The URL can be used to link to this page

2026-04-22 Finance Committee Agenda Packet - Open Session MINUTES OPEN SESSION FINANCE COMMITTEE MEETING MARCH 18, 2026 AT 5:15 PM MEETING CONDUCTED BY ELECTRONIC PARTICIPATION Present: Mayor D. Noade Reardon Councillor G. Sullivan Councillor P. Radwan Councillor G. Norton Absent: Councillor G. Stewart Also Present: Chief Administrative Officer I. Fogan Commissioner of Finance and Treasurer K. Fudge Commissioner Human Resources S. Hossack Commissioner Public Works & Transportation M. Hugenholtz City Solicitor J. Boucher Fire Chief R. Nichol Director Community Planning & Housing P. Nalavde Director Financial Services J. Forgie Director Financial Services C. Lavigne Director Engineering M. Baker Director Corporate Performance S. Rackley-Roach Intermediate Accountant V. Parikh City Clerk J. Taylor Administrative Assistant K. Tibbits 1. Meeting Called to Order Councillor Sullivan called the Finance Committee open session meeting to order. 2. Approval of Minutes 2.1 Minutes of December 9, 2025 Moved by Mayor Noade Reardon, seconded by Councillor Norton: RESOLVED that the minutes of December 9, 2025 be approved. MOTION CARRIED. 3. Approval of Agenda Moved by Mayor Noade Reardon, seconded by Councillor Radwan: RESOLVED that the agenda of March 18, 2026 be approved. MOTION CARRIED. 4. Disclosures of Conflict of Interest No disclosures. 5. Consent Agenda Moved by Mayor Noade Reardon, seconded by Councillor Norton: RESOLVED that Westway & Route 7 Ramps : Endorse the reallocation of $250,000 of City Share funding within the approved 2026 General Fund Capital Program from the Harbour Passage - Riverview Drive Project (26TC04) and add this funding to a new capital project titled Gault Road/ Manawagonish Road/ Ocean Westway & Route 7 Ramps Roundabout Design; and, Recommend approval of the above noted item at the next meeting of Council. MOTION CARRIED. 6. Business Matters 6.1 Enterprise Risk Management Update Director Forgie reviewed the submitted report as part of the Internal Audit Plan, the City, with significant support from BFL, implemented an Enterprise Risk Management (ERM) Framework and developed an ERM Policy to guide the City in maturing our Enterprise Risk Management system. Moved by Mayor Noade Reardon, seconded by Councillor Radwan: the Finance Committee recommend to Council to approve the Enterprise Risk Management Policy. MOTION CARRIED. 6.2 2027-2036 General Fund Long-Term Financial Plan Update City of Saint John Long-, which will focus on updating the plan for 2027 to 2036 and form the financial roadmap for the next few years. Staff will bring a final plan and policy updates in April, based on feedback from the Committee. Moved by Mayor Noade Reardon, seconded by Councillor Radwan: RESOLVED that the Finance Committee receive and file this presentation and direct any questions to staff. MOTION CARRIED. 6.3 2025 General and Utility Fund Unaudited Operating Results Director Lavigne reviewed the submitted ited Year-End Financial Results. The audited consolidated financial statements are expected to be presented to the Finance Committee for approval in late May. Moved by Mayor Noade Reardon, seconded by Councillor Norton: RESOLVED that the Finance Committee endorse transferring $2.875M of the 2025 surplus into a Capital renewal fund as part of the 2027 Operating Budget and the balance of 2025 surplus be directed into the Capital Reserve for the new Multiplex project; and the Finance Committee receive and file the presentation and direct any questions to staff. MOTION CARRIED. 7. Adjournment Moved by Mayor Noade Reardon, seconded by Councillor Norton: RESOLVED that the Finance Committee meeting be adjourned. FINANCECOMMITTEEREPORT Report DateApril 20, 2026 Meeting DateApril 22, 2026 Service AreaStrategic Services Chairman SullivanandMembers of Finance Committee SUBJECT: Internal Audit Winter ManagementUpdate OPEN OR CLOSED SESSION This matter is to be discussed in Finance Committee Open Session. AUTHORIZATION Primary AuthorCommissioner/Dept. HeadChief Administrative Officer Jodie ForgieKevin FudgeIan Fogan RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that Finance Committee receive and file the Winter Management Internal Audit Update. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY On March 24, 2025the Director of Public Works and Transportation Services Chief Administrative Officer to review sidewalk services delivery options to improve achievement of sidewalk service obje Management Plan and make recommendations as part of the 2026 General add an audits. Finance committee wasasked to consider this request at their next On May 14, 2025Finance Committee received this motion and Internal Audit commenced a review of the request and determined that it would be appropriate to include the Internal Audit as the next project to be completed. On October 29, 2025 Finance Committee approved the Audit Scope and recommended to Common Council at its next meeting for approvalas part of the 2025/2026 Internal Audit Plan. Internal Audithired a third party to perform the review in order to receive a team with experience in reviewing winter management operations. The audit was conducted to achieve several key objectives: 1. Optimize winter control operations and improve service quality 2. Assess current levels of service - 2 - 3. Review comparator winter control programs 4. Optimize resource allocation 5. Align with community needs The audit was completed on time and on budget and a detailed report has been provided to senior management along with recommendations. The City staff involved in this audit provided their time and effort and were fully cooperative throughout the process. As part of the service provided by Internal Audit the status of management action plans are reported to Finance Committee annually. For this particular audit the review of management action plans and timelines will be reported back to the Finance Committee in the summer in order to prepare for any budget requests during the budget season. PREVIOUS RESOLUTION Winter Management Internal Audit as part STRATEGIC ALIGNMENT This action aligns with the Council priorities of MOVE and PERFORM by conducting a review of our service delivery model for snow control and determine if there are opportunities to optimize winter control service delivery. REPORT Staff provide annual updates to the Winter Management Plan to Common Council and look for continuous improvement opportunities in performing the level of service set while being fiscally responsible. During the restructuring in 2020-2021 there was a decrease in budget allocated to winter operations out of necessity for the City to balance the budget. Now that time has passed with the resources currently in place staff have reported back that there are additional resource requirements to maintain service levels. Given the importance of the Winter Management Service to Common Council and the careful consideration of budget adjustments during the upcoming budget process Council requested that an independent audit be performed of the winter management operations. The goal of the review was to ensure operational efficiency, cost-effectiveness, transparency and public safety during winter months. The review was performed in 4 phases of work (Phase 1: Initiate, Phase 2: Assess, Phase 3: Strategize and Phase 4: Report). The review identified 12 detailed findings with 5 considered high risk and are listed below: - 3 - In addition to the findings a total of 13 additional opportunities were identified: It was noted that staff have already started working on plans to address some of the findings and opportunities as part of their own self assessment. Staff now have the report and they will respond with their action plans and timelines on all of the 12 detailed findings listed above. Internal Audit will work with staff on ensuring the management action plans address the recommendations and that the work is completed ontime to close the findings. SERVICE AND FINANCIAL OUTCOMES Service delivery opportunities for winter management. INPUT FROM OTHER SERVICE AREAS AND STAKEHOLDERS Name of Service Area/Stakeholder Name of Staff Person Public Works and Transportation Services , Michael Hugenholtz ATTACHMENTS Saint John Winter Control Services Review 2 oriented - decisions based as a result of responsibility or liability to any Document Classification: KPMG Public any and all cludes financial projections. The projections in xpressly disclaims nterpret the information presented. As with any future mplete, sufficient or appropriate for use by any person or entity sources unless otherwise noted within the report. erson or entity other than Client or for any purpose other than set it is possible that the findings contained could change based on y e our engagement agreement with Client dated November 19, 2025 o i n writing by KPMG. co is included or referred to and, if we consider necessary, to review our mation. of on, ose d i r the report has been issued in final form. lys for fte r firms affiliated with KPMG International Limited, a English mbe and such differences may be material. KPMG accepts no responsibility for loss or damages to any party results UglrcpAmlrpmjQcptgacqPctgcu © 2026 KPMG LLP, an Ontario limited liability partnership and a member firm of the KPMG global organization of independent mecompany limited by guarantee. All rights reserved. any information existing at the document date which becomes known to us after that date. Analysis contained in this document or for any purpose other than set out in the Engagement Agreement. This report may not be relied upon by any p in light of other than Clientout in the Engagement Agreement. This report may not be relied upon by any person or entity other than Client, and KPMG herebperson or entity other than Client in connection with their use of this report.The information provided to us by Client was determined to be sound to support the analysis. Notwithstanding that determinatinew or more complete information. KPMG reserves the right (but will be under no obligation) to review all calculations or anaconclusions are based on assumptions and data provided by Client. Significant assumptions are included in the document and must be read tfinancial information, projections will differ from actual on the information presented. Parties using this information assume all responsibility for any decisions made based on the inNo reliance should be placed by Client on additional oral remarks provided during the presentation, unless these are confirmeKPMG have indicated within this report the sources of the information provided. We have not sought to independently verify thKPMG is under no obligation in any circumstance to update this report, in either oral or written form, for events occurring a AgrwmdQ_glrHmflDisclaimer 4 term - targeted While road material storage . formalized recurring through standing constraints - Long . To reduce service disruptions, . accountability between based model to one that is realistic, - and aging facilities should be addressed Document Classification: KPMG Public clearer infrastructure storage . informed downtime and redundancy strategy - recommendations in this report are designed to help the , risk 2 rated 1 Service delivery feasibility and improvement service levels are achievable under rare ideal conditions, the consistently meet these standards during typical winter events. For sidewalks, the assessment found that existing service levels cannot be met with current resources, even under ideal conditions. To address these service delivery gaps, the City should implement a stagedinvest in additional capacity for sidewalks.Improve reliability and resilience the City should introduce structured route backups and stormresponse playbooks; address critical gaps in fleet redundancy and reliability; and improve sidewalk reliability coverage and shift design.Address enabling related to outdoor through a feasibility study for indoor storage and improvements Strengthen governance and continuous improvement report also recommends measures to support longsustainability, including improved data use, reviews of service levels, operational groups, and optional opportunities related to training, technology, communications, and contractor surge capacity. What are the takeaways?The City move from a reactive, effortresilient, and defensible. At a high level, they focus on four interconnected actions:1.2.3.4. storm - in tolerance for - including service standards, r firms affiliated with KPMG International Limited, a English mbe approved Levels of Service under - route structure provides no built . Even under ideal operating conditions, most - specific, and will persist unless addressed through . Many Levels of Service were established when - one , site observations. can reliably deliver Council - vehicle - one that provides a structured framework for roads and sidewalks and , rather than planned redundancy, increasing risk of workforce strain term or weather , - operator (outdoor storage, limited wash and maintenance capacity) increase downtime - . across Public Works, Fleet, Parking, and Communications, with improved pre who consistently demonstrate commitment, flexibility, and pride in service delivery, . The one making during storms. - UglrcpAmlrpmjQcptgacqPctgcu relative to peer municipalities, with Saint John delivering winter services at one of the lowest costs © 2026 KPMG LLP, an Ontario limited liability partnership and a member firm of the KPMG global organization of independent mecompany limited by guarantee. All rights reserved. among comparators event debriefing. - based Winter Management Plan - specific coordination - kilometre - cost efficiency - world winter conditions. The assessment combined operational data analysis, a quantitative Level of Service feasibility Dedicated and experienced staff particularly during challenging storm events.Strong storm planning and postper lane A clear priority supports consistent decision Service levels and routes are misaligned with current capacitySidewalk service levels are not feasible under the current model sidewalk routes cannot be completed within established timelines, particularly for Priority 3 segments.Limited operational resilience equipment downtime, staff absences, or consecutive storm events.Fleet reliability and facility constraints and reduce readiness during peak periods.Growing reliance on workarounds and overtime and service variability. AgrwmdQ_glrHmflConclusion and overall recommendations