►
Description
Environment and Climate Protection Committee Meeting -
September 19, 2017 - Audio Stream
Agenda and background materials can be found athttp://www.ottawa.ca/agendas
A
A
A
Conformation
of
minutes
Tuesday
20th
of
June
2017
carried.
Thank
you
communications.
Unless
someone
wishes
to
lift
those
items,
we
move
on
then
to
item
1
status,
update
Environment
and
climate
Protection,
Committee
inquiries
and
motions
for
the
period
ending
12th,
September
2017.
Those
received
queue.
A
A
Item
for
then
2016
drinking
water
quality
management
system,
annual
management
review
report
I
know
wish
to
be
held.
Councillor
Drew's
and
others
wish
to
hold
that
one
and
I
believe
a
brief
presentation
is
planned
for
that
item.
Is
that
right,
yep?
Okay,
thank
you
item.
Five
financial
statements
are
in
house
solid
waste
collection,
external
audit
results
2016.
A
C
E
A
D
You
mr.
chair,
maybe
Phil.
Allow
me
a
just
switch
to
presentation
just
a
minute
of
intro
that
I
wanted
to
highlight
we
in
front
of
you.
Basically,
we
have
both
finance
and
the
asset
management
team
with
infrastructure
services.
Isabel
jasmine
to
my
left,
Kelly
Martin
to
my
right
and
also
to
his
right
is
Shelley.
Macdonald
and
I
would
like
to
highlight
basically
both
Shelley
and
Kelly,
and
also
some
of
the
members
of
the
team
for
the
hard
work
that
they
have
done,
including
Patrick
Brazeau
in
terms
of
bringing
us
this
report
forward.
D
A
D
What
that
means
that
there
is
a
contributions
that
Kelly
has
brought
to
this
organization
in
terms
of
providing
stability
in
terms
of
our
assets,
but
also
in
terms
of
the
finance
needed
to
sustain
those
assets
and,
at
the
same
time,
I
want
to
welcome
shelly
mcdonald
to
his
right,
who
is
the
new
manager
of
asset
management
within
infrastructure
services?
Shelly
has
taken
over
the
role
that
tech,
healthy
was
occupying
and
Shelly
will
be
the
one
that
will
be
leading
you
through
the
presentations
me.
F
F
The
city
maintains
nearly
42
billion
in
existing
infrastructure
rates,
supported
assets
represent
about
21
billion
of
the
total
replacement
value.
This
infrastructure
is
needed
to
allow
the
city
to
deliver
to
residents,
businesses
and
visitors
with
services
that
are
essential
to
quality
of
life
and
economic
growth.
F
We
sometimes
take
for
granted
the
ability
to
turn
on
our
taps
and
have
drinking
water
walking
through
various
areas
in
the
city
and
able
to
enjoy
the
natural
beauty
provided
in
part
by
the
stormwater
management
systems
and
the
removal
of
waste
water,
effortlessly
and
its
treatment
before
it
returns
to
the
Ottawa
River.
There
are
many
assets
that
form
part
of
these
integrated
systems
that
need
to
remain
reliable,
safe
and
in
a
state
of
good
repair,
so
that
our
residents
can
maintain
a
high
quality
of
life
and
economic
growth.
F
Kam
ensures
the
right
intervention
on
the
right
asset
at
the
right
time,
while
balancing
affordability
and
risk
this
approach
is
not
new.
Successive
city
councils
have
taken
a
number
of
actions
to
proactively
ensure
the
long
term
integrity
of
the
city's
infrastructure,
beginning
in
2002,
with
the
first
long-range
financial
plan,
followed
by
the
integrated
asset
management
strategy
in
2003.
The
capital
standards
review
for
Public
Works
infrastructure
in
2004
and
a
comprehensive
asset
management
program.
F
Cam
in
2012
councils
have
taken
the
necessary
steps
to
ensure
they
and
the
public
have
a
deeper
understanding
of
the
city's
infrastructure
needs.
So
proper
planning
can
inform
councils
investments
in
maintenance,
renewal
and
replacement
as
part
of
each
long-range
financial
plan,
and
every
annual
budget
I
am
proud
to
share
that.
The
City
of
Ottawa
is
a
municipal
leader
in
asset
management
practices
and
long-range
financial
planning.
F
In
June,
2017
Council
received
an
update
on
the
city's
camp
program
in
relation
to
tax
supported
assets,
for
example,
recreation
facilities,
roads
and
sidewalks,
to
name
a
few.
That
report
also
included
the
2017
state
of
the
asset
report,
also
known
as
soar
and
a
strategic
asset
management
plan,
which
is
also
known
as
a
samp.
F
I'd
like
to
highlight
the
progress
that
has
been
made
specifically
for
the
rate,
supportive
programs,
they're
been
improved,
infrastructure,
cost
estimates
and
applied.
Affordability
lends
to
the
infrastructure,
master
plan
and
the
transportation
master
plan.
A
draft
capital
project
value
assessment
for
project
prioritization
has
been
developed.
Some
of
our
existing
infrastructure
standards
had
been
reviewed
through
the
building
better
and
smarter
suburbs
initiative.
F
Time
was
devoted
to
engage
with
a
cross-section
of
professionals
from
across
the
city
and
a
development
community
to
review
some
of
the
city
standards
and
look
for
opportunities
to
line
with
other
municipal
standards,
or
look
for
changes
that
won't
impact
service
level,
but
in
the
future
reduce
the
number
of
assets
within
our
inventory.
The
city
has
participated
on
a
provincial
expert
panel
for
the
development
of
an
asset
management
regulation
and
finally,
as
mentioned
previously,
council
has
received
the
updated
state
of
the
asset
report
for
2017
and
the
first
consolidated
a
strategic
asset
management
plan.
F
We
have
been
what
would
have
been
our
key
accomplishments
since
2012,
we
have
successfully
applied
the
kam
approach
to
select
and
receive
phase
one
federal
program
funding
for
the
clean
water
and
wastewater
fund.
This
is
a
federal
program
designed
to
accelerate
short-term
community
investments
while
supporting
the
rehabilitation
and
modernization
of
drinking
water,
wastewater
and
stormwater
infrastructure,
and
the
planning
and
design
of
future
facilities
and
upgrades
to
existing
systems
through
the
CWF
569
and
a
half
million
is
provided
through
federal
infrastructure
funding
and
up
to
a
further
270
million
of
provincial
funding.
F
This
results
represents
approximately
a
hundred
million
dollar
investment
for
Ottawa.
We
have
kept
pace
with
the
2012
state
of
good
repair
strategy
for
the
raid
assets
and
we
successfully
launched
a
transformational
project,
the
combined
sewage
storage
tunnel.
The
construction
is
started
on
the
CSS
tee,
a
marquee
project
for
the
Ottawa
River
action
plan
to
improve
the
quality
of
water
in
the
Ottawa
River.
The
CSG
project
is
a
two
hundred
and
thirty
two
point:
three
million
dollar
investment,
with
funding
provided
by
the
Government
of
Canada
province
of
Ontario
and
the
City
of
Ottawa.
F
City
infrastructure
assets
are
safe,
full
details
on
the
assets
can
be
found
in
the
2017
state
of
the
asset
report,
as
I
mentioned
earlier,
it
was
received
by
Council
in
June,
as
the
city's
inventory
of
rate
supported
assets
continues
to
expand
an
age.
Our
risk-based
approach
reduces
the
impacts
to
services.
Sustained
investments
are
needed
to
keep
pace
with
deterioration
along
with
refinement
of
the
future
needs
and
uncertainties.
F
Timing
of
the
needs
and
potential
non-financial
strategies
we
need
to
prepare
for
the
wave
of
renewal
needs
sustained
the
levels
of
service
and
incorporate
the
requirements
based
on
legislative
changes.
The
city
has
and
will
continue
to
put
in
place,
risk-based
financial
and
non-financial
frameworks
and
approaches
to
manage
the
way
forward.
F
Specifically,
we
will
continue
to
enhance
the
can
program,
governance
and
implementation
through
the
capital
project,
value
assessments,
to
link
investments
to
service
level
outcomes,
preparing
the
service
based
asset
management
plans,
integrating
life
cycle
costing
into
asset
based
decision
making
and
through
some
data
and
system
improvements
we
will
document,
as
is
levels
of
service
for
core
service
areas,
evaluate
asset
needs
and
timing
of
implementation.
Against
the
documented
and
communicated
levels
of
service
expectations.
We
will
assess
the
outcome
of
phase
two
of
federal
funding,
programs
and
provincial
asset
management
regulation.
F
F
The
development
of
soror
included
working
sessions
and
consultation
with
multiple
business
lines
across
each
city
department.
The
kam
steering
committee
has
representation
from
all
departments
and
has
overseen
the
development
of
all
cam
initiatives
and
the
L
RFP
update.
The
condition
of
the
city's
assets
has
remained
relatively
stable
in
fairly
good
condition.
Some
assets
remain
in
poor
or
very
poor
condition,
but
staff
are
aware
of
these
assets
and
they
are
tracked
assessed
and
managed
on
a
risk
to
service
basis.
F
The
city
continues
to
apply
recognized
asset
management
practices
to
maintain
the
whole
range
of
rate
funded
assets
in
a
state
of
good
repair
and
the
city's
foundational
asset
management
practices
have
been
put
in
place
in
order
to
address
the
next
set
of
challenges
in
the
rehabilitation,
renewal
and
replacement
of
the
city's
infrastructure.
As
mentioned
in
the
report,
the
City
of
Ottawa,
like
other
Canadian
cities,
experienced
tremendous
growth
over
a
relatively
short
period
of
time
between
the
1950s
and
1980s.
F
Since
the
last
saw
report
have
focused
on
providing
system
redundancy
and
the
necessary
planning
and
design
works
for
rehabilitation,
growth
and
legislative
changes
at
Britannia,
the
communal
wealth
systems,
pumping
stations
and
water
mains
across
the
city,
the
Robert
o
Picard,
Environmental,
Center
or
ro
Peck.
