Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
2017-10-16_Agenda Packet--Dossier de l'ordre du jour
City of Saint John Common Council Meeting AGENDA Monday, October 16, 2017 6:00 pm Council Chamber Please use Chipman Hill entrance S'il vous plait utiliser I'entree Chipman Hill Si vous avez besoin des services en francais pour une reunion de Conseil communal, veuillez contacter le bureau du greffier communal au 658-2862. Pages 1. Call to Order 2. Approval of Minutes 3. Approval of Agenda 4. Disclosures of Conflict of Interest 5. Consent Agenda 5.1 Saint John Board of Police Commissioners: 2017 Operating Budget - August 1 - 9 Financial Results (Recommendation: Receive for Information) 5.2 2018 Proposed Council Meeting Schedule (Recommendation in Report) 10-11 5.3 J. Allen Letter: Sponsorship and Support for Cross Country Dog Sledding 12-13 Journey (Recommendation: Receive for Information) 5.4 Contract No. 2017-19: Water Main Cleaning & Lining - Phase 14 14-16 (Recommendation in Report) 5.5 Central Peninsula Neighbourhood Plan - FCM Grant Agreement 17-18 (Recommendation in Report) 5.6 Enterprise Saint John - 2018 Budget (Recommendation: Refer to Finance 19-20 Committee) 5.7 NB Power Request to Present re: Project in East Saint John (Recommendation: 21-21 Refer to the Clerk to Schedule) 1 Poeta Sy: (L K 5.8 Atlantic Flight Centre - 2018 COPA Convention and Trade Show Request for 22-52 Fly -By (Recommendation: Approve Request and Direct Mayor to Send Letter of Support) 5.9 Request for Funding from Growth Reserve Budget, Develop SJ 53-55 (Recommendation in Report) 6. Members Comments 7. Proclamation 8. Delegations / Presentations 8.1 2018 Canada 55+ Games 56-67 8.1.1 Secondment of City of Saint John Employee 68-70 9. Public Hearings - 6:30 p.m. 10. Consideration of By-laws 11. Submissions by Council Members 11.1 Stop Signs on Daniel Avenue (Councillor MacKenzie) 71-72 12. Business Matters - Municipal Officers 12.1 Saint John Energy: A Vision for the Future 73-83 12.2 Fair Property Taxation 84-125 13. Committee Reports 13.1 Saint John Board of Police Commissioners: Additional Board Member 126-126 14. Consideration of Issues Separated from Consent Agenda 15. General Correspondence 16. Supplemental Agenda 17. Committee of the Whole 17.1 Field House Project City's Capital Contribution 127-127 17.2 Abandon Rezoning Consideration in Cedar Point Estates 128-128 18. Adjournment K City of Saint John Common Council Meeting Monday, October 16, 2017 Committee of the Whole 1. Call to Order Si vous avez besoin des services en fran�ais pour une r6union de Conseil communal, veuillez contacter le bureau du greffier communal au 658-2862. Each of the following items, either in whole or in part, is able to be discussed in private pursuant to the provisions of subsection 10.(2)(4) of the Municipalities Act and Council / Committee will make a decision(s) in that respect in Open Session: 4:00 p.m., 8th Floor Boardroom, City Hall 1.1 Legal Matter 10.2(4)(f) 1.2 Taxi Bylaw Enforcement (Verbal) 1.3 Financial Matter 10.2(4)(a,c,d,f) 1.4 Financial Matter 10.2(4)(c) 1.5 Legal Opinion 10.2(4)(f) K3 Ville de Saint John Seance du conseil communal Lundi 16 octobre 2017 18 h, salle du conseil Comit6 pl6nier 1. Ouverture de la s6ance Si vous avez besoin des services en fran�ais pour une r6union de Conseil Communal, veuillez contacter le bureau de la greffiere communale au 658-2862. Chacun des points suivants, en totalite ou en partie, peut faire 1'objet d'une discussion en prive en vertu des dispositions prevues a Particle 10 de la Loi sur les municipalites. Le conseil/comite prendra une ou des d6cisions a cet egard au cours de la s6ance publique 16 h Salle de conf6rence, 8e 6tage, h6tel de Ville 1.1 Question juridique — alinea 10.2(4)f) 1.2 Application de Farr&& sur les taxis (rapport verbal) 1.3 Question financiere — alineas 10.2(4)a)c)d) et f) 1.4 Question financiere — alinea 10.2(4)c) 1.5 Avis juridique — alinea 10.32(4)f) S6ance ordinaire 1. Ouverture de la s6ance 2. Adoption du proces-verbal 3. Adoption de Pordre du jour 4. Divulgations de conflits d'int6rets 5. Questions soumises a Papprobation du conseil 5.1 Bureau des commissaires de la police de Saint John — Budget de fonctionnement de 2017 — Bilan financier d' aout (recommandation accepter a titre informatif) 5.2 Calendrier des r6unions du conseil propose pour 2018 (recommandation figurant au rapport) C! 5.3 Lettre de J. Allen concernant le parrainage et le soutien de la course de cross-country en traineaux a chiens (recommandation : accepter a titre informatif) 5.4 Contrat ri 2017-19 : Quatorzi&me &tape du nettoyage et du revetement de la conduite d'eau principale (recommandation figurant au rapport) 5.5 Plan de voisinage de la p6ninsule centrale : Entente de subvention de la Hd&ration canadienne des municipalit&s (recommandation figurant au rapport) 5.6 Entreprise Saint John : Budget de 2018 (recommandation : accepter a titre informatif) 5.7 Demande de pr6sentation d'Energie Nouveau -Brunswick relativement au projet dans fest de la ville (recommandation : transmettre au greffier pour qu'une date de pr6sentation soit fix&e) 5.8 Atlantic Flight Centre : Demande de d&fil& a6rien des organisateurs du congr&s et de 1'exposition de 2018 de 1'Association canadienne des propri6taires et pilotes d' a&ronefs (recommandation : approuver la demande et demander au maire d'envoyer une lettre d'appui a la demande) 5.9 Demande de financement du budget r&sere& a la croissance de D&veloppement Saint John (recommandation figurant au rapport) 6. Commentaires pr6sent6s par les membres 7. Proclamation 8. D616gations et pr6sentations 8.1 Jeux des 55 ans et plus du Canada de 2018 8.1.1. D&tachement d'un employ& de la Ville de Saint John 9. Audiences publiques —18 It 30 10. Etude des arret6s municipaux 11. Interventions des membres du conseil 11.1 Panneaux d'arret sur Favenue Daniel (conseiller MacKenzie) 12. Affaires municipales 6voqu6es par les fonctionnaires municipaux 12.1 Saint John Energy : Une vision de Favenir 12.2 Imp6ts fonciers justes 13. Rapports d6pos6s par les comit6s 61 13.1 Bureau des commissaires de la police de Saint John: Nouveau membre au conseil d'administration 14. Etude des sujets ecartes des questions soumises a Papprobation du conseil 15. Correspondance generale 16. Ordre du jour supplementaire 17. Comite plenier 17.1 Project Field House — contribution de la capitale 17.2 Abandonner le changement de zonage a Cedar Point Estates 18. Levee de la seance C.1 �':��.,_ SAINT JOHN BOARD OF POLICE COMMISSIONERS ONE Peel Plaza, E2L OEl PO Box 1971 Saint John, New Brunswick Canada E2L 4L1 Bureau des Commissaires du Service de Police de Saint John C.P. 1971 Saint John Nouveau -Brunswick Canada E2L 4L1 JENNIFER CARHART Chair/ President BRIAN BOUDREAU Vice Chair/Vice President MIKE HAYCOX Secretary/Secretaire MAYOR DON DARLING Commissioner/Commissaire GARY SULLIVAN Commissioner/Commissaire WILLIAM THOMPSON Commissioner/Commissaire Commissioner/Commissaire JOHN T. W. BATES, M.O.M. Chief of Police/ Chef de Police DAPHNE WAYE Executive Administrator/ Secretaire Administrative Telephone/Telephone: (506) 648-3324 E-mail/Courriel: policecommission(o) saintiohn. ca Explore our past/ Explorez notre passe Discover your future/ Decouvrez votre avenir October 4, 2017 PUBLIC SESSION M&C 2017-257 Mayor Don Darling and Members of Common Council Your Worship and Councillors: Re: 2017 Operating Budget — August Financial Results The Saint John Board of Police Commissioners, at its meeting on Tuesday, October 3, 2017 accepted and approved the attached Financial Report for the period ended as at August 31, 2017. On behalf of the Saint John Board of Police Commissioners, I am pleased to provide a copy of this report to Common Council in accordance with Section 7(3) of the New Brunswick Police Act. Yours very truly, Jennifer Carhart, Chair Saint John Board of Police Commissioners JC/dew Attachment 1 109 lay, I RM31, October 3, 2017 Ms. Jennifer Carhart, Chair and Members of the Board of Police Commission Chair Carhart and Members 2017 Operating Budget — August Financial Results , T"0511 . I The purpose of this report is to provide the Board with an update on the financial position of the Saint John Police Force's 2017 Operating Budget for the second trimester ended August 31, 2017. FINANCIAL HIGHLIGHTS For the period ended as at August 31, 2017, the net operating expenses for the Saint John Police Force were under budget by $672,998 or 4.3%. There are seven key areas that contributed to this budget variance, 1. Revenue exceeded budget by $97,372. 2. Salaries and Wages under budget by $583,047. 3. Overtime costs exceeded budget by $102,288. 4. Extra -Duty overtime expense was $67,889 and is 100% recoverable. 5. Court Time and Other Personnel costs were over budget by $9,565. 6. Fringe Benefits were under by $262,712. 7. Good and Services were over budget by $76,675. K Chair Carhart and Members of the Board of Police Commission October 3. 2017 Page 2 Subject: 2017 Operating Budget — August Financial Results The $97,372 additional revenue realized from extra -duty assignments and other operational activities is used as a direct offset to overtime expense. Salaries were under budget by $583,047 and this figure does include an allowance for the outstanding 2016 and 2017 wage settlement for sworn members of the Saint John Police Association. Contract negotiations have not been finalized and the actual wage settlement is still unknown. [S3Y1 4 Iti I I AA 14 Saint John Police Association (SJPA) The overtime expense was over budget by $102,288. The Patrol Division accounted for $88,667 and the Criminal Investigation Division was over budget by $15,921. The overtime expense for Extra -Duty was $67,889 and this amount is 100% covered from billings to third parties for paid over -time assignments, Court Time - Saint John Police Association (SJPA) The court time expense exceeded budget by $22,692. The various Goods and Services accounts were over budget by $76,675 and the fleet maintenance costs has already exceeded the projected eight month expense by $111,756. This unexpected variance is a result of the change in the City's Fleet department charge out system to recover full cost, overhead and other operating expenses. This additional cost allocation is an accounting entry and is beyond the control of senior police management. K Chair Carhart and Members of the Board of Police Commission October 3, 2.017 Page 3 Subject- 2017 Operating Budget — August Financial Results Due to an oversight on the part of City's Fleet Services department, the Saint John Police Force did not receive the $190,000 allocation of the $1.4 million fleet budget that was shared proportionally to other City departments in 21017.. OM y WMA IMAM ]XIM The August financial report is the reference point used to project the final budget results at year-end while recognizing there often is unforeseen incidents that may occur at an operational level that are not predictable, which can substantially increase overtime costs. The significant unknown expense is the 2016 and 2017 wage settlement for unionized police officers covered by the Saint John Police Association working agreement. Based on all known variables that can impact the Operating Budget, the projected net 2017 year-end financial position for the Saint John Police Force will be over budget by $50,1000 - $100,000 and all incremental revenue will be used to reduce this anticipated deficit. It is important to highlight if the $190,000 was added to the maintenance budget, it is estimated the Force would be $100,000-$150,000 under budget. All significant purchases will be completed by September 2017 and all other discretionary spending will be closely monitored in the final quarter to ensure any possible savings are recognized. In light of the issue with the maintenance budget, it remains the unwavering goal of the senior management team to deliver a balanced budget. It is recommended that the Board accept and approve this Financial Report for the period ended as at August 31, 2017 and forward a copy to Common Council as required under Section 7 (3) of the New Brunswick Police Act. EI Chair Carhart and Members of the Board of Police Commission October 3, 2017 Page 4 Subject: 2017 Operating Budget — August Financial Results Attached reports and documents: Service Based Budget — Actual versus Budget — August 31, 2017 Budget Variance Analysis — August 31, 2017 