HomeMy Public PortalAbout2016-06-23_COW_Public Agenda Package_Part 1Page 1 of 2
MUNICIPALITY OF THE DISTRICT OF CHESTER
COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE
Thursday, June 23, 2016 – 8:45 a.m.
AGENDA
1. MEETING CALLED TO ORDER.
2. MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETING:
2.1 Committee of the Whole – May 19, 2016.
3. MATTERS ARISING:
3.1 Municipal Government Act Review – Housekeeping Recommendations:
a) Issue 11 – title of Provincial Department
b) Issue 20 – inclusion of e-billing services.
c) Issue 24 – change of wording from “upon a request by the Clerk” to “upon a request by the
Municipality”.
d) Issue 28 – outdated – the Treasurer’s “list” is the newspaper posting.
e) Issue 32 – tax sale amendment re: business occupancy.
f) Issue 33 – tax sale amendment - more information provided to users of legislation.
g) Issue 51 – amendment – allowing deferral of a study of polling districts required if Council has
conducted an additional study since the last study required.
h) Issue 55 – changing name of a Village or Municipality.
i) Issue 63 – amend wording to not require printing of all by-laws – municipalities should be
required to have these on the website.
3.2 Request for Decision dated June 9, 2016 regarding Annex Building Space Improvements.
4. CORRESPONDENCE:
4.1 Letter dated June 9, 2016 from Zack Churchill, Minister of Municipal Affairs, regarding funding
agreement with Federal Government for Clean Water and Wastewater Fund.
a. Capital Plan 2016/17 – Priorities for funding application (CWWF) required.
4.2 Follow-up email from UNSM dated June 9, 2016 regarding consultation re: Proposed Changes to
the Liquor Control Act (previously received by Committee of the Whole on November 19, 2015 –
no action taken).
5. NEW BUSINESS:
5.1 Policy P-58 Remuneration of Appointment Committee Members – consideration for inclusion of
Joint Fire Advisory Committee for reimbursement.
5.2 Information Services:
a) Council Chambers Audio Upgrades RFQ – Backman Vidcom was selected as the successful
proponent because they had the lowest bid and selected the best amplifier/speaker
combination.
Page 2 of 2
b) Computer Hardware Refresh – Use of Provincial Standing Offer (IMP Solutions) - Purchase
from the standing offer through IMP Solutions, desktops and laptops for a total not to
exceed $86,600 net HST.
c) VMWare Server Infrastructure Replacement – Use of Provincial Standing Offer (Dell
Canada) - To proceed with the procurement of server equipment to support our VMWare
infrastructure, as budgeted in the amount of $58,780 net HST.
5.3 Wind Data Report – May 2016.
5.4 Grant Requests.
6. ADJOURNMENT.
In Camera following regular session under Section 22 of the MGA – Land Negotiations
P:\Municipal Affairs\MGA - Housekeeping Amendments\Issue 11 memo - v2.docx
MEMORANDUM
TO: Jeff Shute
Municipal Affairs
FROM: Charles Thompson
DATE: May 19, 2016
RE: MGA Review – Housekeeping amendments
Issue 11
Issue information from Steering Committee
Tracking #: 11
Working Group: Business and Economic Growth/Planning and Development
Issue commented on: “Dept. of Environment”
Amendments proposed by commenter: “This is currently not the title of the prov dept., maybe a
definition could clean this up to be more universal.”
Comments from SC: nil
Section(s) affected: 76A, 278(2)(c) and 479A(a)
Recommendation from Burchell MacDougall: Amend 479A(a) as set out below. Do not amend 76A or
278(2)(c)
Discussion and rationale for recommendation
Sections 76A and 278(2)(c) correctly name the “Department of Environment”. Section 479A(a) refers to the
“Department of Environment and Labour”, which no longer exists. The reference to the applicable legislation in s.
479A(a) should also be updated.
Amendments
Refusal to disclose information
479A The responsible officer may refuse to disclose
(a) any information of any kind obtained by a conciliation board, conciliation officer or mediator
appointed pursuant to the municipality’s collective agreement or appointed pursuant to the Civil
Service Collective Bargaining Act, the Corrections Act, the Highway Workers Collective Bargaining
Act, the Teachers’ Collective Bargaining Act, the Essential Health and Community Services Act or
the Trade Union Act or by an employee of the Department of Environment and Labour and
Advanced Education or an employee, appointee or member of the Civil Service Employee Relations
Board, the Correctional Facilities Employee Relations Board, the Highway Workers Employee
Relations Board or the Labour Relations Board for the purpose of any of those Acts or or the
municipality’s collective agreement [or] in the course of carrying out duties under any of those Acts
or the municipality’s collective agreement;
P:\Municipal Affairs\MGA - Housekeeping Amendments\Issue 20 memo - v2.docx
MEMORANDUM
TO: Jeff Shute
Municipal Affairs
FROM: Charles Thompson
DATE: May 19, 2016
RE: MGA Review – Housekeeping amendments
Issue 20
Issue information from Steering Committee
Tracking #: 20
Working Group: Fiscal Responsibility
Issue commented on: "Under Section 117 (2) under Tax Collection, it states (2) The tax bill shall be
served personally or mailed to the address shown on the assessment roll or any more current address
known to the treasurer.”
Amendments proposed by commenter: This statements should be updated to include current
mentions of communication including ebilling services.
Comments from SC: Tara Manual is also familiar with this issue.
Section(s) affected: 117(2)
Recommendation from Burchell MacDougall: Amend as set out below
Discussion and rationale for recommendation
At present, section 117(2) of the MGA requires that tax bills be served personally, or mailed to the address
shown on the assessment roll, or any more current address for the taxpayer.
We agree with the commenter that the MGA should permit tax bills to be sent electronically. Many people are
used to receiving bills by email or other ways on-line. Municipalities should have the option to send tax bills
electronically to those property owners who agree to receive their tax bills through that method.
Some municipalities are already delivering tax bills electronically, using the “epost” system with Canada Post.
While it may be possible to interpret the MGA to permit this practice, the MGA is certainly not clear in this
regard. In order to clarify that the use of epost is permitted, to allow municipalities to use other systems of
electronic document delivery for tax bills, and to accommodate technological changes over time in how
documents can be electronically delivered, we recommend a fairly broad amendment that allows municipalities
to choose their own system. The onus will be on municipalities to ensure that the system they decide to use will
be secure and reliable.
P:\Municipal Affairs\MGA - Housekeeping Amendments\Issue 20 memo - v2.docx
Residents who do not wish to receive their tax bills electronically can simply not opt in to the system, and will
still be entitled to receive their tax bills via regular mail.
Amendments
117 (2) The tax bill shall be delivered in one of the following ways:
(a) served personally;
(b) or mailed to the address shown on the assessment roll or any more current address known to
the treasurer;
(c) . sent by an electronic delivery system, but only if the person liable to pay taxes has opted in
to an available electronic bill delivery system authorized by the council.
S:\cthompson\Municipal Affairs\MGA - Housekeeping Amendments\Issue 24 Memo.docx
MEMORANDUM
TO: Jeff Shute
Municipal Affairs
FROM: Charles Thompson
DATE: March 3, 2016
RE: MGA Review – Housekeeping amendments
Issue 24
Issue information from Steering Committee
Tracking #: 24
Working Group: Fiscal Responsibility
Issue commented on: This section states that "Upon a request by the clerk, the Director of Assessment
shall value the property for the purpose of a policy adopted pursuant to subsection (1) but, for greater
certainty, shall not change the assessment of the property except in accordance with the Assessment
Act".
Amendments proposed by commenter: Change wording from upon a request by the clerk to upon
request by the MUNICIPALITY.
Comments from SC:
Section(s) affected: 69A(3)
Recommendation from Burchell MacDougall: Amend as set out below
Discussion and rationale for recommendation
We agree with the commenter that this change makes sense – there is no good reason that the clerk must be the
specific representative of the municipality to make the request of the Director of Assessment.
Amendments
69A(3) Upon a request by the municipality clerk, the Director of Assessment shall value the property for the
purpose of a policy adopted pursuant to subsection (1) but, for greater certainty, shall not change the assessment
of the property except in accordance with the Assessment Act.
P:\Municipal Affairs\MGA - Housekeeping Amendments\Issue 28 memo.docx
MEMORANDUM
TO: Jeff Shute
Municipal Affairs
FROM: Charles Thompson
DATE: May 16, 2016
RE: MGA Review – Housekeeping amendments
Issue 28
Issue information from Steering Committee
Tracking #: 28
Working Group: Fiscal Responsibility
Issue commented on: Outdated - the Treasurer's "list" is the newspaper posting
Amendments proposed by commenter: Expand
Comments from SC: Modernize MGA
Section(s) affected: 137
Recommendation from Burchell MacDougall: Amend as set out below
Discussion and rationale for recommendation
Section 137(1) requires municipalities to prepare a “tax sale list” of the properties that are to be sold in a tax
sale, containing basic information about each property to be sold. Section 137(2) states that the tax sale list, or
a copy of it certified by the treasurer, is “conclusive evidence of the facts stated therein”.
We do not recommend eliminating the tax sale list. Practically, in order to conduct a tax sale, a municipality
has to compile a list of the properties that it intends to sell. Section 137(1) sets out standard requirements for
that list that are not onerous or extensive. Section 137(2) should remain, since it could be helpful if the
information on the tax sale list were ever at issue or challenged in a court proceeding.