The
city's
wastewater
treatment
plant,
the
pump
stations
and
over
2,800
kilometers
of
sanitary
sewers
trunks
collectors
and
force
main
pipes,
remove
the
water
use
in
the
homes
and
businesses
daily
and
on
demand.
F
Investments
on
the
wastewater
side
have
primarily
been
focused
on
rehabilitation
and
renewal
planning,
design
and
construction
at
row,
peck
lining
and
renewal
of
pipes
and
pump
station
growth
and
renewal
requirements.
The
stormwater
systems
consist
of
both
natural
and
physical
assets
to
collect
and
convey
rain
and
snowmelt
away
safely.
There
are
over
2,700
kilometers
of
storm,
collector
trunks
and
force
mains,
numerous
pump
stations,
ponds,
storm
management
structures,
outfalls
ditches
and
culverts
that
form
part
of
that
system.
F
The
city
uses
an
extensive
enterprise
system
to
monitor
and
schedule
maintenance
activities
at
the
asset
level
staff
have
the
ability
to
review
historical
information
at
the
asset
level
to
support
their
decision-making.
For
example,
investigations
to
optimize
interventions,
consider
the
performance,
failure
modes
and
the
system
requirements
staff
can
review
the
information
and
adjust
the
type
of
maintenance
or
work
that
should
be
completed
at
that
asset
or
adjust
the
frequency
either
increase
or
lengthen
the
time
between
the
work.
F
Continuous
improvement
approach,
reinvest
operational
savings
back
into
the
system,
not
all
pipes
and
pumps
are
the
same
depending
on
the
location
or
the
type
of
work
that
the
asset
performs.
Supervisors
and
planners
can
make
changes
that
will
shift
staff
time
to
be
focused
on
parts
of
the
system
that
require
a
different
level
of
attention.
Staff
engagement
is
a
key
component
of
the
process.
A
pillar
of
CAM
is
maintenance
and
operations.
These
professionals
that
operate
and
maintain
our
rate
supported
assets
have
been
doing
their
jobs
for
a
long
time.
F
A
risk-based
approach
is
used
to
establish
inspection
frequencies
and
the
information
gathered
from
the
inspections
is
used
to
support
the
prioritization
and
coordination
needs
for
the
buried
assets.
The
large
diameter
water
main
inspection
program
is
comprised
of
230
kilometres
of
water
main
that
are
610
millimeters
or
about
two
feet
in
diameter
or
larger.
These
pipes
typically
transport
the
water
from
the
two
purification
plants
across
the
city
to
the
reservoirs
and
pump
stations
that
are
in
the
local
neighborhoods.
F
The
reocnstruction
cycle
is
relatively
long
compared
to
other
buried
assets
based
on
the
inspections
that
have
been
completed
since
the
program
was
launched
in
2012,
the
reocnstruction
frequency
would
be
every
35
years,
while
the
reinfection
frequency
for
a
similar,
similar
critical
asset
on
the
wastewater
system
is
between
two
and
ten
years,
hydraulic
modeling
to
determine
how
growth
will
be
accommodated,
is
reported
through
the
infrastructure
master
plans,
one
for
water
and
one
for
wastewater.
The
hydraulic
modeling
helps
to
determine
the
capacity
of
the
existing
systems
to
accommodate
additional
properties
to
be
connected.
F
The
long-range
financial
plan,
five
for
water
wastewater
and
stormwater
assets,
has
identified
current
requirements
representing
an
average
of
310
million
per
year
in
2017
dollars,
which
includes
the
renewal,
growth
and
strategic
initiatives.
The
net
city
rate
capital
investment
required
is,
on
average
260
million
per
year
again
in
2017
dollars.
Once
external
revenue
sources,
including,
but
not
limited
to
development
charges
are
removed.
This
investment
rate
provides
for
the
capital
reinvestment
needs
identified
over
the
course
of
2016
and
2017.
F
A
G
So
on
the
long-range
financial
plan
for
water,
wastewater
and
storm
water
is
the
fifth
since
amalgamation
and
is
the
third
and
final
long-range
financial
plan
in
a
series
of
plans
prepared
during
this
term
of
council,
which
includes
the
transit
lr
FP
and
the
L
RFP
for
tax
supported
programs.
The
L
RFP
v,
presented
to
Council
in
2012,
provided
a
funding
plan
that
would
provide
2.1
billion
in
capital
funding
over
a
10-year
period.
G
Over
ten
years
staff
have
implemented
those
rate
increases
each
year
per
council
approval
as
part
of
the
annual
budgeting
process,
the
2012
plan,
the
2012
plan,
had
assumed
that
water
consumption
would
remain
consistent
over
those
ten
years.
However,
there
was
a
reduction
in
per
capita
water
consumption
over
the
past.
G
Four
years,
dropping
from
87
million
cubic
meters
to
81
million
in
2013
to
2015
consumption,
increased
in
2016
due
to
a
drought
and
then
dropped
below
normal
levels
in
2017,
due
to
higher
than
projected
rainfall
to
be,
conservative
staff
have
assumed
the
2015
consumption
levels
to
develop
the
forecast
and
the
plan
for
the
next
10
years.
The
net
capital
requirement
for
the
past
four
years
has
also
been
higher
than
planned
to
maintain
assets
in
a
state
of
good
repair.
G
G
Since
the
rate
supported
programs
are
fully
funded
by
rate
revenues,
the
long-range
plan
includes
a
forecast
for
both
operating
and
capital
costs
for
the
next
ten
years.
Throughout
this
presentation,
we
focus
only
on
the
capital
investment
requirement,
but
it
is
important
to
note
that
the
funding
plan
was
developed
considering
overall
expenditure
requirements,
capital
investment
requirements
include
asset
renewal,
growth
projects
and
strategic
initiatives
and
projects
from
regulatory
requirements
in
2012,
the
ask
for
REITs
supported
capital
investment
for
renewal
growth
and
strategic
initiatives
was
2.8
billion
dollars
over
ten
years,
which
is
3.1
billion
in
2017
dollars.
G
Growth
related
projects
are
also
funded
from
development
charges
collected
from
new
development
senior
government
funding
may
also
be
received
in
relation
to
specific
approved
projects.
Throughout
this
presentation,
I
will
I
will
be
referring
to
the
net
requirement,
which
is
does
not
include
external
sources
of
funding
from
development
charges
and
other
levels
of
government.
It
is
the
amount
that
must
be
funded
from
rate
revenues
and
from
debt.
Therefore,
the
gross
requirement
is
2.1
billion,
but
the
net
requirement
that
must
become
from
rate
revenues
and
debt
funding
is
2.6
billion.
G
As
mentioned
earlier,
the
average
revenue
increase
proposed
in
the
previous
Dell
RFP
was
5.7
percent.
Over
10
years
the
average
forecast
increases
now
4.8%
increases
are
slightly
higher
than
originally
forecast
for
2018
and
2019
being
above
5%,
but
then
decrease
over
time
below
5
to
4.2
percent
in
2027.
This
reflects
the
need
to
catch
up
slightly
from
the
previous
year's
revenue
shortfalls
and
to
match
the
capital
investment
requiring
requirements
in
the
next
few
years,
which
I
will
describe
in
more
detail
later.
G
These
revenue
increases
are
smooth
over
the
period
so
that
there
is
some
predictability
for
the
public.
Unexpected
rate
increases
from
one
year
to
the
next.
In
previous
years,
the
rate
increases
were
consolidated
into
one
overall
rate
increase
for
water
and
sewer
services.
Council
approved
a
new
rate
structure
last
year
that
would
that
would
take
effect
in
2018
when
the
new
water
billing
system
is
implemented.
G
The
new
rate
structure,
approved
by
council
in
2016,
provides
much
greater
flexibility
to
match
increases
to
the
specific
service
and
the
fixed
and
variable
components
of
the
rate.
Individual
rate
increases
will
be
established
each
year
as
part
of
the
budgeting
process,
using
the
overall
revenue
requirements
established
by
the
lr
FP
as
a
target.
The
overall
revenue
target
is
set
to
increase
by
a
certain
percentage,
but
the
actual
rate
increases
will
depend
on
forecast,
consumption
number
of
water
accounts,
number
of
properties
for
the
stormwater
fee
and
assessment
values
in
comparison
to
other
municipalities.
G
Ottawa's
rates
are
below
the
median
toronto
increased
its
water
and
wastewater
rates
by
8%
and
York
by
9%,
because
stormwater
is
a
small
cost
compared
to
the
other
two
services.
The
13%
increase
in
2018
in
dollar
terms
is
quite
low
for
the
average
average
rural
resident.
It
represents
an
increase
of
roughly
three
dollars
and
50
cents
per
year.
G
The
funding
strategy
used
for
the
long-range
plan
is
based
on
four
key
principles:
not
to
exceed
the
15%
debt
servicing
as
a
percentage
of
revenues,
use
longer
debt
financing
terms
to
reduce
the
cost
annually
to
within
affordable
envelopes,
to
match
the
life
of
the
asset
and,
most
importantly,
to
ensure
that
future
generations
that
will
benefit
from
the
asset
pay
for
it.
Not
just
today's
taxpayers
maintain
capital
reserves
of
at
least
sixty
sixty
dollars
to
manage
blockages
sorry,
sixty
million
dollars
to
manage
fluctuations
in
operating
costs
revenues.
G
The
net
capital
investment
required
is
2.6
billion
over
ten
years,
which
equates
to
roughly
260
million
per
year.
However,
current
funding
is
196
million
per
year.
Staff
have
developed
a
plan
that
will
fund
the
entire
2.6
billion
over
10
years,
but
that
will
require
higher
rate
increases
in
the
early
years,
declining
over
time
and
some
additional
debt
in
the
early
years.
G
This
graph
provides
a
good
overview
of
the
funding
plan.
The
ask
for
capital
investment
in
the
first
few
years
is
higher
than
current
funding
levels,
therefore,
to
smooth
out
the
impact
on
water,
wastewater
and
stormwater
rates
and
maintain
debt
within
affordable
levels.
