The Corporation of the Municipality of St.-Charles AGENDA Committee of the Whole Meeting October 2, 2019 at 6:00 PM Council Chambers (Municipal Office) 1. MEETING CALLED TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL 1.1 Resolution to open the meeting BE IT RESOLVED THAT the Committee of the Whole meeting of October 2, 2019 be opened at 6:00 p.m. 2. ADOPTION OF AGENDA 2.1 Resolution to adopt the agenda BE IT RESOLVED THAT the agenda for the Committee of the Whole meeting of Council held October 2, 2019 be adopted as presented. 3. DISCLOSURES OF PECUNIARY INTEREST 4. PRESENTATIONS AND DELEGATIONS 5. ANNOUNCEMENTS AND INQUIRIES BY COUNCIL AND MEMBERS OF THE GENERAL PUBLIC 6. NOTICE OF MOTIONS 7. CLOSED SESSION 7.1 Resolution to enter into closed session BE IT RESOLVED THAT Council for the Corporation of the Municipality of St.-Charles hereby opens a closed session at ________ p.m. this 2nd day Page 1 of 48
48
Embed
The Corporation of the Municipality of St.-Charles AGENDA
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
The Corporation of the Municipality of St.-Charles
AGENDA
Committee of the Whole Meeting
October 2, 2019 at 6:00 PM
Council Chambers (Municipal Office)
1. MEETING CALLED TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL
1.1 Resolution to open the meeting BE IT RESOLVED THAT the Committee of the Whole meeting of October 2, 2019 be opened at 6:00 p.m.
2. ADOPTION OF AGENDA
2.1 Resolution to adopt the agenda BE IT RESOLVED THAT the agenda for the Committee of the Whole meeting of Council held October 2, 2019 be adopted as presented.
3. DISCLOSURES OF PECUNIARY INTEREST
4. PRESENTATIONS AND DELEGATIONS
5. ANNOUNCEMENTS AND INQUIRIES BY COUNCIL AND MEMBERS OF THE GENERAL PUBLIC
6. NOTICE OF MOTIONS
7. CLOSED SESSION
7.1 Resolution to enter into closed session BE IT RESOLVED THAT Council for the Corporation of the Municipality of St.-Charles hereby opens a closed session at ________ p.m. this 2nd day
Page 1 of 48
of October, 2019 to discuss:
____ personal matters about an identifiable individual, including municipal or local board employees, as authorized under Section 239 (2) (b) of the Municipal Act, 2001, as amended;
____ labour relations or employee negotiations, as authorized under Section 239 (2) (d) of the Municipal Act, 2001, as amended;
Topic: Treasury Department (Probation Period Review & Salary Negotiations)
7.2 Resolution to reconvene to open session BE IT RESOLVED THAT having dealt with all matters pertaining to the closed session, we hereby reconvene to the Committee of the Whole meeting at _______ p.m.
FYI a report has been made to MOE and Sudbury Public Health Unit regarding a new bloom found at the south side of
Musky Island on the 20th which grew worse over the weekend. Pictures will follow by separate emails.
I would like to hear back from the municipality as to what is being done to protect this water. Is there a water
management plan in place? Are there by laws for enforcement?
We are new to the St Charles West Arm location as cottagers in 2018. We found the water quality has been poor last
summer and this but the past weekend it was disgusting. We couldn't open the windows of the cottage it stunk so badly.
We can't swim, bathe, do dishes, drink the water or allow pets to go near the lake. This is not only cosmetically
displeasing to us, it is a serious health concern that we need to know is being addressed.
I have attached pictures for you to review. I would appreciate if you would immediately place this issue on the Council
agenda for action and for the record in your public meeting minutes. I am aware that many taxpayers and business
people in the St Charles municipality as well as the French River rely on the beautiful lakes for their livelihood and I find
it beyond reason that this has not been adequately addressed to protect this resource.
Please respond and provide any update on any work being done that you may be aware of or the municipality has
initiated. I did address this issue with candidates before the last municipal election who seemed to share this concern. I
do hope this is the case.
Karen Commandant
Sent from my iPhone
1
Page 4 of 48
Page 5 of 48
Page 6 of 48
I r Page 7 of 48
Page 8 of 48
Report to Municipal Council Meeting Date: October 02, 2019
Report Date: September 27, 2019
Decision Requested: Information
Priority: Quarterly Report
Direction Only: yes
Type of Meeting: Regular
Report Title: Director of Finance Update
Background: Update/Progress Report request for Council.