The commenter refers to the “Treasurer’s” list. Note that the tax sale list does not have to be compiled by the
municipality’s treasurer; the list can be compiled by any employee of the municipality. The only requirement of
the treasurer is that, if a copy of the list is required for court or another proceeding as evidence, the treasurer is
the person responsible for certifying a copy of the list. In any event, under s. 3(cb) of the MGA, treasurer
includes anyone acting under the supervision and direction of the treasurer.
P:\Municipal Affairs\MGA - Housekeeping Amendments\Issue 28 memo.docx
The commenter also refers to the tax sale list being the newspaper posting. We do not believe the newspaper
advertisement of the tax sale can or should constitute the tax sale list. The information required for the
advertisement in s. 142 does not include the name of the owner, the amount of the arrears or the years for which
the arrears are owing. In addition, the tax sale advertisement is not prepared until after the preliminary tax sale
notices are sent (s. 138), title searches are done (s. 139) and the notices of intent to sell have been sent (s. 140).
The tax sale list should be prepared early in the process, not when it is almost complete.
Having said the above, we suggest a couple of minor amendments to s. 137 as set out below. These
amendments do the following:
a. The change to s. 137(1)(b) clarifies that identifying a lot by its civic address is sufficient for the purpose
of the tax sale list.
b. New s. 137(2) clarifies that the tax sale list does not have to be in paper copy form; it can be electronic,
in a spreadsheet, word processing document or other electronic format.
Amendments
Amend s. 137 as follows:
Tax sale property list
137 (1) Where land is to be sold for taxes, a list of the properties to be put up for sale shall be prepared setting out,
with respect to each lot
(a) the name and address of the person assessed;
(b) the civic address of the lot, or a brief description of the lot sufficient to identify and locate it;
(c) the amount of arrears, including interest; and
(d) the years in which the arrears were levied.
(2) The tax sale list may be created and stored in electronic format or in paper format.
(23) The tax sale list, or a copy certified by the treasurer, is conclusive evidence of the facts stated therein.
P:\Municipal Affairs\MGA - Housekeeping Amendments\Issue 32 memo.docx
MEMORANDUM
TO: Jeff Shute
Municipal Affairs
FROM: Charles Thompson
DATE: May 16, 2016
RE: MGA Review – Housekeeping amendments
Issue 32
Issue information from Steering Committee
Tracking #: 32
Working Group: Fiscal Responsibility
Issue commented on: Tax Sale
Amendments proposed by commenter: Move to after 133 (7)
Comments from SC: Clean up
Section(s) affected: 134(5)
Recommendation from Burchell MacDougall: Amend as set out below
Discussion and rationale for recommendation
Section 134 deals with properties that are to be sold for taxes. Section 134(5) states that where a municipality
and taxpayer have entered into a tax arrears payment arrangement, the period of time that a tax lien is effective
is extended. The commenter suggests moving s. 134(5) into s. 133, which deals with tax liens.
We agree with the commenter’s suggestion. Section 134(5) relates to tax liens, and therefore belongs in s. 133.
Amendments
Remove s. 134(5) and insert it as a new s. 133(8). [Note: The existing 133(8) is being deleted, since it deals
with business occupancy tax – see our Memo dated February 2, 2016 on Issues #1, 2 and 44]
Certain taxes are liens
133 (1) Taxes levied in respect of real property are a first lien upon the real property.
(2) Taxes levied in respect of a mobile home are a first lien upon the mobile home.
(3) The lien has priority over the claims, liens or encumbrances of any person and need not be registered.
P:\Municipal Affairs\MGA - Housekeeping Amendments\Issue 32 memo.docx
(4) Where property is sold for taxes and the sale is set aside, the lien is not discharged.
(5) The lien has effect from the first day of the fiscal year for which the tax rate is set.
(6) Taxes are a first lien upon property conveyed between the time the assessment roll is filed and the tax rate is
set and may be collected from a subsequent owner.
(7) Taxes cease to be a lien on the property when six years have elapsed after the end of the fiscal year in which
they were levied, but may be collected after they have ceased to be a lien.
(8) Where the municipality and a taxpayer have entered into a tax arrears payment arrangement, the period for
which the tax lien is effective is extended by the period of the tax arrears payment arrangement.Taxes in respect
of business occupancy assessments are not a lien upon property.
Tax sale
134 (1) Property may be sold for taxes if the taxes with respect to the property are not paid in full for the taxation
year immediately preceding the year in which the tax sale proceedings are commenced, but the proceedings shall
not commence before June 30th in the year immediately following that taxation year.
(2) Property shall be put up for tax sale if taxes are in arrears for the preceding three fiscal years.
(3) The council may defer tax sale proceedings for a property for up to two years.
(4) A municipality is not required to put a property up for tax sale
(a) if the solicitor for the municipality advises that a sale of the property would expose the municipality to
an unacceptable risk of litigation;
(b) if the amount of taxes due is below the collection limit established by the council, by policy;
(c) if the property has been put up for sale three times in the preceding three years and no satisfactory
offer has been made with respect to it;
(d) if the taxes have been deferred pursuant to a by-law; or
(e) if the municipality and the taxpayer have entered into a tax arrears payment arrangement and the
taxpayer is in compliance with the agreement.
(5) Where the municipality and a taxpayer have entered into a tax arrears payment arrangement, the period for
which the tax lien is effective is extended by the period of the tax arrears payment arrangement.
P:\Municipal Affairs\MGA - Housekeeping Amendments\Issue 33 memo.docx
MEMORANDUM
TO: Jeff Shute
Municipal Affairs
FROM: Charles Thompson
DATE: June 11, 2016
RE: MGA Review – Housekeeping amendments
Issue 33
Issue information from Steering Committee
Tracking #: 33
Working Group: Fiscal Responsibility
Issue commented on: Ability to sue for tax sales through 119
Amendments proposed by commenter: Act needs to link this section back to 119
Comments from SC: Give users of the legislation more information
Section(s) affected: 134
Recommendation from Burchell MacDougall: Amend as set out below
Discussion and rationale for recommendation
As we understand this issue, the commenter is suggesting that s. 134 of the MGA (right to conduct tax sale of
property for unpaid taxes) should refer to s. 119 (right to sue for taxes owing).
This amendment is not necessary for the MGA to work properly – s. 119, s. 120-121 (dealing with warrants to
seize goods) and s. 134 each stand on their own, and together provide three separate options for collecting taxes.
However, an amendment along the lines of the commenter’s suggestion would provide additional clarity to
users of the MGA.
We recommend that s. 134 be amended to refer to s. 119, as well as s. 120 and 121.
Amendments (not recommended, but optional)
Amend s. 134(1) as follows:
134 (1) In addition to or instead of a municipality suing for taxes under s. 119 or issuing a warrant to
distrain goods under s. 120 or s. 121 for the collection of taxes, Pproperty may be sold for taxes if the
taxes with respect to the property are not paid in full for the taxation year immediately preceding the
year in which the tax sale proceedings are commenced, but the proceedings shall not commence before
June 30th in the year immediately following that taxation year.
S:\cthompson\Municipal Affairs\MGA - Housekeeping Amendments\Issue 51 memo.docx
MEMORANDUM
TO: Jeff Shute
Municipal Affairs
FROM: Charles Thompson
DATE: February 24, 2016
RE: MGA Review – Housekeeping amendments
Issue 51
Issue information from Steering Committee
Tracking #: 51
Working Group: Governance Efficiencies
Issue commented on: The MGA requires that a municipal boundary review be conducted every 8 years
regardless if one has occurred in the intervening period
Amendments proposed by commenter: Amend s. 369 as the current wording creates unnecessary
burden and leads to the inefficient use of municipal resources. Allow the UARB to defer a municipal
boundary review if a municipality has conducted a review in the intervening period.
Comments from SC: "Add 369 (1A) Where the council has conducted an additional study in an
intervening year other than that required in subsection (1), the Board may approve a deferral of the
regularly scheduled study to the next scheduled year, or to another date specified by the Board."
Section(s) affected: 369
Recommendation from Burchell MacDougall: Amend as set out below.
Discussion and rationale for recommendation
We agree that the MGA should at least allow for the possibility that a municipality can forego a regularly-
scheduled study of the number of councilors and polling districts if it has recently undergone such a study.
Section 369 falls under Part XVI of the MGA, “Boundaries” and reads as follows:
Study of polling districts required
369 (1) In the year 1999, and in the years 2006 and every eighth year thereafter the council shall conduct
a study of the number and boundaries of polling districts in the municipality, their fairness and
reasonableness and the number of councillors.
(2) After the study is completed, and before the end of the year in which the study was conducted, the
council shall apply to the Board to confirm or to alter the number and boundaries of polling districts and
the number of councillors.
S:\cthompson\Municipal Affairs\MGA - Housekeeping Amendments\Issue 51 memo.docx
We recommend that the MGA be amended to allow a municipality to apply to the UARB for permission to
defer a study, if the municipality has had a study in the intervening years since the last regularly-scheduled
study. The UARB would have the discretion to decide whether to approve the deferral.
Amendments
Study of polling districts required
369 (1) In the year 1999, and in the years 2006 and every eighth year thereafter the council shall
conduct a study of the number and boundaries of polling districts in the municipality, their
fairness and reasonableness and the number of councillors.
(2) After the study is completed, and before the end of the year in which the study was
conducted, the council shall apply to the Board to confirm or to alter the number and boundaries
of polling districts and the number of councillors.
(3) Upon application by the council of a municipality, the Board may approve a deferral of a
study required by subsection (1) to the next scheduled year or to another date set by the Board if
the council has conducted an additional study since the last study required by subsection (1).