What did we assess?routes, staffing, fleet, facilities, and supporting processes model, stakeholder interviews, comparator research, and on What is working well?The review found several important strengths that the City can build upon. These include:What are the key challenges?Importantly, these challenges are structural, not shortdeliberate changes. ed6 by present ll stages of r a required ______ April 2026 a final report with findings d e its objective. Document Classification: KPMG Public Develop Nf_qc.2 Report provide recommendations backed and recommendations and achieve may not in order to ied an audit , ectives on current state challenges and gaps, and areas for this rsp identif om comparator municipalities). fr st was required service level ali 2026 ed and Transportation Department as well as other supporting stakeholders ______ ks opportunities March develop Phases, assessment model and Synthesized insights from previous Nf_qc.1 Strategize any information needed to complete the analysis. Staff throughout the City are eager to have r firms affiliated with KPMG International Limited, a English with provided from the auditee. Without mbe are party assistance - leading practices ______ fied identi methodology: November 2025 to February 2026 Nf_qc.0 Assess phase - four assistance was provided by KPMG, which provided specialized knowledge in winter maintenance services. KPMG was responsible fo party - municipalities across Canada for benchmarking and gathering leading practices. third UglrcpAmlrpmjQcptgacqPctgcu © 2026 KPMG LLP, an Ontario limited liability partnership and a member firm of the KPMG global organization of independent mecompany limited by guarantee. All rights reserved. comparator ______ November 2025 and analysis. The Interviews with key stakeholders including management and frontline staff within Public Works and Transportation to gather peimprovement.Meetings with Data analysis of both internal data (e.g., AVL, financial, and HR data) and external data (e.g., public reports and documents Project planning and management Nf_qc./Initiate AgrwmdQ_glrHmflScope, cooperation, and third Ammncp_rgmldpmkqr_dd For any internal audit, the value is found when collaboration, transparency, and acceptance for their inputs. We received full cooperation from the staff engaged, and they were forthcoming the support and recommendations implemented.Rfgpbn_prw_qqgqr_lac evidence execution of the audit through the following 7 contractor . LowLow HighHighHighHighHigh MediumMediumMediumMediumMedium Priority qualified program - . Document Classification: KPMG Public 11. Create a targeted workforce strategy for mechanics and explore an apprenticeship 12. Alternative service models for simple maintenance.13. Develop a preroster - . . . strategy . storage winging compliance - non Formalize and strengthen the joint 6. Develop a strategy to address bylaw 7. Continue pilot program for sidewalk 8. Develop a public engagement and communications 9. operating model between Public Works and Fleet.10. Complete an inventory of assets and organize . peer . - to - field based GIS - scrapers completion r firms affiliated with KPMG International Limited, a English of mbe . . . Incident review committee Fleet downtime and redundancy strategySidewalk reliability and timeliness improvementIndoor storage feasibility studyPlaybooks and route backupsServicing of rural roads Recommendations 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. Continuous reassessment of Levels of Service7. Automated Vehicle Location (AVL) installation8. Direct Liquid Application (DLA) repair9. Vehicle cameras10. 11. Optimize salt shed filling and material handling12. Modernize Public Works facilities Opportunities 1. Investigate simulatortraining2. Formalize the role of peermentors3. Formalize the use mapping for sidewalk 4. Investigate the feasibility of agile trucks and underbody 5. Review fleet procurement practices identified winter season winter season winter season 2027/2028 2026/2027 the 2028/2029 delivery risks and therefore require a the - the UglrcpAmlrpmjQcptgacqPctgcu mitigate or remove risk. Prioritization is prior to are actions required to remediate © 2026 KPMG LLP, an Ontario limited liability partnership and a member firm of the KPMG global organization of independent mecompany limited by guarantee. All rights reserved. to improvement. prior to prior to , by contrast, are optional improvements that in order areas for High priority Medium priority Low priority Recommendations/opportunities Based on the findings of the review, KPMG developed recommendations and opportunities to address the risks and Recommendations observed gaps or serviceformal management response and action plan.Opportunities management may choose to explore based on practicality, resourcing, and alignment with broader operational priorities, and do not require a commitment to implement.Prioritization To support implementation focus, recommendations were prioritized for each observation based on the time required to implementimplementation, and it helps ensure recommendations are actioned with appropriate due care and without creating additional risk. The target timelines for the initiation of recommendations by priority type are listed below: AgrwmdQ_glrHmflOrganizing recommendations and opportunities 9 - of - term capital and - trained operators - informed approach to fleet - training road operators as a - Document Classification: KPMG Public round indoor storage of winter maintenance - Recommendation The City should adopt a staged, riskand operational redundancy aligned with Council approved service levels. This includes reassessing fleet capacity following route optimization, reducing reliance on endequipment for spares, and evaluating supplemental redundancy options such as contractor surge capacity.The City should improve sidewalk reliability by reconfiguring routes and shift coverage using optimization model outputs and by investing in additional dedicated sidewalk capacity. The City should also consider crosssupplemental measure, however crossshould not be seen as a replacement for dedicated sidewalk resources.The City should complete a feasibility study to evaluate options for yearequipment. The study should assess lifecycle cost impacts, operational reliability benefits, opportunities to repurpose existing facilities, and alignment with longsustainability objectives. detail and supporting analysis can be found in the full report. al ) LoS . r firms affiliated with KPMG International Limited, a English mbe full staffing, full fleet availability, round. A review of operational - Assessment Model outputs, KPMG found that the City is unable are rarely sustained in practice however, those conditions LoS Finding KPMG developed a quantitative model to assess the feasibility of Level of Service (completion given current route structures and resource assignments. Based on this model, KPMG found that current road service levels can be achieved under ideal operating conditions; and no disruptions Based on analysis of fleet downtime data and operational practices, KPMG observed equipment unavailability. Stakeholder interviews and operational observations further confirmed that even modest downtime significantly reduces flexibility during peak storm periods and limits recovery from backlogs. As a result, road service reliability is highly sensitive to disruptions.to meet current sidewalk service levels even under ideal operating conditions, indicating a structural capacity gap. A review of route structures and shift coverage showed that existing arrangements do not reliably support timely sidewalk clearing, particularly for Priority 3 segments and high pedestrian areas. KPMG confirmed these findings through site visits, operational discussions, and analysis of service requests. The issue reflects systemic capacity constraints rather than isolated operational challenges.Through site visits and stakeholder interviews, KPMG found that most winter maintenance equipment is stored outdoors yearpractices showed that outdoor storage contributes to longer startup times, higher maintenance demands, and accelerated asset deterioration. KPMG observed that these factors reduce fleet readiness during early morning and overnight storm responses, create ongoing service delivery and asset management risks. HighHighHigh Rating UglrcpAmlrpmjQcptgacqPctgcu © 2026 KPMG LLP, an Ontario limited liability partnership and a member firm of the KPMG global organization of independent mecompany limited by guarantee. All rights reserved. Fleet downtime and redundancy strategySidewalk reliability and timeliness improvementIndoor storage feasibility study Finding title AgrwmdQ_glrHmflSummarized findings and recommendations (1/4) 10 Document Classification: KPMG Public facing documentation accordingly. - ) making without materially increasing staffing levels. - 3 / 2 Recommendation The City should develop standardized storm response playbooks and implement structured route backup and crosstraining strategies to improve consistency, resilience, and decisionThe City should establish a formal governance framework to validate the winter service inventory and confirm road classifications. The City should also seek Council direction where changes to service inventory or standards are required and update publicThe City should establish a formal, recurring process to review and update winter service levels, so they reflect current operating capacity, community priorities, and risk tolerance. This review should include route structure, priority definitions, rural road standards, and available staffing, fleet, and facilities. The outcome should clearly communicate to Council and the public what level of service can realistically be delivered with the investment directed by Council. detail and supporting analysis can be found in the full report. ( al are making. - r firms affiliated with KPMG International Limited, a English mbe world winter events. Even under these ideal assumptions, the - maintained roads are classified and serviced during winter - rural, and non - 2009, despite material changes in operating conditions, resources, and Finding Based on stakeholder interviews and review of winter operations, KPMG found that storm response relies heavily on individual experience and informal decisionThere are limited documented storm response playbooks or structured route backups to guide operations during staffing shortages, equipment downtime, or consecutive storm events. KPMG observed that this reliance on informal practices reduces consistency and slows decision making under pressure, particularly during night shifts. These conditions also increase vulnerability during high demand periods as well as risks related to the loss of institutional knowledge.Through document review and site observations, KPMG found inconsistencies in how rural, suboperations. Some road segments with unclear ownership or design standards are currently included in the winter service inventory. KPMG observed that this results in inconsistent application of service levels and unclear expectations for residents. The issue reflects gaps in governance and inventory validation rather than routing decisions.standards for roads and sidewalks have not been comprehensively reviewed since 2008community expectations. The assessment showed that while road plowing standards are generally achievable under ideal operating conditions, those conditions characterized by full staffing, full fleet availability, and uninterrupted operations rarely present during realmodel demonstrated that most sidewalk routes, particularly Priority 3 segments, cannot be completed within approved timelines. In practice, common factors such as equipment downtime and staff absences further reduce service reliability. As a result, current service levels are effectively calibrated to exceptional conditions rather than the realistic operating environment. This misalignment creates ongoing operational HighHigh Medium Rating UglrcpAmlrpmjQcptgacqPctgcu © 2026 KPMG LLP, an Ontario limited liability partnership and a member firm of the KPMG global organization of independent mecompany limited by guarantee. All rights reserved. Playbooks and route backupsServicing of rural roadsContinuous reassessment of Levels of Service Finding title AgrwmdQ_glrHmflSummarized findings and recommendations 11 governed - benefit analysis of introducing - time decision making and post - Document Classification: KPMG Public wetting systems. This should be supported by - ) 4 / facing vehicle cameras in a targeted and well - 3 Recommendation The City should complete AVL installation and repairs across the winter fleet and establish accountability and quality controls to ensure reliable data for realstorm review.The City should prioritize repair and ongoing maintenance of DLA and prereadiness checks, clear accountability, and alignment with the The City should conduct a costfrontmanner to complement AVL data and strengthen operational transparency and risk management. detail and supporting analysis can be found in the full report. ( al was identified facing vehicle cameras - r firms affiliated with KPMG International Limited, a English KPMG observed that the mbe not strategy or weather wetting systems are frequently unavailable due to maintenance - Finding KPMG identified incomplete and unreliable AVL coverage across the winter fleet. This inconsistent data limits situational awareness during storm events and reduces confidence in service verification. KPMG observed that these gaps contribute to inefficient dispatch decisions, unnecessary rework, and limited performance reporting. As a result, the City is not realizing the full benefit of its AVL investment.Through storm debriefs, equipment condition review, and stakeholder input, KPMG found that brine and preand reliability issues. Equipment availability planned winter treatment strategies and undermines salt reduction objectives.In a review of current practices, KPMG found reliance on AVL data alone provides limited insight when responding to complaints, incidents, and liability claims. Comparator analysis indicated that other municipalities use frontto support service verification and claims defensibility. absence of complementary visibility tools increases staff effort and investigation time. MediumMediumMedium Rating UglrcpAmlrpmjQcptgacqPctgcu © 2026 KPMG LLP, an Ontario limited liability partnership and a member firm of the KPMG global organization of independent mecompany limited by