Summary of October 2019 Quarterly Report:
I have been maintaining high levels of communications with the CAO, Staff, Collins
Barrow‐Bookkeeper, and ICity for the Finance Department for the Municipality of St.
Charles.
Payroll Module
Payroll Module ICity software is set‐up accordingly:
Remittances have been monitored for 2019 and is in order.
Payroll procedures and check list draft is completed, requires review and
procedures to be created by an HR Firm ‐In progress.
Recommended is to provide a least once a year workshop/training for
Payroll Clerk.
Purchase Order Module
Purchase Order Module ICity Software is set‐up accordingly and was implemented as of
Jan.2019. Pending are:
Change the Payable Policy. Bring down the up‐to $1000 down to $0.00
purchase tolerance. Ensuring record of the committed value in our books.
Amending recommended. Still Pending Requires an HR Firm‐In Progress.
Page 9 of 48
- 2 -
Management have Credit Cards if emergency purchases is required after
hours. Emergency to be determined and limit purchases to be
determined. Zero tolerance for personal purchases regardless of
personal emergency reason.
o The Credit Card statements are available monthly, therefore will
be informed of that expense within that month.
o As for the purchases with no PO for all under $1,000 we might not
know the amounts till months later; and expenditure can easily go
over the budget.
o Waiting for directions from CAO.
Prior to amending Policy need Councils input; will require to send a letter
to all current vendors to notify of the update.
Committee of the Whole Meeting required.
Waiting for directions from CAO.
Accounts Payable Module
Account Payable Module with ICity software was not used at full capacity. Director of
Finance ensuring that the step‐by‐step procedure is being followed verbally as written
procedures is being developed in the process. Required is a HR Firm assisting with
developing Procedures from scratch.
Retrait system payments/withdrawals‐cheques are kept in my office.
Retrait system payment will be terminated; and ICity software will be
implemented. –Attempted to implement although: Caisse Alliance not
compatible with system. Discussion required for services.
Monitoring/Training employee with AP Module: ensuring reading of
invoice; ensuring allocation in proper month or period expenses; ensuring
accurate HST calculations, ensuring no late payments.
Accounts Payable (AP) procedures and check list verbally only,
supervision step‐by‐step is provided to AP Clerk. Ongoing progress for the
written procedures and check list. Priority High.
There are 4 types of payments:
o Retrait Files: Files uploaded at the Bank Level includes OMERS,
Page 10 of 48
- 3 -
Union, and all staff expenses reimbursements. Once a month or
when required.
o PAP: Pre‐Authorised Payments automatic payments coming out of
the Municipality Bank Accounts: Hydro, Bell, Printer Contract
Services, Bank Charges, Loans, Great Westlife. Recorded after
Bank Statement is available.
o Online Banking: Going into Bank Account to pay bills online:
Rogers and MasterCard, Remittances. Recorded once a month
towards the end of the month
o Biweekly Cheques: every two weeks cheques payment are
processed for all other vendors.
Property Tax Module
Discrepancies with payments received and not recorded and/or recorded
payments not received.
Tax Module has been in balance for 2019 as of January 2019.
School Board owing/ due was reconciled and completed this month:
From 2018 Year end up to September 30.2019. Payment and report was
completed.
2018 Financial Audit
Based on findings discrepancies are repetitive.
Action Discussion required to hire HR firm to create, implement Procedures and Roles.
Discussion for reserves. Equity not matching with Bank Account Balances. Discussion of Credit Card and PO limits.
Prepared by: Rosa Roussel Approved by:
Page 11 of 48
Report to Municipal Council Meeting Date: October 2, 2019
Report Date: September 27, 2019
Decision Requested: Yes
Priority: High
Direction Only: Yes
Type of Meeting: COW
Report Title: Tax Module
Recommendation: Recommend that council set an upset limit to enable staff to retain a consultant and that prior to awarding any contract that comparison quotes be researched if available for comparison. Background : Attached is a proposal from consultant to remedy the ongoing issues in the tax module. Below are clarifications to the proposal.
Note: There are no time frames for each project and no per hour for services to be rendered. What are the time frames per project? What is the hourly rate for services?
As previously mentioned, we have different rates for different Team Members: Accountant Oversight $125 Treasurer $75 Finance Support $25
Page 12 of 48
- 2 -
Note: Proposal does not include the travel cost: meals‐km‐lodging and no anticipated days of travel cost. What are the anticipated days for travel requirements? And what are your costs for meals‐km‐lodging?
o The above time considerations include travel time o Rate per km is $0.555 per kilometer o Lodging, if necessary, would be charged at cost of lodging (we do not anticipate
this to be necessary) o Where possible, travel will be combined with other work in the same area, thus
splitting travel costs (which is why we do not include travel costs) o The number of days is unknown until we have further information but is not
anticipated to be in excess of 5 days.