S:\cthompson\Municipal Affairs\MGA - Housekeeping Amendments\Issue 55 Memo.docx
MEMORANDUM
TO: Jeff Shute
Municipal Affairs
FROM: Charles Thompson
DATE: March 3, 2016
RE: MGA Review – Housekeeping amendments
Issue 55
Issue information from Steering Committee
Tracking #: 55
Working Group: Governance Efficiencies
Issue commented on: Need to include villages
Amendments proposed by commenter:
Comments from SC:
Section(s) affected: 9
Recommendation from Burchell MacDougall: Amend as set out below
Discussion and rationale for recommendation
Section 9 of the MGA allows for the Governor in Council to change the name of a municipality upon request of
the municipal council. In order to allow the same process to change the name of a village, s. 9 must be
amended to refer to village commissions, as defined in section 3(cfa).
Amendments
9 The Governor in Council may, on the request of the council or village commission of a municipality
or village, change the name of the municipality or village to a name chosen by the council or village
commission.
S:\cthompson\Municipal Affairs\MGA - Housekeeping Amendments\Issue 63 memo.docx
MEMORANDUM
TO: Jeff Shute
Municipal Affairs
FROM: Charles Thompson
DATE: April 7, 2016
RE: MGA Review – Housekeeping amendments
Issue 63
Issue information from Steering Committee
Tracking #: 63
Working Group: Governance Efficiencies
Issue commented on: 187(5)(a&b) it is obsolete to require printing of all bylaws. Municipalities
should be required to have these on their website.
Amendments proposed by commenter: None provided.
Comments from SC: None provided.
Section(s) affected: 187(5)
Recommendation from Burchell MacDougall: Amend as set out below.
Discussion and rationale for recommendation
Section 187 has the heading “Record of by-laws and policies”.
Section 187(4) requires the clerk to maintain the original by-laws which shall be open to inspection by any
person at a reasonable time. As a result, there must always be a paper version of the by-laws in the possession
of the clerk that members of the public can examine.
Section 187(5) requires the clerk to keep printed copies of all by-laws in force, such that they can be sold to the
public.
We agree with the commenter that it no longer makes sense for the clerk to print and hold copies of all by-laws
in the event a person makes a request. We also agree that it would make better sense for all by-laws to be
posted to the municipality’s website, and for the clerk to simply print by-laws from the website when so
requested.
S:\cthompson\Municipal Affairs\MGA - Housekeeping Amendments\Issue 63 memo.docx
Amendments
Amend section 187(5) as follows:
(5) The clerk shall
(a) post print all of the by-laws of the municipality from time to time in force on a website
maintained by the municipality;
(b) keep printed copies of the by-laws, amended to date, for sale; and
(cb) make and provide a copy of a by-law, amended to date, to a person requesting one, at a
reasonable price, having regard to the cost of printing the by-law.
MUNICIPALITY OF THEDISTRICT OF CHESTER
REQUEST FOR DECISION /DIRECTIONREPORT TO:Warden Webber and Municipal Council MembersSUBMITTED BY:Matthew Davidson, P.Eng.Director of Engineering and Public WorksDATE:June 9, 2016SUBJECT:Annex Building Space ImprovementsORIGIN:April 28th, 2016 Council Meeting______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
CURRENT SITUATION:At the April 28, 2016 Council Meeting, Council approved (motion 2016-177) to direct staff to bring backthe Request for Quotations for renovation of the Annex Building to Council for approval prior to beingissued.
RECOMMENDATIONS:Staff recommend to Council the following:
Staff to proceed with Asbestos’s Abatement, removal of the large oil tank and demolition activityas generally described and in accordance with MODC’s Procurement Policy (without approvalof the Request for Quotation (RFQ) documents by Council).
Staff to proceed with the quotation of Heating and Cooling Option 3 and award in accordancewith MODC’s Procurement (without approval of RFQ document by Council)
That Staff proceed with preparing specifications for interior and exterior work.Uponcompletionof draft RFQ document,provide Council the opportunity to review and approveprior to issuing for quotes.
BACKGROUND:At the request of Council, staff worked with a local contractor to assist with scoping and estimating thecostof the proposed renovations to the Annex basement.A general summary of the proposedrenovations and a revised project budget were presented to Council on April 28th, 2016.
DISCUSSION:Since April 28th, 2016, staff have discussed the project to revise and further refine the plan of action tocomplete the renovation of the lower level of the Annex.Below is a list of actions, based on priority, anda summary of the findings to date. Prior to proceeding with quotations and performance of work,weare looking to confirm with Council that they are in general agreement with the plan of actions, withhopeswe can complete the renovations in an expedited manner.
Plan of Action:1)Demolition and removal of an aged interior oil tank, abatement of Asbestos containingmaterials(ACM’s), and demolition of interior space, as per the Procurement Policy (P -04)-June 2016;a.Regardless of the heating/cooling option selected, the current interior oil tank is aged ,doesn’t have leak detection or spill containment. Furthermore, the tank limits the spaceavailable for onsite storage.The value for this work is estimated to be below $2,500.b.The issuance of a quotation will be based on a unit price per square foot, for the removalof asbestos containing materials (ACM’s). The square footage amount will be basedupon the 2014 Hazardous Materials Survey, as well as the further testing we arecurrently completing.It should be noted that staff will obtain pricing for the removalACM’s (i.e. upper floor entrance tile). If the budget can accommodate the removal wewill proceed with work due to safety concerns and efficiency purposes.The value forthis work is estimated to be below $1,200 in total.c.Staff will endeavor to complete the interior demolition of the space in-house. Outsidecontractors will only be hired if there are safety concerns (i.e.ACM’s or electrical).d.Finalization of floor plan.2)Install a heating/cooling option to efficiently supply service to the lower level of the Annex andmaintainexisting services to the Upper Level-July 2016;a.Options for Heating and AC are outlined below:1.Status quo -Maintain oil heating (hot water baseboard)within both levels of theAnnex, as well as the existing heat pump (AC only) for the upper floor.Thisoption will require a new oil tank to be installed in the furnace room, and anextension of existing baseboards.2.Maintain oil heating along with existing heat pump for the upper only. Removehot water baseboards downstairs and replace with electric baseboards. Thisoption will require a new oil tank to be installed in the furnace room.3.Maintain oil heating along with existing heat pump for the upper only. Inaddition, add a heat pump which controls comfort levels,providing heating andair conditioning with humidity control to lower level only. The existing electricalpanel is adequate. This option will require a new oil tank to be install ed in thefurnace room.Estimate cost of construction is ~$12,500.4.Similar to option 3, however replace the oil fired burner with a propane boiler.This option will require propane tank(s) with vehicle protection to be installedoutside near the Annex.Estimate cost of construction is ~$17,0005.Similar to option 3, however replace the oil fired burner with an electric boiler.Estimate cost of construction similar to option 4.6.Replace upper level heating pumps which are presently air conditioner unitsonly, to service entire building with heating and cooling.Requires additionalAMP service.Estimate cost of construction is ~$35,500.7.Heat pump pricing is based on rough costing by local contractors, exact pricingcan only be attained through quotation process.b.Considerations for selecting an option:1.Status quo and use of electric baseboards provides no climate control in the levellower which will affect building condition and staff comfort.Also air conditioningwindow units no longer a common practice.2.The budget did not allocate any funds for repairs to the upper floor. The refore,we need to maintain the water baseboard heating system for the upper floor.3.Currently constrained by having a ducted heat pump (AC only) in the upper levelthat is not tied into the existing heating system and has a remaining residual lifeof ~10 years. Furthermore, it is at the maximum capacity.
4.The oil fired boiler heating the upper level and portions of the lower level is closeto 15 years old and in good condition, we can expect another 10 years of service.5.Removal of the existing oil tank (25 years in age) is appropriate and timely forthis project.6.The lower level would require its own separate heat pump, due to spacelimitations for ductwork, a mini split type heat pump with inline heater is theonly option for the lower level.7.Not recommended to install a heat pump that provides heating with an existingheating system in operation due to the need to tie in together.8.Switching completely to heat pumps for heating and air conditioning wouldrequire a new 200 amp panel and insurance does not consider heat pumps as aprimary heat source, therefore back-up heating system would be required (i.e.oil would remain.3)Complete exterior work (As per Council’s direction of April 28, 2016, s pecifications will bebrought back to Council for review)–August 20164)Complete interior work (As per Council’s direction of April 28, 2016, s pecifications will bebrought back to Council for review)–September 2016
IMPLICATIONS:
1 Policy:All procurement will comply with MODC’s Procurement Policy (P-04)
2 Financial/Budgetary:The 2016-17 Capital Budget includes $140,000 for municipal buildings.
3 Environmental:n/a
4 Strategic Plan:
Ensure sufficient infrastructure is available to best serve our residents and businesses;
5 Work Program ImplicationsAccommodated within the Capital Work Program of Engineering and Public Works. There will belittle to no disruption to the provision of community development services during the renovations
ATTACHMENTS:
OPTIONS:1.Proceed with work, as recommended.
2.Defer any decision on the matter and direct staff to bring back further information as identifiedby Council.
Prepared BY Christa D.Rafuse, P.Eng Date June 2, 2016Reviewed BY Matthew S. Davidson, P.Eng Date June 8, 2016Authorized BY Tammy Wilson, CAO Date June 14, 2016
Ca
p
i
t
a
l
B
u
d
g
e
t
R
e
v
i
e
w
-
2
0
1
6
/
1
7
Ap
r
i
l
1
2
,
2
0
1
6
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
Ca
p
i
t
a
l
Op
e
r
a
t
i
n
g
Ga
s
T
a
x
Wi
n
d
R
e
v
e
n
u
e
Re
c
r
e
a
t
i
o
n
Pa
r
k
l
a
n
d
La
n
d
f
i
l
l
C
l
o
s
e
.