The
capital
investment
must
also
be
smoothed
out
based
on
this
plan.
Full
funding
is
achieved
in
2023
and
thereafter
continues
to
increase,
at
a
slower
rate,
to
find
investments
that
would
have
been
pushed
out
to
later
years
again,
while
maintaining
service
levels
in
a
state
of
good
repair.
G
Based
on
this
plan,
the
full
2.6
billion
is
funded
over
a
10-year
period,
as
mentioned
earlier,
debt
is
issued
in
the
early
years
to
help
alleviate
the
pressure
for
high
rate
increases
debt
service,
debt
servicing
peaks.
At
fourteen
point,
nine
percent
in
2021
and
fourteen
point,
eight
percent
in
2026.
This
level
is
still
within
the
fifteen
percent
debt
servicing
limit
approved
by
council
and
is
actually
very
reasonable,
considered
the
considering
the
asset
intensive
nature
of
these
services.
G
As
a
case
in
point
in
the
2014
survey,
was
published
by
the
National
Association
of
clean
water
agencies
related
to
opportunities
and
challenges.
In
clean
water,
utility
financing
and
management,
this
survey
showed
that
in
2013,
debt
servicing
represented
26%
of
utility
expenditures
in
the
u.s.
overall.
This
capital
investment
plan
is
very
much
aligned
with
the
C's
affordable
or
for
affordability
principles,
industry
standard
and
meets
the
overall
capital
investment
requirements
over
the
next
ten
years.
Thank
you.
A
Thank
you.
It's
the
end
of
the
presentation,
all
right,
so
I
started
a
speaker's
list
from
people
who
have
come
to
ask
to
be
on
it.
I'd
ask
em
both
the
vice-chair
Sher
Ali
is
first
on
that
list,
but
there
is
also
a
motion
to
be
an
amendment
to
be
read
onto
the
record
as
well
to
start,
if
you
could
open
with
that,
please.
E
This
one
okay,
it
is
moved
by
myself,
whereas
report
ACS,
2017,
CSD,
fi,
n,
0,
0
3
includes
numerous
tables
to
highlight
financial
information
and
whereas
errors
have
been
discovered
in
table,
11
wastewater
on
page
18
of
the
report
and
whereas
errors
have
been
discovered,
discovered
in
table.
13.
Total
rates
supported
on
page
18
of
the
report,
therefore
be
it
resolved
to
correct
the
errors.
Noted
above
the
Environment
and
climate
protection
committee
approved
the
substitution
of
the
original
table
11
and
table
13
of
the
report
with
the
following
revised
tables
and
I.
H
G
Were
the
only
tables-
and
it
was
very
minor
instead
of
five
percent-
it
was
four
percent,
and
so
we
changed
it
back
to
five
percent
and
then
the
dollar
values
the
toe-in
and
changed
the
total.
So
each
year
there
was
a
ten
million
dollar
difference
in
the
revenues,
but
it
didn't
change
the
over
ma
model.
It
was
just
a
transposition
error.
All.
A
G
E
E
E
E
Comparison
of
the
L
RFP
2012
forecast
to
the
actuals
we
go
year,
2012-13
14,
2015
2016
and
we
see
the
revenue
shortfall
of
ten
point:
three
million
one
year.
Twenty
point:
two
million:
the
next
thirty
two
point:
three
million
the
next
forty
point:
seven
million
the
next
thirty
six
point:
1
million
the
next.
At
what
point
in
that
series
of
years?
E
E
G
E
Thing
is
I,
don't
believe
that
every
year
you
were
that
far
off
in
your
forecasting.
So
at
what
point
did
your
forecast
simply
not
get
adopted
by
council
and
the
council
just
maybe
increase
the
contribution,
but
by
not
enough
to
meet
what
your
forecast
was
because
I
don't
think
you
were
stuck
with
a
30
million
dollar
deficit
one
year
and
then
completely
blew
the
estimate
the
next
year.
That's.
E
G
So
over
the
past
four
years
we've
been
adjusting
the
budget
to
match
consumption
rates.
We
had
gone
from
87
million
cubic
meters
that
was
in
2012
and
then
each
year
we
adjusted
the
revenue
budgets
based
on
past
trends,
that
87
million
was
still
in
that.
So
we
were
probably
over
forecasting
in
those
early
years
and
in
2016
we
adjusted
it
to
the
trend
over
the
last
three
years,
which
is
at
the
lowest
level
that
81.
E
G
E
G
E
E
G
E
E
G
The
expenditure
is
if,
for
example,
consumption
goes
down
over
time.
We
need
to
adjust
our
costs
to
match
it's
not
to
say
that
we're
going
to
recover
our
costs,
no
matter
what
they
are,
and
so
there
is
a
balance
between
usage
and
what
it
costs
to
deliver
those
services.
That's
why
it's
based
on
a
cost
recovery
model.
You
want
to
be
able
to
match
that,
and
over
time
consumption
has
gone
down
because
of
more
efficient
appliances.
So
we
need
you.
E
I
know
I
know
that
what
I'm
saying
is,
if
people
cut
their
use
of
water
in
half,
it
would
cost
us
basically
the
same.
Not
it
wouldn't
cost
us
half
will
cost
us
basically
the
same.
So
why
do
we
set
up
a
whole
billing
apparatus
to
go
after
each
individual
person
in
the
city
when
we
could
collect
the
same
amount
of
revenue
just
by
putting
it
on
the
tax
rate
and
like
what?
How
do
we
justify
spending
that
money
on
the
actual
billing
apparatus.
E
G
So
it
had
been
on
the
tax,
we
wouldn't
be
adjusting
expenditures
to
match
the
consumption.
There's,
there's
a
direct
relationship
between
the
revenue
and
the
consumption
of
that
service
and
what
it
costs
to
deliberate
and
if
we're
putting
in
more
efficient
appliances
and
that
consumption
goes
down,
we
need
to
match
the
expenditures
to
deliver
that
service.
We
have
to
be
more
efficient,
also
in
terms
of
the
delivery.
That's
only.
G
A
H
B
You,
mr.
chair
and
good
morning
to
everyone
and
to
staff,
thank
you
for
the
plan
before
us
in
your
critical
review
and
oversight
in
a
very
important
key
piece
of
the
city's
infrastructure
number
of
questions.
First
of
all,
do
you
work
collaboratively
with
independent
professionals
who
can
provide
an
independent
overview
or
analysis
of
the
infrastructure
in
the
city?
What
the
needs
are.
Are
you
getting
like
a
second
opinion
before
you
come
and
present
this
detailed
plan.
D
Mr.
cherrick,
we
have
a
number
of
professionals
that
do
provide
oversight
in
terms
of
all
the
plans
that
we
put
together
and
when
you
look
at
the
individual
component
parts
when
it
comes
to
the
assessment
process,
we
also
have
a
number
of
professionals
that
are
involved
in
providing
their
professional
and
unbiased
opinion.
So
all
of
the
information
that's
being
presented
to
you
has
had
a
number
of
different
sets
of
eyes
to
be
able
to
rationalize
and
support.
Basically,
the
numbers
that
are
being
put
in
front
of
you
when.
B
D
The
short
answer
is
yes,
and
if
you
go
back
to
2012,
where
we
started
to
really
focus
on
a
risk-based
approach
to
how
we
manage
assets,
it
was
a
recognition,
then
that
we
needed
to
ensure
that
basically,
we
had
our
eye
on
assets
that
were
more
critical,
higher
risk
or
impacts
of
service
and
those
needed
attention.
Now.
That
being
said,
we
don't
wait
for
assets
to
fail
or
to
reach
failure
to
to
maintain
them.
D
B
B
Next
questions
about
the
formula
you
use
the
revenue
formula,
so
in
order
to
get
to
the
310
million
you
have
you
calculate
the
existing
revenues
that
come
in.
You
calculate
the
amount
of
debt
that
you
want
to
incur,
and
then
you
have
to
look
at
what
the
rate
increases
will
be
to
balance
that
all
out
I'm
concerned
about
the
rate
increase,
so
we
can
I
think
fairly
accurately
estimate.
Well,
we've
brought
in
X
number
of
revenues
over
the
past
few
years.
We're
looking
at
the
trends
of
consumption.
B
Is
there?
Is
there
a
direct
relationship
between
the
amount
of
debt
you're
able
to
incur
there's
a
ceiling
to
that
and
then,
ultimately,
the
rest
goes
to
to
the
rate
increase
or
how
are
you
trying
to
have
a
balance,
a
reasonable
balance
with
that
rate
increase
I'm,
seeing
increases
now
over
5%
LARM
bells
are
going
off,
so
I
want
to
have
a
better
understanding
of
the
relationship
between
incurring
debt
and
the
actual
rate
increase.
G
So
the
revenue
pays
for
debt
servicing
and,
as
you
increase
your
debt,
your
debt
servicing,
would
it
also
increase
so
we're
trying
to
balance
between
that.
Also
we're
doing
this
in
the
earlier
is
because
interest
rates
are
very
low,
as
let's
say,
for
example,
interest
rates
climbed.
Well,
then,
we'd
have
to
rebalance
the
the
interest,
costs
wouldn't
be
as
affordable
and
then
we'd
have
to
increase
rates
even
more
so
in
balance
it
back
towards
the
right
side
right
now.
G
B
Did
you
look
at
having
a
rate
increase
at
5%
or
less
over
the
10-year,
because
in
the
last
five
years,
it's
well
below
5%
in
the
first
five
years,
you're
averaging
above
five,
there's,
there's
I,
don't
know
about
other
members,
I
mean
there's
people
understand
the
need
for
infrastructure
renewal,
no
one's
really
pushing
back
on
that,
but
it
is
expensive
and
perpetual.
Five
to
six
percent
rate
increases
with
no
end
in
sight.
I
think
is
a
concern
for
many,
and
we
know
my
very
first
briefing
at
boot
camp.
B
My
understanding
was
there
was
a
finite
period
of
five
to
six
percent
rate
increases
we're
dealing
with
critical
projects.
