alignments in the next contract. Harmonization of Waste Collection By-Laws will benefit overall program efficiencies Staff anticipate harmonization of waste collection by-laws across the N6 could have significant positive benefits.This harmonization would provide for consistent messaging throughout the N6 including communications from our call centres,coordinated promotion and education materials and improved contract enforcement. Harmonization would also provide maximum flexibility for the contractor delivering service across municipal boundaries,over large geographic areas and throughout the urban-rural makeup of the N6. General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday,March 3,2015 Item 2 Page -3 -10 - March 3,2015 -4 -Report No.IES15-011 Harmonization of waste by-laws could include: Frequency of collection Type of waste collected Bag limits Implementation of clear garbage bags Ability to purchase bag tags and/or white good and bulky tags Enforcement Recycling at super mail boxes SM4RT Living Plan will be incorporated to maximize diversion goals The Integrated Waste Management Master Plan has been endorsed by York Region and each of the N6 municipalities.The plan is an innovative,long-term plan to drive waste reduction and reuse for the next 25 to 40 years. The SM4RT Living Plan will not only incorporate the traditional 3R’s (reduce,reuse, recycle)but will incorporate a fourth R –recovery.Part of this recovery component is energy recovery from waste through the new partnership facility between York and Durham region. Call Centre -Customer Service Approach to be evaluated to optimize program A contractor operated call centre for residents is a requirement of the current waste collection contract.This call centre addresses missed collections,damaged collection containers or other complaints.Residents are also able to schedule special waste collections using the call centre. The call centre has significantly reduced the number of calls to N6 front-line staff. Under consideration for call centre: Status quo -contractor operated with enhanced performance standards and reporting Contracting out this service to a third party Contracting out this service to one of the N6 call centres The first priority of a customer call centre is to provide service to N6 residents.Staff feel the call centre can provide other valuable information to the municipalities and be used to evaluate key performance indicators and customer satisfaction.An independent call centre reporting directly to the N6 may also enhance contract enforcement by identifying potential collection issues affecting residents. General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday,March 3,2015 Item 2 Page -4 -11 - March 3,2015 -5 -Report No.IES15-011 Contract Administration approach and delivery model to be reviewed to better leverage staff resources Through a Memorandum of Understanding the N6 collectively manages the waste contract but more specifically the N6 appoints a “Municipal Relationship Manager” (MRM),typically a Director,who acts as the contract administrator on behalf of the N6. The MRM carries the responsibilities for a term of approximately two years. Each MRM takes on significant workload and responsibility on behalf of the other municipalities.The 2007-2017 contract has a value of $100M.During normal operations,the role of MRM is manageable however during emergency events such as the severe winter and ice storm of 2013/2014,the administration of the contract can directly impact the MRM and the respective municipality. While there are efficiencies with this MRM model,the N6 will review existing resourcing to determine it’s adequacy to effectively manage the contract. Other contract considerations will be explored to leverage new practices where warranted Staff will research new technologies for incorporation into the waste contract where appropriate to implement.Examples of such technologies might include;cameras to record curbside conditions before and after collection (remotely accessible by N6 representative),GPS route tracking including vehicle speed,direction of travel and time of day etc.(part of current contract),radio-frequency identification (RFID)tags on front end container collection.Inclusion of new technologies is intended to improve contract conformance,service level improvements and accuracy of billing. Staff identified an opportunity to embrace green fleet technology as an N6 commitment to the environmentally sustainable service delivery. Under Ontario regulation,both the Public and Separate school Boards are required to implement waste diversion programs.Staff intend to include a piggyback clause in the N6 contract to assist the school boards in this statutory responsibility.The piggyback clause will permit the Boards to take advantage of the economies of scale and N6 contract pricing.If this piggyback clause is exercised by the Boards,the Boards will be required to undertake 100 percent of the administration of the services provided to the Boards. LINK TO STRATEGIC PLAN The above projects support the Strategic Plan goal of Supporting an exceptional quality of life for all through their accomplishment in satisfying requirements in the following key objectives within this goal statement: General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday,March 3,2015 Item 2 Page -5 -12 - General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, March 3,2015 Item 2 Page - 6 -13 - March 3, 2015 -6-Report No. IES15-011 Investing in sustainable infrastructure: Maintain and expand infrastructure to support forecasted population growth through technology, waste management, roads, emergency services and accessibility ALTERNATIVE(S) TO THE RECOMMENDATIONS As directed by Council FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS Sufficient funding has been requested in the 2015 operating budget to fund Aurora's portion of the consultant costs associated with the preparation of tender documents and the tender bid evaluation. The estimated funding requirement is $7,500 . CONCLUSIONS The Northern Six Municipalities of York Region are initiating preparation of the next Northern Six Waste Collection Contract as the current contract is set to expire in September 2017. Tendering will be required to be completed by early 2016 to allow for sufficient to for the successful bidder to procure the collection fleet. In the lead up to the tender completion, Council will be consulted to review and endorse service levels, and other aspects of the tendering process . PREVIOUS REPORTS None ATTACHMENTS None PRE-SUBMISSION REVIEW Executive Leadership meeting of February 19, 2015 Prepared by: //mar Simanovskis, Director, Infrastructure and Environmental Services -Ext. 4371 llmarsrrnat1011Ski Director, Infrastructure & Environmental Services Neil Garbe Chief Administrative Officer TOWN OF AURORA GENERAL COMMITTEE REPORT No.IES15-012 SUBJECT:Speeding Concerns on Cousins Drive and Multi-Way Stop Control Request at the Wells Street and Cousins Drive Intersection FROM:Ilmar Simanovskis,Director of Infrastructure &Environmental Services DATE:March 3,2015 RECOMMENDATIONS THAT Report No.IES15-012 be received;and THAT the request for a three-way stop sign control at the intersection of Wells Street and Cousins Drive be denied;and THAT notice of Council’s decision be sent to area residents. PURPOSE OF THE REPORT The purpose of this report is to investigate the speeding concerns on Cousins Drive and the request for a multi-way stop sign control at the Wells Street and Cousins Drive intersection. BACKGROUND On August 18,2014,an email from a resident (Attached as Appendix “A”)was received by staff regarding speeding concerns on Cousins Drive and a request for a three-way stop sign installation at the Wells Street and Cousins Drive intersection. The request for a three-way stop sign control at the Wells Street and Cousins Drive intersection has been before Council in the past and the request was denied due to the lack of traffic volumes and pedestrian activities in the area.However,since then both traffic and pedestrian volumes have increased.In addition,the Town supports active transportation initiatives and providing safer and uninterrupted routes for pedestrians is a major goal that the Town is trying to achieve to encourage physical activities and reduce greenhouse gas emissions. COMMENTS Existing physical road characteristics of Cousins Drive and Wells Street Cousins Drive is a two lane local road in the east/west direction with an urban cross- General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday,March 3,2015 Item 3 Page -1 -14 - March 3,2015 -2 -Report No.IES15-012 section (curbs and gutters),an 8.5 metre pavement width,a posted speed of 40 km/h, and a sidewalk on the south side between Edward Street and Wells Street and on the north side between Wells Street and Yonge Street.Parking is prohibited at anytime on the south side between Yonge Street and Cameron Avenue. Wells Street is a two lane local road in the north/south direction with an urban cross- section,an 8.5 metre pavement width,a posted speed of 40 km/h,and a sidewalk on the west side.There are no-parking restrictions on Wells Street north of Cousins Drive. The intersection of Wells Street and Cousins Drive is controlled by a stop sign at the Wells Street approach.Refer to Appendix “B”showing the area in question. Traffic volume counts and speed study on Cousins Drive Concerns were raised by the residents about the traffic volume and speed of vehicles on Cousins Drive.To determine the extent of these concerns,staff conducted a traffic volume count and speed study on Cousins Dive between September 3rd and September 9th,2014.The results are summarized in Table 1 below. Table 1:Vehicular Speed and Traffic Counts on Cousins Drive Location Eastbound Westbound Eastbound Westbound Eastbound Westbound 43 41 52 50 696 626 Average Speed 85th Percentile Speed*ADT** Cousins Drive in front of #55 *The 85th percentile speed is a common transportation indicator,which refers to the speed 85 percent of the vehicles are traveling at or below **ADT=Average Daily Traffic The results of the vehicular speed and traffic counts show the average speed is between 41 and 43 km/h and the 85th percentile speed is between 50 and 52 km/h.The overall average daily traffic for Cousins Drive was 1,322 vehicles per day. To address the compliance with the posted speed limit,staff have installed the drivers’ feedback speed board on Cousins Drive from October 6th,2014 to January 5th,2015, which resulted in reduction in both the average and 85th percentile speeds.In addition, staff have requested York Regional Police to monitor the area for speed enforcement. Furthermore,residents should utilize the Road Watch Program to report aggressive drivers directly to the Police by completing the Road Watch complaint form available on the York Regional Police website. General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday,March 3,2015 Item 3 Page -2 -15 - March 3,2015 -3 -Report No.IES15-012 Three-Way stop sign review for the Wells Street and Cousins Drive intersection Staff conducted an eight hour multi-way stop sign review of the Wells Street and Cousins Drive intersection on Tuesday November 4,2014 and the results are shown in Table 2 below. Table 2:Multi-Way Stop Sign Analysis Time Southbound Traffic Volume Eastbound Traffic Volume Westbound Traffic Volume North/South Pedestrian Volume 7:00a.m.-8:00a.m.32 68 11 4 8:00a.m.-9:00a.m.52 86 26 13 11:00a.m.-12:00a.m.29 60 20 2 12:00a.m.-1:00p.m.25 59 18 0 1:00p.m.-2:00p.m.23 58 18 0 3:00p.m.-4:00p.m.30 65 29 10 4:00p.m.-5:00p.m.26 68 37 18 5:00p.m.-6:00p.m.24 44 38 1 Average 30 64 25 6 Overall 8-Hour Average 124 Side street Average 36 The established warrants state that one or more of the following conditions must exist at an intersection on a local/local road before the installation of multi-way stop signs is warranted: Total traffic volume entering the intersection from all approaches must average at least 350 vehicles per hour for any 8 hours of an average day,and the combined vehicular and pedestrian volume from the minor street or highway must average at least 120 units per hour for the same 8 hours; An accident problem exists at the intersection,indicated by having had three or more accidents at the intersection in a year;and A restricted view problem exists at the intersection. As can be seen,the average volume entering the intersection from all approaches is 124 vehicles per hour for an eight-hour period.The combined average vehicular and pedestrian traffic from Wells Street is 36 units for the same eight-hour period,which is below the required average traffic volumes.Based on the low traffic volumes observed during the peak and off-peak hours,the required traffic volume warrant has not been met. General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday,March 3,2015 Item 3 Page -3 -16 - March 3,2015 -4 -Report No.IES15-012 The second and third warrants have not been met as there have been no reported traffic collisions at this intersection in the past 3 years and there are no sightline restrictions on both sides of Cousins Drive for motorists on Wells Street. Town’s parks and sidewalks on opposite sides of Cousins Drive There are two parks in the vicinity of Cousins Drive.The Rotary Park is located on the northwest corner of Cousins Drive and Wells Street intersection and Cousins Park is located south of Cousins Drive.The sidewalks on Cousins Drive are located on the north side between Yonge Street and Wells Street and on the south side between Wells Street and Edward Street as shown in Figure 1.Pedestrians walking along Cousins Drive at some point are forced to jaywalk to connect between the sidewalks.There is an opportunity to provide a safe and continuous route for pedestrians on Cousins Drive at this location however,there is no policy that supports installation of