Equipment Sewer Grants/Other Fund from Fund from Fund from
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
C
o
s
t
Ca
t
e
g
o
r
y
Re
s
e
r
v
e
Re
s
e
r
v
e
Re
s
e
r
v
e
Re
s
e
r
v
e
Re
s
e
r
v
e
Re
s
e
r
v
e
Re
s
e
r
v
e
Reserve Reserve Funds Operations Area Rate Borrowing
Ba
l
a
n
c
e
M
a
r
c
h
3
1
/
1
6
(
E
s
t
i
m
a
t
e
d
)
$4
7
,
0
0
0
$4
,
5
0
0
,
0
0
0
$1
,
0
8
5
,
0
0
0
$6
4
0
,
0
0
0
$4
2
,
0
0
0
$1
8
8
,
0
0
0
$4
,
3
0
5
,
0
0
0
$76,000 $393,000
RE
C
R
E
A
T
I
O
N
&
P
A
R
K
S
Tr
a
i
l
s
-
S
u
r
f
a
c
e
U
p
g
r
a
d
e
s
(
A
T
6
.
2
0
)
$
7
8
,
0
0
0
1
$6
8
,
0
0
0
$10,000 OHV grant
Tr
a
i
l
s
-
B
r
i
d
g
e
E
v
a
l
u
a
t
i
o
n
25
,
0
0
0
1
25
,
0
0
0
Tr
a
i
l
s
-
S
w
i
n
g
G
a
t
e
s
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
1
9
,
0
0
0
1
14
,
0
0
0
5,000 OHV grant
Ne
w
R
o
s
s
T
r
a
i
l
15
,
0
0
0
1
7
,
8
0
0
7
,
2
0
0
$1
3
7
,
0
0
0
CA
O
/
A
d
m
i
n
i
s
t
r
a
t
i
o
n
Ch
e
s
t
e
r
W
i
n
d
F
a
r
m
-
P
l
a
n
n
i
n
g
&
D
e
s
i
g
n
$
5
5
0
,
0
0
0
1
55
0
,
0
0
0
E-
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
-
E
q
u
i
p
m
e
n
t
U
p
g
r
a
d
e
s
6
,
0
0
0
1
6,000
$5
5
6
,
0
0
0
So
l
i
d
W
a
s
t
e
La
n
d
f
i
l
l
O
n
l
y
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
s
(
V
a
l
l
e
y
)
Re
p
l
a
c
e
B
u
l
l
d
o
z
e
r
$3
0
,
0
0
0
1
$30,000
Se
c
o
n
d
T
o
w
e
r
S
i
t
e
20
0
,
0
0
0
1
200,000
Ra
d
i
o
R
e
p
e
a
t
e
r
8,
5
0
0
1
8,500
Ce
l
l
4
A
D
e
s
i
g
n
a
n
d
C
o
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
i
o
n
3
,
2
0
0
,
0
0
0
1
3,200,000
Co
m
p
a
c
t
o
r
-
R
e
b
u
i
l
d
63
5
,
0
0
0
1
635,000
Re
p
l
a
c
e
L
o
a
d
e
r
16
5
,
0
0
0
1
165,000
So
l
i
d
W
a
s
t
e
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
s
(
C
h
e
s
t
e
r
o
n
l
y
)
Ch
l
o
r
i
n
e
C
o
n
t
a
c
t
C
h
a
m
b
e
r
$
2
5
,
0
0
0
1
$25,000
Be
a
r
B
o
x
e
s
6,
0
0
0
1
6,000
St
o
r
a
g
e
C
o
n
t
a
i
n
e
r
s
9,
0
0
0
9,000
$4
,
2
7
8
,
5
0
0
Ec
o
P
a
r
k
Ec
o
P
a
r
k
P
r
o
m
o
t
i
o
n
a
l
E
q
u
i
p
m
e
n
t
$1
0
,
0
0
0
2
1
0
,
0
0
0
Wi
n
d
T
u
r
b
i
n
e
Co
m
m
u
n
i
t
y
D
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
Fi
r
e
S
e
r
v
i
c
e
s
-
E
q
u
i
p
m
e
n
t
$
1
0
,
0
0
0
2
10
,
0
0
0
ED
-
I
n
d
u
s
t
r
i
a
l
P
a
r
k
D
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
/
A
c
q
u
i
s
i
t
i
o
n
3
0
0
,
0
0
0
1
30
0
,
0
0
0
Pa
r
k
i
n
g
S
t
u
d
y
35
,
0
0
0
2
35,000
Ai
r
P
h
o
t
o
g
r
a
p
h
y
-
L
i
d
a
r
-
F
l
o
o
d
P
l
a
i
n
M
a
p
p
i
n
g
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
13
0
,
0
0
0
2
13
0
,
0
0
0
$4
7
5
,
0
0
0
In
f
o
r
m
a
t
i
o
n
S
e
r
v
i
c
e
s
Tr
a
n
s
f
e
r
t
o
E
q
u
i
p
m
e
n
t
R
e
s
e
r
v
e
s
$
1
2
,
5
0
0
1
12,500
Ha
r
d
w
a
r
e
U
p
g
r
a
d
e
s
10
,
0
0
0
1
10,000
VM
w
a
r
e
I
n
f
r
a
s
t
r
u
c
t
u
r
e
60
,
0
0
0
1
60,000
Au
d
i
o
U
p
g
r
a
d
e
s
f
o
r
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
R
o
o
m
1
5
,
0
0
0
1
5
,
0
0
0
De
s
k
t
o
p
a
n
d
L
a
p
t
o
p
R
e
p
l
a
c
e
m
e
n
t
8
6
,
6
0
0
8
6
,
6
0
0
$1
8
4
,
1
0
0
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
Ca
p
i
t
a
l
Op
e
r
a
t
i
n
g
Ga
s
T
a
x
Wi
n
d
R
e
v
e
n
u
e
Re
c
r
e
a
t
i
o
n
Pa
r
k
l
a
n
d
La
n
d
f
i
l
l
C
l
o
s
e
.
Equipment Sewer Grants/Other Fund from Fund from Fund from
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
C
o
s
t
Ca
t
e
g
o
r
y
Re
s
e
r
v
e
Re
s
e
r
v
e
Re
s
e
r
v
e
Re
s
e
r
v
e
Re
s
e
r
v
e
Re
s
e
r
v
e
Re
s
e
r
v
e
Reserve Reserve Funds Operations Area Rate Borrowing
Pu
b
l
i
c
W
o
r
k
s
Un
i
v
e
r
s
a
l
S
e
w
e
r
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
s
:
Co
l
l
e
c
t
i
o
n
S
y
s
t
e
m
s
-
C
l
e
a
n
i
n
g
&
V
i
d
e
o
i
n
g
-
B
l
u
e
A
r
e
a
$2
2
,
5
0
0
1
11,250 PCAP 11,250
Ma
n
h
o
l
e
R
e
p
a
i
r
s
&
I
n
f
i
l
t
r
a
t
i
o
n
R
e
d
u
c
t
i
o
n
7
0
,
0
0
0
1
35,000 PCAP 35,000
Pu
m
p
R
e
p
l
a
c
e
m
e
n
t
s
-
A
l
l
o
w
a
n
c
e
2
5
,
0
0
0
1
25,000
$1
1
7
,
5
0
0
Ch
e
s
t
e
r
S
e
w
e
r
:
Pr
o
p
e
r
t
y
I
m
p
r
o
v
e
m
e
n
t
s
-
A
l
l
o
w
a
n
c
e
$
2
0
,
0
0
0
1
20,000
Wa
s
t
e
w
a
t
e
r
P
l
a
n
t
I
m
p
r
o
v
e
m
e
n
t
s
-
P
h
a
s
e
2
2
5
,
0
0
0
1
25,000
$4
5
,
0
0
0
Ne
w
R
o
s
s
S
e
w
e
r
:
Pu
m
p
i
n
g
S
t
a
t
i
o
n
I
m
p
r
o
v
e
m
e
n
t
s
-
P
a
n
e
l
D
e
s
i
g
n
&
C
o
n
s
t
r.