Respectfully subm Marven �. Corscadden, CPQ DIRECTOR HR & FINANCE 14 rZIMMUMV,"'I MIM 61 Wo � 11 r4i -- 0 : I Service Revenue 290,000 193,333 402,674 209,341 108.3% Other Funding Sources 360,000 240,000 128,031 - 111,969 -46.7% Total Revenue 650,000 433,333 530,705 97,372 22.5% Salaries & Benefits 21,634,920 14,084,074 13,431,773 652,301 4.6% Goods & Services 3,134,839 2,089,868 2,166,543 - 76,675 -3.7% Other* 14,900,774 9,622,150 9,299,606 322,544 3.4%© 4,168,000, Total Expenditures 24,769,759 16,173,942 15,598,316 575,626 3.6% General Funding Required 24,119,759 152740,609 15,967,611 672,998 43% FTEs 176 176 172 4 Operating Budget - Breakdown,of Operational Costs, by Division / Accountability Administration Police Commission Support Services Patrol Services Criminal Investigations Buildings and Stations Detention Services Automotive Equipment 1,897,757 1,260,396 1,245,919 14,477 1.1% 92,844 59,856 59,234 622 1.0% 1,813,615 1,218,819 1,039,822 178,997 14.7% 14,900,774 9,622,150 9,299,606 322,544 3.4%© 4,168,000, 2,735,913 2,631,812 104,101 3.8%® 1,076,693 717,768 726,629 - 8,861 -1.2% 304,000 202,664 177,999 24,665 12.2% 516,076 356,376 417,295 - 60,919 -17.1% 24,769,759 16,1'73,942 15,598,316 575,626 3.6% 1.1 M,41 IM MIAMI lip Budget Expenses Variance Current Variance Timing Actual $16,173,942 $15,598,316 $575,626 $575,626 • Salaries: Local 486 under budget by Expense Category Variance Explanation of Variance Salaries & Wages $583,047 • Salaries: Non -Union under budget by $71 k,. • Salaries: Local 486 under budget by $34k. • SJPA Police Officer wages under budget by $478k. Note: The SJPA collective agreement expired on 12/3112015 and the wage increase for 2016 and 2017is still unknown. Overtime ($170,177) • Overtime: SJPA-Patrol: Over budget by ($89k). • Overtime-SJPA-Criminal Investigations: Over budget by ($16k). • Extra -Duty Overtime - Over by (68k) and this expense is 100% recovered with earned revenue as all hours paid are invoiced to 3d parties for Extra—Duty assignments. Other Personnel Costs ($23,281) • Court Time: Over budget by ($23k). Fringe Benefits $262,712 • Benefits: The rate for police officers is at 28.6% and 24.8% for civilian employees. This rate now includes the employer portion the Long -Term Disability (LTD) plan and the Shared Risk Pension plan. It also includes El, CPP, WC13 and employee group benefit costs. General Services ($59,542) • Telephone: Under budget by $5k. • Radios: Under budget by $8k. • Employer Training: Over by ($68k). Saint John Police Force — August 31, 2017 Budget Variance Analysis Expense Category Variance Explanation of Variance Insurance ($28,748) - Vehicle Insurance: The actual premium cost for insurance coverage in 2017 (fleet and facilities) was ($2k) more than anticipated. 0 Deductible Account: Over budget by ($27k) and this relates to the timing of any charges back to Police via the City's insurance department for V party claims. Professional Services $51,518 ® Legal: Under budget by $14k, 0 Detention Security: Under budget by $25k and part of this is caused by a timing difference with the budget allocation and when invoices are paid. Other Purchased Services $4,528 » No significant variance at the end of August 2017. Repair & Maintenance $14,859 Computer Maintenance $15k - This is the timing between the monthly budget allocation and the payment of invoices for computer maintenance and software licensing contracts with various vendors. Rentals ($19,657) * Equipment Rental - Photocopiers — ©ver budget by $5k. ® Vehicle Rentals: Over by($1 1 k) and a some of this amount has been recovered from CSINB as part of their cost-sharing of joint operations with other policing partners. Purchased Goods ($28,315) 4 Safety Equipment (Body Armour) Over budget by ($24) as the number of officers requiring a replacement vest in 2017 was higher than the budget allocation. 2 1 Praze Saint John Police Force - August 31, 2017 Budget Variance Analysis Expense Category Variance Explanation of Variance Government Services $1,416 No significant variance at the end of August 2017, Internal Services ($115,818) Fleet Maintenance — ($112k) — The cost for maintenance was over budget due to the change in the City's Fleet Maintenance program where Police is incurring significant costs for labour and overhead. No allowance from the Fleet's $1.4 million was made in the SJPF 2017 operating budget to cover this change in a business practice. Approximately 60% of this additional expense is beyond the control of the police management team. 0 Fleet Fuel — ($27k) — The fuel costs were over budget. ® Computer Replacement program — ($20k) — The variance is a result of posting error and it will be corrected in the next reporting period. a SLM Annual Fee — $43k — This is an annual charge from the City's IT department for a service level maintenance agreement (SLM). This variance is a temporary timing difference between the charge from the City and the monthly budget allocation. The full: amount will be posted by year-end. Asset Purchases $103,0,84 e Vehicles $100k — This variance at the end of August is due the timing difference between the budget allocation and when new police vehicles are purchased and delivered. The full $120k allocated for the purchase of new units will be charged to the account in September. 3 1 P a, g, e COUNCIL REPORT M&C No. 2017-262 Report Date October 11, 2017 Meeting Date October 16, 2017 Service Area Corporate Services His Worship Mayor Don Darling and Members of Common Council SUBJECT: 2018 Proposed Council Meeting Schedule OPEN OR CLOSED SESSION This matter is to be discussed in open session of Common Council. AUTHORIZATION Primary Author Commissioner/Dept. HeadL4 City Manager Jonathan Taylor Jonathan Taylor m I Jeff Trail RECOMMENDATION That Common Council approve the attached 2018 proposed Council meeting schedule. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The attached 2018 proposed Council meeting schedule has been submitted for Council's review and approval. The schedule has been adjusted in the summer months to allow for a meeting every third week. INPUT FROM OTHER SERVICE AREAS AND STAKEHOLDERS Growth and Community Development was consulted with respect to scheduling of the public hearing dates. ATTACHMENTS Proposed 2018 Council meeting schedule. iN Committee of the Whole meetings begin at 4:30 pm in the 8t" Floor Boardroom of City Hall and precede the regular Council meetings. January 2, 2018 (Tuesday) NO MEETING January 8, 2018 NO MEETING January 15, 2018 REGULAR MEETING January 22, 2018 No meeting scheduled - only if required January 29, 2018 REGULAR MEETING with PUBLIC HEARING February 5, 2018 No meeting scheduled - only if required February 12, 2018 REGULAR MEETING February 20, 2018 (Tuesday) No meeting scheduled - only if required February 26, 2018 REGULAR MEETING March 5, 2018 No meeting scheduled - only if required March 12, 2018 REGULAR MEETING with PUBLIC HEARING March 19, 2018 No meeting scheduled - only if required March 26, 2018 REGULAR MEETING April 3, 2018 (Tuesday) No meeting scheduled - only if required April 9, 2018 REGULAR MEETING with PUBLIC HEARING April 16, 2018 No meeting scheduled - only if required April 23, 2018 REGULAR MEETING April 30, 2018 No meeting scheduled - only if required May 7, 2018 REGULAR MEETING with PUBLIC HEARING May 14, 2018 No meeting scheduled - only if required May 22, 2018 (Tuesday) REGULAR MEETING May 28, 2018 No meeting scheduled - only if required June 4, 2018 REGULAR MEETING with PUBLIC HEARING June 11, 2018 No meeting scheduled - only if required June 18, 2018 REGULAR MEETING June 25, 2018 No meeting scheduled - only if required July 3, 2018 (Tuesday) No meeting scheduled - only if required July 9, 2018 REGULAR MEETING with PUBLIC HEARING July 16, 2018 No meeting scheduled - only if required July 23, 2018 No meeting scheduled - only if required July 30, 2018 REGULAR MEETING with PUBLIC HEARING August 7, 2018 (Tuesday) No meeting scheduled - only if required August 13, 2018 No meeting scheduled - only if required August 20, 2018 REGULAR MEETING August 27, 2018 No meeting scheduled - only if required September 4, 2018 (Tuesday) No meeting scheduled - only if required September 10, 2018 REGULAR MEETING with PUBLIC HEARING September 17, 2018 No meeting scheduled - only if required September 24, 2018 REGULAR MEETING October 1, 2018 No meeting scheduled - only if required October 9, 2018 (Tuesday) REGULAR MEETING with PUBLIC HEARING October 15, 2018 No meeting scheduled - only if required October 22, 2018 REGULAR MEETING October 29, 2018 No meeting scheduled - only if required November 5, 2018 REGULAR MEETING with PUBLIC HEARING November 13, 2018 (Tuesday) No meeting scheduled - only if required November 19, 2018 REGULAR MEETING November 26, 2018 No meeting scheduled - only if required December 3, 2018 REGULAR MEETING with PUBLIC HEARING December 10, 2018 No meeting scheduled - only if required December 17, 2018 REGULAR MEETING December 24, 2018 NO MEETING December 31, 2018 NO MEETING Hello, My name is Justin Allen, I am originally from New Brunswick. I have spent the past five years in Churchill, a small northern community in Manitoba. I've dedicated these years to learning the art of dog mushing from an indigenous mentor. In January 2018, my team of dogs and I will begin a journey running across the country from Churchill, Manitoba back to my home province - an estimated 3000km/1900miles. When I first came to Churchill, I only planned on staying for four days to see polar bears and northern lights. During that time, I volunteered at a local dog kennel, fell in love with sled dogs, the lifestyle and culture of dog mushing. I decided to commit myself to the craft. Working with sled dogs allows me to be outdoors, and be physically active every day. Sharing time and energy with the dogs out on the land, overcoming obstacles, and braving harsh conditions together has formed a deep connection and relationship that I feel with my team and the northern landscape. Earning their respect and trust has been truly rewarding. I feel this adventure on which we are about to embark, is an amazing opportunity to raise awareness for the communities, traditions & animals that have transformed my life. Firstly, I recognize that our journey will include running through traditional indigenous territories. We are running to honour and pay homage to: 1. The Indigenous peoples and their connection to this land. More specifically, for passing on this ancient tradition of dog mushing - which has allowed me to live this life. As I travel through northern communities, I want to share my experiences with the rest of Canada. 2. To promote the art of dog sledding and animal rights. To educate people and show them that these dogs live a happy and fulfilling life - a life 'for the love of running'. There are unfair generalizations of the treatment of sled dogs, I would like to showcase that relationship from a positive perspective. I plan on running along winter roads and snowmobile trails through the provinces. I will be supported by a support crew, including a fully -equipped dog truck. We plan to stop periodically in northern towns and small communities along the way, to share this experience with as many as possible. Regarding sponsorship & support, there are a number of ways you can help us bring this journey to a reality. We are looking for donations and sponsorships to help us with supplies, trail-mapping/clearing, media coverage and meeting the financial requirements of the journey. The dogs and I hope to hear from you, thanks so much! Justin D. Allen 12 Canada _ sty OR IG NE A IL Nv United States.-. _ IN U WO CA OK Aft 4N! AZ MM ms AL 2,732 km 13 Add polifl COUNCIL REPORT M&C No. 2017-261 Report Date October 10, 2017 Meeting Date October 16, 2017 Service Area Saint John Water His Worship Mayor Don Darling and Members of Common Council SUBJECT. Contract No. 2017-19: Water Main Cleaning & Lining — Phase 14 OPEN OR CLOSED SESSION This matter is to be discussed in open session of Common Council. AUTHORIZATION Primary Author Commissioner/Dept. Head City Manager John Campbell Brent McGovern/Brian Keenan Jeff Trail RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that Contract No. 2017-19: Water Main Cleaning & Lining — Phase 14 be awarded to the Tenderer, Trenchless Solutions Inc., at the tendered price of $530,575.50 (including HST) as calculated based upon estimated quantities, and further that the Mayor and Common Clerk be authorized to execute the necessary contract documents. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The purpose of this report is to recommend that Council award Contract 2017- 19: Water Main Cleaning & Lining — Phase 14 to the Tenderer. PREVIOUS RESOLUTION November 14, 2016; 2017 Water & Sewerage Utility Fund Capital Program Approved. March 6, 2017; 2017 Water & Sewerage Utility Fund and General Fund Capital Program Adjustments Approved. August 8, 2017; Contract 2017-06 Water Main Cleaning and Lining — Phase 13 Awarded. 14 -2 - STRATEGIC ALIGNMENT This report aligns with Council's Priority for Valued Service Delivery, specifically as it relates to investing in sustainable City services and municipal infrastructure. REPORT BACKGROUND The approved 2017 Water & Sewerage Utility Fund Program includes funding for the cleaning and lining of existing unlined cast iron water mains to improve pressure, water quality and fire flows at various locations throughout the City. Contract 2017-19: Water Main Cleaning & Lining - Phase 14 includes work on the following streets: • Hayes Avenue • Currie Avenue • Queen Street • Queen Square North • Duke Street TENDER RESULTS Tenders closed on October 3, 2017 with the following results, including HST: 1. Trenchless Solutions Inc., Moncton, NB $ 530,575.50 The Engineer's estimate for the work was $471,994.50 including HST. The tender was reviewed by staff and found to be formal in all respects. Staff is of the opinion that the tenderer has the necessary resources and expertise to perform the work, and recommend acceptance of their tender. Work is expected to carried out in the Spring of 2018 and be complete by June 30th, 2018. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS The Contract includes work that is charged against the 2017 Water & Sewerage Utility Fund Capital Program. Assuming award of the Contract to the tenderer, an analysis has been completed which includes the estimated amount of work that will be performed by the Contractor and Others. 15 -3 - The analysis is as follows: Budget $ 902,960.00 Project net cost $ 510,160.00 Variance (Surplus) $ 392,800.00 Staff intends to issue another tender to undertake water main cleaning and lining at additional locations to utilize the remaining project funding. This additional contract work will be publicly tendered in 2018. Igo] 114V=II1►19711 ilk] 1010to] 9ito] 0PII: e141 M 0114to] ►11:7_[OW The recommendation in this report is made in accordance with the provisions of Council's policy for the tendering of construction contracts, the City's General Specifications and the specific project specifications. SERVICE AND FINANCIAL OUTCOMES The cast iron water mains on these streets are unlined and contribute to water quality issues. The rehabilitation of this infrastructure will increase pressures and fire flows and improve water quality. This project will be completed within the original approved financial budget. INPUT FROM OTHER SERVICE AREAS AND STAKEHOLDERS N/a ATTACHMENTS N/a COUNCIL REPORT M&C No. 2017-263 Report Date October 11, 2017 Meeting Date October 16, 2017 Service Area Growth and Community Development Services His Worship Mayor Don Darling and Members of Common Council SUBJECT: Central Peninsula Neighbourhood Plan — FCM Grant Agreement OPEN OR CLOSED SESSION This matter is to be discussed in open session of Common Council. AUTHORIZATION Primary Author Commissioner/Dept. HeadL4 City Manager Jeffrey Cyr Jacqueline Hamilton m I Jeff Trail RECOMMENDATION That Common Council, 1. That the Mayor and Common Clerk be authorized to execute the Federation of Canadian Municipalities Grant Agreement for the Central Peninsula Neighbourhood Plan. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY To undertake the project, the City of Saint John submitted applications for external grant funding from both the Federation of Canadian Municipalities (FCM) Green Municipal Fund. The City also received an external funding contribution from Uptown Saint John to support the neighbourhood plan. The purpose of this report is to authorize the Mayor and Common Clerk to execute the agreement for the FCM Green Municipal Fund grant. PREVIOUS RESOLUTION On March 20, 2017 Common Council awarded planning and urban design consulting services for the Central Peninsula Neighbourhood Plan to Urban Strategies and authorized the Mayor and Common Clerk to execute the consulting agreement. STRATEGIC ALIGNMENT As a priority related to a Vibrant Safe City and Growth and Prosperity, focusing strategic investments in the City's core will accelerate urban growth, reduce 17 -2 - urban sprawl and encourage a more compact, livable and fiscally sustainable community. Report The Central Peninsula Neighbourhood Plan is an important tool to both guide and encourage positive change and development in Saint John's core urban neighbourhood. Through a comprehensive community engagement process, it will enable the community to play a central role in shaping the areas where they live, work and play. The plan will also identify the actions, programs and services needed for the City and its community partners to undertake in order to implement PlanSJ at the neighbourhood level. To undertake the project, the City of Saint John successfully applied for external grant funding from both the Federation of Canadian Municipalities (FCM) Green Municipal Fund and the Province of New Brunswick's Environmental Trust Fund. The purpose of this report is to authorize the Mayor and Common Clerk to execute the agreement for the FCM Green Municipal Fund grant. The City also received an external funding contribution from Uptown Saint John to support the neighbourhood plan. As part of the process for FCM Green Municipal Fund grant recipients, FCM requires all successful applicants to sign an agreement governing the terms and conditions of the grant. Following the execution of the grant agreement, the grant will be disbursed to the City of Saint John in two payments in both November of 2017 and March of 2018. The payments will be based on the overall eligible costs incurred by the City at the time of submission for each disbursement period. It is anticipated that the majority of the funding will be disbursed in November 2017 as the bulk of project costs associated with consultant fees and public engagement will have been completed. The total FCM grant could yield up to a maximum of $132,200 in project funding. SERVICE AND FINANCIAL OUTCOMES The Central Peninsula Neighbourhood Plan maximizes the resources of the City of Saint John by leveraging grant funding from FCM, the Environmental Trust Fund and community partners such as Uptown Saint John. It is anticipated that roughly two thirds of project costs will be covered by external funding sources leveraged for the project. INPUT FROM OTHER SERVICE AREAS AND STAKEHOLDERS N/A ATTACHMENTS N/A iF:3 a • •.CAINAIDAS MOST J 1 t i September 30th, 2017 City of Saint John Jeff Trail, City Manager 8th Floor, City Hall Saint John, NB E2L 4L1 Dear Jeff 40 rue II/iiir'ng SLIP ek Sahn�LJohn, NII3 Ca in day II LII IG3 11 506.658,28// 11: 800,5 61,28// 28// II : 506.658,28/1 iu°n�fl'a�Q�pna�unu�:a!�irp:riru ¢�n'al�l.u;a�ir'm� anranranr a�unu�:a!�irli:ririi aa�nal�l.u;a�ir'm� Please find attached Enterprise Saint John's budget for 2018. As in previous years (2013, 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017) our request for investment from Saint John is $475,076 for 2018. This also remains the same proportionate amount of total municipal partner funding of $700,000. City of Saint John $ 475,076 Town of Quispamsis $ 112,133 Town of Rothesay $ 86,422 Town of Grand Bay -Westfield $ 24,836 Village of St. Martins $ 1,500 The City of Saint Johns support not only allows us to leverage the additional support from other municipalities, but $250,000 from private sector Strategic Partners and an additional $1,500,000 from other partners to support priority economic development projects and initiatives. We appreciate the commitment and confidence that the regional municipalities have placed in Enterprise Saint John and we look forward to working with the Village to continue to grow our great community. As always, we would be pleased to meet with the Mayor and Council at any time. Should you have any questions, please do not hesitate to ask. Regards, /U 1 �oc Steve Carson, CEO Giu aid Bay ffyestfiiek] 0 Q~fuunull,nar nsis 0 Ra:uQllmnesay - SL mlgni bins 0 ffaii nQ: kulhi n iLoll Coocc (Z) Cc 01 (Z) O .2, 0 0 0 0 (Z) . 0 Q) 0 tocco(z)ZO(Z)o Ci C, 0 C, 0 U N V- O (::� k.6 d l6 w d O & 0 0 Ln W m N 0 0 Q) N N � rlj 0 O Q) to Lf) Ln to Ln Ln 40 0 40 0 to to ca ca ao� ao� ca ca a* a* V) V) CL :E 0 0 bjO 0 CL Ln an c (3) (3) (3) = (3) LL t S Ll O z > (3) 0 U Cf (3) (3) -a (3) c 12 U. LL. u (3) (3) u — %_,0 4- Q Ln (3) io 0 0 N Ci Ci Ci Ci Ci Ci Ci C, 0 C, 0 U N Ln 0 0 Ln W 00 � u 0 N m m W N N 0 0 O N to Ln Ln to to ca ca a* a* O 0 CL CL W OJ CL 0 on aj > aj OJ c 0 OJ 4' co -FU > 0 c .- C, 'n r 0 r, -0 OJ M -0 c -�6 CL 0 < aj CL C M io �2 C = c 0 x LU -z- , m -a c UJ x Lu U to -Z5 O aj u u m m -Fu E . aj 6 40-1 0:E cL u �4 A!, 0 o " " , (1, 2 0 co u 0- a> 0 0 0- 0 N October 11, 2017 Mayor and Council, You may be aware we are looking at different options for a project in east Saint John that would improve reliability for industrial customers in that area. At this time, the project is being evaluated, but potentially, it could include installation of a new transmission line from our Courtenay Bay Terminal to Canaport LNG parallel to our existing line on new and existing right of ways. A new line, if constructed, may also share some infrastructure with the existing line along Bayside Drive. If the project moves forward in this form, it is subject to an EIA process and the project team would like an opportunity to brief council (either privately, at a regular public meeting, or both) and city staff to ensure relevant feedback is captured and that you are in a position to respond to questions if they come up from citizens. The second option is to refurbish only the existing line only, and not install a new, second line, but we would discuss both of these options with your council. We are tentatively planning an open house the week of October 30th and we'd appreciate a briefing opportunity in advance of that event. Regards Bob Scott, APR, FURS Director, Government Relations NB Power 21 From: Stacey Richards [rnai[to state aficttao.con7 Sent: September -29-12 2:19 PNC To: Darling, fon Cc: O'Connor, Colleen Subject: Fwd: FW: INFRAL RESPONSE: COPA 2018 Convention Flyby/Demo in Saint John, NB 22-24 Jun 2018 Good Afternoon Mayor Darling & Colleen, To refresh, we (AFC and the Saint John Airport) are hosting the 2018 COPA (Canadian Owners and Pilots Association) Convention & Tradeshow next June 22 & 23, 2018. We're thrilled that you are already scheduled to speak at our closing awards dinner on Saturday, June 23, 2018. The event plans are coming along wonderfully and we have exciting news! We made a request for the famous Canadian Snow Birds to do a fly -by during our convention and National Defence (see above) has requested that we provide a supporting letter from the Mayor's office authorizing. the fly -by (see template attached for the municipal letter). The fly -by is above 500 feet and will most likely take place over the Saint John Acrodrome (exact mapping to be confirrned). We sincerely hope that you will allow this exciting opportunity to take place as it is quite rare for the Snow birds to be in our area - also, it would be the sweetest treat for our delegates AND the city - making our event a great draw!'. Please do not hesitate to contact nic if you have any questions or concerns. 1 look forward to hearing froin you. Kind regards, Stacey Richards Operations & Administration Atlantic Flight Centre 4180 Loch Lomond Road, Hangar ##40 Saint John, NB 62N 1 L7 Office: (506) 634-5565 / Fax: (506) 634-7411 WA w PREAMBLE The following 1 Canadian Air Division (CAD) Air Display Organizer's Package provides information on the available types of Royal Canadian Air Force (RCAF) aircraft, respective minimum crew complements, procedure for requesting RCAF resources and the "Organizer's" support obligations with respect to participating aircrews. Other than for the Snowbirds and CF18 Demo Team, whose schedules are determined in advance, the amount of notice that can be provided with regard to committing resources to a particular event will vary greatly with the time of year and the number of requests being fielded by the 1 CAD Special Events office at the time. Please be aware that aircraft availability is subject to national, operational and training requirements as well as aircraft and aircrew availability. RCAF participation can be cancelled at any time due to the foregoing circumstances. Notwithstanding, 1 CAD Special Events office will make every effort to seek out available resources. 