a three way stop at this location for the purpose of pedestrian access improvements. Figure 1:Parks and Sidewalks on Cousins Drive Pedestrian lines and “Pedestrian Must Yield to Traffic”caution signs were recently installed to assist residents crossing Cousins Drive and connect between the sidewalks In the interim and in order to address the road crossing concerns,on Tuesday November 11,2014 pedestrian crossing lines were painted and “Pedestrian Must Yield to Traffic”caution signs were installed on Cousins Drive to provide a connection between the sidewalks on both sides of the street to assist residents crossing the road. The pavement markings could be utilized if the intersection is changed to a three-way stop controlled;however the caution signs will be removed.Figure 2 showing the pavement markings and signs. General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday,March 3,2015 Item 3 Page -4 -17 - March 3,2015 -5 -Report No.IES15-012 Figure 2:Pavement Markings and Cautions Signs LINK TO STRATEGIC PLAN Strategic Plan Goal of Supporting an Exceptional Quality of Life for All Objective 1:Improve transportation,mobility and connectivity Examine traffic patterns and identify potential solutions to improve movement and safety for motorists and pedestrians/students. Objective 4:Encouraging an active an healthy lifestyle Develop programs and policies that nurture and contribute to the development of youth. Continue to develop awareness programs that promote the benefits of recreation in supporting a healthy lifestyle. ALTERNATIVE(S)TO THE RECOMMENDATIONS Council may wish to implement three-way stop control at Wells Street and Cousins Drive intersection.If so,the following recommendations would allow for staff to proceed with this direction: THAT three-way stop sign control at the intersection of Wells Street and Cousins Drive be approved;and THAT a by-law to implement three-way stop sign control at the intersection of Wells Street and Cousins Drive be introduced;and THAT “Pedestrians Must Yield to Traffic”caution signs be removed upon implementation of three-way stop sign control at the intersection of Wells Street and Cousins Drive;and General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday,March 3,2015 Item 3 Page -5 -18 - General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, March 3,2015 Item 3 Page - 6 -19 - March 3, 2015 . 6-Report No. IES15-012 THAT notice of Council's decision be sent to area residents. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS There is no cost to leave the intersection as is. Should implementation of the three way stop be approved, the cost for the implementation of the stop signs is approximately $500 and the cost will be covered by the Operations Budget. CONCLUSIONS The traffic operations of the Wells Street and Cousins Drive intersection have been reviewed . The multi-way stop sign installation warrants according to the Town's policy have not been met. However, for the benefit of area residents and to eliminate jaywalking and provide an uninterrupted and safer connection between the sidewalks on both sides of Cousins Drive, a three way stop could be implemented if directed by Council. The proposed recommendation is attached as Appendix "C". PREVIOUS REPORTS Report TSACOB-012 -Cousins Drive Traffic Study ATTACHMENTS • Appendix "A" -Email correspondence for the resident • Appendix "B" -Key Map of Area in Question • Appendix "C" -Map showing report recommendation PRE-SUBMISSION REVIEW Executive Leadership Team meeting of February 19, 2015 Pre~ Massadeh, Traffic/Tra:f!? ;l1f:zxt. 4374 lltfmr Simanovskis Neil Garbe Director, Infrastructure & Chief Administrative Officer Environmental Services APPENDIX A Cousins Drive Aurora,Ontario L4G 1B5 August 18,2014 Jamal Massadeh Traffic/Transportation Analyst 100 John West Way,Box 1000 Aurora,Ontario L4G 6J1 Dear Jamal, Thank you very much for sharing some of your time with me today.I especially appreciate your thorough and forthright presentation of all data and information pertaining to the issue of which I am concerned.Although I was disappointed to learn that this potentially imminently dangerous issue may not be brought before the Aurora Council until January of 2015,you did however convince me that indeed you care about the citizens of Aurora. The Issue In Question:the decision to not create a stop-sign at the Wells Street-Cousins Drive intersection My wife,myself,and our 3 year old daughter,moving into our house @ 55 Cousins Drive in August of 2013. My sister,Sunny Matheson,has lived @ 51 Metcalfe Street since 2006.She has 3 children all under the age of 6. Over the years,has forged many relationship with people all over town as she has lived in Aurora the majority of her life.In the year of 2008,Sunny became a mother for the first time.Since then,she,along with all of the mothers and fathers she has become friendly with, tend to want to create a very safe neighbourhood for their children to play.During this period of time,she discovered that her home-owning friends (living on Cousins Drive;parents also of 3 children under the age of 6)have become very concerned with the 5-10%of the cars that speed up and down Cousins Drive at speeds exceeding 65 km/h FULL-DISCLOSURE:although I can only approximately,I can confidently state that at least 1 out of 15 cars are exceeding the posted 40km/h speed-limit by at least 50% Recently,I was mowing the front-portion of my lawn.I then looked to the west portion of Cousins Drive for coming cars.I saw no cars coming my way,so I swung my push-mower into a portion of my lawn that always forces my body into the street....at which point I noticed a car speeding (at least 65-70km/h)coming over the crest of the hill.The car was been driven by a young-man (estimated age 16-20)texting on the phone,only noticing me and swerving away at the last second (me having been 5 feet into the street)while I was hustling to stay clear of his car. Sunny,along with her friends that live on Cousins Drive,have become fearful of playing with their children in the open-field of Cousins Park.As children tend to spontaneously dart out,and away,in different directions,visions of their children being struck-down (by any of the cars speeding too fast to safely react)has already motivated many of them to request that the township put in a stop-sign at the bottom of the hill;cars tend to be parked curb-side if front of General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday,March 3,2015 Item 3 Page -7 -20 - Cousins Park which provides visual-obstructions for children to slip through. My fear is that this situation is a sort of ticking time-bomb.It seems inevitable that a child will eventually be struck by a careless-driver at the bottom of the hill on Cousins Drive;in fact,we are requested a stop-sign at the very bottom of 2 hills...both the east and east directions of Cousins Drive are downhill,only to bottom-out at Wells Street. If a child was ever to be struck-down around this dangerous intersection,then I believe that the parents/homeowners would literally emotionally-snap!There would be so much outrage that it would most likely be difficult to contain.This would truly be an awful day in the great history of Aurora.At this point,a stop-sign would become an absolute demand from these citizens.So, the question becomes...WHY NOT NOW? Sunny tells me how nervous she gets walking up and down Cousins Drive during Hallowe'en.She,along with her fellow parents/friends,become very emotional when they speak of such things,as if they have premonitions of a great horror to come unless there is a stop-sign placed at this intersection;considering the fact that they are thinking of their children romping around in these neighbourhoods over the next decade or so. Additionally,this currently dangerous intersection is a morning and afternoon bus-stop for toddlers.This is indeed nervous-time for those parents. Personally,I have lived here @ 55 Cousins Drive since last August,and I too am becoming very concerned in the sense that my daughter almost 4 years of age and is becoming quite fast-on- her-feet.To our east is Cousins Park.Directly to our north is Rotary Park.I have become confused why there is not a stop-sign at the bottom of 2 hills in between 2 town parks.Surely, some of the only people that do not wish to have stop-sign put at that intersection are those that enjoy zipping across Cousins in order to avoid the very stop-signs we wish to create. Jamal,I guess that I am writing to you in a sort of desperate plea/action to potentially save my daughter's life.The fact is that I live at the bottom of both of the "2 Hills of Cousins",and I really feel a great pressure to do everything in my power in order to have a stop-sign put in at this potentially fatal intersection.My daughter's life may depend on my action,or inaction. Could you please guide me to the next step I/we should take in order to have this very important issue resolved. Thank you very much for reading this letter. Kind regards, Craig Matheson General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday,March 3,2015 Item 3 Page -8 -21 - Appendix“B”NKeymapshowingareainquestionMulti-waystopsignrequestatWellsStreetandCousinsDriveintersectionExistingSidewalkonCousinsDriveGeneral Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday,March 3,2015 Item 3 Page -9 -22 - Appendix“C”Installthree-waystopsignsandremove“PedestriansMustYieldtoTraffic”SignsNMulti-waystopsignrequestatWellsStreetandCousinsDriveintersectionReportrecommendationsGeneral Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday,March 3,2015 Item 3 Page -10 -23 - TOWN OF AURORA GENERAL COMMITTEE REPORT No.IES15-013 SUBJECT:Durham York Energy Centre Status Report FROM:Ilmar Simanovskis,Director Infrastructure and Environmental Services DATE:March 3,2015 RECOMMENDATIONS THAT Report No.IES15-013 be received for information. PURPOSE OF THE REPORT The purpose of this report is to update Council on the progress of the Durham York Energy Centre. BACKGROUND Waste management is a joint responsibility between York Region and the nine local municipalities with the municipalities responsible for collection and the Region responsible for processing,marketing and disposal of residual materials.The Regional program supports diversion as a priority which includes blue box and green bin materials in addition to other reusable materials.Household waste is currently managed primarily through land fill disposal. The process for investigating energy from waste alternatives began in 1998 within Durham Region as part of their long range planning for managing residential waste.In 2005,York Region Partnered with Durham Region to initiate the joint environmental assessment which was approved in 2006.The recommended solution was to use the energy from waste process as the preferred alternative for managing residential garbage. The necessary studies to meet the environmental assessment requirements were completed in 2009 and approved by the Ontario Ministry of the Environment and Climate Change in 2010. The project has been proceeding through the construction phase and is now complete with commissioning operations being initiated this month. General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday,March 3,2015 Item 4 Page -1 -24 - March 3,2015 -2 -Report No.IES15-013 COMMENTS Energy from Waste (EFW)facility is part of the long term solution to responsible waste management Waste management is a high priority for the Region and its municipal partners and this has been demonstrated through successes with current programs and the recent approval of the SM4RT Living plan embodied in the Integrated Waste Management Master Plan of September 2013. The priorities for waste management have been captured in the four “R’s”of Reduce, Reuse,Recycle and Recover and within the objective of recovery is the energy from waste program which is expected to process up to 90 percent of garbage collected in the Region thereby significantly reducing the Region’s reliance on landfill disposal. EFW has begun commissioning phase as of February 2015 The Region has begun shipping garbage to the facility as part of a 60 day commissioning period.This start-up period is necessary to ensure all systems are functioning properly and allows for short notice shut down of the facility without impacting local waste collection services. Once commissioning is complete,waste will continue to be shipped to the facility as landfill usage diminishes. EFW program a significant benefit to the long term goal of waste reduction and energy recovery Some of the key points of this component of the waste management program are: General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday,March 3,2015 Item 4 Page -2 -25 - March 3,2015 -3 -Report No.IES15-013 Durham York Energy Centre will serve a population of 1.8 million residents within York and Durham Regions and operate 24 hours a day,seven days a week Energy-from-waste is a highly efficient process that takes garbage and burns it at extremely high temperatures resulting in electrical generation form thermal energy capture The facility will process up to 140,000 tonnes of post-diversion residual waste annually while recovering metals and energy from the process Energy produced by the facility is sufficient to power between 10,000 and 12,000 homes The facility has followed strict requirements to ensure residents and the environment are protected The capital costs is $284.2 million Community awareness of Region’s change from landfill operations to energy recovery is important step in waste management accountability Proper disposal of all waste products is a social responsibility we all are accountable for.The shift from landfill to EFW processing is another opportunity for residents to re- evaluate personal household waste management practices and the value recoverable materials have to both the economy and the ecosystem. To