$5
0
,
0
0
0
1
50,000
P
C
A
P
(
r
e
c
e
i
v
e
d
)
Mi
l
l
C
o
v
e
S
e
w
e
r
:
$1
,
4
5
5
,
0
0
0
1
150,000
9
7
0
,
0
0
0
B
C
F
I
n
f
r
a
s
t
r
u
c
t
u
r
e
3
3
5
,
0
0
0
Ot
t
e
r
P
o
i
n
t
S
e
w
e
r
:
WW
T
P
&
C
o
l
l
e
c
t
i
o
n
S
y
s
t
e
m
I
m
p
r
o
v
e
m
e
n
t
s
$
2
0
,
0
0
0
1
20,000
Pu
m
p
i
n
g
S
t
a
t
i
o
n
I
m
p
r
o
v
e
m
e
n
t
s
3
0
,
0
0
0
3
15,000 15,000
$5
0
,
0
0
0
We
s
t
e
r
n
S
h
o
r
e
S
e
w
e
r
:
WW
T
P
U
p
g
r
a
d
e
s
-
U
V
&
B
u
i
l
d
i
n
g
U
p
g
r
a
d
e
s
$0
1
0
Mu
n
i
c
i
p
a
l
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
:
Mu
n
i
c
i
p
a
l
B
u
i
l
d
i
n
g
I
m
p
r
o
v
e
m
e
n
t
s
&
R
e
p
a
i
r
s
1
4
1
,
0
0
0
1
9
1
,0
0
0
50,000
Co
u
n
c
i
l
C
h
a
m
b
e
r
C
h
a
i
r
s
6,
0
0
0
6,
0
0
0
Tr
u
c
k
R
e
p
l
a
c
e
m
e
n
t
-
T
r
u
c
k
3
(
J
a
r
e
d
s
2
0
0
8
)
3
7
,
5
0
0
1
37,500
Du
m
p
T
r
a
i
l
e
r
10
,
0
0
0
1
0
,
0
0
0
Wi
l
d
R
o
s
e
P
a
r
k
D
r
a
i
n
a
g
e
25
,
0
0
0
2
25,000
Fi
r
e
P
r
o
t
e
c
t
i
o
n
S
y
s
t
e
m
D
e
s
i
g
n
-
M
i
l
l
C
o
v
e
W
a
t
e
r
1
5
0
,
00
0
1
1
0
0
,
0
0
0
40,000
1
0
,
0
0
0
Ch
e
s
t
e
r
B
a
s
i
n
R
e
t
a
i
n
i
n
g
W
a
l
l
-
C
o
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
i
o
n
4
3
,
2
0
0
2
2
1,
6
0
0
21,600
C
r
e
d
i
t
U
n
i
o
n
$4
1
2
,
7
0
0
Ro
a
d
s
&
S
i
d
e
w
a
l
k
s
Ro
a
d
R
e
h
a
b
i
l
i
t
a
t
i
o
n
-
M
i
l
l
C
o
v
e
-
F
o
x
w
o
o
d
$
3
0
3
,
0
0
0
2
30
3
,
0
0
0
Ch
e
s
t
e
r
S
i
d
e
w
a
l
k
(
C
o
m
p
l
e
t
i
o
n
o
f
2
0
1
5
/
1
6
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
)
$
1
6
,0
0
0
16
,
0
0
0
Ch
e
s
t
e
r
B
a
s
i
n
W
h
a
r
f
65
,
1
2
5
1
7
,
0
0
0
48,125
W
i
l
d
R
o
s
e
P
a
r
k
L
E
D
L
i
g
h
t
i
n
g
C
o
n
v
e
r
s
i
o
n
1
8
,
1
0
0
2
18,100
$4
0
2
,
2
2
5
Pu
b
l
i
c
W
o
r
k
s
T
o
t
a
l
$2
,
5
3
2
,
4
2
5
To
t
a
l
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
s
&
F
u
n
d
i
n
g
C
o
n
t
r
i
b
u
t
i
o
n
s
$8
,
1
7
3
,
0
2
5
$0
$3
7
5
,
0
0
0
$5
3
8
,
2
0
0
$8
5
0
,
0
0
0
$0
$2
5
,
0
0
0
$0 $60,000 $185,000 $1,102,850 $0 $264,125 $174,350 $4,598,500
Re
s
e
r
v
e
B
a
l
a
n
c
e
$4
7
,
0
0
0
$
4
,
1
2
5
,
0
0
0
$
5
4
6
,
8
0
0
-
$
2
1
0
,
0
0
0
$
4
2
,
0
0
0
$
1
6
3
,
0
0
0
$
4
,3
0
5
,
0
0
0
$
1
6
,
0
0
0
$
2
0
8
,
0
0
0
Op
e
r
a
t
i
o
n
E
x
p
e
n
d
i
t
u
r
e
s
$1
0
0
,
0
0
0
$
1
1
8
,
5
0
0
Co
n
t
r
i
b
u
t
i
o
n
s
2
0
1
6
/
1
7
$2
8
1
,
4
0
0
$
5
6
0
,
0
0
0
$
9
5
8
,
5
7
8
$
5
,
0
0
0
$
5
5
0
,
0
0
0
$
1
2
,
5
0
0
$
1
4
2
,
6
55
In
t
e
r
e
s
t
E
a
r
n
e
d
$5
0
0
$
5
0
,
0
0
0
$
2
0
,
0
0
0
$
1
2
,
0
0
0
$
5
0
0
$
5
0
0
$
1
0
8
,
0
0
0
$
6
0
0
$
2
,
4
0
0
Ba
l
a
n
c
e
M
a
r
c
h
3
1
,
2
0
1
7
$4
7
,
5
0
0
$4
,
3
5
6
,
4
0
0
$1
,
1
2
6
,
8
0
0
$6
4
2
,
0
7
8
$4
2
,
5
0
0
$1
6
8
,
5
0
0
$4
,
9
6
3
,
0
0
0
$29,100 $353,055
1
Pam Myra
From:UNSM Info <Info@unsm.ca>
Sent:Thursday, June 09, 2016 10:37 AM
To:Tracy Verbeke
Subject:CONSULTATION REGARDING PROPOSED CHANGES TO THE LIQUOR CONTROL ACT--
Action Required: Feedback Requested by July 15, 2016
Attachments:Letter to UNSM and AMA 060816.doc
TO: Mayors/Wardens, Councillors, All Units
CC: Chief Administrative Officers/Clerk-Treasurers, All Units
RE: CONSULTATION REGARDING PROPOSED CHANGES TO THE LIQUOR CONTROL
ACT
We’ve been asked to send out the e-mail below and attached letter looking for feedback from UNSM members:
The Alcohol, Gaming, Fuel & Tobacco Division of Service Nova Scotia and the Nova Scotia Liquor
Corporation are coordinating proposed amendments to the Liquor Control Act and are currently
undertaking consultations. We are writing to advise you of particular proposals and to ensure that
you have an opportunity to consider them and to provide feedback.
Please see the attached letter.
Phone: (902) 423-8331
Fax: (902) 425-5592
www.unsm.ca
PLEASE NOTE: If you do not want to receive communications from UNSM, please e-mail Tracy
Verbeke at tverbeke@unsm.ca, and you will be removed from the mailing list.
Service Nova Scotia
Alcohol, Gaming, Fuel & Tobacco
Executive Director
Torrington Place
2nd Floor
780 Windmill Road
PO Box 545
Dartmouth, NS
B2Y3Y8
902.424.4884 T
TOLL FREE IN NS
1.877.565.0556
902.424.0684 F
Ms. Betty MacDonald, Executive Director
Union of Nova Scotia Municipalities
Suite 1106, 1809 Barrington Street
Halifax, N.S. B3J 3K8
E-mail: info@unsm.ca; bmacdonald@unsm.ca
Ms. Janice Wentzell, Executive Director
Association of Municipal Administrators
E-mail: info@amans.ca ; jwentzell@amans.ca
Dear Ms. MacDonald and Ms. Wentzell:
Re: Consultation with regard to proposed amendments to the Liquor Control Act
The Alcohol Gaming Fuel & Tobacco Division of Service Nova Scotia (AGFT) and the
Nova Scotia Liquor Corporation (NSLC) are coordinating proposed amendments to the
Liquor Control Act and regulations (LCA) and have undertaken a number of
consultations. We wrote to you previously setting out details to ensure municipalities
are informed, and have an opportunity to provide feedback.
Due to limited response (25%), we have been asked to follow up with you and to share
additional information. We welcome feedback by July 15, 2016 with regard to these
proposals which may be returned to us as follows:
Service Nova Scotia
Alcohol, Gaming, Fuel and Tobacco Division
RE: Eliminating Plebiscites, or Liquor in Eating Establishments
Email: AGDConsult@novascotia.ca or by mail to:
P.O. Box 545
Dartmouth, NS B2Y 3Y8
Please note that, even if respective Councils have no position with regard to a
proposal, it would be helpful for us to know. We would appreciate being advised
accordingly.
Eating Establishment Regulations – Allowing Two Drinks without a Food Purchase
We will be engaging in a public consultation via telephone survey shortly with regard to
this proposal. Thus far, the response from municipalities has been limited, and we feel
it appropriate to seek public input. We thank the municipalities which have provided a
response.
Service Nova Scotia
Alcohol, Gaming, Fuel & Tobacco
Executive Director
Torrington Place
2nd Floor
780 Windmill Road
PO Box 545
Dartmouth, NS
B2Y3Y8
902.424.4884 T
TOLL FREE IN NS
1.877.565.0556
902.424.0684 F
We also want to share some additional information for your consideration:
• The proposed changes are to update the existing regulations and bring them in
line with other Canadian jurisdictions as well as respond to a request of the
restaurant sector to be permitted to sell limited quantities of alcohol to customers
without a food order. Other jurisdictions in Canada allow consumption of alcohol
in restaurants as long as food is available, but do not require a food purchase.
Instead, we are proposing a limitation of two drinks without a food purchase.
• The restaurant sector says that this change will allow them to better serve their
customers, attract new customers and grow their business.
We are also mindful of the potential risks associated with over-consumption of alcohol
and thus are taking the time to seek input from the public, law enforcement and other
stakeholders.
Removal of the Requirement for a Plebiscite
The proposal is to eliminate the requirement for a public plebiscite to be held when an
application is received for a liquor license in an area of Nova Scotia currently
considered to be a “dry” area. We wish to share some additional information for your
consideration.
• Nova Scotia is the only province in Canada that restricts the permissible
locations of alcohol license by provincial legislation. In other provinces where
there are restrictions it is accomplished by municipal zoning or bylaws.
• A plebiscite is a public vote conducted by Elections Nova Scotia. The proposal is
to simplify the process for obtaining community input before a liquor license is
issued, still providing the public an opportunity to comment on proposed
applications.
• What is a dry area?
o A dry area requires a plebiscite before a lounge or beverage room
application can be considered by AGFT. A dry area also requires that
public consultation be conducted when an application is received for an
eating establishment (restaurant) at which alcohol can be purchased.
o Liquor can be sold and consumed by the glass in a restaurant in a dry
area after the public has been consulted and the license issued. There
are approximately 105 small rural areas of the Province which are still
considered dry. However, residents may consume alcohol purchased
outside the area.