There
would
be
a
end
to
that
at
some
point
and
now
we're
looking
at
another
ten
year
period,
with
the
same
basically
percentage
increases
with
no
end
in
sight.
Are
we
perpetually
every
ten
years,
I?
Think
you're
going
to
come
back
to
us
here?
Are
the
next
round
of
infrastructure
projects
they're,
not
part
of
the
budget
per
se,
and
we're
going
to
need
people
taxpayers
to
continuously
pay
five
to
six
percent
rate
increases
forever.
B
When
you
look
at
revenues
plus
debt,
you
are
left
with
well,
what's
left,
will
the
rate
increases
and
I
think
that's
becoming
more
difficult
for
some
residents
to
pay
year
after
year?
So
is
there
any
way
to
still
deliver
what
needs
to
be
delivered
but
refine
that
rate
increase
over
the
ten
years
so
that
it
doesn't
exceed
5%.
D
B
D
Mr.
chair,
if
I
could
just
follow
up
on
the
councillors
question,
who
were
a
couple
of
significant
strategic
priorities
which
were
part
of
councils
priorities
with
a
large
diameter
inspection
program,
which
was
part
of
councils
priorities
and
also
the
stormwater
retrofit
program?
Also
part
of
councils
priorities.
A
I
Thank
you
very
much,
I,
just
a
just
a
couple
of
questions
and
you
talked
about
a
$3
and
50
percent
50
cent
increase
now
the
area
that
I
represent
is
is
neither
fish
nor
fowl.
So
there's
there's
were
urban,
but
I
have
a
number
of
communities
that
are
privately
serviced
and
we
had
a
long
discussion
about
this
last
year
and
in
fact
one
of
my
communities
came
for
with
a
number
of
suggestions
for
change
which
were
incorporated.
We
didn't
really
get
into
the
dollar
pieces
at
that
point.
I
So
can
you
give
me
a
sense
for
those
communities
because
not
paying
the
full
amount
and
they're
not
paying
the
rural
rate?
So
if
we
go
to
Table
twelve,
for
example,
what
what
increases
are
they
looking
at
in
real
dollars
over
the
next
I?
Think
the
table
goes
out
to
twenty
twenty
twenty
seven?
So
what
what
numbers
are
they
looking
at
in
real
dollars,
increase
wise
as.
G
It's
so
in
the
urban
areas
that
aren't
connected.
They
received
a
30%
discount
versus
rural
areas
that
received
a
50%
discount
at
a
hundred
percent
rate.
So
the
the
amount
of
I'm,
quoting
is
the
phased
in
amount.
So
next
year
they're
only
paying
fifty
percent
it's
a
phased
in
amount
and
they
would
be
paying
an
extra
four
dollars
in
30th
cents
per
year.
Once
it's
a
hundred
percent
phased
in.
That
would
be
an
additional
that
would
equate
to
an
additional
eight
dollars
free.
I
I
What
I'm
asking
what
I'd
like
to
know
before
I
can't
vote
today?
I,
don't
sit
on
committee,
but
before
I
do
vote.
I
want
to
know
what
the
actual
numbers
are.
Percentages
are
one
thing
and
that's
that's
great,
but
I
want
to
know
what
the
actual
dollar
amounts
are
as
well,
that
my
residents
will
be
paying
that
are
in
that
in
that
area
that
are
again
urban
but
self-service.
If.
G
I
can
just
clarify
what
we're
presenting
today
is
revenue
increases
that
we
need.
This
is
a
key
element
for
our
budgeting
process
and
it's
in
the
budgeting
process
that
we
actually
determine
the
rate
increases
and
I
was
explaining
my
presentation
that
the
rate
is
actually
developed
based
on
forecasts
for
consumption,
number
of
residences
properties,
so
for
stormwater,
for
example,
it's
divided
by
the
number
of
properties.
If
the
number
of
properties
increase
over
time,
the
amount
shared
is
also
decreased.
G
So
every
year
we
look
at
while
we
need
an
extra
13%
in
revenue,
but
we
have
an
extra
10,000
households.
Well,
then,
the
denominator
helps
to
reduce
that,
so
it
wouldn't.
Thirteen
percent
is
the
amount
of
revenue
additional
revenue
we
need.
It
doesn't
reflect
the
actual
rate
increase,
there's
a
separate
calculation
that
we
have
to
do
as
part
of
the
budgeting
process
to
figure
out
what
that
is.
I
can't
tell
you
ten
years
from
now
how
many
properties
we'll
be
sharing
in
the
cost
of
the
stormwater.
That
would
be
no.
I
I
understand
that,
but
this
report,
obviously,
if
approved,
is,
is,
is
a
tool
that
you're
going
to
use
in
order
to
determine
what
that
dollar
amount
is
for
people.
So
maybe
what
you
can
do,
then,
before
this
does
get
to
Council
for
vote.
If
you
can
tell
me
if
we
froze
the
population
today,
the
number
of
houses
today,
what
would
those
people
be
paying
in
2027
additionally
per
year
and
I?
Guess
on
the
answer?
I
You've
just
given
me
that
that
would
be
the
worst-case
scenario,
assuming
that
the
population
of
the
city
doesn't
go
down,
which
I
think
we
all
agree
is
unlikely.
So
if
you
could
freeze
the
population
and
say
if
we
still
had
the
same
number
of
houses
in
2027,
this
is
what
in
real
dollars.
People
would
be
paying
in
that
category.
I
would
appreciate
that
the
other
is
to
is
to
build
on
councillor
Ellie's
suggestion
or
question,
and
they
don't
often
like
to
do
that.
But
I
thought
he
raised
an
interesting
idea.
I
That
would
reduce
it
and
population
growth
would
reduce
it
correct
so
again,
so
the
13
percent.
What
you're
saying
to
us
today
without
being
able
to
give
us
a
number?
The
13
percent
is
the
worst
case
scenario
you
can
see
over
the
next
10
years.
But
if
you
were
to
adopt
councillor
Shirley's
model,
then
you
and
again,
assuming
no
population
or
residence
change,
that
13
percent
figure
would
go
down
correct.
I
Thank
You,
chair
and
I'll
continue.
The
line
of
conversation
that
counselor
le
and
you
I
have
been
looking
at
so
I
just
want
to
confirm
when
I
take
a
look
at
the
the
actuals
versus
for
cat
or
the
actuals
versus
the
plan
numbers
in
the
previous
period.
Our
revenue
was
off
by
about
nine
point.
Six
percent
and
the
expenses
were
up
by
about
eight
point.
Seven
percent
is
that
roughly
correct
we
brought
in
you
know
almost
ten
percent
less
revenue
than
we
had
expected
in
the
plan.
I
Just
a
first
confirmation,
deputy
treasurer
in
the
previous
plan,
it
looks
like
we
received
about
almost
10%,
roughly
nine
point:
six
percent
less
revenue
than
we
had
planned
over
the
period
when
you
take
a
look
at
plan
versus
actual
expenses
were
eight
point,
seven
percent
or
so
higher
than
planned.
When
we
look
at
the
actuals,
so
that's
that's
the
the
rough
number
there.
One
of
the
things
we've
chatted
about
this
morning
is
I
want
to
I,
want
to
confirm
something
that
you
told
councillor
Ellie.
I
It
looks
to
me
in
this
new
plan
like
we're,
making
a
change
to
have
longer-term
debt.
I
thought
I
heard
you
say
to
councilor
Cirelli,
though,
that
that
is
simply
consistent
with
what
you
know.
The
previous
debt
periods
that
we've
done
are
we
making
a
change,
we're
making
a
conscious
change
to
extend
the
debt
periods
for
the
various
different
borrower
ones
that
we
do.
G
I
Extending
or
having
a
longer
debt
term
does
imply
that
we're
going
to
pay
higher
interest
costs
overall,
if
even
if
the
lower
amount,
if
the
amount
is
lower
each
year,
do
you
have
any
scenarios
for
what
changing
the
borrowing
period
might
be
in
terms
of
the
total
interest
cost
in
any
given
debenture?
So
if
we
were
to
borrow
at
20
years
instead
of
30
40
years
instead
of
30,
what
would
be
the
toll?
The
implication
for
the
total
interest
costs
that
were
pain.
I
So
it's
going
to
get
that
decision
or
that
that
approach
in
which
we
have
long
term
is,
is
actually
costing
us
more
on
interest
charges
overall,
which
has
a
long-term
implication
for
the
for
the
next
generations.
The
debt
servicing
costs
are
projected
to
average
14
percent
over
this
period.
If
our
forecasts
are
out
by
that
same
magnitude,
if
the
planned
revenue
is
again,
you
know
say:
9
10
percent
less
than
we
planned
and
if
our
expenses
are
again
9
percent
higher
than
we
thought
we
would.
I
G
Even
over
the
past
four
years,
we've
seen
those
fluctuations
in
revenue
and
the
the
estimates
that
we
have
now
are
based
on
the
much
more
conservative
forecast
in
terms
of
consumption.
So
we
were
using
the
2015
consumption
to
forecast
out
over
the
next
10
years,
and
that
was
the
lowest
point
that
we
have
been
so
we're
very
conservative
in
the
overall
forecast
and
what
we've
been
doing
every
year
as
part
of
the
budgeting
process
is
looking
at.
Where
are
we
trending?
What
should
this
is
a
ten-year
plan?
G
It
has
to
be
updated
every
term
of
council
based
on
new
information,
so
we're
constantly
updating
this
plan.
What
we
do
on
a
budgeting
every
year
is
based
on
revenues,
expected
revenues
and
also
expenditures.
So
there's
an
adjustment
made
each
year,
then
we
build
in
the
debt
servicing.
So
when
you
look
back
the
2012
plan,
we
were
estimating
we'd,
be
around
ten
ten
point:
two
percent
of
debt
servicing
and
based
on
choices
we've
made
each
year
as
part
of
the
budgeting
process,
we're
closer
to
twelve
point
seven.
G
I
I
think
that's
an
interesting
question.
We're
beginning
to
bump
against
that
ceiling
going
from
ten
percent
expected
debt
servicing
cost
to
twelve
is
is
obviously
not
insignificant.
