The URL can be used to link to this page

2026-09-29 Finance Committee Agenda Packet - Open Session Finance Committee Meeting Open Session August 13, 2026 MINUTES OPEN SESSION FINANCE COMMITTEE MEETING AUGUST 13, 2026 AT 4:30 PM MEETING CONDUCTED BY ELECTRONIC PARTICIPATION Present: Mayor D. Noade Reardon Councillor G. Sullivan Councillor B. Wyatt Councillor D. Merrithew Councillor G. Norton Also Present: Deputy CAO and Commissioner of Finance and Treasurer K. Fudge Commissioner Human Resources S. Hossack Principal Strategist of Transformation S. Hossack Interim Chief Operating Officer Service Delivery K. Loughery City Solicitor J. Boucher Fire Chief R. Nichol Director Community Planning & Housing P. Nalvde Director Financial Services C. Lavigne Intermediate Accountant V. Parikh Manager Capital Planning & Funding L. Currie 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 April 22, 2026 Moved by Mayor Noade Reardon, seconded by Councillor Merrithew: RESOLVED that the minutes of April 22, 2026 be approved. MOTION CARRIED. 3. Approval of Agenda Moved by Councillor Merrithew, seconded by Mayor Noade Reardon: RESOLVED that Item 6.2 2025 Consolidated Financial Statements be brought forward and that the agenda of August 13, 2026 be approved. MOTION CARRIED. 4. Disclosures of Conflict of Interest No disclosures. 5. Consent Agenda 5.1 Fall Debenture Report Moved by Mayor Noade Reardon, seconded by Councillor Merrithew: Finance Committee Meeting Open Session August 13, 2026 RESOLVED that the Finance Committee recommend to Council to approve the 2026 Fall Debenture of Notice of Motion: Purpose of Issue The City of Saint John Proposed issue of Debentures To Be Dated On or after September 13th, 2026 GENERAL FUND Protective Services $1,575,000 Transportation $2,200,000 Recreation and Culture $3,225,000 TOTAL $ 7,000,000 SAINT JOHN TRANSIT COMMISSION $ 1,000,000 MOTION CARRIED. 6. Business Matters (J. Mallais and B. Eaton, Deloitte, joined the meeting) 6.2 2025 Consolidated Financial Statements J. Mallais and B. Eaton reviewed the submitted financial statements Year End Audit Results City of Saint The open session meeting recessed briefly to allow for an in-camera session between members of the Finance Committee and the auditors. Moved by Councillor Merrithew, seconded by Mayor Noade Reardon: RESOLVED that y of MOTION CARRIED. (J. Mallais and B. Eaton left the meeting) Deputy CAO and Commissioner of Finance and Treasurer K. Fudge reviewed the submitted presentation 2025 Audited Moved by Councillor Wyatt, seconded by Councillor Norton: RESOLVED that the Finance Committee approve the 2025 Consolidated Financial Statements, the 2025 Trade and Convention Financial Statements, 2025 Saint John Transit Commission Financial Statements and 2025 Trust Funds Financial Statements and forward to Common Council for approval; and further that the information. MOTION CARRIED. 6.1 2027 Shape Your Budget Overview and 2027 Operating and Capital Budget Timelines Director Lavigne Moved by Councillor Wyatt, seconded by Councillor Merrithew: for information. MOTION CARRIED. Finance Committee Meeting Open Session August 13, 2026 Moved by Mayor Noade Reardon, seconded by Councillor Merrithew: RESOLVED that the Finance Committee endorse the timelines and plan set out in the submitted presentation for the 2027 Operating and Capital Budget process. MOTION CARRIED. 6.3 June 2026 Financial Results General and Utility Fund th Utility Fund, June 30, 2026 Year to Moved by Councillor Wyatt, seconded by Mayor Noade Reardon: RESOLVED that the Finance Committee receive and file the June 2026 Financial Results and direct any questions to staff. MOTION CARRIED. 7. Adjournment Moved by Councillor Norton, seconded by Councillor Merrithew: RESOLVED that the Finance Committee meeting be adjourned. MOTION CARRIED. The Finance Committee open session meeting held on August 13, 2026, was adjourned at 5:57 p.m. FINANCE COMMITTEEREPORT Report DateSeptember 15, 2026 Meeting DateSeptember 29, 2026 Service AreaFinance and Strategic Investments Chair Sullivan and Members ofFinance Committee SUBJECT:Financial Policies OPEN OR CLOSED SESSION This matter is to be discussed in Finance Committee Open Session. AUTHORIZATION Primary AuthorDirectorExecutive LeadCAO Craig Lavigne/Jodie Craig Lavigne/Jodie Kevin FudgeIan Fogan ForgieForgie RECOMMENDATION following policies and forward to Common Council for approval FAS-003 Operating and Capital Reserves Policy FAS-004 Operating Budget Policy FAS-011 Strategic Procurement Policy FAS-021 Budget Monitoring Policy FAS-025 Travel Policy EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Finance staff in coordinationwith Common Clerks office,review policiesto ensure that policiesreflect any changes in legislation, remain relevant and effective, ensurealignment with and organizational changes. Regular reviews and updates to policies and procedures are essential to good municipal management. PREVIOUS RESOLUTION(S) M&C 2017-311-FAS-003 Operating and Capital Reserves Policy M&C 2018-129-FAS-004 Operating Budget Policy M&C 2023-156 -FAS-011 Strategic Procurement Policy M&C 2020-127 -FAS-021 Budget Monitoring Policy M&C 2022-194 -FAS-025 Travel Policy STRATEGIC ALIGNMENT The report aligns with Council's priority, Perform by ensuring continued financial health, transparency and accountability. REPORT The Finance staff in coordination with Common Clerks office, review policies to ensure that policies reflect any changes in legislation, remain relevantand effective, ensure alignment with ,service expectations and organizational changes. The five policies brought forwardcontain no material changes from the previously approved versionsand are administrative changes. Summary of Proposed Changes: - - - - - - INPUT FROM OTHER SERVICE AREAS AND STAKEHOLDERS Name of Service Area/StakeholderName of Staff Person ATTACHMENT(S) Appendix A FAS-003 Operating and Capital Reserve Policy Appendix B FAS-004Operating BudgetPolicy Appendix C FAS-011Strategic ProcurementPolicy Appendix DFAS-021BudgetMonitoring Policy Appendix E FAS 025 Travel Policy City of Saint John Operating and Capital Reserve Policy Title: Operating and Capital Reserve Policy Subject: Operating and Capital Reserves Policy Category: Finance and Strategic Services Policy No.: FAS-003 M&C Report No.: Effective Date: 2018-01-01 Next Review Date: Area(s) this policy applies to: Cross Corporate Office Responsible for review of this Policy: Finance and Strategic Services Related Instruments: Policy Sponsors: FAS-001 Asset Management Policy Chief Financial Officer FAS-002 Investment Policy FAS-004 Operating Budget Policy FAS-005 Capital Budget Policy FAS-020 Long Term Financial Plan Policy Document Pages: This document consists of 8 pages. Revision History: Common Clerk's Annotation for Official Record I certify that the Operating and Capital Reserve Policy Statement was adopted by Common Council on I certify that the Operating and Capital Reserve Policy was approved by the Chief Administrative Officer on th April 27, 2018 Common Clerk Date Common Council Approval Date Updated: Contact: I I Date: 2026-08-18 Finance and Strategic Services 1 City of Saint John Operating and Capital Reserve Policy TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.POLICY STATEMENT ...................................................................................................................... 3 2. DEFINITION OF RESERVES .............................................................................................................. 5 3.PERMITTED USE OF RESERVES ......................................................................................................... 5 4. AUTHORITY .................................................................................................................................. 6 5.ADEQUACY OF RESERVES ................................................................................................................ 6 6.FUNDING RESERVES ..................................................................................................................... 6 7.INVESTMENT OF RESERVE FUNDS .................................................................................................... 7 8. TEMPORARY BORROWING FROM RESERVES .................................................................................. 7 9. ANNUAL REPORTING ................................................................................................................... 7 10. RESPONSIBILTIES ....................................................................................................................... 8 2 CityofSaintJohn Operating and Capital Reserves 1. POLICY STATEMENT 1.1 This policy sets consistent standards and guidelines for the establishment, management, and accounting of reserve and reserve funds in accordance with agreed upon policy guidelines and applicable regulations under the New Brunswick Local Governance Act. 1.2 The City of Saint John (City) establishes this policy to address longer term funding strategies and to ensure good financial and cash management for the ongoing financial stability of the City. In conjunction with the Asset Management, Investment and Debt Management Policies, Operating and Capital Budget Policies and Long Term Financial Plan Policy this policy will guide decisions relating to long term operating and capital expenditures to minimize debt servicing costs, address the infrastructure deficit, and mitigate the effect of unanticipated events. 1.3 The City must comply with the New Brunswick Local Governance Act Reserve Fund Regulation in relation to the establishment and use of Reserves. Under the Act, reserves are permitted to be established for Operating and Capital purposes. 1.4 All reserves will be managed in accordance with the New Brunswick Local Governance Reserve Fund Regulation as follows: 1 General Operating Reserve Fund A municipality may, by resolution of Council, establish, manage and contribute to a general operating reserve fund for the payment of operating expenses, unexpected operational deficits or emergency revenue shortfalls. Total accumulated balance held in a general operating reserve shall not exceed 5% (Five percent) of the total expenditure that was budgeted for the municipality for the previous fiscal year. Monies held in a general operating reserve fund shall be used for no purpose other than the payment of operating expenses. Transfers to capital funds or capital asset projects are strictly prohibited. Every Council resolution respecting a contribution made to or a withdrawal from a general operating reserve fund in respect of a calendar year shall be made by December 31 of that calendar year and shall specify the dollar amount contributed to or withdrawn from the general operating reserve fund. 1 Reserve Fund Regulation, NB Reg 97-145, Sections 3.1 to 3.4, under the Municipalities Act (O.C. 97-1036), as continued under the Local Governance Act. 3 CityofSaintJohn Operating and Capital Reserves 2 General Capital Reserve Fund A municipality may by resolution of Council, establish, manage, and contribute to a general capital reserve fund for the payment of capital expenses. Monies held in a general capital reserve fund shall be used for no purpose other than the payment of capital expenses. A capital expense is defined as an expenditure for a tangible asset that confers an operational benefit on the municipality for a period exceeding one (1) year. Every Council resolution respecting a contribution made to or withdrawal from a general capital reserve in respect of a calendar year shall be made by December 31 of that calendar year and shall specify the dollar amount contributed to or withdrawn from the general capital reserve fund. 3 Utility Operating Reserve Fund A municipality may, by resolution of Council, establish, manage and contribute to a utility operating reserve fund for the payment of operating expenses, unexpected operational deficits or emergency revenue shortfalls. Total accumulated balance held in a utility operating reserve shall not exceed 5% (Five percent) of the total expenditure that was budgeted for the municipality for the previous fiscal year. Monies held in a utility operating reserve fund shall be used for no purpose other than the payment of operating expenses. Transfers to capital funds or capital asset projects are strictly prohibited. Every Council resolution respecting a contribution made to or withdrawal from a utility operating reserve fund in respect of a calendar year shall be made by December 31 of that calendar year and shall specify the dollar amount contributed to or withdrawn from the utility operating reserve fund. 2 Reserve Fund Regulation, NB Reg 97-145, Sections 4.1 to 4.3, under the Municipalities Act (O.C. 97-1036), as continued under the Local Governance Act. 3 Reserve Fund Regulation, NB Reg 97-145, Sections 5.1 to 5.5, under the Municipalities Act (O.C. 97-1036), as continued under the Local Governance Act. 4 CityofSaintJohn Operating and Capital Reserves 4 Utility Capital Reserve Fund A municipality may by resolution of Council, establish, manage, and contribute to a utility capital reserve fund for the payment of capital expenses. Monies held in a utility capital reserve fund shall be used for no purpose other than the payment of capital expenses. A capital expense is defined as an expenditure for a tangible asset that confers an operational benefit on the municipality for a period exceeding one (1) year. Every Council resolution respecting a contribution made to or withdrawal from a utility capital reserve in respect of a calendar year shall be made by December 31 of that calendar year and shall specify the dollar amount contributed to or withdrawn from the utility capital reserve fund. 2. DEFINITION OF RESERVES 2.1 "Reserves" are established when funds are set aside (designated) for a future purpose by a resolution of Council. 2.2 "Operating Reserve" means a general operating reserve; a service; or utility operating reserve. 2.3 "Capital Reserve" means a general capital reserve; a service or utility capital reserve. 3. PERMITTED USE OF RESERVES 3.1 The City of Saint John will set aside and maintain adequate reserves to provide for: 3.1.1 Major unanticipated/unforeseen events; 3.1.2 Major capital renewal; 3.1.3 Future liabilities; 3.1.4 One time operating expenses which are greater than $100,000 and are not part of the recurring operating budget; 3.1.5 Infrastructure deficit; and 3.1.6 Investment in growth opportunities. 4 Reserve Fund Regulation, NB Reg 97-145, Sections 6.1 to 6.4, under the Municipalities Act (O.C. 97-1036), as continued under the Local Governance Act. 5 CityofSaintJohn Operating and Capital Reserves 4. AUTHORITY 4.1 A resolution of Council will be required to establish a reserve. 5 4.2 No transfer of money from general and utility operating reserve fund or general and utility capital reserve fund shall be made except: 4.2.1 By resolution of Council; and 4.2.2 Within the fiscal year to which the expenditure relates. 6 4.3 A resolution of Council will be required to close a reserve. 5. ADEQUACY OF RESERVES 5.1 The target balance and adequacy of individual reserves shall be determined on a case- by-case basis. All targets should align with the General Fund and Utility Fund Long Term Financial Plan, Asset Management Plan, and the Debt Management Plan to ensure fiscal sustainability. 6. FUNDING RESERVES 6.1 Reserve funds shall be funded through council-approved allocations. Sources of funding may include: 6.1.1 Operating Surpluses: The excess of actual revenues over actual expenditures at the end of a fiscal year. 6.1.2 Planned Budget Allocations: Annual contributions approved within the City's operating or capital budgets. 6.1.3 One-Time Revenues: Unexpected or non-recurring revenue, such as unbudgeted grants or unallocated non-tax revenues. 6.1.4 Asset Sales: Net proceeds from the sale of City-owned assets. 5 Reserve Fund Regulation, NB Reg 97-145, Sections 7.1 to 7.2, under the Municipalities Act (O.C. 97-1036), as continued under the Local Governance Act. 6 Reserve Fund Regulation, NB Reg 97-145, Section 10. to 10.2, under the Municipalities Act (O.C. 97-1036), as continued under the Local Governance Act. 6 CityofSaintJohn Operating and Capital Reserves 7. INVESTMENT OF RESERVE FUNDS 7 7.1 Any money, including interest, held within general and utility operating reserve fund or general and utility capital reserve fund shall be invested in accordance with the provisions of the New Brunswick Trustees Act. 7.2 All investments of general and utility reserve funds shall comply with the New Brunswick Trustees Act and the City's Investment Policy. 8. TEMPORARY BORROWING FROM RESERVES 8.1 Temporary borrowing from general and utility reserves for short term cash flow management and internal financing is permitted, however the following conditions must be met: 8.1.1 Borrowing must not adversely affect the intended purpose of the reserves; 8.1.2 Borrowing must not be used for purposes contrary to the Long Term Financial Plan; 8.1.3 A plan to repay the reserve within a reasonable timeframe is required and must be documented; and 8.1.4 Borrowing must be approved by Resolution of Council. 9. ANNUAL REPORTING 8 9.1 The annual reporting of the Operating and Capital Reserve Funds shall be in accordance with the requirements of the Local Governance Act regulatory framework. 7 Reserve Fund Regulation, NB Reg 97-145, Section 8, under the Municipalities Act (O.C. 97-1036), as continued under the Local Governance Act. 8 Reserve Fund Regulation, NB Reg 97-145, Section 9, under the Municipalities Act (O.C. 97-1036), as continued under the Local Governance Act. 7 CityofSaintJohn Operating and Capital Reserves 7 Reserve Fund Regulation, NB Reg 97-145, Section 8, under the Municipalities Act (O.C. 97-1036), as continued under the Local Governance Act. 8 Reserve Fund Regulation, NB Reg 97-145, Section 9, under the Municipalities Act (O.C. 97-1036), as continued under the Local Governance Act. 8 CityofSaintJohn Operating and Capital Reserves 10. RESPONSIBILITIES 10.1 Council shall: 10.1.1 Approve the Reserve Policy; and 10.1.2 Approve transactions to and from reserves by specific resolution. 10.2 The Chief Administrative Officer Shall: 10.2.1 Ensure compliance with the principles and mandatory requirements contained in this policy. 10.3 The Chief Financial Officer Shall: 10.3.1 Develop and update this policy as necessary and present changes to Council; 10.3.2 Ensure that the principles and requirements contained in this policy are applied consistently across all Service Areas; 10.3.3 Perform the transfers to and from reserves and reserve funds as authorized by Council; 10.3.4 Recommend strategies for the adequacy of reserve levels; and 10.3.5 Report to Council, the reserve balances and forecast as part of the annual budget approval process. 9 CityofSaintJohn Operating BudgetPolicy Title: Operating Budget Policy Subject: Operating Budget Category: Finance and Strategic Services Policy No.: FAS-004 M&C Report No.: Effective Date: Next Review Date: As required Area(s) this policy applies to: Cross Corporate Office Responsible for review of this Policy: Finance and Strategic Services Related Instruments: Policy Sponsors: FAS-001 Asset Management Policy Chief Financial Officer FAS-002 Investment Policy FAS-003 Operating and Capital Reserves Policy FAS-005 Capital Budget Policy FAS-006 Debt Management Policy FAS-020 Long Term Financial Plan Policy FAS-021 Budget Monitoring Policy Document Pages: This document consists of 7 pages. Revision History: Common Clerk's Annotation for Official Record I certify that the Operating Budget Policy Statement was adopted by Common Council on April 23, 2018. I certify that the Operating Budget Policy was approved by the City th Manager on April 27, 2018 th April 27, 2018 Common Clerk Date Date Updated: Common Council Approval Date: Contact: 2026-08-13 Finance and Strategic Services 1 CityofSaintJohn Operating BudgetPolicy TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. POLICY STATEMENT ...................................................................................................................... 3 2. DEFINITIONS ................................................................................................................................ 3 3. PRINCIPLES AND STRATEGIES .......................................................................................................... 4 4. AUTHORITY .................................................................................................................................. 4 5. USE OF NON-RECURRING REVENUES ............................................................................................... 5 6. USER CHARGES & FEES ..................................................................................................................... 5 7. GRANTS ......................................................................................................................................... 6 8. VARIANCE REPORTING...................................................................................................................6 9. ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES...........................................................................................................6 2 CityofSaintJohn Operating BudgetPolicy 1. OPERATING BUDGET POLICY STATEMENT 1.1 The purpose of this policy is to outline the financial principles governing the funding of the City operating budget; 1.2 Operating budget planning shall comply with all relevant provisions of the Local Governance Act and all other applicable legislation; 1.3 The City's objectives with respect to the Operating Budget Policy are as follows: 1.3.1 Strengthen Financial Sustainability by budgeting recurring expenditures with recurring revenues and allocating non-recurring revenues to non-recurring expenditures or reserves; 1.3.2 Reduce Financial Vulnerability by gradually decreasing reliance on sources of revenue outside its controls such as operating grants from other government sources. 2. DEFINITIONS Operating Budget - Council approved plan containing the revenue and expenditure allocations required to provide City programs and services, including the Utility fund, for the current fiscal year which must be aligned with a Council Approved Long Term Financial Plan; Basis of Budgeting - All budgetary procedures will conform to the New Brunswick Local Governance Act, the Local Government Budgets Regulation, and all applicable provincial financial reporting standards; Structurally Balanced Budget - A budget for which recurring operating revenues are sufficient to fund recurring operating expenses, ensuring compliance with the statutory balanced budget requirements of the New Brunswick Local Governance Act and the Local Government Budgets Regulation; Non-Recurring Revenues - Revenues that the City cannot reasonably expect to receive on an ongoing basis. The source is most likely one-time if any of the following applies: Has a set ending date ranging between 12-36 months with the exception of intergovernmental funding agreements designed to improve long-term sustainability; Revenue spikes due to higher-than-normal transactional activity; One-time transactions, such as the sale of assets or insurance proceeds; 3 CityofSaintJohn Operating BudgetPolicy 3.PRINCIPLES AND STRATEGIES 3.1 The City will utilize the following principles and strategies in making decisions related to the operating budget: 3.1.1 Alignment with Strategy- The City's budgeted operations shall be in line with agreed upon Council priorities and the Long Term Financial Plan; 3.1.2 Affordability - The City must be able to bear the budgeted costs of providing services without incurring financial difficulty or risking other undesirable consequences; 3.1.3 Innovation - Implementation of operational efficiencies, continuous improvement initiatives, and new revenue generation strategies will be considered when planning the operating budget; 3.1.4 Sustainability - The operating budget will be produced with a long-term focus on achieving a structurally balanced budget; giving taxpayers a better representation of the link between financial resources and services that can be delivered over the long term; 3.1.5 Diversification - The City will seek to improve its mix of operating budget revenues to the extent feasible within the confines of the Local Governance Act, and other applicable legislation. 