Note: Proposal is expected to be completed remote‐verification, therefore requiring providing of documents and coordinating work will be required by staff? Please confirm if correct, as it was discussed that it would require your presence at the office?
o The majority of work would be completed remotely but attendance in St Charles
would initially be required to discuss the issue and meet with officials from St Charles and potentially, the auditing firm. Our overall goal would be to minimize impact on staff workload. We have allocated time in our proposal to be onsite for perusal of original documents and the collection/copying of documents we may require. We have not included any “follow up” i.e. posting of Journal Entries which will be negotiated separately at the time if necessary.
Prepared by: Denis Turcot
Page 13 of 48
PROPOSAL TO
THE MUNICIPALITY OF ST. CHARLES
FOR
MUNICIPAL SUPPORT SERVICES RE:
TAXES RECEIVABLE AUDIT /
VADIM SOFTWARE REVIEW
Prepared By:
Peggy Young-Lovelace
E4m Consultant
Page 14 of 48
Expertise for Municipalities
Sudbury, Ontario
September 20, 2019 Corporation of the Municipality of St. Charles 2 King St E, PO Box 70 St.-Charles, ON P0M 2W0 Via Email – [email protected] Attention: Mr. Denis Turcot, Chief Administrative Officer Dear Denis:
RE: Taxes Receivable Audit / Vadim Software Review Thank you for the opportunity for Expertise for Municipalities (E4m) to provide you with this proposal. We trust it is sufficient for your current needs. For questions related to our submission please contact Peggy Young-Lovelace by phone at 705-863-3306 or by email at [email protected]. Warm Regards,
A group of like-minded thinkers recognized that the municipal sector in Rural and Rural
Northern Ontario is underserviced with respect to training and municipally related
services. The group also recognized that this same part of the sector, at times, lacks the
capacity (human and financial) to execute practices necessary to comply with legislation
and good governance. To that end, there was a desire to make a difference by giving
back to the sector. To accomplish this, they incorporated Expertise for Municipalities
(E4m) as a not-for-profit association (July 2017) to empower excellence in small
municipalities.
E4m believes in the following core principles:
a) That by providing “on the ground” support services to small municipalities, in all
aspects of the municipal operation, we can help municipalities with limited budgets
and few staff succeed in delivering mandatory services;
b) That by holding relevant conferences, meetings, or training sessions this segment
of the municipal sector will be strengthened through the professional development
of its elected officials, employees and volunteers;
c) That by assisting small municipalities with preparing presentations to government
and/or the private sector we can help them to deliver on and advocate for the
municipal mandate;
d) That by sharing information collected resulting from research carried out by E4m,
municipalities can be better equipped to address issues and solve problems;
e) That by promoting the principles of good municipal governance we can encourage
municipalities to achieve strength and sustainability through sound governmental
practices and public engagement; and
f) That we can give back to the municipal sector by transferring knowledge and
assisting to build capacity.
E4m is a network of municipal professionals with a wide array of competencies and
experiences who have a passion and commitment to providing small municipalities with
affordable professional services.
Page 16 of 48
Expertise for Municipalities
Sudbury, Ontario
Our Understanding of the Requirements We understand that the Municipality of St. Charles, its Mayor and Council have concerns with respect to the financial system of the Municipality. It is also our understanding that the municipal auditor, Collins Barrow could not offer an Unqualified Audit Opinion as at December 31, 2107. As a result, Collins Barrow submitted a Qualified Audit Opinion based on apparent anomalies with Taxes Receivable. The basis for the Qualified Opinion was presented and has been published as:
The Corporation of the Municipality of St.- Charles' taxes receivable is carried at $226,550 on the consolidated statement of financial position as at December 31, 2017. We were unable to obtain sufficient appropriate audit evidence about the amount of these taxes’ receivable as at December 31, 2017 because of significant discrepancies in comparison to the tax’s arrears listing. Consequently, we were unable to determine whether any adjustments might be necessary to taxes receivable, excess of revenues over expenditures, assets and accumulated surplus.
It would appear that the basis for the issues around the Taxes Receivable may be related to the VADIM accounting system. Our experience with VADIM and with other systems is that unreconcilable Taxes Receivable are rare due to the nature of the systems. We finally understand that the Municipality of St. Charles requires the following:
a) Reconciliation of the Taxes Receivable as at December 31, 2017 b) Reconciliation of the Taxes Receivable as at December 31, 2018 c) Reconciliation of the Taxes Receivable for each month in 2019. d) An assurance that the individual tax accounts are accurate e) An assurance that the controls are in place to avoid a similar
situation from occurring in the future f) An assurance that the VADIM accounting system was set-up as it
was intended.