guarantee. All rights reserved. Automated Vehicle Location installationDirect Liquid Application repairVehicle cameras Finding title AgrwmdQ_glrHmflSummarized findings and recommendations 12 enhancements money improvements to - for - value a phased facilities modernization Document Classification: KPMG Public a formal incident review committee stablish ndertake mplement ) and assess material handling /4 4 Recommendation The City should eand implement a recurring driver training program to improve safety outcomes, accountability, and continuous improvement.The City should ienclosuresimprove storage efficiency, reduce waste, and support winter operations.The City should ustudy to define needs, prioritize improvements, and inform future capital planning while maintaining winter service continuity. detail and supporting analysis can be found in the full report. ( al - long related - in material winter materials improve inefficiencies r firms affiliated with KPMG International Limited, a English mbe , KPMG identified identified an increasing trend in KPMG debriefs , data of current practices showed no formal, consistent process to assess of incident visits and storm eview ite A r nalysis safety and workforce sustainability risks. Incremental upgrades alone are unlikely Finding In an aincidents. root causes or apply lessons learned. KPMG observed, through comparator research, that structured incident review processes support improved safety outcomes and accountability. The lack of a formal mechanism limits organizational learning.Based on senclosure and filling practices that expose salt to weather and reduce usable inventory. These practices increase rework and strain staff and equipment during peak periods. KPMG observed that relatively modest improvements could stewardship with limited disruption.Through site observations and stakeholder interviews, KPMG found that Public Works facilities have space, layout, and amenity limitations that do not align with modern operational or workforce expectations. KPMG observed that these conditions pose term to fully address underlying facility constraints. LowLow Medium Rating UglrcpAmlrpmjQcptgacqPctgcu © 2026 KPMG LLP, an Ontario limited liability partnership and a member firm of the KPMG global organization of independent mecompany limited by guarantee. All rights reserved. Incident review committeeOptimize salt shed filling and material handlingModernize Public Works facilities Finding title AgrwmdQ_glrHmflSummarized findings and recommendations FINANCECOMMITTEEREPORT Report DateApril 15, 2026 Meeting DateApril 22, 2026 Chairman SullivanandMembers of Finance Committee SUBJECT: Disaster Mitigation and Adaptation Fund(DMAF) Funding-Raisingof the Courtenay Bay Causeway OPEN SESSION This matter is to be discussed in open session of Finance Committee. AUTHORIZATION PrimaryAuthorCommissioner / Dept. Chief Administrative HeadOfficer Mikel LesterMichael Hugenholtz Ian Fogan Michael Baker RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that members of the Finance Committee: Endorse proceeding with the City signing the Disaster Mitigation and Adaptation Fund (DMAF) funding agreementas generally detailed in Exhibit #1attached to this report, and, Recommend that Common Council approve theDMAF agreement generally in the form that is attachedto this reportfor the Courtenay Bay Causeway projectat its next meeting. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The purpose of this report is to recommend that the Finance Committee endorse the City proceeding with accepting the 40% DMAF funding in order to raise the Courtenay Bay Causeway to better protect the east side of the City from sea level rise and storm surge. Over the last few years Gemtec Consulting Ltd.(Gemtec) has completed a preliminary investigation and conceptual design for the Courtenay Bay Causeway renewalproject. The work also included the evaluation of a forebay pumping stationwhich was proposed to be completed in the original funding application which was submittedin late 2021. The key findings of the investigation were that a pumpstation to pump theforebay is not feasibleat this time due to the high cost of installation and limited upstream benefitcompared to cost. However, through the preliminary investigation and conceptual design process, it has been - 2 - determinedbased on conceptual cost estimatesthat the renewal and raising of the Courtenay Bay Causeway can be completed within the approved DMAF funding envelope. The proposed cross-section includes two 3.6-metre-wide vehicle lanes and a 3.0-metre multi-use trail, separated by a 1.0-metre concrete boulevard with an integrated concrete barrier. Estimated project costs will become more accurate as the design process proceeds through its development. Renewal of the Causeway would extend its useful life and better protect the east side of the City from the longterm impacts of climate change. PREVIOUS RESOLUTIONS November 27, 2023: M&C 2023-266 Engineering Services Conceptual Design and Investigation for the Courtenay Bay Causeway, approved. st December 1, 2025: M&C 2025-273 2026 General and Utility Fund Capital Budget, approved. th December 15, 2025: M&C 2025-297 5 Year Capital Investment Plan Update (Utility & General Fund), approved. STRATEGIC ALIGNMENT GREEN, MOVE, and PERFORM priorities as this project signifies the city's commitment to ongoing investment in climate adaptation initiatives. The primary objective of this project is to upgrade the causeway strategically mitigating the risks associated with long-term climate change. This aligns with the council's GREEN initiative, emphasizing sustainability and environmental resilience. The project aligns with the MOVE priority through the inclusion of a multi-use trail that supports MoveSJ objectives by enhancing active transportation connectivity. Furthermore, this project aligns with the PERFORM priority by leveraging external funding sources. REPORT In late 2021, the City of Saint John applied to the Federal Government for DMAF funding to raise the Courtenay Bay Causeway and construct a stormwater pumping station at the Marsh Creek forebay. At the time the application was informed by the 2009 Terrain Group report, Marsh Creek Watershed Assessment, Evaluation and Improvements, thChange Action Plan, and the 2020 ACAP report on understanding climate change in Saint John. As a brief summary, the Terrain Group report identified the Marsh Creek watershed and the Courtenay Bay Causeway as critical points of vulnerability for the City of Saint John. Among other recommendations, the Terrain Group report - 3 - identified raising the causeway in addition to building a pumping station in the forebay as key measures to address the impacts of flooding, sea level rise, and storm surge. Climate Change report which identified the Courtenay Bay Causeway as a key failure point under sea level rise conditions, with a potential breach impacting approximately 23 emergency response routes and significantly disrupting citywide connectivity. In late 2022 the DMAF application was approved by the Federal Government for dollars (eligible costs), with a funding split of 60% City share and 40% funding through the DMAF funding program. At the time the approved funding was intended to support the design and construction of a new pump station in the forebay, as well as raising the Courtenay Bay Causeway to address climate change impacts. Over the year timeframe where the application was submitted and the funding was approved costs within the construction industry rose dramatically therefore at the time staff did not proceed with recommending the City sign up for the original scope of work that was defined until further investigation/ conceptual designs were completed to ensure the City could afford to do the full scope of work. In late 2023, the City engaged Gemtec to conduct a preliminary investigation and conceptual design for the pumping station and to raise the Courtenay Bay Causeway. The intent of this investigation and planning work was to determine some of the risks on the overall project that were unknown at the time the application was completed (i.e. geotechnical investigation, pump station modeling, etc.). Gemtecreport identified the following key findings: Causeway Risk Analysis: The analysis concluded that if the Causeway were to be overtopped and fail, the estimated impacts would include approximately dollars in property damage and municipal repairs. While Gemtec cannot predict the precise probability of structural failure of the Causeway due to the number of influencing variables, exceedance probability provides a useful indicator for assessing risk over time. For additional context, exceedance probability indicates the probability of water levels, or waves being higher than the current causeway elevation. Using historical climate data, their analysis determined that under current conditions there is a 20% annual exceedance probability for the Causeway. This means a 1-in-5-year storm event already reaches the top of the Causeway. Under the projected year-2100 climate conditions, the annual exceedance probability increases to approximately 95%, indicating that a typical 1-year storm event would most likely exceed the elevation of the existing Causeway. Geotechnical Investigation: A geotechnical investigation was undertaken to assess the feasibility of raising the Causeway. The analysis determined that the proposed 2-metre elevation increase is geotechnically feasible; however, construction - 4 - sequencing and settlement monitoring will be required to manage both short-term and long-term stability and settlement during construction. Traffic Analysis and Conceptual Geometric Design: A traffic study was undertaken to assess the impacts of reducing the Causeway from four lanes to two lanes, while accommodating active transportation infrastructure. Traffic modeling based on future traffic projections indicated that the proposed lane reductions would have minimal impact on congestion. Hydraulic and Hydrological Analysis: Gemtec conducted hydraulic modelling for Marsh Creek to evaluate the feasibility and sizing for the stormwater pumping station along the forebay. The hydraulic analysis and pumping station sizing exercise determined that a 12 m³/s pumping station would only provide localized benefits to the Marsh Creek watershed, with significant improvements observed only from the forebay to approximately kilometers upstream. This corresponds to the area near Civic #It was determined through this analysis that there are limitations along Marsh Creek that staff will be investigating the possibility of upgrades in the future (i.e. upgrading crossings upstream). As a result of the analysis, the pumping station would not provide significant benefit to the broader Marsh Creek drainage areas, including the Glen Falls and Coldbrook areas. Cost estimates were completed for all of the proposed work in order to determine if the funding approved was sufficient. operating costs of approximately $190,000 (2025 dollars). Two initial Causeway geometric design options were developed, with the following estimated capital costs in 2025 dollars: Causeway Raising Conceptual Design of two 4.3m vehicle lanes, two 1.6m bicycle lanes, a 1.5m greenspace boulevard, and a 1.5m sidewalk. Causeway Raising Conceptual Design two 3.6m vehicle lanes, a 1.5m boulevard, a 3m multi-use path. Given the limited benefits of the pumping station and its estimated capital cost of feasible within the current DMAF funding scope. As a result of the high capital costs noted above for raising the Causeway and installing a new pumping station City Staff and Gemtec focused their efforts on value-engineering for the raising of the Courtenay Bay Causeway to fit within the DMAF funding envelope that was originally approved eligible funding does not include the HST rebate which the City receives separately from the Federal Government. When the HST rebate is considered, the total - 5 - project cost, including HST for the Courtenay Bay Causeway raising is approximately dollars. City Staff worked with Gemtec and their team to conduct a value-engineering exercise to complete a conceptual design for the Causeway to remain within a (including HST). To achieve this, a revised Causeway cross-section was developed consisting of two 3.6-metre-wide vehicle lanes and a 3.0-metre multi-use path separated by a 1.0-metre concrete boulevard with an incorporated concrete barrier. It should be noted the above estimate for the revised scope of work is based on preliminary investigation and concept design. Estimated project costs will become more accurate as the design process proceeds through its development. Once it was determined that a reduced scope of work could be completed within the original DMAF funding envelope, City Staff proposed a scope change to the Federal Government funding partners (i.e. raising causeway only). The Federal Government has indicated its acceptance of the reduced project scope while maintaining the original approved funding envelope. City Staff have completed an iterative review process with the Federal Government to arrive at the attached draft agreement, which follows a standard federal funding template. If the project is endorsed by the Finance Committee and approved by Council, Staff will seek formal confirmation from the Federal Government and proceed with the detailed design phase for the renewal/ raising of the Courtenay Bay Causeway. SERVICE AND FINANCIAL OUTCOMES To date Staff have included funding in the 2026 General Fund Capital Program to complete the further investigations and detailed design for this project starting in 2026 (once the funding is formally secured) with the expectation that the design and permitting will take 1 to 2 years to complete. As the proposed raised cross- section reduces the number of lanes from four to two, the permitting process is not expected to be as extensive as it would be if the existing four-lane cross- section were raised by approximately two metres, which would require the City to expand the Causeway footprint into undeveloped land. It is expected that this project will trigger an EIA along with other permitting requirements. 