HomeMy Public PortalAbout2017-10-26_Council_Public_Agenda PackagePage 1 of 2
Municipal COUNCIL
AGENDA
Thursday,October 26, 2017 at 8:45 a.m.
Chester Municipal Council Chambers
151 King Street, Chester, NS
1.MEETING CALLED TO ORDER.
2.APPROVAL OF AGENDA/ORDER OF BUSINESS.
3.PUBLIC INPUT SESSION (8:45 a.m. to 9:00 a.m.)
4.MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETING:
4.1 Council –October 12, 2017
5.COMMITTEE REPORTS:
5.1 Committee of the Whole –October 5, 2017 –Warden Webber
(approval of motions)
5.3 Recreation and Parks Committee –September 18, 2017 –Councillor Church
(received minutes only)
5.4 Recreation and Parks Committee –September 18, 2017 –Councillor Barkhouse
(approval of motions only)
5.5 Any other Committees.
6.MATTERS ARISING:
6.1 PowerPoint Presentation -Inter-Municipal Sharing of Services -Building/Fire
Inspection/Dangerous and Unsightly (from October 5 COW Meeting).
7.CORRESPONDENCE.
8.NEW BUSINESS:
8.1 Information Report prepared by Administration Department dated October 13,
2017 regarding Award of Low Value Procurement –Sewer Line Cleaning
Videoing.
(approval of minutes only)
5.2 Committee of the Whole – October 19, 2017 – Warden Webber
Page 2 of 2
8.3 Request for Decision prepared by Department of Engineering and Public Works
regarding Award of One (1) Ton Chassis Cab Truck RFQ.
8.4 Request for Decision prepared by Department of Community Development
dated October 20, 2017 regarding Signage Report.
8.5 Request for Decision prepared by Department of Community Development dated
October 19, 2017 regarding Staff Appointment –Fire Inspection and
Administrator of Dangerous and Unsightly Premises.
8.6 Rural Caucus Meeting Agenda Items Request –deadline Sunday, October 29,
2017. (meeting to be held in conjunction with the UNSM Fall Conference –
Wednesday, November 9, 2017 at the Westin in Halifax from 1:45 p.m. to 4:15
p.m.)
8.7 Financial Report 2nd Quarter –Direction of Finance
9.IN CAMERA:
8.2 Grant Request for 2018-19 – Lunenburg County Hall of Fame (Pre-Budget
approval)
9.1 Land Negotiations - Section 22(2)(a) of the MGA – Mahone Islands Conservation
Association (MICA) – East Chester.
10. ADJOURNMENT.
MOTIONS REQUIRING APPROVAL OF COUNCIL FROM
OCTOBER 19, 2017 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE MEETING
2017-558 Approval of Agenda/Order of Business
2017-559 Approval of Committee of the Whole Minutes of October 5, 2017
2017-560 RESCIND MOTION AND PREPARE TENDER FOR WINTER ROAD
MAINTENANCE ON MUNICIPAL ROADS IN DISTRICT 1
MOVED by Councillor Hector, SECONDED by Councillor Barkhouse that the Committee of the
Whole recommend to Council to rescind the following motion from February 23, 2017 and
direct staff to tender for winter road maintenance on Municipal Roads in District 1.
2017-103 –“... Council direct staff to prepare a 3-year contract for Foxwood & Parkwood
Drive, Mill Cove and request NSTIR to do remaining Municipal Roads.”
CARRIED.
2017-561 APPROVAL OF REVISED STRATEGIC PRIORITIES CHART
MOVED by Councillor Assaff, SECONDED by Councillor Barkhouse the Revised Strategic
Priorities Chart (October 10, 2017) be approved as circulated and discussed. CARRIED.
2017-562 ROAD NAME CHANGE TO SEABREEZE LANE
MOVED by Councillor Assaff, SECONDED by Councillor Church the Committee of the Whole
recommend to Council the approval of the renaming of Hazel Lane, Chester Basin, to “Seabreeze
Lane.” CARRIED.
2017-563 APPLICATION FOR FUNDING –GAS AT KAIZER MEADOW LANDFILL
MOVED by Councillor Hector, SECONDED by Councillor Barkhouse that the Committee of the
Whole recommend to Council to engage Eosense to make an application on behalf of the
Municipality of the District of Chester to the appropriate federal funding organization and to
also complete work and produce a document for us that clearly articulates the quality and
quantity of gas available to us (from Kaizer Meadow Landfill) for either commercial application
or remediation for Occupational Health and Safety reasons.CARRIED.
2017-564 RESPONSE TO UNSM REGARDING FIRE SERVICES STUDY
MOVED by Councillor Church, SECONDED by Councillor Barkhouse that the Committee of the
Whole recommend to Council to forward the recommended comments to the Union of Nova
Scotia Municipalities as outlined in the October 13, 2017 Request for Decision “Response on
Recommendations made in UNSM/AMANS Fire Services Study of April 2017”. CARRIED.
2017-565 APPLICATION TO NSDOTIR FOR COST SHARED FUNDING FOR ROADS
MOVED by Councillor Hector, SECONDED by Councillor Barkhouse that the following roads be
submitted to the Province for consideration UNDER THE 50% Cost Shared road Upgrades in the
order of listed priority:
1.District 3 -Regent Street, Chester (.35 km)
2.District 1 –Beech Street (.11 km), Birch Street (.18 km), Cedar Street (.11 km), Maple Street
(.24 km), Pine Street (.25 km)
3.District 5 –Lawrence Hatt Road (.3 km)
4.District 3 –Prince Street, Chester (.7 km)
CARRIED.
2017-566 CHANGE OF DATE FOR NOVEMBER 9, 2017 COUNCIL MEETING
MOVED by Councillor Church, SECONDED by Councillor Barkhouse that the Committee of the
Whole recommend to Council to change the date of the November 9, 2017 Council meeting to
November 16, 2017 as members of Council will be at a UNSM conference in Halifax.CARRIED.
2017-567 REQUEST TO DOTIR TO REPLACE MISSING ROAD NAME SIGN
MOVED by Councillor Hector, SECONDED by Councillor Barkhouse that the Committee of the
Whole recommend to Council to request the NS Department of Transportation & Infrastructure
Renewal to replace the missing sign for Pine Street, East Chester. CARRIED.
2017-568 IN CAMERA -as per Section 22(2)(a) acquisition of municipal property to provide
information to Councillor Hector.
2017-569 ADJOURNMENT
MOTIONS FOR COUNCIL’S CONSIDERATION FROMMONDAY,OCTOBER 16, 2017RECREATION AND PARKS COMMITTEE
2017-552 APPROVAL OF MINUTES –SEPTEMBER 18, 2017
2017-553 MOVED by Leslie Taylor,SECONDED by Christine Rafuse,that the Recreation
Committee recommend to Council to approve $13,950 in Recreation Grants to the
applications as per the Grants Sub-Committee’s recommendations (see attached list
below). MOTION CARRIED.
2017-554 MOVED by Christine Rafuse,SECONDED by Adam Kaizer,that the RecreationCommittee recommend to Council that a 2nd Call for Recreation Grants is offered to the
Community with the remaining $6050.MOTION CARRIED.