3.1.6 Statutory Compliance - The annual operating budget will be prepared in accordance with the New Brunswick Local Governance Act and its regulations. 4.AUTHORITY 4.1 The operating budget establishes the spending authority for all Service Area activities and initiatives; 4.2 Operating budgets, at the Service Area level, cannot be reallocated without Council approval; 4.3 Executive Leadership Team is responsible for managing activities within their existing budget; 4.4 In cases where significant budget overruns are expected due to Emergencies such as 4 CityofSaintJohn Operating BudgetPolicy severe weather conditions or EMO events, such cost overruns can be approved by the Chief Administrative Officer in advance and must be reported back to the Finance Committee as per Section 8 of this Policy together with recommended mitigation measures. 5. USE OF NON-RECURRING REVENUES 5.1 Non-recurring revenues shall be directed to one-time uses and away from funding ongoing services. Examples of non-recurring revenues would include one-time sale of assets. Examples of acceptable uses would include funding Pay-As-You-Go for capital expenditures that would otherwise be funded by debt, funding the infrastructure deficit, or building up capital or operating reserves; 5.2 Short term revenue spikes should be treated in a similar way to non-recurring revenue. 6.USER CHARGES AND FEES 6.1 The City will seek to balance the need for services and the ability to raise fees, charges, and taxes to support those services. User fees will be assessed relative to the cost of providing the services; 6.2 Service areas should assess the cost of activities supported by user fees on an annual basis to identify the impact of inflation and other cost increases; 6.3 Council may decide against full cost recovery in cases where greater public benefit is demonstrated; 6.4 Factors suggesting a higher level of cost recovery include (1) the service is similar to services available in the private sector or through another agency; (2) there is a strong nexus between the amount paid and the benefit received; (3) the goal is to discourage use of a service or limit demand; (4) the service is regulatory. 6.5 Factors suggesting a lower level of cost recovery include (1) there is a community wide benefit to the service; (2) the fee will discourage compliance with regulation; (3) there is a weak correlation between the amount paid and benefit received; (4) collecting the fee is not effective; (5) is an emergency service that may depend on no notice. 6.6 Service areas should develop cost recovery policies that will be used as a basis for 5 CityofSaintJohn Operating BudgetPolicy setting the charges or fees, as well as the service cost recovery goals based on quantitative targets (percentage recovery targets) and how the charges and fees will be levied and collected. 7.GRANTS 7.1 Inter-Governmental funding opportunities will be pursued for initiatives that are in line with Council priorities, the approved budget, and the Long Term Financial Plan; 7.2 Any opportunities falling outside the criteria in 7.1 will require Council approved adjustments to the budget and the Long Term Financial Plan and be supported by a business case. 8.VARIANCE REPORTING 8.1 The Finance Committee shall be informed on a timely basis on all significant unfavorable financial matters and will receive, as a minimum, quarterly financial budget variance reports; 8.2 Executive Leadership Team is responsible for presenting a quarterly report analyzing material variances and causes of such variances to the Finance Committee for their service areas. 9. ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES 9.1 Council shall: 9.1.1 Approve the operating budget as recommended by the Finance Committee; 9.1.2 Establish priorities through the Long Term Financial Plan. 9.2 The Finance Committee shall: 9.2.1 Review the operating budget and make recommendations for Council approval; 9.2.2 Ensure the operating budget is aligned with the Long Term Financial Plan 9.3 The Chief Administrative Officer shall: 9.3.1 Direct the preparation and presentation of the operating budget; 9.3.2 Exercise financial control over all corporate operations in conjunction with 6 CityofSaintJohn Operating BudgetPolicy the Chief Financial Officer to ensure compliance with the operating budget approved by Council. 9.4 The Chief Financial Officer and Finance Team shall: 9.4.1 Prepare long range revenue and expenditure forecasts; 9.4.2 Review departmental budgets with individual departments; 9.4.3 Analyze and make recommendations on budget requests; 9.4.4 Review the consistency and alignment between budget requests and overall budget goals; 9.4.5 Consolidate all budget requests and their impact into a package that clearly communicates the City's budget objectives, pressures, and linkage to the City's Long Term Financial Plan. 7 Strategic Procurement Policy Effective Date: \[Date\] Last Revision Date: \[Date\] Version: \[Version #\] TABLE OF CONTENTS Section 1 Purpose and Principles Section 2 Interpretation and Application Section 3 Ethical Conduct and Conflict of Interest Section 4 Roles and Responsibilities Section 5 Establishment of Supply Arrangements Section 6 Procurement of Deliverables Section 7 - Social Procurement Section 8 Supplier Relations and Contract Management Section 9 Procurement Record-Keeping Section 10 Compliance Monitoring and Reporting 2 | Page STRATEGIC PROCUREMENT POLICY SECTION 1 PURPOSE AND PRINCIPLES 1.1 Purpose The purpose of this policy is to detail the principles, procedures, roles, and responsibilities for the City Procurement operations. The City recognizes that the taxpayers expect and have the right to receive a high level of services at the best value. The City is committed to maintaining a high standard of professionalism in the management of its public resources. The strategic objectives of business practices are reflected in this policy. This policy establishes the accountability to ensure that economically, socially and environmentally responsible acquisitions include goods, services, inventory, vehicles, equipment, infrastructure, construction, and capital expenditures. The City will take the necessary actions to ensure it complies with applicable trade agreements, legislated requirements, and best procurement practices in the public sector. All competitive opportunities will be open where required, fair, and transparent. This policy applies to the procurement of all goods, services and construction for the City. This policy and its corresponding Procurement Procedures Manual is administered by Supply Chain Management under the direction of the CAO. 1.2 Principles Strategic Procurement Policy Statement The City benefits from the alignment of its administrative and operational duties to meet its long-term objectives. The City wants to ensure best value is realized in all its procurement activities. Through procurement actions, the City can achieve best value for its citizens which can result in social, environmental and economic benefits. This policy will assist in obtaining best value and alignment with , Ten-Year Strategic Plan and Ten-Year Financial Plan). The City is committed to conducting its Procurement operations in accordance with the following principles: (a) compliance and consistency with applicable legislation, trade agreements, policies, and procedures; (b) open, fair, and transparent processes that afford equal access to all qualified Suppliers; (c) reciprocal non-discrimination and geographic neutrality with respect to its trading partners in accordance with trade treaty obligations; 3 | Page (d)achieving best value through consideration of the full range of Procurement Methodsand the adoption of commercially reasonable business practices; (e) effective balance between accountability and efficiency; (f) ensuring adherence to the highest standards of ethical conduct; (g) establishing standardization of goods, equipment, and technology wherever possible to realize best value; (h) procuring goods and services with due regard to the use of responsible products without compromising a healthy, safe, relevant, and aesthetically acceptable learning and working environment; (i) procuring the necessary quality and quantity of goods and services in an efficient, responsive, and cost-effective manner; (j) ensuring that administrative effort and expense are to be commensurate with the value of the purchase; (k) ensuring that the City is not unduly exposed to risk in all procurement-related transactions; (l) ensuring business processes are conducted with fairness, integrity, accountability, and transparency; and (m) ensuring that all procurement awards and contracts are free of any conflicts of interest or bias. 1.3 Role of Supply Chain Management Supply Chain Management is responsible for the procurement of goods and services, and the procurement of construction contracts for all City departments, and where applicable, agencies, boards and commissions. For any agencies, boards and commissions procurements coordinated through the Supply Chain Management department this policy will be followed unless an approved board or commission policy is provided. related to the procurement of goods, services and construction. Supply Chain Management shall prepare, or assist with the preparation of all bid documents, related reports and recommendations for consideration, approval or award by the CAO, or designate, and/or Common Council on all procurement related matters. The City will consider other leading sustainability practices and may incorporate these emerging policies objectives. Supply Chain Management oversight and support services include, but are not limited to: 1. deploying procurement strategies and tactics which ensure value for money in all transactions; 2. determining the procurement method which is most appropriate for the market conditions and facilitating the competitive bid processes and procedures; 3. e; 4 | Page 4.compliance with all specifications for all acquisitions; 5. processing all procurement-related contracts as per the signing authorities for contracts; 6. considering environmental, economic and strategic values when making recommendations or decisions; 7. supporting other departments with policy compliance and best practices; 8. providing professional procurement advice and services, including the recommendations on type of bid solicitation method; 9. monitoring compliance with this policy, the Procurement Procedures Manual and any applicable legislation and trade agreements; 10. notifying Chief Officers or Directors, of non-compliance with this policy, the Procurement Procedures Manual and applicable legislation and trade agreements; and 11. notifying the CAO and/or Common Council of non-compliance. Chief officers are responsible for procurement activities within their departments and divisions and are accountable for achieving the specific objectives of the procurement policy. 1.4.1 Requirement for Approved Funds With respect to subsection 2.3.2 the authority to award a Contract is subject to the identification and availability of sufficient funds in appropriate accounts within the Budget(s). Where goods and services are routinely purchased or leased on a multi-year basis, the authority to award a Contract is subject to all of the following conditions: 1. the identification and availability of sufficient funds in appropriate accounts for the current year within the Budget(s); 2. the requirement for the goods or services will continue to exist in subsequent years and, in the opinion of the Chief Financial Officer, the required funding can reasonably be expected to be made available; and 3. the Contract has a provision in it that the supply of goods or services in subsequent years is subject to the approval by Common Council of the Budget estimates to meet the proposed expenditures. 1.4.2 Acquisitions Outside of Approved Budget Where a requirement exists to initiate a project for which Deliverables are required and funds are not contained in appropriate accounts within Common Council approved Budget(s) to meet the proposed expenditure, the Chief Officer shall, prior to the commencement of the purchasing process, submit a report, through the CAO, to Common Council containing: 1. information surrounding the requirement to contract; 2. the terms and conditions of the proposed Contract; and 3. information on the availability of the funds within existing Budget(s), which were originally 5 | Page approved by Common Council for other purposes or on the requirement for additional funds. 1.5 Common Council Approved Contracts Notwithstanding any other provision of this policy, the following shall be subject to Common Council approval: 1. any Contract prescribed by legislation to be made by Common Council; 2. where the Bid price is higher than the approved Budget(s) and the necessary adjustments cannot be made; 3. where authority to approve has not been expressly delegated; and 4. where a Contract is a result of a public private partnership opportunity. 1.6 Prohibitions The following activities are prohibited: 1. the division of contracts, purchases, or changes to the scope of work to avoid the requirements of this policy; 2. the award or approval of a Contract without the appropriate authority to do so; 3. purchase by the City of any goods or services for personal use by or on behalf of any member of Common Council, appointed officers, employees of the City or their immediate families unless specifically authorized by Common Council; 4. purchase by the City from any member of Common Council, appointed officers, employees of the City or their immediate families or from any other source that could result in a conflict of interest; 5. the use of personal credit cards for City purchases where a City Purchasing Card is available; 6. making commitments to other parties or acquiring items through a Contract which extends beyond approved funding availability; 7. the award of a Contract where Supply Chain Management has determined that the provisions of this policy have not been adhered to and has so advised the person responsible for the procurement;and 8. any transaction which could result in the creation of an employee - employer relationship. 6 | Page SECTION 2 INTERPRETATION AND APPLICATION 2.1 Defined Terms Terms used in this policy are defined in the following Glossary of Terms: GLOSSARY OF TERMS Bid Solicitation Document, and includes tenders, proposals, quotations, or other responses. Bidder Supplier that submits a Bid, and includes proponents and respondents. Budget(s) means a Common Council approved annual General Fund Operating and Capital Budgets and Saint John Water Operating and Capital Budgets, including authorized revisions. means the Chief Administrative Officer of the City of Saint John, New Brunswick. City hief means the Chief officer positions, also referred to as the C-level or C-suite are the executive leadership roles at the City reporting directly to the CAO. Common Council Common Council. Competitive Process Bids from multiple Suppliers. Contract City for the Procurement of Deliverables from a Supplier, which may be evidenced by an agreement executed by the Supplier and the City, or a Purchase Order issued by the City to the Supplier. Contract Administrator Deliverables s, services, or construction, or combination thereof. -means using an online platform for the entire procurement process which includes receiving proposals and bids along with any questions. The current online platform used by the City is bids&tenders (GPO) means an entity that leverages the collective buying power of multiple organizations to negotiate discounts and favorable terms with suppliers. Invitational Competition Competitive Process in which an invitation to submit Bids is issued to at least three Suppliers. 7 | Page Legal Services City Low-Value Procurement Threshold the Procurement Value is below the Low-Value Procurement Threshold set out in the Procurement Policy and the Deliverables are not covered under an existing Standing Offer or Qualified Supplier Roster. Service Areas may make Low-Value Procurements without the involvement of Supply Chain Management. Master Framework Agreement means a master agreement entered into between the City and the prequalified Suppliers that have been included on a Qualified Supplier Roster. Non-Standard Procurement Deliverables through a process or method other than the standard method required for the type and value of the Deliverables. Non-standard Procurement methods include: (a) acquiring Deliverables directly from a particular Supplier without conducting a Competitive Process when an Invitational Competition or an Open Competition would normally be required; and (b) soliciting Bids from a limited number of Suppliers without conducting an open prequalification process when an Open Competition would normally be required. Open Competition Bids through a publicly posted Solicitation Document. Open Competition Threshold means the minimum value for a Procurement that the City must procure using an Open Competition as prescribed by applicable Acts and Trade Treaties. Open Framework Competition means the Competitive Process used to establish a Qualified Supplier Roster and provide for an ongoing application process during the term of the Qualified Supplier Roster. Performance Evaluation Report. Procurement Deliverables by purchase, rental, or lease. Procurement Manager Supply Chain Management. means the bid solicitation format and includes but is not limited to: Request for Quotations (RFQ) Request for Proposals (RFP) Negotiated Request for Proposals (NRFP) Invitation to Tender (ITT) Procurement Oversight CommitteePOC City under the Procurement Policy for the purposes of considering and making determinations on procurement-related matters. 8 | Page Procurement Plan Service Areaat the outset of an Invitational Competition or Open Competition. means the compilation of specific details pertaining to various procurement processes. Procurement Value Deliverables being procured, and it must include all costs to the City, including, as applicable, acquisition, maintenance, replacement, and disposal; training, delivery, and installation; and extension options, less applicable rebates or discounts and exclusive of sales taxes. Purchase Order CityCity to a Supplier formalizing all the terms and conditions of the purchase and supply of the Deliverables identified on the face of the Purchase Order. Purchasing Card City to authorized officers and employees for use as a payment method to purchase directly from Suppliers where permitted under the Procurement Policy and in accordance with any cardholder agreement and applicable procedures. Qualified Supplier Roster Suppliers that have participated in and successfully met the requirements of a Request for Supplier perform discrete work assignments involving the delivery of a particular type of deliverable. The Suppliers that qualify for inclusion on the Qualified Supplier Roster will enter into a Master Framework Agreement and will be eligible to participate in Roster Competitions, as and when the goods or services are required. or means a market research initiative for the collection of data for the purposes of future Procurement planning. Roster Competition Suppliers that have been included on a Qualified Supplier Roster for the selection of a Supplier to perform a discrete work assignment during the term of the roster. Service Area epartment, division, or unit of the City that is requisitioning the purchase of the Deliverables. Service Area Head Service Area. Service Area Lead employee assigned primary responsibility for a procurement. means a procurement outcome which has a positive impact on inclusive employment practices, small to medium-sized businesses, supplier diversity, workforce development and environmental stewardship. Solicitation Document City to solicit Bids from Bidders. 9 | Page Standing Offer written offer from a pre-approved Supplierto supply Deliverables to the City, upon request, through the use of an ordering process during a particular period of time, at a predetermined price or discount, generally within a predefined dollar limit. The Standing Offer does not create a contractual commitment from either party for a defined volume of business. The commitment to purchase against a Standing Offer is formed at the time a specific order is placed through the issuance of a Purchase Order to the Supplier. Supplier Deliverables. Supply Chain Management Deliverables for the City. 2.2 Application This policy applies to the Procurement of all Deliverables with the exception of the exclusions set out below: SCHEDULE OF EXCLUSIONS 2.2.1. Excluded Acquisitions and Expenditures This policy does not apply to: (a) Contracts or agreements for the sale, purchase, lease, or licence of land or existing buildings. (b) the acquisition of the following Deliverables: i. services of expert witnesses or factual witnesses used in court of legal proceedings; ii. goods intended for resale to the public; iii. goods purchased on a commodity market; iv. works of art; and v. subscriptions to newspapers, magazines, or other periodicals. (c) Contracts or agreements relating to hiring of employees or employee compensation or reimbursement of employee expenses. Procurement includes the acquisition of Deliverables by purchase, rental, or lease. 10 | Page 2.3.1 Spending and Approval Authorities Spending and approval authorities are as follows (excluding tax): Approved Operating Approved Capital Title Budget Budget Amount Amount Common Council Greater than $150,000 Greater than $500,000 Chief Administrative $150,000 or less $500,000 or less Officer* Chief Officers $100,000 or less $100,000 or less Directors $25,000 or less $25,000 or less Line Manager $15,000 or less $15,000 or less Foreman, Supervisor, $7,500 or less $7,500 or less Admin or Designate 2.3.2 Contract Award Authority Delegation Pursuant to By-law No. LG-21-law Respecting Delegation of Authority to Award or Approve CAO, Chief Officers and Directors within the spending limits authorized under this policy and subject to compliance with any other applicable terms and conditions of this policy. 2.4 Low Value Procurement Threshold As referred to in this policy, the Low Value Procurement Threshold is set at $15,000 plus taxes. 2.5 Emergency Purchases Notwithstanding any other provisions of this policy, where an emergency exists and prior approval of the Procurement Manager cannot be obtained, a Service Area Head, or their designate, may authorize any officer or employee to acquire required Deliverables in an expedited manner. 