5- year Capital investment plan (2026-2030), which was approved by Council in December 2025, includes funding for this project in 2026, 2027 and 2028. The funding was proposed to be spread over three years to help with the Capital cash flow. The current plan is construction would take place in 2028. The $6.965 dollars in DMAF funding represents a significant investment in Other share funding for this project. If the City chooses not to proceed with this project at this time Other Share funding is not guaranteed to be available in the future. As presented in this report, the risk of Causeway overtopping and furthermore potential failure of the Causeway increases over time. - 6 - As indicated above, the total project cost for this project is currently projected to be $19.2 million dollars when the HST rebate is included in the budget. As a result, the following breakdown is the forecasted City share funding required per year: 2026 $1,036,906 2027 $5,242,133.51 2028 $5,242,133.51 Total $11,521,172.54 It should be highlighted that $5,242,133 in City Share funding in 2027 and 2028 is a significant amount of City Share funding to assign to one capital project. As detailed in the -year investment plan, assigning this amount of funding to one capital project results in less other capital projects being able to be completed in each of those years. As a high-level example when you compare the overall City share funding from the 2025 and 2026 General Capital funding programs, this project would represent approximately 25% of the 2025 program ($5,238,196.27/ $21,140,000) and 19.5% of the 2026 program ($5,238,196.27/ $26,750,000). This is a significant project which will have a large City share footprint on the Capital program for years to come. INPUT FROM OTHER SERVICE AREAS AND STAKEHOLDERS The Finance Department reviewed the report and provided input. ATTACHMENTS DRAFT DMAF 1473_62581_City of Saint John Courtenay Bay Causeway The City of Saint John 2026 General Fund Operating Budget March 2026 2026YTD YTD YTD BudgetBudgetActualVariance $$$$ Revenues Property Taxes157,817,11 39,454,2819 39,454,281 - Equalization & Unconditional Grant 4,297,03217,188,123 4,297,032 - Regional Services Grant1,223,082 305,772 305,772 - Surplus 2nd Year Previous Year39,097 9,774 9,774 - Transfer from Operating Reserves 1,398,000 - - - Growth & Community Services9,957,165 1,047,933 1,306,06 258,1314 Public Works & Transportation Services7,007,82 1,694,468 1,766,510 72,0577 Public Safety Services2,516,40 706,2977 650,182 (56,115) Utilities & Infrastructure Services275,00 68,7510 60,572 (8,179) Strategic Services6,456,21 1,426,7528 1,277,10 (149,645)7 Saint John Energy Benefits1,200,00 -0 - - Total Revenues 205,078,040 4 9,011,052 4 9,127,300 1 16,248 Expenditures Growth & Community Services27,452,522 6,530,692 7,095,65 (564,966)8 Public Works & Transportation Services51,939,033 11,327,48 11,530,3429 (202,853) Public Safety Services - Fire, EMO and PSCC34,287,39 8,609,2854 8,624,37 (15,091)6 Public Safety Services - Police Commission31,999,26 7,955,1826 7,023,042 932,14 0 Utilities & Infrastructure Services6,249,87 1,505,4324 1,340,962 164,47 0 Strategic Services10,217,33 2,883,579 1,988,9257 894,652 Corporate Services9,314,019 2,420,085 2,012,703 407,382 Other Charges33,618,593 5,566,15 5,366,0026 200,15 4 Total Expenditures 205,078,040 4 6,797,898 4 4,982,010 1 ,815,888 Surplus (Deficit) - 2 ,213,154 4 ,145,290 1 ,932,136 City of Saint John by Service 2026 General Fund Operating Budget March 2026 2026YTD YTD YTD BudgetBudgetActualVariance $$$$ Growth & Community Services Salaries7,712,66 1,928,156 1,660,236 267,9197 Goods & Services19,739,855 4,602,53 5,435,4226 (832,886) TOTAL 27,452,522 6,530,692 7,095,658 (564,966) Public Works & Transportation Services Salaries19,773,84 4,744,8099 4,517,76 227,0427 Goods & Services32,165,18 6,582,684 7,012,570 (429,896)6 TOTAL 51,939,033 11,327,489 11,530,342 (202,853) Public Safety Services - Fire, EMO and PSCC Salaries27,030,913 6,775,07 6,643,734 131,3404 Goods & Services7,256,481 1,834,211 1,980,64 (146,435)6 TOTAL 3 4,287,394 8 ,609,285 8 ,624,376 ( 15,091) Public Safety Services - Police Commission Grant31,999,26 7,955,1826 7,023,042 932,14 0 TOTAL 3 1,999,266 7 ,955,182 7 ,023,042 9 32,140 Utilities & Infrastructure Services Salaries3,592,48 898,1226 887,761 10,361 Goods & Services2,657,389 607,31 453,2010 154,109 TOTAL 6 ,249,874 1 ,505,432 1 ,340,962 1 64,470 Strategic Services Salaries5,479,57 1,369,8934 1,070,472 299,421 Goods & Services4,737,765 1,513,68 918,4534 595,231 TOTAL 1 0,217,339 2 ,883,577 1 ,988,925 8 94,652 Corporate Services Salaries6,546,719 1,636,68 1,548,784 87,9004 Goods & Services2,767,30 783,4010 463,922 319,479 TOTAL 9 ,314,019 2 ,420,085 2 ,012,703 4 07,382 Other Charges Goods & Services33,618,593 5,566,15 5,366,0026 200,15 4 3 3,618,593 5 ,566,156 5 ,366,002 2 00,154 TOTAL EXPENDITURES 2 05,078,040 4 6,797,898 4 4,982,010 1 ,815,888 The City of Saint John 2026 General Fund Operating Budget March 2026 2026YTD YTD YTD BudgetBudgetActualVariance $$$$ Revenues Property Taxes157,817,11 39,454,2819 39,454,281 - t 4,297,03217,188,123 4,297,032 - Equalization & Unconditional Gran Regional Services Grant1,223,082 305,772 305,772 - Surplus 2nd Year Previous Year39,097 9,774 9,774 - -0 - - Transfer from Operating Reserves1,398,00 Growth & Community Services9,957,165 1,047,933 1,306,06 258,1314 1,694,468 1,766,510 72,0577 Public Works & Transportation Services7,007,82 706,2977 650,182 (56,115) Public Safety Services2,516,40 Utilities & Infrastructure Services275,00 68,7510 60,572 (8,179) 1,426,7528 1,277,10 (149,645)7 Strategic Services6,456,21 -0 - - Saint John Energy Benefits1,200,00 Total Revenues 205,078,040 4 9,011,052 4 9,127,300 1 16,248 Expenditures Growth & Community Services Growth & Community Planning Services1,668,32 349,350 378,0474 (28,693) Development Engineering397,629 99,961 62,652 37,309 Community Development525,81 121,8370 110,201 11,636 Animal Control126,903 31,725 28,603 3,122 Dangerous and Vacant Building Program286,436 34,931 36,191 (1,260) Minimum Property Standards606,319 154,456 112,917 41,539 Heritage Conservation Service215,097 34,337 30,697 3,640 Other By-Laws1,391,435 349,202 101,206 247,996 Permitting & Inspection Services1,611,441 402,40 339,5850 62,815 Regional Economic Development Agency3,087,50 474,9990 543,92 (68,925)4 Market Square2,500,00 624,9990 624,999 - Saint John Trade & Convention Centre159,54 39,8850 34,099 5,786 Imperial Theatre346,889 86,722 86,371 351 Saint John Aquatic Centre453,63 113,4080 117,225 (3,817) Saint John Arts Centre133,943 33,486 33,350 136 TD Station500,851 125,213 136,931 (11,718) Library594,457 151,958 148,28 3,6744 City Market1,449,361 351,617 545,27 (193,653)0 The City of Saint John 2026 General Fund Operating Budget March 2026 2026YTD YTD YTD BudgetBudgetActualVariance $$$$ Growth & Community Services (Continued) Arts & Culture Board70,000 - 4,165 (4,165) PRO Kids257,32 63,4884 31,280 32,208 Carleton Community Center 97,990195,979 97,990 - North End Community Center 97,990195,979 97,990 - Recreation Programming1,311,535 315,165 234,935 80,230 Neighbourhood Development261,00 130,500 -0 130,50 0 YMCA - Contracted Services157,898 78,949 78,949 - Boys and Girls Club - Contracted Services146,34 73,1724 73,172 - Unspecified Grants300,40 150,200 219,400 (69,200)0 Affordable Housing Strategy205,972 53,800 42,218 11,582 Lifeguards207,466 - - - Lord Beaverbrook Rink185,907 58,408 68,543 (10,135) Building Incentive Reserve350,00 -0 145,00 (145,000)0 Regional Services Commission663,67 165,9180 128,96 36,9544 Housing Accelerator Program3,291,241 792,81 241,1810 551,629 Housing for All2,090,12 512,0967 1,857,41 (1,345,314)0 Growth Department827,12 189,9670 134,161 55,806 Saint John Industrial Parks679,00 169,7490 169,749 - Total Growth & Community Development Services 2 7,452,522 6 ,530,692 7 ,095,658 (564,966) Public Safety Services - Fire, EMO and PSCC Fire Rescue and Suppression Service25,563,543 6,438,86 6,410,784 28,0768 Fire Training4,500 1,125 - 1,125 Technical Rescue Response100,41 25,1630 18,888 6,275 Hazardous Materials82,939 22,281 15,685 6,596 Fire Prevention991,086 249,042 207,996 41,046 Fire Investigation70,698 17,757 7,977 9,780 Emergency Management Services260,392 65,412 97,62 (32,212)4 Water Supply and Hydrants2,600,00 650,0010 650,001 - Public Safety Communications Centre3,301,22 811,4916 914,548 (103,057) Street Lighting1,282,60 320,6490 290,305 30,344 Total Public Safety Services - Fire, EMO and PSCC 34,287,394 8,609,285 8,624,376 ( 15,091) Public Safety Services - Police Commission Saint John Police Commission Grant31,999,26 7,955,1826 7,023,042 932,140 Total Public Safety Services - Police Commission 31,999,266 7,955,182 7,023,042 9 32,140 The City of Saint John 2026 General Fund Operating Budget March 2026 2026YTD YTD YTD BudgetBudgetActualVariance $$$$ Public Works & Transportation Services Snow Control Streets6,182,269 1,625,439 2,307,325 (681,886) Street Cleaning1,783,385 445,337 444,517 820 Utility Cuts1,291,76 322,9537 152,135 170,818 Street Services - Surface Maintenance8,851,449 891,321 844,811 46,510 Snow Control Sidewalk1,225,913 302,84 367,974 (65,130)4 Sidewalk Maintenance1,109,40 255,544 250,854 4,6904 Pedestrian & Traffic Management Service2,552,33 586,5294 555,041 31,488 Solid Waste Management4,008,47 1,008,5030 799,83 208,6694 Landscape - Parks & Open Spaces3,523,462 837,049 638,861 198,188 Rockwood Park632,279 144,491 55,501 88,990 Urban Forestry463,041 98,941 39,628 59,313 Saint John Horticultural Association80,000 55,000 55,000 - 433,1998 449,026 (15,827) Arena Operation & Maintenance1,447,05 Sportsfield Operation & Maintenance1,780,793 287,902 253,416 34,486 Other Facilities Operation & Maintenance777,116 193,001 75,673 117,328 212,360 212,360 -0 Transit Debt1,373,00 y 1,902,837,611,353 1,902,837 -7 Transit Subsid Fleet Stockroom371,833 97,169 460,805 (363,636) (24,878)0 Stormwater4,236,465 1,056,132 1,081,01 Parking Administration1,010,882 253,259 211,343 41,916 67,7474 73,761 (6,014) Peel Plaza Parking Garage246,33 Market Square Parking Garage299,906 75,243 106,228 (30,985) Off Street Parking 1,080,519 174,689 192,399 (17,710) Total Public Works & Transportation Services 51,939,033 1 1,327,489 1 1,530,342 (202,853) The City of Saint John 2026 General Fund Operating Budget March 2026 2026YTD YTD YTD BudgetBudgetActualVariance $$$$ Utilities & Infrastructure Services Engineering1,655,775 421,61 398,0064 23,608 Carpenter Shop431,012 110,425 123,186 (12,761) 119,4484 Facilities Management2,279,722 590,342 470,89 City Hall Building 228,7481,174,123 205,44 23,3044 GIS470,828 94,695 96,567 (1,872) 12,7444 Stockroom238,413 59,608 46,86 Total Utilities & Infrastructure Services 6,249,874 1 ,505,432 1 ,340,962 1 64,470 Strategic Services Finance1,659,945 564,36 281,3384 283,026 Assessment1,909,173 - - - Supply Chain Management 117,005468,030 120,962 (3,957) Information Technology4,524,991 1,364,68 890,5856 474,101 Corporate Planning928,195 228,271 97,248 131,023 Insurance157,006 39,251 50,619 (11,368) Liability Insurance570,00 570,000 548,1730 21,827 Total Strategic Services 10,217,339 2 ,883,577 1 ,988,925 8 94,652 Corporate Services Chief Administrator Office688,693 172,177 222,697 (50,520) Mayor's Office186,31 46,7964 49,648 (2,852) Common Council673,869 168,59 144,3820 24,208 Common Clerk805,318 201,328 187,561 13,767 Human Resources3,239,721 809,936 736,963 72,973 Legal Department1,442,78 355,6987 255,067 100,631 Real Estate376,638 77,410 86,811 (9,401) Customer Service926,251 344,542 188,069 156,473 Corporate Communications974,427 243,608 141,506 102,102 Total Corporate Services 9,314,019 2 ,420,085 2 ,012,703 4 07,382 Other Charges 636,4450 622,467 13,978 Fiscal Charges12,956,40 75,0000 75,000 - Landfill Closure300,00 Special Pension Contributions10,409,465 2,602,365 2,357,512 244,853 Other Misc. Expenses / PILT Adjustment952,728 2,346 9,388 (7,042) Transfer to Capital Reserves3,000,00 750,000 801,6350 (51,635) Capital from Operating6,000,00 1,500,000 1,500,000 -0 Total Other Charges 3 3,618,593 5 ,566,156 5 ,366,002 2 00,154 Total Expenditures 2 05,078,040 4 6,797,898 4 4,982,010 1 ,815,888 (Deficit) - 2 ,213,154 4 ,145,289 1 ,932,136 Surplus Saint John Water 2026 Water & Sewerage Operating Budget March 2026 2026YTD YTD YTD BudgetBudgetActualVariance $$$$ Revenues Flat Rate Accounts22,102,000 11,051,000 11,096,145 45,145 Meter Rate Accounts19,389,500 3,231,583 3,152,998 (78,585) Industrial Raw Water Accounts7,697,445 1,282,907 1,183,890 (99,017) Fire Protection Levy2,600,000 649,998 649,998 - Storm Sewer Levy1,000,000 249,999 249,999 - Other Revenues1,750,000 404,994 361,990 (43,004) Previous Year's Surplus1,170,837 292,707 292,707 - Transfer from Reserve- - - - Total Revenues55,709,782 17,163,188 16,987,727 (175,461) Expenditures Drinking Water Service25,818,826 5,648,400 5,259,585 388,815 Wastewater Service20,573,228 4,526,384 5,172,700 (646,316) Infrastructure Management1,024,413 256,029 232,707 23,322 Industrial Water Service8,293,315 1,689,425 1,395,966 293,459 Total Expenditures55,709,782 12,120,238 12,060,958 59,280 Surplus (Deficit)- 5,042,950 4,926,769 (116,181) Њ Saint John Water 2025 Water & Sewerage Operating Budget Salaries and Goods & Services March 2026 Drinking Water Service Wages and Benefits4,021,156 1,005,236 1,038,346 (33,110) Goods & Services21,797,670 4,643,164 4,221,240 421,924 Total 25,818,826 5 ,648,400 5 ,259,585 388,815 Wastewater Service Wages and Benefits4,767,626 1,191,870 1,291,745 (99,875) Goods & Services15,805,602 3,334,514 3,880,955 (546,441) Total 20,573,228 4 ,526,384 5 ,172,700 (646,316) Infrastructure Management Wages and Benefits762,199 190,544 188,730 1,814 Goods & Services262,214 65,485 43,977 21,508 Total 1 ,024,413 2 56,029 2 32,707 23,322 Industrial Water Service Wages and Benefits1,301,196 325,254 317,072 8,182 Goods & Services6,992,119 1,364,171 1,078,895 285,276 Total 8 ,293,315 1 ,689,425 1 ,395,966 293,459 TOTAL EXPENDITURES 55,709,782 1 2,120,238 1 2,060,958 5 9,280 Ћ Saint John Water 2025 Water & Sewerage Operating Budget March 2026 2026YTD YTD YTD BudgetBudgetActualVariance Revenues Flat Rate Accounts22,102,000 11,051,000 11,096,145 45,145 Meter Rate Accounts19,389,500 3,231,583 3,152,998 (78,585) Industrial Raw Water Accounts7,697,445 1,282,907 1,183,890 (99,017) Fire Protection Levy2,600,000 649,998 649,998 - Storm Sewer Levy1,000,000 249,999 249,999 - Other Revenues1,750,000 404,994 361,990 (43,004) Previous Year's Surplus1,170,837 292,707 292,707 - Total Revenues55,709,782 17,163,188 16,987,727 (175,461) Expenditures Drinking Water Service Watershed Management693,523 176,042 251,935 (75,893) Water Treatment9,453,598 2,358,811 1,809,040 549,771 Water Pumping & Storage1,258,775 304,332 347,330 (42,998) Transmission & Distribution5,080,715 1,283,172 1,196,669 86,503 Customer Metering768,131 192,508 237,096 (44,588) Internal Charges470,000 101,874 154,357 (52,483) Other Charges595,272 148,818 180,316 (31,498) Debt Servicing3,265,121 24,419 24,419 - Capital from Operating4,233,691 1,058,424 1,058,424 - Total Drinking Water Service25,818,826 5,648,400 5,259,585 388,815 Wastewater Service Wasterwater Pumping3,697,101 963,733 877,686 86,047 Wastewater Collection3,547,516 888,992 764,927 124,065 Wastewater Treatment6,622,431 1,680,815 2,505,742 (824,927) Internal Charges470,000 101,874 101,874 - Other Charges595,271 148,815 180,316 (31,501) Debt Servicing2,688,182 3,975 3,975 - Capital from Operating2,952,727 738,180 738,180 - Total Wastewater Services20,573,228 4,526,384 5,172,700 (646,316) Infrastructure Management Engineering Services1,024,413 256,029 232,707 23,322 Total Infrastructure Management 256,0291,024,413 232,707 23,322 Industrial Water Service Watershed Management942,821 236,991 145,021 91,970 Water Pumping & Transmission3,189,162 802,249 650,760 151,489 Customer Metering279,710 69,826 19,828 49,998 Debt Servicing1,560,169 - - - Ќ Transfer to Capital Reserves836,677 209,169 209,169 - Transfer to Operating Reserve730,182 182,544 182,544 - Capital from Operating754,594 188,646 188,646 - Total Industrial Water Service8,293,315 1,689,425 1,395,966 293,459 Total Expenditures55,709,782 12,120,238 12,060,958 59,280 Surplus (Deficit)- 5,042,950 4,926,769 (116,181) Ѝ 6 S E T A R T S E R E T N I 6 A D A 203 - N A 7 C F O 202 K N A B - 1 E R U G I F - of and and cost in March on heavy and one of resulting in as shown in mitigates this more stable CPI uncertainty impacts how the can have a direct fuel cost and will down significantly Plan reliance been identified as n % per $100 of assessed has Carbon Tax 1.7 which as President to its ConsumerPriceIndexMonthly 535 2025 saw an impact on the Financial 4. by the US and Isreal have s f the consumer which can fuel an issue in Saint John. The City Saint John f continued to remain strong i the Federal last update to the plan r a lot of business and 202 was to implement additional tariffs. cost of debt a e up. 3 T s th launched d electricity and food. real estate market.These unknown factors n he Long Term a The tariffs There is continued pressure on CPI largely recognizing the tax burden on residential in 202 . k . T created exposed cities due s - ultimately i increase R objectives e s s property tax revenues. t years, n have aA war was of shelter, continues to be o R inflation 5 i program main t t i s annual CPI s d e on cost r n ed which will have a significant impact o o t C n due to the current Capital I Province had an average annual CPI of c i d its n Interest rates can m impacts historical affordability a rates have dropped since . o , the United States elected Donald Trump , the n n exports go to the United States. over the past 5 largely due from the removal of with Iran o o i t CITY OF SAINT JOHN | TEN YEAR FINANCIAL PLAN administration c 6 a E l 2025 f . n 2 IIn 202indexa sharp drop in in fuel prices. due to continueHome prices and rental costs have housing reduced the property tax rate from $1.785 to $1.valueCity funds risk by reducing reliance on debt to fund capital and increasing pay as you go.In the IndiceDesPrixALaConsommationMensuel1.pdf from the homeowners InterestFigure 1The additional tariffs negativegoods for business and inflationary pressures.202drive the cost of goods and serviceNew Brunswick has a large exposure and vulnerability to this risk as 90% of NB one of Canada’s most tariffindustry and cross border trade. impact on the City and it 9 to ese must sites, had a which financial staff and diverting and has services. Along Service team monitoring rate but impact on y t Safety e housing f a and unfortunately th S s c a very challenging issue for in terms of i l core business b significant of City facilities, such the City u issue The City has put a lot of P / Community 36 transitional y t ese i l also a i the City’s b 20 i s - abuse that is but There has been more Police hired n encampments o s p will not be easily solved. 27 s , e d focus on R escalating community safety concerns through l 20 a i homeless resource c o investment by the City to assist with providing Outreach S / and protective services. s staff is not only putting pressure on the tax away the s e s financial resources cannot be understated. The City now n s n , non policing responses and targeting interventions. s has seen a significant rise in homelessness, social related issues take e l annually with e mental health and drug . Most recently the City created a s while being addresse m o s issue H . 5 Saint John such aresidents, Councilfinancial resources into addressing thissueThe impact oinvest in more security guards for severalMarket and Customer Service. formed the Quick Response Team, to focus on the more challenging areas of the Cityaddress emerging and coordinatedThere has also been services along with various temporary or with the services the City is providing, there is also significant cost being incurredPublic Safety responses and cost of cleaning up sites when vacated. Thislarge impact onresources which funding from other core service delivery. a are et a draft the most of a predominate and as result of ) $340,097 in 2024. from an increase in some ed 5 vs to increase access to outlook/ - . The Housing Accelerator 202 continues to m the Federal and Provincial benefit as recovery from the COVID ro y l and has put pressure on housing has market p - p lan highlighted 366,989 u $ S Canada g as n i The p housing arket the City’s tax base has grown much s - u m o H john much of - d ousing supply issues n Saint John region in h a g The in Saint John w n and i undertaken several strategies . and s s u interprovincial migration o of 2022, the City’s Growth Committee released price H have Rapid Housing Initiative are Federal funding programs that e ousing l h b continue a d Recent growth and changing demographicsEscalating rental costs and house pricesDiminished housing access and affordability Emerging challenges, gaps and barriers within the housing mark r o f outcome of the housing affordability and supply issue has created er than expected except in 2026, the Province froze assessments. f 1.2.3.4. A CITY OF SAINT JOHN | TEN YEAR FINANCIAL PLAN . https://blog.remax.ca/saint 4 Affordable issue in Saint Johninternational and demand and supply.Average home(the increase in this real estate high pandemicIn September Affordable Housing Action Plan.relevant trends in Saint JohnThis City, along with funding commitments fGovernmentaffordable housing and increase housing supplyFunding and helping to address these challenges.The homelessness crisis in Saint John. , s d 12 and ate tax allowing financially continue contractors productivity, forms, make The density of . All three of The benefits of er and is the broaden the pool of rs k growth and expansion of s i R initiative e s t operational efficiency, better i r n 36 pe North End Neighborhood Plan r the City operates, p transformation for the CityManagement System m e enterprise resource planning system t e theal 20 n g . This will play a key role in better E- a n / n a g l a n The last key P i 27 M that is critical to increasing n d security ne o c a l o 20 element in the success of the plan. n P h a r e o on replacing its m c r b r the first draft of o h u f g or i s e e e P N / R provide value to the taxpayers of Saint John. opportunities, activate public spaces and street and ensure t d e n increased data n financial reporting, creating s embarking e i E r The growth will support regional supplie m p h r e t ed r e g key initiatives will transform how 29. . t oa ing in 2026. This is a generation n t n N E a .. 6 City staff completedwas brought forward to Common Council in December 2025.development will be a keydensity can expand customer base for local businesses, employmentinfrastructure investments by the City and other partners are viableThe plan for the North End will help address the housing shortage, the affordability of housing and rental units and be a catalyst for investment and revitalization of the area which in turn will increase property tax revenues forthe City.7M The City is starimprovworkflows, performance managementemployee engagement, continuous improvement and decision making for the operation of the City.implementation if the Enterprise Risk these decisions and in Canada. This investment is expected to create up to 100 jobs by the end of 20developing clustering opportunities to related businesses and generrevenue. The potential of business growth, job business will lead to potential property tax growth. s ’ cial has help ort ly $2 plan. P urchill e its first B existing rovin is to P s aligned with financial time owth, “Ensuring the company to ly $14.47 million r d logistics and e approximat n tio i ions for the utility while at controlle - opportunities benefits of strategy for g th ir lity. The goal over i e a $205 million initiative that es. th tal expect i a ie Export Hub at Port Saint John, d Saint John Energy has undertaken a - n . perty tax revenue and the e al benefit of approximat io g John receives A has undertaken to modernize it h n t savings o i ership to build a wind farm known as the w s n o n atives across three broad categories. r i gy generation and storage a capacity and capabilities to strengthen the change and socr G p Industry l operations as part of Logistics Park. x completed in 2024 y E ai ed g a direct financ r ribute to additional grow t t er in energy This benefit has been built into the updated o n . has he City of Saint EP lybuilding its first Import s nn i Saint John Energy published hh 2035 - oo technological ty. JJ i Renewable eneSmart energy services for consumersStrategic partnership opportunit tt nn ii 2026 aa 1.2.3.d Farm that SS CITY OF SAINT JOHN | TEN YEAR FINANCIAL PLAN in .. 4 Saint John Energy began in 2012 to strategically reposmeet the 5 The Saint John Port still maintaining the traditional services and benefits for the Saint John communa Sustainable Future” in 2019. The strategy lays out initAs the owner, tmillion annualproject with a private partWfrom Under this agenda and a new structure for Saint John Energy, the return on equity would congovernment policy and the City’s sustainabthe City reduce reliance on prCommunity Capacity Funding.significantly expandposition as part of the Atlantic Gateway.The resulting growth in container cargo is expected to create an additional 500 jobs over time.transportation and rAmericold, a global leader in temperaturewarehouses o 16 ity t % 8 : 6 900 203 % 36 the money to cover said expenses 5 . s 3 20 - y a 27 D 575 % y 003) was created. This policy allows the C n 50i - 20 maintained after a never to fund operating or maintenance costs. The R – a and r o f % y e 20 n o M money to use for future operating expenses and capital r 4% of budget or $15k per year, whichever is greater2% of the assessed value of real propertyTotal amount borrowed shall not exceed 6% of the assessed value of real propertyDebt per Capita shall not exceed $The Debt Service Ratio shall not exceed Total debt outstanding as a percentage of the Operating Budget shall not exceed Debt per Capita of $The Debt Service Ratio to be Total debt outstanding as a percentage of the Operating Budget to be u o y Borrowings in any one year shall not exceed: e v a S . will only be issued to finance projects approved in the Capital Budget and the Capital Investment Plan other key limits and targets are as follows:Limits (From the New Brunswick Local Governance Act):Key Performance Indicators of Debt Limits of the General Fund:Targets to be achieved3Everyone knows that surprises happen. There will always be unforeseen expenses that will come up and sometimeexpenditures. The stipulations are: will not be available. So, in order to ensure the City remains in compliance with the Debt Management and Operating Budget policies, an Operating and Capital Reserves Policy (FASset aside It is follow term debt of debt in - time expenses 004) was established to - nancial vulnerability. e k cash for everything, the reality is a y m a p u o y n a h term financial plan is to have a road map to t - y e n o number of best practice policies have been adopted M A e r o y Policies Ml e d s i n e W 006) sets out the acceptable conditions for the use p - S oney will go to funding their minimum payments. That is why it is w t en financial sustainability and reduce fio ’ Maintain a structurally balanced budget: Recurring operating expenses should be covered by recurring operating revenuesThe City needs to be able to function without having to rely on revenue sources outside of its controlOne time revenues should only be used for one key financial values: r h n r o o purpose of having a long CITY OF SAINT JOHN | TEN YEAR FINANCIAL PLAN DB .. he box Treach a defined set of goals. In the City’s case, the number one goal is to be financially sustainable. by council to help achieve this goal. These policies are meant to several1If every year a person uses credit cards to pay for things that they need, but can’t afford, they will dig themselves a financial hole that will be very difficult to get out of. Every year, their debt levels will get higher and a larger portion of their mimportant to only spend the money you have made, thereby living within your means. The Operating Budget Policy (FASsummarized as follows:2While it would be great to be able to that at some point or another debt will become a fact of life, especially when it comes to large ticket items such as houses or cars. The Debt Management Policy (FASaddition to debt limits, targets and capacity. It stipulates that long strengt 17 u o Y f o l o r e t r n ent increased by 3% or u o t i C n r e % for new capital. It also k u f a 20 t advises that the capital budget m y o e 36 o h rthe following order: t g e 20 r n i o - v f i l e b w s 27 e e n 005) of the City s - y n 007) was created. This policy is meant to ensure u 20 e- b p x u E o r y % capital renewal and u 0 e o r 8 people who do not receive significant pay increases every Y o f f o e jects will be completed in l b o f r o t o n r o e C Wage escalation does not cause a reduction in service levels in order to balance the General Operating BudgetWage escalation does not exceed the City’s assessment base growthAll employee groups are treated equitablyMandatoryRiskPriority of Council The City spends within its meansWage escalation does not cause a tax rate increase in order to balance the General Operating BudgetPositive Financial ImpactDiscretionary h e t k xcapital pro a i 1.2.3. 