2017-555 ADJOURNMENT
#
1 2 Bays 4H Club 50.00$50.00$Tug of war competitions2Aspotogan Arts & Crafts 500.00$500.00$Art Supplies for Seniors Programs
3 Aspotogan Recreation Association 2,500.00$2,500.00$Programs, activities and maintain playground equipment4Blandford & Area Historical Society 500.00$500.00$Publishing a "Pictorial History of Blandford" Book
5 Blandford Seasiders Seniors Club 2,000.00$2,000.00$Social, recreational & spiritual events for Seniors6Charing Cross Garden Club 500.00$500.00$To purchase and maintain the hanging baskets in the Community
7 Chester Duplicate Bridge Club 800.00$800.00$Purchase of an electronic clock and 12 side tables
8 Chester Garden Club 1,000.00$500.00$Maintenance of Cove Garden, Municipal Parade Square, Post-Office Bulletin Board
9 Chester Minor Hockey 2,000.00$2,000.00$Cover developmental Ice time to train our players
10 Chester Playhouse 2,000.00$-$Help keep the cost low for two Matinee Performances for schools and families
11 Friends of Chester Competitive Dancers 1,000.00$1,000.00$Assist with Cheerleading fees (competition, costume and training)
12 Heritage Handwork 1,000.00$50.00$Facility rental and supplies
13 Lunenburg County Crime Prevention Assoc.500.00$250.00$Purchase a new laptop computer to be used in Community presentations
14 New Ross Country Market Co-op Ltd.1,800.00$1,800.00$Improvements for new steel roof, plywood for the booths, landscaping & benches15South Shore Seniors Society 1,500.00$1,500.00$Recreation activities, bus trips and outings
TOTAL 17,650.00$13,950.00$
Description
MUNICIPALITY OF CHESTER
RECREATION & PARKS COMMITTEE
GRANT PROGRAM 2017-2018
Groups
Requesting
Recommend to
CouncilORGANIZATION
Building / Fire / Dangerous & Unsightly Services –LunenburgCounty
October 26,2017
OUTLINE
Why share services?
Why would we not share services?
Proposed Sharing Model
Next Steps
Why?
•Concern over Sustainability of the services•Services are mandatory;•Development Community relies on services: Building Inspection delays are costly•Delays in Fire Inspection can impact life safety / public safety creating liability•Municipal Units do not have backup resources•Certification / Qualifications Requirements
•Difficult/timely to train existing staff
•Impact ability of labour market meeting demand (supply and demand issue)•Aging workforce (retirements)•Municipal Units pouch from each other
•Fall 2016-Lunenburg County Mayors directed that options for sharing services beexplored
Why-Share?
•Facilitates the efficient use of resources
•Efficient utilization of Level 2 inspectors; Not all units would have toengage Level 2 inspectors
•Creates the capacity needed to hire Level 1 inspectors and enable themto train up to Level 2 over time
•Smaller units struggle to recruit for less than one FTE
•Impacts to services created by vacations/illness/ vacancies aremitigated
Why-Share?
Increases training opportunities
•Level One Inspectors in Rural Units would get more exposure to Level TwoInspectors
•Non-certified /qualified individuals can be hired for Fire Inspection /Dangerous Unsightly and train to Level 1 and 2 Building Inspection overtime (builds capacity)
Why-Share?
Focus on gaps and build capacity
•Efficient use of resources creates additional capacity that canbe used to fill current gaps•Outstanding Occupancy Permits;•Fire Inspection Programs•Inspectors can provide multiple functions
Why-Share?
Uniform Approach and Interpretation in Lunenburg County
•Uniform Code interpretation
•Uniform processes regardless of location
•Issue raised by REN in Regional Economic Strategy
Why Not?-Challenges
•Costs will not decrease.
•Policies/Processes changes will occur to enableconsistency
•Fear of change / uncertainty for staff can impactmorale
•Existing differences in service levels from urban andrural, due to geography. Some may see service levelchanges
Proposed Approach-Goals
Improve service delivery
Provide a sustainable service
Improve training opportunities/ capacity
Ensure continuity in service delivery in region
Proposed –Phase 1
Planning and Implementation
Objectives
-MOU completed; Funding Formula developed
-Sharing inspectors
-Uniform application process/ policies
-Service available from any office (permit tracking software; scheduling software etc.)
-Position Descriptions revised for consistency; salaries may be adjusted for uniformity
Time Line
-Existing Resources-Completed Dec 2018 ; External Resources –Sept 2018
-Funding formula for first 2 years –Existing percentage of combined budgets. Finalfunding formula (post two years) to be determined .
Phase 1 -Governance
Financial Implications-Phase 1
Approx. $180,200
•Salary Adjustments –approx $40,000
•Software -$115,000 (one time)
•Students-Scanning $25,200 (one time)
Phase 2-Regional Service Model
•Municipal Units may or may not proceed to Phase 2
•Jumping off point
•Exact model to be determined (i.e. regional body; host unit)
•Two offices (Bridgewater ; Chester)
•One Time Set up Costs-Vehicles; Office Relocations; Website Updates
•Chief Building Official
Time Line
•Existing Resources –July 2019; External Resources –March 2019
Phase 2-Governance
Financial Implication Phase 2
•Website $15,000
•CBO $17,000
•One time Capital Cost $130,000 (office; vehicle)
Next Steps-Motions for Council to Consider
•That Municipal Council approve in principle the development andimplementation of a Joint Municipal Partnership (Lunenburg County) in
the delivery of Building Inspection, Fire Inspection and Dangerous andUnsightly Services, and that this approval be subject to receipt of aMemorandum of Understanding that is satisfactory to all parties for thedevelopment of a joint service delivery model for the said services; and
•That Municipal Council appoint two members to a Joint MunicipalCommitteetooversee the development of a Memorandum ofUnderstanding for the development and implementation of a JointService Delivery Model for Building Inspection, Fire Inspection and
Dangerous and Unsightly Services.
Next Steps
Create Joint Committee-November 2017
Draft MOU for Council consideration-November 2017
Commence Phase 1-December 2017
INFORMATION REPORT
Prepared By:Tammy Wilson, CAO Date October 13, 2017
Reviewed By:Date
Authorized By:Date
CURRENT SITUATION
MODC’s Procurement Policy P-04, Section 4 notes
For all low value procurement, the Chief Administrative Officer is authorized to award to the supplier
offering best value for all contracts under the amounts listed above in value, in any one case, provided
that the expenditure is included in the approved budget allocation. An Information Report will be
provided to Council for all expenditures that fall between $10,000 and the amounts noted above”
($25,000 for goods; $50,000 for services; and, $100,000 for construction)
MODC’s Capital include funds for Sewer Line Cleaning and Videoing. This report is to advise Council of
the award of the Low Value Procurement for Sewer Line Cleaning and Videoing to the lowest compliant
bidder Clean Earth I the amount of $13, 483.75, inclusive of HST.
RECOMMENDATION
N/A-Information Report
BACKGROUND
Three submissions were received for Tender 2017-10-12 –Sewer Line Cleaning and Videoing
Submissions Clean Earth Envirosystems Loomers
Price (pre HST)$ 11, 725.00 $ 19, 088.30 $ 11, 959.50
HST $ 1, 758.75 $ 2, 863.25 $ 1, 793.93
Total Price $ 13,483.75 $ 21,951.55 $ 13, 753.43
Clean Earth was the lowest compliant bidder. Work has commenced will be complete by the end of
October 2017. Notices will be sent out to residents affected by the work to advise them of the same.
IMPLICATIONS
Policy
Policy P-04 (Procurement Policy). This is Low Value Procurement
.
Financial/Budgetary
Funds are included in the 2017/18 Budget for the completion of this work.
REPORT TO:Municipal Council
SUBMITTED BY:Administration
DATE:October 13, 2017
SUBJECT:Low Value Procurement –Sewer Line Cleaning
Videoing
ORIGIN:Procurement Policy: P-04
2 Error! Reference source not found./Direction
Environmental
n/a
Strategic Plan
n/a
Work Program Implications
Within existing workplan
OPTIONS
n/a.
ATTACHMENTS
None
COMMUNICATIONS (INTERNAL/EXTERNAL)
Notices will be sent out to affected residents to advised of the work to be completed in advance of the work
commencing.
Lunenburg County Sport Heritage Society
VISION:Celebrating Sport Excellence
MISSION:The Lunenburg County Sport Heritage Society identifies and
recognizes contributions and accomplishments made in sport through
coaches,administrators, athletes and builders.