11 | Page If the expenditure is not within the approved budget envelope and/or the amount of the purchase exceeds the spending and approval authorities set out in this policy the Service Area Head must provide a report to Common Council providing the relevant details surrounding the application of this section. For the purposes of this policy, an emergency exists when an unforeseeable situation or event occurs that is a threat to any of the following: (a) public health and/or safety; (b) the maintenance of essential services; or (c) the welfare of persons or public property; Situations of urgency resulting from the failure to properly plan for a Procurement do not constitute an emergency. When using this section, the Service Area Head, or their delegate, shall ensure that a formal contract (when necessary) and other required procurement records are created prior to the acquisition of the goods or services, or, where not feasible in cases of extreme urgency, as soon thereafter as is reasonably possible. For greater certainty, Section 3 Ethical Conduct and Conflict of Interest shall apply to emergency purchases and Conflicts of Interest must be avoided in relation to all purchases including emergency purchases. 2.6 Related Documents The following documents are to be read in conjunction with this policy: 1. The City of Saint John Procurement Procedures Manual under the Strategic Procurement Policy 2. The City of Saint John Procurement Card Policy 3. The New Brunswick Procurement Act and Regulation 2014-93 4. The Canadian Free Trade Agreement 5. The Canada-European Union Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement SECTION 3 ETHICAL CONDUCT AND CONFLICTS OF INTEREST 3.1 Conduct and Conflicts of Interest For the purposes of this section (a) when applied to the activities of the City and its consultants and service providers: (i) a relation to any procurement activity; or (ii) engaging in any conduct that may give another party an unfair advantage in a procurement process; or (b) in relation to a bidding process, a Bidder has an unfair advantage or engages in conduct, directly or indirectly, that may give it an unfair advantage, including, but not limited to: (i) 12 | Page having, or having access to, confidential information of the Cityin the preparation of its Bid that is not available to other Bidders; (ii) having been involved in the development of the Solicitation Document, including having provided advice or assistance in the development of the Solicitation Document; (iii) receiving advice or assistance in the preparation of its response from any individual or entity that was involved in the development of the Solicitation Document; (iv) communicating with any person with a view to influencing preferred treatment in the bidding process (including, but not limited to, the lobbying of decision-makers involved in the bidding process); or (v) engaging in conduct that compromises, or could be seen to compromise, the integrity of the open and competitive bidding process or render that process non-competitive or unfair; or (c) in relation to the performance of its contractual obligations, a other commitments, relationships, or financial interests: (i) could, or could be seen to, exercise an improper influence over the objective, unbiased, and impartial exercise of its independent judgement; or (ii) could, or could be seen to, compromise, impair, or be incompatible with the effective performance of its contractual obligations. The CityProcurement activities must be conducted with integrity, and all individuals involved in the CityProcurement activities must act in a manner that is consistent with the principles and objectives of this policy and avoid any Conflict of Interest. All participants in a Procurement process, including any outside consultants or other service providers participating on behalf of the City, must declare any perceived, potential, or actual Conflicts of Interest and, must recuse themselves from participating in any manner in a Procurement Process to which the perceived, potential, or actual conflict of interest applies. For greater clarity, it is the responsibility of all members of Common Council to disclose any perceived, potential or actual procurement-related conflict of interest and, when the conflict is raised by a member of Common Council, to address that conflict in accordance with the procedures established by Common Council. 3.2 Supplier Conduct and Conflicts of Interest The City requires its Suppliers to act with integrity and conduct business in an ethical manner. All Suppliers participating in a Procurement process or providing Deliverables to the City must declare any perceived, potential, or actual conflicts of interest and must conduct themselves in accordance with the Supplier Code of Conduct set out below. The City may refuse to do business with any Supplier that has engaged in illegal or unethical bidding practices, has an actual or potential conflict of interest or an unfair advantage, or fails to adhere to ethical business practices. 13 | Page SUPPLIER CODE OF CONDUCT The City requires its Suppliers to act with integrity and conduct business in an ethical manner. The City may refuse to do business with any Supplier that has engaged in illegal or unethical bidding practices, has an actual or potential conflict of interest or an unfair advantage, or fails to adhere to ethical business practices. Suppliers are responsible for ensuring that any employees, representatives, agents, or subcontractors acting on their behalf conduct themselves in accordance with this Supplier Code of Conduct. The City may require the immediate removal and replacement of any individual or entity acting on behalf of a Supplier that conducts themselves in a manner inconsistent with this Supplier Code of Conduct. The City may refuse to do business with any Supplier that is unwilling or unable to comply with such requirement. A. ILLEGAL OR UNETHICAL BIDDING PRACTICES Illegal or unethical bidding practices include: (a) bid-rigging, price-fixing, bribery or collusion, or other behaviours or practices prohibited by federal or provincial statutes; (b) offering gifts or favours to the Citynted or elected officials, or any other representative of the City; (c) engaging in any prohibited communications during a Procurement process; (d) submitting inaccurate or misleading information in a Procurement process; and (e) engaging in any other activity that compromises the CityProcurement process. The City will report any suspected cases of collusion, bid-rigging, or other offences under the Competition Act to the Competition Bureau or to other relevant authorities. B. CONFLICTS OF INTEREST All Suppliers participating in a Procurement process must declare any perceived, potential, or actual conflicts of interest. Suppliers, includes any situation or circumstance where: (a) in the context of a Procurement process, the Supplier has an unfair advantage or engages in conduct, directly or indirectly, that may give it an unfair advantage, including but not limited to: 14 | Page i. having, or having access to, confidential information of the City that is not available to other Suppliers; ii. having been involved in the development of the Procurement document, including having provided advice or assistance in the development of the Procurement document; iii. receiving advice or assistance in the preparation of its response from any individual or entity that was involved in the development of the Procurement document; iv. communicating with any person with a view to influencing preferred treatment in the Procurement process (including but not limited to the lobbying of decision- makers involved in the Procurement process); or v. engaging in conduct that compromises, or could be seen to compromise, the integrity of an open and competitive Procurement process or render that process non-competitive or unfair; or (b) in the context of performance under a potential Contract, the Supplier relationships, or financial interests: i. could, or could be seen to, exercise an improper influence over the objective, unbiased, and impartial exercise of its independent judgment; or ii. could, or could be seen to, compromise, impair, or be incompatible with the effective performance of its contractual obligations. Where a Supplier is retained to participate in the development of a Solicitation Document or the specifications for inclusion in a Solicitation Document, that Supplier will not be allowed to respond, directly or indirectly, to that Solicitation Document. C. ETHICAL BUSINESS PRACTICES In providing Deliverables to the City, Suppliers are expected to adhere to ethical business practices, including: (a) performing all Contracts in a professional and competent manner and in accordance with the terms and conditions of the Contract and the duty of honest performance; (b) complying with all applicable laws, including safety and labour codes (both domestic and international as may be applicable); and (c) providing workplaces that are free from harassment and discrimination. 15 | Page SECTION 4 ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES 4.1 Role and Responsibilities of Common Council It is the role of Common Council to establish policy and approve expenditures through the City- approval process. Through this policy, Common Council delegates to the City authority to incur expenditures in accordance with approved budgets through the Procurement of Deliverables in accordance with the rules and processes set out in this policy. Common Council may provide strategic direction and guidance on major projects prior to the commencement of the Procurement process; however, Common Council will not generally be involved in the day-to-day Procurement operations or individual Procurement processes, except to the extent that the approval of Common Council is required under this policy or in the event that an exception to this policy is required. 4.2 Roles and Responsibilities of Officers and Employees Specific responsibilities pertaining to all stages of a Procurement process, from the initial identification of requirements through to the management of Contracts with Suppliers, are detailed in this policy. In addition to those specific responsibilities, the general roles and responsibilities delegated to the City officers and employees are set out below. 4.2.1 Procurement Manager It is the role of Supply Chain Management to lead the CityProcurement operations. In fulfilling this role, the Procurement Manager, or designate, is responsible for: (a) ensuring the consistent application of this policy and the provision of Procurement services to the Service Areas efficiently and diligently; (b) in collaboration with Service Areas, developing an annual procurement plan to help facilitate proactive procurement planning across the organization and to help identify major projects requiring the creation of project-specific oversight steering committees; (c) developing Procurement strategies and continually analyzing business requirements and spending patterns to identify opportunities for more strategic sourcing, including the creation of new Qualified Supplier Rosters to consolidate purchasing opportunities and to reduce instances of emergency procurements and Non-Standard Procurements; (d) monitoring and reporting non-compliance and conflicts of interest in accordance with this policy; (e) researching, developing, maintaining, updating, and communicating Procurement procedures, and templates; (f) addressing any issues or concerns that arise in respect of a Procurement process and seeking guidance, support, and advice of Legal Services, as required; and 16 | Page (g)developing an annual procurement training plan for the organization and providing appropriate orientation, training, and tools to employees involved in Procurement activities. 4.2.2 Service Area Heads It is the role of the Service Areas to ensure that their requirements for Deliverables are met in accordance with the principles and objectives of this policy. In fulfilling this role, Service Area Heads are responsible for ensuring that their Service Area complies with this policy, encouraging sound Procurement practices and ensuring the provision of appropriate education and training to employees involved in Procurement activities. Service Area Heads will be held accountable for any decision to proceed with a Procurement process or transaction that is not conducted in accordance with this policy or does not have the approval of Supply Chain Management. 4.2.3 Service Area Employees Employees of all Service Areas are responsible for complying with this policy. Service Area employees involved in Procurement activities must understand their obligations and responsibilities under this policy, and they should consult with Supply Chain Management in respect of any questions regarding the application or interpretation of this policy or adhering to any established procurement procedures. 4.2.4 Supply Chain Management Employees Employees of Supply Chain Management are responsible for complying with this policy and ensuring this policy is applied consistently. Supply Chain Management employees must understand their obligations and responsibilities under this policy, and they should consult with the Procurement Manager in respect of any questions regarding their application or interpretation. 4.2.5 Legal Services It is the role of Legal Services to provide legal advice and assistance on the CityProcurement activities and its relationships with Suppliers. In fulfilling this role, Legal Services is responsible for: (a) advising the Procurement Manager as required on legal issues arising from Procurement activities and reviewing and approving specific Solicitation Documents and related documentation referred for legal review by the Procurement Manager; (b) providing advice on the finalization of Contracts and agreements and reviewing and advising on proposed changes to the City, and Solicitation Document templates; and (c) providing legal advice and counsel to the City in the event of a Contract dispute or legal challenge flowing from a Procurement process. 17 | Page 4.3Procurement Oversight Committee The CAO may establish a Procurement Oversight Committee POC for the purpose of: (a) making determinations relating to Conflict of Interest; (ii) Non-Standard Procurement; (iii) bid protests; and (iv) supplier suspension; (b) providing oversight as the steering committee for all Open Competitions, unless a project-specific oversight steering committee is created for a specific procurement; (c) monitoring and reporting non-compliance with this policy; and (d) providing input on other Procurement matters that may be referred to it by the Procurement Manager. The POC will include the Procurement Manager and at least two other senior-level officers or employees of the City and will also include the Service Area Head responsible for the specific Procurement in question. Legal Services will provide guidance and advice to the POC, as required. For greater clarity, if the CAO does not establish a POC, reference in this policy to POC shall be interpreted to mean CAO. SECTION 5 ESTABLISHMENT OF SUPPLY ARRANGEMENTS 5.1 Recurring Requirements Before initiating a procurement, Service Areas must consider the availability of existing supply arrangements. If the Deliverables will be required on a frequent or regularly recurring basis, and there is no existing supply arrangement, the Service Area must consult with Supply Chain Management about the possibility of establishing a Standing Offer or Qualified Supplier Roster. 5.2 Standing Offers Standing Offers may be established for standardized Deliverables to be purchased by all Service Areas, where: (a) the requirements for Deliverables are recurring and predictable over an extended period of time; (b) the requirements are standard and clearly defined at the time of establishment of the Standing Offer; and (c) it is possible to fix pricing for the Deliverables for the duration of the Standing Offer. 18 | Page The establishment of a Standing Offer does not create a contractual commitment to procure Deliverables from the Supplier. The commitment to purchase against a Standing Offer is formed at the time a specific order is placed through the issuance of a Purchase Order to the Supplier. The Procurement Manager is authorized to establish Standing Offers through Invitational and Open Competitions as required. The competitions will be managed by Supply Chain Management, with the co- operation and involvement of subject-matter experts from the relevant Service Area(s). If multiple Standing Offers are established for the same goods or services, clear ranking methodologies and call-up procedures must be specified. 5.3 Qualified Supplier Rosters Qualified Supplier Rosters may be established to prequalify Suppliers that will be eligible to compete for discrete work assignments involving the delivery of a particular type of Deliverables, as and when required. The establishment of a Qualified Supplier Roster does not create a contractual commitment to procure Deliverables from any of the Suppliers. When Deliverables are required, a Roster Competition will be conducted for the purposes awarding a contract to one of the qualified Suppliers. The Procurement Manager is authorized to conduct Open Framework Competitions to establish Qualified Supplier Rosters. The Open Framework Competition will be managed by Supply Chain Management, with the co-operation and involvement of the Service Area(s). 5.4 Co-operative Purchasing The City may participate in co-operative or joint purchasing initiatives with other entities where such initiatives are determined to be in the best interests of the City. If the City participates in such co-operative or joint purchasing initiatives, the City may adhere to the policies of the entity conducting the purchasing process, provided that such policies comply in spirit with this policy and with generally applicable legal requirements. If the City is leading a co-operative or joint purchasing initiative, this policy will be followed. Included in the Co-operative Purchasing approach is the utilization of contracts available through Group . SECTION 6 PROCUREMENT OF DELIVERABLES 6.1 Procurement Planning Effective Procurement planning is essential to ensuring an effective result and to limiting risk to the City. Service Areas must ensure that they leave sufficient time to plan for a procurement, including time for: (a) developing proper specifications and business requirements; (b) obtaining internal reviews; 19 | Page (c)conducting a Competitive Process, as required; and (d) obtaining necessary approvals. 6.2 Market Research Where the Service Area is uncertain about the Deliverables required or where there is insufficient internal knowledge about the market, the Service Area must consult with Supply Chain Management about the feasibility of conducting a Request for Information (RFI) process. If it is determined that an RFI is needed, that RFI process must be openly posted in order to gather market research from prospective Bidders. It must not be used as a prequalification tool. 6.3 Procurement Value It is important to accurately estimate the value of the Procurement to determine the appropriate Procurement method and ensure compliance with the requirements of this policy. 6.4 Contract-Splitting Subdividing, splitting or otherwise structuring Procurement requirements or contracts in order to reduce the value of the Procurement or in any way circumvent the requirements or intent of this policy is not permitted. 6.5 Initiating Procurement Unless specifically permitted under this policy, Service Areas are not permitted to procure Deliverables or engage with potential Suppliers regarding the Procurement of Deliverables without the involvement of Supply Chain Management. 6.6 Procurement Authorization Before any Procurement process begins, proper authorization of the Procurement and delegation of authority to procure must be obtained in accordance with 2.3.1. 6.7 Standard Procurement Methods Depending on the nature, value, and circumstances of the procurement, the City may procure Deliverables through the following standard Procurement methods. The various thresholds for the different methods of procurement shall be as established and maintained by the POC. 6.7.1 Existing Supply Arrangement 6.7.1.1 Ordering from Standing Offer When a Standing Offer is available, its use is mandatory for all Service Areas. To purchase from the Standing Offer, the Service Area must submit an authorized requisition to Supply Chain Management. A 20 | Page purchase order referring to the Standing Offer detailsshould be created and sent to the Supplier. The Purchase Order referencing the Standing Offer and reflecting the pre-negotiated prices and terms and conditions of the Standing Offer will be created and issued to the Supplier by the Procurement Manager. 6.7.1.2 Roster Competition If the Deliverables are available under an existing Qualified Supplier Roster, they must be acquired through a Roster Competition. Roster Competitions will be managed by Supply Chain Management, with the co-operation and involvement of the Service Area. 6.7.2 Low-Value Procurement Where the Procurement Value is below the Low-Value Procurement Threshold and the Deliverables are not covered under an existing Standing Offer or Qualified Supplier Roster, Service Areas may make Low- Value Procurements without the involvement of Supply Chain Management. It is the responsibility of the Service Area to determine if there is an existing Standing Offer or Qualified Supplier Roster for the required Deliverables before making a purchase. When available, the Deliverables must be purchased in accordance with the terms of the Standing Offer For Low-Value Procurements, the Service Area is only required to obtain one quote and may acquire the Deliverables using a corporate purchasing card or by submitting a requisition to the Procurement Manager. Where practical, departments are encouraged to obtain multiple quotes to ensure they are obtaining best value. Quotes may be obtained through advertisements or Supplier catalogues or by contacting the potential Supplier(s) by telephone or email. The Service Area Head is responsible and accountable for Low-Value Procurements and may authorize specific individuals within the Service Area to make Low-Value Procurements and may assign specific spending authority limits. If a Service Area anticipates making multiple Low-Value Procurements of the same Deliverables and the total value of those purchases may exceed the applicable Low-Value Procurement Threshold, the department must contact Supply Chain Management to discuss the possibility of setting up a Standing Offer or Qualified Supplier Roster or consolidating the Procurement to avoid contract splitting. Supply Chain Management is available to assist Service Areas with Low-Value Procurements, and Service Areas may request that Supply Chain Management conduct an Invitational Competition for any Low-Value Procurement. 6.7.3 Invitational Competition An Invitational Competition, in which Bids are solicited from a minimum of three Suppliers, is the standard method of Procurement when the Procurement Value is between the Low-Value Procurement Threshold and the Open Competition Threshold. 21 | Page Invitational Competitions will be managed by Supply Chain Management, with the co-operation and involvement of the Service Area. Open Competition may be conducted in lieu of an Invitational Competition, where the Procurement Manager, in consultation with the Service Area, determines that it would be in the City best interest. 