support community accountability,staff will be supporting York Region’s media campaign as they continue to promote the transition to EFW.Key aspects of this support are to ensure residents appreciate the need to eliminate toxic and inappropriate waste materials from the garbage so that the new facility is able to operate as efficiently as possible. LINK TO STRATEGIC PLAN This project also supports the Strategic Plan Goal of Supporting Environmental Stewardship and Sustainability by creating and promoting waste diversion education programs in partnership with York Region. ALTERNATIVE(S)TO THE RECOMMENDATIONS There are no alternatives to the recommendation FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS This report has no direct financial impact to the Town. General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday,March 3,2015 Item 4 Page -3 -26 - General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, March 3,2015 Item 4 Page - 4 -27 - March 3, 2015 -4-Report No. IES15-013 CONCLUSIONS As the Durham York Energy Centre begins its comm1ss1oning process, increased amounts of Aurora garbage will transition from landfill to Energy from Waste recovery. In following with the four "R's", priority is placed on reducing, reusing, and recycling our waste materials. Once exhausted, any residual garbage will then be processed at the Energy Centre to produce electricity and fulfilling the fourth R of recovery. As users of this new facility, our residents will benefit from being informed of this transition from landfill as a solution and are encouraged to consider how materials are sorted within the home so that unsuitable materials such as paints, batteries or chemicals are disposed of through the appropriate channels. PREVIOUS REPORTS None ATTACHMENTS None PRE-SUBMISSION REVIEW Executive Leadership meeting of February 19, 2015 Prepared by: //mar Simanovskis, Director, Infrastructure & Environmental Services -Ext.4371 I ar Jmanovskis Director, Infrastructure & Environmental Services Neil Garbe Chief Administrative Officer GENERAL COMMITTEE REPORT No.IES15-014 SUBJECT:Clear Bag Program for Waste Collection,Follow-up Report FROM:Ilmar Simanovskis,Director of Infrastructure and Environmental Services DATE:March 3,2015 RECOMMENDATIONS THAT Report No.IES15-014 be received;and THAT staff undertake two additional open-houses and two additional public on- line surveys to occur in advance of each of the voluntary and full transition dates; and THAT a Clear Bag Program for waste collection to replace black opaque bags for waste collection be approved;and THAT the voluntary Clear Bag Program start date be June 5,2015,to coincide with the United Nations Environment Day;and THAT the Clear Bag Program full transition date be October 19,2015,to coincide with Canada Waste Reduction Week,after which compliance measures will be implemented;and THAT staff bring forward an amendment to By-law Number 5590-14,“BEING A BY-LAW for the collection of solid waste and recyclable materials in the Town of Aurora”that includes the replacement of black opaque bags with clear bags for the setting out of garbage. PURPOSE OF THE REPORT The purpose of this report is to update Council on activities taken to fulfill public education and engagement activities for a clear bag program,provide additional information on options to increase diversion rates related to curb side collection and to seek Council approval to proceed with implementation of the program for the spring of 2015. BACKGROUND York Region’s Integrated Waste Management Master Plan was completed and endorsed by Council in late 2013.In addition,Council endorsed Staff Report IES14-050 which outlined Town of Aurora initiatives that are in support and aligned with the TOWN OF AURORA General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday,March 3,2015 Item 5 Page -1 -28 - March 3,2014 -2 -Report No.IES15-014 Region’s Integrated Waste Management Master Plan.The two initiatives identified for 2014 were to update the Town’s waste by-law and introduce a clear bag program for waste collection.Both projects were initiated in 2014.The waste by-law update was completed and the clear bag program was deferred to 2015 pending completion of public education and engagement activities. The clear bag program was recommended for the Town of Aurora based on the great success it experienced in Markham which is one of a growing number of Municipalities that are moving beyond recycling and adopting a sustainable Zero Waste approach to waste management.In April 2013 Markham launched a clear bag program and since then has increased their waste diversion from 71 percent to 81 percent.It is from this experience that staff consulted with Town of Markham staff and initiated the process to transition from black opaque bags to clear bags for waste collection.The following is a summary of reports to Council and directions provided upon which staff have acted. Staff Report IES14-006,Implementation of a Clear Bag Waste Program was before General Committee January 14,2014 and Council passed the following motion: THAT report IES14-006 and the delegate presentation from Delegate (a)be referred to the Environmental Advisory Committee. At its meeting of February 6,2014,the Environmental Advisory Committee recommended that the clear bag waste program be approved.This was reported to the February 18,2014 General Committee meeting for approval.This recommendation was amended by Council February 25 with the following recommendation: THAT Item 7 (EAC14-02 EAC Feb 6 Report)be referred back to the Environmental Advisory Committee for more information. In the meantime,Staff Report IES14-008,Solid Waste By-law Update was before General Committee on February 4,2014 wherein the following motion was passed and carried at the subsequent Council meeting: THAT Report IES14-008 be deferred to a future meeting when the Clear Bag report comes back to Council. The Environmental Advisory Committee meeting was held on April 3,2014 in which the following EAC recommendation was approved for consideration by Council at its April 15,2014 meeting.The following motion was approved by Council on consent April 22, 2014: General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday,March 3,2015 Item 5 Page -2 -29 - March 3,2014 -3 -Report No.IES15-014 THAT the extract from Council Meeting of February 25,2014 be received;and THAT the Environmental Advisory Committee endorse the Clear Bag Waste Program;and THAT the Environmental Advisory Committee recommend to Council:THAT Council endorse the Clear Bag Waste Program. Following the April 22,2014 Council meeting,staff prepared report IES14-026,Solid Waste By-law Update and Clear Bag Status which was presented at the May 20,2014 General Committee Meeting.At its Council meeting of May 27,2014,the following resolution was approved: THAT the request for approval of a clear bag program be brought back to Council in January 2015 for a proposed launch of June 2015;and THAT staff immediately begin a process of public education and engagement on the clear bag initiative as part of an overall waste diversion strategy using internal resources;and THAT staff bring forward By-law number 5590-14,“BEING A BY-LAW for the collection of solid waste and recyclable materials in the Town of Aurora”to a future Council meeting for enactment,exclusive of the clear bag program. As a result of the following resolution,staff brought forward a revised by-law exclusive of the clear bag program which was enacted July 29,2014. This report is intended to satisfy the first and second part of the above resolution of Council and to provide additional information on the development of the clear bag program. COMMENTS Everyday purchase choices benefit from focus on environmental sustainability and the Four “R’s”strategy of waste management The reduction in waste generation is a strategic priority both within the Town’s Strategic Plan and as part of the Integrated Waste Management Master Plan.Social accountability of the consumer also influences buying decisions. General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday,March 3,2015 Item 5 Page -3 -30 - March 3,2014 -4 -Report No.IES15-014 The first line of response for any household is to make conscious product choices that either minimize packaging or provide recyclable packaging.By making these choices, consumers can have a direct influence on the amount of non-recoverable waste that is generated within the home. Once buying choices are made,the next best line of defense for responsible waste management is to ensure that as much waste as possible is diverted to the appropriate streams with priority being organic recycling through the green bin program or backyard composting,and recyclable materials recovery through the blue box program. Not all materials can be collected at the curb resulting in the need for consumers to take a more active role in supporting sustainable waste management Waste management systems have drastically changed in the past 30 years resulting in significant economic and environmental benefits.Very few materials remain to be recycled or recovered within the York Region programs,and now with the new energy recovery facility,even residual waste will provide a benefit through energy recovery. However other household waste streams such as e-waste electronics,batteries,and toxic consumables such as paints,solvents,medications,pesticides and construction waste are not intended to be collected and recovered through the curb side program. The cost to collect and separate these materials at curb side is significant and not an efficient use of our resources.This is due to both the limited quantities of these materials and the unique handling and recovery processes required. This is where resident engagement is important in knowing what materials cannot be recycled through the curb side collection programs and how to appropriately dispose of these materials.The Regional Community Environmental Centres are the first stop to disposing of these materials as well as local events such as e-waste and other special collection events. Maximizing effectiveness of curb side collection program includes careful use of the three primary collection streams The three primary curbside collection streams are blue box,green bin and garbage. When sorting household waste,most residents maximize the use of the blue and green bin streams.However,convenience,or expedience may periodically result in the overuse of the black garbage bag for not only waste that is intended to be collected there,but also as an option for disposal of wastes that can be recovered through other options such as a CEC depot. This can result in materials being hidden in a black garbage bag and is a lost opportunity for increased material recovery and long term sustainability. General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday,March 3,2015 Item 5 Page -4 -31 - March 3,2014 -5 -Report No.IES15-014 Opportunity statement:How can material recovery be maximized and waste generation be minimized at the curb in the most cost efficient way? This opportunity statement is based on one of the Master Plan goals of reducing waste and maximizing diversion of recyclable materials and has formed the basis for consideration of the clear bag program.Although the clear bag approach is only one option,industry experience for this option is growing with significant success at minimal to no cost.In some cases cost savings have been reported due to overall reduction in weight as inappropriate materials are totally removed from the curb side collection program. However,this is not the only option for advancing the stated opportunity.Additional information is provided to describe other options considered,their impacts and costs and to formalize the recommendation to proceed with the clear bag option as the most cost effective approach to advancing diversion with the curbside collection program. Specific goal to support opportunity statement is to minimize amount of recoverable materials and inappropriate materials that get placed in the garbage stream With the green bin and blue box programs maturing,there is little doubt that most residents are using these recovery options as diligently as possible.The remaining opportunity for curbside collection is to take a closer look at how the waste stream is generated.To achieve this goal,the following options were considered as possible approaches to improving waste decisions made at the curb related to non-recoverable garbage. Option Description Status Quo This is the baseline option based on the current service level and practices with use of the black bag for garbage with an unenforceable bag limit of 3 Introduce Bag Tag Program Implement a bag tag program to allow enforcement of the current 3 bag limit Eliminate garbage bags along with use of a bag tag program Ban any large bags for garbage set out and require all residents to use garbage cans to reduce waste along with a tag program to enforce 3 “can”limit Introduce Clear Bag Program with no limits Implement clear bag for waste along with no bag limit for all waste that meets the criteria Reduce waste collection to every third week Continue with current program with additional non-collection week thereby reducing waste collections from 27 to 17 annually. Eliminate residential waste collection Ban curbside collection of residential waste and require that residents transport residual household waste to CEC or other appropriate disposal General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday,March 3,2015 Item 5 Page -5 -32 - March 3,2014 -6 -Report No.IES15-014 Public engagement and education part of ongoing activities that will occur regardless of preferred approach to changing curbside garbage behavior Each option above has the potential to reduce the recoverable and inappropriate materials placed in the waste stream.However,each option also