OBJECTIVES OF THE SOCIETY ARE:
To be recognized as the governing body for the identification
and recognition of those individuals and/or teams that have
excelled in sport in Lunenburg County for recognition through
the Society;
To honour, celebrate, preserve and share outstanding
achievements and contributions of those who have brought
recognition to Lunenburg County through sport;
To select and induct worthy members of the Lunenburg
County Sport Heritage Society;
To collect, store and display requested information, pictures
and awards that represent the inductees’ participation in and
contributions to sport;
To raise funds to support the activities of the Lunenburg
County Sport Heritage Society;
To publicize and share the sport history and accomplishments
of Lunenburg County, Nova Scotia.
BOARD OF DIRECTORS
Co-Chairs: Carroll Randall and Marilyn Neily
Secretary: Patrick Hirtle
Treasurer: Greg Flinn
Board members: Dave Cook, Mark Nelson, Susan Cochrane, Dave Pottie,
Terry Atherton, Jack Murphy, Shelley Bolivar-Sabean,
David Walker, Glenn Josephson
REQUEST FOR DECISION/DIRECTION
Prepared By:Matthew S. Davidson, P.Eng Date October 18,2017
Reviewed By:Tammy S. Wilson, CAO Date October 19,2017
Authorized By:Tammy S. Wilson, CAO Date October 19,2017
CURRENT SITUATION
The approved 2017-18 Capital Budget included the supply and delivery of a One (1) Ton Chassis
Cab Truck.The budget for this project was estimated at $65,000, Net HST.
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the Municipality award Tender No.T-2017-016 Supply & Delivery of a
One (1) Ton Chassis Cab Truck be awarded to Saunders Motors,Hebbville,NS for the amount of
$ 47,747 plus HST and administrative fees.
BACKGROUND
This truck will be used primarily for plowing the gravel surface roads (~ 5 km’s) within the
KMEMC, as well as the transport of aggregate and other miscellaneous supplies related to
KMEMC operations. This truck will replace a 2007 Chevrolet Silverado 3500.
DISCUSSION
A tender was issued in September and closed on October 6, 2017. Two (2) submissions were
submitted, both missing requested information (i.e. Residual value, maintenance costs and fuel
efficiency. However, both submissions were for Ram 3500 Regular Chassis Cab Trucks that met
the equipment specifications and the truck is vital to the operation of the KMEMC. Therefore,
Staff proceeded with the evaluation and recommendation based on price alone rather than Life
Cycle Costing.
IMPLICATIONS
Policy
Procurement would follow P-04, Procurement Policy.
REPORT TO:Municipal Council
SUBMITTED BY:Engineering & Public Works Department
DATE:October 18,2017
SUBJECT:Tender Award T-2017-016 –Supply &
Delivery of a One Ton Chassis Cab Truck
ORIGIN:2017-2018 Capital Budget
2 Request For Decision
Financial/Budgetary
Submission Pre-HST HST Total Net HST Total
Saunders Motors $ 47, 747.00 $ 7, 162.05 $ 54, 909.05*$ 49, 793.53
Atlantic Dodge $ 51, 120.94 $ 7, 668.14 $ 58, 789.08 $ 53, 312.08
Budget $ 65,000.00
Under Budget $15, 206.47
*Administrative Fees and other taxes (tires) = $121.88 are additional to price.
Environmental
N/A
Strategic Plan
2. Continually improve public satisfaction with municipal services;
3. Ensure sufficient infrastructure is available to best serve our residents and businesses;
Work Program Implications
N/A
OPTIONS
N/A
ATTACHMENTS
N/A
REQUEST FOR DIRECTION
tataPrepared By:Peter Nightingale Date September 22, 2017
Reviewed By:Tara Maguire Date October 19, 2017
Authorized By:Tammy Wilson, CAO Date October 20, 2017
CURRENT SITUATION
At the Council meeting of February 23, 2017, a motion was passed for Council to write a letter to
NSTIR regarding enforcing their rules on signage regulations at the East Chester Exit (Exit 7 from
Highway 103). At the April 6 Committee of the Whole Meeting, staff commented on previous
conversations with NSTIR suggesting that there is a lack of enforcement of the provincial
regulations, and all the signage at highway exits is likely illegal. If TIR were to enforce their
regulations, it would likely result in the removal of all signage at highway exits, rather than the
signage just being “cleaned up”.After discussion, the previous motion was put on hold to give
staff the opportunity to research alternatives to dealing with highway advertising signage, and
motion 2017-188 was passed that “the Committee of the Whole recommend to Council that the
issue of highway signage become a Next Priority in the Strategic Priorities.”
RECOMMENDATION
For discussion and direction.
BACKGROUND
Provincial regulations are in place concerning advertising signage on or near public highways.To
construct advertising signage along a public highway, a permit is required from Transportation
and Infrastructure Renewal.Additionally, advertising signage is not permitted within 1,000
metres of a controlled access highway, which includes the access road to Highway 103 at exit 7.
Thus, the existing signage at Exit 7 is illegal.Mill Lake 1 Road (Exit 6), Highway 14 (Exit 8), and
Highway 12 (Exit 9) are not controlled access highways (this has been confirmed by NSTIR), so
advertising signage is permitted where these roads intersect with Highway 3, though signage
without a license from NSTIR is still technically illegal.Staff at NSTIR have indicated that they do
not actively seek out illegal signage but they will remove it if it interferes with official signage, or
presents a safety concern.
REPORT TO:Municipal Council
SUBMITTED BY:Community Development Department
DATE:
SUBJECT:Advertising Signage on Public
Highways
ORIGIN:COW Motion 2017-188
2 request for direction
In 2012, the Municipality drafted a Highway Signage By-law, but it was abandoned before second
reading as Council was looking for a way to replace signage for generic directional signage (i.e
signage directing traffic to galleries, shops, restaurants etc).At the time, it was explained that
signage could not be replaced at controlled access highways. Previously, staff had been informed
by TIR that Mill Lake Road No. 1, at Exit 6, was controlled access, but upon further discussion with
NSTIR, it has been confirmed that only the sections between the highway ramps are controlled
access –the section between Trunk 3 and the ramps is not controlled access, therefore signage
can be placed at the intersection.
DISCUSSION
As TIR does not routinely enforce the Advertising Signs Regulations, Council must adopt a
Highway Advertising Signage By-law if the Municipality is to have any form of control over
advertising signage. Such a by-law would allow the municipality to set standards and issue
licenses for signage along any public highways in the municipality which are included in the by-
law area, and which are not controlled access. At any areas within 1,000 metres of a controlled
access highway that are included in the by-law, signage would have to be removed and could not
be replaced, either with uniform signage or standalone licensed signage. Any licenses issued by
NSTIR for signage within the by-law area cease to be in effect when the municipal by-law comes
into effect, and any signage that does not comply with the by-law can be removed. There is no
“grandfathering” of signage that was installed prior to the coming into effect of the by-law.
A by-law could take the form of a licensing program, which would allow businesses to install their
own signage, and allow the Municipality to remove signage that does not have a license or does
not meet the requirements of the by-law, such as damaged or out-dated signage, or signage that
is too far from a business. This would allow the Municipality to clean up the existing unsightly
signage, and issue licenses to the existing signage that meets the by-law requirements. Such a
by-law could closely resemble the existing regulations that the province has (Attachment 1), the
main difference being the Municipality could actually enforce it.
Alternatively, a signage by-law could allow the Municipality to create a uniform signage program,
whereby the Municipality would erect signage structures and businesses could pay a fee to have
their business advertised on the structure, as illustrated in the examples in the following section.
A review of existing Uniform Signage Programs in other jurisdictions suggests that signage under
such a program should be created, installed, and maintained by the Municipality, rather than
business owners to ensure uniformity and compliance with regulations.
In 2011, an amendment to the Public Highways Act enabled municipalities to enact a by-law
regulating most aspects of advertising signage on non-100-series provincially owned highways.
This allows municipalities to have greater control over signage that is erected, and allows
municipalities to remove signage that is not in compliance with the by-law. However, the
provincial 1,000 metre prohibition from the centre line of a controlled access highway would still
apply, meaning signage at Exit 7 will always be illegal.