6.7.4 Open Competition An Open Competition, in which Bids are solicited from all interested Suppliers through a publicly posted Solicitation Document, is the standard method of Procurement when the Procurement Value equals or exceeds the Open Competition Thresholds. Open Competitions may include two-stage Procurement processes in which a prequalification process is conducted by soliciting and evaluating submissions from all interested Suppliers in order to establish a short list of prequalified Suppliers that will be eligible to submit a Bid in response to a second-stage Solicitation Document. A two-stage Procurement process may be used whenever determined appropriate by the Procurement Manager, in consultation with the Service Area. Open Competitions will be managed by Supply Chain Management, with the co-operation and involvement of the Service Area. 6.8 Non-Standard Procurement Non-Standard Procurement means the acquisition of Deliverables through a method other than the standard method for the type and value of the Deliverables, as set out above under Section 6.7. Details pertaining to Non-Standard Procurements can be found in the Procurement Procedures Manual. Non-standard Procurement methods include: (a) acquiring Deliverables directly from a particular Supplier without conducting a Competitive Process when an Invitational Competition or an Open Competition would normally be required, including but not limited to emergency purchases; and (b) soliciting Bids from a limited number of Suppliers without conducting an open prequalification process when an Open Competition would normally be required. Under no circumstances will a Non-Standard Procurement be used for the purpose of avoiding competition among Suppliers or in a manner that discriminates against, or advantages Suppliers based on geographic location. For greater certainty: (a) the Service Area Head will remain responsible for ensuring Open Competition, or at minimum, Invitational Competition, whenever feasible even in circumstances where direct awards would otherwise be recognized under the applicable trade treaties; and (b) the Conflict of Interest rules will apply to all Non-Standard Procurements. 22 | Page 6.9Contract Award and Finalization Contracts must be awarded in accordance with this policy. A Contract may be entered into through the execution of a legal agreement and/or the issuance of a Purchase Order evidencing the contract. The Contract must be entered into prior to the delivery or provision of the Deliverables. The Procurement Manager has delegated authority to issue Purchase Orders on behalf of the City. Agreements must be signed by the Mayor and Common Clerk. No Contract may be entered into, either through the issuance of a Purchase Order or the execution of an agreement, unless: (a) approved funding in an amount sufficient to cover the Procurement Value is available; (b) the Procurement process was conducted in accordance with this policy; and (c) all required authorizations have been obtained. SECTION 7 SOCIAL PROCUREMENT 7.1 Social Procurement Values Where possible and practicable, to achieve best value for taxpayer dollars, the acquisition of Deliverables may include the following values and criteria when planning for and sourcing its requirements: 1. Sourcing of environmentally and ecologically responsible products and equipment, leveraging low carbon options; 2. Respect for the values of inclusivity, diversity, equity, culture, and fair labour practices; 3. Support of diverse organizations or organizations that have a social impact The criteria and process will be outlined in the Procurement Procedures Manual to assist in the proper execution of these values. 7.2 Social Procurement Above the Open Competition Threshold Any social procurement objective above the applicable Open Competition Thresholds must be supported by a plan approved by Common Council prior to its implementation that confirms, among other things: 1. the jurisdictional basis for the City to implement the objective under authority delegated by the provincial government; 23 | Page 2.the trade-treaty authority for the City to implement the objective under programs established by the federal or provincial government based on the powers granted to those senior levels of government under the trade treaties; 3. the public policy rationale supporting the objective, including a clear definition of measurable outcomes that the objective is intended to achieve; and 4. operational details for the implementation of the objective in the form of evaluation and award criteria and contract performance requirements that ensure the transparency and defensibility of evaluation and award decisions and contract administration practices in compliance with existing public procurement standards. 7.3 Social Procurement Below the Open Competition Threshold A Service Area may implement social procurement objectives for Contracts valued below the applicable Open Competition Thresholds as a pilot project and shall report the results of that pilot project to Common Council within a year of its implementation. For greater clarity, any below-threshold Contracts that include social procurement objectives will remain subject to the provisions of this policy, including but not limited to Section 3 Ethical Conduct and Conflict of Interest, and any such pilot project shall at minimum address factor number four identified in the prior paragraph and shall be approved by the POC before being implemented by the Service Area. SECTION 8 SUPPLIER RELATIONS AND CONTRACT MANAGEMENT 8.1 Debriefings Where the City has conducted an Open Competition, the City shall provide a debriefing to all unsuccessful Suppliers upon request. 8.2 Procurement Protests Suppliers may formally protest the outcome of a Procurement process. Procurement protests must be managed and responded to in accordance with directions provided by the POC. 8.3 Contract Management All contracts for Deliverables must be managed by the Service Area. Master Framework Agreements will be managed by Supply Chain Management. 8.4 Contract Extensions or Amendments Contract extensions and amendments must not be used to expand a Contract beyond what was contemplated under the terms of the Contract and the original Procurement process or to circumvent the need to procure additional Deliverables through a Competitive Process in accordance with this policy. 24 | Page During the course of a contract, additional work may arise that could not be anticipated during the project planning process. Contract amendments for adjustments to the scope of the Contract may be approved if the adjustment is for work that is directly connected or incidental to the original Contract scope. The expansion or extension of a Contract to procure Deliverables that were not contemplated in the original Procurement is a Non-Standard Procurement and, if the total cumulative value of the additional Deliverables equals or exceeds the Open Competition Threshold, the Non-Standard Procurement must be approved by the POC. Where a Contract is amended or extended more than once, the total cumulative value of the additional Deliverables includes the value of all previously approved amendments and extensions and the value of the proposed amendment or extension. If a Contract amendment results in a net increase to the Contract value previously approved, the amendment must be approved in accordance with 2.3.1. All amendments to an existing Contract must be appropriately documented. Legal Services should be consulted regarding all matters pertaining to Contract interpretation and application, and for any changes, extensions, renewals, or amendments required to be made to any executed contract. 8.5 Contract Disputes All potential Contract disputes with Suppliers must be managed in accordance with the dispute resolution mechanisms outlined in the contract. Where a Contract is silent on dispute resolution, the Service Area should ensure that potential disputes are proactively managed and appropriately escalated. Written copies of all communications and correspondence with Suppliers concerning a Contract dispute must be maintained by the Service Area. A Contract can be terminated prior to its expiry date only with the involvement of Legal Services. 8.6 Supplier Performance The performance of a Supplier under Contract must be monitored and tracked by the Service Area. Details pertaining to managing supplier performance can be found in the Procurement Procedures Manual. 8.7 Supplier Suspension Suppliers can be suspended from participating in future Procurement processes based on determinations made by the POC and as allowed for by the New Brunswick Procurement Act and Regulation 2014-93. SECTION 9 PROCUREMENT RECORD-KEEPING 9.1 Supplier Information The City must ensure that Supplier information submitted in confidence in connection with a Procurement process or Contract is adequately protected. Supply Chain Management and the Service Areas must 25 | Page ensure that all Bids and contracts are kept in a secure location and are only accessible by those individuals directly involved with the Procurement or management of the contract. 9.2 Procurement Records The maintenance, release, and management of all Procurement records must be in accordance with the City Supply Chain Management is responsible for ensuring that all documentation relating to a Procurement is properly filed and maintained in a Procurement project file. Documentation and reports regarding Procurement processes and Contract awards (including Non-Standard Procurements) and data necessary to trace the process conducted electronically must be maintained for a minimum period of at least seven years from the Contract award date, or such longer period as may be required under the City management policies. SECTION 10 COMPLIANCE MONITORING AND REPORTING 10.1 Compliance Monitoring Non-compliance with this policy may expose the City to the risk of Supplier complaints, reputational damage, Bid disputes, and legal challenges, and may comprises the integrity, fairness, openness, and transparency of the process. The Procurement Manager is responsible for monitoring compliance across the organization. Based on the results of compliance monitoring, reports outlining instances of non-compliance may be issued by the Procurement Manager to the relevant Service Area Head. The Service Area Head must address the identified compliance concerns and submit a written confirmation of actions taken to the Procurement Manager. Ongoing concerns with respect to compliance will be subject to internal audit and to the additional reporting requirements outlined herein. 10.1.1 Non-Compliance Defined For the purposes of this section, non-compliance includes: (a) a breach of any purchasing card policies and procedures; (b) a breach of any codes of conduct involving a Procurement; (c) executing a purchase of any kind, including a new purchase, a purchase made through a contract amendment, or a purchase made under an expired contract, without first obtaining the necessary funding authorization and other applicable approvals; (d) commencing performance of a contract prior to the formal approval and execution of that contract; 26 | Page (e)directly awarding a contract, or engaging in restrictive tendering, in instances where Open Competition is required, without first obtaining formal approvals for any such exception to Open Competition practices; (f) obtaining procurement approvals based on inaccurate or incomplete information or based on material misrepresentations or omissions; (g) failing to adhere to requirements of the procurement policy, including non-compliance relating to conflict of interest, proper advanced planning, contract splitting, sole sourcing, and recordkeeping; or (h) failing to adhere to the due process standards applicable to the government tendering process, including standards relating to transparency, procedural fairness, non-discrimination, and the protection of confidential supplier information. 10.1.2 Duty to Report and Rectify Service Area Heads are required to observe and address non-compliance with this policy within their Service Areas. Where instances of non-compliance are identified, the Service Area Head is expected to notify the Procurement Manager and obtain advice: (a) with respect to mitigating potential risks to the City arising from the non-compliance; and (b) to ensure future non-compliance is avoided. The Procurement Manager shall record all reported non-compliance to the Procurement Oversight Committee on a quarterly basis and shall, in consultation with that committee: (a) develop recommendations for rectification of any such non-compliance; and (b) provide a report to Common Council on an annual basis of any non-compliance issues not resolved or without a remediation plan in place. 10.1.3 Procurement Oversight Committee Once established by the CAO, the Procurement Oversight Committee (POC) shall meet at minimum on a quarterly basis, and more frequently as required, to address non-compliance incidents and develop non- compliance remediation measures that may include, based on the severity of the breach: (a) the requirement that the individual(s) involved in the breach complete prescribed procurement remediation training; (b) the suspension of the individual(s) involved in the breach from any future procurement-related activities including the use of the purchasing cards or any other involvement in the procurement process; (c) additional disciplinary measures as may be appropriate based on consultation with Human Resources and Legal Services; 27 | Page (d)a report to law enforcement authorities where the breach in question is ofa criminal or quasi- criminal nature, and, for greater certainty, such breaches may include but are not limited to potential breaches of the Criminal Code or Competition Act. 10.2 Audit All Procurement activities will be subject to audit as prescribed by the CAO. 10.3 Reporting The Procurement Manager will prepare and submit to Common Council an annual report summarizing the CityProcurement activities, including: (a) non-standard Procurements; (b) instances of non-compliance as described above; (c) procurements over $100,000; and (d) instances of collaborative procurement The Procurement Manager will prepare and submit to the Province of New Brunswick as requested an annual report summarizing the CityProcurement activities, including: (a) Goods procured in excess of the applicable Canada European Union Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement (CETA) threshold; (b) Services procured in excess of the applicable CETA threshold; and (c) Construction procured in excess of the applicable CETA threshold. 28 | Page 29 | Page Cityof Saint John BudgetMonitoringPolicy Title: Budget Monitoring Policy Subject: Budget Monitoring Policy Category: Finance and Strategic Services Policy No.: FAS-021 M&C Report No.: Effective Date: Next Review Date: Area(s) this policy applies to: Cross Corporate Office Responsible for review of this Policy: Finance and Strategic Services Related Instruments: Policy Sponsors: FAS-001 Asset Management Policy Chief Financial Officer FAS-002 Investment Management Policy FAS-003 Operating and Capital Reserve Policy FAS-004 Operating Budget Policy FAS-005 Capital Budget Policy FAS-006 Debt Management Policy FAS-007 Wage Escalation Policy FAS-020 Long Term Financial Plan Policy Document Pages: This document consists of 7 pages. Revision History: Common Clerk's Annotation for Official Record Date of Passage of Current Framework: I certify that this Policy was adopted by Common Council as indicated above. Common Clerk Date Contact: Finance and Strategic Services City of Saint John Budget Monitoring Policy TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.PURPOSE AND CONTEXT...................................................................................................................................3 2. POLICY STATEMENT ...................................................................................................................... 3 3. DEFINITIONS ................................................................................................................................ 5 4. PRINCIPLES ................................................................................................................................... 5 5. POLICY APPLICATION .................................................................................................................... 6 6. ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES .......................................................................................................... 7 2 City of Saint John Budget Monitoring Policy 1. PURPOSE AND CONTEXT 1.1. Common Council adopted a rigorous Long Term Financial Plan focused on achieving structural self-sufficiency, decreasing long-term liabilities, and systematically reducing infrastructure debt.; 1.2. The Budget Monitoring Policy enhances budget accuracy, accountability and cost control by ensuring budget allocations are managed and adhered to; 1.3. The Budget Monitoring Policy enhances fiscal responsibility and financial flexibility by integrating budget monitoring practices with the City's Reserve fund, Debt Management strategies and Operating and Capital budget policies; 2. POLICY STATEMENT 2.1 The City shall implement standardized financial monitoring to track performance against the annual approved budget; 2.2 The Budget Monitoring Policy objectives are as follows: 2.2.1 No expenses shall be incurred which are not approved by Council unless it is unavoidable and pre-approved by Chief Financial Officer; 2.2.2 Personnel and non-personnel budgets shall be managed separately; 2.2.3 Increase operating budget transparency & performance management; 2.2.4 Increase budgeting accuracy by ensuring annual operating expenditure match forecasts and predefined Council approvals; 2.2.5 Increase financial control to ensure resources are funded and spent in a fiscally prudent manner; 2.2.6 Provide enhanced fiscal oversight and support a strategic corporate lens throughout each fiscal year; 2.2.7 Increase financial flexibility by integrating reserve strategies with the annual budget monitoring process; 2.2.8 Increase administrative efficiency by reducing budget lines with an annual budget under $1,000 or as established by Chart of Accounts Governance document. 3 City of Saint John Budget Monitoring Policy 2.3 Revenue budgets shall be carefully monitored with particular attention to: 2.3.1 Seasonality, and whether comparable to prior observations; 2.3.2 Any potential volatility and the resulting impacts; 2.3.3 Trends and comparison to past actuals and previous year budget; 2.3.4 One-time sources and timing of receipts; 2.3.5 Relationship with economic indicators; 2.3.6 Changes in policy or practice of overarching governments involved in disbursement of revenues; 2.3.7 Review of patterns at other similar/related governments. 2.4 Expenditure budgets shall be carefully monitored with particular attention to: 2.4.1 Wages and Benefits (Personnel) - Examine additional details beyond just regular payroll expenses, including hiring and vacancy information, analysis of part-time, overtime, leave pay out and special pay, as well as whether fringe benefit costs are within budgeted expectations; 2.4.2 Goods and Services (Non-personnel) - Monitoring needs to include more than just current expenses, but also encumbrances, outstanding purchase orders, and major contracts to develop a better picture of not only what was spent, but what remains to be spent; 2.4.3 Service Outcomes - Determine if services are being provided as budgeted and if additional services have been provided that were not anticipated, in addition to trends observed that may impact whether or not spending remains on track; 2.4.4 Performance Measures - Examine performance measures and linkages to financial outcomes. The analysis should include any changes to goals/initiatives from budget adoption and are there any new initiatives not initially included in the budget; 2.4.5 Root cause - move beyond just identifying deviations from budget versus actuals and work towards analyzing why deviations occurred. 4 City of Saint John Budget Monitoring Policy 3. DEFINITIONS 3.1 Personnel Costs - means the total wage and benefit costs for internal resources (including benefits); 3.2 Non-Personnel Costs - means the total amount of annual expenditure spent on goods and services; 3.3 Surplus - means an approved annual budget amount is greater than the actual spends within a particular category; 3.4 Deficit - means an approved annual budget amount is less than the actual spends within a particular category. 3.5 Unapproved Budget Line/Code means any general ledger account, cost centre, or object code that has not received explicit annual Council approval or authorized appropriation for the current fiscal year. 4. PRINCIPLES 4.1 Recognize in principle that all budget surpluses and deficits are non-recurring in nature and should be treated as such; 4.2 Budget surpluses and deficits considered to be recurring shall be permanently adjusted for in the following operating budget; 4.3 Operating Budget surpluses for Wages and Benefits are not intended to subsidize Goods and Services; 4.4 Operating Budget surpluses for Goods and Services are not intended to subsidize Wages and Benefits; 4.5 Operating Budget surpluses for Wages and Benefits are appropriate to reallocate to Goods and Services when a staff vacancy generating the surplus requires third-party contracted services to maintain the service level for that particular role; 4.6 Revenues and Grants intended for resourcing programs (human resources) will not be spent on Goods and Services; 5 City of Saint John Budget Monitoring Policy 4.7 During the annual budget preparation process, service areas should review the past 3 to 5 years of actual expenditures and identify and isolate non-recurring, unapproved, or emergency spending so that the new budget remains accurate and realistic. To satisfy objective 2.2.8, individual line items under $1,000 (subject to future Chart of Accounts Governance document) should be avoided to minimize administrative processing, variance reconciliation costs, and system fragmentation. 