We're
now
forecasting
that
we'll
be
somewhere
around
that
fourteen
percent
that
doesn't
leave
us
a
lot
of
wriggle
room
in
terms
of
trying
to
stay
within
that
cap.
I
What
are
the
various
different
options
that
we
have
in
order
to
stay
underneath
that,
and
would
that
include
dipping
into
reserves
in
order
to
accomplish
projects
that
we
felt
were
critical,
or
are
we
looking
at
much
higher
rate
increases
down
down
the
road?
If
we
have
the
same
magnitude
of
error
with
respect
to
the
plan
versus
actuals.
I
It's
the
the
the
fluctuate,
the
change
in
the
terms
of
plan
versus
actual,
was
you
know,
ten
percent
or
call
it
nine
percent
in
each
one
of
those
categories
and
I'm
just
trying
to
understand
if
that
same
magnitude
of
actuals
versus
planned
were
experienced
over
the
period
of
the
next
plan.
You
know:
does
that
put
us
over
fifteen
percent
and
then
in
order
to
get
back
under
that
fifteen
percent?
Could
we
do
that
out
of
reserves
instead
of
rates?
You
know
I'm,
trying
to
understand
the
wriggle
room
that
we
have
to
work
with
here.
Okay,.
G
So
we
built
into
the
forecast
a
lot
of
conservative
estimates
we
have
built
in
building
up
the
reserves
up
to
sixty
million
dollars.
So
there
is
flexibility
for
year-over-year
fluctuations.
We
were
very
conservative
in
our
consumption
assumptions,
a
water
consumption
assumptions
and
we
were
also
very
conservative
in
terms
of
our
interest
rates,
we're
using
5%
interest
rates,
so
all
of
it
is
built
with
a
lot
of
flex
in
it.
Okay,.
I
I
Okay,
I
I'll
be
interested
to
hear
the
the
continued
discussion
with
councillors
sure
Ellie.
It
continues
to
strike
me
I.
Think
I
asked
you
or
I
asked
the
treasurer
in
the
process
which
led
up
to
the
creation
of
the
new
rate
structure.
How
much
of
the
cost
of
water
particularly
is
fixed
and
I
was
told
it's
it's
90
percent,
whether
or
not
you
actually
use
any
water,
90
percent
of
the
cost
of
it
is
is
fixed
just
to
have
the
pipe
to
your
house
and
the
ability
to
get
clean
water.
H
Thank
you
just
looking
at
because
a
couple
reports,
this
Jen
is
pretty
bored
and
so
the
report
from
last
year.
That
has
we
mentioned
today
somewhat
important,
because
that
sets
out
how
we
collect
these
fees
for
the
foreseeable
future.
Then
also
that
report
was
predicated
on
the
previous
long-range
financial
plan,
which
was
long
rich
pension
plan.
For
so
the
I'm
not
mistaken.
The
number
that
we
used
to
calculate
the
storm
water
rates
was
42
million
dollars
annually
right
correct.
H
So
in
the
report
from
last
year
the
water
rate
structure
review.
The
report
speaks
to
the
long
range
financial
plans
over
the
years
since
2002
and
that
the
city
has
taken
a
a
you
know,
a
proactive
approach
in
ensuring
that
our
infrastructure
is
is
up
to
speed
that
we're
investing
appropriately
in
this
infrastructure.
So
when
we
calculated
that
rates-
and
we
said
42
million
dollars-
is
what
we're
spending.
How
did
we
get
to
a
point
that,
within
the
next
10
years,
that
goes
from
42
million
dollars,
budgeted
in
2016
to
135
million
dollars
in
2027?
H
G
G
G
H
H
We
did
an
L
RFP
in
2012
and
we
didn't
review
it
the
rate
structure
until
just
the
last
couple
of
years,
knowing
that
we
were
going
to
be
doing
an
L
RFP
this
year,
which
has
clearly
given
us
different
information,
and
we
set
the
rate
structure
based
on
a
number,
that's
significantly
lower
than
what
we
need
to
collect
over
the
next
ten
years.
Why
didn't
we
wait
to
the
rate
structure
review
until
after
we
did
L
RFP
five.
G
The
intent
of
the
race
structure
was
to
redistribute
whom
pays
for
what
it
was
based
on
the
current
rates.
In
my
when
we
talk
about
what
is
funded
for
storm
water,
it's
196
million
versus
the
average
of
260
million
that
we're.
So
when
we
talk
about
the
long
range
financial
plan
and
what
the
requirements
are
they're
higher
than
what
we're
currently
funding.
The
rate
structure
was
based
on
what
we're
currently
funding
based
on
the
2016
budget,
reallocating
that
to
three
separate
services,
water,
wastewater
and
storm.
G
H
Yes,
so
in
the
report
when
we
projected
the
phase-in
period
of
the
storm
water
rate-
and
we
projected
that
phase
in
at
four
years-
and
we
said
what
we
thought,
that
rate
would
be
over
the
next
four
years
and
that
would
be
fifteen
dollars.
First,
a
tip
on
on,
let's
say
the
real
side:
it
impacts
urban
as
well.
Everyone
in
this
city
will
pay
a
stormwater
fee.
H
Why
didn't
we
tell
them
or
put
in
the
report
that
we're
facing
this
in?
It's
likely
going
to
be
this
number,
but
it's
really
not
gonna
be
that
number,
because
we
haven't
done
a
long,
rich
financial
plan
yet
and
that
numbers
actually
be
quite
stiffly
higher
I
realized
that
by
dollars,
you
don't
agree
that
it's
significant,
because
we've
talked
about
that
before
percentages,
wise
though
it
is
significant
and
13%
is
significant
and
now
I
know.
H
You've
also
said
to
counsel
I
that
the
30%
is
just
on
the
the
revenue,
not
the
tax,
but
that's
not
in
here
I
mean
you're
in
the
RFP
from
from
five
years
ago.
You
specifically
said
in
that
a
RFP
that
the
impact
on
the
water
and
sewer
rate
would
be
seven
percent
of
a
few
years
in
the
first
two
years,
then
six
percent-
that
five
percent
that's
proved
to
be
fairly
accurate.
G
What
the
rate
increases
were
now
we've
created,
we've
created
a
new
rate
structure
with
a
fixed
component
volumetric
component
stormwater
is
based
on
a
tiered
rate
model,
there's
a
lot
of
moving
parts
in
that
rate
to
make
it
more
equitable,
and
so
it's
not
a
one,
two
one
relationship
now
between
that
percentage
increase
and
the
amount
that's
being
shown
in
the
in
the
amount
that
we
actually
increase
each
rate.
The
rates
are
calculated
much
more
precisely
aligned
with
those
specific
services.
So
it's
very
different.
It
was.
It
was
a
combined
rate
before
for
all
services.
G
There
was
no
decision
not
to
consult.
It
was
part
of
the
long-range
financial
planning
exercise.
It
was
based
on
the
requirements
that
are
there.
This
is
a
recommendation
based
on
forecasted
needs,
it's
consistent
with
what
other
you
municipalities
are
implementing.
It
was.
We've
always
talked
about
storm
water
and
the
requirements
in
those
areas.
H
G
H
I
would
love
to
have
not
found
out
that
the
budget
was
going
off
by
270
percent,
because
somebody
visited
my
booth
at
the
Russian
fair
this
weekend.
I
would
have
loved
to
have
found
out
from
someone
else,
because
I
know
other
people
knew
I
know.
The
chair
of
the
committee
knew
I
know
that
you
knew
that
this
report
was
recommending
a
230
percent
increase
in
the
stormwater
budget,
but
yet
no
one
felt
the
need
to
tell
members
of
council.
A
A
The
long-range
financial
planning
was
an
exercise
that
we
specifically
have
directed
them
to
go
through
and
I
think
we
have
to
be
very
careful
with
numbers
to
say
two
hundred
and
seventy
percent
increase
is
ten
years
from
now
we
can
come
up
from
with
yes
it
you
did,
but
it's
easy
to
get
people
I
suppose
excited
with
the
big
number.
That's
ten
years
away
from
now,
I
think
it's
quite
important
that
we
lead
people
through
sorry.
A
H
A
Now
giving
my
view
that
it's
important
that
we
look
year
by
year,
I
know
that
I
can
project
electricity
rates
20
years,
ten,
twenty
or
thirty
years
from
now,
and
the
number
will
appear
absolutely
monstrous,
but
that
isn't
the
same
as
the
2018
number
that
someone
will
be
paying
so
I
think
that's
important
that
we
keep
in
mind
and
also
I'm
very
sensitive
to
the
fact
that
we
went
out
to
the
river
the
public
and
consulted
widely.
We
were
at
those
meetings.
A
A
I,
don't
believe
we
have,
but
I
want
to
be
sure
of
that
when
we
vote
on
this
I
know
that
staff
in
their
presentations
during
the
rate
review
made
as
clear
as
they
could
I
certainly
did
I
heard
the
question
asked
and
responded
to
that.
What
we
were
doing
in
that
exercise
was
deciding
on
how
we
were
going
to
divide
up
the
pie.
The
pie
was
the
2016
budgeted
amount.
A
We
were
deciding
how
that
would
be
divided
up
differently
and
in
a
more
fair
way
and
other
criterion
that
we
chose
on
how
to
do
that,
but
we
then
made
as
clear
as
possible.
This
isn't
a
fixed
number
that
will
not
change,
but
that
that
is
not
what
we
are
doing
today
as
part,
then,
as
part
of
that
exercise,
that
was
a
rate
review
and
in
the
future-
and
here
we
are
the
first
year
of
that
future
we
will
be
looking
at
our
actual
financial
forecasts.
A
So
I
think
that's
also
important
for
us
to
keep
in
mind
that
that
was
if
there
is
any
promise
that
was
made,
that
this
report
in
front
of
us
is
reneging
on
I
would
like
to
know
what
that
is.
I
have
questions,
so
that
was
my
first.
Is
there
anything
in
the
long-range
financial
plan
before
us?