3 request for direction
A hybrid approach could also be used, where advertising structures could be erected in areas
where signage has become cluttered, such as highway exits, but allow licenses to be issued for
standalone signage that is a certain distance away from an advertising structure. Under such a
program, the “problem areas” could be tackled with Uniform Signage right away, and additional
advertising structures could be considered in the future if other areas become cluttered or
unsightly.
A Highway Advertising Signage By-law can be created to apply to the entire Municipality, or just
to certain areas or highways. Council could choose to create a by-law that applies to a very limited
area as a pilot project,and if it is successful, could be expanded to include other areas of the
Municipality. This approach would allow the Municipality to test out a uniform signage program
or licensing program on a small scale,gauge public reaction to the program,and resolve any
issues before expanding it to a larger area.
The two areas of greatest concern are where Exits 6 and 7 from the 103 meet Highway 3. As
previously discussed, including Exit 7 in the by-law would result in the removal of all advertising
signage at the intersection, due to the controlled-access designation of the road.
Of these two areas, only exit 6 can be addressed through a uniform signage or licensing program,
as Exit 7 is a controlled access highway. At Exit 7, if included in the by-law area, the Municipality
would have to remove all signage but we would be unable to permit new signage, including any
uniform signage as NSTIR would retain jurisdiction.
Signage at Exit 6:
Signage at Exit 7:
EXISTING SIGNAGE PROGRAMS IN OTHER MUNICIPALITIES
Staff have identified four other Nova Scotia municipalities in the province which have adopted
highway signage by-laws.Two municipalities (HRM and Kings County) have adopted uniform
signage programs, while two (East Hants and Port Hastings) have adopted by-laws that prohibit
4 request for direction
advertising signage on public highways outright.Staff were not able to identify any municipalities
which had adopted only a licensing program for standalone signage.In all cases, their by-laws
give the municipalities the ability to remove illegal signage, since TIR will not do so unless it
interferes with official signage.
HRM Uniform Signage Program
HRM’s Advertising on Provincial Highways By-law covers
Route 333 (Peggys Cove Rd./Prospect Rd.) and includes a
uniform signage program. Under this program, businesses
apply for advertising on a municipally owned structure, and
the municipality is responsible for creating, installing, and
maintaining the signage.Standalone signage is prohibited
within 2.5km of an advertising structure in the by-law area.
Advertising structures cannot be located within 200 metres of
an intersection, or within 100 metres of another advertising
structure. Advertising structures can have up to five
advertisements, after which a new structure may be built to
accommodate more advertisements.
A license is $200 initially, to cover the cost of producing and
installing the sign, and $50 every 12 months to renew the
license.
Kings County Uniform Signage Program
Kings County administers their uniform signage program
through their land use by-law, which is a practice that the
Province will no longer approve. TIR will only approve
standalone by-laws under the Public Highways Act, without
any references to the Land Use By-law.The Kings County LUB
sets out the standards for what a sign may look like and where
it may be located, but sign owners are responsible for having
the signs made and installed in accordance with the provisions
in the LUB.
In 2014, Kings County did a signage study, which in part
evaluated their uniform advertising signage program.1 The
report found that Kings’ signage program was onerous for
business owners, and produced inconsistent signage, which
did not follow the parameters set out in the by-law. The signs had inconsistent layout, materials
1 Municipality of the County of Kings (2014).Signage Study. Retrieved from:
http://www.countyofkings.ca/upload/All_Uploads/COUNCIL/Meeting_Documents/COTW/2017/2017-09-
19%20COTW/applications/Signs.pdf
Above: HRM Uniform Signage
Below: Kings County Uniform Signage
5 request for direction
and colours varied, some had logos which exceed the design
requirements, and there were inconsistencies with fonts,
capitalization, and justification. The report ultimately
recommended that Kings overhaul its uniform signage
program so that the Municipality would create, install, and
maintain the signage.The report suggested modelling the new
program after the PEI Tourism Directional Signage Program,
which is widely held as a model program for Uniform Signage.
EXISTING PROVINCIAL SIGNAGE PROGRAMS
NSTIR operates its own uniform signage programs for certain
types of businesses. Signs under these programs are placed on
100-series highways and at off-ramps and major intersections
of trunk roads. Most private businesses would not be eligible for signage under these programs,
and staff do not feel that a municipal uniform signage program would have redundancies with
any of the existing provincial programs.Furthermore, if the province were to pursue any of these
signage programs, it would likely not result in the removal of derelict standalone signage.
Major Tourist Attractions
Major Tourist Attractions are eligible to advertise their
business on blue and white signs that encourage visitors and
travellers to leave the highway and discover local communities
and major tourist attractions.To be eligible for this program,
business’s primary purpose must be to offer visitors one or
more of the following kinds of activities, with the sale of goods
being secondary:
Outdoor recreation
Heritage or historical
Educational
Scientific
Environmental
Natural
Cultural
Entertainment
Motorist Service Symbols
The brown and white or blue and white Motorist Service Symbols
provide direction to services that are essential to motorists and
located close to 100-series highway interchanges or intersections.
These are generic in nature, and do not advertise specific businesses.
Concept for proposed Kings County
Uniform Signage
6 request for direction
IMPLICATIONS
Policy
n/a
Financial/Budgetary
The cost to administer a signage licensing system, where businesses still erect their own signage
once they have received a license, would be minimal, but would require a staff person to review
license applications to confirm that the proposed signage conforms to the requirements of the
by-law. Some of theses costs may be offset by licensing fees.
The cost to administer a universal signage program is unknown, but would require the
construction and long-term maintenance of uniform advertising structures and individual signs
for businesses. Presumably some of the costs of the signs would be covered by annual fees
charged to license holders.
Additional costs would be incurred to enforce the program, including the removal of any signs
that do not have permits/licenses. This cost would fluctuate depending on the direction from
Council regarding enforcement (i.e. complaint basis or going out and proactively removing signs).
In addition to the ongoing costs associated with either a licensing or uniform signage program,
there would be initial costs associated with removing illegal signage, contacting business owners
who have signs in place to inform them of the need to obtain a license, and storage of signs that
have been removed.
Environmental
n/a
Strategic Plan (Goal)
Council Goal #6: “The Municipality will promote conditions conducive to fostering economic
prosperity.”
Work Program Implications
It has not yet been identified which Department(s)would administer and enforce this by-law and
program, nor what resources would be required to enforce. In Kings County, the Development
Officer is responsible for administering the bylaw but enforcement responsibility, especially the
removal of signs, is not clear and continues to be a challenge. Depending on which option Council
chooses,there will be implications for the work program,with CDD and Public Works being the
two departments that will most likely be impacted.
7 request for direction
OPTIONS
The following options can be considered for either the whole Municipality, or specific areas or
highways:
1.Draft an Advertising Signage on Public Highways By-law that incorporates Uniform
Signage Structures and prohibits stand-alone signage within the by-law area
2.Draft an Advertising Signage on Public Highways By-law that incorporates Uniform
Signage Structures and regulates and licenses stand-alone signage within the by-law area
3.Draft an Advertising Signage on Public Highways By-law that does not include a Uniform
Signage Program, and regulates and licenses standalone signage
4.Draft an Advertising Signage on Public Highways By-law that prohibits advertising signage
ATTACHMENTS
1.Existing NSTIR Signage Regulations
ATTACHMENT 1: EXISTING NSTIR STANDARDS FOR HIGHWAY SIGNAGE (EXCERPT
FROM ADVERTISING SIGNS REGULATIONS MADE UNDER SECTION 49 OF THE
PUBLIC HIGHWAYS ACT)
Sign sizes
10 An advertisement that is displayed on or adjacent to a highway
(a)where the maximum speed limit is at or below 80 km/h, shall have a maximum
area of 3 m²;
(b)where the maximum speed limit is greater than 80 km/h, shall have a maximum
area of 7.5 m².