5. POLICY APPLICATION: 5.1 Personnel budgets are not intended to subsidize non-personnel budget; therefore, surpluses occurring in wages and benefits shall not be reallocated to offset budget deficits in goods and services unless supported by a business case and approved by the Chief Administrative Officer and the Chief Financial Officer; 5.2 Non-personnel budgets are not intended to subsidize personnel budgets; therefore, surpluses occurring in goods and services shall not be reallocated to offset deficits in Wages and Benefits unless supported by a business case and approved by the Chief Administrative Officer and the Chief Financial Officer; 5.3 Aggregate Wage and Benefits surpluses will be applied to the Operating Reserve until the Operating Reserve is fully financed in accordance with FAS-003 - Operating and Capital Reserves Policy; all surpluses thereafter will be applied fifty percent to the Capital Reserve and fifty percent to the City's Long Term Debt Obligations; 5.4 Aggregate Goods and Services surpluses will be applied to the Operating Reserve until the Operating Reserve is fully financed in accordance with FAS-003 Operating and Capital Reserves Policy; all surpluses thereafter will be applied fifty percent to the Capital Reserve and fifty percent to the City's Long Term Debt Obligations; 5.5 All departmental and service area surplus and deficit positions shall be analyzed annually to determine if permanent budget adjustments for the following year are necessary; 5.6 As part of the annual operating budget process, service areas will identify one-time operating expenditures and submit proposals to fund the one-time expenditure using Reserve Funds as per FAS-003 - Operating and Capital Reserves Policy; 5.7 To support objective 2.2.1, no actual expenses or transactions shall be processed against any unapproved budget code unless it is preapproved by the Chief Financial Officer; 5.8 To support objective 2.2.8, budget lines with an annual budget under $1,000 or as established 6 City of Saint John Budget Monitoring Policy by Chart of Accounts Governance document will be tracked together as a combined single group at the department level rather than as separate individual items. Service areas must work to systematically merge and eliminate these micro-lines during the annual budget preparation process; 5.9 Annual budget preparation must be driven by combining the current year's approved budget parameters with the actual expenditures of the immediate past 3 fiscal years, balanced against the service area trend adjustments outlined in clause 4.7; 5.10 The Chief Administrative Officer and Chief Financial Officer shall make any recommendations respecting the use of Reserve Funds as part of the Annual Operating Budget Process and shall be in accordance with the Long-Term Financial Plan. 6 ROLES AND RESPONSIBILTIES 6.1 Council shall: 6.1.1 Approve the Budget Monitoring Policy. 6.2 Finance Committee shall: 6.2.1 Recommend the Budget Monitoring Policy to Common Council for approval; 6.2.2 Review any changes to the Budget Monitoring Policy in the future. 6.3 The Chief Financial Officer shall: 6.3.1 Review annually to ensure that Wages and Benefits vs Goods and Services allocations are in compliance with the Budget Monitoring Policy; 6.3.2 Recommend any changes to the Budget Monitoring Policy in the future; 6.3.3 Design an analysis framework that will monitor surplus and deficit positions. 7 Title: Travel Policy Subject: Travel Policy Category: Finance and Strategic Services Policy No.: FAS-025 M&C Report No.: Effective Date: Next Review Date: Area(s) this policy applies to: Cross Corporate Office Responsible for review of this Policy: Strategic Services Related Instruments: Policy Sponsors: Chief Financial Officer Document Pages: This document consists of 17 pages. Revision History: Common Clerk's Annotation for Official Record Date of Passage of Current Framework: May 30, 2022 I certify that this Policy was adopted by Common Council as indicated above. May 31, 2022 Common Clerk Date Date Updated: Common Council Approval Date: Contact: 2026-08-11 2022-05-30 Finance and Strategic Services City of Saint John Travel Policy TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.PURPOSE AND CONTEXT .............................................................................................................. 3 2. POLICY STATEMENT ..................................................................................................................... 3 3.GLOSSARY .................................................................................................................................... 3 4. POLICY ......................................................................................................................................... 3 4.1 APPROVALS ........................................................................................................................... 3 4.2 METHODS OF PAYMENTS ....................................................................................................... 4 4.3 TRAVEL 4.4 TRAVEL ARRANGEMENTS ...................................................................................................... 5 4.5 METHODS OF TRAVEL ............................................................................................................. 5 4.6 MEALS ................................................................................................................................... 7 4.7 ACCOMODATIONS ................................................................................................................ 9 4.8 NON-REIMBURSABLE TRAVEL EXPENSE ................................................................................ 9 4.9 MISCELLANEOUS ................................................................................................................... 9 4.10 COUNCIL MEMBERS11 5.ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES..12 6.TRAVEL PREAPPRO 13 7.TRAVEL EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT . 15 2 City of Saint John Travel Policy 1. PURPOSE AND CONTEXT a. All Employees of the City of Saint John will adhere to the City of Saint John Travel Policy. Exceptions to the Policy must be approved by the Chief Administrative Officer or designate. b. All members of Common Council will adhere to the City of Saint John Travel Policy. 2. POLICY STATEMENT a. The City of Saint John acknowledges that business travel is a necessary part of some roles. The Travel Policy for Employees and Council Members addresses the requirements of such business travel and related demands and establishes acceptable limits and guidelines for approved business travel undertaken on behalf of the City. 3. GLOSSARY a. "Employee" means a person employed by the City of Saint John, members of the 486 Union employed by the Saint John Police Commission and Members of Common Council. b. "Department Head" means the Council-appointed head of the Department, or the Department Head's designate. c. "The City" refers to the City of Saint John. d. "Travel Supplier" refers to any travel booking organization, such as an airline, hotels, car rental agency, travel agency, etc., authorized or licensed to undertake travel-related bookings on behalf of clientele. e. "Council Members" refers to areas that are only applicable to Common Council and not to other employees. 4. POLICY 4.1 Approvals All travel required for City Business or training purposes must be approved in advance. Travel Request Form 3 City of Saint John Travel Policy Employees shall request approval a minimum of seven working days in advance. Approval of travel requiring air transportation shall be requested sufficiently in advance to take advantage of discounted airfares. A travel request can be denied based on the price of airfare or transportation after initial approval. a. All travel within the Province of New Brunswick shall have approval by the immediate manager. b. All out-of-Province travel shall have approval by the Department Manager or designate. c. All travel out of the country shall have approval by the Chief Administrative Officer. d. No person shall approve his/her own travel request or travel claim. e. City business travel funded other than by the City, shall have prior approval at the Department Head level. f. Travel advances will only be provided under special circumstances. Formal letter of request is to be submitted by the employee to the Department Head for approval. 4.2 Methods Of Payment Unless an employee has lost the use of their corporate credit card, employees are not to use a personal credit card for City business. All approval processes should be in accordance with this policy along with meeting the timelines for submission of the expense reports within the PCARD Procurement Policy. Payments should be made by: a. Employee's corporate credit card; or b. Billed directly to the City of Saint John c. If the employee is unable to use the two methods above a personal card can be used 4.3 Travel Advances Travel advances must be requested only for pre-approved official municipal travel where expenses (such as per diems, lodging, or registration etc.) are not directly billed or paid via a corporate/travel card. Advance requests must be submitted in writing to the Finance department at least one week prior to travel date using City of Saint John Travel Preapproval Form. Travel Request Form The advance amount will be calculated based on the approved per diem rates and estimated out-of- pocket costs for the duration of the trip. 4 City of Saint John Travel Policy If the advance exceeds actual expenses, the employee must remit the difference to the municipality alongside the final expense claim. No subsequent travel advances will be approved or issued to any employee who has an outstanding, un-reconciled advance from a prior trip. 4.4 Travel Arrangements Travel-related services may be arranged through any local travel supplier. Employees shall take advantage of any cost-saving opportunities. E.g. Group discounts, conference rates, etc. 4.5 Methods Of Travel Whenever possible, Employees shall travel by the most direct route and use the most economical means of transportation, taking into consideration the travel time involved and the working schedule. Employees shall adhere to this Policy unless circumstances dictate otherwise and prior approval has been obtained from the Chief Administrative Officer or designate. Travel Request Form Air Travel a. Air travel shall be at the lowest available rates. b. When travel requirements are known in advance, Employees shall book ahead to take advantage of lower rates. c. When a trip extension, i.e., overnight Saturday, may result in substantially reduced airfares, additional costs for accommodations, meals and related expenses shall be reimbursed where overall savings are realized. d. Business Class or other up-grade costs shall be the Employee's responsibility. e. Employees will not be held personally responsible for any financial penalties caused by unavoidable cancellation of, or changes to, airline tickets. f. Stopover costs for personal reasons will be at the Employee's responsibility. Vehicle When travelling by vehicle, a City Vehicle from fleet services is to be utilized. a. When two or more Employees are travelling by automobile to the same destination, coordination of travel plans is encouraged, to use fewer vehicles where possible. b. Travel by automobile is encouraged within the Maritimes where to do so is more economical. 5 City of Saint John Travel Policy The use of a personal vehicle should be the last method chosen and approved by the Department Head. If a personal vehicle is used the employee is responsible for proper insurance and payment of insurance premiums. Any liabilities incurred for claims arising from the use of the personal vehicle is the responsibility of the employee. c. Where use of a personal vehicle by an Employee is approved for transportation instead of air travel, transportation expenses will be reimbursed only up to the level of the most economical airfare. d. The rate for reimbursement amounts for personal vehicle usage should be based on legislated rates by the Canada Revenue Agency. To determine the distance travelled, the employee will calculate based on their place of work to the business destination. Meal and vehicle rates used to calculate travel expenses - Canada.ca Bus and rail travel Public transportation such as bus and rail are encouraged whenever practical and economical. Automobile Rentals a. Where it is economical to do so, and prior approval of the Department Head has been given, an Employee may use a rental vehicle. b. An Employee travelling outside New Brunswick by air, or other mode, and requiring the use of a vehicle at his/her destination, shall arrange the rental in advance. Employees are encouraged to procure the most cost-efficient rental. c. Employees shall be responsible for any additional cost in up-sizing. d. Reimbursement for Automobile Rentals will include, in addition to the daily rental charge, the kilometric and/or gasoline charges, where applicable. The City of Saint John provides the necessary and appropriate insurance coverage for rental vehicles used by City Employees for business travel. e. Detailed receipts shall support all charges claimed. Transportation Between Local Airport and Residence or Office The Employees will exercise own judgement, depending on circumstances, on how to travel to and from the local airport. Where a choice is available, choose the most economical method. Ensure a receipt is obtained to support costs for reimbursement. Ground Transportation at Destination a. Ground transportation (airport limousine service, airport shuttle bus, etc.), may be used where deemed appropriate/necessary. Receipts shall support all costs. 6 City of Saint John Travel Policy b. Taxis and or Rideshare (Uber, Lyft, Gett etc.) may be used where other less expensive modes of transportation are not available. Receipts shall support all taxi costs incurred from hotel to various business points. c. Subway and/or local transit service may be used where available. Receipts shall support all costs. Changes To Planned Travel Itinerary Unless extenuating circumstances occur, additional expenses incurred for failure to meet itinerary schedules shall be the responsibility of the Employee. 4.6 Meals Eligibility for meals is based on travel times as described within the meal allowance chart. Reimbursement or allowance will not be made where meals are included as part of registration fees for conferences, seminars, training, etc. There are 3 methods of obtaining meals as follows: (1) Meal Allowance a. Employees will be extended a daily meal allowance for meals while travelling on City business. b. The meal allowance will be submitted to accounts payable by way of the travel form with appropriate approvals. Meal allowance is paid as follows: Allowance rates are subject to change upon changes in legislated rates by the Canada Revenue Agency. Breakfast allowance may not be claimed if an Employee Breakfast $15 departs after 8:00 a.m., Lunch cannot be claimed if you return to the office. You Lunch $20 can claim lunch if you are out of City limits during the time of your lunch break. Dinner allowance may not be claimed if an Employee Dinner $30 returns home prior to 6:00 p.m. 7 City of Saint John Travel Policy (2) Corporate Credit Card Employees should use the corporate credit card wherever possible to purchase a meal. Meals are eligible for purchase within reasonable amounts, similar to the meal allowance provided. The purchase will go through the corporate credit card process by submitting an expense report with all the required backup which would include: a. Detailed Receipt b. Date c. Name of establishment d. Identification of all guests/attendees e. Nature of business involved (3) Personal payment method When a corporate credit card cannot be used employees may purchase meals using their personal purchasing method. In order to be reimbursed for the meals purchased, they must complete a travel form with appropriate approvals and submit to accounts payable for processing. The required backup is the same as the corporate credit card. Room Service Room service meal costs shall adhere to the above-noted meal allowance. Exceptions may be made, at the discretion of the Department Head or designate, for such reasons as the Employee's safety, extended working hours, etc. Meals En-route Meal costs incurred en-route to a destination shall be considered a legitimate cost, unless included in travel fare. Exceptions a. In cases where an Employee may have certain dietary requirements due to a medical condition, it is understood, strict adherence to this Policy may not be possible. Approval will be at the discretion of the Department Head, in such cases. b. For meal and incidental expenses involving travel outside Canada, an Employee may be reimbursed for costs of meals and incidental expenses to the extent the Department Head considers reasonable under the circumstances. 8 City of Saint John Travel Policy 4.7 Accommodations a. Employees shall attempt to secure the best value in accommodation. b. Employees are encouraged to ask for government rates at hotels. c. Employees must book standard accommodation when available, including when attending a seminar/convention/trade show/training session, etc., in the same hotel. Employees should book as early as possible to ensure the availability of the lower priced rooms. d. Accommodation selection should be the nearest to the area of business related to the trip, and at the most reasonable cost. e. Employees shall be familiar with the cancellation policy of the accommodation booked, prior to making reservations; in the case of "no show", the Employee will be responsible for the charges. Private Accommodation Employees travelling on approved City business, who opt to use private accommodation, will be provided with a $25 stipend per night. No receipts are required. 4.8 Non-reimbursable Travel Expenses Although not an all-inclusive list, the following expenses are not reimbursable: a. Babysitting Costs b. Personal Entertainment Costs C. Haircut Costs d. Traffic Fines e. Kennel Fees for Pets f. Airline Club Dues g. Alcohol 4.9 Miscellaneous Guest Accompanying Employee on Business Trip At the employee's discretion, they may be accompanied on a business trip by a guest. All additional expenses including transportation costs, meals, entertainment and hotel (if an additional charge is levied for the extra person) are the responsibility of the employee. 9 City of Saint John Travel Policy Passports The cost for passports required for approved business travel out-of-country will be borne by the City. Laundry/Dry-Cleaning For trips of one or more nights, the City will reimburse the Employee a maximum of $5.00 per day for laundry, dry-cleaning and pressing services. Receipts shall be provided. Telephone Calls An Employee on travel status will be reimbursed the costs incurred for necessary local and long- distance business telephone calls. Travel Insurance For details on travel coverage, consult the City's Employee Health Care Benefits Plan. The City will not pay any additional travel insurance costs when not required as a condition of travel. Tolls If the employee is required to pay tolls on the trip, reimbursement can be provided if a detailed receipt is provided or proof of travel through a toll (description of travel location). Extraordinary Expenses Expenditures necessarily incurred on City business which are not covered by this Policy, or which may be in excess of the amounts available under this Policy, shall be accounted for with the Employee's claim, accompanied by receipts and details of the circumstances. Such claim will be paid only if the Chief Administrative Officer or designate is satisfied that the expenses were reasonable and justifiable. The Department Head may authorize payment of necessary expenses incurred by an Employee because of an illness or accident that occurred while the Employee travelling on City business. Such expenses shall be paid only if the Chief Administrative Officer or designate is satisfied the expenses were additional to those which the Employee might have incurred had he/she not been out of town on City business, and which are not otherwise recoverable under an insurance policy, the Workers' Compensation Act, the Medical Services Payment Act, or a private health plan to which the Employee belongs. Tipping guide Appropriate tips are allowable. This amount will vary with circumstances, the service required and the service rendered. Both over-tipping and under-tipping are of questionable value. a. Taxi Drivers (including taxi fare) 10% - 15% of cost of fare. b. Ride Share (Uber, Lyft, Gett, Etc.) 10% - 15% of cost of fare. c. Waiters (including meal cost) 12% - 20% of cost of the meal. d. Bell Hops: About 50 cents per bag depending on size, weight, distance, etc. Usual 10 City of Saint John Travel Policy minimum $1.00. At some depots, a regular charge establishes a minimum. e. Laundry or Valet pick-up or delivery: $1.00 f. Hotel Cleaning Staff: $1.00 a day for good service g. Room Service/Housekeeping deliveries: $1.00 per delivery or pick-up h. Parking Attendant: approximately $2.00 for car delivery 4.10 Council Members All travel required for City Business or training purposes must be approved in advance. Prior to the start of the fiscal year, every reasonable effort will be made to provide within Common Council's operating budget a reasonable estimate of the level of travel expenditures necessary for elected officials to carry out their responsibilities. Once the Annual Operating Budget has been approved by Common Council, the approval required to incur business expenses shall be as follows; a. All travel within the approved Annual Operating Budget shall have approval by the Mayor. b. All travel which is not part of the approved Annual Operating Budget shall be authorized by resolution of Common Council. c. All travel should be in accordance with the City of Saint John Travel Policy, with exception to areas noted below. d. All requests for reimbursement for travel will be submitted to the Finance department and will be reviewed for compliance to the policy and approved by the Chief Financial Officer. All council members will receive a corporate credit card that will be held in the Common Clerk's office. The corporate credit card will be used for travel purposes only and is required to be brought back to the Common Clerk's office along with all the detailed receipts for transactions made on the corporate credit card. Council Members do not receive a daily meal allowance; Council Members are expected to submit receipts for meals at reasonable amounts which are similar to the meal allowance provided to Employees. 11 City of Saint John Travel Policy 5. ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITES 5.1 Common Council shall 5.1.1 Approve the Travel Policy; 5.1.2 Familiarize themselves with the Policy. 5.2 Finance Committee shall: 5.2.1 Recommend the Travel Policy to Common Council for approval; 5.2.2 Review any changes to the Travel Policy in the future. 5.3 Chief Financial Officer: 5.3.1 Recommend any changes to the Travel policy in the future. 5.4 Employees 5.4.1 Comply with the Travel policy; 5.4.2 Completing expense reimbursements within 14 days of return and with sufficient documentation, leveraging the most optimal value for the City. 5.5 Department Heads and Delegates 5.5.1 Ensure expense claims are consistent with this policy; 5.5.2 Expense claims are verified and approved before reimbursement with appropriate documentation; 5.5.3 All expenses have appropriate justification and are incurred while conducting government business or training. 12 City of Saint John Travel Policy 6. TRAVEL PREAPPROVAL FORM Travel Request Form CITY OF SAINT JOHN TRAVEL PREAPPROVAL form This form is to be used in advance of travel to obtain approval based on the Travel Policy, the form is to be included with travel expense form for reimbursement. Date: Name of Traveler: Trip Information: Destination of Trip: Leave Saint John: Date of proposed trip: Return to Saint John: Instructions: 1)Per the Travel Policy, employees shall request travel approval a minimum of seven working days in advance. 