comes with various social,economic and environmental impacts.These factors are presented further in the report.Regardless of the preferred option,the following were identified as baseline attributes that would be required to be fulfilled regardless of the final option. Public awareness and education programs need to continue to meet goals Enforcement required as a last resort to encourage change behaviours Enforcement mechanisms will remain in place to support any of the identified options based on stickering and non-collection of unsuitable materials Resident engagement and feedback essential in assessing effectiveness of programs and progress towards stated goals Program evaluation is ongoing to assess and adjust responses to support changing environment The above activities are an ongoing part of the waste program and are essential in maintaining service targets and long term environmental objectives. Evaluation criteria summarized in challenges and benefits table for each option Each option was evaluated as to specific challenges and benefits that could be expected and is summarized in the following table: Option Challenges Benefits Status Quo -recyclable material can be placed in garbage bag -banned materials can be “hidden”in garbage bag (construction waste,e- waste,paints,grass clippings,soil,etc.) -unable to determine suitability of materials other than by exceeding weight limit -program well established -users understand how to use black bags -many households retain a stock of black bags -convenient if customer chooses to "hide"materials that would otherwise require alternate efforts to dispose Introduce Bag Tag Program -additional cost to implement program and costs to customers requiring additional bags -3 bag limit is high resulting in few customers actually requiring additional bags -creates incentive to be more selective when disposing of waste -source of revenue for Town -may increase diversion -minimal change to existing program based on experience of N6 partners currently using bag tags Eliminate garbage bags along with tag program -concerns with privacy (loose garbage) -costs associated with buying cans -storage space requirements for customers -restrictive to customers -difficult to assess content once can is emptied -elimination of plastic waste associated with black bags -increased visibility of waste contents during dumping -may increase diversion General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday,March 3,2015 Item 5 Page -6 -33 - March 3,2014 -7 -Report No.IES15-014 Introduce Clear Bag Program with no limits -concerns with privacy -unused black bags -perceived as government interference and restrictive -increased awareness of need to recycle due to increased visibility -driver ability to identify non-collectable waste -expected increased diversion based on other municipal experiences with clear bags Reduce waste collection to every third week -increased complaints due to accumulation of waste. -odour concerns during warm seasons -increased probability of dumping on private property/road side -costs savings in frequency of collection -increased incentive to divert as much as possible Eliminate residential waste collection -increased customer costs to find own solution -increased probability of dumping on private property/road side -increased operational costs of CEC's to accommodate increased volume and traffic -eliminate cost of collection and transfer to customer -incentive to increase recycling to reduce effort in transporting waste to CEC's -ultimate approach towards zero waste goal Life cycle costing applied to each option to assess economic value Life cycle costing was applied to each option to assess economic value.The following parameters were applied to develop the net present value for each option. Discount rate of 5 percent Term of 10 years Assumption that renewed contract will consolidate cost per ton for one overall cost to eliminate current higher cost for green bin and blue box collections Cost boundary only considered direct costs to Town and to the consumer.Does not include costs related to regional operations Cost differences between options are primarily influenced by expected diversion rates and transfer of waste delivery from Town to customer through increased use of Community Environmental Centres (CEC).This secondary driver is a result of reduced options to dispose of waste not suitable for curbside collection thereby requiring individual delivery to a CEC.Costs have also been considered for increased dumping on public lands due to customer frustration or lack of curbside collection options. The estimated percentage shift in diversion options is summarized in the following table: Option Increase to CEC Increase to Blue Box Increase to Green Bin Status Quo NA NA NA Introduce Bag Tag Program/Eliminate garbage bags along with tag program 0%2%2% Introduce Clear Bag Program with no limits 10%6%6% Reduce waste collection to every third week 5%5%5% Eliminate residential waste collection 80%10%10% General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday,March 3,2015 Item 5 Page -7 -34 - March 3,2014 -8 -Report No.IES15-014 The life cycle costs results are presented in the following table: Option NPV (Town Cost)NPV (All Cost)Expected Diversion (at Curb) Expected Diversion (Net Residual for MRF)* Status Quo $13,279,280 $13,279,280 62%54% Introduce Bag Tag Program (or)Eliminate garbage bags along with tag program $13,161,715 $13,161,715 63%55% Introduce Clear Bag Program with no limits $12,920,788 $13,677,018 70%65% Reduce waste collection to every third week $13,179,359 $13,557,474 68%60% Eliminate residential waste collection $10,618,072 $16,667,910 100%92% *Materials Recovery Facility (MRF)experiences operational waste due to recyclable materials that are not recoverable resulting in a percentage loss towards total diversion amount. Comments on the life cycle cost results are as follows: The “all costs”column minus the “Town costs”column is the additional cost to the community as a result of increased resident costs in driving and tipping fees for use of CEC facilities.These costs are based on an estimation of waste that will not comply with curbside collection requirements.In the status quo option, these costs are hidden based on non-curbside material being collected through the curbside program.In the other options these cost can have significant variability based on real curbside contamination which is difficult to determine. The CEC usage was estimated on the conservative side to fully account for these potential social costs. Bag tag program is not expected to yield significant shift in diversion rates as currently all other York municipalities have bag tag programs (in Georgina’s case with a 1 bag limit),in which overall diversion rates are similar to Aurora’s. Reduction or elimination of waste collection days is expected to yield higher diversion due to increased inconvenience to community.However,it is also expected to increase secondary costs of cleanup related to dumping on public roads and properties which have been included. Clear Bag program diversion increase based on experiences of other municipalities that have implemented similar programs.Other program experiences have resulted in net cost savings,however conservative impact through increased CEC use included as part of evaluation. Elimination of residual waste collection although achieving a zero waste target, would have significant negative impacts,both related to inefficiencies in individual transport of household waste to CEC’s and increased traffic and waste volume at the CEC’s which will drive up regional operating costs (not included in analysis). Difference between diversion rate at curb and net diversion rate less residual at MRF is based on recyclable materials that are sorted out of the recover stream due to noncompliance with requirements. General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday,March 3,2015 Item 5 Page -8 -35 - March 3,2014 -9 -Report No.IES15-014 Costs do not include Waste Diversion Ontario funding which is calculated based on percentage of diverted blue box material.Funding formula is based on total tonnage of blue box material as a percentage of total waste.Increasing diversion rate favours increase in external funding receipts. Converting to clear bags for waste is favourable option to achieve increased diversion with minimal overall impact to residents and collection costs The lowest cost option is to implement a bag tag program.This is due to the marginal reduction in waste combined with a nominal revenue stream estimated at $20,000 per year.However,experience from other N6 communities that have a bag tag program is that there is no significant difference in the net diversion rates.At the very least,the bag tag program generates a small revenue to offset administrative costs of operating the program. Although not the lowest overall cost option,the clear bag program would be the next best choice to boost diversion rates with both the least financial and social impact to the community. To achieve the stated goal of minimizing the amount of recoverable materials and inappropriate materials that get placed in the garbage stream,it is recommended that a clear bag program be implemented for waste collection at curbside. Public education program implemented from Fall 2014 to early 2015 Staff completed a public education and awareness campaign as directed by Council. This program consisted of information posted on the Town’s website along with nine separate advertisements on the Aurora Banner notice board. Upon conclusion of the education campaign,an online survey was initiated and remained active from January 28,2015 to February 26,2015 to assess the level of public awareness and engagement with the program.A total of 171 responses were received and key results are summarized in the table below.In general,there is opportunity to improve communication of the program to increase community awareness. Survey Summary Question Response (Feb 2015) Aware of consideration to move to clear bags Yes 71%,No 29% Aware of protection of privacy using opaque grocery bag Yes 66%,No 34% Aware of unlimited set out of clear bags that comply (no limit) Yes 35%,No 65% Aware that enforcement will be similar to current practice for blue and green bins Yes 54%,No 46% Aware that diversion could increase by up to 10%Yes 39%,No 61% Aware that energy from waste facility in Durham is where much of our waste will go and the importance of keeping unsuitable materials out of the garbage Yes 35%,No 75% Do you support transition of clear bag Yes 24%,No 76% General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday,March 3,2015 Item 5 Page -9 -36 - March 3,2014 -10 -Report No.IES15-014 Public Open House further identified need to continue with public education and awareness A public information meeting was held on February 9 from 5:00 to 7:00 pm with a total estimated attendance of 60 residents.Residents who were concerned about the program were generally satisfied or in support of the program once made aware of program details.Common concerns were: Privacy and limit of 3 opaque bags within clear bag.This has been addressed through allowing an unlimited amount of opaque (used grocery bags)within the clear bag Use of garbage cans.Some residents don’t use bags and were concerned that the program would mandate use of clear bags.The continued use of garbage cans is acceptable as this will still allow limited inspection.The benefit of not using any bag is greater than the risk of non-collectible material being placed in the garbage cans. Costs and availability of clear bags-The clear bags would not cost any more than black bags and retailers have been engaged to transition to clear bag inventory once the program is approved. Disposal of broken glass-Some reported placing broken glass in craft bags to protect the driver from injury.This practice is acceptable and understandable. Issues with non -collection due to presents of craft or paper bags will be considered by the drivers and addressed appropriately. Enforcement-The program would be enforced no differently than the current practice for blue box and green bin compliance.Any compliance issues would be communicated to the resident through a detailed Clear Bag Garbage “OOPS” sticker which would identify the reasons for non-collection.Any disputes can be channeled back to the Town for consideration.The intent is to educate the residents on acceptable material to ensure proper collection is achieved,and not to avoid collection which only increases resident frustration. It is recommended that public education and awareness continue through to the end of 2015 as the program transitions from voluntary start to full transition.In addition,staff will conduct two additional surveys and open-house events.One will be targeted in advance of the voluntary start date of June 5 and the second will be in advance of the full transition date planned for October 19.The focus of these events will be to gauge community support and ensure appropriate messaging is occurring.The results of these events will be reported to Council prior to launch dates. Program benefits and staff ability to address majority of resident concerns warrant continued support in proceeding with clear bag program Based on the options consider to increase diversion through improved waste management and the community response once adequate information is provided,it is recommended that the Town continue with implementation of a clear bag program. General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday,March 3,2015 Item 5 Page -10 -37 - March 3,2014 -11 -Report No.IES15-014 A Benefits Dependency Analysis is attached as Appendix A and provides a graphical representation of how specific projects relate to waste reduction and ties those back to the stated strategic priorities Program voluntary start of June 5,2015 to coincide with the United Nations Environment Day Pending Council Approval,staff will initiate retailer preparations and continued program media communications to prepare of a launch date of June 5.Early approval of the program will provide sufficient time to allow retailers to transition their stock from black opaque bags to clear bags as well as provide residents time to use up their existing inventory of black bags. LINK TO STRATEGIC PLAN Promoting and advancing green initiatives:through the use of effective education and promotion,staff will encourage increased diversion of recoverable and recyclable materials as new provisions of the By-law are implemented. ALTERNATIVE(S)TO THE RECOMMENDATIONS As directed by Council. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS A consulting assignment to VisionQuest Environmental was awarded in January 15, 2014 at a value of $33,900.This assignment will continue to support the transition through to the fall of 2015.There are not expected to be any other Town costs related to the program. An application was made to the Continuous Improvement Fund for waste program grants.The Town was successful in receiving a grant for $15,264 to go towards implementation of a clear bag program. CONCLUSIONS The concept of a clear bag program to encourage increased diversion of recyclable materials has been before Council since January 2014. Public consultation has occurred through the fall and winter of 2014/2015 with the result that the majority of residents are in support of the program once made aware of the specific aspects of the program.In particular,residents’concerns were focused on privacy,cost,and enforcement which in most cases were addressed once staff were given an opportunity to fully describe the program. General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday,March 3,2015 Item 5 Page -11 -38 - General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, March 3,2015 Item 5 Page -12 -39 - March 3, 2014 ~ 12-Report No. IES15~014 As improvement opportunities for public awareness have become evident , staff are recommending an ongoing education program. Community engagement will also be undertaking through two additional open houses and two additional community surveys. These will be conducted in advance of both the voluntary start and full transition start dates planned for the spring and fall of 2015. PREVIOUS REPORTS January 14, 2014-IES14-006-Implementation of a Clear Bag Waste Program February 4, 2014-IES14-008-Solid Waste By-law Update May 20, 2014-IES14-026-Solid Waste By-Law Update and Clear Bag Status September 16, 2014 -IES14-050 -Integrated Waste Management Master Plan Update ATTACHMENTS Appendix "A" -Benefits Dependency Analysis PRE-SUBMISSION REVIEW Executive Leadership Team meeting of February 19, 2015 Prepared by: //mar Simanovskis, Director, Infrastructure & Environmental Services -Ext. 4371 1!6tar Simanovskis Director of Infrastructure & Environmental Services Neil Garbe Chief Administrative Officer General Committee Meeting AgendaTuesday, March 3,2015 Item 5 Page -13 -40 -(WHY)~ Benefits Dependency Analysis ¢:::JC HOW) Deliverable/project/enabler Implement Clear Bag program Business Change Increase curbside waste audits Implement bag tag 14!1 I \ I I >I Enc~urag.e more. use l4l C:::::::: , -program \ of d1vers1on options \ Reduce frequency of garbage collection days Increase education and awareness for I-. :::::::::: public I ./ __./"7 \. ../\./ Increase enforcement ""'~ \ se visibility of*'-/ \.;---I Improve customer I •--' \ " waste streams response messaging I ""-\ '\ / "' / -Increase social accountability Benefit Minimize overall collection costs Strategic Objective Reduce total weight I collection ~-------------......,_.! of curb side 1 L__ ____ _j / I_ --Maximize MRF capacity and investment Increase WOO Increased worker safety Reduce risk of environmental impacts due to contamination r----Reduce operating costs related to sorting/tagging Increase diversion )> , i ::J Q. )C' )> GENERAL COMMITTEE REPORT No.LLS15-011 SUBJECT:Questions on the Ballot –2014 Municipal Election Results FROM:Warren Mar,Director of Legal &Legislative Services/Town Solicitor DATE:February 3,2015 RECOMMENDATIONS THAT Report No.LLS15-011 be received;and THAT Council provide direction with respect to the 2014 Municipal Election Questions on the Ballot. PURPOSE OF THE REPORT To provide Council with information on the results of voting on the Questions on the Ballot from the 2014 Municipal Election,and to seek Council direction on the next steps (if any)that Council wishes to take in response to the results. BACKGROUND In accordance with the provisions of clause 8(1)(b)of the Municipal Elections Act,1996, S.O.1996,c.32,Sched,as amended (the “Elections Act”),Council passed By-law Number 5612-14 on April 22,2014,to submit two (2)questions to the electors of the Town of Aurora at the 2014 Municipal Election.The two (2)approved questions were as follows: 1.“Are you in favour of electing all Aurora councillors,other than the Mayor,by ward vote instead of general Town-wide vote?” 2.“Are you in favour of reducing the number of Aurora councillors,other than the Mayor,from eight (8)councillors to six (6)councillors?” Both questions appeared on the ballots for the 2014 Municipal Election held on October 27,2014.In accordance with the provisions of clause 55(4)(b)of the Elections Act,the Town Clerk declared the results of the Voting on the Questions on the Ballot on October 30,2014 (Attachment 1).The certified results of the voting on the Questions on the Ballot are as follows: TOWN OF AURORA General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday,March 3,2015 Item 6 Page -1 -41 - March 3,2015 -2 -Report No.LLS15-011 QUESTION #1 Are you in favour of electing all Aurora councillors,other than the Mayor,by ward vote instead of general Town-wide vote? YES 5,512 45.25% NO 6,670 54.75% Total 12,182 100% QUESTION #2 Are you in favour of reducing the number of Aurora councillors,other than the Mayor,from eight (8)councillors to six (6)councillors? YES 8,060 64.55% NO 4,427 35.45% Total 12,487 100% The Town Clerk has also certified that that the total number of eligible electors in the October 27,2014 Municipal election was 37,123. COMMENTS Section 8.2 of the Municipal Elections Act Under subsection 8.2(1)of the Elections Act,the results of a question authorized by a by-law are binding on the municipality if at least 50%of eligible electors in the municipality vote on the question. The implication of subsection 8.2(1)is that the results of a question authorized by a by- law are not binding on a municipality if less than 50%of eligible electors in the municipality vote on the question.As such,if voter turnout is less than 50%of the eligible electors,then the results of the referendum are not binding on the municipality, and Council would be free to proceed on the matter as it chooses. Section 8.3 of the Municipal Elections Act Under clause 8.3(1)(a)of the Elections Act,if the results of a question authorized by a General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday,March 3,2015 Item 6 Page -2 -42 - March 3,2015 -3 -Report No.LLS15-011 by-law are binding on the municipality in the affirmative,then the municipality shall do everything in its power to implement the results of the question in a timely manner (this means,pursuant to subsection 8.3(2),placing the necessary action before Council between 14 and 180 days after voting day). Finally,under clause 8.3(1)(b)of the Elections Act,if the results of a question authorized by a by-law are binding on the municipality in the negative,the municipality shall not do anything within its jurisdiction to implement the matter which was the subject of the question for a period of four (4)years following voting day. Analysis of Question #1 (Introduce Wards)Voting Results Of the voters who voted on Question #1,the majority voted “No”to electing Councillors, other than the Mayor,by ward vote instead of general Town-wide vote.The Total number of voters who voted “No”was 6,670 or 54.75%.The total number of voters who voted “Yes”was 5,512 voters or 45.25%. The total number of voters who voted on Question #1 was 12,182 voters out of 37,123 eligible voters.This means that only 32.82%of eligible voters voted on the question and the results are therefore not binding on Council in view of the provisions of section 8.2 of the Elections Act.As such Council has the discretion to: 1.Implement a ward system to elect Councillors,other than the Mayor;or 2.Not implement a Ward system to elect Councillors. If Council chooses to exercise its discretion to implement a ward system (Option #1),it is recommended that staff be directed to report back on a process to develop and implement a ward system for the Town in time for the 2018 Municipal Election.If Council wishes to proceed with Option #1,it is also recommended that the following resolutions be introduced: THAT Council endorse the electing all Aurora councillors,other than the Mayor,by ward vote instead of general Town-wide vote;and THAT staff be directed to report back to Council on a process to be followed in dividing the Town into wards. If Council wishes not to proceed with introducing a ward system for electing Councillors in Aurora (Option #2),then it does not need to take any further action with regards to Question #1. Analysis of Question #2 (Reduce the Size of Council)Voting Results Of the voters who voted on Question #2 the majority voted “Yes”to reducing the number of Aurora councillors,other than the Mayor,from eight (8)councillors to six (6) councillors.The total number of voters who voted “Yes”was 8,060 or 64.55%.The total General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday,March 3,2015 Item 6 Page -3 -43 - March 3,2015 -4 -Report No.LLS15-011 number of voters who voted “No”was 4,427 voters or 35.45%. The total number of voters who voted on Question #2 was 12,487 voters out of 37,123 eligible voters.This means that only 33.64%of eligible voters voted on the question and the results are not binding on Council in accordance with the provisions of section 8.2 of the Elections Act.As such,in response to the voting results,Council may: 1.Reduce the size of Council by eliminating two (2)Councillor positions;or 2.Maintain the current size of Council as is. If Council chooses Option #1 to reduce the size of Council,it is recommended that the following resolutions be introduced: THAT the composition of the Council of The Corporation of the Town of Aurora be changed from nine (9)members to seven (7)members, comprised of one (1)Mayor,who shall be the Head of Council,and six (6) Councillors;and THAT the change in the composition of Council come into force following the next regular municipal election in accordance with the provisions of subsection 217(3)of the Municipal Act,2001;and THAT the necessary by-law be brought forward at the February 24,2015 meeting of Council for enactment to change the composition of Council for The Corporation of the Town of Aurora from nine (9)members to seven (7)members,comprised of one (1)Mayor,who shall be the Head of Council,and six (6)Councillors. Based on the provisions of section 217 of the Municipal Act,2001,to change the composition of Council in time for the next regular municipal election in 2018,the current Council need merely pass the necessary by-law on or before December 31, 2017.Council is authorized to pass any such by-law under the provisions of subsection 217(1)of the Municipal Act,2001.The only limitations on this authority are: “1.There shall be a minimum of five members,one of whom shall be the head of council. 2.The members of council shall be elected in accordance with the Municipal Elections Act,1996. 3.The head of council shall be elected by general vote. 4.The members,other than the head of council,shall be elected by general vote or wards or by any combination of general vote and wards. General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday,March 3,2015 Item 6 Page -4 -44 - March 3,2015 -5 -Report No.LLS15-011 5.The representation of a local municipality on the council of an upper-tier municipality shall not be affected by the by-law of the local municipality under this section.” Under subsection 217(3)of the Municipal Act,2001,a by-law passed under subsection 217(1)comes into force: “(a)after the first regular election following the passing of the by-law;or (b)if the by-law is passed in the year of a regular election before voting day,after the second regular election following the passing of the by- law.” If Council wishes not to proceed with reducing the size of Council in Aurora (Option #2), then it does not need to take any further action with regards to Question #2. LINK TO STRATEGIC PLAN Proceeding with a by-law to put two questions on the ballot for the 2014 municipal election achieved the objective of strengthening the fabric of our community by identifying new formats,methods and technologies to effectively and regularly engage the community. ALTERNATIVES TO THE RECOMMENDATIONS 1.Council may receive this report for information only and take no further action on the Questions on the Ballot at the 2014 Municipal Election. 