Sign spacing
11 Advertisements that are displayed on or adjacent to a highway
(a)where the maximum speed limit is at or below 80 km/h, shall be a minimum of
50 m apart;
(b)where the maximum speed limit is greater than 80 km/h, shall be a minimum of
100 m apart.
Distance limitation
12 An advertisement that is displayed on or adjacent to a highway shall be located within 50 km
of the place or business to which the advertisement relates.
REQUEST FOR DECISION
Prepared By:Tara Maguire Date October 19, 2017
Reviewed By:Date
Authorized By:Tammy Wilson Date October 20, 2017
CURRENT SITUATION
Given the resignation of the former Fire Inspector, it is necessary to make some appointments
that will allow us to continue to enforce Dangerous and Unsightly Premises, and the Fire Safety
Act. Arden was also appointed as a special constable for the enforcement of the Motor Vehicle
Act was inadvertently missed. This appointment is necessary to provide authority to issue
parking tickets and will allow our staff to assist the RCMP in enforcement.At this time,due to
staff resources and capacity,we are proposing that this appointment be made once the
vacancy is filled.
RECOMMENDATION
To appoint Brent Haase as a Fire Inspector and as an administrator for Dangerous and
Unsightly Premises.
Further to direct staff to amend Mr. Haase’s application for Special Constable Status to
include enforcement of the Nova Scotia Fire Safety Act and Regulations, and relevant sections
of the Municipal Government Act.
DISCUSSION
Fire Inspection is a mandatory service, as required by the Nova Scotia Fire Safety Act.In 2014
Council appointed Bruce Blackwood as a Fire Inspector and Special Constable. Bruce has the
required certifications as a Level 1 inspector and is nearing completion of his level 2
certification however, his experience administering and enforcing the Nova Scotia Fire Safety
Act is limited. Given this, we are proposing that we appoint Brent Haase as a fire inspector.
Together, Brent and Bruce will be able to fulfil new inspection requests until the vacancy is
filled. This will not provide us with sufficient resources to do renewals but will provide capacity
to deal with urgent matters.This will also provide back up as special constable for enforcement
of Municipal Bylaws and the Dangerous and Unsightly Premises bylaw in the absence of the
REPORT TO:Municipal Council
SUBMITTED BY:Community Development
DATE:October 19, 2017
SUBJECT:Staff Appointment –Fire Inspection and
Administrator of Dangerous and
Unsightly Premises.
ORIGIN:
2 Request For Decision
replacement position.Brent has experience administering and enforcing the Nova Scotia Fire
Safety Act and has certification as a Fire Inspector.
IMPLICATIONS
Policy
No policy changes are necessary
Financial/Budgetary
None
Environmental
N/A
Strategic Plan
N/A
Work Program Implications
Existing Community Development Staff has the capacity to fill the void created by the vacancy
on an as needed basis until the vacancy is filled.
1
Cindy Hannaford
Subject:FW: RURAL CAUCUS MEETING AGENDA ITEMS--Action Required: Send in AgendaItems by October 29, 2017
From:UNSM Info [mailto:Info@unsm.ca]
Sent:Thursday, October 19, 2017 11:48 AM
To:Tracy Verbeke <TVerbeke@unsm.ca>
Subject:RURAL CAUCUS MEETING AGENDA ITEMS--Action Required: Send in Agenda Items by October 29, 2017
TO:Mayors, Wardens, Councillors and CAO’s, Rural Caucus
FR:Lyle Goldberg, Manager, Member Relations
RE:RURAL CAUCUS MEETING AGENDA ITEMS
The next Rural Caucus meeting takes place in conjunction with the UNSM Fall Conference on Wednesday, November 8
at the Westin in Halifax from 1:45 p.m.-4:15 p.m. This meeting will also include holding elections for any available
caucus positions.
If there are any items you would like added to the agenda please email them by Sunday, October 29 to
lgoldberg@unsm.ca.
If possible, please include relevant background information for the item you wish to discuss which could be attached to
the agenda.
Phone: (902) 423-8331
Fax: (902) 425-5592www.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.
Municipality of the District of Chester
Statement of Operations and Year End Forecast
Statement of Capital Projects and Year End Forecast
For the Six Months Ended September 30, 2017
The financial report on the draft operating results shows a surplus forecast for the year ended
March 31, 2018 of $266,718 versus a budgeted surplus of $53,851. The report explains most of
the line items variances, but a few highlights are as follows:
The surplus of $266,718 could be explained by a few major variances such as:
Recreation –trail maintenance under budget $37,317
Municipal property –Gold River School under budget $84,888
Waste collection –fuel rebate over budget $44,130
Waste collection –blue bags expense under budget $68,982
These four items add to $235,317.
Capital projects forecast shows that expenditures on capital project will be $8,067,717 versus a budget
of $9,027,100. The major project variances are:
VoC water system design $440,000
Industrial park development/acquisition $250,000
Wind project $83,000
Parkland $60,000
Council should be cautioned that a forecast is an estimate of the most likely results and as a
result is subject to change as actual results occur. The assumption used in the preparation of
the forecast are noted below. Adjustments made to the forecast were determined through
consultation with each program Director via a review of line by line revenues and expenditures.
Assumptions Made
1.Revenues and expenses in first six months will continue at same rate in second six months.
2.Adjustments made to #1 for any known one time revenues/expenditures in first six months.
3.Adjustments made to #1 for any known future changes in rate of accumulation of revenues or
expenditures in the second six months.
4.Global forecast adjustments made for accrued wages for the last week of September.
5.Global forecast adjustments made for wage benefits (CPP, EI, WCB) and vacation pay/accrual as
their impact is not even over the fiscal year.
Malcolm Pitman, CPA, CA
Director of Finance
October 20, 2017
Municipality of the District of Chester
Statement of Operations and Year End Forecast
Statement of Capital Projects and Year End Forecast
For the Six Months Ended September 30, 2017
Supplementary Forecast Comments
Further review of the financial report on the draft operating results has amended the surplus
forecast for the year ended March 31, 2018 from $266,718 to $580,077. The focus of the
additional review was on the Landfill operation. Forecast amendments were made as follows:
$192,094 HRM commercial tip fees increased –these are normally higher in the second half of
the year, but this was not captured in the original forecast
$ 99,144 Landfill operating expenses reduced –various expenses forecast to spend their
budgeted amounts were reduced based upon spending to date and revised estimates
$22,121 Transfer to reserves for landfill surplus –budget amount of $285,359 reduced to
$263,238 based upon Landfill surplus forecast.
$313,359 Total of the change in the forecast
The original surplus of $266,718, if correct, should have included a reduced transfer to reserves
for landfill surplus of approximately $10,000 vs. a forecast of $285,359.This would have
changed the forecast to $542k.However, with the above Landfill changes the forecast would
have then been revised as $542k + $192k +$99k -$253k = $580k, which is the current forecast.