Page 17 of 48
Expertise for Municipalities
Sudbury, Ontario
Audit Opinions While the Mayor, Council and Municipality Staff may have discussed the difference between a Qualified Audit Opinion and an Unqualified Audit Opinion, it is worth repeating here. An Unqualified Opinion – its Importance Professional auditing standards establish when it is appropriate for any auditor to express an “unqualified opinion” commonly referred to as a clean opinion. In an unqualified audit report, the auditors conclude that the financial statements of the
Municipality present fairly its affairs in all material aspects. Such a report implies that any
changes in the accounting policies, their application and effects, are adequately
determined and divulged. This opinion embodies the assumptions that a municipality
observed compliance with generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP) and statutory
requirements.
This communicates to financial statement users that they may have reasonable assurance that the financial statements are free of any material misstatement. This is the most common outcome and has some distinct advantages. It is important to keep in mind that the users of your financial statements include:
1. Municipal Council 2. The Province of Ontario and Canada 3. Your taxpayers 4. Banking Institution 5. Miscellaneous Market Lenders (i.e. the Ontario Infrastructure and Lands
Corporation) 6. Suppliers 7. Leaseholders 8. School Boards
An unqualified audit opinion will give these users and others all the confidence in the world to continue their relationship with you unabated.
Page 18 of 48
Expertise for Municipalities
Sudbury, Ontario
A Qualified Audit Opinion – Proceed with caution Professional standards also establish when a “qualified opinion” or in other words, a reservation is warranted for inclusion in the opinion. In the auditing profession, a qualified audit opinion is a rare occurrence in the public sector. It indicates to the users of the financial statements that some of the information is misleading or not auditable. When auditors issue a qualified opinion, they are communicating they have a major concern with the availability of sufficient and appropriate evidence or, The entity’s compliance with accounting standards (GAAP) or statutory requirements. An auditor may issue a qualified audit opinion when parts (but not all) of the financial statements are inaccurate or lack support (i.e. Taxes Receivable). The larger question then becomes, how does the Qualified Opinion affect the relationship with the list of users noted above? The quick and easy answer is; negatively. Qualified opinions can alter favourable terms from creditors, suppliers, your banking institution and other lenders. It sends the wrong message to the Province of Ontario, the Federal Government and School and can affect applications for grants from these organizations. Most importantly, a qualified opinion may bring serious questions from your ratepayers about the finances of the Municipality, their own tax accounts and a lack of required oversight by Council. A qualified opinion brings into question the credibility of the numbers. In the opinion of the auditor, this means that readers of the financial statements, such as the aforementioned public, elected officials and credit rating or lending agencies, cannot fully assess the fiscal situation using the Municipality’s financial statements for the year end of December 31, 2017. It is quite possible that the following may happen:
1. Your banking institution, who is provided a copy of your annual audited financial statements, will request a full explanation on why the audit was qualified.
2. Lenders or creditors may shy away from the Municipality if it is required to borrow funds for a major capital project, for example. This has been known to happen with the Ontario Infrastructure and Lands Corporation (OILC) who offer loans to municipalities at better than market rates.
3. Other creditors, such as your day to day vendors may require immediate payment of invoices as opposed to on a 30 or 60-day basis.
4. Should the media, both local and regional, decide that the qualification of your audit and the safety of the finances of the Municipality are a good story, you may find
Page 19 of 48
Expertise for Municipalities
Sudbury, Ontario
yourself in the “news” for the wrong reason. In today’s world of social media, that is a story that will never go away.
5. Lastly, your taxpayers will most assuredly want answers. They have entrusted you to run the community in their best interest and a problem with municipal finances will no doubt spurn local gossip and create an exponential number of questions. This could then take up valuable resources to address thus detracting for any progress you may have hoped for. In the end, taxpayers will want answers that are quick, simple and encouraging.
Importance of Transparency and Accountability The Municipality of St. Charles, for the purposes of this situation may want to take of notice of the requirements of the Municipal Act as follows: Section 224 says in part that it is the role of Council
(a) to represent the public and to consider the well-being and interests of the municipality
(d.1) to ensure the accountability and transparency of the operations of the municipality, including the activities of the senior management of the municipality
(e) to maintain the financial integrity of the municipality The Municipal Act also goes to talk about the adoption of required policies. Section 270 says in part that a municipality shall adopt and maintain policies with respect to:
(5) The manner in which the municipality will try to ensure that it is accountable to the public for its actions, and the manner in which the municipality will try to ensure that its actions are transparent to the public.