431 Air Demonstration Squadron (the Snowbirds) and the CF18 Demo Team schedules are developed one year in advance, subsequently approved by the Commander of the RCAF, and released in the first week of December in the year prior to the applicable season. Requests for all RCAF resources should be submitted using the online request form, which can be found at http://www.rcaf-arc.forces.gc.ca/en/events/booking.page. Thank you for your interest in the RCAF and may your event be safe, sunny, and successful. -2- 17/01/2017 0z! T able of Contents PREAMBLE................................................................................................................... 2 1.0 GENERAL INFORMATION........................................................................................... 4 1.1 Canadian Forces Air Display Policy......................................................................... 4 1.2 1 Canadian Air Division (1 CAD) Contact Information ........................................... 4 1.3 Request Procedure.................................................................................................... 4 1.4 Requesting Deadlines............................................................................................... 4 1.5 Sequence of Events................................................................................................... 4 1.6 Supporting Documentation....................................................................................... 6 1.7 Approval Process...................................................................................................... 6 1.8 Foreign Military Participation at Canadian Sites ...................................................... 7 2.0 AIR OPERATIONS.......................................................................................................... 7 2.1 Weather Limits.............................................................................................................. 7 AirspaceReservations......................................................................................................... 7 2.2 Notice to Airmen (NOTAM) Requirements: both Canadian and American Shows.... 8 2.3 Show Site Criteria......................................................................................................... 9 2.4 Municipal Government Approval............................................................................... 13 2.5 Imagery of the Show Site / Flyby Route................................................................. 13 2.6 Practice Days for Snowbirds and CF 18 Demo ....................................................... 14 2.7 Mobile Aircraft Arresting System (MAAS) Team ................................................. 14 2.8 Flight Operations Director (Air Boss)........................................................................ 14 2.9 Ground Support Coordinator.................................................................................. 15 3.0 LOGISTICAL SUPPORT............................................................................................... 15 3.1 Organizer's Responsibilities...................................................................................... 15 3.2 Transportation........................................................................................................... 15 3.3 Meals...................................................................................................................... 15 3.4 Accommodations.................................................................................................... 15 AircraftSecurity................................................................................................................ 16 3.5 Aircraft Fuel........................................................................................................... 16 3.6 Music Licenses....................................................................................................... 17 4.0 PUBLIC RELATIONS................................................................................................... 17 4.1 Public Relations Procedures................................................................................... 17 4.2 1 CAD Public Affairs Office Contact Information.................................................17 4.3 VIP / Sponsors / Air Show Performers Chalets ...................................................... 17 5.0 ANNEXES................................................................................................................. 18 1 Cdn Air Div Security Requirements and Checklist Annex C ....................................... 27 ScheduleI Aerodromes..................................................................................................... 28 -3- 17/01/2017 alp 1.0 GENERAL INFORMATION Canadian Forces Air Display Policy To ensure that limited resources are allocated as fairly as possible, support to air displays is co- ordinated by the 1 Canadian Air Division (1 CAD) Headquarters Special Events office. 1.1 1 Canadian Air Division (1 CAD) Contact Information Special Events Plans I plans des evenements speciaux 1 Canadian Air Division Headquarters I Quartier general de la 1 re Division aerienne du Canada Royal Canadian Air Force I L'Aviation royale canadienne National Defence I Defense nationale PO Box 17000 Stn Forces I CP 17000, succ. Forces Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada, R3J 3Y5 Office Numbers: (204) 833-2500 Ext 5206 and 5228 Email: SpecialEventsa-forces.gc.ca 1.2 Request Procedure To request RCAF aircraft support for air displays (including flybys, static displays and flying demos), please use the request form which is located online at: http://www.rcaf-arc.forces.gc.ca/en/events/booking.page. As a general rule, the less time provided between receiving the request and the date of the event, the less likely the event can be supported. 1.3 Requesting Deadlines In order to increase the likelihood of RCAF support, the following timelines are highly recommended. Inability to meet these timelines reduces the amount of time available to properly coordinate support for your event. 1 September (previous year) — Snowbirds and CF18 Demonstration Team Requests 1 November (previous year) — SkyHawks Note: If you are requesting the SkyHawks, you must contact them directly at SKYHAWKS@FORCES. GC.CA 1 CAD Special Events is not involved in their scheduling process and the Army chain of command approves the schedule for the SkyHawks. 90 Days Prior — All other flying and static requests for RCAF aircraft 1.4 Sequence of Events 1. Follow the request procedure detailed at para 1.3 2. An email will be sent to the email address associated with the request submission providing direction on the required documentation; 3. Once the required documentation is received, a check for available aircraft will be made to the Wings located closest to where the event will occur; -4- 17/01/2017 41.1 4. Upon confirmation that a squadron can support the event requested, a "Coordination Message" will be published authorizing RCAF participation. If you have not received an "Initial Response" email within 30 days of submitting your request, please call to verify that we have received your request via the website. If we cannot support your request, you will be notified by email indicating the reason why. -5- 17/01/2017 AXI 1.5 Supporting Documentation When an Initial Response email is sent back to the individual requesting an RCAF flyby it will contain a request for the following: 5. A Letter of Approval from the local authorities. This is usually the Mayor of the City, Town or Regional Municipality of the community within which RCAF flying activity will take place (described in section 2.4.7 below); and 6. A map showing the intended location of the flying activity. This could be the location of a site at which a ceremony will take place or a landing zone where a helicopter will be on display (described in section 2.4.7 below). If a flyby is requested then the routing and timing of the flyby will also be necessary. Google Earth has proven to be a very good resource for developing maps and routings. When an Initial Response is sent back for an RCAF air demonstration and it appears that the RCAF will be in a position to support the event, the following will be requested: 1. A map containing a depiction of the Sterile Air Display Area (SADA) as described in section 2.4 below; and 2. A copy of the proposed NOTAM as described in section 2.3 (will be requested as part of the 45 day checklist). 1.5 Approval Process Approval is based on several factors including operational activity levels, the suitability of the air display location, the occurrence of other CF displays, other air displays in the region, the availability of aircraft, the availability of aircrew, the proximity of resources to the air display location, training value, and equitable regional distribution. Assuming the required supporting documentation is received between 90 and 45 days in advance, we will then determine appropriate levels of support and co-ordinate participation with RCAF Wings and Squadrons. At this point it is very important to understand that any RCAF flying activity in support of requested special events is determined at the squadron level and is entirely at the discretion of the Commanding Officer of that squadron. Squadrons will determine if they can support a request based upon their ability to utilize their training hours and still maintain an appropriate level of readiness. If a particular squadron feels they cannot meet their readiness posture, they will decline a request for a special event. Approximately 30 days prior to the event, Squadrons will be in a better situation to assess their training requirements and therefore, will determine if they can support a special event request. If the Squadron responds positivelythen the request will be reviewed bythe Commander, 1 Canadian Air Division two weeks prior to the event. Assuming the requested support for a particular special event is approved, the Squadrons providing aircraft will receive specific instructions regarding their participation. This message is called a "Coordination Message" and the individual making the original request will be included as a recipient— by email. Coordination messages contain the name of the individual requesting the event as well as his/her telephone numbers and email addresses. The Squadron/aircrew will make contact with the individual requesting RCAF support to make final arrangements forsuch things as timings, routings, accommodations and transportation, as necessary. -6- 17/01/2017 28 1.6 Foreign Military Participation at Canadian Sites All foreign military aircraft must be authorized by 1 CAD HQ and Special Events for participation at a Canadian civilian or military air show. It is important that timely action be taken to ensure proper authorization is finalized well in advance of the display. To this end, 7 to 10 days prior to the event, notification must be sent to 1 CAD HQ or Special Events via email with the details of the confirmed foreign military participation. The format is as follows: a. FLY: USAF 1 X F15 DEMO USN 1 X E613 FLY -BY b. STATIC: USN 1 X F14 USCG 1 X CC130 RAF 1 X TORNADO If a foreign participant is unsure whether they can attend, include the aircraft in the message as TBD (to be determined). 