2)Travel advances must be requested only for pre-approved official municipal travel where expenses (such as per diems, lodging, or registration etc.) are not directly billed or paid via a corporate/travel card. 3)The advance amount will be calculated based on the approved per diem rates and estimated out-of- pocket costs for the duration of the trip. Common Council Order (Where applicable) __________________________________________ Estimate of Expenses Instructions: An account of expenses necessarily incurred in the course of duty is to be submitted through the Travel Reimbursement Form within 14 days of your return to Saint John. DATE PARTICULARS AMOUNT Fare or Car Kilometers (include $ locations) Accommodation $ Meals $ Other expenses to be specified $ TOTAL Estimated Expenses $ 13 City of Saint John Travel Policy Travel Advance Request PARTICULARS AMOUNT Fare or Car Kilometers (include $ locations) Accommodation $ Meals $ Other expenses to be specified $ $ TOTAL Estimated Expenses Employee Name & Position: Signature: Date: Approved By: Employee Name & Position: Signature: Date: Authorized By: Employee Name & Position: Signature: Date: 14 City of Saint John Travel Policy 7. TRAVEL EXPENSES REIMBURSEMENT FORM Travel Expense Reimbursement Form CITY OF SAINT JOHN travel EXPENSE reimbursement form Expense Report Instructions: 1)An account of expenses necessarily incurred in the course of duty is to be given below within 14 days of your return to Saint John. A form is required for advances even if no money is owed or due to validate the advance. 2)Itemized original receipts must be attached for all expenses. A standard credit card or debit card signature items purchased, and total tax paid (HST). For digital purchases, the official PDF invoice/receipt must be printed or digitally attached. Missing receipts can only be self-certified for small incidental expenses under $25.00 CAD. Any missing receipt over $25.00 will not be reimbursed. 3)If expenses were paid in a foreign currency (e.g., USD), they must be converted to Canadian Dollars (CAD) before being written on this form. Employees must use the actual transaction rate shown on their personal credit card statement or bank receipt. If paid in cash, use the official Bank of Canada daily average exchange rate for the date of the purchase. 4)If the preapproved advanced amount exceeds actual expenses, the employee must remit the difference to the City alongside the final expense claim. DATE PARTICULARS AMOUNT (in CAD) $ Mileage (include locations and kilometers) $ Fare receipts attached Accommodation receipts $ attached $ Meals receipts attached $ Other expenses to be specified $ TOTAL Expenses 15 City of Saint John Travel Policy DEDUCT Advance Given - $ BALANCE Reimbursed / Refunded DAILY EXPENSES (ATTACH ORIGINAL RECEIPTS) NUMBER OF DAYS SPENT ON CITY BUSINESS (INCLUDING TRAVEL DAYS) _______________ DATE: ______________ EXPENSE CATEROGY FOREIGN CURRANCY EXCHANGE RATE TOTAL CAD MILAGE: LOCAITON: KILOMETERS: FARE: AIR, TRAIN, RENTAL ACCOMODATION BREAKFAST LUNCH DINNER TOTAL MEALS TIPS PORTERS/BELLMEN INCIDENTAL 16 City of Saint John Travel Policy TOTAL This Date: TOTAL of all Daily Expenses $ ___________________ EXPLANATION (If needed): ___________________________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________________________ I certify that all expenses claimed are accurate and business-related. For any checked items where an original receipt was lost or unavailable, I certify that the funds were spent strictly for business travel, and I will not claim them elsewhere. Employee Name & Designation: ____________________ Signature: _____________________ Date:_____________________ Approved By: Employee Name & Designation: ____________________ Signature: _____________________ Date:_____________________ 17 FINANCE COMMITTEEREPORT Report DateSeptember 15, 2026 Meeting DateSeptember 29, 2026 Service AreaFinance and Strategic Investments Chair Sullivan and Members ofFinance Committee SUBJECT:City of Saint John Reserve Balance OPEN OR CLOSEDSESSION This matter is to be discussed in FinanceCommittee Open Session. AUTHORIZATION Primary AuthorDirectorExecutive LeadCAO Craig LavigneCraig LavigneKevin FudgeIan Fogan RECOMMENDATION The Finance Committee receive and file this report. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The City of Saint John reported as part of the 2025 Audited Financial Statements on Note 23, Statement of Reserves,an overall reserve balance of $73,190,140. The reserve balances are made up of the General Operating Reserve, General Capital Reserve, Utility Operating Reserve and Utility Capital Reserve. reserves are guided by the Local Governance Act and FAS- 003 Operating and Capital Reserve Policy. This report will provide a detailed breakdown on each balance showing the various commitments in each reserve, the intendeduse, internal borrowing and risk mitigation. PREVIOUS RESOLUTION(S) M&C 2017-311 FAS-003 Operating and Capital Reserves Policy STRATEGIC ALIGNMENT The report aligns with Councils priority, Perform by ensuring continued financial health, transparency and accountability. REPORT The City of Saint John reported as part of the 2025 Audited Financial Statements on Note 23, Statement of Reserves, an overall reserve balance of $73,190,140. The reserve balances are made up of the General Operating Reserve, General Capital Reserve, Utility Operating Reserve - 003 Operating and Capital Reserve Policy. Under the Local Governance Act, municipalities may by resolution, establish, manage and contributeto a General and Utility operating reserveup to a maximum of five percent of total expendituresfor the prior year. There areno restrictions onthe balance held in the General and Utility Capital Reserves. Mostreserves are funds set aside (designated) for a future purpose. The amount held in reserves shall be determined, on a case-by-casebasis, and aligned with theLong- TermPlan, Asset Management Plan and Debt Managementplan as stated in the Operating and Capital Reserve Policy, section 5.1. Appendix A included in the report isa breakdown of each reserve balance, and Statement of Reserveas reported in the Cityof the Saint John, Audit Financials Statement, December 31, 2025. INPUT FROM OTHER SERVICE AREAS AND STAKEHOLDERS Name of Service Area/StakeholderName of Staff Person ATTACHMENT(S) Appendix A Reserve Details by Fund Appendix B FAS-003 Operating and Capital Reserve Policy r y t s g Appendix A - Reserve Details 9,000,000.00 $ Future snow event$ Funding for Various Projects - Temp Building Inspectors/Bylaw Enforcement Office$ Funding for Benefit Fluctions$ Funding Pilot Program 26/27$ Funding Pilot Program 26/27$ Funding Committed Development Incentives$ Funding for Affordable Housin$ Funding for Various Growth Initaitive$ Funding for unforseen circumstances$ $ Funding for Replacement of Vehicle and Equipmen$ Funding for Replacement of IT Equipment and Self Insurance for Cyber Securit$ Funding for Captial Budget Overages due to Inflation - to be expended in 2026$ Funding for Multiplex $ Funding for new ERP Project$ Internal borrowing for Capital Projects$ Funding for Strategic Land Purchases$ Funding for Fallsview Drive Harbour Passage Extension - to be expended in 2026/27$ Funding for Capital Works at City Market - to be expended in 2026$ Funding for Recreation Investment - to be expended in 2027$ Funding for a Future Roundabout - Currently Loch Lomond Arterial $ Funding to replace float docks - to be expended in 2026$ Funding to Replace Ladder Truck - to be expended in 2027/28$ Funding for unforseen circumstances y General Operating ReserveSnow Removal2,000,000.00Community Reserve552,741.19Worksafe NB/Benefit Fluctuation911,709.00Community Security Program1,500,000.00Community Resilance Fund500,000.00Developmen t Incentive Reserves1,194,588.69Affordable Housing300,000.00Growth Reserve Initiatives317,510.15Risk Mitigation Reserve1,792,982.19General Operating Reserves, Dec 31, 20259,069,531.22General Capital ReservesFleet Reserves10,403,761.00IT and Insurance Reserves3,064,547.002023 Capital Budget inflation 478,961.00Multiplex Recreation FacilitERP Funding1,335,000.00Internal Debentures4,800,00 0.00Strategic Land Reserves575,009.58Fallsview Drive Harbour Passage1,800,000.00City Market Strat Plan500,000.00Recreation Investment500,000.00Future Roundabout1,000,000.00Market Slip - Floating Docks210,000.00Fire Ladder Truck1,000,000.00Risk Mitigation Reserve1,895,443.42General Capital Reserve Balance Dec 31 202536,562,722.00 s t s s Appendix A - Reseve Details $ Funding For Potable Asset Replacement $ Funding for unforseen circumstance$ To fund 4-6 months revenue of Industrial Customer$ $ Funding for Vehicle and Equipment Replacement$ Funding for Industrial Asset Replacemen$ Funding for Lancaster Lagoon - to be expended 2026$ Internal borrowing for Capital Project$ Utility Fund Operating ReservesPotable Operating Reserves105,849.00Industrial Rate Stabilization 2,524,419.00Total Utility Operating Reserves, Dec 31, 20252,630,268.00Utility Fund Capital ReservesFleet Reserves4,254,437.00Industrial Capital 5,793,297.00Potable Capital12,634,886.00Lancaster Lagooon1,720,000.00Internal Debenture525,000.00Total Utility Fund Capital Reserves, Dec 31, 202524,927,620.00 Appendix A - Reserve Details Funding for unforseen circumstancesFunding for Recreation Investment - to be expended in 2027Funding for unforseen circumstances ee Risk Mitigation ResRisk Mitigation Res FINANCE COMMITTEEREPORT Report DateSeptember 03, 2026 Meeting DateSeptember 29, 2026 Service AreaFinance and Strategic Investments Chair Sullivan and Members ofFinance Committee SUBJECT:2027 Heritage Grant Program Funding Increase OPEN OR CLOSED SESSION This matter is to be discussed in Finance Committee OpenSession. AUTHORIZATION Primary AuthorDirectorExecutive LeadCAO Rodrigo Mendes Pankaj NalavdeAmy PoffenrothIan Fogan Campos RECOMMENDATION Staff recommend that Finance Committee refer the following two Heritage Grant requests to the 2027 Budget process: EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Staff recommend increasing the 2027Heritage Grant Program allocation from $80,000 to $110,000. The Heritage Development Board has requested an increase to $150,000 (Attachment A). The allocation has remained at $80,000 for a number of years.Approximately$107,000 is now needed simplyto maintain its 2015purchasing power, demand has fully committedthe budget in 2024, 2025 and 2026, and heritage materials and specialized trades have become significantly more expensive. have funded all approved and waitlisted 2026 applications ($109,278). The $150,000 option would provide further capacity to address rising heritage labour costs and growing demand, and to mark the 150th anniversary of the Great Fire of Saint John in 2027. PREVIOUS RESOLUTION(S) October 31, 2023 -Growth Committee Resolution: $30,000 top-up from Unspecified Grants February1, 2012 Council Resolution: Heritage Grant allocation reducedfrom $200,000 to $90,000 STRATEGIC ALIGNMENT Common Council adopted a set of Priorities for 2021- priorities included key infrastructure investments and community vibrancy through beautification and Heritage. REPORTIncluding Any Service and Financial Outcomes HISTORICAL CONTEXT The Heritage Program is a long-standing grant program that assists property owners in undertaking maintenance and conservation work on propertieslocated Conservation Areas. These funds help ensure the maintenance and enhancement of iconic streetscapes and our rich cultural heritage, which are enjoyed by residents and visitors. Demand has regularly exceeded the $80,000 allocation. Council allocated an additional $25,000 in 2018, and the Growth Committee provided a $30,000 top-up from Unspecified Grants in 2023 (Attachment B). From 2020 to 2022, material and skilled-labour shortages, compounded by COVID-19 restrictions, prevented many projects from starting or meeting program deadlines (Attachment B). ANALYSIS programs, Planning staff assessed the Heritage Grant Program against current demand, rising heritage rehabilitation costs, and comparable programs in other municipalities. Reliance on one-time top-ups when demand exceedsthe $80,000 budgetcreates uncertainty for staffand applicants. Alarger base allocation would make the program more predictableand reducethe need for supplemental requests. Despite labour shortages and rising costs, demand remainshigh. The full $80,000 was used in both 2024 and 2025, leaving eligible waitlisted projects unfunded. As of September 3,2026, 27 applications representing $434,047.23 in work have been received. Fourteen have been conditionally approved, fully committing the $80,000 budget, and 13 are waitlisted. The application deadline is November 30, 2026. The 2026status is summarizedbelow(details inAttachment D): APPLICATIONSGrant Amount Paid Out 2applications$8,139.12 Outstanding 12applications$71,860.88 2026 Waitlisted 13applications$29,278.27 The $80,000 allocation has also lost significant purchasing power. inflation calculator, $80,000 in 2015 equals $106,771 in 2026, an increase of approximately 33.5% ($26,771) simply to maintain existing purchasing power. Staff therefore consider $110,000 a reasonable, inflation-adjusted minimum. This amount would also have funded all approved and waitlisted 2026 applications ($109,278) as of September 3. General inflation does not fully capture heritage rehabilitation costs. Historic buildings require specialized materials, trades and conservation techniques whose costs do not necessarily follow Preliminary information gathered by staff (Attachment E) indicates increases for heritage doors and windows of approximately 15% in materials, 20% in shipping and 6% in overhead, and approximately 2530% for masonry work between 2021 and 2026, based on quotations and invoices. Skilled labour shortages appear to be a significant contributing factor. Staff Charlottetown (Attachment E). Saint John manages a relatively large heritage inventory (543 designated properties) with a comparatively modest funding envelope. Moncton provides grants of up to 50% of eligible costs and has increased its allocation from $65,000 to $85,000 in recent ogram more in line with the scale of its heritage resources and with comparable municipalities. The program also leverages significantprivate investment.Staff calculate return on investment (ROI) asthe total value ofapproved projects (based on applicant quotes and invoices)divided by the of grant funding was associated with approximately $7.93 in private investment in heritage properties (Attachment C). This indicatesleverage rather than suggesting grant funding alone causedthe work;some owners may have proceeded regardless,butgrant availability caninfluence the timingandextent of conservation work. Heritage rehabilitationalso supportstourism, neighbourhood vibrancy and cultural identity. Whilethese benefits are difficult toquantify, historic buildings are a finite asset:once historic materials and character are lost, they are difficult and costly to replace. th Theincrease is also timely:2027 marks the 150anniversary of the Great Fire of Saint John, which destroyed approximately 1,600 buildings and reshaped the Citys built environment. Separately, staff will bring the Heritage Grant Program Policy (Attachment F) to the Heritage Development Board for review, including options to prioritize first-time applicants, improve the intake process and distribute funding more broadly across heritage properties. INPUT FROM OTHER SERVICE AREAS AND STAKEHOLDERS Name of Service Area/StakeholderName of Staff Person ATTACHMENT(S) Attachment A: Year2025No of Projects:22 Estimated Value$573,854.63Conditionally Approved $80,435.47 Submission DateAddressNamePayout 1/29/202520-22 Canterbury StWilliam Rector$5,027.50 2/3/202522 King StreetPierre Castonguay$750.00 2/5/202589-91 Cantebury StKimberly Harrity (HISTORICA)$1,500.00 2/6/2024147-149 Orange Street Adam Pottle$695.22 2/10/2024118 Orange StreetAndrew Kane$4,802.00 2/21/2025197 Germain StreetKimberly Harrity (HISTORICA)$4,338.45 2/21/202589-91 princess StreetKimberly Harrity (HISTORICA)$2,462.76 2/21/202547 Duke StreetKimberly Harrity (HISTORICA)$7,500.00 2/21/202589-91 Canterbury StreetKimberly Harrity (HISTORICA)$750.00 2/21/202521-23 Horsfield StreetKimberly Harrity (HISTORICA)$7,500.00 2/21/202599 Germain StreetKimberly Harrity (HISTORICA)$7,500.00 2/21/202519 Horsfield StreetKimberly Harrity (HISTORICA)$3,450.00 2/21/202517 Horsfield StreetKimberly Harrity (HISTORICA)$7,500.00 2/21/2025109 Germain StreetKimberly Harrity (HISTORICA)$7,500.00 2/21/2025206 Germain StreetKimberly Harrity (HISTORICA)$382.50 3/18/2025216 Germain StreetJohn Mee$1,944.00 4/9/2025160 Sydney StreetMallory & Osman Hamid $1,080.00 5/27/2025254 Prince William StreetJasmine Chandra$5,068.94 6/10/2025127 Douglas AvenueSarah Airey$750.00 6/24/2025118 Orange StreetAndrew Kane$1,684.10 22/7/202520 Horsfield StreetDavid Collins$750.00 30/07/202538-42 Water StreetMatthew Brown$7,064.53 BudgetTotal Payout $80,000.00$80,000.00 Waitlisted applications:12 Waitlisted Applications not disbursed: 1 Withdrawn applications: 6ROI (estimated project value/total payout)Utilization Non-eligible application: 1 7.17100% Year2024No of Projects:31 Estimated Value$566,765.05Conditionally Approved $106,143.20 Submission DateAddressNamePayout 1/3/202420-22 Canterbury StWilliam Rector$5,281.50 2/7/2024109 Germain StHistorica Developments$1,500.00 2/7/202419 Horsfield StHistorica Developments$1,500.00 2/7/202421-23 Horsfield StHistorica Developments$1,445.00 2/7/202491 Prince William StHistorica Developments$6,048.00 2/7/202417 Horsfield StHistorica Developments$7,500.00 2/7/202489-91 Princess StHistorica Developments$1,260.00 2/7/202435-37 Harding StHistorica Developments$750.00 2/7/202455 Canterbury StHistorica Developments$6,498.00 2/14/202421 Queen Square NHistorica Developments$68.75 2/14/202429 Queen Square NHistorica Developments$135.00 3/4/202447 Duke StHistorica Developments$1,500.00 2/14/202478 Sydney StHistorica Developments$750.00 2/14/202489 Canterbury StHistorica Developments$750.00 2/14/202493 Prince William StHistorica Developments$750.00 3/1/2024160 Prince William StHistorica Developments$1,500.00 3/1/2024197 Germain StreetHistorica Developments$1,500.00 3/12/2024211 Germain StreetGeorge / Eileen Thornhill$750.00 3/18/2024179 Germain StreetJulien Ouimet$1,500.00 4/29/2024290 Crown StreetJanet Vijaya Light Thompson$1,488.00 4/30/202467-69 Orange StreetJohn Neville$750.00 5/8/2024120 Prince William StreetPeter Asimakos$750.00 5/21/2024115 Charlotte StreetTrinity Anglican Church$7,500.00 5/21/2024191-193 Douglas AvenueTong Gao$1,500.00 5/24/2024145 GermainChipman Hill Suites$7,500.00 6/24/202424 Queen StreetMichael Wallace$491.61 6/25/202441 Duke StreetBarkley Bauer$3,398.63 6/25/202443 Duke StreetBarkley Bauer$3,385.85 6/25/2024248 Douglas AvenueCornel Ceapa$7,500.00 6/28/2024127 Douglas AvenueGreg Paterson$2,925.00 7/3/2024115-117 Germain StreetTanya Chapman$1,824.66 BudgetTotal Payout $80,000.00$80,000.00 Waitlisted applications:10 Waitlisted Applications not disbursed: 5 Withdrawn applications: 2ROI (estimated project value/total payout)Utilization Non-eligible application: 2 7.08100% Year2023No of Projects:26 Estimated Value$616,601.46Conditionally Approved $111,772.52 Submission DateAddressNamePayout 1/3/202320-22 Canterbury StWilliam Rector$5,265.66 1/16/20238 pagan placePhil Ouellette$1,160.00 1/16/20238 pagan placePhil Ouellette$2,226.64 1/24/202354 Orange StRobert Manning$6,821.16 2/14/2023115 Charlotte StTrinity Church$7,500.00 2/27/2023153 Canterbury StChris Webb$7,500.00 3/7/2023143 Charlotte StJason Jenkins$5,664.80 3/13/2023264 Prince WilliamAshley Nowlan$875.00 3/29/2023166-168 Prince WilliamRehabitat Inc.$7,500.00 4/11/2023228 Germain StChuck Teed$7,500.00 4/20/202378 Sydney StreetHISTORICA SIX LTD. PARTNERSHIP$530.00 4/21/2023151 King Street East HISTORICA SIX LTD. PARTNERSHIP $118.75 4/24/202336 Water StTim Webber$425.00 4/25/2023154 Germain StTrevor Gaal$7,000.00 4/27/2023264 Prince WilliamAshley Nowlan$2,383.80 5/1/202332 Queen Sq SAnn Barrett$450.00 5/8/202338-42 Water StreetBrackish Design Studio$1,280.00 5/8/2023143 Charlotte StKeirsteads Flower and Gift Shop$431.25 5/10/2023118 Wentworth StreetDerek Mullin$7,500.00 6/13/202335-37 Harding StreetHISTORICA PROPERTIES INC.$750.00 6/13/202382 King StHISTORICA PROPERTIES INC.$7,380.00 6/13/202389 Canterbury StHISTORICA PROPERTIES INC.$750.00 6/13/2023265-269 Charlotte StHISTORICA PROPERTIES INC.$6,750.00 7/24/202317 Horsfield StHISTORICA PROPERTIES INC.$1,500.00 4/26/202391 Prince William StHISTORICA PROPERTIES INC.$6,048.00 10/23/2023240 Prince William StTong Gao$1,500.00 Budget**Total Payout $110,000.00$96,810.06 **80,000+Council Top-Up -$30,000, November 15 Waitlisted applications:12 Waitlisted Applications not disbursed:6 Withdrawn applications: 12ROI (estimated project value/total payout)Utilization Non-eligible application: 1 6.3788% Year2022No of Projects:20 Estimated Value$516,484.63Conditionally Approved $91,191.40 Submission DateAddressNamePayout 1/13/20228 Pagan PlaceClaire Ryan$7,500.00 1/13/20228 Pagan PlaceClaire Ryan$2,020.86 1/21/202289-91 Princess StHistorica Properties Inc$1,451.25 1/21/202217 Queen Square NorthHistorica Six $620.87 1/21/202219-21 Queen Square NorthHistorica Six$484.00 1/21/202299 Germain StHistorica Quathro LP$5,771.50 1/21/202278-82 King StHistorica Properties Inc$7,380.00 3/9/20229 Pagan PlaceChris Whaites$650.00 6/2/2022160 Orange StGordon Anderson$2,689.00 6/2/2022160 Orange StGordon Anderson 2/17/2022240 Prince William StTong Gao$7,500.00 13-Ap147-149 Orange StAdam Pottle$750.00 6/2/202216 Orange StreetCarla and Patrick Bell$750.00 6/2/202216 Orange StreetCarla and Patrick Bell$2,507.30 7/22/202280 Sydney StBarbara Kliffer$1,250.00 8/18/2021269 Charlotte StHistorica Properties Inc$7,500.00 8/3/202287-91 Germain StDerek Billingsley$5,000.00 8/23/2022162 Sydney StScott Mitchell$4,521.60 8/23/2022162 Sydney StScott Mitchell$750.00 8/26/2022115 Charlotte StTrinity Anglican Church$7,500.00 BudgetTotal Payout $80,000.00$66,596.38 Waitlisted applications:2 Waitlisted Applications not disbursed:1 Withdrawn applications: 7ROI (estimated project value/total payout)Utilization Non-eligible application: 0$7.7683% Year2021No of Projects:14 Estimated Value$659,338.19Conditionally Approved $97,311.50 Submission DateAddressNamePayout 3/4/202138 Duke StreetJohn Logan$4,170.23 3/15/202156 Canterbury StreetKurt Peacock$2,015.07 3/19/2021147 Germain StreetWilliam Ryan$3,831.75 3/25/202180 Sydney StreetBarb Kliffer$2,050.00 4/7/202177 Orange StreetRachel Long$2,475.00 4/8/202118 Canterbury StreetWilliam Rector$7,500.00 4/8/202120-22 Canterbury StreetWilliam Rector$7,500.00 4/9/202116 Queen StreetColin Waldschutz$1,102.00 4/12/202161 Queen StreetNick Fanelli$4,301.36 4/27/2021100-102 Princess StreetBrent McGovern$3,101.25 4/27/2021104-106 Princess StreetBrent McGovern$2,351.25 5/4/2021115 Charlotte StreetTrinity Church$7,500.00 5/12/202124 Horsfield StreetGenevieve Reissig$3,336.00 5/28/202129 Horsfield StreetWilliam Ryan$3,199.10 BudgetTotal Payout $80,000.00$54,433.01 Waitlisted applications:6 Waitlisted Applications not disbursed:5 Withdrawn applications: 4ROI (estimated project value/total payout)Utilization Non-eligible application: 0$12.1168% Year2020No of Projects:17 Estimated Value$208,032.73Conditionally Approved $76,303.59 Submission DateAddressNamePayout 1/15/2020127 King Street EastDr. Greg Paterson$900.00 1/15/2020127 King Street EastDr. Greg Paterson$1,500.00 3/17/2020297 Douglas AvenueShimbur Kaur$1,375.00 3/17/20208 Queen Square SouthPat Desmond$2,393.50 3/17/202092-96 Princess StreetJohn Desmond$7,500.00 3/17/202092-96 PrincessStreetJohn Desmond$750.00 186 Germain StreetDave Dysart$6,373.76 54 Orange StreetBob Manning$5,938.83 8 Queen StreetCarolyn Weldon$750.00 79-81 Duke StreetKennedy Coleman-Eustace$2,700.00 20-22 Canterbury StreetDr. William Rector$7,500.00 18 Canterbury StreetDr. William Rector$7,500.00 18 Canterbury StreetDr. William Rector$2,925.00 77 Orange StreetRachel Long$7,099.12 38 Duke StreetJohn Logan$6,525.00 87 Germain StreetDerek Billingsley$7,500.00 40 Duke StreetLinda O'Brien$6,547.50 BudgetTotal Payout $83,000.00$75,777.71 Waitlisted applications:1 Waitlisted Applications not disbursed:1 Withdrawn applications: 1ROI (estimated project value/total payout)Utilization Non-eligible application: 0$2.7591% Year2019No of Projects:47 Estimated Value$1,264,082.32Conditionally Approved $166,943.22 Submission DateAddressNamePayout 2/1/20127-9 Harding StreetIsabelle Cormier$4,706.78 1/1/200212 King Square South Imperial Theatre $7,500.00 1/1/200277 Orange StreetRachel Long$900.00 3/1/2011149-157 Charlotte StreetShawn Cormier$1,000.00 3/1/2011149-157 Charlotte StreetShawn Cormier$2,035.30 3/1/2011127-129 King Street EastGreg Paterson$973.37 3/1/201838 Duke StreetJohn Logan$800.00 3/1/201838 Duke StreetJohn Logan$7,500.00 4/1/20041 Princess StreetDenise Dow$1,125.00 4/1/200562 Water StreetJennifer Irving$1,500.00 4/1/200562 Water StreetJennifer Irving$5,928.75 4/1/2005147 Orange StreetAdam Pottle$750.00 4/1/2025114 Orange StreetAndrew Chase$2,309.84 5/1/2010228 Germain StreetMichael Wilcott -InterAction$7,380.00 5/1/201316 Queen Square SouthHilary Ladd$7,500.00 6/1/2005147 Orange StreetAdam Pottle$1,985.00 7/1/200880 Sydney StreetBarbara Kliffer$5,575.00 7/1/2008156 Sydney StreetLeslie Jeffrey$1,935.00 7/1/200920-22 Canterbury StreetDr. William Rector$7,500.00 7/1/2009122-124 Prince William StreetDr. Edward Reardon$4,770.00 8/1/2013115 Charlotte StreetPeter Josselyn$7,500.00 17 Pagan PlaceJanet Scott$760.50 8/1/2015228 Germain StreetMichael Wilcott -InterAction$4,504.00 9/1/201127 Queen StreetRodney MacDonald$7,500.00 122-124 Prince William StreetDr. Edward Reardon$1,000.00 79-81 Duke StreetKennedy Coleman$6,435.00 79-81 Duke StreetKennedy Coleman$612.50 71 Orange StreetBrian & Juliana Tibbet$999.00 71 Orange StreetBrian & Juliana Tibbet$1,000.00 179 Germain StreetJulien Ouimet$420.00 193 Princess StreetFt2 Group Inc.