The public may see Accountability as a general principle that the Municipality is answerable to the public and responsible for their actions, decisions and policies. The Public may also see Transparency as a general principle that Municipality will operate in an accessible and visible manner and that their activities and decision making are open and clear to the public. It is part of the role of Council is to ensure the accountability and transparency of municipal operations. A municipality must adopt and maintain a policy that ensures these tenets.
Page 20 of 48
Expertise for Municipalities
Sudbury, Ontario
Balancing Transparency and Confidentiality It would be in the best interest of the Municipality of St. Charles to consider openness and transparency in the current situation. Of course, there may reasons that some information should be kept confidential such as; names or other identifying information. In this particular situation, Council will want to maintain confidentiality at all times, but also be in a position to discuss the situation in manner that is open and transparent – at the appropriate time. Our Proposed Workplan E4m understands that the concerns of the Municipality of St. Charles must be managed in the best interest of the Municipality itself, and the parties who have a stake in the outcome. Every project starts with a plan. Once the project starts to unfold, that plan will likely be tested in multiple ways - through unexpected questions and problems. The Goals Goal 1 To provide a measure of confidence to the Municipality of St Charles that its financial system is trustworthy and that the Taxes Receivable are accurate. In the course of this project we will want to fully reconcile the Taxes Receivable with a goal of avoiding another Qualified Audit and as follows:
• Reconciliation of the Taxes Receivable as at December 31, 2017
• Reconciliation of the Taxes Receivable as at December 31, 2018
• Reconciliation of the Taxes Receivable for each month in 2019 (if necessary). Goal 2 To provide assuredness to the Municipality that each individual sub-ledger or tax account reflects its true value. Goal 3 To ensure that the issue of the Qualified audit does not result in a complaint to either the Municipality’s Integrity Commissioner or the Provincial Ombudsman. Such complaints will only delay any measure of confidence in the accounting system.
Page 21 of 48
Expertise for Municipalities
Sudbury, Ontario
Goal 4 To ensure that any disruption to your staff and day-to-day operation is minimal if not eliminated. E4m specializes in working with small municipalities. Our work in this area and the experience of our municipal professionals has taught us that small municipalities have limited resources and that these resources are usually overextended. Thus, there is no capacity to deal with anomalies of any kind when they occur. Goal 5 An assurance that the controls are in place to avoid a similar situation from occurring in the future Goal 6 An assurance that the VADIM accounting system was set-up and is operating as it was intended. Steps In order to achieve the above noted Goal for the Municipality, E4m will execute the following steps:
a) Meeting with Municipality staff to discuss with them, their understanding of the problem and to obtain copies of any relevant working papers for Taxes Receivable. This will likely not just include 2017 but may also include 2016 and 2018.
b) E4m will then examine all documents provided and make an initial determination of the further work required.
c) We anticipate that we will require remote access to your accounting system in order to work through the working papers and unreconciled Taxes Receivable. Such access would be on a “read only” basis with our assigned logon being disabled form making any changes to the data or system.
d) We also anticipate that we will need to analyze general ledger accounts, batch postings (and their detail), general journals, tax system entries and any changes made to your system in the period of study.
e) We would review the original setup of the structure of the Vadim System. This may assist us in understanding how the problem occurred.
Page 22 of 48
Expertise for Municipalities
Sudbury, Ontario
Assistance During the Process Should it be necessary, E4m can assist the Municipality of St. Charles in managing any questions from ratepayers or any other interested party in messaging related to the audit Qualification or to the attempts by the Municipality to correct this situation. Final Report E4m will provide a final report to the Municipality of St. Charles that will detail:
a) Our examination of the system, b) The results of our examination
i. How the six (6) Goals of the project have been met: ii. A Reconciliation of the Taxes Receivable iii. Comment on whether or not the individual tax accounts can
be relied upon as being accurate. c) Any adjusting entries required
E4m will also assist the Municipality in managing any final messaging once the project is complete. Our Team E4m has a team of experienced professionals that have extensive experience in the
municipal sector, most notable in the area of municipal finance. More importantly, the
experience includes the setup and operation of the Vadim system and already established
relationships with VADIM Software and CentralSquare, the company that owns VADIM
Software.