2.0 AIR OPERATIONS 2.1 Weather Limits RCAF aircraft performing a demonstration at an air display must adhere to specific safety distances and other air display regulations. This information is outlined both in Canadian Aviation Regulations (CARS) and in RCAF Flying Orders. These limits vary depending on the aircraft type providing the performance. Please refer to the appropriate annex in this document for specific aircraft requirements. Regardless of the weather forecast, actual conditions present at the time of the display will be assessed to arrive at a Go or No -Go decision. The aircraft commander or formation lead will have the final say on whether or not a flying performance will be conducted. Note: In the event that a performance is cancelled, the air show organizer remains financially responsible for the items detailed within this manual. Airspace Reservations 2.1.1 Canadian Show Site Restriction Requirements RCAF aircraft require "Restricted" or "Class F' airspace to be reserved for all performances. Specific timelines for this reservation are detailed in each team annex of this document. Despite the airspace classification, normal operations can be conducted up to the point that the RCAF aircraft begins to taxi. All traffic must be clear of the restricted area prior to the scheduled take off. 2.1.2 United States Show Site Restriction Requirements Anytime RCAF aircraft perform an aerobatic show/demonstration or low level flight in the USA, an FAA waiver is required. This waiver can be obtained by contacting the nearest Flight Standards District Office (FSDO) and filling out the FAA form 7711-2 "Application for Certificate of Waiver or Authorization". This request must be submitted at least 90 days prior to the demonstration or air show. The waiver request must be accompanied with a map or -7- 17/01/2017 Wel diagram of the desired demonstration/show site. Please contact the local FSDO for all details regarding waivers and NOTAM requirements. The Federal Aviation Regulations (FARs) required to be waived are as follows; FAR 91.117 FAR 91.119 FAR 91.127 FAR 91.129 FAR 91.131 FAR 91.303 2.1.3 Dimensions of Restricted Airspace The dimensions of the restricted airspace required in both Canada and the United States are as follows: The Snowbirds require ten (10) NM radius centred on show centre with a height of 7,500 feet AGL. While a 10 NM radius is preferred, this maybe reduced. Only the Snowbird Team Lead can accept reduced restricted airspace dimensions. If you require reduced restricted airspace contact the team for approval and advise 1 CADHQ/Special Events accordingly The CF18 Demo Team require five (5) NM radius centered on show centre with a height of 7,500 feet AGL minimum. During the show, VFR weather conditions permitting, the CF18 climbs vertically to 18,000 AGL and, therefore, must have this airspace coordinated with the appropriate ATC unit for the 3 minute duration it takes to conduct this manoeuvre. 2.2 Notice to Airmen (NOTAM) Requirements: both Canadian and American Shows Where Restricted / Class F airspace has been granted, Transport Canada or the FAA will issue a NOTAM prior to the show date. However, there are extenuating circumstances where Restricted Airspace may not be available. If this is the case, it is important that 1 CADHQ/Special Events be advised as soon as possible. As a minimum, a NOTAM will need to be issued. This can be done by contacting the nearest Nav Canada Regional Office. The request for a NOTAM must be made a minimum of 60 days in advance to the Regional Air Navigation Services and Airspace Branch for Transport Canada. The NOTAM must be issued a minimum of 7 days in advance of the event. The following is an example of the NOTAM that is required to be in place for the Snowbirds and the CF18 Demo Team. The organizer is to ensure that the NOTAM includes the authority from the air show control and tower prior to permitting anyone to fly into the airspace as per the last line of the example below. °HALIFAX/SHEARWATER 03 NOTAMN CYAW IN ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION 5.1 OF THE AERONAUTICS ACT, THE AIRSPACE WITHIN A 10 NM RADIUS OF AIRPORT IS RESTRICTED DURING THE SHEARWATER INTERNATIONAL AIR SHOW. SFC TO 15000 FT MSL. NO PERSON SHALL OPR AN ACFT WITHIN THE AREA DESCRIBED EXCEPT AS AUTH BY AIR SHOW CONTROL AND SHEARWATER TWR, VHF FREQ 126.2, UHF FREQ 340.2.03MMDDHHMM TIL 03MMDDHHMM" It is important that the NOTAM be worded exactly as this example. For US NOTAMs, the request must be submitted to your regional FAA/ FSDO office. Please note that NOTAMs are required for the arrival manoeuvres, practice (if required) and the show(s). -g- 17/01/2017 091 For United States Temporary Flight Restriction (TFR), you are required to obtain a TFR from your local FAA office. The request for a TFR must be submitted 120 days prior to your show/event. This TFR should cover the duration of the arrival manoeuvres, practice, and performances. The TFR in conjunction with the NOTAM prevents all non -participant aircraft incursions during the applicable times. 2.2.1 Special Flight Operations Certificate (SFOC) A Special Flight Operations Certificate (SFOC) is authorization for civilian air demonstrations and is obtained from Transport Canada. The event organizer must submit an application to Transport Canada no later than 60 days in advance of the planned performance. For additional information, contact your Transport Canada Regional Manager of General Aviation. An SFOC is not required for RCAF aircraft. 2.3 Show Site Criteria 2.3. Sterile Air Display Area (SADA) The Snowbirds, CF18 Demo, and all RCAF aircraft require a sterile area (No one other than essential personnel are allowed into this area known as the "sterile air display area") as detailed in the diagram below. Event organizers are required to exercise access control over this area. Security personnel must block access roads that may enter or cross this area. Any buildings that may be within this area must be vacant. These measures must be in place if military demonstrations are to be performed. This includes all practice days as well as performances. The markers used to display the show line must be discernable at least 2 miles from show centre at an altitude of 200 feet. The crowd left and crowd right markers must be clearly visible from the highest altitude required by the applicable team. Show sites in Canada at which military aircraft perform must meet all RCAF requirements. There are 5 markers as designated in the image below: • One marker at show centre, situated on the Show Line at the centre of the Show Box; • Two markers on the show line, each approximately 1,500 ft either side of the show centre marker. (If it is not geographically possible to locate each one 1,500 ft from the Show Centre marker, they need to be equidistant); and • Stage right and stage left markers 500 ft from the left and right edge of the Crowd Line. The barrier defining the crowd line must not be closer than 500 feet from the closest edge of the active runway. As our aircraft manoeuvre to the rear of the crowd, the Crowd Line should normally be no longer than 5,000 ft. -9- 17/01/2017 31 The Show Line is a line on the ground that the pilots must not cross while performing most manoeuvres during the show. Marking can be accomplished in a number of ways, but whichever method is utilized, it must be visible from 300 — 500 feet above ground, 2 —3 nautical miles away, for an aircraft, moving at upwards of 5 miles a minute (300 kts). Objects that make the best show lines are runways, tractor trailers, and school buses. The show line must be marked so that it can be easily seen from the air. The show line does not have to be a line drawn on the ground however; it has to be three objects in a row along the designated show line. If your proposed show line is located in a field or in the trees without naturally occurring geographical references, please inform 1 CAD Special Events as soon as possible. Close coordination will be required to ensure acceptable show line marking. 3 ()0() rt larker The show line must be set up prior to the arrival of RCAF aircraft so that an assessment and familiarization of the show site can be made prior to any practices or performances. It is important that the left, centre and right show line markers lineup precisely along the designated show line. A GPS should be used wherever possible to line up the markers. Inability to properly align your show line markers will make providing a safe and effective show more difficult. The Snowbirds and/or the CF18 Demo pilots will provide feedback to the Point of Contact following their arrival at the location of the event. It is essential that the SADA be completely clear of all people. This means that no other aircraft may operate within the airspace or any vehicle operate within the confines of the sterile air display area on the ground while the aircraft is manoeuvring. This policy also applies to buildings and roads lying within the sterile air display area. Essential vehicles such as Aircraft Rescue Fire Fighting (ARFF) and Security Units are permitted on a limited basis. Maintaining security of the SADA is essential to providing a safe air show and 1 CAD/Special Events expects compliance with this critically important requirement. In the event of a security breach of the SADA during the show, the appropriate safety pilot shall be advised as soon as possible. While regrettable, there will almost certainly bean immediate suspension of the demonstration. Both the RCAF safety pilot and/or the Air Boss present have the authority and responsibility to suspend the show. 17/01/2017 0 2.3.2 Overwater Shows Show line requirements for an over -water show are the same as those for a land based performance. This means that the 1,500 ft show line must be marked in the same manner as it would be for a land based show. The two crowd line markers, each 500 ft on either side of the end of the crowd line, may be placed on shore or in the water as required by local geography. Experience has proven that single anchored buoys are not easily visible, especially in rough water; therefore, multiple buoys may be needed to ensure that the show line is visible from the air. Experience has also shown that yellow markers are the easiest to see. 2.3.3 Reduced Show Line Waivers The SADA must measure 3,000' wide by 6,000' long and have 500'X 500' extensions at both ends bringing the total length to 7,000'. The 3,000' width is divided into two areas separated by the show line; the primary spectator area (near side) and the secondary spectator area (far side). This creates a show line 1,500' from the crowd line. Occasionally, a naturally occurring show line (a tree line or a river for example) is evident at a distance less than 1,500' from the crowd line. If unable to provide a show box as detailed above (but can meet the pre -requisites outlined below), it may be possible to apply for a waiver to reduce the distance from the primary spectator or secondary spectator areas, but not both, to the show line to as little as 1,200' in order to take advantage of the naturally occurring show line. The conditions of a reduced show line waiver are: The show line must be a permanent, unique "prominent terrain feature." The pilots must be able to easily recognize it at 300 kts and 300'. Examples would be a runway, river, or unique tree line. Artificial markers such as flags and fences etc., do not qualify; The intent is not to allow bringing the crowd closer to the performance area but to take advantage of naturally occurring features. To mitigate aircraft having to manoeuvre in a smaller area, it's essential that the reduced show line is a precise and very obvious show line. Detailed maps or aerial photographs must be submitted for approval; For show sites in the USA, a copy of either the FAA waiver or a letter from the FAA stating approval of the show site; Application does not equate to approval. A 90 -day minimum lead time is required; and Each application will be handled on a case by case basis. If it is determined that a reduced show line waiver would be beneficial, contact 1 CAD Special Events at the addresses found at the beginning of this manual. 17/01/2017 33 2.3.4 Other Flying Demonstrations There are other flying demonstrations available as listed in the table below. However, as previously stated in this document, operational commitments and training requirements will determine support for the requested event. Consequently, the flying demos listed below cannot be confirmed until two weeks prior to the requested event date. Also, please be aware that due to the possibility of higher priority missions, 1 CAD may have to cancel the flying demonstrations at any time. CH 146 Griffon Tactical Flying Demo, SAR Demo CH 149 Cormorant SAR Demo CC130H Hercules SAR Demo CP140 Aurora Operational Flying Demo CC115 Buffalo Operational Flying Demo 2.3.5 Flying Display Area for Helicopters The minimum size of the sterile air display area for a helicopter demonstration is an area that measures 3,000' (if required, this can be reduced to 2000' with approval) in width and 1,000' in depth. The same criteria and safety requirements mentioned in Para 2.4.1 remain applicable to helicopters. 