Service Nova Scotia
Alcohol, Gaming, Fuel & Tobacco
Executive Director
Torrington Place
2nd Floor
780 Windmill Road
PO Box 545
Dartmouth, NS
B2Y3Y8
902.424.4884 T
TOLL FREE IN NS
1.877.565.0556
902.424.0684 F
• What is a wet area?
o A wet area requires public consultation before a lounge or beverage room
application can be considered by AGFT. A wet area does not require that
public consultation be conducted when an application is received for a
restaurant at which alcohol can be purchased.
• Reasons for change:
o The concept of “wet/dry” areas in Nova Scotia is outdated extending back
to the time of prohibition.
o Wet/dry areas are determined by electoral boundaries, which have
changed many times over the years making it difficult to determine those
boundaries.
o Current requirements to conduct a plebiscite can cost up to $15,000 and
may result in delays for new business of up to a year.
o Nova Scotia is the only jurisdiction left in Canada which restricts the
permissible location of alcohol license by provincial legislation. All other
jurisdictions accomplish this by municipal zoning or bylaws.
o While the proposal is to eliminate the plebiscite, alternative checks and
balances for liquor license applications will be maintained, such as public
consultation and confirmation of zoning requirements.
• Transition: we anticipate planning for a one year transitional period before any
change in law would take effect. This would enable municipalities to prepare by,
for example, making any appropriate zoning changes.
Please contact us should you have any questions.
Sincerely,
John R. MacDonald
Notice of Intention to Amend – Committee of the Whole – September 22, 2011 (2011-520)
First Notice – Council – September 29, 2011 (2011-552)
Second Notice – Council – October 13, 2011 (2011-566)
Effective Date – October 13, 2011
**** CONSIDERATION TO INCLUDE JOINT FIRE ADVISORY COMMITTEE
MUNICIPALITY OF THE DISTRICT OF CHESTER
POLICY P-58
REMUNERATION OF APPOINTED COMMITTEE MEMBERS
BE IT RESOLVED that the remuneration of the Council appointed public members of the following
Committees of Council shall be paid $60.00 per meeting:
1. Committees of Council:
1.1 Heritage Advisory Committee
1.2 Citizens Landfill Monitoring Committee
1.3 Planning Advisory Committee
1.4 RCMP Advisory Committee
1.5 Recreation & Trails Committee
2. The Fire Advisory Committee is recognized as a Committee of Council, however, will only
be paid mileage at the current rate ($/km) for the fuel expense incurred to and from
scheduled meetings.
3. This list of Committees may be amended by Council from time to time.
4. This amended Policy shall take effect on the 13th day of October, 2011.
MUNICIPALITY OF THE
DISTRICT OF CHESTER
REPORT FOR INFORMATION
REPORT TO Warden Webber and Members of the Committee of the Whole
SUBMITTED BY Cliff Gall, Director of Information Services
DATE June 1, 2016
SUBJECT Council Chambers Audio Upgrades
ORIGIN 2016/17 Capital Budget
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
CURRENT SITUATION:
The audio system in council chambers is no longer functioning correctly. This is due to old equipment
and faulty microphones.
The 2016/17 Capital Budget includes $15,000 to replace existing system. As per Subsection 4.1 of the
Municipality’s Procurement Policy (P-04), an information report is required to be provided to Council
advising of all Low Value Goods and Services Procurement over $10,000. This report is to advise that
MODC will procure the 2016/17 Council Chambers Upgrade from Backman Vidcom for a total of
$12,773.03 net HST.
DISCUSSION:
Through a direct Request for Quote, three (3) quotes were received for TOA audio conferencing
equipment:
• Videoworld, New Minas - $12,783+HST
• Dramis, Halifax - $12,283.41+HST
• Backman Vidcom, Halifax - $12,248.55+HST
Backman Vidcom was selected as the successful proponent because they had the lowest bid and
selected the best amplifier/speaker combination.
IMPLICATIONS:
N/A
1 Policy:
Procurement Policy-04, Request for Quotation
2 Financial/Budgetary:
$12,773.03 net HST from the 2016/17 Capital Budget
3 Environmental:
n/a
4 Strategic Plan:
3.) Continually improve public satisfaction with municipal services
4.) Ensure sufficient infrastructure is available to best serve our residents and businesses
5 Work Program Implications
This Project will be accommodated in the baseline work program of the Information Services
Department.
ATTACHMENTS:
OPTIONS:
Prepared BY Cliff Gall, Director of IS Date June 8, 2015
Reviewed BY Date
Authorized BY Tammy Wilson, CAO Date
MUNICIPALITY OF THE
DISTRICT OF CHESTER
REPORT FOR DECISION
REPORT TO Warden Webber and Members of the Committee of the Whole
SUBMITTED BY Cliff Gall, Director of Information Services
DATE June 9, 2016
SUBJECT Computer Hardware Refresh
ORIGIN 2016/17 Capital Budget
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
CURRENT SITUATION:
Our existing laptops and desktops are at the end of their lease in the Fall of 2016. As a result, we will
be replacing these machines this summer.
The 2016/17 Capital Budget includes $86,600 to replace existing laptops and desktops. As per
Subsection 4.1 of the Municipality’s Procurement Policy (P-04), a report for decision is required to be
provided to Council advising of all High Value Goods and Services Procurement over $25,000.
RECOMMENDATION:
Purchase from the standing offer through IMP Solutions, desktops and laptops for a total not to exceed
$86,600 net HST.
BACKGROUND:
In the past the MODC has leased Computer equipment for a three-year cycle. Moving forward MODC
will replace computer hardware on a four-year cycle which will include staggering the replacement to
reduce the cost and labour requirement to replace and setup new hardware.
DISCUSSION:
IMP Solutions is currently the computer hardware vendor of record (Standing Offer) for the Provincial
Government of Nova Scotia. After careful review of the specs provided to MODC from IMP Solutions,
we could move forward with the following configurations:
• HP 840 Laptop with Docking Station
• HP Elitedesk 800 SFF Desktop
• Z1 Workstation Laptop with Docking Station
IMPLICATIONS:
N/A
1 Policy:
Procurement Policy-04, Alternative Procurement – Standing Offer.
2 Financial/Budgetary:
$86,600 net HST from the 2016/17 Capital Budget
3 Environmental:
n/a
4 Strategic Plan:
3.) Continually improve public satisfaction with municipal services
4.) Ensure sufficient infrastructure is available to best serve our residents and businesses
5 Work Program Implications
This Project will be accommodated in the baseline work program of the Information Services
Department.
ATTACHMENTS:
OPTIONS:
Prepared BY Cliff Gall, Director of IS Date June 9, 2016
Reviewed BY Date
Authorized BY Tammy Wilson, CAO Date
MUNICIPALITY OF THE
DISTRICT OF CHESTER
REPORT FOR DECISION
REPORT TO Warden Webber and Members of the Committee of the Whole
SUBMITTED BY Cliff Gall, Director of Information Services
DATE June 9, 2016
SUBJECT VMWare Server Infrastructure Replacement
ORIGIN 2016/17 Capital Budget
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
CURRENT SITUATION:
The 2016/17 Capital Budget includes $60,000 to replace our existing VMWare server infrastructure.
As per Subsection 4.1 of the Municipality’s Procurement Policy (P-04), a report for decision is required
to be provided to Council advising of all High Value Goods and Services Procurement over $25,000. Dell
Canada is the vendor of record (standing offer) for storage solutions with the Province of Nova Scotia.
RECOMMENDATION:
To proceed with the procurement of server equipment from Dell Canada and through the provincial
standing offer to support our VMWare infrastructure, as budgeted in the amount of $58,780 net HST.
BACKGROUND:
In the past the Municipality of the District of Chester has purchase VMWare infrastructure on a 48-
month cycle. Every year we budget a portion of revenue to offset this cost. Over the next 48-month
period MODC staff will be considering the following options:
• Migration of IT services to the cloud
• Business Continuity options through partnerships with neighboring municipalities
DISCUSSION:
Dell Canada is the current vendor of record (standing offer) for network storage solutions with the
Provincial Government of Nova Scotia. The following equipment will be purchased:
• (3) Dell Poweredge R630 Servers
• (1) Compellant SCv2020 Storage Area Network (SAN)
• (2) Dell N2024 Switch
IMPLICATIONS:
N/A
1 Policy:
Procurement Policy-04, Alternative Procurement – Standing Offer.
2 Financial/Budgetary:
$58,780 net HST from the 2016/17 Capital Budget
3 Environmental:
n/a
4 Strategic Plan:
3.) Continually improve public satisfaction with municipal services
4.) Ensure sufficient infrastructure is available to best serve our residents and businesses
5 Work Program Implications
This Project will be accommodated in the baseline work program of the Information Services
Department.