E4m also includes and has access to professionals who have extensive experience in the
overall management of municipalities. This experience can prove invaluable as we move
through this process together,
Our Experience Our experience in the municipal sector is extensive. E4m acts as Integrity Commissioner
for fifty-four (54) municipalities across the Province of Ontario making us the largest
Integrity Commissioner in the Province. We also act as the Election Compliance Audit
Committee for over twenty-five (25) communities and as Closed Meeting Investigator for
several.
More importantly, E4m has been engaged in a host of municipal roles including
mentorship, general advice, temporary staff replacement (Treasurer, CAO, Clerk), policy
writing and report writing.
Page 23 of 48
Expertise for Municipalities
Sudbury, Ontario
Pricing
It is important to us to obtain the right outcome for the Municipality of St. Charles. In order
to do that we will want to ensure that we provide you with a price that is fair and reflects
our goal of helping municipalities across the Province.
We will want to ensure that while the vast majority of our work will be remote there will be
times when we need to attend in the Municipality of St. Charles. Our pricing should reflect
that. Twenty percent (20%) of all fees stay within E4m to support the municipal sector in
various ways.
In order to satisfy your needs, get you the result you need and provide E4m with the time
required, we can execute this project for:
$33,825 plus HST1
This price includes our time only including travel time. If required, meals, accommodation
and mileage would be extra but detailed on each invoice.
We would propose that billing would occur over the course of the project as follows:
$11,913.00 plus HST at the award of the project
$10,000.00 plus HST at the half-way stage of the project
$11,912.50 plus HST at the conclusion of the project
E4m is genuinely concerned about the situation as described. We look forward to working
with you to achieve the goals stated above.
It is our hope that with our assistance, the Municipality of St. Charles will continue to
deliver great services to the residents of your community.
1 Should circumstances be discovered that would warrant a larger project, we reserve the right to discuss possible further pricing.
Page 24 of 48
Report to Municipal Council Meeting Date: October 2, 2019
Report Date: September 26th, 2019
Decision Requested: Yes
Priority: Med
Direction Only: No
Type of Meeting: COW
Report Title: Community Transportation Grant
Recommendation: That the executive committee be comprised of:
- 1 elected voting member from each representative municipality. - 1 non-voting advisory member from each municipality - I would recommend that Senior support and Centre de Santé Representative be a
permanent (non-voting) Advisory Member And that the following clause be added to the agreement which deals with variation of budget, major capital purchases and contract non-compliance “That at any time where the following issues are known:
- Issues that have impact on the project finances and sufficiency of grant funding, - Items that involve capital acquisitions or disposals, or - Involve the compliance with the contract terms between St.-Charles and the
Province of Ontario/MTO, that they be immediately be forwarded to the Municipality of St.-Charles for review and approval.”
Prepared by: Denis Turcot
Page 25 of 48
for
September 26, 2019
To Council for the Municipality of St Charles:
This letter is notice of my resignation as a member of the St. Charles Age—friendlyAdvisory Committee.
I've enjoyed working with this dedicated team of volunteers on the Committeewho are committed to the best services for St Charles’ aging population. I amimmensely proud of our Age Friendly Community Action Plan approved byCouncil in March 2017, and our acceptance by the World Health Organization’sGlobal Network of Age-Friendly Cities and Communities.
I encourage Council to view and address local opportunities through an agefriendly lens and to implement the Plan’s recommended actions and principles.
To the Committee co—chairsand members: Thank you for your dedication andinsight. it has been a pleasure working with you and I wish you success in yourpursuit of our age-friendly vision to make the municipality a better place to live forresidents of all ages.
Thank you the opportunity to contribute.