2.3.6 Helicopter Landing Site Requirements RCAF helicopters requested to support air and static displays require a landing site that is no closer than 500 feet to any spectator or an area that is 1,000' in diameter. This is in the interests of spectator safety and protection from flying debris caused by rotor wash. The diagram below details the minimum distances required fora helicopter to land. In addition to the Mayor's approval letter and the map detailed in Para 1.6, if the proposed landing site is not at an aerodrome, permission from the landowner must accompany the required documentation. —12— Crowd Line 17/01/2017 If the helicopter is to land within an already secure area, i.e. an area where there will be no spectators — such as private property, or will land at a time of day where no spectators are present, then the distance requirement of the landing zone can be waived. However, 1 CAD Special Events will need verifiable proof to authorize these exceptions. A Google Earth image of the landing site and a Land Use Authority letter can usually accomplish this requirement. 2.3.7 Flybys RCAF aircraft are available for ceremonial flybys. These would include Canada Day, Remembrance Day and typically events with either an aviation or military connection or a community event. It can consist of up to two passes. If the flyby is to take place over any part of a city or town, a letter from the Mayor acknowledging this request will be required. These passes will be conducted at 1000 feet above the highest obstacle within 2000 feet of the aircraft at a speed not to exceed 250 knots as required by both civilian and military regulation. If you wish the aircraft to be lower than 1000 feet, two waivers must be obtained to allow the aircraft to fly as low as 500 feet; one from the Mayor of the community, the other from the Commander of 1 Cdn Air Div. The Mayor's waiver would be included in the approval letter and would specifically state "as low as 500 feet". The Commander's waiver would occur after the Mayor's approval has been received and will be requested by 1 CAD Special Events staff. See Para 2.5 Municipal Government Acknowledgement. As well, a map showing the location to be over flown (GPS coordinates are preferred) must be forwarded to Special Events via email as soon as possible. Google Earth is a sufficient means of providing this map. If the event includes livestock, 1 CAD will require a Letter of Indemnification from the organizer absolving DND of any legal action should harm come to the livestock as a result of the flyby. If an indemnification letter is not received and livestock is present, we will be unable to conduct the flyby. 2.4 Municipal Government Approval The RCAF requires a letter from the Mayor, Reeve or Municipal authority authorizing RCAF aircraft to overfly "built-up areas" (cities) at less than 1,000 feet. The minimum lowest altitude allowed by regulation is normally 1,000 feet, however, under certain circumstances such as community ceremonies and commemorations, altitudes as low as 500 feet can be authorized. It is the responsibility of the Event Organizer to obtain this letter from the Municipal authority's office and to forward it to 1 CAD Special Events. The letter must specifically state "no lower than 500 feet" or "as low as 500 feet" above ground. Some city councils will have a designated person, such as a City Manager, who can sign on behalf of the mayor. These letters should be scanned and emailed to 1 CAD at SpecialEventsa-forces.gc.ca. 2.5 Imagery of the Show Site / Flyby Route 1 CAD Special Events requires a map of the SADA over which the aircraft will perform. For flybys, we require a highlighted map of the flyby route. The best tool for this is Google Earth. These maps must include the GPS coordinates for show centre for air shows. For flybys, GPS coordinates should be provided for the flyby target. Please forward this diagram along with all other show site maps to 1 CAD Special Events, the Snowbirds, and the CF18 Demo pilot (as required) via email at your earliest possible convenience. -13- 17/01/2017 35 Practice Days for Snowbirds and CF18 Demo The Snowbirds and the CF -18 demo must have a scheduled practice on the day prior to the air show. This practice slot must be a minimum of 45 minutes for the Snowbirds and 25 minutes for the CF18 Demo. The above-mentioned sterile air display area and NOTAM as well as all road closures must be in effect for this practise. If this cannot be arranged, please contact Special Events to discuss options. 2.6 Mobile Aircraft Arrestor System (MAAS) Team Under certain circumstances, at show sites where the runway length is less than 6,000', the CF18 can land and work off of this runway but only with the installation of arrestor gear to help recover the aircraft. The RCAF has mobile arrestor gear systems (MAAS) that can be installed at the request of the Event Organizer. The MAAS can be made available for all hook equipped military aircraft including USAF aircraft. Typically, where MAAS are required and requested, the cost of installation and recovery will be borne by the Event Organizer. This cost was more than $20,000 per air show in the summer of 2013. Specific requirements for each site will be co-ordinated by the MAAS Team Leader. Prior to the event, the Team Leader will contact the Event Organizer to establish a pre -site visit. The MAAS Team will generally arrive two to three days prior to the event and will depart two days after the event. Close communications/co-ordination between the (military) Air Display Director, (civilian) Flight Operations Director, Air Traffic Control and the MAAS Team Leader is required. 2.6.1 MAAS Team Logistical Requirements The requirement for MAAS will be determined by 1 CAD Special Events. In the event MAAS is required, the Event Organizer will be responsible for providing accommodations and transportation for the 6 -person crew. In addition, organizers must be prepared to provide the team with support equipment that includes the following: • a 20 ton (minimum) capacity crane with operator for load and off load; • a 2.5 ton (minimum) capacity forklift for use during load, off load, and system placement & removal; • a 2.5 to 5 ton Trans Canada type truck with operator and pintle hook or large loader with pintle for use during load, off load, and system placement & removal; • at some locations, a "Bob Cat" or drilling rig may be required to facilitate installation of the anchors; and • a 4x4 pick-up truck available until departure, for use during system installation and operation. 2.8 Flight Operations Director (Air Boss) Although there presently is no certification or licence required within the Canadian air show industry to be an Air Boss*, it is the responsibility of the event organizers to ensure that their Air Boss has the required experience, the requisite expertise and the confidence of the performers to carry out this duty. * The FAA is working with ICAS to certify Air Bosses in the U.S. prior to the 2018 air show season. Transport Canada is looking into the possibility of doing the same thing in Canada during the next few years. 1 CAD supports the concept of Air Boss certification. -14- 17/01/2017 36 Ground Support Coordinator At designated air display sites in Canada, where significant numbers of military aircraft are involved, a Ground Support Co-ordinator will be appointed to co-ordinate and supervise military ground support personnel and equipment. The cost of transporting equipment from a military base to the air show site will be the responsibility of the Event Organizer. The GSC will ensure all supporting equipment and personnel are properly requested and in place for the air display. The GSC team shall be provided accommodations and transportation as described in the following Para 3.1 - "Organizer's Responsibilities". 3.0 LOGISTICAL SUPPORT 3.1 Organizer's Responsibilities Organizers of an air display are responsible for providing accommodations and ground transportation and all associated fees (i.e. landing fees, parking fees). The minimum number of crew members you will be required to host by aircraft type is outlined below. Organizers requesting a flyby may not be required to provide any of the following items listed in this paragraph; please call for confirmation. 3.2 Transportation Transportation can be either rental vehicles or courtesy cars with 1 full tank of gas (with sufficient space for personnel, equipment and baggage) or crew transport that is both easily and frequently available. If either rental cars or courtesy cars are utilized, the organizer is responsible for providing the necessary insurance for all crew members to drive the vehicle. For Snowbird and CF18 Demo Team transportation requirements, air show organizers will receive specific instructions from the team coordinators on the number and size of rental vehicles required. 3.3 Meals Provision of meals is not required. However, if crews are expected to remain at their aircraft through the course of a day -long air show, then meal provision will need to be discussed with 1 CAD Special Events. 3.4 Accommodations Military crews spend a lot of time on deployed operations and training away from home. Therefore, the minimum standard of accommodation for each crew member is to have a single hotel room that is modern, clean, and quiet. Each room should be configured with: 1. One double bed with a separate bathroom; and 2. Standard media/communication (telephone, TV and Internet). 3.4.1 Specific Crew Requirements The Snowbird and CF18 Demo Team accommodation requirements do not vary much from location to location. The organizer should be prepared to set aside 30 rooms for the Snowbirds and eight for the CF -18 Demonstration Team. The coordinators for both teams will confirm with the organizer the actual requirement (number of team members attending) prior to the airshow in sufficient time so that the organizer can release any unused rooms. Below is a chart indicating specific aircraft and crew complements. Please note these are minimum crew complements. The organizer is obligated to host this number unless special arrangement is made through 1 CAD Special Events and the participating unit. The sponsor may host additional crewmembers, but is not obligated to do so. -15- 17/01/2017 Kul AIRCRAFT DESIGNATOR COMMON NAME CREW COMPLEMENT MINIMUM RUNWAY CF188 HORNET STATIC - 2 5000' CT142 DASH 8 STATIC/FLY - 6 5000 CP140 AURORA STATIC/FLY - 8 5000' CH124 SEA KING STATIC/FLY - 6 Helo CH146 GRIFFON STATIC/FLY - 4 Helo CH149 CORMORANT STATIC/FLY - 5 Helo CC130H HERCULES STATIC/FLY - 5 3000' CC130J HERCULES STATIC/FLY - 4 3000' CC115 BUFFALO STATIC/FLY - 7 1500' CC138 TWIN OTTER STATIC/FLY - 4 2000' CF LEASED AIRCRAFT CT -156 HARVARD II STATIC - 2 3500' CT -155 HAWK STATIC - 2 6000' BH -06 JET RANGER STATIC - 2 Helo C90B KING AIR STATIC - 2 4000' 120A Grob 120A STATIC - 2 2000' * requires MAAS Aircraft Security Aircraft security is the Event Organizer's responsibility. Annex E provides a detailed breakdown of the security requirements. 3.5 Aircraft Fuel The government providing the aircraft, using applicable NATO procedures, pays for fuel for NATO military aircraft. For RCAF aircraft, one of the crew will pay for fuel using a Canadian Government or US DOD credit card. In some cases, a corporate fuel credit card maybe used. Most aircraft types use JP -8 or JET A and some aircraft may require oxygen. Please confirm aircraft requirements with the pilot when contact is made a few weeks prior to the event. At an airport where a DND services contract is in place, refuelling must be carried out by the contractor regardless of other sponsorship arrangements made by the air show. In all cases, the invoice must go directly from the corporate supplier to the Department of National Defence. At designated major air display sites, this can be co-ordinated by the Ground Support Co-ordinator. Under no circumstances is fuel for Canadian or NATO military aircraft to be charged to or paid for by the Event Organizer and subsequently billed to the Canadian Government. Mark-up of fuel sold to military aircraft is not permitted. Arrangements for non -NATO military aircraft are the responsibility of the Event Organizer and the providing nation (e.g.: Eastern European, Middle Eastern, or Pacific nations). -16- 17/01/2017 38 Music Licenses It is the Event Organizer's responsibility to ensure the appropriate licences have been obtained for the music used to accompany the air displays. This must be done well in advance. In Canada, the Society of Composers, Authors and Music Publishers (SOCAN - www.socan.ca, 800-557-6226) is the agency responsible for issue of the required licence. In the USA, the event organizer must contact BMI at 877-264-2137, ASCAP at 800-505-4052 and SESAC at 800-826-9996 to obtain the licence. 