The
contradicts
our
renege
on
what
the
city
told
residents
during
and
council.
During
that
rate,
review
I
asked
our
staff.
Is
there
anything
you
are
aware
of,
that
is
a
change
or
backtracking,
no
okay!
Thank
you.
A
What
would
happen
if
council
chose
and
I
know
those
numbers
two
hundred
and
seventy
percent
is
over
ten
years
is
true
what
would
happen
if
we
were
to
choose
not
to
adopt
that
long-range
financial
plan?
What
would
happen
if
we
were
to
say
that
number
is
too
big?
It
looks
badly
on
us.
It's
a
blow
to
our
residence
for
us
to
shrink
that.
Can
you
explain
what
our
options
might
be
not
go
with
the
lrl
RFP
in
front
of
you,
particularly
let's
say
on
the
stormwater
side.
That
is
the
much
bigger
number.
D
Well,
Tara,
maybe
I
can
start
from
a
I
guess
the
non-financial
impacts
the
dollars
are.
A
put
in
front
of
committee
are
basically
the
dollars
that
are
required
to
sustain
the
infrastructure
and
I
know
that
there's
been
number
discussions
around
fix
rates
and
consumptions
and
and
the
councillors
are
correct-
that
there
is
a
lot
of
fix
component
to
to
the
asset.
These
are
very
capital
intensive
services,
they're,
probably
the
most
capital
intensive
services
that
we
have
in
the
city,
and
there
is
funding,
that's
required
to
sustain
them.
D
If
we
get
less
revenue,
then
basically,
we
will
have
to
adjust
basically
the
investments
that
are
made
to
match
those
those
revenues,
and
that
means
basically
deferring
some
of
the
works
that
that
might
be
planned
now,
all
in
the
context
of
a
risk-based
approach.
So
it
doesn't
mean
that
suddenly
everything
is
going
to
be
falling
apart.
We
will
continue
to
play
our
risk-based
approach
in
terms
of
prioritizing
those
investments
so
that
we
we
apply
basically
the
investments,
so
that
was
services
that
or
or
the
risk
that
pose
a
higher
risk
to
to
service
I.
D
A
G
A
And
I
see
mr.
Harley
in
the
room.
We
know
that
he
has
and
will
again
remind
us
that
deferring
major
capital
project
infrastructure
projects
ultimately
ends
up
costing
more
down
the
road.
It's
not
just
that
it
puts
it
off.
It
can
sometimes
be
multiples
of
what
it
would
have
cost
that
to
have
done
in
a
more
more
timely
manner.
So
I
guess
we
are.
We
are
we're
aware
of
that.
I
just
want
to
be
quite
clear
on
on
the
cost
of
deferral.
I
will
now
turn
back
to
our
speakers.
E
Okay,
thank
you.
Mr.
chair,
first
of
all,
when
you
were
answering
questions
about
the
revenue
increases
ten
years
from
now
five
years
from
now
to
councilor
egg
lies
questioning
councilor
Moffitt's.
Could
you
clarify
whether
the
numbers
we
were
talking
were
the
actual
dollars?
People
will
pay
in
those
years
or
are
they
2017
dollars.
G
E
G
E
G
G
A
E
At
the
garbage
garbage
issue-
and
we
got
two
very
fine
calculations-
granular
calculations-
about
what
we
could
do
to
get
individual
residents
to
do
this
or
that
to
produce
a
better
outcome.
And
then
somebody
mentioned,
oh
and
by
the
way
two
thirds
of
our
waste
isn't
covered
by
this,
because
it's
in
the
industrial,
institutional
and
commercial
sector
and
we're
not
even
doing
anything
there.
So
what
percentage
of
our
water
revenue
comes
from
the
corporate
sector,
institutional
or
industrial?
So.
G
That's
one
thing
that
we
actually
improved
as
part
of
the
water
rate
structure.
Previously
when
water
was
build
based
on
consumption
and
water,
sewer
and
storm,
the
industry
industrial
sector
was
paying
a
just
disproportionately
lower
amount
of
what
they
should
have
been
paying
for
for
storm
water
and
so
for
the
storm
water
rate.
We
actually
split
it,
it's
it's,
it
should
be
a
60/40
split.
It
was
a
70/30
split
before
and
so
we've
actually
adjusted
that
so
they're
paying
their
fair
share.
Okay,.
E
And
I
got
an
email
from
somebody.
A
couple
days
ago
who
said
I've
been
looking
at
the
structure
and
I've
been
looking
at
what
you're,
planning
and
I've
calculated
that
if
I
reduce
my
water
to
almost
no
usage
I'm
still
going
to
pay
more,
you
guys
have
made
a
mistake,
so
I've
written
back,
obviously
saying
no,
it's
not
a
mistake.
It's
the
way
the
cost
of
water
actually
is.
E
But
what
are
we
going
like?
I?
Don't
see
the
point
in
in
trying
to
sugarcoat
it
to
the
public,
they
should
know
that
they
will
pay
more
and
that
the
whole
reason
for
the
rate
structure
exercise
was,
for
the
first
main
reason
was
to
get
more
money
out
of
the
public
to
pay
down
the
deficit
that
was
happening
every
year.
What
are
you
doing
to
get
that
message
across,
because
if
we
keep
keep
getting
people
calling
us
or
writing
us
saying
hey,
this
must
have
been
a
miscalculation
because
I'm
still
paying
more.
G
First,
it
wasn't
to
get
more
money,
it
was
to
stabilize
the
money
we
were
when
we
developed
the
rate
structure.
It
was
based
on
collecting
the
exact
same
amount
of
revenue.
What
we
were
doing
is
redistributing
and
actually
stabilizing
20%
of
it
saying
20%
of
it
will
be
fixed
going
forward
and
80%
will
be
volumetric.
So
it
was
the
same
amount
of
money.
It
wasn't
more
money
through
the
rate
structure
and.
G
E
D
Mr.
chair,
if
you
look
at
successive
long-range
financial
plan,
especially
on
the
right
side,
we
have
seen
fairly
significant
rate
increases
and
a
lot
of
those,
and
it
was
consistent
message.
A
lot
of
them
were
driven
by
the
capital
intensive
nature
of
the
service,
so
we
have
seen
significant
increases
in
investments.
We
also
have
seen
increases
in
terms
of
the
renewal
need
to
sustain
those
infrastructure
assets.
D
Miss
McDonald
and
her
presentation
talked
about
kind
of
the
age
wave
in
terms
of
a
lot
of
the
infrastructure
built
in
the
50s
to
to
80s
at
the
end
for
structure
that
now
were
we're
focusing
on
in
terms
of
renewing
and
that's
also
driving.
Some
of
the
increases
on
the
stormwater
site.
Stormwater
is
kind
of
the
the
newer
type
of
infrastructure.
We
certainly
were
building
water
and
sewer
infrastructure
long
before
we're
building
stormwater
infrastructure,
but
that
infrastructure
now
is
aging
and
is
also
in
need
of
a
in
need
of
attention.
D
So
it's
not
necessarily
just
a
question
of
catching
up.
It's
a
question
of
looking
forward
and
seeing
what
are
the
investments
that
are
needed
to
continue
to
sustain
the
services
that
we
had
when
you
look
at
assets
of
93
percent,
in
fair
to
very
good
condition,
doesn't
significant
significant?
It
doesn't
indicate
that
basically,
we've
been
running
our
assets
at
the
ground.
It
indicates
that
we
have
been
sustaining
our
assets,
which
we
need
to
continue
as
we
continue
to
face
some
of
the
pressures
of
of
age
and,
to
your
earlier
point,
around
conservation.
D
Ie
I
wouldn't
want
this
committee
to
have
the
notion
that
basic
conservation
is
a
bad
thing,
because
conservation
is
not
a
bad
thing,
because
we're
dealing
with
such
a
capital
intensive
service.
The
more
that
we
can
get
from
that
infrastructure
is
important
to
more
that
we
can
defer,
upgrades
and
increases
to
that
infrastructure
is
important
and
that
has
significant
significant
financial
benefits
to
to
the
city.
So
we
are
projecting
continued
investments
in
terms
of
renewal
because
we
do
have
a
lot
of
infrastructure
out
there.
E
B
You
mr.
chair
again,
thank
you.
The
staff
you've
you've
taken
some
challenging
questions
this
morning,
but
you
certainly
know
this
file
well
and
again
appreciate
your
time
on
this.
Just
on
a
personal
note,
I
don't
receive
a
city,
bottled
water,
bill,
I,
live
in
a
condo
and
they
get
an
aggregate
bill,
and
then
we
sorted
out
ourselves
based
on
the
volume
use,
but
for
bills
that
are
sent
out
to
homeowners
and
business
owners.
First,
you
have
the
opportunity
to
insert
a
information.
B
G
G
B
Manage
thank
you
very
much.
My
other
question
part
of
the
second
report.
The
comprehensive
asset
management
program
update.
You
have
a
figure
at
Table,
one
on
page
12,
you
list
a
number
of
departments
within
the
city.
You
are
providing
a
status
of
those
assets
from
poor
or
very
poor
all
the
way
up
to
very
good,
given
that
this
is
a
comprehensive
estimate
program
on
water
and
sewer
rates.
Can
you
talk
to
me
how
that
is
relevant
to
some
of
the
departments
that
you
list
in
this
table?
B
You
list
paramedic
service,
you
list
the
fire
department,
you
as
parks
and
recs.
Is
that
separate?
Do
I,
read
this
table
and
say
well
we're
not
just
talking
about
sewer
infrastructure,
we're
talking
about
all
assets
that
these
departments
own
in
this
table,
specifically
about
a
snapshot
on
the
assets
all
assets
so.
D
Chair
when
you
look
at
the
comprehensive
asset
management
program,
it
speaks
to
all
of
the
assets
that
are
required
to
support
services.
So
what
you
have
in
terms
of
the
figure
one
are
basically
all
of
the
assets
and
the
service
areas.
Mrs.
McDonald
in
their
presentation,
made
reference
to
a
presentation
that
was
made
in
June
to
committee
and
council
on
the
tax
site.