Carolyn Thain
CcSCAACCo Chair Gisele Henderson
RECEIVEDSEP
Page 26 of 48
Report to Municipal Council Meeting Date: October 2, 2019
Report Date: September 26th, 2019
Decision Requested: Yes
Priority: Med
Direction Only: No
Type of Meeting: COW
Report Title: Beautification Committee
Update: The Beautification committee is preparing for November 11th ‐ Remembrance Day. A full report of their 2019 activities will be brought for year end. The purpose of this report is to provide notification to council of the intention to buy a dedicated sound system for this event and that the funds be taken from the Cenotaph reserve account. The reserve account is the result of excess private donations when the cenotaph was built. Prepared by: Denis Turcot
Page 27 of 48
Municipality of St.-Charles Building Controls and Bylaw Department For Consideration by Council RE: CBO Department 3rd Quarter Report 2019
OBJECTIVE:
To update Council on the initiatives and activities of the Building Control and Bylaw Department
BACKGROUND: The quarterly ‘activity’ report was developed to provide interim updates on activities as an ongoing effort to be able to communicate the activities, initiatives and impact of the Building Controls and Bylaw Services to Council and ratepayers. ANALYSIS: The Building Controls Department is responsible for administering and enforcing the Ontario Building Code Act and its Regulations and the Planning Act. This is done through plans examination, issuing the appropriate building permits and conducting site visits at various stages of construction. The Bylaw Service Department upholds the bylaws governing our municipality. Highlights of activities are included within the report. LINKS TO STRATEGIC PLANS:
Ensure Community Safety Ensure timely knowledge of policies, By-Laws, and Building Controls Provide personalized and efficient customer service
Respectfully Submitted by: Andrea Tarini – Chief Building Inspector
Page 28 of 48
BUILDING CONTROLS STATISTICS
Item Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 2019 Total
to date
2018 Total
2017 Total
Applications 1 16 13 - 30 41 33
Permits Issued 0 16 11 - 27 41 33
House Permit - Average working days to issue
0 4 5 - 4.5 3.0 4.5
Actual House Building Permits issued
0 15 10 - 25 39 33
Small Building - Average working days to issue
0 0 0 - 0 3.5 0
Actual Small Building Permits issued
0 0 0 - 0 2 0
Large Building - Average working days to issue
0 3 3 - 3 4.5 0
Actual Large Building Permits issued
0 1 1 - 2 3 0
Complex Building Average working days to issue
0 0 0 - 0 8 0
Actual Complex Building Permits issued
0 0 0 - 0 1 0
Total Inspections 10 22 32 - 64 87 NA
- Inspections include, but not limited to, preconstruction site inspection, footings, foundation, drainage/weeping tile, concrete slab, plumbing rough-in, framing, insulation, vapor/air barrier, heating, occupancy, fire protection, final inspection.
- Average working days to issue a building permit are a measure of the service level of the building department. The Ontario Building Code prescribes the maximum time allowable to issue a building permit once the application is complete. House permits are to be issued in 10 business days, Small and Large Buildings are to be issued in 15 business days Complex buildings are to be issued in 30 business days.
Page 29 of 48
St.‐Charles
Building Permits Issued by Quarter (2019)
Residential Construction
Types of Permits 1st Quarter Permit Information 2nd Quarter Permit Information
Permits Issued Construction Value Permits Issued Construction Value
Addition 0 $0.00 2 $191,000.00
Demolish 0 $0.00 0 $0.00
Install/Erect/Replace 0 $0.00 2 $23,500.00
New Accessory Structure 0 $0.00 5 $222,830.00
New Building Construction 0 $0.00 2 $53,760.00
Renovation/Alter/Repair 0 $0.00 4 $68,420.00
Total 0 $0.00 15 $559,510.00
Types of Permits 3rd Quarter Permit Information 4th Quarter Permit Information
Permits Issued Construction Value Permits Issued Construction Value
Addition 0 $0.00 0 $0.00
Demolish 1 $1,000.00 0 $0.00
Install/Erect/Replace 2 $12,850.00 0 $0.00
New Accessory Structure 3 $30,480.00 0 $0.00
New Building Construction 1 $233,790.00 0 $0.00
Renovation/Alter/Repair 3 $14,500.00 0 $0.00
Total 10 $292,620.00 0 $0.00
St.‐Charles
Building Permits Issued by Quarter (2019)
Other Construction
Types of Permits 1st Quarter Permit Information 2nd Quarter Permit Information
Permits Issued Construction Value Permits Issued Construction Value
Commercial 0 $0.00 0 $0.00
Industrial 0 $0.00 0 $0.00
Government/Institutional 0 $0.00 1 $0.00
Total 0 $0.00 1 $124,000.00
Types of Permits 3rd Quarter Permit Information 4th Quarter Permit Information
Permits Issued Construction Value Permits Issued Construction Value
Commercial 1 $2,000.00 0 $0.00
Industrial 0 $0.00 0 $0.00
Government/Institutional 0 $0.00 0 $0.00
Total 1 $2,000.00 0 $0.00
Page 30 of 48
St.‐Charles
Building Permits Issued YTD Comparison (Jan 1 ‐ Sep 30)
Residential Construction
Types of Permits 2019 Permit Information 2018 Permit Information 2017 Permit Information
Totals Title 2019 Permit Information 2018 Permit Information 2017 Permit Information
Total Construction $978,130.00 $1,360,596.00 $910,858.00
Total Building Permit Fees $12,396.30 $14,916.71 $9,482.10
Page 31 of 48
Shared Service Reporting This table reports the number of permits that have been issued in each member municipality and the number of building inspections that have occurred.