$7,500.00 9/24/2019200 Germain StreetDr. Edward Reardon$1,264.50 9/7/20198 Pagan PlacePhil Ouellette$2,975.00 9/7/20198 Pagan PlacePhil Ouellette$2,860.00 87 Germain StreetDerek Billingsley$1,026.18 88 Germain StreetDerek Billingsley$4,171.05 15 Orange StreetRyan Gosson$1,150.00 148 Sydney StreetJohn Paul Westin$7,500.00 148 Sydney StreetJohn Paul Westin$1,880.87 212 Germain StreetJon O'Kane$1,888.31 28-38 King StreetHistorica Properties$3,948.06 93 Prince William SteetHistorica Properties$1,631.25 89 Canterbury StreetHistorica Properties$750.00 89 Princess StreetHistorica Properties$652.95 82 King StreetHistorica Properties$3,537.45 265-271 CharlotteHistorica Properties$796.50 147 Germain StreetBill Ryan$556.52 **BudgetTotal Payout $160,000.00$148,493.68 **Council Top-Up Waitlisted applications:0 Waitlisted Applications not disbursed:0 Withdrawn applications: 7ROI (estimated project value/total payout)Utilization Non-eligible application: 0 8.5193% Year2018No of Projects:29 Estimated Value$381,012.13Conditionally Approved $111,808.82 Submission DateAddressNamePayout 1/1/200392-96 Princess StreetJohn Desmond$1,080.00 1/1/20161 Princess StreetDenise Dow$3,825.00 3/1/2012112 Princess StreetSaint John Theatre Company$7,500.00 3/1/2013118 Wentworth StreetAnne Drouet & Gary Davis$5,442.75 4/1/201812 King StreetElizabeth Cook -Handworks Gallery$702.50 4/1/193032 Queen Square SouthDennis & Ann Barrett$750.00 115 Charlotte StreetTrinity Anglican Church$3,757.38 5/1/201188 OrangeMatt Doherty$1,427.50 5/1/20178 Pagan PlacePhil Ouellette$1,200.00 5/1/201717-19 Pagan PlaceJanet Scott$1,950.00 6/1/2004127 King Street EastGreg Paterson$892.81 6/18/201854 Orange StreetRobert Manning$1,350.00 6/18/201854 Orange StreetRobert Manning$4,065.75 9/18/2018228 Germain StreetMichaelWilcott$7,500.00 6/18/201893 Prince William StreetHistorica Properties$2,029.50 7/1/201187 Germain StreetDerek Billingsley$1,775.25 7/12/201930 Queen StreetCathy O'Brien$750.00 7/13/201840-42 Queen Square SouthLisa McGeachy$7,500.00 7/13/201816 Queen StreetColin Waldschutz$6,948.27 7/16/201889 Canterbury StreetHistorica Properties$572.63 7/30/2018265 Charlotte StreetHistorica Properties$519.75 7/30/2018115 Prince William StreetJeff McAloon$750.00 7/30/201820-22 Canterbury StreetWilliam Rector$7,500.00 7/30/2018201-215 Charlotte StreetKey Industries$10,500.00 7/30/201816 Queen Square SouthHilary Ladd$3,150.00 10/26/20181260 Manawagonish RoadPeter Smit$2,074.24 11/2/201825 Harding StreetAlex and Steve Weaver Crawford$5,057.50 11/26/201836 Queen Square South641460 NB Inc$3,676.05 11/26/201828-38 King StreetHistorica Properties$7,500.00 **BudgetTotal Payout $105,000.00$101,746.88 **Council Top-Up -$25,000, September 9 ($105,000) Waitlisted applications:1 Waitlisted Applications not disbursed:0 Withdrawn applications: 5ROI (estimated project value/total payout)Utilization Non-eligible application: 1 3.7497% Year2017No of Projects:20 Estimated Value$335,108.93Conditionally Approved $73,040.25 Application NumberAddressNamePayout 17-01115 Charlotte StreetChris Waldshutz -Trinity Church$1,884.50 17-02118 Wentworth StreetAnne Drouet$7,182.00 17-0446 Princess StreetLadds Batten$4,190.73 17-0687 Germain StreetDerek Billingsley$4,477.50 17-0798 Prince William StreetLeah Ross$500.75 17-0878 Orange StreetDerek Mullin$4,698.00 17-1015 Horsfield StreetAlex and Steve Weaver Crawford$6,053.77 17-12198 King Street EastGordon Chapman$594.00 17-14168 King Street EastShane & Tara Goguen$7,500.00 17-15166 King Street EastElizabeth Rourke$750.00 17-1640-42 Queen Square SouthLisa McGeachy$7,500.00 17-1789 Princess StreetHistorica Properties$166.85 17-18160 Prince William StreetHistorica Quattro$750.00 17-1930-38 Canterbury StreetHistorica Quattro$2,709.00 17-2093 Prince William StreetHistorica Properties$3,150.00 17-2199 Germain StreetHistorica Quattro$2,385.00 17-2416 Queen StreetColin Waldschutz$7,500.00 17-25124 Prince William StreetRick Watters$435.00 17-2697 Prince William StreetTheresa Jennings$750.00 17-27179 Germain StreetPatrick McCaffrey$750.00 **BudgetTotal Payout $80,000.00$63,927.10 Waitlisted applications:0 Waitlisted Applications not disbursed:0 Withdrawn applications: 7ROI (estimated project value/total payout)Utilization Non-eligible application: 0 5.2480% Year2016No of Projects:27 Estimated Value$1,700,995.42Conditionally Approved $103,426.75 Application NumberAddressNamePayout 16-0187-91 Germain StreetDerek Billingsley " Two Partners Holding Corp"$1,500.00 16-02127 King Street EastGreg Paterson$7,500.00 16-0466 Sydney StreetJim Bezanson$3,551.00 16-05191 Princess StreetJim Bezanson$4,033.25 16-06114-116 Wentworth StreetJim Bezanson$7,500.00 16-08198 King Street EastGordon M Chapman$510.00 16-09122/124 Prince William StreetEdward Reardon/John Lawson$4,036.00 16-1024 KingSquare SouthHeather White Brittain$7,500.00 16-1179-81 Princess St.Constance Richard$2,700.00 16-1278-82 King St.Historica Properties Inc$1,250.00 16-1393-99 Germain, 34-38 GrannanHistorica Quattro Limited Partnership$1,500.00 16-1489-93 Canterbury St.Historica Properties Inc.$7,500.00 16-1645 Canterbury St.Holly & Ken Singh$619.88 16-17118 Wentworth Anne Drovet & Gary Davis$7,500.00 16-1893-99 Germain St.Historica Quattro Limited Partnership$7,500.00 16-191 Princess StreetDenise Dow$2,700.00 16-2040 Grannan LaneJody Kliffer -Five & Dime$157.00 16-22101 Prince William StreetKelly Lawson -Ella$636.00 16-2317 Pagan PlaceJanet Scott$750.00 16-24122 Prince William StreetJudith Makin -TUCK Studio$650.00 16-25142 Prince WilliamTian's Property Investment Company Ltd$1,250.00 16-26142 Prince WilliamTian's Property Investment Company Ltd$7,500.00 16-2795 Prince William StreetLarche SJ -Kristopher Woods$248.75 16-28229 Douglas AvenueRahul Datta$750.00 16-2936 Queen Square SouthDebbi Knopp$750.00 16-3036 Queen Square SouthDebbi Knopp$7,500.00 16-3115 Orange StreetRyan Gosson$4,578.87 **BudgetTotal Payout $92,170.75$92,170.75 ** Estimated. Real amount unknown Waitlistedapplications:0 Waitlisted Applications not disbursed:0 Withdrawn applications: 4ROI (estimated project value/total payout)Utilization Non-eligible application: 0 18.45100% Total investedby applicants$6,822,275.49 Total invested by City$950,170.75 Total Payout$859,955.57 Total number or projects253 Average ROI(total invested by applicants/ total invested by the city)7.93 Average Utilization90% Average Payout Value$3,412.52 Grant Grant Est. Value Conditionally AddressWaitlistDisbursed No.Typeof WorkApproved Window 26-01216 Germain Street$9,580.00$4,311.00 Grant Conservation 26-02115-117 Germain Street$3,000.00$1,500.00 Plan Grant Window 26-0320-22 Canterbury Street$33,195.60$6,639.12 Grant Conservation 26-04146 Germain Street$3,675.00$1,500.00 Plan Grant Conservation 26-05228 Germain Street$24,193.66$7,500.00 Grant Window 26-06146 Germain Street$18,033.12$3,606.62 Grant Conservation 26-0747 Princess Street$14,828.71$3,707.18 Grant Conservation 26-08115 Charlotte Street$126,175.00$7,500.00 Grant Window 26-09115 Charlotte Street$38,020.00$7,500.00 Grant Conservation 26-10197 Germain Street$13,440.00$6,048.00 Grant Conservation 26-11160 Prince William Street$12,240.00$5,508.00 Grant Conservation 26-1289-91 Princess Street$4,910.00$2,209.50 Grant Conservation 26-13109 Germain Stret$16,800.00$7,500.00 Grant Conservation 26-1499 Germain Street$18,248.00$7,500.00 Grant Conservation 26-1517 Horsfield Street$16,440.00$7,398.00 Grant Conservation 26-1619 Horsfield Street$6,800.00$72.58$2,987.42 Grant Conservation 26-1747 Duke Street$3,360.00$1,512.00 Grant Conservation 26-1821-23 Horsfield Street$8,000.00$3,600.00 Grant Conservation 26-1989 Canterbury Street$18,636.00$7,500.00 Grant Maintenance 26-20151-155 King Street East$2,240.00$560.00 Grant Conservation 26-2128 King Street$9,737.00$4,381.65 Grant Conservation 26-2238 Canterbury Street$3,696.00$1,663.20 Grant Window 26-23240 Prince William Street$1,040.00$468.00 Grant Window 26-24118 Orange Street$9,680.00$4,356.00 Grant Maintenance 26-2579-81 Duke Street$5,350.00$750.00 Grant Maintenance 26-26196 King Street East$5,600.00$750.00 Grant Maintenance 26-27159 King Street East$7,129.14$750.00 Grant Total approved:Total Waitlisted: $80,000.00$29,278.27 COMPARATIVE TABLE HERITAGE GRANTS applications Top-ups by Municipal Municipally Start Funding Maximum Annual Municipal have been council/finance Municipalityheritage designated DatePercentagegrantGrant allocationapproved in committee in grant?properties 20252025 FrederictonNoN/AN/AN/AN/AN/AN/A350 (2023) Up to 50% of MonctonYes2011$10,000 $85,000 122025=10,000135 (2024) eligible costs ~1,100 properties in the four Up to 25% of $1500- municipal Heritage St. John'sYes2016$120,000(60,000)132025=60,000 Areas. eligible costs$10000 158 Municipally designated (2023) 30% general - Not Charlottetown Yes200350% for $5,000 Not confirmed14 (2023)350 (2023) confirmed windows/signage No. Last top- up happened Saint John Yes198925%-45%$7,500 $80,000 22543 in 2023 ($30,000) COMPARATIVE TABLE -MATERIALS/LABOUR INCREASES Type of workIncreases post-pandemicMore noticeableSource Increase of 15% -Waiting for local Hardwood/softwood lumber and Heritage wood windowsStatistics Canada manufacturers responsemetals increase: materials 15%, shipping 20%, Metal components, door, sills, overhead 6% . Estimates have hinges, reinforcements, Heritage doorsHatch+Parley increased by 30 to 42% since we hardwood from lumber yard: oak opened in 2023 and maple increase of 25-30%(2021-2026). Comparison of received Masonry workunclear Waiting for manufacturers responsequotes/invoices Heritage Standing Inc. - Construction Inflation 5% -2026Extreme labour shortage supplementalreport 15 Market Square,506 658-2838 Heritage Development Board Saint John, NBheritage @saintjohn.ca Canada E2L 4L1 September 14, 2026 Re: 2027 Heritage Grant Program Funding To The Finance Committee: On behalf of the Heritage Development Board, I am writing to respectfully request that the annual allocation for the 2027 Heritage Grant Program be increased from $80,000 to $150,000. Following a review of the program, current rehabilitation costs, demand,and comparable municipal programs, the Board believes this increase represents a timely and responsible investment in Saint John’s existing building stock, its local economy, and the distinctive historic character that continues to attract residents, businesses, and visitors to the city. The Heritage Grant Program has consistently seenstrong interestfrom heritage property owners and its full allocation wasutilized in both 2024 and 2025. This level of participation demonstrates that the program is valued by the community and remains an important tool for supporting investment in Saint John's heritage buildings. Demand for the program continues to grow. In 2026, the program's entire annual allocation was committed within two months of applications opening, and more than 20 additional projects remain on a waitlist seeking access to funding this year. As a result, the Board and City staff are increasingly challenged to manage demandwhen the number of eligible projects exceeds the funding available. The current allocation canlimit both the numberof projects that can be supported and the level of assistance that can be provided to individual applicants.This is not an indication of a lack of interest or project readiness. Rather, it reflects a strong and ongoing willingness among property owners to invest in the conservation and maintenance of their heritage properties when assistance is available. Saint John is steward to an unusually large heritage inventory relative to the size of the program. The city has 543 heritage properties across 10 Heritage Conservation Areas, yet the current $80,000 allocation equates to approximately $147 per property. By comparison, St. John’s, Newfoundland and Labrador, provides $120,000 annually for heritage grants, while Moncton has recently increased its annual allocation to $85,000 despite having a substantially smaller designated heritage inventory. The value of the program should not be measured by the municipal contribution alone, but by the private investment it helps unlock. Heritage grants reduce the gap between conventional repairs and the specialized work needed to retain character-defining materials and details. In doing so, -2- they help property owners proceed with work that may otherwise be reduced, deferred, or completed using incompatiblematerials. The use of incompatible materials can result in work being undertaken without the benefit of a Heritage Permit, creating compliance matters that require staff resources to investigate and address. By making appropriate conservation approaches more attainable, the Heritage Grant Program can help reduce these situations and allow staff to focus more of their time on strategic heritage planningand proactive project support. The need for this support has become more pressing as construction costs have risen. Preliminary information gathered by staff indicates that estimates for heritage wood-window work have increased by approximately 15 percent; information from a local door manufacturer indicates project-cost increases of approximately 30 to 42 percent since 2023; and masonry costs are estimated to have risen by approximately 25 to 30 percent since 2021. While these figures continue to be reviewed and updated, they demonstrate the scale of the pressures now facing property owners. These established cost increases are now being compounded by new trade-related pressures affecting construction materials and supply chains. The recent 50 percent tariffs on certain U.S.- origin steel and aluminum products are particularly relevant to building-envelope work, including projects involving metal components, hardware, flashings, and specialized window systems. Heritage-window projects can be especially vulnerable because they frequently involve custom fabrication, specialized components, and a limited supplier base. As these costs rise, a fixed grant allocation supports progressively less work and provides less incentive for owners to undertake appropriate conservation. The current $80,000 allocation has also remained unchanged for a number of years. Based on the Bank of Canada’s inflation calculator, $80,000 in 2015 would have purchasing power of approximately $106,771 in 2026. An allocation of approximately $110,000 would therefore be required simply to restore the program’s previous purchasing power. The Board considers $110,000 the minimum reasonable funding level. Our request for $150,000 recognizes that restoring purchasing power alone will not address the program’s demonstrated demand, the scale of Saint John’s heritage inventory, or the continuing escalation in rehabilitation costs. The requested increase would provide the City with greater capacity to support an appropriate number and range of projects across its Heritage Conservation Areas. This is also a matter of prudent asset management. Timely maintenance is almost always more economical than major intervention following prolonged deterioration. A grant that helps an owner repair a window, stabilize masonry, or address water infiltration today can help avoid more extensive work later. By encouraging preventative maintenance, the program helps protect both private investment and the public value embodied in Saint John’s historic streetscapes. The Heritage Grant Program also contributes to broader municipal objectives. Investment in existing buildings supports local contractors and specialized trades, improves the appearance and vitality of neighbourhoods and commercial streets, and helps retain adaptable building stock for residential, commercial, and community use. Saint John’s historic architecture is central to how the city presents itself to residents, visitors, businesses, and investors. The program should -3- therefore be understood not simply as assistance for individual properties, but as an economic- development and neighbourhood-reinvestment tool. June 2027 will mark the 150th anniversary of the Great Fire of 1877. That anniversary offers Saint John a rare opportunity not only to remember the scale of what was lost, but to recognize the remarkable city that was rebuilt in its aftermath. Many of the buildings and streetscapes that define Saint John today are the legacy of that period of extraordinary civic resolve. Increasing the Heritage Grant Program in this anniversary year would be a tangible expression of the City’s continued commitment to that legacy and to the owners who are investing in its future. Saint John’s heritage is not a passive record of the past. It is part of the city’s present-day economic infrastructure and one of the qualities that distinguishes Saint John as a place to live, visit, invest, and do business. A stronger Heritage Grant Program will help ensure that this irreplaceable advantage is maintained, used, and carried forward.For these reasons, the Heritage Development Board respectfully requests that the Finance Committee recommend to Common Council an increase in the 2027 Heritage Grant Program allocation from $80,000 to $150,000. Sincerely, Melissa Wakefield, AANB, EMBA (DLX) Chairof the Heritage Development Board HERITAGE GRANT PROGRAM POLICY PROGRAM AIM The Heritage Grant Program is an incentive program designed to encourage property owners tomeet the spirit and intent of the Saint John Heritage Conservation Areas By-Law, as expressed in the National Standards for Conservation of Historic Placesin Canada and Saint John's own series of Practical Conservation Guidelines. Heritage Grants are not construction subsidies; they are intended to assist owners to retain traditional materials and details of character-defining elements and, if necessary, replace them with new components, matching the original materials and profiles. OBJECTIVES Primary: To encourage retention of designated heritage buildings and their character-defining elements, including their materials and details; To maximize conservation of the character-defining elements of designated heritage buildings using an approach of: understanding, documenting, planning (for proposed use) and then intervening. Secondary: To create employment opportunities for the citizens of Saint John; To discourage demolition of designated heritage buildings; To reduce waste and the impact on the environment by demonstrating that the greenest building is one that already exists; To encourage owners to undertake necessary but costly major conservation projects. CATEGORIES OF GRANTS 1.Heritage Maintenance Grant:A grant of 25% up to a maximum of $750 per year available to properties without a Conservation Plan in place; also available to tenants for storefront signage. 2.Heritage Conservation Grant: Agrantof 25% -45% up to a maximum of $7,500 per year to support large conservation projects for properties which have a Conservation Plan in place. There are two levels of funding provided by the Conservation Grant, depending on the nature of the project: a) Minor funding:25% up to a maximum of $7,500 for maintenance work, as outlined in the Conservation Plan. b) Major funding: 45% up to a maximum of $7,500 for restoration work to original character- defining elements, and for major projects such as masonry or structural repair. 