2.Council may receive this report and direct staff to report back on a process to implement a ward system to elect members of Council AND reduce the size of Council from eight (8)Councillors to six (6)Councillors for the 2018 Municipal Election,in which case the following resolutions can be adopted: THAT report LLS15-011 be received;and THAT Council endorse the electing all Aurora councillors,other than the Mayor,by ward vote instead of general Town-wide vote;and THAT staff be directed to report back to Council on a process to be followed in dividing the Town into wards;and THAT the composition of the Council of The Corporation of the Town of Aurora be changed from nine (9)members to seven (7)members, comprised of one (1)Mayor,who shall be the Head of Council,and six (6) General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday,March 3,2015 Item 6 Page -5 -45 - March 3,2015 -6 -Report No.LLS15-011 Councillors;and THAT the change in the composition of Council come into force following the next regular municipal election in accordance with the provisions of subsection 217(3)of the Municipal Act,2001;and THAT the necessary by-law be brought forward at the February 24,2015 meeting of Council for enactment to change the composition of Council for The Corporation of the Town of Aurora from nine (9)members to seven (7)members,comprised of one (1)Mayor,who shall be the Head of Council,and six (6)Councillors. 3.Council may receive this report and direct staff to report back on a process to only implement a ward system to elect members of Council for the 2018 Municipal Election,in which case the following resolutions can be adopted: THAT report LLS15-011 be received;and THAT Council endorse the electing all Aurora councillors,other than the Mayor,by ward vote instead of general Town-wide vote;and THAT staff be directed to report back to Council on a process to be followed in dividing the Town into wards. 4.Council may receive this report and reduce the size of Council from eight (8) Councillors to six (6)Councillors,in which case the following resolutions can be adopted: THAT report LLS15-011 be received;and THAT the composition of the Council of The Corporation of the Town of Aurora be changed from nine (9)members to seven (7)members, comprised of one (1)Mayor,who shall be the Head of Council,and six (6) Councillors;and THAT the change in the composition of Council come into force following the next regular municipal election in accordance with the provisions of subsection 217(3)of the Municipal Act,2001;and THAT the necessary by-law be brought forward at the February 24,2015 meeting of Council for enactment to change the composition of Council for The Corporation of the Town of Aurora from nine (9)members to seven (7)members,comprised of one (1)Mayor,who shall be the Head of General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday,March 3,2015 Item 6 Page -6 -46 - March 3,2015 -7 -Report No.LLS15-011 Council,and six (6)Councillors. As the Questions on the Ballot for the 2014 Municipal Election did not contemplate moving from part-time Councillors to full-time Councillors,this matter was not explored in this report.Should Council desire to make this change,it is recommended that staff be directed to provide a further report examining the process,physical space requirements,staffing options,and overall costs of implementing such a change. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS The cost of creating and implementing a ward system is estimated to be between $50,000 and $60,000 in one-time funding.These funds would be used to retain an expert/land planning economist to facilitate the ward boundary review process. Additional costs associated with creating a ward system may also be required for the purpose of defending any ward boundary by-law passed by Council before the Ontario Municipal Board.Additional communication costs will also be required for the 2018 municipal election.The effective implementation of a new ward system requires dedicated communication resources as part of the overall election communication strategy.If Council implements a ward system for the Town of Aurora,staff will review the election budget to determine if additional funding is required.If staff are unable to accommodate these increased expenses in the current election budget forecast,staff would be recommending an increase to the overall election budget in 2017. If Council chooses to reduce the size of Council from eight (8)Councillors to six (6),the Town would realize savings from the salaries and benefits currently paid to Members of Council.Based on the 2015 salary and benefits paid to Councillors,the annual savings to the Town are estimated to be at least $71,600,calculated as follows: Councillor’s Annual Salary $28,800 x 2 =$57,600 Councillor’s Annual Benefits $1,850 x 2 =$3,700 Councillor’s Annual Expenses $5,150 x 2 =$10,300 $71,600/year Additional minimal savings would be realized from reduced expenditure on ancillary items such as cell phones and business cards. CONCLUSIONS The results of the voting on the two (2)Questions on the Ballot at the 2014 Municipal Election are not binding on the Town.Council can therefore take no further action in respect to the Questions on the Ballot,or can exercise its discretion to implement a ward system to elect councillors and/or reduce the size of Council. General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday,March 3,2015 Item 6 Page -7 -47 - General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, March 3,2015 Item 6 Page - 8 -48 - March 3, 2015 -8-Report No. LLS15-011 ATTACHMENTS Attachment 1 -Certified Election Results , Questions on the Ballot PREVIOUS REPORTS 1. Report No. LLS14-13 -Determination of Two Questions on the Ballot, dated March 24, 2014 2 . Report No . LLS14-10-Two Questions on the Ballot, dated March 4, 2014 3 . Report No. CLS13-030-Question on the Ballot, dated November 5, 2013. PRE-SUBMISSION REVIEW Executive Leadership Team-January 22, 2015 Prepared by: Stephen M.A. Huycke, Town Clerk, ext. 4771 Warren Mar Director of Legal & Legislative Servicesnown Solicitor Neil Garbe Chief Administrative Officer Attachment 1 General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, March 3,2015 Item 6 Page - 9 -49 - AURORA VOTES CERTIFIED ELECTION RESULTS Questions on the Ballot Municipal Electipns Act, 1996, [s.55(4)(b)} I, Stephen M.A. Huycke, Town Clerk a·nd Returning Officer of The Cqrporation of the Town of Aurora do certify the number of votes cast as set out below with respect to the Questions on the Ballot in the Municipal Election held on Monday, October 27, 2014. Are you in favour of electing all Aurora councillors, other than the Mayor, by ward vote instead of general Town-wide vote? · 5,512 45.25% Are you in favour of reducing the number of Aurora councillors, other than the Mayor, from eight (8) councillors to six (6) councillors? YES 8,060 64.55% NO 4,427 35.45% Dated this 301h day of October, 2014 .. 11Page GENERAL COMMITTEE REPORT No.LLS15-012 SUBJECT:Civil Marriage Solemnization Services FROM:Warren Mar,Director of Legal &Legislative Services/Town Solicitor DATE:March 3,2015 RECOMMENDATIONS THAT Report No.LLS15-012 be received;and THAT the Town’s services be enhanced to include civil marriage solemnization services;and THAT a by-law to authorize the Town Clerk to provide civil marriage solemnization services be enacted;and THAT the fees for civil marriage solemnization services as set out in Report No. LLS15-012 be approved;and THAT a by-law be enacted to amend Schedule “C”of By-law Number 5680-15 (being the Town’s Fees and Charges By-law)to include fees for civil marriage solemnization services. PURPOSE OF THE REPORT To recommend enhancement of the Town’s services by providing civil marriage solemnization services,and to establish fees for the provision of those services. BACKGROUND Civil marriage solemnization services provide residents with a convenient local opportunity to enter into the legal state of matrimony without the need of attending a place of worship.Prior to 2004,civil marriage solemnization was only available from a Judge or Justice of the Peace.In 2004,in an effort to enhance access to civil marriage services and reduce the burden on the judiciary,the Government of Ontario filed regulatory changes to R.R.O.1990,Reg.738 under the Marriage Act,R.S.O.1990,c. M.3,as amended,(the “Act”)to provide municipal clerks the authority to solemnize civil marriages,as follows: TOWN OF AURORA General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday,March 3,2015 Item 7 Page -1 -50 - March 3,2015 -2 -Report No.LLS15-012 “1.1 For the purposes of subsection 24 (1)of the Act,the clerk of a local municipality is authorized to solemnize marriages under the authority of a licence.” Since 2004,municipalities have had the option to offer civil marriage services and to set fees to cover the cost of providing these services.Municipalities wanting to ‘opt-in’to the provision of civil marriage solemnization services are required by the Registrar General of Ontario to pass a by-law authorizing the municipal clerk to perform civil marriages. COMMENTS The need for civil marriage services by the residents of Aurora will likely grow as result of demographic shifts within the Town.According to the 2011 National Household Survey (conducted by Statistics Canada in conjunction with the 2011 Census)12,205 out of 52,385 persons in Aurora,or 25.2%,identify as having no religious affiliation.1 This compares to the 2001 Census where 6,980 out of 39,815 persons in Aurora,or 17.5%,identified as having no religious affiliation.2 Persons who have no religious affiliation,or for whom a particular religious service of their choosing is not readily available,require access to civil marriage solemnization services to enter into the legal state of marriage. As of 2014,all local municipalities in York Region,with the exception of Aurora,are providing civil marriage services.Aurora residents seeking civil marriage ceremonies are currently required to obtain these services from another municipality. Service Level Options The Act does not prescribe the location,dates or times for the providing civil marriage solemnization services.Municipalities are permitted to establish their own processes for providing these services,allowing them to respond to their own local needs. Many municipalities are using a broad range of options to provide civil marriage ceremonies.The service levels provided range from ceremonies being held every other Friday to every day of the year.The location for ceremonies also vary greatly from them being conducted in Council Chambers,dedicated municipal ‘chapels’or meeting rooms, or at off-site locations such as a banquet hall of in a resident’s backyard.In addition, some municipalities have expanded their service offering by hiring external contractors to conduct civil marriage ceremonies on behalf of the municipal clerk without any impact on other municipal operations.Table 1 outlines the location and dates of services currently offered in York Region. 1 Statistics Canada 2011National Household Survey (NHS)Profile,Aurora,Ontario 2 Statistics Canada ,2001 Census Profile,Aurora,Ontario General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday,March 3,2015 Item 7 Page -2 -51 - March 3,2015 -3 -Report No.LLS15-012 Table 1 –York Region Civil Marriage Solemnization Service Levels Aurora Program and Service Level It is proposed that the Town Clerk be authorized to perform civil marriage solemnization. To accommodate any vacation periods,and other municipal business demands,the Clerk may also delegate the authority to perform civil marriages to other Town Staff (e.g.the Council/Committee Coordinator/Deputy Clerk)as permitted by the Act and the Municipal Act,2001. The proposed service level for 2015 will be the provision of up to two (2)civil marriage ceremonies every second Friday in the Council Chamber beginning in June or July. Availability and suitability of these times have already been discussed with Town facilities booking staff.Additional services and times during the first year of service may be made available subject to the demands of other municipal business.Following an initial roll-out period,staff will examine overall demand for the program and examine opportunities to enhance the program service levels for residents while not impacting the regular operations of the Town. Generally speaking,a couple wishing to use the Town’s proposed civil marriage solemnization services will be required to: 1.Reserve the ceremony time and date,subject to availability; 2.Attend a consultation meeting with the Town Clerk,or designate,two weeks prior to the reserved wedding date,at which time the couple will be required to: a.pay any required fees; b.provide the Marriage License required by the Act;and LOCATION DATES &TIMES Dedicated Room at Town Hall Offsite Business Hours Evening Weekend East Gwillimbury No (Council Chambers)No Friday 9 a.m.to 4 p.m.No No Georgina No (Council Chambers)Yes Daily Yes Yes King No (Council Chambers)No Fridays 12 to 3:30 p.m.No No Markham Yes (x 2)Yes Daily 9 a.m.to 4 p.m.Yes Yes Newmarket No (Council Chambers)No Weekdays 10 a.m.to 3 p.m.No No Richmond Hill No (Committee Room)No Fridays 10 a.m.to 3 p.m.No No Vaughan Yes No Weekdays 9 a.m.to 4 p.m.No No Whitchurch- Stouffville No (Council Chambers)No Fridays 9 a.m.to 4 p.m.No No General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday,March 3,2015 Item 7 Page -3 -52 - March 3,2015 -4 -Report No.LLS15-012 c.select the ceremony script. Ceremonies themselves will generally be 15 to 25 minutes in length,and couples will be required to provide two (2)witnesses. Proposed Fees Staff propose the adoption of a base fee of $250.00 (excluding tax)per civil marriage solemnization service provided.This fee would include the use of the Council Chamber (or another appropriate facility inside Town Hall).The proposed base fee is in the mid- range of those charged by the other York Region municipalities,which range from a low $189.00 for a ceremony in the City of Markham’s Wedding Room (10 persons,standing room only)to $400.00 in the Town of Newmarket.Table 2 outlines the fees payable for wedding services in York Region including any additional facility rental fee (fees do not including the cost of a marriage license,which is a separate requirement under the Act). Table 2 –Civil Marriage Services Fees in York Region In addition to the base fee of $250.00,staff are also proposing the adoption of additional fees to address administrative needs of the program and future possible enhancements to the