4.5. F T en increasing at a much faster rate than revenue. It is to this end that the .. 5For the majority ofyear, the smallest of increase in basic expenses such as rent, mortgage payments and electricity have a major impact on their monthly spending. Think about how hard it would be to manage if your rso every single year, when your pay only increased by 1%. There will come a point where living in your apartment will simply not be affordable any longer. For the City, as described earlier in this report, total wage expenses have beWage Escalation Policy (FAS 6The Capital Budget Policy (FASprescribes the priority in which capital money is spent each year, specifying that that: shall comprise of assets in good condition ing y t r e p operating expenses which are greater than o r e to replace it before the maintenance charges P 001) was created. The specific objectives of the r time- - u o y f Major unanticipated eventsMajor Capital renewalFuture LiabilitiesOne$100,000 that are not part of the operating budgetInfrastructure deficitInvestment growth opportunities o e r a C d Reserves are meant to provide for: o o G Improve the decisions related to the management of the City’s assetsImprove the transparency and accountability of community investments in the management of the City’s assetsImprove the management of the City’s exposure to risks of reduced service deliveryFacilitate the leveraging of partnerships and infrastructure funding from external sources. Improve the reliability of customer service by maintaining clearly defined levels of service by maintain e k CITY OF SAINT JOHN | TEN YEAR FINANCIAL PLAN a T . 4 When you own a car, you know that routine maintenance such as changing the oil and rotating the tires will help extend the life of your vehicle as well as minimize the operating expenses in the long run. Also, once the car gets old, there is an optimal timbecome too high. City assets are very similar and for that reason, an Asset Management Policy (FAS Asset Management Policy are to: 18 address an was established to . 36 icy ld upon the mutual understanding i 20 - The pol and bu 27 transparency 20 on funding. d ’s and promote of communication Committees baseopportunity between ABC , s, s be cast off to e ments. lity and . i jectives, e accuracy, b es cial results, this can n , tuition and managed and 022) sets out . y - t ances iSome Agencies, and s are .to one the City’s ner r nh books s match for e e v i n at ions and spent in a fiscally u practices with the City’s icators, fina dependent go t d ameeting their obligation n ed i nel budgets are managed a s for marks t l are u BC) Policy (FAS and asset management s sponsible man e (A r When is a policy thgs n i v ficant portion of the annual operating on they i i e , meeting their goals i for room and board, included in the reporting requir 021) performance - h c a are new living room furniture can be purchased. key pay FAS s i responsibility, . The policy enhances fiscal responsib t n are nel and non person y e n e d C’s is a sign n n that the ABC’s are aligned with the City’s o o templates and guidelines with reporting to the City. e there al results m p integrating budget monitoring perso s e r are helping d uclass, performing ative by tion or r here is an expectat a t y res e u f, o lity . and control by ensuring budget allocat i requirement to present an annual report o y ensure k oper e ensu according to policy cr so ilityand you , annual operating revenues and expenditure a u r al s to t l flexib plans and is operating in a fiscally re e is p k e a ciath and e ous w CITY OF SAINT JOHN | TEN YEAR FINANCIAL PLAN K M .. This means that given the limited available money to spend, the leaky roof will need to be replaced beforeThe Capital budget policy follows four key principles and strategies:affordability, ownership, fiscal 7The Budget Monitoring Policy (accountabreserve fund and debt management strategies. The policy separatelyfinancial controls to ensure resources are fundprudent manner.8University is a significant investment. adheredfinanuniversityother expenseswhich is going to measured by the results the student receives Boards, and Commissions are heavily subsidized and dependent on City taxpayer fundsThis City’s funding for ABbudget. It is impvariThe Agencies, Boards, and Commissionstandardized reporting The reporting groThere City of Saint John Debt Management Policy Title: Debt Management Policy Subject: General Fund Debt Management Category: Finance and Administrative Services Policy Policy No.: FAS- 006 M&C Report No.: 2019-167 Effective Date: Next Review Date: Area(s) this policy applies to: Cross Corporate Office Responsible for review of this Policy: Finance and Administrative Services Related Instruments: Policy Sponsors: Chief Financial Officer FAS-001 Asset Management Policy FAS-002 Investment Management Policy FAS-003 Reserves Policy FAS-004 Operating Budget Policy FAS-005 Capital Budget Policy Document Pages: This document consists of 8 pages. Revision History: Common Clerk's Annotation for Official Record Date of Passage of Current Framework: July 8, 2019 I certify that this Policy was adopted by Common Council as indicated above. ________________________ July 10, 2019 Common Clerk Date Date Created: Date Updated: Common Council Approval Contact: July 8, 2019 March 12, 2025 Date: July 8, 2019 Strategic Services 1 City of Saint John Debt Management Policy TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. POLICY STATEMENT ........................................................................................................ 3 2. DEFINITIONS .................................................................................................................... 3 3. ACCEPTABLE PURPOSES FOR DEBT ................................................................................. 4 4. DEBT LIMIT CITY OF SAINT JOHN ................................................................................. 5 5. DEBT LIMIT SAINT JOHN WATER .................................................................................. 6 6. DEBT ISSUANCE ............................................................................................................... 6 7. INTERNAL BORROWING .................................................................................................. 7 8. PAY AS YOU GO ............................................................................................................... 7 9. REPORTING ..................................................................................................................... 7 10. RESPONSIBILITIES .......................................................................................................... 8 2 City of Saint John Debt Management Policy 1. POLICY STATEMENT 1.1. The Debt Management Policy also applies to Saint John Water (Utility); 1.2. The Debt Management Policy is established to ensure that all debt is issued prudently and cost effectively in accordance with the Long Term Financial Plans of the City and Saint John Water; 1.3. The Debt Management policy objectives are as follows: The Organization obtains debt financing only when necessary; The Organization manages debt such that future financial flexibility is maintained; The Organization strategically issues debt based on sound financial planning. 1.4. The Capital Investment Plan (CIP) is essential to intelligent planning of debt issuance by prioritizing potential capital investment and potential sources of financing. 1.5. The organizations debt issuance and management procedures will comply with the following legislation where applicable: Province of New Brunswick Local Governance Act Province of New Brunswick Municipal Capital Borrowing Act Province of New Brunswick Municipal Debentures Act Province of New Brunswick Control of Municipalities Act Province of New Brunswick Financial Corporation Act 2. DEFINITIONS Sustainability - means meeting the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs. Long Term Debt - means financing with a term over 10-30 years with municipal bonds through the Municipal Finance Corporation or capital leasing as defined by the Public Sector Accounting Standards. Inter-Generational Equity - means distributing the costs associated with capital investments across the generations which will be enjoying the benefits of the capital assets built today. Debt Term - the period of time during which debt payments are made. At the end of the debt term, the loan is paid in full. 3 City of Saint John Debt Management Policy Internal Financing - means financing for capital purchases from reserve funds as permitted in FAS-003 Reserves Policy. Pay-As-You Go Financing- means the use of operating funds for capital purchases as opposed to using debt or reserves. Organization the term is used to include the City and Saint John Water as one entity for the purpose of the policy unless specified otherwise. 3. ACCEPTABLE CONDITIONS FOR USE OF DEBT 3.1 The Organization will issue long-term debt solely for the purpose of financing the projects approved in the Capital Budget and the Capital Investment Plan (CIP); 3.2 Long term debt shall not be used to fund operating or maintenance costs or used as a tool balance the operating budget; 3.3 The Long Term Debt amortization period shall not exceed the life of the asset it is financing; 3.4 The Organization shall promote a balanced approach between maintaining an affordable debt level, maintaining infrastructure and accommodating growth by: 3.4.1 Utilizing this Policy in conjunction with the Asset Management Plan, FAS- 005 Capital Budget Policy, FAS-004 Operating Budget Policy and FAS-003 Reserves Policy. 3.4.2 Integrating debt issuance with the Capital Budgeting process to determine the necessity, priority, and viability of the capital project. 3.4.3 Considering the Long Term Financial Plan and analyzing the tolerance or capacity to absorb and manage new debt given future priorities. 3.5 Debt will be structured to fairly distribute the costs over time, taking into consideration inter-generational equity. 3.6 The Organization may also issue debt on behalf of an Agency, Board or Commissions (ABC) under its control pursuant to Generally Accepted Accounting Principles to further the public purposes of the City. The City shall take appropriate steps to confirm the financial feasibility of the project, the financial solvency of the ABC, and that the issuance of such debt is consistent with the policies set forth herein; 4 City of Saint John Debt Management Policy 3.7 This Policy does not apply for the use of Short Term debt instruments. 4. DEBT LIMITS AND DEBT CAPACITY GENERAL FUND 4.1 The New Brunswick Local Governance Act stipulates that: 4.1.1 A local government shall not, in any one year, borrow for its current operations any money in excess of the sum represented by 4% of the budget of that local government for that year or $15K, whichever is greater. 4.1.1 A local government shall not, in any one year, borrow for capital expenditures any money in excess of the sum represented by 2% of the assessed value of real property in that local government. 4.1.2 The total amount of money borrowed by a local government for capital expenditures shall not exceed 6% of the assessed value of real property in the local government. 4.2 The City's capacity to issue debt is directly related to Taxpayer's ability to service the payments required on the debt. Three key performance indicators will be benchmarked and measured, and the following debt limits shall be applicable: 4.2.1 Debt per Capita: This measurement can provide elected officials with a trend of overall debt outstanding by measuring how much debt the City has per citizen. General Fund Debt per Capita shall not exceed $900; 4.2.2 Debt Service Ratio: This measurement allows elected officials to be aware of the amount of the current year's annual operating budget which is devoted to servicing debt. The General Fund Debt Service Ratio shall not exceed 8%; 4.2.3 Total Debt Outstanding as a Percentage of Operating Budget: This measurement identifies the percentage of annual operating revenues that would be required to extinguish the City's outstanding debt. The General Fund Total Debt Outstanding as a Percentage of Operating Budget shall not exceed 50%; 4.3 Additional debt is only permissible when existing debt is within these limits, the limits will be reviewed and updated on an annual basis; 4.4 Long Term Debt shall be in accordance with the Debt Management Plan. 5 City of Saint John Debt Management Policy 5. DEBT LIMITS AND DEBT CAPACITY SAINT JOHN WATER 5.1 The New Brunswick Local Governance Act stipulates that: 5.1.1 A local government may borrow temporarily in each year for current expenditures in respect of the operation of a generation facility a sum or sums of money not exceeding 50% of the budgeted revenue for that year. 5.2 The capacity to issue debt is directly related to ratepayers ability to service the payments required on the debt. Two key performance indicators will be benchmarked and measured, and the following debt limits shall be applicable: 5.2.1 Debt Service Ratio: This measurement allows elected officials to be aware of the amount of the current year's annual operating budget which is devoted to servicing debt. The Utilities Fund Debt Service Ratio shall not exceed 15%. 5.2.2 Total Debt Outstanding as a Percentage of Operating Budget: This measurement identifies the percentage of annual operating revenues that would be required to extinguish the Saint John Water's outstanding debt. The Utility Fund Total Debt Outstanding as a Percentage of Operating Budget shall be reduced to 100% by the year 2026 and shall not exceed by 100% then after unless there is a business case to substantiate the increase. 5.3 Additional debt is only permissible when existing debt is within these limits, the limits will be reviewed and updated on an annual basis; 5.4 Long Term Debt Term shall be in accordance with the Debt Management Plan. 6. DEBT ISSUANCE 6.1 A resolution of Council is required for all new debt issues. 