3.Heritage Conservation Plan Grant:A grant provided to offset the cost of retaining a design professional (architect or engineer) to prepare a Conservation Plan for designated heritage properties. A Conservation Plan provides the property owner with a phased plan to undertake required heritage/structural work. 50% of the cost is funded up to a maximum of $1,500. Page 1 of 4 ELIGIBLE PROPERTIES Grants are awarded based on the Property Identification Number (PID) rather than per civic address. Each PID is eligible to receive one grant per category per year. Property must be a non-government owned designated heritage property located within one of the designated Saint John Conservation Heritage Areas. Refer to the Saint John Heritage Conservation Areas By-Law for a listing of properties. A copy of the By-Law can be found on the City’s website, picked up in person at the Growth and Community Development Services office, or an official copy at the Common Clerk’s office. Property must be covered by insurance. Property owner must be in good standing with the City of Saint John and shall not have unpaid property taxes. Property owner must not have any outstanding property-related by-law violations and/or building permit violations. ELIGIBLE WORK & MATERIALS Projects must be to the exterior of the property and in accordance with the terms and conditions of a Certificate of Appropriateness \[Heritage Permit\]. Projects must be completed prior to the Grant Summary Form deadline and grant funding for projects not completed by the end of the calendar year will be forfeited except in exceptional circumstances. Note: For appropriate materials and restoration approaches, please see the Practical Conservation Guidelines on the City’s website, which can also be picked up in person at the Growth and Community Development Services offices. INELIGIBLE WORK & MATERIALS Contemporary materials such as but not limited to vinyl or aluminum clad windows, steel doors, or vinyl siding. Work carried out prior to issuance of a Certificate of Appropriateness \[Heritage Permit\]. Work carried out without required building permits in place prior to work being undertaken. Work related to landscaping, roof replacement, or infill construction. Owner performed labour. Poor or defective work as identified by the Heritage Officer and/or Building Inspector. HERITAGE GRANT FUNDING APPLICATIONS Note: Application forms can be found on the City’s website, or picked up in person at the Growth and Community Development Services office, 10th floor City Hall. Before completing and submitting a Heritage Grant Funding Application form, applicants must first obtain a Certificate of Appropriateness \[Heritage Permit\] and building permit (if required), and include these numbers on their Heritage Grant Funding Application form. The following must accompany the completed application form: o Certificate of Appropriateness \[Heritage Permit\] number; o Building permit number (if required) for proposed work; o Recent photographs of all sides of the building and detailed photographs of area related to proposed work; o Start and end date for proposed project; o Signature of both the applicant and owner of the property; Page 2 of 4 o Those applying for a Heritage Conservation Grant must copy and attach page extracts from the Heritage Conservation Plan that relate to the proposed work to be funded; o Those applying for a Heritage Conservation Plan Grant must include the Heritage Conservation Plan; o Written project cost estimate. REVIEW OF HERITAGE GRANT FUNDING APPLICATIONS FOR APPROVAL OR DENIAL Applications will be screened for basic eligibility as they are received (i.e. application package is complete and legible). Applicants will be notified promptly if their application is ineligible. Complete applications will be reviewed by Heritage Staff for the following: o Ensuring the Certificate of Appropriateness was approved; o If required, confirming building permit has been issued; o Reviewing project estimates and calculating amount of requested grant funding; Conditional approval will be awarded to applicants that meet the eligibility requirements. Conditional approval will be awarded in the sequence in which applications are submitted. Approval of a Heritage Grant Application conditionally approves the applicant for grant funding rather than guaranteeing it. Conditional approvals cannot exceed the Council-approved budgeted amount. If the grant requests exceed the budgeted amount, then any subsequent applicants will be placed on a waiting list in the sequence in which they applied. Applicants that are on the waiting list will submit the grant summary form upon completion of their project. Waiting list applicants will be notified by letter after the November 30 deadline about the status of their submission. BUILDING INSPECTION A successful building inspection by Building & Inspections Services for the proposed work is required to receive grant funding (If a building permit is required). It is the responsibility of the grant applicant to notify the Building & Inspections Services of the project completion and arrange for inspection. The Building inspection should be arranged and completed prior to submission of the Grant Summary Form. The inspection must be completed by November 30. Allow two weeks for the inspection to be scheduled and completed. HERITAGE OFFICER INSPECTION A successful inspection by a Heritage Officer of the City of Saint John is required to receive grant funding. It is the responsibility of the grant applicant to notify the Growth and Community Development Services that the project is complete and ready for inspection by the Heritage Officer. A Heritage inspection should be arranged and completed prior to submission of the Grant Summary Form as outlined below. The Heritage Officer will inspect and photograph the completed work to ensure that it shows good craftsmanship and complies with the Certificate of Appropriateness \[Heritage Permit\]. The inspection must be completed by November 30. Allow two weeks for the inspection to be scheduled and completed. Page 3 of 4 GRANT SUMMARY FORM The Grant Summary Form is required to be completed and submitted once the project work related to the grant application is complete in order toreceive grant funding. Grant Summary Forms are accepted throughout the year up until November 30. The Grant Summary Form should include the following information and attached documents: o Using the space provided, an itemized summary of the invoices and receipts that correspond tothe work outlined in the Certificate of Appropriateness with the amounts stated pre-HST; o Legible photocopies of all invoices and receipts included in the summary with proof of payment; o Signature of the applicant, the legal owner ofthe property, and contractors who performed the project. Applicant must assert that abuilding inspection(if required)and heritage inspection have been requested and completed to the best of their knowledge. It is the responsibility of the applicant toensure that the itemized summaryis complete, accurate, and legible. Grant Summary Forms are reviewed when received and applicants will be notified through written communication within 60 days of submission whether the form is approved, with attached cheque, or whether it has been denied. PAYMENT OR DENIAL OF GRANT FUNDING Whether the applicant receives grant funding depends on successful building and heritage inspections and a properly completed and approved Grant Summary Form. TheCity will release grant funding payments within 60 days after submission of the Grant Summary Form provided all requirements are met. Wait list applicants will be notified by letter after the November 30 deadline about the status of their submission. Heritage Services| Growth and Community Development Services th 10Floor, City Hall, P.O. Box 1971 Saint John, New Brunswick E2L 4L1 If you have any questions or concerns Heritage Staff can be contacted at: Phone: (506) 658-2835 Fax: (506) 658-2837 Email: heritage@saintjohn.ca Page 4 of 4 FINANCE COMMITTEEREPORT Report DateSeptember 22, 2026 Meeting DateSeptember 29, 2026 Service AreaService Delivery and Operations Chair Sullivan and Members ofFinance Committee SUBJECT:Implementation ofWinter Management Plan AuditRecommendations OPEN OR CLOSED SESSION This matter is to be discussed in Finance Committee OpenSession. AUTHORIZATION Primary AuthorDirectorExecutive LeadCAO Kevin LougheryIan Fogan RECOMMENDATIONS The Finance Committee recommendsCommon Council: EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Following successive years of community concern with the condition of streets and sidewalks during the winter months, a council motion was put forwardand Finance Committee and Common Council approved aninternal The audit, completed by KPMG,provided anopportunity to haveexternal advice complement own continuous improvement effortstocreate a plan to meetservice delivery standards set by council while balancing the considerations of costs and operational planning. This reportand the attachmentspresentoverall response tothe 12 recommendations in the audit as well as a detailed and costed implementation planfor the high-priority recommendationsfor the years 2026 and 2027, including costimprovements that can be considered in the 2027 General Fund Operating Budget. PREVIOUS RESOLUTION(S) STRATEGIC ALIGNMENT This report aligns with MOVE and PERFORM prioritiesandan. REPORT KPMG was engaged n and operations following direction from Finance Committee and Common Council and successive years of concern with how streets and sidewalks were cleared in winter conditions. KPMG conducted the audit and presented it to Finance Committee earlier in 2026. attached to this report. The next step was for city staff to indicate level of agreement with each recommendation. Further, city staff also took the additional step of developing a two-year implementation plan based on the Audit recommendations and Continuous Improvement efforts that have been underway for several years.The high priority recommendations will have an impact on budgets and as such have been included with the associated budget costs considerations. The Audit included 12 recommendationswhich were ranked in priority with associated timelines for completion. report includes the findings and recommendations along with opportunities and areattached to this report as Appendix C. Ciresponse to each recommendation and an overall indication of implementationis included in Appendix A of this report.Internal Audit will work with the service area to include detailed management action plans, associated timelines and owners for all 12 recommendations which will be followed up on as they become due. Internal Audit has reviewed the information being put forward for the high priority recommendations and confirms they are consistent with the recommendations provided. Two Year Implementation Plan (2026-2027)Strategy City staff focused on both the High Priority recommendations in the Audit as well as maintained focus on theContinuous Improvement path already started by City staff in developing an initial Implementation Plan. KPMG providedthree options for the City to consider for resource addition, City staff is proceeding with the option which balances the implementation costs and addressesthe largest structural gaps. City staff have determined that aniterative annual approach to resource addition, followed by a re-assessment of how well the resources supportedachieving Winter Management Plan service objectivesbefore any further resource additions are contemplated. City staff are also aware that resource additions need to be aligned with both the Operating and Capital budget approval processes. Support for Current Service Objectives is an assumption that Common Council will remain supportive to sustain the current time-based service objectives of the Winter Management Plan. As KPMG identified recommendations to increase resources to more consistently meet service objectives, the plan includes annual iterative increases in resourcesto accomplish this. The alternative, which City staff is assuming is not the policy direction Common Council would like to proceed given community feedback, is to reduce service standards to match current resource levels. City staff is seeking to confirm this policy direction through Finance Committee and Common Council as pera recommendation of this report. 2026-2027 recommended progress toward Recommendation #1: Fleet Downtime and Redundancy Strategy a newtypeof fleet and operational redundancy through a staged plan. They are recommending ceasing reliance on end-of-life assets as a redundancy option and exploring other redundancy options such as use of contracted services.(City staff note that since Recommendation #2 provides dedicated focus on Sidewalk plowing, implementation phases in 2026 and 2027 associated with Recommendation #1 are focused mainly on street plowing.) City staff arerecommending three stages of introducing resource redundancy in 2026 and 2027 associated with Recommendation #1: 2026-2027 recommended progress toward Recommendation #2: Sidewalk Priority and Timeliness Improvement Another high priority recommendation from KPMGis to build in additional capacity specific to the sidewalk plowing operation, through resource addition, review of routes, and shift coverage. City staff arerecommending three stages of introducing resourcesin 2026 and 2027 associated with Recommendation #2: 2026-2027 recommended progress toward Recommendation #3: Indoor Storage Feasibility Study Recommendation#3 was toreview options to provide year-round storage of plowing equipment and recommendation #12 was to look to modernize Public Works facilities as they identified several shortcomings with existing facilities. City staff are recommending these two recommendationsbe addressed together, at least at a preliminary level for possible synergies. External consulting services would be used to evaluate, together, both short term and long term facility options. As an example, City staff are concerned that investing in current facilities may be expensive and/or limited by land constraints, and implementation may be influenced by feasibility and cost of more long term options.This work is expected to cost $125,000 and would be charged to the 2027 General Fund OperatingBudget. 2026-2027 recommended progress toward Recommendation #4: Playbook KPMGrecommended thedevelopment ofa playbook that supports decisions as variables are introduced during storms. City staff intend to work on an initial playbook during the upcoming 2026-2027 winter season. City staff notes that many processes are already developed, and in some cases documentedin operational (situational awareness) reports, but will be consolidated costs to the General Fund Operating or Capital budgets. 2026-2027 recommended progress toward Recommendation #5: Servicing of Rural Roads KPMG recommended a framework to define, maintain and periodically validate the winter service inventory. In particular, areview of theapproximately 100 rural roadsthat lack basic design standards (such as being very narrow) and/or are partially or completely on private property. City staffalready commenced policyrecommendationsthat clearly separatethese roads from other rural roads in Saint John by - intend to return to Common Council to recommenda new Priority 5 Street Plowing Category with its own time-based standards within the Winter Management Planfor these Sub-RuralRoads. A Priority 6 Street Plowing Category was recently approved by Common Council for - This work is not expected to add costs to the General Fund Operating or Capital budgets. Sustaining a Focus on Continuous Improvement Over the last number of years, and beforecontemplation of the Audit, city staff have been, on a storm-by-storm and season-by-season basis, implementing aContinuous Improvement philosophy. A number of service improvements are already adopted or contemplated separate from the Audit, which have been detailed in previous Council reports. On-street parking during and following winter storms remains an impediment to meeting service objectives. Efforts in recent years included putting more emphasis on street-by-street parking bans, providing focus to a smaller area during North-East-West overnight parking bans, and raising fines for parking violations that interfere with street plowing (supported by Common Council). For the 2026-2027 season, city staff intend to recommend to Common Council expanded towing authority to city parking enforcement officersso that these resources can authorize towing for many more violations that interfere with plowing. Total 2027 Budget Implications The following tablesummarizes, and totals,the . These costs would need to be added to the 2027 General Fund Operating Budgetwith additional capital requests included in future years as part of the 5 year capital investment plan. All but the last item,the Works Facility Review, would also be re-occurring annual costs beyond 2027(except for anyannualamendments to each item through review of implementation). (*) will not be a re-occurring cost beyond 2027 There are no net new Capital expenditures recommended with this phase of audit implementation. However, as noted previously in this report, the plan requires the re- assignment of three sidewalk plows fromthe sidewalk plowing expansion (to 75% as detailed in the Strategic Plan) to improvehow oftencurrently serviced sidewalksare plowed within service standard timelines. INPUT FROM OTHER SERVICE AREAS AND STAKEHOLDERS Name of Service Area/StakeholderName of Staff Person Finance and Strategic InvestmentsJodie Forgie John Mascarenhas, Chris Phinney, Barb Public Works Crawford, Travis Baxter Fleet ServicesDan Gibson, Chris Patterson ATTACHMENT(S) Appendix A: Appendix A: High Level Management Response to 12 Recommendations 1. Realignment of Level of Service - Agree with finding that resource levels are currently not adequate to meet the established service-level objectives. Will develop plan for additional resources for both streets and sidewalks to be implemented over a period of several years through the annual budgeting process. 2. Indoor storage feasibility study - Agree with the benefits of indoor storage to improve mobilization time and to improve equipment reliability. This recommendation to be considered as part of an overall strategy to improve the quality and functionality of Works facilities. 3. Playbooks and route backups - winter storm scenarios and challenges with staffing or equipment downtime. These will be more formally documented and reviewed regularly. As resources are increased and redundancy built-in these backups will be less critical over time. 4. Servicing of rural roads - It has been established that the City is obligated to continue service delivery even on streets built to substandard conditions with right-of-ways that are not properly vested with the municipality. The updates to the WMP will include a review of the service-level standards for these roads. 5. Fleet downtime & redundancy strategy - Agree with the need to increase resources (including fleet redundancy) to meet service level standards. Will develop plan for additional resources for both streets and sidewalks to be implemented over a period of several years through the annual budgeting process. 6. Sidewalk reliability and timeliness improvement - Agree with the need to increase resources to meet service level standards for current inventory of sidewalks and for the additional sidewalk plowing identified in the 10 Year Strategic Plan. Will develop plan for additional resources for both streets and sidewalks to be implemented over a period of several years through the annual budgeting process. 7. AVL installation - For both the functionality of the AVL units and the Direct Liquid Application/Prewetting, the limiting factor this past season was the shortage of mechanics, and the lack of feasible contract solutions. Recent changes to the Collective Agreements may help address this shortage and allow for proper prioritization of these systems. 8. Direct Liquid Application - For both the functionality of the AVL units and the Direct Liquid Application/Prewetting, the limiting factor this past season was the shortage of mechanics, and the lack of feasible contract solutions. Recent changes to the Collective Agreements may help address this shortage and allow for proper prioritization of these systems. 9. Vehicle Cameras - As service delivery becomes more technologically-driven on our equipment (across most public-facing service areas) there needs to be resources dedicated to maintaining the specialized software and hardware, and to ensure maximum value is derived from these investments. The benefits of these cameras needs to be analyzed further, and a resource plan developed to support the necessary hardware and software. 10. Incident Review Committee - Should be a consistent corporate approach to incident review, driver training with proper systems in place. 11. Optimize salt shed filling and material handling - There is no ROI for significant improvements to the East Depot shed. Opportunities for material handling improvements and conveyors to fill salt sheds will be examined further. 12. Modernize Public Works facilities - Most of the Public Works facilities were never purpose-built for our needs and lack functionality. Some of the improvements recommended analysis needs to be undertaken to understand options for improving existing facilities or options for consolidating operations into single, purpose-built facility. Appendix B: Plan to Upgrade Priority of Sidewalks in the South Central Peninsula 2 oriented - decisions based as a result of responsibility or liability to any any and all cludes financial projections. The projections in xpressly disclaims nterpret the information presented. As with any future sources unless otherwise noted within the report. mplete, sufficient or appropriate for use by any person or entity erson or entity other than Client or for any purpose other than set y eit is possible that the findings contained could change based on 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 and such differences may be material. KPMG accepts no responsibility for loss or damages to any party results 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 - and . The 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 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. 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, 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. - relative to peer municipalities, with Saint John delivering winter services at one of the lowest costs 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 post High per 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. routes, staffing, fleet, facilities, and supporting processes realmodel, stakeholder interviews, comparator research, and onThe review found several important strengths that the City can build upon. These include:Importantly, these challenges are structural, not shortdeliberate changes. as ed6 by present ll stages of r a required a final report with findings d e its objective. Develop 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 ed and Transportation Department as well as other supporting stakeholders ks opportunities develop Phases, assessment model and Synthesized insights from previous Strategize any information needed to complete the analysis. Staff throughout the City are eager to have with provided from the auditee. Without are leading practices fied identi methodology: 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 comparator 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 Initiate 1.2.3.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.evidence execution of the audit through the following 7 contractor . LowLow HighHighHighHighHigh MediumMediumMediumMediumMedium qualified program - . 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 of . . . Incident review committee Fleet downtime and redundancy strategySidewalk reliability and timeliness improvementIndoor storage feasibility studyPlaybooks and route backupsServicing of rural roads 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 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 mitigate or remove risk. Prioritization is prior to are actions required to remediate to improvement. prior to prior to , by contrast, are optional improvements that in order areas for High priority Medium priority Low priority 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.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: life 9 - of - term capital and - trained operators - informed approach to fleet - training road operators as a - round indoor storage of winter maintenance - 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 . 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 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 Fleet downtime and redundancy strategySidewalk reliability and timeliness improvementIndoor storage feasibility study 1.2.3. - 10 facing documentation accordingly. - making without materially increasing staffing levels. - 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. - 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 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 Playbooks and route backupsServicing of rural roadsContinuous reassessment of Levels of Service 4.5.6. - 11 governed - benefit analysis of introducing - time decision making and post - wetting systems. This should be supported by - facing vehicle cameras in a targeted and well - 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 - KPMG observed that the not strategy or weather wetting systems are frequently unavailable due to maintenance - 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 Automated Vehicle Location installationDirect Liquid Application repairVehicle cameras 7.8.9. to 12 enhancements money improvements to - for - value a phased facilities modernization a formal incident review committee stablish ndertake mplement and assess material handling 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 , 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 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 Incident review committeeOptimize salt shed filling and material handlingModernize Public Works facilities 10.11.12.