ATTACHMENTS:
OPTIONS:
Prepared BY Cliff Gall, Director of IS Date June 9, 2016
Reviewed BY Date
Authorized BY Tammy Wilson, CAO Date June 15, 2016
April May June July August September October November December January February March Result April 2016 to March 2017
Expected Yield 462,550 445,775 342,375 304,700 328,900 422,125 501,325 524,150 595,650 525,800 462,825 584,100 5,500,275
Expected Revenue $60,594 $58,397 $44,851 $39,916 $43,086 $55,298 $65,674 $68,664 $78,030 $68,880 $60,630 $76,517 $720,536
Yield (kWh)649,873 406,595 1,056,468
Revenue Estimate $85,133 $53,264 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $138,397
Availability 99.01%100.00%100.12%
Power Curve (Y/N)Y Y
T3 Time (Seconds)319 314
T5 Time (Seconds)11,697 139
Downtime (Hours)3.34 0.13 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.46
Estimated Annual Compensation -$33,289 -$36,855
Total Annual Revenue $51,845 $101,542
Legend:
Calculated
Fixed
Data Entry
0
100,000
200,000
300,000
400,000
500,000
600,000
700,000
Expected Yield
Yield (kWh)
MUNICIPALITY OF THE
DISTRICT OF CHESTER
REQUEST FOR DECISION
REPORT TO Warden & Council
SUBMITTED BY Chad Haughn, Recreation & Parks Director
DATE June 16, 2016
SUBJECT Grants
ORIGIN Annual Council Grants
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
CURRENT SITUATION:
The first Council / Tourism grants deadline for the 2016-2017 fiscal year was May 31, 2016.
Applications have been received and the next step of the process is for Council to review the
submissions and make decisions on how the grants budget will be allocated. In addition, the Major
Project applications that were previously submitted need to be reviewed as do the other budgeted
grants.
BACKGROUND:
Over the past year, Council took time to review and restructure the entire grants program. Among the
changes was the development of new guidelines, clarification of criteria, changes to application forms
and a new grant category was added for major projects. The community was made aware of the new
program and its implementation started during the 2016-2017 budget deliberations.
ITEMS FOR CONSIDERATION:
1. Two Deadlines
As part of the new grants program, Council decided to have two intake dates or deadlines for
the Council/Tourism grants (May 31st and October 31st each year). It was also decided that
there would be some flexibility with the deadlines for the accommodation of special requests
and consideration for the timing of projects and events.
2. Grants Budget
2.1 Retain Funds For October
Given that there are two deadlines, Council must retain a portion of the grants budget for
requests that are submitted in October.
2.2 Council Grants
The total Council Grants budget for the current fiscal year is $72,000.
Total Council Grants requested to date is $104,049.
Total amount previously approved by Council is $6,000.
Total amount remaining for both the May and October deadlines is $66,000.
2.3 Tourism Grants
The total Tourism Grants budget for the current fiscal year is $43,000.
Total Tourism Grants requested to date is $41,474.
Total amount previously approved by Council is $29,324.
Total amount remaining for both the May and October deadlines is $13,676.
2.4 Major Project Grants
Council accepted applications in the new Major Projects category which had a deadline of
March 31, 2016. Two applications were received and require a funding decision. Two other
projects are included in this category but have already received approval.
Total amount of funds requested and budgeted is $148,421.
Total amount previously approved by Council is $115,000.
2.5 Budgeted Grants
As part of the review of the grants program, Council requested that specific annual grants be
considered as part of budget deliberations and that they be included in the Recreation & Parks
budget.
Total amount of budgeted grants is $67,968.
Total amount previously approved by Council is $57,968.
3. Application Budgets
It should be noted that as part of the application submissions, some organizations included the
total budget for their organization and others included a specific project budget.
4. Churches
It should also be noted that the Council Grant criteria states that Council does not fund churches,
however, exceptions can be made as long as the funds are not for general operating or capital
projects and they are the only organization in the area providing the service. There are 3
applications from churches this year, all of which are special circumstances.
ATTACHEMENTS
1. Grants Spreadsheet
Attached is a grants spreadsheet showing the grant requests as well as the amount the group
received last year, if applicable. The groups highlighted in green have already received funding
approval from Council this fiscal year.
2. Grant Applications
All of the original grant applications are attached for your reference.
Prepared BY Chad Haughn Date June 16, 2016
Reviewed BY Date
Authorized BY Date
20
1
5
/
1
6
CO
U
N
C
I
L
CO
U
N
C
I
L
CO
U
N
C
I
L
TOURISM TOURISM TOURISM
CO
U
N
C
I
L
a
n
d
T
O
U
R
I
S
M
G
R
A
N
T
R
E
Q
U
E
S
T
S
2
0
1
6
/
1
7
Re
p
o
r
t
20
1
5
/
1
6
20
1
6
/
1
7
20
1
6
/
1
7
2015 / 16 2016 / 17 2016 / 17
Re
c
e
i
v
e
d
Gr
a
n
t
e
d
Re
q
u
e
s
t
Ap
p
r
o
v
e
d
Granted Request Approved
A
-
E
S
S
E
N
T
I
A
L
S
E
R
V
I
C
E
S
B
-
R
E
G
I
O
N
A
L
S
E
R
V
I
C
E
S
CO
U
N
C
I
L
Bi
g
B
r
o
t
h
e
r
s
/
B
i
g
S
i
s
t
e
r
s
o
f
S
o
u
t
h
S
h
o
r
e
N/
A
5,
0
0
0
.
0
0
$
CO
U
N
C
I
L
Ch
r
i
s
t
m
a
s
D
a
d
d
i
e
s
10
0
.
0
0
$
10
0
.
0
0
$
CO
U
N
C
I
L
He
a
l
t
h
S
e
r
v
i
c
e
s
F
o
u
n
d
a
t
i
o
n
o
f
t
h
e
S
o
u
t
h
S
h
o
r
e
(
D
a
v
i
d
A
t
k
i
n
s
o
n
B
o
n
s
p
i
e
l
)
YE
S
50
.
0
0
$
50
0
.
0
0
$
CO
U
N
C
I
L
Ju
n
i
o
r
A
c
h
i
e
v
e
m
e
n
t
o
f
N
o
v
a
S
c
o
t
i
a
N/
A
1,
0
0
0
.
0
0
$
CO
U
N
C
I
L
No
v
a
S
c
o
t
i
a
C
r
i
m
e
S
t
o
p
p
e
r
s
(
L
u
n
e
n
b
u
r
g
C
o
u
n
t
y
D
i
v
i
s
i
o
n
_
N/
A
50
0
.
0
0
$
TO
U
R
I
S
M
So
u
t
h
S
h
o
r
e
T
o
u
r
i
s
m
3,324.00 $ 3,324.00 $
CO
U
N
C
I
L
Th
e
S
o
c
i
e
t
y
o
f
S
t
.
V
i
n
c
e
n
t
d
e
P
a
u
l
N/
A
1,
0
0
0
.
0
0
$
CO
U
N
C
I
L
Un
i
t
e
d
W
a
y
o
f
L
u
n
e
n
b
u
r
g
C
o
u
n
t
y
(
M
a
t
c
h
e
m
p
l
o
y
e
e
s
)
1,
1
5
0
.
0
0
$
1,
2
0
0
.
0
0
$
C
-
L
O
C
A
L
N
O
N
-
P
R
O
F
I
T
CO
U
N
C
I
L
Ae
n
o
n
B
a
p
t
i
s
t
C
h
u
r
c
h
N/
A
1,
0
0
0
.
0
0
$
CO
U
N
C
I
L
Ch
e
s
t
e
r
&
A
r
e
a
F
a
m
i
l
y
R
e
s
o
u
r
c
e
C
e
n
t
r
e
5,
0
0
0
.
0
0
$
10
,
0
0
0
.
0
0
$
TO
U
R
I
S
M
Ch
e
s
t
e
r
M
e
r
c
h
a
n
t
s
A
s
s
o
c
i
a
t
i
o
n
YE
S
1,800.00 $ 2,000.00 $
CO
U
N
C
I
L
Ch
e
s
t
e
r
M
i
n
o
r
H
o
c
k
e
y
A
s
s
o
c
i
a
t
i
o
n
6,
2
0
0
.
0
0
$
TO
U
R
I
S
M
Ch
e
s
t
e
r
M
u
n
i
c
i
p
a
l
C
h
a
m
b
e
r
o
f
C
o
m
m
e
r
c
e
25,000.00 $ 25,000.00 $ 25,000.00 $
CO
U
N
C
I
L
Ch
e
s
t
e
r
M
u
n
i
c
i
p
a
l
H
e
r
i
t
a
g
e
S
o
c
i
e
t
y
YE
S
4,
5
2
5
.
0
0
$
6,
0
0
0
.
0
0
$
CO
U
N
C
I
L
Ch
e
s
t
e
r
M
u
n
i
c
i
p
a
l
R
e
l
a
y
f
o
r
L
i
f
e
(
B
B
Q
)
1,
5
0
0
.
0
0
$
1,
5
0
0
.
0
0
$
1,500.00
$
CO
U
N
C
I
L
Ch
e
s
t
e
r
U
n
i
t
e
d
B
a
p
t
i
s
t
C
h
u
r
c
h
50
0
.
0
0
$
5,
0
0
0
.
0
0
$
CO
U
N
C
I
L
/
T
O
U
R
I
S
M
De
e
p
C
o
v
e
F
i
r
e
w
o
r
k
s
&
W
e
i
n
e
r
R
o
a
s
t
30
0
.
0
0
$
30
0
.
0
0
$
CO
U
N
C
I
L
Fr
i
e
n
d
s
o
f
2
5
0
t
h
L
e
g
a
c
y
P
a
r
k
S
o
c
i
e
t
y
N/
A
80
0
.
0
0
$
CO
U
N
C
I
L
Fr
i
e
n
d
s
o
f
N
a
t
u
r
e
C
o
n
s
e
r
v
a
t
i
o
n
S
o
c
i
e
t
y
N/
A
2,
0
0
0
.
0
0
$
2,000.00
$
CO
U
N
C
I
L
/
T
O
U
R
I
S
M
Hu
b
b
a
r
d
s
A
r
e
a
B
u
s
i
n
e
s
s
A
s
s
o
c
i
a
t
i
o
n
YE
S
50
0
.