Permits and Inspections per Municipalities (Jan 1 ‐ Sept 30)
MUNICIPAL LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICER REPORT Training/Conferences/Certification
- Bylaw officer will attend Property Standards training in 2020 COMPLAINTS BY CATEGORY:
Complaints *Only formal complaints are tracked*
Drainage 1 Noise Control 0 Property Standards 3
Roads 1
Snow Removal 2
Zoning 3
GRAND TOTAL 10
Page 32 of 48
Report to Municipal Council Meeting Date: October 2, 2019
Report Date: September 26th, 2019
Decision Requested: Yes
Priority: Med
Direction Only: No
Type of Meeting: COW
Report Title: Pharmacy expansion
Recommendation: That council agrees to the request with the following condition:
‐ That any leasehold improvement that are undertaken be approved by the Chief Building official and all cost be borne by the proponent.
‐ That upon lease termination that the renter be responsible to restore premises to its original condition.
‐ Rent be $17,001.43 increasing yearly at the rate of 2% for a term of 20 years
Background:
Request from St Charles Pharmacy: “So, we are looking to acquire the whole space for the pharmacy and massage room along with the shared space combined (1003.5 sq ft.) and would be responsible for the total space rent that is 17001.43 annual with the 0.02% annual increment to lease it for 20 years. We will be looking to do changes in the area as follows:
‐ In order to provide a more space for front shop items Like over the counter medications and patient self‐selection products, we will be need for an open space. So, Whatever walls that are not weight bearing will be removed.
‐ Water and sewage connections will be closed but kept in place. ‐ I will have the contractor (Mr. Bruce Steffan) to arrange with your representative
before starting to work. ‐ If you have any comments or notes I'm very open to suggestions or requirements.
Thank you regards, Hazem” Prepared by: Denis Turcot
Page 33 of 48
Page 34 of 48
OPP 2020 Annual Billing StatementSt. Charles MEstimated costs for the period January 1 to December 31, 2020Please refer to www.opp.ca for 2020 Municipal Policing Billing General Information summary for further details.
Year Over Year Variance (reconciled cost for the year is not subject to phase-in adjustment)
2017 Reconciled Cost per Property 291.77
2018 Reconciled Cost per Property (see above) 294.61
Cost per Property Variance (Increase) 2.84
2018 Billed Amount (298,735)
2018 Year-End-Adjustment 2,361
Note
The Year-End Adjustment above will be included as an adjustment on the 2020 Billing Statement.
This amount will be incorporated into the monthly invoice amount for 2020.
OPP 2018 Reconciled Year-End Summary 11 of 12
Page 45 of 48
This page intentionally left blank
Page 46 of 48
Report to Municipal Council Meeting Date: October 2, 2019
Report Date: September 26th, 2019
Decision Requested: Yes
Priority: Med
Direction Only: No
Type of Meeting: COW
Report Title: Road extension proposition
Recommendation: That council agrees to a road extension with the condition listed below and conditional that the Director of Public Work also gives his approval I do not recommend pursuing an exchange of a lot of land for water access due to the cost of
building a new road. I continue to encourage council to pursue a land use permit or similar to
build an access point to Nepewassi Lake (Boat Launch).
Background:
The owner wishes to build to build a new residence on his property in 2020 and wants to build a
new driveway rather than use a shared drive. Council did consider an exchange of property, but
after the DPW’s review of estimate prepared by staff, the cost would have been greater than
$80,000 to build he road.
Municipal road extension request.
This is often seen in plans of subdivision where the proponent is required to build roads to an established standard and then the municipality takes over maintenance, normally the economic benefit is great enough to justify it.
Council most often take the position that, if they do consider assuming a road as a municipality‐maintained road, that the following conditions are met or considered:
o That the road is brought up to an acceptable standard that will consider width & thickness of materials on the road e.g. Granular “A” & “B” & proper ditching. Further details would be provided by our Director of Public Work. As he is away this week, I can’t estimate or give specs.
o That the land (below the road, normally 66’) is conveyed to the municipality at no cost. In this case this does involve two other private properties that the proponent would have to negotiate with.
o The need for seasonal or year‐round maintenance and the cost associated with this maintenance. In this case we would assume a year‐round maintenance for an additional +/‐ 250 meters of roadway.
Page 47 of 48
- 2 -
Due to other groups that may request such road expansion, council must be fair and equitable to all taxpayers. Some road expansions can be very costly to maintain and others require very little additional maintenance. Please note that the municipality is not obligated to expand its road system.
Any municipality will normally not assume roads that will generally increase the burden to the tax payers.