6.2 The debt issuance process generally follows the steps below: 6.2.1 Notice of motion: Council gives notice of intent to borrow after 30 days from the day of Council resolution; 6.2.2 After expiration of 30 days, Council authorizes staff to issue and sell to the New Brunswick Municipal Finance Corporation debentures at such terms and conditions recommended by the Corporation; 6 City of Saint John Debt Management Policy 6.2.3 Application form filled out and submitted to the New Brunswick Municipal Finance Corporation; 6.2.4 New Brunswick Municipal Finance Corporation advises the City of the actual bond issue; and 6.2.5 Staff reports back to Council regarding terms of the issue, coupon rate, price, average yield and settlement date. 6.3 Debt is structured to fairly distribute the costs over time, taking into consideration intergenerational equity; 7. INTERNAL FINANCING 7.1 The Organization may use reserves as a source of funds for the internal financing of capital projects as approved by Council. Any borrowing from reserve funds shall comply with Policy FAS-003 Reserves Policy. 8. PAY-AS-YOU-GO FINANCING 8.1 The Organization will seek to gradually increase pay-as-you-go as an option for financing capital over time. Factors which favor pay-go financing include: 8.1.1 Asset Renewal Projects; 8.1.2 Assets with a useful life that is less than 10 years - for example, IT equipment and road maintenance; 8.1.3 Situations where additional debt could adversely impact the financial health; 8.1.4 Situations where market conditions favour the use of cash rather than debt (for example, escalating interest rates) 9. REPORTING 9.1. The total debt outstanding, and total annual debt service payments will be reported in the annual consolidated financial Statements; 9.2. Key performance indicators for debt will be measured and tracked in the Annual Financial Health Report Card; 7 City of Saint John Debt Management Policy 9.3. Long-term debt will be forecasted over the long term in a Debt Management Plan based on the Capital Investment Plan as part of the Long-Term Financial Plan. 10. ROLES AND RESPONSIBILTIES 10.1 Council shall: 10.1.1 Approve the Debt Management Policy; 10.1.2 Approve new debt issues; and 10.1.3 Approve budgets sufficient to provide for the timely payment of principal and interest on all debt. 10.2 Finance Committee shall: 10.2.1 Review borrowing requirements for alignment with the Long Term Financial Plans; and 10.2.2 Recommend to Council the approval of new debt management plan. 10.3 The Chief Financial Officer shall: 10.3.1 Review the policy annually in consideration to meeting the City's and debt management goals and submit required changes to the Finance Committee for recommendation to Common Council consideration and approval. 10.3.2 Assume primary responsibility for the debt management process; 10.3.3 Determine the Ci available debt capacity and alignment with Long Term Financial Plans; 10.3.4 Provide for the issuance of debt at appropriate intervals and in reasonable amounts as required to fund approved capital expenditures; 10.3.5 Submit to Finance Committee and Council, all recommendations to issue debt; and 10.3.6 Ensure compliance with the principles and mandatory requirements contained in this policy. 8 FINANCE COMMITTEE REPORT Report DateApril 16, 2025 Meeting DateApril 22, 2025 Service AreaStrategic Services Chairman Sullivan and Members of Finance Committee SUBJECT:Generative Artificial Intelligence (Gen AI) Policy Statement Adoption AUTHORIZATION Primary AuthorCommissioner/Dept. HeadChief Administrative Officer StephanieRackley-RoachKevin FudgeIan Fogan RECOMMENDATION the following resolutions as they relate to Generative Artificial Intelligence (GenAI): transformative potential of these technologies and emphasizes that their acquisition, implementation, and use must be responsible, ethical, and compliantwith all applicable regulations. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Generative Artificial Intelligence (Gen AI) technologies are increasingly influencing how information is created, analysed, and communicated across the public and private sectors. While Gen AI offers opportunities to improve internal efficiency, analysis, and service delivery, it also introduces risks related to privacy, data management, accuracy, bias, cybersecurity, records management, transparency, and public trust. The proposed Gen AI Policy Statement and related draft policy establish a clear, principled framework to guide the responsible use of Gen AI within the City of Saint John, ensuring it supportshuman decision-making and remains aligned with legislative obligations, public-sector values, and community expectations. The policy statement represents a foundational first stepin the adoption of Gen AI. The reportoutlinesa phased, risk-based implementation approach that prioritizes governance, data management, privacy protection, user guidance and training, and low-risk pilot use cases before broader integration. Adoption of the policy positions the Cityto realize the benefits of Gen AI while proactively managing risks, maintaining public trust, and ensuring future use is consistent with Council direction and sound governance. PREVIOUS RESOLUTION N/A REPORT Generative Artificial Intelligence (GenAI) refers to a type of technology that can create new content (i.e., text, images, audio, or code) based on patterns learned from large amounts of existing data. Unlike traditional software, which follows fixed rules, GenAI tools can respond to questions, draft documents, summarize information, and assist with analysis in a more flexible and conversational way. These tools, including AIenabled productivity and collaboration platforms, are increasingly embedded in modern workplace technologies. Municipal governments across Canada are adopting AIenabled tools to support service delivery, administrative efficiency, and informed decisionmaking. At the same time, the use of GenAI introduces new considerations related to privacy, information management, accountability, transparency, and responsible use of technology in the public sector. Municipalities must ensure that any use of AI aligns with publicinterest obligations, applicable legislation, and governance frameworks. Many Canadian municipalities have responded to these challenges by adopting formal GenAI policies to provide clear direction to leadership and employees, guide decisionmaking, and support consistency in how thesetechnologies are evaluated and used. This report recommends a policy statement to guide the responsible, ethical, and secure acquisition and use of GenAI tools and outlines a policy framework and implementation approachto realize the benefits of this technology. Need for a Policy Framework An approved policy frameworkensures the consistent use of GenAI tools to mitigate organizational risk and uphold public confidence. Common Councilleadership role in committing to the ethical, responsible, and secure use of GenAI tools is proposed in the following policy statement. The City recognizes the transformative potential of these technologies and emphasizes that their acquisition, implementation, and use must be responsible, ethical, and compliantwith all applicable regulations. The policy statement and related governancedocumentation that will be developed establishes clear expectations for employeesand anyone that delivers service on behalf of the City (e.g., Members of Council, vendors, volunteers). The policy statement focuses on enablinginnovation while maintaining strong governance and public trust. It outlines the responsibility toreinforce compliance with existing privacy and informationmanagement legislation. The proposed policy statement is intended to ensurethat acquisition and implementation of GenAI toolsis guided by publicsector values rather than technologicaltrends. Opportunities and Risks of GenAIin the Public Sector Gen AIoffers municipalities opportunities to improve internal efficiency, support better analysis, enhance servicedelivery, and augment resource capacity. Adopting Gen AI within a strong governance framework can support broader digital transformation efforts, including improved data use, modern workflows, and innovation readiness. When used appropriately, GenAI can assist staff with drafting, summarization, research, and data preparation, allowing greater focus on work that requires professional judgement, policy expertise, and community engagement. These benefits are most evident in lowrisk, internal support activities where humans retain decisionmaking authority and accountability, and where AI is used as a tool to augment municipal expertise. At the same time, Gen AI introduces material risks that must be carefully managed. These include risks to privacy and confidentiality, the potential generation of inaccurate or misleading information, embedded bias that could affect fairness and equity, cybersecurity and datasovereignty concerns, and challenges related to transparency, records management, and public accountability. Inappropriate or poorly governed use of GenAI may also erode public trust and expose the municipality to legal, reputational, and operational risk. The adoption of a clear policy framework is therefore essential to ensurethat the benefits of GenAI are realised while risks are proactively identified, mitigated, and managed in a manner consistent with municipal responsibilities and publicsector values. Implementation Approach The proposed Gen AI Policy statement and related policy instruments represent the first step in a deliberate and phased approach to the responsible use of GenAI. The policy establishes a highlevel roadmap that guides future implementation while recognising that additional procedures, standards, andcontrols will be developed over time. Municipal adoption of GenAI typically follows a phased, multi-year timeline rather than a single implementation. Most municipalities begin with a policy and governance phase (approximately the first 6 months) to establish principles, clarify legal and privacy obligations, and set expectations, followed by a readiness and pilot phase (618 months) focused on data management, user training andguidance, and low-risk internal use cases. Only after pilots demonstrate value and manageable risk do municipalities move into formal integration and expansion (1836 months), embedding approved uses into business processes and strengthening data governance, procurement, and oversight. Beyond this, Gen AI use continues to evolve over time with ongoing review, training, and adaptation, reflecting the need for continuous governance rather than a one-time rollout. STRATEGIC ALIGNMENT The approval of a policy statement for Genpriority of Perform. The use of GenAI canimprove internal efficiency, support better analysis, and enhance service delivery. SERVICE AND FINANCIAL OUTCOMES The GenAI policy statement and related draft policy supports modernization service delivery whileThe Policy provides clear direction to City leadershipand employeestoensure the use of GenAI tools supports responsible decisionmakingwhile enhancingtransparency and public trust. There are no direct financial implications associated with approval of the policy statementitself. Any future implementation of GenAI tools would be subject to separate evaluation, budgeting, and approval processes, as required. INPUT FROM OTHERSERVICE AREAS AND STAKEHOLDERS Name of Service Area/StakeholderName of Staff Person G eneral Counsel Office Jacqueline Boucher Human Resources Dianne McQuade-Clark/ Stephanie Hossack Executive Leadership Team ELT Members ATTACHMENTS Title: Generative Artificial Intelligence (Gen AI) Policy Subject: Generative Artificial Intelligence Category: Information Technology (Gen AI) Policy Policy No.: COS-ITS-004 M&C Report No.: TBD Effective Date: TBD Next Review Date: TBD Areas this policy applies to: All authorized Office Responsible for review of this Policy: Information Technology Service Technology Assets, Systems, and Corporate Data Acceptable Use Policy (COS-ITS-001) as well as service providers, volunteers and other stakeholders that operate on behalf of the City. Related Instruments: Policy Sponsor: Chief Administrative Officer COS-CC-001 Access Policy (CAO) / Chief Information Officer (CIO) COS-CC-004 Information Security Policy COS- CC-010 Privacy Policy COS-ITS-001 Information Technology Assets, Systems, and Corporate Data Acceptable Use Policy COS-IT-003 Mobile Device Governance Document Pages: This document consists of 6 pages. Revision History: New Policy City Clerk's Annotation for Official Record I certify that the Access Policy was approved by Common Council on \[Date\]. ____ ___ _____ City Clerk Date nd Contact: City Clerk, 2 floor City Hall, 15 Market Square, P.O.B. 1971, Saint John, NB, E2L 4L1 Telephone: 658-2862 Email: cityclerk@saintjohn.ca Table of Contents 1.0 Policy Statement ............................................................................................................ 1 2.0 Definitions ...................................................................................................................... 1 4.0 Ownership ...................................................................................................................... 2 6.0 Responsibilities .............................................................................................................. 3 7.0 Principles ........................................................................................................................ 4 8.0 Acceptable Use .............................................................................................................. 5 9.0 Regulatory Compliance .................................................................................................. 5 10.0 Security .......................................................................................................................... 6 11.0 Exceptions ...................................................................................................................... 6 12.0 Non-Compliance ............................................................................................................. 6 13.0 Review ........................................................................................................................... 6 1.0 Policy Statement 1.1 committed to leveraging generative artificial intelligence (Gen AI) to enhance and improve public service delivery. The City recognizes the transformative potential of these technologies and emphasizes that their acquisition, implementation, and use must be responsible, ethical, and compliant with all applicable regulations. 2.0 Definitions 1.1 Access: Assigned permission to use Information Technology Assets, Systems, or Corporate Data in some manner to ensure the integrity and security of these Information Technology Resources. 