So
at
that
point
we
were
focusing
on
the
tax
supported
type
of
asset,
so
paramedic
roads
parks
some
of
the
buildings.
D
B
How
feasible
is
it
for
staff
to
give
us
a
breakdown
not
today,
but
if
you
could
give
us
a
breakdown
of
what
types
of
assets
we're
talking
about
a
walkie
talkie
is
different
than
a
firetruck,
and
so
that
I
think
particularly
going
into
budget
time,
would
help.
Members
of
this
committee
and
council
get
a
more
accurate
idea
by
law.
72%
of
assets
learn
poorer,
very
poor
condition,
but
what
assets
do
by
law
use,
for
example,
I,
don't
know
so
how
feasible
is
it
to
get
that
information
so.
D
Check
the
certainty-
this
is
a
summary
table,
but
there
is
a
state
of
the
asset
report
that
was
distributed
back
in
June.
It's
also
referenced
in
this.
In
his
report.
It
provides
a
more
granular
breakdown
of
the
assets,
typically,
the
services
that
you've
highlighted
where
there
tends
to
be
a
higher
percentage,
those
tend
to
be
related
to
fleet
assets
and
fleet
assets
tend
to
have
certainly
shorter
lives.
D
So
this
is
an
area
where
you
tend
to
see
more
significant
changes
from
reporting
period,
just
because
you're
dealing
with
assets
that
have
maybe
a
7-day
10-year
life
as
services
that
are
more
and
I
would
caution
that
these
are
not
nested
apartments
or
more
aligned
to
services
that
we
provide
to
the
public,
the
ones
that
are
more
capital
intensive
in
terms
of
long
live
assets.
You
certainly
see
that
they
have
lower
percentages
in
those
poor
to
very
poor
and
again
where
we,
where
we
do
have
poor
to
very
poor.
D
B
H
H
Consumption
is
irrelevant
to
stormwater
it's
most
of
our
stormwater
infrastructure
is
required
to
support
our
road
network.
It's
nothing
else.
Yes,
residents
use
it,
but
the
primary
function
of
stormwater
services
is
to
service
our
road
network.
It
has
nothing
to
do
with
consumption,
it's
nothing
to
do
with
where
you
flush
your
toilet.
That
was
something
that
we
made
clear
a
year
ago
when
we
keep
it
with
these
other
two
budgets.
H
We
make
it
okay
to
increase
it
by
more
than
two
percent
roads
doesn't
have
the
luxury
row.
Infrastructure
is
more
pivotable
pivotal
than
then
our
story
of
structure.
It
costs
more.
It
costs
more
to
maintain
that
we
have
a
higher
asset
level
in
our
road
infrastructure
than
our
summer
infrastructure.
In
fact,
quite
often
when
replace
the
roads
were
also
replacing
stormwater.
So
at
what
point
would
it
make
more
sense
to
shift
the
stormwater
budgets
seeing
as
and
we're
now
collecting
and
separately
we're
not
collecting
it
on
the
water
bill?
H
G
G
H
G
H
I'm
not
talking
about
it,
should
be
on
the
taxes.
Okay,
I'm
saying:
why
is
it
still
managed
alongside
these
other
two,
when
all
the
discussion
is
of
being
run
conception,
all
we
need
to
have
the
rate
bill
up,
because
the
consumption
voila
it
clouds
the
issue
of
stormwater.
It
justifies
massive
increases
in
stormwater
because
you
have
it
aligned
with
relatively
larger
large
increases
in
water
and
sewer,
which
can't
be
bound
by
a
2%
cap.
H
My
name
is
also
because
after
I
spoke,
the
chair
decided
to
ask
a
lot
of
questions
which
seemed
directly
aimed
at
my
line
of
questions
when
we
referred
to
what
we
said
to
residents
a
year
ago,
you're
right.
Nowhere
in
that
report
did
it
say
that
we
weren't
going
to
increase
it,
but
you
do
recall
that
the
most
critical
people
had
said
to
us.
The
second
you
remove
that
rates
and
isolate
that
race.
It
put
it
on
the
tax
bill
as
its
own.
H
The
city
will
increase
it
because
that's
what
they
do,
they'll
come
back
and
they'll
increase
it
and
they'll
double
it.
I,
don't
know
what
your
response
to
that
was.
My
response
was
that
it's
my
job
to
make
sure
we
don't
do
that
to
you.
One
of
the
examples
I
used
was
the
garbage
rate.
Eighty
two
dollars
for
four
straight
years.
Eighty
four
dollars
this
year,
so
we
went
up
two
dollars
over
four
five
years.
H
You
know
I
was
using
as
an
example
of
how
we
manage
our
fees
so
that
we
don't
just
remove
it
from
another
rate
charge
you
something
new
and
the
second.
We
get
an
opportunity
to
raise
it.
We
do,
but
that's
exactly
we're
doing
that's
exactly
this
report.
Does
it
creates
a
new
fee
that
we
did
last
year
and
it
takes
it
and
it
doubles
it
more
than
doubles
it
I
know.
You
say
that
that's
might
not
be
what
happens,
but
you
also
can't
say
that
that
it
won't
happen.
H
H
So
either
we
weren't
transparent
with
people,
and
we
didn't
tell
them
that
was
going
to
go
up
or
we
created
the
rates
on
a
number
that
made
no
sense
and
we
didn't
allocate
enough
dollars
from
water
and
sewer
to
create
the
rate.
In
the
first
place
we
use
a
lower
rates,
so
we
get
a
lower
survey.
We
took
a
lower
budget,
so
we
create
a
lower
rate.
So
you
get
more
buy-in,
so
we
could
create
the
stormwater
rates
pass.
It
unanimously.
H
H
Again,
you're
right
that
it
wasn't
in
the
report
and
that
he
didn't
lie
to
people,
but
we
certainly
didn't
tell
him
the
whole
story.
It
lacked
transparency
and
when
the
people
told
me
that
this
is
what
we
were
going
to
do
and
I
said
we
weren't
going
to
do
this,
I
was
wrong.
This
report
makes
me
wrong.
J
Want
to
make
a
comment:
I
know:
we've
been
talking
about
it
all
morning,
but
I
will
support
councillor
Moffat
and
that
was
not
brought
up
to
the
public
and
we
did
lack
on
transparency
yeah.
We
did
a
mistake.
Accepting
the
fat
working
with
you
and
I
do
believe
back
the
resident
motion,
I
think
between
now
and
council
I
like
you
to
pull
the
motion
that
we
pass
at
Council.
That
will
not
increase
the
rate
in
the
next
four
years.
J
A
Thank
you.
Take
that
as
direction
to
bring
that
to
us
set
counsel.
We
have
a
motion
for
referral.
That's
going
to
come
up
I'd
like
to
make
some
comments
before
that,
but
I'd
also
like
first
to
for
us
to
vote
on
the
the
technical
amendment,
because
I
think
regardless
is
purely
a
technical
amendment.
Mike.
Can
we
carry
that
technical
amendment
q?
So
what
we
do
refer
to
counsel
and
the
debate
that
does
happen.
A
There
will
be
done
with
the
with
the
corrected
numbers
and
motion
as
the
person
who
chaired
that
process
was
at
many
of
those
public
meetings
and
worked
with
councillors
to
find
a
prevent
and
staff
very
much
so
to
find
a
proposal
through
the
rate
review
that
we
could
vote
on
unanimously.
I
do
recall,
on
many
occasions,
being
very
transparent
that
what
we
were
talking
about
was
how
we
divvy
up
the
pie
and
that
the
pie
was
the
42
million
dollars.
A
2016
budget
amount
that
we
could
not
take
a
possible
2017,
18
19
20
amount
and
tell
them
what
that
might
be,
because
we
didn't
know
that
at
the
time,
but
I
also
recall
our
staff
being
transparent.
That
we
have
a
long-range
financial
plan,
it's
updated
regularly
and
it
does
forecast
significant
increases
in
the
rates
for
maintaining
our
water
related
infrastructure.
A
A
They
just
happen
to
come
forward
at
this
time,
and
perhaps
that
helps
to
explain
why
are
they
why
they
are
quite
different
in
a
mount
and
in
one
case
it's
significantly
larger
I-best
forecasts
of
our
staff
as
to
what
is
going
to
be?
What's
going
to
be
needed,
so,
yes,
they
are
presented
together,
but
not
as
closely
tied.
Water
and
wastewater
are
very
closely
tied
water
in
a
water
out
from
homes
and
businesses,
for
whatever
you
used
it,
but
that
stormwater
is
is
not
so.
A
A
A
A
A
J
You
mr.
chair,
through
you,
I,
really
appreciate
the
staff
being
here
today
to
answer
a
few
question
on
a
matter
probably
where
it's
raised
in
the
last
few
days
in
our
community
and
I,
know
probably
I'm
glad
to
see
the
correction
and
nitrate
level
I
just
wanna
to
the
context
of
what
we
the
motion
and
what
we've
been
going
on
in
the
community.
J
In
the
last
four
years,
I
remember
in
2014
we
received
when
we
receive
the
report
and
we
were
advised
the
community
and
we
advised
the
resident
that
we've
seen
the
trend
that
it's
been
going
on
since
2012
I'm
assuming
til.
Now
there
is
any
changes
in
the
trend
that
we're
really
not
expecting
is.
Are
we
seeing
higher
jump
or
we're
coming
constancy
with
the
expectation
that
we
did
said
to
the
resident
is
going.
K
K
So
since
2009
we've
seen
an
increasing
trend
in
those
nitrates
levels
responding
to
to
councillor
to
roses
question
there,
there
has
been
no
significant
change
to
the
trend,
so
it
continues
to
increase
and
given
the
current
trend,
the
top
line,
that's
dashed
shows
the
regulatory
limit
for
safe
drinking
water,
so
I
think
one
of
the
key
messages
to
take
away
is
that
the
the
water
in
shadow
Ridge
is
very
safe.
So
the
quality
is
excellent
and
there
are
no
health
concerns
with
the
water
in
shadow
Ridge.