Malcolm Pitman, CPA, CA
Director of Finance
October 24, 2017
2017-10-24
Municipality of the District of Chester
Income Statement - Actual vs. Budget
March 31, 2018 - Forecast
2016-2017 2016-2017 Analytical
ACTUAL BUDGET ACTUAL YTD Forecast Variance BUDGET Variance Review
March 31 TOTAL Sept. 30 $ TOTAL %Note #
EXPENDITURES
Council/Committee Remuneration 150,726 164,844 78,953 157,905 (3,001) 154,904 -1.9%
Administrative Expenses 64,266 90,047 23,633 85,153 (3,938) 81,215 -4.8%
Grants to Organizations 267,929 253,921 86,840 354,155 (13,155) 341,000 -3.9%
Elections and Plebiscites 57,452 75,000 2,824 2,823 16,177 19,000 85.1%1
Council 540,373 583,812 192,250 600,036 (3,917) 596,119 -0.7%
Salaries 365,582 374,906 172,779 404,557 21,276 425,833 5.0%2
Administration Expenses 113,790 128,551 48,598 123,857 13,208 137,065 9.6%3
Town Crier - 1,000 - 500 - 500 0.0%
Surveys/Appraisals 1,043 2,000 2,346 4,693 (2,693) 2,000 -134.6%4
Communications 10,985 33,520 4,462 23,294 6 23,300 0.0%
CAO 491,400 539,977 228,184 556,900 31,798 588,698 5.4%
Salaries 343,360 338,364 170,508 341,015 5,139 346,155 1.5%
Administration Expenses 232,991 260,235 151,269 242,164 11,319 253,484 4.5%5
Property Tax Administration 275,919 279,900 228,947 315,152 (30,302) 284,850 -10.6%6
Assessment Recovery Costs 340,514 340,514 255,211 340,281 233 340,514 0.1%
Finance 1,192,784 1,219,013 805,935 1,238,612 (13,610) 1,225,002 -1.1%
Salaries 218,369 217,195 106,322 212,644 15,225 227,869 6.7%7
Administration Expenses 195,723 210,245 70,265 233,596 7,200 240,796 3.0%
Debt Charges 18,992 19,122 17,467 18,729 - 18,729 0.0%
Information Systems 433,083 446,562 194,054 464,969 22,425 487,394 4.6%
Salaries 74,693 83,751 43,067 86,135 3,995 90,130 4.4%
Administrative Expenses 36,006 44,100 12,141 39,230 8,140 47,370 17.2%8
Property Services 114,662 110,976 71,979 144,006 77,094 221,100 34.9%9
Wharves, Boat Launches, etc 5,415 8,500 2,391 7,781 719 8,500 8.5%
Community Development/Gardens 7,687 15,000 7,695 22,537 (4,537) 18,000 -25.2%
Municipal Properties 238,463 262,327 137,273 299,690 85,410 385,100 22.2%
Salaries 142,041 154,663 72,790 145,581 6,099 151,680 4.0%
Administrative Expenses 56,005 85,197 19,867 58,913 10,087 69,000 14.6%10
Sprinkler/Fire Mill Cove 23,733 34,965 10,496 34,052 2,148 36,200 5.9%
Public Works 221,779 274,825 103,153 238,546 18,334 256,880 7.1%
Police Services 1,742,347 1,751,980 460,179 1,802,181 19,498 1,821,679 1.1%11
Correction Services 235,698 236,441 58,660 234,640 1 234,641 0.0%
Legal - Prosecution Services 7,725 5,000 - 5,000 - 5,000 0.0%
Policing / Corrections 1,985,770 1,993,421 518,839 2,041,821 19,499 2,061,320 0.9%
By-Law Operating Expenditures 18,185 35,751 8,290 31,389 3,767 35,156 10.7%
By-law 18,185 35,751 8,290 31,389 3,767 35,156 10.7%
Animal Control Operating Expenditures 67,440 76,700 20,988 75,161 1,639 76,800 2.1%
Animal control 67,440 76,700 20,988 75,161 1,639 76,800 2.1%
Remo Operating Expenditures 45,010 41,114 16,915 37,722 1,892 39,614 4.8%
REMO 45,010 41,114 16,915 37,722 1,892 39,614 4.8%
Salaries 62,925 58,310 9,653 19,305 5,956 25,261 23.6%12
Administrative Expenses 38,882 63,291 13,412 65,548 1,733 67,281 2.6%
Insurance 66,104 67,000 65,801 65,801 3,199 69,000 4.6%
Fire/Village Commissions 1,461,732 1,497,036 1,183,871 1,584,632 (83,214) 1,501,418 -5.5%13
Fire Contract -Districts 1,3,7 153,761 237,748 182,024 241,791 672 242,463 0.3%
Fire Rescue Boat 12,129 12,123 9,108 12,144 1 12,145 0.0%
Fire Protection 1,795,534 1,935,508 1,463,869 1,989,222 (71,653) 1,917,568 -3.7%
Salaries 142,972 166,763 79,073 158,145 29,771 187,916 15.8%14
Administrative Expenses 37,139 64,205 22,008 53,552 8,029 61,581 13.0%
Building Inspection 180,111 230,968 101,080 211,697 37,800 249,497 15.2%
Salaries 53,826 54,141 26,610 53,219 3,915 57,134 6.9%
Administrative Expenses 16,060 24,804 8,588 18,128 6,395 24,524 26.1%
Fire Inspection 69,885 78,945 35,198 71,348 10,310 81,658 12.6%
Administration 17,390 26,269 4,673 14,257 7,123 21,380 33.3%15
Provincial Road Maintenance Fee 182,494 182,494 92,616 238,232 418 238,650 0.2%
Municipal Roads & Street Signs 56,686 87,500 6,170 92,341 1,159 93,500 1.2%
Private Road Maintenance 90,660 90,660 104,397 104,397 (444) 103,953 -0.4%
Sidewalks/Crosswalks 93,669 90,000 12,686 86,930 11,070 98,000 11.3%16
Short Term Borrowing 3,959 3,965 - - - -
Debt Charges 77,439 78,517 38,510 77,251 (790) 76,461 -1.0%
Roads 522,297 559,405 259,052 613,408 18,536 631,944 2.9%
Streetlights - Administrative Expenses 108,995 107,255 45,138 109,288 323 109,611 0.3%
Streetlights 108,995 107,255 45,138 109,288 323 109,611 0.3%
Universal Sewer Salaries 165,253 223,549 85,686 171,372 27,828 199,200 14.0%17
Universal Sewer Operating Expenses 317,552 318,282 149,058 319,076 30,004 349,080 8.6%18
Debt Charges 46,859 39,670 65,922 81,219 (0) 81,219 0.0%
Sewers 529,664 581,501 300,666 571,667 57,832 629,499 9.2%
Waste Collection Salaries 43,384 57,134 22,649 45,298 7,165 52,463 13.7%19
Waste Collection Operating Expenses 1,260,209 1,298,424 552,983 1,189,735 132,123 1,321,857 10.0%20
Waste Collection 1,303,593 1,355,558 575,632 1,235,033 139,288 1,374,321 10.1%
Landfill Salaries 551,132 527,734 253,925 507,850 (32,989) 474,861 -6.9%21
Landfill Operating Expenses 556,027 745,468 287,899 721,182 73,073 794,254 9.2%22
Landfill Closure 2 Expenses 19,254 550,000 - 490,000 - 490,000 0.0%
Landfill Debt Charges 1,411,702 1,440,237 918,468 1,156,917 (0) 1,156,917 0.0%
2017-18
Page 1 of 3
2017-10-24
Municipality of the District of Chester
Income Statement - Actual vs. Budget
March 31, 2018 - Forecast
2016-2017 2016-2017 Analytical
ACTUAL BUDGET ACTUAL YTD Forecast Variance BUDGET Variance Review
March 31 TOTAL Sept. 30 $ TOTAL %Note #
2017-18
Landfill 2,538,115 3,263,439 1,460,292 2,875,949 40,083 2,916,033 1.4%
Recycling Salaries 22,813 25,957 10,521 21,042 4,324 25,366 17.0%23
Recycling Operating Expenses 28,178 38,615 9,949 32,984 4,963 37,947 13.1%24
Recycling 50,991 64,572 20,470 54,025 9,287 63,313 14.7%
Health Housing - Administrative Expenses 29,395 52,000 28,641 100,216 8,495 108,711 7.8%
Health 29,395 52,000 28,641 100,216 8,495 108,711 7.8%
Econ Dev - Salaries 60,129 81,726 12,623 54,646 31,227 85,874 36.4%25
Administration 43,037 105,249 12,435 79,621 12,699 92,321 13.8%26
REN 45,794 45,794 22,897 45,794 - 45,794 0.0%
Tourism Development 50,777 48,000 42,489 48,000 0 48,000 0.0%
Economic Development 199,737 280,769 90,445 228,062 43,927 271,988 16.2%
Planning Salaries 362,386 358,601 190,107 380,215 16,555 396,770 4.2%
Planning Operating Expenses 138,628 221,547 60,050 206,475 24,450 230,924 10.6%27
Planning 501,013 580,148 250,158 586,689 41,005 627,694 6.5%