1.2 Authorized User: An individual who is either a) a member of Council as defined in the Local Governance Act; b) employed by the City, including permanent, casual, and seasonal employees, students, those employed on contract; or c) a board service from Information Technology Resources to carry out their responsibilities, whether explicitly or implicitly. With respect to the Gen AI Policy, an authorized user includes service providers, volunteers and other stakeholders that operate on behalf of the City (as set out in Section 5.1 of this Policy). 1.3 Chief Administrative Officer (CAO): The appointed administrator of the City within 1.4 Chief Information Officer (CIO): Team that is responsible for the strategic direction, governance, and oversight of the capabilities, including authority over IT standards, platforms, and technology risk management. 1.5 City: administration. 1.6 Confidential Information: Information that cannot be shared with the public or other unauthorized individuals as defined under the Local Governance Act SNB 2017, c. 18, the Right to Information and Protection of Privacy Act, SNB 2009, C. R-10.6, as they may be amended from time to time, and other relevant by-laws or legislation (e.g., privileged information, draft by-laws or reports, third-party information, personal identifiable information). 1.7 Corporate Data: Any and all data created or received for furthering the work of the City and its service delivery including, but not limited to, documents, spreadsheets, images, videos, presentations, social media posts, website content, and raw data stored in databases. 1.8 Gen AI: Generative AI (Gen AI) means artificial intelligence systems (including large language models and related technologies) that generate or transform content Generative Artificial Intelligence (Gen AI) Policy 1 (e.g., text, images, audio, video, or code) in response to prompts or other inputs, rather than solely analyzing or classifying existing data. 1.9 Prompt: Prompt means any instruction, query, or content (including text, code, images, audio, files, or embedded data) submitted to a Gen AI service to elicit, condition, or influence an output, including any associated system settings or context provided with the request. 3.0 Purpose 3.1 This Policy establishes clear guidelines for the ethical, responsible, and cost- effective procurement and use of Gen AI by individuals authorized by the City of Saint John to enhance and create efficiencies in the delivery of municipal services. It ensures that the acquisition and application of Gen AI technologies align with the residents and stakeholders. 3.2 This policy seeks to ensure compliance with existing , privacy, and security policies, as well as all applicable laws and regulations. It is designed to safeguard the City against potential risks associated with Gen AI use, including data privacy breaches, copyright infringement, and the dissemination of inaccurate or biased information. 4.0 Ownership 4.1 Any data, outputs, prompts, or other content created, generated, transmitted, or stored using Gen AI services for business purposes are the property of the City, to the extent permitted by applicable law and contractual terms. 4.2 The CIO has the delegated authority under this policy, to define, interpret, and Us. Authority includes but is not limited to permitted Gen AI tools, services, websites, prompts, and access. 5.0 Applicability 5.1 This Policy applies to all authorized users as defined in the Information Technology Assets, Systems, and Corporate Data Acceptable Use Policy (COS-ITS- 001) as well as service providers, volunteers and other stakeholders that operate on behalf of the City who use Gen AI for municipal-related purposes, whether on municipal-owned devices or personal devices used for municipal business. 5.2 The Policy applies to all instances where Gen AI functionality is known to be included, such as new tools for existing products, new products being considered for use or Gen AI technology developed by City Employees, contractors, partner agencies or other stakeholders. Generative Artificial Intelligence (Gen AI) Policy 2 6.0 Responsibilities 6.1 City Council: a. Approve the Policy Statement position on the use of Gen AI. 6.2 Chief Administrative Officer (CAO): a. Adopt this policy and any amendments or updates to the Policy. b. Ensure compliance with this Policy and that the use of Generative AI aligns with responsibility to the CIO to oversee, administer, and enforce the application of this Policy across the organization. 6.3 Chief Information Officer (CIO): a. Provide timely advice to the Information Technology Steering Committee and managers respecting the application of this Policy, and all City procedures and guidelines, including guidance on an appropriate employer response to violations of the Policy. b. Report on implementation and compliance to the Policy and other activities related to the acquisition and use of Gen AI for innovation and improvement in service delivery to the Information Technology Steering Committee and the appropriate Committee of Council. c. Coordinate the development of awareness, training, and communication programs in support of this Policy to ensure all employees and other stakeholders subject to this Policy to support the responsible, ethical, and cost- effective application of Gen AI as outlined in this Policy. d. Provide oversight to the acquisition, development, and use of Gen AI as outlined in this Policy. 6.4 Information Technology Steering Committee: a. Comprised of the members of the Executive Leadership Team. b. Identify and prioritize opportunities for the ethical use of Gen AI to improve service delivery, while overseeing the acquisition, development, and use of Generative AI in accordance with this Policy. c. Ensure that employees and other stakeholders subject to the Policy are informed through appropriate awareness, training, and communication programs, and that all legal and operational risks associated with the use of Gen AI are identified and managed. Generative Artificial Intelligence (Gen AI) Policy 3 6.5Employees and all other stakeholders subject to this Policy: a. Adhere to this Policy and all City procedures and guidelines that relate to the acquisition and use of Gen AI. b. Participate in awareness programs and training provided by the City regarding the safe and ethical use of Gen AI. c. Check with their manager or supervisor when they are uncertain about any aspect of this Policy. 7.0 Principles 7.1 are aligned with strategic objectives. The following principles are intended to guide the responsible, ethical, and practical use and acquisition of Gen AI by all authorized users and parties acting on behalf of the City who use Gen AI for municipal purposes, ensuring innovation is balanced with public trust, accountability, and service excellence. a. Public Interest First: Authorized users must ensure their use of Gen AI supports service delivery to residents, customers, and other stakeholders in an effective, equitable, and responsible manner. Gen AI may be used to improve service delivery, support decision-making, and enhance operational efficiency, provided appropriate human judgement is applied in matters that affect the b. Human Accountability and Oversight: Decisions that have legal, financial, safety, or policy impacts must retain meaningful human oversight, with clear accountability for outcomes. c. Transparency and Explainability: Authorized users will be transparent about when and how Gen AI is used in the course of their municipal work. Where Gen AI influences decisions, processes, or publicfacing content, users must be able to clearly and understandably explain the role Gen AI played. d. Privacy, Security, and Data Protection: Authorized users must ensure their use of Gen AI complies with all applicable privacy, access to information, and recordsmanagement legislation. Personal, confidential, or sensitive City data must not be used in Gen AI tools unless appropriate safeguards, approvals, and contractual protections are in place. e. Fairness, Equity, and Inclusiveness: Authorized users are responsible for being mindful of potential bias in Gen AI-supported processes and must not use AI tools in ways that disadvantage individuals or communities based on protected or vulnerable characteristics. Gen AI use should support inclusive and accessible service delivery. f. Reliability, Accuracy, and Responsible Use: Authorized users must ensure Gen AI outputs are appropriate for their intended municipal purpose and are verified before use, particularly in public communications, policy development, Generative Artificial Intelligence (Gen AI) Policy 4 or operational decisionmaking. Gen AI must not be used in highrisk scenarios where errors could reasonably cause harm. g. Continuous Improvement and Governance: Authorized users are responsible for complying with applicable governance documents, policies, standards, and training related to Gen AI use, and for adjusting their use as legislation, technology, and best practices evolve. 8.0 Acceptable Use 8.1 The City permits the use of Generative AI tools to support municipal operations commitment to public service. Acceptable uses may include, but are not limited to: a. Drafting, summarizing, and editing internal documents, reports, policies, and correspondence, with human review prior to finalization. b. Analyzing non-confidential data to identify trends, improve planning, and support evidence-based decision-making. c. Supporting research, benchmarking, and the preparation of briefing materials. Enhancing customer service through approved tools for drafting responses, knowledge retrieval, and service navigation. d. Assisting with training materials, process documentation, and operational guidance. e. Supporting innovation, process improvement, and automation in low-risk, non- decision-making contexts 8.2 All use of Gen AI must include appropriate human oversight and must not replace professional judgment or decision-making. Detailed requirements, restrictions, approval processes, and role-specific guidance will be defined in related operating procedures and standards. 9.0 Regulatory Compliance 9.1 The use of Gen AI by the City must comply with all applicable federal, provincial, and municipal legislation, regulations, and standards, including but not limited to privacy, access to information, records management, employment, human rights, procurement, and information security requirements. Generative AI tools shall not be used in any manner that would result in non-compliance with statutory obligations or contractual commitments. 9.2 The City will ensure that Gen AI systems and use cases are assessed for regulatory compliance prior to implementation and throughout their lifecycle, with appropriate controls, documentation, and oversight in place. Additional requirements, approval processes, and compliance guidance will be established through related operating procedures and standards.Vendors, service providers, and contractors must disclose any embedded artificial intelligence or Gen AI capabilities within products or services provided to the City. Such capabilities must comply with all applicable legislative, regulatory, privacy, security, and records-management requirements Generative Artificial Intelligence (Gen AI) Policy 5 including but not limited to, RTIPPA and City security policies, and shall be subject 10.0 Security 10.1 The use of Gen policies, standards, and controls to protect the confidentiality, integrity, and availability of City information and systems. Gen AI tools shall not be used in a manner that introduces unacceptable cybersecurity risk, including unauthorized access, data exposure, system vulnerabilities, or misuse of City information. 10.2 All Gen AI solutions, including vendor-provided and embedded AI capabilities, must undergo appropriate security assessment prior to use and be subject to ongoing monitoring throughout their lifecycle. Additional security requirements, approval processes, and technical controls will be established through related operating procedures and information security standards. 11.0 Exceptions 11.1 Exceptions must be approved in advance through the Information Technology Governance Committee. 12.0 Non-Compliance 12.1 Compliance with this Policy is mandatory. Violations of this Policy will be addressed with appropriate corrective and/or disciplinary action, up to and including dismissal. 12.2 Breach of this policy shall be subject to the sanctions outlined in section 8 of the Information Technology Assets, Systems, and Corporate Data Acceptable Use Policy (COS-ITS-001). 13.0 Review 13.1 This Policy will be periodically reviewed and updated to address emerging challenges and changes in Gen AI-related frameworks. Generative Artificial Intelligence (Gen AI) Policy 6 FINANCE COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE OPENREPORT M&C No.N/A Report DateApril 15, 2026 Meeting DateApril 22, 2026 Service AreaPublic Works and Transportation Services Chairman Sullivanand Members ofFinance Committee SUBJECT: Baseball Field EXECUTIVE SUMMARY OF FINANCE COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE REPORT FOR OPEN SESSION OF FINANCE COMMITTEE The purpose of this report is to present for Finance Committeethe approvalof funding of $175,000 from Capital Reserves towards the , contingent uponPort City Pirates raising the remaining required funds. COUNCIL RESOLUTION NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESLOVED That Finance Committeeapprove the funding of $175,000 from Capital Reserves on Port City Pirates raising the remaining required funds. FINANCE COMMITTEE OPENREPORT Report DateApril 21, 2026 Meeting DateApril 22, 2026 Service AreaGrowth and Community Services Chairman Sullivanand Members ofFinance Committee SUBJECT: PRO Kids Dashboard EXECUTIVE SUMMARY OF FINANCE COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE REPORT FOR OPEN SESSION OF FINANCE COMMITTEE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY As part of good governance and to ensure the fiscal sustainability and accountability of the P.R.O. Kids program, staff have assembled a performance dashboard template to be used for annual reporting back to the Finance Committee so program health and effectiveness of the PRO Kids program can be effectively monitored and reviewed. FINANCE COMMITTEERESOLUTION NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESLOVED That Finance CommitteeRecommends: That Common Council directs P.R.O. Kids to report the results of the PRO Kids Governance dashboard annually to the Finance Committee.