4.0 PUBLIC RELATIONS 4.1 Public Relations Procedures Whenever DND assets are used in any form of promotion for an event, approval must first be sought through 1 CAD Public Affairs. For the Snowbirds and CF18 specific events, please contact the respective team public affairs staff for assistance. Their contact information can be found in annex A and B respectively. 4.2 1 CAD Public Affairs Office Contact Information Email: +PA @forces.gc.ca Office: (204) 833-2500 Ext 2030 Fax: (204) 833-2512 4.3 VIP / Sponsors / Air Show Performers Chalets Separate chalets, away from the general public, are a common feature of most air shows. RCAF air crew in attendance at air shows would typicallyfall under the "performer" category. Senior and General Officers attending an air show would be considered VIPs. Where chalets have been specifically designated, the following is provided as a guideline: Where there are only VIP and Sponsors chalets, the following is provided as a guideline: Performers VIP Sponsors RCAF Air Crew Normal access At the invitation of the At the invitation of the Sponsor Snr & General Event Organizer Sponsor Snr & General Normal access Normal access At the invitation of the Officers Sponsor Sponsor Where there are only VIP and Sponsors chalets, the following is provided as a guideline: The intent of the above guidance is not for crews to spend lengthy periods of time in a VIP or Sponsor chalet away from their primary duties of being available to display RCAF aircraft to the public. Event Organizers are encouraged to make VIPs and Sponsors aware that military air crews are available for invitation. A separate participant's chalet would meet the purpose of crew rest and meals but, if not available, then limited access to the VIP chalet would meet this same purpose. -17- 17/01/2017 061 VIP Sponsors RCAF Air Crew Limited access At the invitation of the Sponsor Snr & General At the invitation of the Normal access Officers Sponsor The intent of the above guidance is not for crews to spend lengthy periods of time in a VIP or Sponsor chalet away from their primary duties of being available to display RCAF aircraft to the public. Event Organizers are encouraged to make VIPs and Sponsors aware that military air crews are available for invitation. A separate participant's chalet would meet the purpose of crew rest and meals but, if not available, then limited access to the VIP chalet would meet this same purpose. -17- 17/01/2017 061 5.0 ANNEXES 5.1 Annex A K I. I - IVICIVUI to LAULVI - M11 01 1UW March 29, 2011 Captain Bruce. Ehirnarin, Special Evierits Plans 1 Canadlan Ah, Vivislon Ilpadquartrw% National Defence P6 Box 11000 SW rorcip_5 W4iinipog, M�n�toba R3J3 5 l'o the Canadlan, Forces �nowbirdO`earn: Re , W.U.g.r tir riVicar„ A Li � AShow 6p. V On July 1,6 and 17, 2011 and citizens of thin city of Xrdrie and area wjR dee ht, in, your perfon-rancv. We excRedfly awaift your arrival and are pl(.,,,as(-,d to provide this letter of suplicrt to fly over our contrnunity, ablidirg by all regulatlons applicable for, this ac-fivitv at 5DO feei above the, highoo, obstade ovpr ground lowal Thfn refe�r, to the arrival day and sporilsor recogni,hoft and volunteer ofiLritatronflights which will be held between Thursday, July 15 arid Monday, July 118, 20111 - on behallf of Courldl, staff and Otizenh,, we are thrilled to ance aigarri have the Canadian Forces Snowlblrds perform In our remion. The learn can (,xpect outstandInf.; hospitality, excellent lire and post sh,aw events and a warna welcome frDrn all. if you have any questioii,s reg@rdlng the City of Airdrki, please contact the mayDir's office. at the Ctt'y of Airdrie, at D403) 948-8820, who can answer any questions the may arise. I Sincerely, Mayor Peter brow" Ge"'i plane oq RWITel: 40$-4)48.980iD Pllgk5ilpubfic. world Ffnegelcy sur,eWP;xwd lkpo cast Ulke 51W rirr dr). 10ah $r -r I 5F 5.F-tLAw ,HMNE munlUp"'I 511orciawnt"t AiMftl AR T4A 7K9 Nfdrlir duberu Vaal 3C'_3 i.888AJADRIE Airdidw, ABT4A.,?.V,) Ros Krim Strpof 1;w Fax: 19$ "aj8 po Airdilt, AR rqU $Cri wwwakdriox.a Fnw 401,.94 0 0614 -18- 17/01/2017 A 1.2 - Mayor's Letter - Flyby Mayl 2, 20 11 He 00,01-002-1/6 Captain Bruce Ehniann Spectal Events Plains 1 u,afiiadiiqn Apr Dvksioin Headquarters Nationah Defence PO Box, 17000 Stn IForces WRMPEG MB R3j 3Y5 Dear Captain Ehmwin Office of the Mayor Re:Approval for Fly OVel'—JWY 3, 2011 . ........................... ............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................. In response t!o Talxtha Goodiniari, Saskatchewan, Rough6der's, request foir appro4 of a fly past of Canadian Forces avcraft(s) at 500 feet o,,,ueiir the Mosaic Stadium at 5:03 p,m,. for CFL footbaH gaime on JIUhy 3, 20111 Nease Lake this corirelaponderiice as conFirmabon that the Cfty of Regina Iis aware of the proposed Hy pmt dwing the CFL fixtballll game 1.*kng held at Mosanc Sta6urry Subject to t1he Right cornppying wWi A appficable requk'ement:,, regLdahon5 an,d autho6zations as set by 'Frain:sprKt Canada and other relevaint Rlithorihe5l, the Oty of Reg�na 5uppoi-B the ffight as piropo5ed The participaboin cwF 115 Wing i5 most appreoated S h irr (., P r e 11 y, Rat Pismo an Mayor EII 17/01/2017 A 1.3 - City Official Letter — Flyby Winnipeg PLIVIvIWA, PWvpYWsj, and Deparkirml - SvVO,�v dr do 1"44,W111 m dw Filyn A vpwriol twum vr,wo dgrfiflffl vp A'% w4v'omovome* qpAriumu Cobniw V),o,,vbyhuz. 1pmuvoc)r off,tvcnfs WIIIVIuPev, f"ciodbaH Club Wmmrv,i, Mmt�lol[,%W Dew Ms Dvisbyhuz- RF-',', AIR FORCP FP(PNXi ACIIVITIFS IN p,TPOIRT OF' FU iLE (Al I'll, NI I;, R, J ,II V mm, 2011 It o, o"'m ff"w9 m aiconldmvx, "01 Caruhfiall Arm' Headiclumiln-, regul,uporv, arul ycmu re,upve ctrilticanon flhal' the p',o�'ermnq,� mun�,Llp,'0oy of un cd, dw 13hue IRof0mm,,% rq,T,Oar Fnda,,,.fijlvS,2011 - HIS�M-111P(Xfhcms A Carmfizin Ft)rccs G1Y) mo (T-P&INIMIS INIVC 1i r.moBm ICqUCSI[Cd NI fly 50G feci, Lhas the Cfu-p8 =eruft v0H nomunnfiq 'I SCLond m-�agh ,,;pced Hlov fly-bys "kill fiurn rhic west qA the Au&um, wow ^qwclfic dlmjoilm,, depert,deM upon 0W TT4,11fiC JIMUTTI 01 d1c airlsorl, m thitio, tirrav, Gven ae mature of the aircra0,, not corru,lainus mav ame, and %dll be by p7 Wv,q,11 Tfle Coly of %VamIqYeg, on, thio'se WrIns, vexpcs�, ;,snd e,xpiessoa no c&,Pjetsmms to 'y(uur pri'.qxvsa!, pu mug odc Ulm 0, an" of alesc servir, charlgc, die, ("ay of Mnu'urfq, is he tind th�Ar 01k wAH bC LOMSHICged aull arsd vcrii(,J Vhva Lomcspjrwdurp,wv us pfc,o,vl,wd or¢ flre spoMlt undostamhnp"I" dua the dI sn; tuumumur Iisml abo,,e VvIll fiAlpy on6mn Iko 0yvIpa0ment or Nati,owd Dd"MW Ng,LdatRIB aud all other uppNcaWe reqguhuoorls �,'md cfiwra. Furnheirrm',ire, flhas sualwam"ni yum in"ply any ors the oNthc 0Y', ofWum,"npeg Com ,ma' ham!i vW danop "C' "b,'a nm, If you vcquulc fUlThUT IkIMII dhc City of Mr,,nupcp, pflioase fed fiec o coWav, lity oRke, 6 S 'ClIvy Bkyciv, Managel CcMr O.D. )c"4% Dveooz - Magvumg, and Doekfpmera Dcporme ',,,w, Admooarmof� dg NIamm'a"'m R'41'1 �"9 hmO x""j- -20- 17/01/2017 :1P A 1.4 Mayor's Letter — Helicopter Landing 1;m_ Flzm June 17"s_ 20111 capla 'n jolul P PoweU Visits Officef 3 Area Support Group Hearkliumets Canadian Forces Base Gagetown PO, Box 17000 Sm. Forces Oromocto, NB E2V 4J5 Dear Sa, Re, L New Bnaimlick Day a=1 C",madjan Forot,,,, Duy 20111, City of Frectericton 'nil -Is lemur will seme as rsmlmmion for your �,,quadron to land a helicx4met in dw, City of Freder ict an I August 2011 in the parking lot of d1je victona Gencial Hospital We sweeiely appreciate yota partscipation m this event and muscipate as stumy, calm day fov optiarami, landmg, Tlank you for this opjxrfturuto host your selAwlton and to coatinue the bond forged betwmi you an ow City Suicerely, BRAD WOODSIDE -MAYOR CIC Heather BroAm, Special Events C oor dimitor offic of khe may P0 Saw 130 tC,4 Hail 1, 307 Queen 15v**� Fmdepiram, NB E3S 4'w'7 TeC; 500,400,M85,1 ;ac SN4134 ww".fr04erww,n_e3 ea` alihe'Maamm 2 (31 0 —21- Buireau du, make C P 130 (haw de vdley 3'9'3, rut Omeen Frpdenalm., "N.-6) E'N3 4)17 'T�l 508,400,M8 5 IF 505-4W 2134 wwwlredetictomea, 17/01/2017 A 2.0 Land Use Authority Letter for Helicopter Landing Approval- Land Owner Sco 6-10-j"'t ',,ikreet NXV IA)mee La Prairie, NIB F; IN I Z7 ��"01 8`57-7185 Ji ma 6 111 Dear Sir m. Nfw;km, As ths- E"'eclAh r 11 )ireoki'l, 44" 1-11)0,age � kraivriao Nurwr .sdmid Im „and ours� B(oa ,,,I )jjlre,'J,m�, I aJjrjpti5ve dw, reque.o 6w a hefio, (jjoilefvmn ard be a OaHc displam µA fl[w hunik I@1nerul talknK Iola( v at Ole exhibiflqpilu rqolwk od, Lskuvj Park am NImmdar%. htnv -'Olh-2,01 111"ori f arll*'Wer I �jVltr,11,11, 111(pr%tjfjl V krainml Vwser I ) kw -22- 17/01/2017 :1 E, I A 3.0 Indemnification Letter June 22, 2011 1CainaMar, D ni AJIOMon I I Wing P , 0 , Box 170010, Station Forces Wfnnlpeq, Manftoba R3J 3Y5 Atterrhow Captain Bruce Efirnarin Sjipeclall Events Coordinator Dew Sm: As you are aware, the Calgairy Starnipecte w0l take, place from Fnday July 8 - Sunday July 17, 20111 - We appreciate the do -se assoca ation we have wfth the Canadian Armed Forces and are pteased that t1ve folloMng wid be partrclpaUng at the 2011 Stampede; ai) F18 Hlornet(s) rlypast an Parade, rcxjte at a ry*wwnurn levo d of 500, feet on Frlday JUy 8 between 0830 and 01900, b) GrOon HeOcopter ca"mg a 20' x a0" Canadian flaq ands stabiltzmg barrel air a minErnurn 1 e Df 3100 feell for practice cm Wedrmisday July 7 (turning T'BD), d) Offlon(s) fly past w4hout the ffag at a irninimum, ievel of 300 feet before Grandstand Show at apprexrmleely 2200 onThursday July 7, e� Nightly Ry past of Griffrin lieficopter carrymM a 20'x 40' Cmia6an flag and slabiljzOng barrei at a mirrimuro kwel of 300 feet before ChUckwagon Paces and Grandstai'W Strow at appromirnattkly 20DO - Friday July 8 thru Sund'ay July 17, 2011 lndusfve, "Rosa calgary starrwecie wflil undemn&y and hod harmiess Vie Department of National Defense fear ltS partl�cipabon In the above mentioned events and will be responslIble for any injury to any anurMs on Stampede Park, 71ke Cana6an Armed Fcwces wvdld Indem nlfy and hrAd harnrless the, Calgwy Stampede for any ctaims aftng out of the neghgence Or misconduct of the Canadlan Armed Forces. We trust tNs 1s saOsfactwy, SMceredy Pauli Rnseriberg, Vice- Presldent Cc Caiptaln Patrick HoweV CaptaM Steve Charest C&II19MY tAIUbon, and surnpodm ILimted UPM 6W,601260 V 40,1 161,01101 F 40?L,70.?W1 www,UgatysWnMk,,wm —23- 17/01/2017 5.2 Annex B B 1.0 — AIR SHOW MAP 1.1 OVERLAND Le2end �,00 Ft Show Line 1000 Ft Show Line 14;00 ft Shov'- line Flying Display Area Primary Spectator Area , Static diplay Asea 7.......... I Air Sho,,% Arrciift Park-irru, and refueling area (hut pit) 0 Stage left and night markea� as iequired foi arc-in-ievieo, maivueutiYes Silcox Cclitre H ) Helicopte,z landing, orea Air Show central control Pyrotechnic area Parachute drop zone Medical facilities C rash fire rescue Emeng-ency access foute —24- 17/01/2017 B 2.0 Air Show Map — Over Water B 3.0 Flyby Map -25- :11FA Tnget is the Forks 49" 53"21.37„N 97 07' 4 7 66” W TDvffi ON TARGET IS 1614,30 Obstacles rid mid crane outImed m yellow Caniera and ground control location Blue circle 17/01/2017 B 4.0 Helicopter Landing Map -26- 17/01/2017 !E:3 5.3 Annex C C 1.0 SECURITY CHECKLIST 1Cdn Air Div Security Requirements and Checklist Annex C -27- 17/01/2017 Definitions 1. An "armed response" is defined as a security force that is in place at an air display to provide a response to an incident affecting a CF aircraft. The air show shall utilize only LEA's such as RCMP, Provincial Police or local Police. Military air shows will use Military Police and WASF personnel for security at the air show. 2. A "bonded cleared" security guard is defined as an employee of a security company that has met the CAN/CGSB-133.1-99 standard for security guards within Canada. 