Industrial Park Operating Expenses 14,987 21,082 5,131 16,176 5,312 21,488 24.7%28
Eco Park 14,987 21,082 5,131 16,176 5,312 21,488 24.7%
Wind Energy Operating Expenses 75,261 89,741 62,077 79,457 (566) 78,890 -0.7%
Wind Energy Debt Cost 327,134 327,905 280,905 324,572 - 324,572 0.0%
Wind Turbine 402,394 417,646 342,983 404,029 (566) 403,462 -0.1%
Recreation Salaries 440,235 421,075 209,586 377,332 18,266 395,599 4.6%29
Recreation Grants to Organizations 46,688 56,000 18,507 56,000 0 56,000 0.0%
Recreation Operating Expenses 264,615 331,686 124,985 288,255 44,117 332,372 13.3%30
Recreation Debt Charges 38,615 39,167 35,459 37,329 - 37,329 0.0%
Church Memorial Park - 50,000 - 50,000 - 50,000 0.0%
Recreation 790,153 897,928 388,537 808,916 62,384 871,300 7.2%
Heritage Properties - 500 - - 500 500 100.0%
Library Contributions 68,035 69,056 34,358 68,715 1,722 70,437 2.4%
School Board Contributions 4,602,030 4,602,030 2,322,779 4,689,086 (43,528) 4,645,558 -0.9%
Heritage Library School 4,670,065 4,671,586 2,357,136 4,757,801 (41,306) 4,716,495 -0.9%
Extraordinary Revenue Items (6,880) - - - - -
Extraordinary (6,880) - - - - -
Global forecast adjustments
Payroll expense 2 weeks ended October 7 71,193 142,387 (142,387)
CPP, EI, WCB exp lower in 2nd half of year (18,000) 18,000
Vacation accrual usage exceeds accrual - assume will equal by year end 29,266 58,532 (58,532)
71,193 182,919 (182,919)
Expenditure Total 18,934,335 20,571,812 10,036,135 20,401,290 345,375 20,746,665 1.7%
0
REVENUES
Property Tax and GIL 13,149,196 13,046,659 13,046,472 13,639,099 66,718 13,572,381 0.5%31
Council election 20,637 - - - - -
Finance Admin 231,668 173,750 116,945 233,889 60,064 173,825 34.6%32
Public Works 9,477 44,877 45,577 9,477 (35,400) 44,877 -78.9%33
Fire Protection 1,798,655 1,840,026 1,936,098 1,934,074 83,107 1,850,967 4.5%34
Remo 7,270 6,976 1,253 7,006 30 6,976 0.4%
Animal Control 35,564 37,350 17,345 35,064 (61) 35,125 -0.2%
Building & Fire Inspection 47,103 36,662 27,783 47,743 8,081 39,662 20.4%35
Roads 139,360 139,612 149,899 149,899 (3,376) 153,275 -2.2%
Streetlights 106,892 107,255 107,252 109,289 (322) 109,611 -0.3%
Universal Sewer 881,414 862,323 943,753 950,307 7,807 942,500 0.8%
Waste Collection and RRFB 1,643,292 1,641,599 1,614,696 1,734,663 (23,819) 1,758,482 -1.4%36
Landfill 3,809,730 3,187,316 1,762,492 3,417,888 (46,410) 3,464,298 -1.3%37
Recycling 91 500 71 143 (357) 500 -71.5%
Planning 71,704 68,808 36,271 69,681 2,452 67,229 3.6%
ECOPark 5,054 5,000 11,515 23,031 18,031 5,000 360.6%38
Wind Turbine 729,854 719,650 308,929 758,929 39,279 719,650 5.5%39
Recreation 226,293 110,150 65,775 123,084 (24,266) 147,350 -16.5%40
Revenue Total 22,913,255 22,028,513 20,192,124 23,243,264 151,557 23,091,708 0.7%
(0)
Net surplus (Deficit) - excluding depreciation 3,978,920 1,456,701 10,155,989 2,841,975 496,932 2,345,043 21.2%
(0)
Reconcile to Surplus (deficit) for property tax purposes
Federal and provincial capital grants revenue 680,349 1,815,957 13,994 657,007 7,299 649,708 1.1%
Transfer from reserves revenue 929,401 2,347,330 - 410,858 - 410,858 0.0%
Transfer to reserves expense (3,741,555) (2,055,532) (8,079) (2,856,080) 10,978 (2,867,058) -0.4%
Capital from revenue expense (1,058,695) (3,562,025) 14,116 (473,682) 11,018 (484,700) -2.3%
(3,190,500) (1,454,270) 20,031 (2,261,897) 29,295 (2,291,192) -1.3%
Surplus (Deficit) for property tax purposes 788,420 2,431 10,176,020 580,077 526,227 53,851 977.2%
Page 2 of 3
2017-10-24
Municipality of the District of Chester
Income Statement - Actual vs. Budget
March 31, 2018 - Forecast
2016-2017 2016-2017 Analytical
ACTUAL BUDGET ACTUAL YTD Forecast Variance BUDGET Variance Review
March 31 TOTAL Sept. 30 $ TOTAL %Note #
2017-18
Notes on Analytical Review of Variances
Expenditures
Council
1 16,177 Elections plebiscites expense - One bi-election this year, but expense low as elected by acclamation
CAO
2 21,276 Salaries down as new position did not start until end of September
3 13,208 Administration expenses down as training/PD and conferences are down
4 (2,693) Surveys/Appraisals over budget due to work on Sustane property
Finance
5 11,319 Administration down due to insurance expense underbudget
6 (30,302) Property tax administration overbudget due to new property being granted a property tax exemption
Information systems
7 15,225 Salaries underbudget due expense for last week Sept. recorded in Oct. (see global forecast adjustment above)
Municipal Properties
8 8,140 Administrative expense under budget due to mileage and phone
9 77,094 Property services underbudget due to the Gold River School
Public Works
10 10,087 Administrative expense under budget due to mileage, phone, computer service maintenance and engineering services
Policing / Corrections
11 19,498 Police Services underbudget as final annual increase was less than budgeted
Fire Protection
12 5,956 Salaries down as very little overtime compared to budget
13 (83,214) Fire/Village Commissions payments up as VOC had rate increase that was not budgeted. Offset by additional revenue (note 35).
Building Inspection
14 29,771 Salaries down as lower salary band being paid than was budgeted. Also, see note 7 as same applies.
Roads
15 7,123 Administration down due to various items such as storm drainage, legal and advertising
16 11,070 Sidewalks/crosswalks - spent $7,400 YTD on sidewalk mtce. and do not expect to spend any more out of $17,500 budget
Sewers
17 27,828 Salaries and wages - less time spent on sewer maintenance therefore less time allocated
18 30,004 Operating expenses - down in various operating expense items
Waste Collection
19 7,165 Waste Collection Salaries underbudet, but in line with actuals for last two years
20 132,123 Waste Collection Operating Expenses underbudget due to blue bag charges and fuel rebate, but in line with actuals for last two years
Landfill
21 (32,989) Landfill Salaries overbudget due to insufficient budget as actuals are in line with last two years
22 73,073 Landfill Operating Expenses underbudget due to engineering services, site maintenance and lagoons expense.
Recycling
23 4,324 Recycling Salaries temporaily underbudget due to summer vacation. See global adjustment for vacation expense.
24 4,963 Recycling Operating Expenses underbudget due to public bins and blue bins expenses and various office expenses
Economic Development
25 31,227 Salaries underbudget due to vacancy for part of the year
26 12,699 Administration underbudget due to promotions expense
Planning
27 24,450 Planning Operating Expenses down due to various expenses such as photocopier, legal, planning review and books/subscriptions.