0
0
$
50
0
.
0
0
$
500.00 $ 500.00 $
CO
U
N
C
I
L
Hu
b
b
a
r
d
s
A
r
e
a
L
i
o
n
s
C
l
u
b
3,
0
0
0
.
0
0
$
5,
0
0
0
.
0
0
$
TO
U
R
I
S
M
Hu
b
b
a
r
d
s
C
o
m
m
u
n
i
t
y
W
a
t
e
r
f
r
o
n
t
A
s
s
o
c
i
a
t
i
o
n
750.00 $ 1,000.00 $
CO
U
N
C
I
L
/
T
O
U
R
I
S
M
Hu
b
b
a
r
d
s
C
o
v
e
D
a
y
s
YE
S
20
0
.
0
0
$
200.00 $ 1,000.00 $
CO
U
N
C
I
L
/
T
O
U
R
I
S
M
Hu
b
b
a
r
d
s
W
r
i
t
e
r
s
F
e
s
t
i
v
a
l
YE
S
1,
0
0
0
.
0
0
$
1,000.00 $ 3,150.00 $ 1,000.00 $
CO
U
N
C
I
L
Ne
w
R
o
s
s
F
a
m
i
l
y
R
e
s
o
u
r
c
e
C
e
n
t
r
e
YE
S
3,
0
8
2
.
0
0
$
4,
6
6
7
.
0
0
$
CO
U
N
C
I
L
Ne
w
R
o
s
s
F
a
r
m
e
r
s
A
s
s
o
c
i
a
t
i
o
n
YE
S
2,
4
0
3
.
0
0
$
3,
0
0
0
.
0
0
$
CO
U
N
C
I
L
/
T
O
U
R
I
S
M
Ne
w
R
o
s
s
R
e
g
i
o
n
a
l
D
e
v
S
o
c
i
e
t
y
YE
S
49
0
.
0
0
$
49
0
.
0
0
$
750.00 $ 1,000.00 $
CO
U
N
C
I
L
Sh
o
r
e
R
i
d
e
r
s
A
T
V
C
l
u
b
N/
A
5,
0
0
0
.
0
0
$
CO
U
N
C
I
L
Te
a
m
S
a
u
n
d
e
r
s
O
l
y
m
p
i
c
T
e
a
m
1,
0
0
0
.
0
0
$
CO
U
N
C
I
L
Vi
l
l
a
g
e
C
o
m
m
i
s
s
i
o
n
3,
5
0
0
.
0
0
$
D
-
C
O
M
M
U
N
I
T
Y
H
A
L
L
S
CO
U
N
C
I
L
Di
s
t
r
i
c
t
N
o
.
1
C
o
m
m
u
n
i
t
y
C
e
n
t
r
e
YE
S
4,
3
9
7
.
0
0
$
9,
7
9
2
.
0
0
$
CO
U
N
C
I
L
Ea
s
t
C
h
e
s
t
e
r
R
e
c
r
e
a
t
i
o
n
H
a
l
l
NA
6,
0
0
0
.
0
0
$
CO
U
N
C
I
L
/
T
O
U
R
I
S
M
Fo
r
t
i
e
s
C
o
m
m
u
n
i
t
y
C
e
n
t
r
e
2,
6
0
0
.
0
0
$
9,
5
0
0
.
0
0
$
500.00 $ 500.00 $
E
-
N
A
T
I
O
N
A
L
/
P
R
O
V
I
N
C
I
A
L
,
C
U
L
T
U
R
A
L
/
H
E
A
L
T
H
S
E
R
V
I
C
E
S
CO
U
N
C
I
L
UN
S
M
(
C
a
n
a
d
i
a
n
R
e
d
C
r
o
s
s
-
F
o
r
t
M
c
M
u
r
r
a
y
)
$2
,
5
0
0
.
0
0
2,500.00
$
TO
U
R
I
S
M
Ch
e
s
t
e
r
Y
a
c
h
t
C
l
u
b
(
R
a
c
e
W
e
e
k
)
YE
S
3,
0
0
0
.
0
0
$
3,000.00 $ 4,000.00 $
CO
U
N
C
I
L
NS
S
e
a
S
c
h
o
o
l
NA
5,
0
0
0
.
0
0
$
CO
U
N
C
I
L
Sh
o
r
e
h
a
m
V
i
l
l
a
g
e
(
G
o
l
f
T
o
u
r
n
a
m
e
n
t
S
p
o
n
s
o
r
s
h
i
p
)
YE
S
65
0
.
0
0
$
2,
0
0
0
.
0
0
$
CO
U
N
C
I
L
St
.
S
t
e
p
h
e
n
'
s
A
n
g
l
i
c
a
n
C
h
u
r
c
h
(
M
u
s
i
c
a
l
F
r
i
e
n
d
s
)
4,
0
0
0
.
0
0
$
RE
Q
U
E
S
T
E
D
AP
P
R
O
V
E
D
REQUESTED APPROVED
10
4
,
0
4
9
.
0
0
$
6,000.00
$
41,474.00 $ 29,324.00 $ 72,000.00
$
Funds Available 43,000.00 $ 66,000.00
$
Remaining Funds 13,676.00 $
Pe
n
d
i
n
g
G
r
a
n
t
R
e
q
u
e
s
t
Pending Grant Request 66,000.00
$
13,676.00 $
WI
N
D
R
E
V
E
N
U
E
Ch
e
s
t
e
r
A
r
t
C
e
n
t
r
e
N/
A
N/
A
13
,
4
2
1
.
0
0
$
WI
N
D
R
E
V
E
N
U
E
Ch
e
s
t
e
r
T
h
e
a
t
r
e
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
(
P
l
a
y
h
o
u
s
e
)
20
,
0
0
0
.
0
0
$
WI
N
D
R
E
V
E
N
U
E
Ne
w
R
o
s
s
2
0
0
t
h
A
n
n
i
v
e
r
s
a
r
y
C
o
m
m
i
t
t
e
e
N/
A
N/
A
15
,
0
0
0
.
0
0
$
15,000.00
$
WI
N
D
R
E
V
E
N
U
E
Ou
r
H
e
a
l
t
h
C
e
n
t
r
e
10
0
,
0
0
0
.
0
0
$
10
0
,
0
0
0
.
0
0
$
100,000.00
$
RE
Q
U
E
S
T
E
D
AP
P
R
O
V
E
D
TO
T
A
L
14
8
,
4
2
1
.
0
0
$
115,000.00
$
CO
U
N
C
I
L
Ch
e
s
t
e
r
G
a
r
d
e
n
C
l
u
b
CO
U
N
C
I
L
Ch
e
s
t
e
r
T
e
n
n
i
s
C
l
u
b
CO
U
N
C
I
L
Ne
w
R
o
s
s
L
e
g
i
o
n
P
o
p
p
y
T
r
u
s
t
F
u
n
d
RE
Q
U
E
S
T
E
D
AP
P
R
O
V
E
D
TO
T
A
L
-
$
-
$
RE
C
R
E
A
T
I
O
N
Ch
u
r
c
h
M
e
m
o
r
i
a
l
P
a
r
k
50
,
0
0
0
.
0
0
$
50
,
0
0
0
.
0
0
$
50,000.00
$
RE
C
R
E
A
T
I
O
N
So
u
t
h
S
h
o
r
e
S
a
f
e
C
o
m
m
u
n
i
t
i
e
s
4,
3
3
3
.
0
0
$
5,
9
6
8
.
0
0
$
5,968.00
$
RE
C
R
E
A
T
I
O
N
Ca
r
d
L
a
k
e
P
a
r
k
2,
0
0
0
.
0
0
$
2,
0
0
0
.
0
0
$
2,000.00
$
RE
C
R
E
A
T
I
O
N
Hu
b
b
a
r
d
s
A
r
e
a
R
e
c
r
e
a
t
i
o
n
A
s
s
o
c
i
a
t
i
o
n
2,
0
0
0
.
0
0
$
2,
0
0
0
.
0
0
$
F
-
M
A
J
O
R
P
R
O
J
E
C
T
S
G
R
A
N
T
S
Co
u
n
c
i
l
G
r
a
n
t
s
F
u
n
d
s
A
v
a
i
l
a
b
l
e
G
-
D
E
S
I
G
N
A
T
E
D
C
O
M
M
U
N
I
T
Y
P
R
O
J
E
C
T
F
U
N
D
P
O
L
I
C
Y
(
P
-
7
7
)
H
-
G
R
A
N
T
-
O
T
H
E
R
C
O
M
M
I
T
M
E
N
T
S
Re
m
a
i
n
i
n
g
F
u
n
d
s
RE
C
R
E
A
T
I
O
N
Mu
n
o
f
C
h
e
s
t
e
r
T
r
a
n
s
p
o
r
t
a
t
i
o
n
S
o
c
i
e
t
y
(
C
o
m
m
W
h
e
e
l
s
)
6,
0
0
0
.
0
0
$
6,
0
0
0
.
0
0
$
RE
C
R
E
A
T
I
O
N
Lu
n
e
n
b
u
r
g
Q
u
e
e
n
s
V
o
l
u
n
t
e
e
r
P
a
r
t
n
e
r
s
h
i
p
2,
0
0
0
.
0
0
$
2,
0
0
0
.
0
0
$
RE
Q
U
E
S
T
E
D
AP
P
R
O
V
E
D
67
,
9
6
8
.
0
0
$
57,968.00
$
Ot
h
e
r
Li
g
h
t
h
o
u
s
e
F
o
o
d
b
a
n
k
20
,
0
0
0
.
0
0
$
20,000.00
$