K
If
the
continuing
trend
doesn't
change,
we
expect
that
we
could
reach
this
regulatory
limit
in
about
a
12
to
15
year
range
and
currently
the
city
is,
is
exploring
the
option
to
go
into
the
deeper
aquifer
where
there
are
no
nitrates
in
the
source
water.
So
that
is
the
preferred
approach
to
to
not
to
fix
the
issue
but
to
address
the
issue
of
nitrates,
Thank.
J
J
Think
you
can
mr.
Brown
give
us
a
little
update
on
where
we
are
with
the
well
and
design
like
what
to
expect
I
know.
You
can't
talk
about
the
financial,
but
can
we
address
the
committee
a
little
bit
or
give
them
a
progress?
What
happened
from
last
year
to
e
this
year,
because
I
remember,
we
talked
about
that
in
last:
Environment
Committee,
yes,.
C
So
staff
are
going
to
be
conducting
a
study
to
ensure
that
reviewing
past
reports
and
doing
the
engineering
to
determine
the
proper
depth
make
sure
that
it
gets
to
an
aquifer
that
is
free
of
nitrates
and
moving
forward
in
a
in
a
plan.
Hopefully
within
2019
2020,
to
to
actually
drill
the
well
to
the
deeper
aquifer.
J
Thank
you.
Are
we
like
one,
do
you
think
will
have
a
confirmative
answer
that
we
can
go
to
the
community
and
talk
to
them
about
because
I
remember,
we
met
with
them
two
last
year
the
year
before,
and
we
promised
them
going
to
come
back
and
talk
to
them
publicly
to
explain
to
them
our
plan
and
our
schedule.
C
To
your
first
question,
mr.
chair,
with
respect
to
timing
of
going
back
to
the
community,
we'd,
be
pleased
to
discuss
with
the
ward
councillor
about
setting
up
meeting
to
go
to
the
public.
There
are
some
details
with
respect
to
the
financial
situation,
which
there
was
an
in-camera
report
that
went
to
committee
and
council,
but
the
details
of
that
will
be
public,
hopefully
in
the
very
near
future,
so
we'd
be
pleased
to
work
with
the
ward
councillor
to
do
to
conduct
a
public
meeting
to
assure
the
community.
C
With
respect
to
your
second
question,
which
I
believe
was
related
to
the
development
progress
there,
the
shadow
Ridge
well
is
only
used
by
approximately
5%
of
the
residents
of
Greely.
It's
a
communal,
well
operated
by
the
city
by
miss
roses
group.
It
is
still
owned
by
the
developer.
All
other
development
within
the
village
of
Greely
is
on
private
wealth
systems,
which
are
the
responsibility,
the
homeowner,
the
study.
Sorry,
the
water
quality
metrics
which
which
water
services
are
pretending,
are
just
strictly
to
the
communal.
Well,
which
is
for.
C
Ridge,
which
I
believe
there
are
approximately
190
to
200
homes
at
this
time,
further
development
within
the
shadow
Ridge
development
area
is
not
progressing
at
this
time
there
are,
there
has
been
a
mediation
session
that
was
held
to
determine
that
the
future
of
development,
but
at
this
time
there
is
no
progress
on
that
and
your
third
question
I'll
be
honest,
I'm,
not
sure
what
it
was.
We.
C
J
Thank
you,
mr.
chair.
This
is
for
the
benefit
of
this
committee.
I
know
there
is
some
media
outlet
made
tight
made
this
up,
I
wouldn't
say
irresponsible,
but
the
title
was
of
an
article
came
out
in
the
Metro
last
week
on
Friday
about
water
toxic
in
greeley
Ontario,
that
that
really
sets
lots
of
resident
and
lots
of
community
association
and
in
specific
the
resident
that
they
live,
not
only
in
the
shadow
Ridge
area.
They
live
in
the
whole
community
as
Greely.
There
is
3600
home
and
really,
as
mr.
Brown
mentioned,
that
there
the
this
isn't.
J
J
They've
been
working
very
hard
with
myself
and
the
community
on
making
sure
we
address
all
these
issues
that
we
inherited
ourself
and
they've
been
working
very
professionally
and
we
are
keeping
our
resident
and
community
informed
every
step
of
the
way,
but
sometimes
a
headline
like
this
it.
It
sends
a
long
message
not
only
to
the
people
who
live
in
shadow
Ridge
to
the
whole
people
who
live
in
Greeley
and
they
start
bringing
some
other
subdivision
that
to
the
equation,
which
is
there
is
two
separate
issue.
The
communal
wall
has
nothing
to
do
with
private
service.
J
Well,
most
of
us
who
live
in
Greeley.
We
know
how
to
service
our
world
and
the
quality
of
water
is
really.
There
is
nothing
wrong
with
it,
and
if
there
is
maybe
nitrate
high
nitrate
or
some
deficiency,
it's
probably
in
the
equipment
or
probably
sometimes
in
the
pipe
and
I
just
want
to
emphasize
on
that
to
making
sure
this
is
this.
J
This
reports,
under
lots
and
anxiety
to
my
community
and
I,
will
be
sending
a
public
letter
to
the
to
the
editor
and
I'm
sure
I
want
to
ask
staff
if
what
we
are
doing
for
public
as
a
city,
we
are
responsible
to
release
some
kind
of
statement
or
something
to
ensure
that
our
property
is
not
depreciation
in
Greeley
the
anxiety.
If
people
are
going
to
Google
right
now
that
they
want
to
move
the
really
first
thing
they're
going
to
see
that
is
toxic
in
Greeley,
and
this
is
very
strong.
J
A
misleading
headline
and
I'm
really
are
pausing
to
it
and
I'm
really
happy
with
it.
As
you
know,
myself
and
my
community
so
I'm
asking
stuff
what
we
are
doing
to
help
this
and
anxiety
and
make
a
public
statement
to
my
community
to
city
wide
that
to
let
people
know
that
there
is
not
people,
and
there
is
no
kids
turning
blue
and
gray,
and
that
water
is
safe
to
drink
to
to
the
benefit
of
my
resident
and
chair.
C
We're
working
with
corporate
communications
on
getting
something
out,
hopefully,
while
since
possible,
hopefully
today,
and
it
will
set
the
record
straight
on
not
just
the
water
quality
in
shadow
Ridge,
but
also
services
where
private
well
owners
can
also
have
their
water
tested.
If
they're
not
aware
of
that,
as
of
yet.
J
Thank
you.
Thank
you.
Thank
you.
Kevin
and
I
really
appreciate
mr.
chair
to
give
me
the
opportunity,
because
this
is
really
this-
is
how
sometimes
coupled
ward
in
the
media.
It
changed.
The
whole
perception
what's
happening
on
the
ground.
I'm
really
disappointed,
but
I
just
want
to
bring
this
to
the
attention
of
the
committee
and
I
will
be
sending
the
letter
that
I'm
sending
to
Metro
to
the
to
this
committee,
for
your
benefit
and
for
staff
just
to
review
it
and
to
make
sure
that
to
know
what's
going
on
in
Bailey.
A
Most
welcome,
naturally,
I
would
be
as
concerned
as
you
should.
I
residents
have
read
a
headline
like
that
and
be
under
the
fear
of
toxic
water,
so
I'm
glad
that
we
were
able
to
put
on
the
record
that
that
is
not
the
case
and
steps
are
being
taken
to
ensure
that
there
is
a
long-term
solution
that
Council
Brockton.
You
had
a
couple
of
questions.
What.
K
K
K
B
Folks
know
fully
aware:
you've
talked
about
potentially
building
or
going
deeper
to
draw
from
a
let's
just
say,
a
cleaner
source.
Are
you
trying
to
understand
what
the
source
of
the
nitrates
are?
If
it's
a
farming
I,
don't
know
if
it's
a
farming
community
around
it,
but
certainly
nitrates
from
chemicals,
manure
or
anything
that
can
run
in
and
seep
into
that
that
aquifer
water?
Are
we
trying
to
target
the
source
instead
of
digging
a
whole
new
aquifer?
B
C
B
J
A
All
right,
thank
you
so
on
this
item
this
report,
to
received
yes,
we
need
to
vote
on
the
on
the
amendment.
We've
lost
our
Vice
Chair
to
read
that,
what's
that
we
received
it
on
the
amendment,
that's
carried
okay
and
the
report
is
received.
Thank
you,
then,
quickly.
Any
notice
of
motions
seeing
none
inquiries-
cancer,
leaper
Thank,
You,
chair,
quick.
I
A
Thank
you
will
receive
that
item
in
closing.
I
do
want
to
note
that
there
has
been
a
number
of
there
has
been
media
coverage,
particularly
on
waste
related
issues
of
note,
of
course,
a
waste
watch
report
release
and
everything
from
bridgeheads
coffee
pods
to
others.
I
did
want
to
put
one
fact
out
there,
which
I
think
is
very
important
and
also
draw
attention.
A
Kevin
Wylie
general
manager
sent
out
a
memo
yesterday,
which,
which
gave
more
detail
on
this.
The
city
has
been
anticipating
the
provinces,
entirely
new
approach,
the
waste
3
Ontario
Act
of
2016
bill
151.
For
a
couple
of
years,
we've
known
that's
coming
and
we've
known
that
the
approach
that
it's
recommending
is
going
to
be
significantly
different
from
the
approach
that
has
been
taken
to
waste
management
in
municipalities
across
Ontario,
and
it
was
believed
that
major
investments
in
changes
in
advance
of
something
that
was
going
to
force
significant
changes
on
us
made
no
sense.
A
A
In
fact,
we
have
a
major
promotional
campaign
underway
right
now
for
waste
diversion
out
into
public
and
on
buses,
but
for
anyone
who
did
not
see
that
memo,
it
is
publicly
available
and
we
can
certainly
make
sure
others
receive
that
I
thought
that
in
quite
quite
important
to
get
on
the
record,
and
it
turns
out
to
be
closely
related
to
this
inquiry
so
closing
them
a
other
business,
seeing
none
German.
Thank
you.