Eco Park
28 5,312 Industrial Park Operating Expenses underbudegt due to surveys/appraisals
Recreation
29 18,266 Recreation Salaries - overtime is underbudget
30 44,117 Recreation Operating expenses underbudget due to trail maintenance expense
Other
Adj (182,919) Global adjustment for accrued wages, CPP, EI & WCB exp and vacation usage
Oth 15,997
345,375
Revenues
31 66,718 Ppty tax and GIL overbudget due to deed transfer tax
32 60,064 Finance admin revenue overbudget due to interest on overdue taxes and investments
33 (35,400) Public works revenue underbudget due to Mill Cove wells area that is not revenue, but a payment on loan receivable.
34 83,107 Fire protection revenue is overbudget as VOC had a rate increase that was not budgeted. Offset to payment expense to VOC (see note 13)
35 8,081 Bldg and Fire Inspection revenue up due building permits revenue
36 (23,819) Waste Collection and RRFB - waste processing fee Town of Lunenburg is down, but so was last year's
37 (46,410) Landfill tipping fees revenue is down, but in line with last year's actual which was down because of less contaminated soil. Partially offset by increase in Valley revenues
38 18,031 ECOPark revenue overbudget as Sustane lease revenue was not budgeted
39 39,279 Wind Turbine revenue forecasted to be over budget, based upon YTD revenue and average of the last two years revenue in the 2nd half of the year.
40 (24,266) Recreation - pro-kids underbudget and budget for municiapl grants reveneu of $5k forecast as zero
Oth 6,172
151,557
496,932
29,295 Transfers to Reserves down $22,122 as transfer for landfill surplus of $263,237 less than budgeted $285,359.
526,227
Page 3 of 3
Municipality of the District of Chester
Actuals to Sept. 30, 2017 and Forecast to March 31, 2018
Adjusted
Actual Forecast Budget
Capital Revenue
Transfer from General Operating 239,187 455,805 468,700
Borrowing 1,706,154 3,355,000 4,254,200
Grants - Other 391,162 3,236,000 2,294,200
Sewer reserve 5,071 40,300 433,000
Parkland reserve - 53,294 92,500
Recreation reserve - - 12,500
Wind Revenue reserve - 217,000 550,000
Gas tax reserve 41,720 199,874 379,000
Operating reserve 51,000 510,444 543,000
2,434,295 8,067,717 9,027,100
Capital Expenditures
Wind Project - 17,000 100,000
GPS Units - 20,000 20,000
- 37,000 120,000
Chester Basin Wharf 10,489 10,489
Municipal Bldg Improvements & Repairs - Annex 25,678 125,000 125,000
Fire Protection System Mill Cove 22,585 165,000 165,000
Fire Protection System Distribution & Repairs -MC - 35,000 35,000
Fire Protect Sys Design -Decommissioning Review-MC - 20,000 20,000
Collection Sys - Cleaning & Videoing - Blue Area - 16,000 20,400
Manhole Repairs & Infiltration Reduction 1,289 20,000 40,800
Pump Replacements - Allowance - 15,000 15,300
System Assessment - Chester - 5,000 15,000
Pump Station Refurbished - Chester PS 4 - 15,300 15,300
VOC Water System - Design 23,446 60,000 500,000
Property Improvements - WWTPs - - 10,200
System Assessments - Western Shore - 5,000 15,000
WWTP Upgrades -UV & Bldg Upgrades 61,552 1,761,000 1,761,200
System Assessment - Chester Basin - 2,500 7,500
WWTP Bldg Replacement & Repairs 5,071 10,000 12,500
System Assessment - Otter Pt - 2,500 7,500
Wasterwater Plant Improvements - New Plant 328,966 1,441,000 1,441,800
System Assessment - Mill Cove - 5,000 10,000
Public Works 479,076 3,713,789 4,217,500
Snowplowed Skid Steer - 9,800 9,800
Office Roof Shingle - Metal 5,037 6,500 12,000
Main Leachate Pump 23,961 23,961 20,000
Convert to roll off truck*3 containers - 60,000 60,000
Second Tower Site 13,073 200,000 200,000
Road Upgrade - 50,000 50,000
Cell 4A Design & Construction 1,693,081 3,130,000 3,130,000
Truck Replacement - 1 tonne w/dump box - 52,000 65,000
Loader Replacement 201,793 201,793 190,000
Chlorine Contact Chamber - 25,000 25,000
Solid Waste 1,936,945 3,759,054 3,761,800
ED-Industrial Park Development/Acquisition - 200,000 450,000
Permit Tracking Software - 60,000 60,000
Flood Plain Modelling - 100,000 100,000
Backbone - Broadband Design - 20,000 50,000
Community Development - 380,000 660,000
Grants - Other (16,700) (16,700)
Trails-Surface Upgrades (AT 6.20)29,551 29,551 15,000
Trails - Bridge Evaluation - - 25,000
Trails - Swing Gates Project 5,423 7,023 7,800
Land Acquisition -Parkland - 110,000 170,000
East River Trail - 25,000 25,000
Spectacle Lake Cottage Demolition - 15,000 15,000
Gold River Park Land/Playground - 8,000 10,000
Recreation 18,274 177,874 267,800
2,434,295 8,067,717 9,027,100
- - -
Capital Only
Municipal Awareness Week
Proposed Itinerary
Date Event Description Location/
District Confirmed
Nov. 20
Launch of online
photo/FYI
campaign
This campaign will
encourage residents to
post photos of MODC to
our social media
platforms. MODC will post
photos, videos, and FYIs all
week.
Municipal-wide √
Special COW
meeting & tour
Hold a special COW
meeting
(live stream)
4 - FHCS √
Nov. 22 Classroom
presentations
“What if the Municipality
didn’t exist?” story book
with props or fake election
themes
2 - ACES
6 – NRCS √
7 – KML √
Nov. 24
1:00pm Sewer Plant tour Invite the public to
municipal sewer plant 3 – Chester STP √
Nov. 25
10:00am
2:00pm
Trails/Park Day
Showcase of municipal
parks and trails including
an organized hike and
kids’ day @ playground
1 – East River
5 – GRWS school √
Nov. 26 Island Boat Tour &
Picnic
Boat tour of municipal
islands Clay Island X
Nov. 21
9:00am
Nov. 2 Open House
Invite the public to Kaizer
Meadow for refreshments,
tours, etc.
Municipal Awareness Week
Messaging & Event Descriptions
Key Provincial messages:
• Importance of municipal government in people’s daily lives
• Encouraging participation by citizens
• Increase voter turnout
Key Municipal messages:
• Showcase what municipal government and Councillors do (vs. provincial and in general)
• Where do our taxes go?
Event Descriptions
Online Campaign • Post to Instagram, Facebook, Twitter
• Create hashtag or use UNSM’s
• MAW video, marketing videos, photos, selfies, fun facts/DYKs
Special COW
• Highlight Community School partnership
• Tour?
• Involve Student Council
• Refreshments
• Facebook live stream?
Class Presentations
• Have a skit/presentation/or pretend election (UNSM has a
powerpoint template, but it’s pretty dry)
• Giveaways
Open House
• Campfire
• Meet “Dear Shabby”
• Region 6 present
• Refreshments?
• Landfill tour, highlighting economic development aspect
• Giveaways
Sewer Plant tour • Visual of how a sewer plant works
Trails Day • Organized hike (District 1)
• Kids activities (District 5)
Other Potential Events suggested by UNSM
• Poster/essay contest
• Warden for a day contest
• Historical-related event (UNSM suggested citizens developing material for their
community)
• Sporting event (curling? Hockey? UNSM suggests Council challenging group to sporting
event)
• Host a pancake breakfast
• Displays (could install in various locations)
• Job shadowing
• Develop short videos (of councillors maybe?)
• Community member profiles
Municipal Awareness Week
Communications
We will utilize existing municipal resources, such as
• Municipal newsletter
• Social media platforms
• MODC website
• UNSM website via Lyle Goldberg (lgoldberg@unsm.ca 423-8673)
• Media advisory (UNSM has a template) to inform media of events
• Proclamation at November 2 meeting to kick off promotion
• Post-event media release with photos of events