service.The full list of proposed fees is included in Table 3.A by-law to amend Schedule “C”of the Town’s Fees and Charges By-law will need to be passed to implement these new fees. 2015 Fee H.S.T.Total Fee East Gwillimbury $250.00 $32.50 $282.50 Georgina: Business Hours $200.00 $26.00 $226.00 After Hours $300.00 $39.00 $339.00 King $259.50 $33.74 $293.24 Markham: Wedding Room (10 person maximum)$189.00 $24.57 $213.57 Wedding Chapel (ceremony and facility rental)$377.50 $49.08 $427.30 Newmarket $400.00 $52.00 $452.00 Richmond Hill $300.00 $39.00 $339.00 Vaughan $300.00 $39.00 $339.00 Whitchurch-Stouffville $287.00 $37.31 $324.31 General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday,March 3,2015 Item 7 Page -4 -53 - March 3,2015 -5 -Report No.LLS15-012 Table 3 –Proposed Aurora Fees for Civil Marriage Ceremonies Description of Service for Fee or Service Charge Unit of Measure Fee (excluding tax) H.S.T. Total Fee (including tax) CIVIL MARRIAGE SERVICES Civil Marriage Solemnization Fee during regular business (fee includes the use of a Town Hall facility only,other Town facility rental fees may apply ) per service $250.00 $32.50 $282.50 Civil Marriage Solemnization Fee outside regular business hours per service $350.00 $45.50 $395.50 Witness Fee per witness $50.00 $6.50 $56.50 Rehearsal Fee for offsite Civil Marriage ceremony per service $75.00 $9.75 $84.75 Administrative Fee to be charged for change of wedding date within 7 days of scheduled ceremony $50.00 $6.50 $56.50 Administrative Fee to be charged for cancellation of Civil Marriage ceremony before consultation meeting $50.00 $6.50 $56.50 Administrative Fee to be charged for cancellation of Civil Marriage ceremony after consultation meeting $125.00 $16.25 $141.25 LINK TO STRATEGIC PLAN Implementing civil marriage solemnization services achieved the objective of supporting an exceptional quality of life for all by investing in sustainable infrastructure that promotes the adaptability and flexibility of services to respond to demographic shifts. ALTERNATIVE TO THE RECOMMENDATIONS Council may choose not to implement civil marriage solemnization services for the General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday,March 3,2015 Item 7 Page -5 -54 - General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, March 3,2015 Item 7 Page - 6 -55 - March 3, 2015 -6-Report No. LLS15-012 Town of Aurora at this time. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS The 2015 Legal & Legislative Services draft operating budget includes estimated revenue from civil marriage solemnization service in the amount of $3,000.00. This amount is equal to the provision of 12 civil marriage ceremonies in 2015 (at the base cost of $250.00 per service). The Town will not incur any direct on-going operating costs as a result of the provision of civil marriage solemnization services. It is anticipated that that the Town will need to acquire minimal decorative elements (e .g . silk floral pieces and arrangement) to help transform Town facilities to suit the festivities. Any expense will be minimal and recoverable within the Legal & Legislative Services operating budget. CONCLUSIONS It is recommended that Council, in recognition of the changing demographics of the Town, enhance the level of services provided to residents by offering civil marriage solemnization services. ATTACHMENTS None PRE-SUBMISSION REVIEW Executive Leadership Team-February 19, 2015 p,w::sre::A. Huycke, ro~2(~ Warren Mar Director of Legal & Legislative Servicesffown Solicitor Neil Garbe Chief Administrative Officer MEMORANDUM DATE:March 3,2015 TO:Members of Council FROM:Mayor Geoffrey Dawe RE:Finance Advisory Committee Member Appointments RECOMMENDATION: THAT the memorandum regarding Finance Advisory Committee Member Appointments be received;and THAT the following Members of Council be appointed to the Finance Advisory Committee: Mayor Geoffrey Dawe Councillor Harold Kim Councillor Michael Thompson BACKGROUND: On December 16,2014 Council considered and adopted the following motion: THAT a Finance Advisory Committee be established for the current Term of Council and that the draft Terms of Reference,which were developed in consultation with the Director of Corporate and Financial Services/Treasurer to reflect the current needs of the Corporation and Council,be approved. ATTACHMENT: Attachment 1 -Finance Advisory Committee –Draft Terms of Reference Town of Aurora Office of the Mayor General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday,March 3,2015 Item 8 Page -1 -56 - Finance Advisory Committee –Revised Draft Terms of Reference 1 of 2 TOWN OF AURORA FINANCE ADVISORY COMMITTEE (Revised Draft)TERMS OF REFERENCE 1.PURPOSE The primary function of the Finance Advisory Committee is to assist Council and the Corporation in fulfilling its fiscal responsibilities by reviewing and recommending on the long range corporate financial planning process;capital planning initiatives and fiscal policy matters. The Committee mandate shall include proactive advance input into the annual budgeting processes with a view to enhancing reporting and analysis mechanisms to ensure we are delivering values programs and services in the most effective and efficient manner. 2.MEMBERSHIP The Committee shall be composed of three (3)Councillors. As part of its mandate the Committee shall also cultivate a consultative advisory group comprised of community members who have financial qualifications and experience within the public/private sector (i.e.,Chief Financial Officer or Vice President Finance)from which it will periodically obtain input with respect to specific projects or initiatives. 3.TERM The Committee shall hold office for a term of four years concurrent with the term of Council. 4.REMUNERATION None Attachment 1 General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday,March 3,2015 Item 8 Page -2 -57 - Finance Advisory Committee –Revised Draft Terms of Reference 2 of 2 5.DUTIES AND FUNCTIONS The Committee shall review and make recommendations to Council in the following areas: •long-range,corporate financial planning policy/process that would enhance the long-term financial health of the Corporation •the annual capital and operating budget process and financial reporting process to enhance: 1.the higher level policy decision-making role of Council 2.the existing reporting/analysis tools to assist Council’s decision-making process 3.the timing and extent of public participation in the process •the business practices of the organization,identifying opportunities that would increase effectiveness and efficiencies •fiscal policy matters •the annual performance measures report to the Province,noting the relative position of Aurora with comparator municipalities in the designated categories •undertake other assignments as may be requested by Council from time to time. 6.MEETING TIMES AND LOCATIONS The Committee shall meet in the Council Chambers starting at either 9:00 a.m. or 1:00 p.m.at the call of the Chair,four times per year,or as otherwise required by the Committee. 7.STAFF SUPPORT Technical support shall be provided by the CAO and the Director of Corporate &Financial Services -Treasurer.The Legal &Legislative Services Department shall provide administrative support services to the Committee. 8.AGENDAS Agendas are set by the Director in consultation with the Chair. General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday,March 3,2015 Item 8 Page -3 -58 - MEMORANDUM DATE:March 3,2015 TO:Members of Council FROM:Mayor Geoffrey Dawe RE:Proposed Revision to the Council Meeting Calendar RECOMMENDATION THAT the memorandum regarding Proposed Revision to the Council Meeting Calendar be received;and THAT the Council meeting currently scheduled on Tuesday,May 12,2015 be rescheduled to Monday,May 11,2015 at 7:00 p.m.to accommodate the 2015 York Regional Police Appreciation Night. BACKGROUND The Police Appreciation Night Dinner began 23 years and is an annual fundraising event attended by several municipal delegates and representatives from across York Region including the Town of Aurora. I am requesting Council consider rescheduling the May 12th Council meeting to accommodate attendance at the 23rd Annual Police Appreciation Night. As the York Regional Police are headquartered in Aurora,I feel attending this evening is an appropriate way to show our support. Town of Aurora Office of the Mayor General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday,March 3,2015 Item 9 Page -1 -59 - NOTICE OF MOTION Councillor Harold Kim Date:March 3,2015 To:Mayor and Members of Council From:Councillor Kim Re:Multicultural Festival WHEREAS the Town of Aurora was recently ranked the best place to live in York Region and one of the top 25 places to live in Canada;and WHEREAS Aurora is striving to be one of the healthiest communities in Canada;and WHEREAS Aurora is quickly becoming a multicultural town;and WHEREAS new homes in the 2C lands in the north-east section of Town are quickly selling out and bringing in up to 12,000 people from diverse backgrounds;and WHEREAS it is critical that we welcome and engage new residents and share with them the rich culture and history of Aurora,along with its spirit of volunteerism in which Aurora was built;and WHEREAS Aurora has validated its enjoyment and appreciation of history,culture,and food by the successful events sponsored by the Aurora Cultural Centre,Aurora Historical Society,and the Town of Aurora events such as:Ribfest,Aurora Chamber Street Festival,Magna Wild Wild West Hoedown,and Jazz Festival,which have been roaring successes;and WHEREAS supporting food,culture,and diversity in itself supports Aurora’s Strategic Plan objectives of “Supporting an exceptional quality of life for all,”which in turn attracts people and businesses;and WHEREAS the Town of Richmond Hill has held the highly successful multicultural festival “Tastes of the Hill”for the past eight (8)years and counting;celebrating the rich cultural diversity of its community via the many international foods,arts and crafts, sports and entertainment showcased at the event;and generating funds for local charities;and WHEREAS understanding our neighbours’food and culture is an excellent way to get to know one another and bring the community closer together. NOW THEREFORE BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED THAT staff be directed to investigate and report back to Council on the potential for Aurora to hold a multicultural festival similar to those of other York Region Municipalities with a timeline of an inaugural event to be held sometime in 2016. General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday,March 3,2015 Notice of Motion (a)Page -1 -60 - TOWN OF AURORA ADDITIONAL ITEMS FOR GENERAL COMMITTEE MEETING Tuesday, March 3, 2015 7 p.m. Council Chambers  Delegation (a) Emily Stewart, representing residents on Cousins Drive Re: Item 3 – Report No. IES15-012 – Speeding Concerns on Cousins Drive and Multi-Way Stop Control Request at the Wells Street and Cousins Drive Intersection  Replacement pages for Item 6 (agenda pages 41 to 49) Re: Report No. LLS15-011 – Questions on the Ballot – 2014 Municipal Election Results DELEGATION REQUEST This Delegation Request form and any written submissions or background information for consideration by either Council or Committees of Council must be submitted to the Clerk’s office by the following deadline: 4:30 P.M. ON THE BUSINESS DAY PRIOR TO THE REQUESTED MEETING DATE COUNCIL/COMMITTEE/ADVISORY COMMITTEE DATE: March 3, 2015 SUBJECT: Item 3 – Speeding Concerns on Cousins Drive and Multi-Way Stop Control Request at the Wells Street and Cousins Drive Intersection NAME OF SPOKESPERSON: Emily Stewart NAME OF GROUP OR PERSON(S) BEING REPRESENTED (if applicable): Residents on Cousins Drive BRIEF SUMMARY OF ISSUE OR PURPOSE OF DELEGATION: We would like a 3 way stop sign installed at the corner of Cousins Drive and Wells Street for the safety of the people in the community. PLEASE COMPLETE THE FOLLOWING: Have you been in contact with a Town staff or Council member regarding your matter of interest? YES ☒ NO ☐ IF YES, WITH WHOM? Mayor Dawe DATE: Fall 2014 Legal and Legislative Services 905-727-3123 councilsecretariatstaff@aurora.ca Town of Aurora 100 John West Way, Box 1000 Aurora, ON L4G 6J1 GENERAL COMMITTEE REPORT No. LLS15-011 SUBJECT: Questions on the Ballot – 2014 Municipal Election Results FROM: Warren Mar, Director of Legal & Legislative Services/Town Solicitor DATE: March 3, 2015 RECOMMENDATIONS THAT Report No. LLS15-011 be received; and THAT Council provide direction with respect to the 2014 Municipal Election Questions on the Ballot. PURPOSE OF THE REPORT To provide Council with information on the results of voting on the Questions on the Ballot from the 2014 Municipal Election, and to seek Council direction on the next steps (if any) that Council wishes to take in response to the results. BACKGROUND In accordance with the provisions of clause 8(1)(b) of the Municipal Elections Act, 1996, S.O. 1996, c.32, Sched, as amended (the “Elections Act”), Council passed By-law Number 5612-14 on April 22, 2014, to submit two (2) questions to the electors of the Town of Aurora at the 2014 Municipal Election. The two (2) approved questions were as follows: 1. “Are you in favour of electing all Aurora councillors, other than the Mayor, by ward vote instead of general Town-wide vote?” 2. “Are you in favour of reducing the number of Aurora councillors, other than the Mayor, from eight (8) councillors to six (6) councillors?” Both questions appeared on the ballots for the 2014 Municipal Election held on October 27, 2014. In accordance with the provisions of clause 55(4)(b) of the Elections Act, the Town Clerk declared the results of the Voting on the Questions on the Ballot on October 30, 2014 (Attachment 1). The certified results of the voting on the Questions on the Ballot are as follows: TOWN OF AURORA March 3, 2015 - 2 - Report No. LLS15-011 QUESTION #1 Are you in favour of electing all Aurora councillors, other than the Mayor, by ward vote instead of general Town-wide vote? YES 5,512 45.25% NO 6,670 54.75% Total 12,182 100% QUESTION #2 Are you in favour of reducing the number of Aurora councillors, other than the Mayor, from eight (8) councillors to six (6) councillors? YES 8,060 64.55% NO 4,427 35.45% Total 12,487 100% The Town Clerk has also certified that that the total number of eligible electors in the October 27, 2014 Municipal election was 37,123. COMMENTS Section 8.2 of the Municipal Elections Act Under subsection 8.2(1) of the Elections Act, the results of a question authorized by a by-law are binding on the municipality if at least 50% of eligible electors in the municipality vote on the question. The implication of subsection 8.2(1) is that the results of a question authorized by a by- law are not binding on a municipality if less than 50% of eligible electors in the municipality vote on the question. As such, if voter turnout is less than 50% of the eligible electors, then the results of the referendum are not binding on the municipality, and Council would be free to proceed on the matter as it chooses. Section 8.3 of the Municipal Elections Act Under clause 8.3(1)(a) of the Elections Act, if the results of a question authorized by a March 3, 2015 - 3 - Report No. LLS15-011 by-law are binding on the municipality in the affirmative, then the municipality shall do everything in its power to implement the results of the question in a timely manner (this means, pursuant to subsection 8.3(2), placing the necessary action before Council between 14 and 180 days after voting day). Finally, under clause 8.3(1)(b) of the Elections Act, if the results of a question authorized by a by-law are binding on the municipality in the negative, the municipality shall not do anything within its jurisdiction to implement the matter which was the subject of the question for a period of four (4) years following voting day. Analysis of Question #1 (Introduce Wards) Voting Results Of the voters who voted on Question #1, the majority voted “No” to electing Councillors, other than the Mayor, by ward vote instead of general Town-wide vote. The Total number of voters who voted “No” was 6,670 or 54.75%. The total number of voters who voted “Yes” was 5,512 voters or 45.25%. The total number of voters who voted on Question #1 was 12,182 voters out of 37,123 eligible voters. This means that only 32.82% of eligible voters voted on the question and the results are therefore not binding on Council in view of the provisions of section 8.2 of the Elections Act. As such Council has the discretion to: 1. Implement a ward system to elect Councillors, other than the Mayor; or 2. Not implement a Ward system to elect Councillors. If Council chooses to exercise its discretion to implement a ward system (Option #1), it is recommended that staff be directed to report back on a process to develop and implement a ward system for the Town in time for the 2018 Municipal Election. If Council wishes to proceed with Option #1, it is also recommended that the following resolutions be introduced: THAT Council endorse the electing all Aurora councillors, other than the Mayor, by ward vote instead of general Town-wide vote; and THAT staff be directed to report back to Council on a process to be followed in dividing the Town into wards. If Council wishes not to proceed with introducing a ward system for electing Councillors in Aurora (Option #2), then it does not need to take any further action with regards to Question #1. Analysis of Question #2 (Reduce the Size of Council) Voting Results Of the voters who voted on Question #2 the majority voted “Yes” to reducing the number of Aurora councillors, other than the Mayor, from eight (8) councillors to six (6) councillors. The total number of voters who voted “Yes” was 8,060 or 64.55%. The total March 3, 2015 - 4 - Report No. LLS15-011 number of voters who voted “No” was 4,427 voters or 35.45%. The total number of voters who voted on Question #2 was 12,487 voters out of 37,123 eligible voters. This means that only 33.64% of eligible voters voted on the question and the results are not binding on Council in accordance with the provisions of section 8.2 of the Elections Act. As such, in response to the voting results, Council may: 1. Reduce the size of Council by eliminating two (2) Councillor positions; or 2. Maintain the current size of Council as is. If Council chooses Option #1 to reduce the size of Council, it is recommended that the following resolutions be introduced: THAT the composition of the Council of The Corporation of the Town of Aurora be changed from nine (9) members to seven (7) members, comprised of one (1) Mayor, who shall be the Head of Council, and six (6) Councillors; and THAT the change in the composition of Council come into force following the next regular municipal election in accordance with the provisions of subsection 217(3) of the Municipal Act, 2001; and THAT the necessary by-law be brought forward at the March 31, 2015 meeting of Council for enactment to change the composition of Council for The Corporation of the Town of Aurora from nine (9) members to seven (7) members, comprised of one (1) Mayor, who shall be the Head of Council, and six (6) Councillors. Based on the provisions of section 217 of the Municipal Act, 2001, to change the composition of Council in time for the next regular municipal election in 2018, the current Council need merely pass the necessary by-law on or before December 31, 2017. Council is authorized to pass any such by-law under the provisions of subsection 217(1) of the Municipal Act, 2001. The only limitations on this authority are: “1. There shall be a minimum of five members, one of whom shall be the head of council. 2. The members of council shall be elected in accordance with the Municipal Elections Act, 1996. 3. The head of council shall be elected by general vote. 4. The members, other than the head of council, shall be elected by general vote or wards or by any combination of general vote and wards. March 3, 2015 - 5 - Report No. LLS15-011 5. The representation of a local municipality on the council of an upper-tier municipality shall not be affected by the by-law of the local municipality under this section.” Under subsection 217(3) of the Municipal Act, 2001, a by-law passed under subsection 217(1) comes into force: “(a) after the first regular election following the passing of the by-law; or (b) if the by-law is passed in the year of a regular election before voting day, after the second regular election following the passing of the by- law.” If Council wishes not to proceed with reducing the size of Council in Aurora (Option #2), then it does not need to take any further action with regards to Question #2. LINK TO STRATEGIC PLAN Proceeding with a by-law to put two questions on the ballot for the 2014 municipal election achieved the objective of strengthening the fabric of our community by identifying new formats, methods and technologies to effectively and regularly engage the community. ALTERNATIVE S TO THE RECOMMENDATIONS 1. Council may receive this report for information only and take no further action on the Questions on the Ballot at the 2014 Municipal Election. 2. Council may receive this report and direct staff to report back on a process to implement a ward system to elect members of Council AND reduce the size of Council from eight (8) Councillors to six (6) Councillors for the 2018 Municipal Election, in which case the following resolutions can be adopted: THAT report LLS15-011 be received; and THAT Council endorse the electing all Aurora councillors, other than the Mayor, by ward vote instead of general Town-wide vote; and THAT staff be directed to report back to Council on a process to be followed in dividing the Town into wards; and THAT the composition of the Council of The Corporation of the Town of Aurora be changed from nine (9) members to seven (7) members, comprised of one (1) Mayor, who shall be the Head of Council, and six (6) March 3, 2015 - 6 - Report No. LLS15-011 Councillors; and THAT the change in the composition of Council come into force following the next regular municipal election in accordance with the provisions of subsection 217(3) of the Municipal Act, 2001; and THAT the necessary by-law be brought forward at the March 31, 2015 meeting of Council for enactment to change the composition of Council for The Corporation of the Town of Aurora from nine (9) members to seven (7) members, comprised of one (1) Mayor, who shall be the Head of Council, and six (6) Councillors. 3. Council may receive this report and direct staff to report back on a process to only implement a ward system to elect members of Council for the 2018 Municipal Election, in which case the following resolutions can be adopted: THAT report LLS15-011 be received; and THAT Council endorse the electing all Aurora councillors, other than the Mayor, by ward vote instead of general Town-wide vote; and THAT staff be directed to report back to Council on a process to be followed in dividing the Town into wards. 4. Council may receive this report and reduce the size of Council from eight (8) Councillors to six (6) Councillors, in which case the following resolutions can be adopted: THAT report LLS15-011 be received; and THAT the composition of the Council of The Corporation of the Town of Aurora be changed from nine (9) members to seven (7) members, comprised of one (1) Mayor, who shall be the Head of Council, and six (6) Councillors; and THAT the change in the composition of Council come into force following the next regular municipal election in accordance with the provisions of subsection 217(3) of the Municipal Act, 2001; and THAT the necessary by-law be brought forward at the March 31, 2015 meeting of Council for enactment to change the composition of Council for The Corporation of the Town of Aurora from nine (9) members to seven (7) members, comprised of one (1) Mayor, who shall be the Head of March 3, 2015 - 7 - Report No. LLS15-011 Council, and six (6) Councillors. As the Questions on the Ballot for the 2014 Municipal Election did not contemplate moving from part-time Councillors to full-time Councillors, this matter was not explored in this report. Should Council desire to make this change, it is recommended that staff be directed to provide a further report examining the process, physical space requirements, staffing options, and overall costs of implementing such a change. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS The cost of creating and implementing a ward system is estimated to be between $50,000 and $60,000 in one-time funding. These funds would be used to retain an expert/land planning economist to facilitate the ward boundary review process. Additional costs associated with creating a ward system may also be required for the purpose of defending any ward boundary by-law passed by Council before the Ontario Municipal Board. Additional communication costs will also be required for the 2018 municipal election. The effective implementation of a new ward system requires dedicated communication resources as part of the overall election communication strategy. If Council implements a ward system for the Town of Aurora, staff will review the election budget to determine if additional funding is required. If staff are unable to accommodate these increased expenses in the current election budget forecast, staff would be recommending an increase to the overall election budget in 2017. If Council chooses to reduce the size of Council from eight (8) Councillors to six (6), the Town would realize savings from the salaries and benefits currently paid to Members of Council. Based on the 2015 salary and benefits paid to Councillors, the annual savings to the Town are estimated to be at least $71,600, calculated as follows: Councillor’s Annual Salary $ 28,800 x 2 = $ 57,600 Councillor’s Annual Benefits $ 1,850 x 2 = $ 3,700 Councillor’s Annual Expenses $ 5,150 x 2 = $ 10,300 $ 71,600/year Additional minimal savings would be realized from reduced expenditure on ancillary items such as cell phones and business cards. CONCLUSIONS The results of the voting on the two (2) Questions on the Ballot at the 2014 Municipal Election are not binding on the Town. Council can therefore take no further action in respect to the Questions on the Ballot, or can exercise its discretion to implement a ward system to elect councillors and/or reduce the size of Council. March 3, 2015 -8-Report No. LLS15-011 ATTACHMENTS Attachment 1 -Certified Election Results, Questions on the Ballot PREVIOUS REPORTS 1. Report No. LLS 14-13 -Determination of Two Questions on the Ballot, dated March 24, 2014 2. Report No. LLS14-1 0-Two Questions on the Ballot, dated March 4, 2014 3. Report No. CLS13-030-Question on the Ballot, dated November 5, 2013. PRE-SUBMISSION REVIEW Executive Leadership Team-January 22, 2015 Prepared by: Stephen M.A. Huycke, Town Clerk, ext. 4771 Warren Mar Director of Legal & Legislative Servicesnown Solicitor Neil Garbe Chief Administrative Officer AURORA VOTES CERTIFIED· ELECTION RESULTS Questions on the Ballot Muni~ipal Electipns Act, 1996, [s.55(4)(ti)] I, Stephen M.A. Huycke, Town Clerk a·nd Returning Officer of The Cqrporation of the Town of Aurora do certify the number of votes cast as set out below with respect to the ·Questions on the Ballot in the Municipal Election held on Monday, October 27, 2014. Are you in favour of electing all Aurora councillors, other than the Mayor, by ward vote instead of general Town-wide vote? YES 5,512 45.25% Are you in favour of reducing the number of Aurora councillors; other than the Mayor, from eight (8) councillors to six (6) councillors? YES 8,060 64.5So/o NO 4,427 35.45o/o Dated this 30th day of. October, 2014 .. 11Page