3. An "enhanced security guard" is defined as a volunteer with the air show who has undergone a background check to ensure suitability for the role of guarding aircraft. General 4. Forward the security layout to 1 CDN AIR DIV Special Events no later than 30 days prior to the date of the event. The required information shall include a. Verification of the security guards' reliability b. Verification of the security force provider/employer reliability c. Identity of the provider of the armed response if other than the agency providing the security guards d. Air show layout, detailing static parking plan, car parking plan and entry points to flight line and static line e. Plan for controlling the general public. i.e. searching of hand carried items, not allowing coolers, etc. 5. At Schedule I Aerodromes (list below) the static line shall be handed back to the airport authority after air show hours thus meeting the restricted area requirement. If the aforementioned is not the case, then "bonded cleared" security will be required to guard the aircraft. At non -Schedule I Aerodromes, a "bonded cleared" security guard will be required to guard the aircraft after the air show hours of operation. One guard per restricted area. 6. A 24 hour armed response must be capable of responding to an alarm affecting CF aircraft within 5 min. Static Displays 7. A cordon is to be placed around the aircraft to a distance of 3.5m (10 ft). The distance for the CP -140, CC -130, CC -150, CC - 115 and the CT -142 can reduced so that the general public is not able to touch the aircraft and is not permitted under any part of the aircraft. This area will be considered a restricted zone a. All CF aircraft may be contained within a single restricted zone b. After air show hours, one "bonded cleared" security guard shall be present for each restricted area. Access to the restricted area after air show shall be limited to authorized personnel c. No other aircraft are to be parked within 3.5m (10 ft) of the restricted area d. Hand carried items by visitors are subject to a physical search, which shall be carried out if physical searches of hand carried items are not conducted as personnel enter the air show grounds 8. If the aircraft are to open to the public, a single entry and exit point shall be established along the cordon to control access. 9. If more than one aircraft is to be contained within a restricted area, a cordon shall be in place to ensure the flow of visitors is directly to and from the aircraft. 10. The entry and exit point shall be monitored with crewmembers and "enhanced security" air show personnel. The number of visitors allowed within the restricted area shall be no more than the crew can effectively monitor. 11. Provide security guards and crewmembers with communications that are capable of direct communications with the armed response agency. 12. Ensure that vehicle traffic on the static line is restricted to the following. a. Airfield service vehicles providing service and support for aircraft and aircrew b. Escorted crew vehicles c. Escorted concessions vehicles d. Emergency vehicles Flying Displays 13. CF aircraft are to be placed within a restricted area. A "bonded cleared" security guard shall ensure that access to the restricted area is limited to authorized personnel. 14. The security guard shall have communications that are compatible with the armed response -27- 17/01/2017 C 2.0 Schedule Aerodromes Schedule Aerodromes Schedule I Aerodromes Calgary international Edmonton International Halifax international Montreal International (Dorval) Montreal International (Mirabel) Ottawa —Macdonald -Cartier International Toronto — Lester B. Person International Vancouver International Winnipeg International Schedule II Aerodromes Charlottetown Fredericton Gander International Kelowna London Moncton Prince George Quebec Regina Saint John St. John's Saskatoon —John G. Diefenbaker Sudbury Thunder Bay Toronto Island Victoria Whitehorse Windsor Yellowknife -28- 6119] 17/01/2017 Z r LO � E +, O W v o ca Ln v � n a ro N p 1 D> +s+ fa n H_&_- _N +� `� t6ro N O N d N N O i1 N d O U ++ N O L - t6 t6ro N N N M Ln N to Q O +'4- N O L% L- B M _ N N nA c O i M M c-I r-I N C O N W rl Q H to r -I r -I Z >-cn 3: cn OC Z Ln cn r LO October 12, 2017 Special Events I Canadian Air Division Headquarters National Defence PO Box 17000 Stn Forces Winnipeg, MB R3J 3Y5 Dear Sir/Madam: The Municipality of Saint John is supportive of a flyby by RCAF Aircraft, as low as 500 feet, for the planned 2017 Canadian Owners and Pilots Association Convention & Tradeshow being held in Saint John, New Brunswick, for transit, practice and shows on June 22 & 23, 2018. Yours truly, Don Darling Mayor 61► COMMON COUNCIL REPORT M&C No. 2017. ..264 Report Date October 11, 2017 Meeting Date October 16, 2017 Service Area Growth and Community Development Services His Worship Mayor Don Darling and Members of Common Council SUBJECT: Request for funding from Growth Reserve Budget, Develop SJ OPEN OR CLOSED SESSION This matter is to be discussed in open session of Common Council. AUTHORIZATION Primary Author Commissioner/Dept. Head City Manager Steve Carson I Jeff Trail RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that Common Council adopt the following resolution: Adopt the allocation of a $25,000 grant from the Growth Reserve Fund, which was adopted as a recommendation to Council from the Growth Committee on October 3rd, 2017, and be transferred to Saint John Industrial Parks to support one-time transitional expenditures associated with Develop Saint John. Adopt the transfer of the $90,000, which was approved by Common Council on March 27th, 2017 for the Real Estate Alignment Exercise, to Saint John Industrial Parks for transitional expenditures associated with Develop Saint John. Adopt the transfer of $37,500 from the Real Estate Division, Finance and Administrative Services, which is a portion of the Department's projected budget surplus for 2017, to Saint John Industrial Parks for transitional expenditures associated with Develop Saint John. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Director of Strategic Real Estate is working towards the start-up of Develop Saint John for January 1, 2018. There is a myriad of activities that require action and funding. In order to ensure the new company is up and running, the 6V -2 - requisite interim funding must be in place and there must be a conduit to facilitate the expenditures and associated payments. The Growth Committee granted, subject to Council approval, an additional $25,000 towards this work on October 3rd which compliments the $90,000 already approved in the Growth Budget. An additional $37,500, which is a portion of the Real Estate Department's projected budget surplus for 2017, is also sought for this start up purpose. Saint John Industrial Parks for its part has $17,500 in projected savings which will form the last of the $170,000 budget required to establish Develop Saint John. Real Estate is significantly under budget as at the time of this report for 2017 as the allowance for real property taxes alone carries significant unspent monies ($34,300) due to the Coast Guard remaining on site for the 2017 operating year and hence paying in full its share of property taxes. PREVIOUS RESOLUTION N/A STRATEGIC ALIGNMENT Growth and prosperity is a pillar of Council's priorities for 2016-2020. Develop Saint John is charged with the growth of the tax base through investment attraction for strategic properties. REPORT The Director of Strategic Real Estate is working towards the start-up of Develop Saint John for January 1, 2018. There is a myriad of activities that require action and funding. In order to ensure the new company is up and running as per the plan, the requisite interim funding must be in place and there must be a conduit to facilitate the expenditures and associated payments. The Growth Committee granted $25,000 towards this work on October 3rd subject to Council approval, which compliments the $90,000 previously approved by Council in the Growth Budget. An additional $37,500, which is a portion of the Real Estate Department's projected budget surplus for 2017, is also sought for this start up purpose. Saint John Industrial Parks for its part has $17,500 in projected savings which will form the last of the $170,000 budget required to establish Develop SJ. Real Estate is significantly under budget as at the time of this report for 2017 as the allowance for real property taxes alone carries significant unspent monies ($34,300) due to the Coast Guard remaining on site for the 2017 operating year and hence paying in full its share of property 6'i! -3 - taxes. For accounting purposes, staff is advising that the most appropriate budget allocation to support transitional real estate alignment expenditures is through the existing structure of Saint John Industrial Parks. These transitional funds cannot be distributed to Develop Saint John in 2017 as it is not yet established as a legal entity, so Saint John Industrial Parks can be used as a temporary location to finance the expenditures of the real estate alignment exercise for the remainder of the 2017 fiscal year. The following highlights the transitional revenue and expenditures anticipated for Q4, 2017. DEVELOP SAINT JOHN - TRANSITIONAL BUDGET OCT -DEC, 2017 FXPFNSFS• Salaries/benefits $43,000 Project Support $44,000 Dev strategy, HR plan, KPIs $ 8,000 Office/admin/IT $10,000 Legal/accounting $15,000 Communications $10,000 Website/CRM Dev $40,000 TOTAL $170,000 REVENUE: City Growth Budget - Previously Approved $90,000 SJ Industrial Parks - Unallocated Budget $17,500 SJ Real Estate — Portion of Projected 2017 Budget Surplus $37,500 City Growth Reserve - New Request $25,000 TOTAL $170,000 INPUT from other SERVICE AREAS Input was received from Growth and Community Development, Finance and Administration, and Saint John Industrial Parks Ltd. 6191 4mJ (A 0 C6 u R +J QJ O • � • � C6 V) k z p L iwo z +J QJ O • � • � C6 V) k wWll�u �fl V��� III„ O ca Ln _0 E > 0 ° > ° O E cn O V •— — L7 -C a--+ • - O —0 > O CL O VL- O }, tw i O ° +� O E z —C CL O � 0 0 -0 ° C-0 ern L- O w V) Li O 00 _ Q r --I; f oN fu CO O a - O > ° O — vi V) O � V V Ca O > O V— +� O •— O ja :3 • Nl0 CL > C-0 > L- O w O Li W V a c O E _0 ca m E w V O m tw i U • tw tw 0 V � m U O _0 U— m V ca • r -M _O Ln • V) ca U tw • - E o E 'C: •— C: Ln 0 ,— 0 E C O • U V) i 0 E U tw C: .0 0 U • 0 w O 0 w i 0 ■■ u') m L O 0L a W H l0 r—I O N m -c,n- a� > O 0 V c6 E •V E O C O V c6 V O H v s O V O C— _0 _0 to � O V cam/) C6 J C- 141. N O O Ln D � � C- L 0 O c6 J � � O C- C6 � 0 +, C •V E 0L C6 bA 00 C6 Q rZi u') m L O 0L a W H l0 r—I O N m -c,n- a� > O 0 V c6 E •V E O C O V c6 V O H C6 O W � o +� aA ago N N LO 13 LO 4-j 4-j - .� +-j 4-j 3 4 — O > - - +, — Q E sC6 O +-+ V +- p O c6 � •N z L) O .E tf O Q Q O cn cn N E m A, u 00 O N N Q cn L 0) cn 0 U E U N C: N a) cn 0) 0) C •L- to .L '> O > — N m O 111111111111111m) C/) N N 42 cnC:O .� � C q p •� c „ •C N 4-0a 111111111110 cn =3 > O O N m 4-0 — � Q � � 0- O N 'E E U Ecu '� N > L Q O U 0}, 4-0cu Q Q Q � 0 4-j u O U) . . _ O •N ' a) 4- 0 4-j - > 2) O cn r N U) _0 4— C: c� a) O a) -0 > a) 00 0 a) 00 N N • — cn N .— E > O O E +� U � O O UC: O O c� � a) O — U cn •— _ o O 4-0 a) co co •— °' C:a) > o cn Co 4-10 cz 4-0 LuM a)C: C: _0 C: a) co 0 C: =3 a) 0 _0 a) 0 70 0- > 4-0 C: - E cn O U W N Co c6 O N >> C6 . — C: O N U QL U co U — o 0) U) QL Q- C: (f) .— cn M �° LL X Q Q Q W, 11 0 a U) 0 co I 0 CC � G Ln (D CIO � 60- i cn c: z ._ c: i E cn c: .� :3 cr O N E Q �� Vk°IIII6� P 0 V 011111 oll 0 a U) 0 co I 0 CC � G Ln (D CIO � 60- i cn c: z ._ c: i E cn c: .� :3 cr O N E Q a) L Co a) Co O fn OV mC: c � W O m U }' O cn > Yco co m °� U U U Q C/)o o= U Z3 O = _ D U- U U cn O fLn V O cn a vn 2 cn L O U- N O cn t� N N N LL t� •L O E C� G L El ry� W D O U LL m N 06 a cn ~ J � 0 O U ulll.lu LOC� }' cn p c+Nn Q -rCo NE O C/) u— E W E m O m N Q J J }' (n � Q -,-% (!) ^L^11 � 7 U m _ H N m >+ m O 0E 0O U L a O LmN Co U L = >1 L N a L O (D X O O JOU N -2 N AZ- .Lm � C/)_ -r = O L O + Cp .1 M 70 m H VJ a) L Co a) Co O fn OV mC: c � W O m U }' O cn > Yco co m °� U U U Q C/)o o= U Z3 O = _ D U- U U cn O fLn V O cn a vn 2 cn L O U- N O cn t� N N N LL t� •L O E C� G L El ry� W D O U LL m N 06 a cn ~ J � > O a E p U v O Q roN ro Q O ro ro Q U O O O N N N ro +, i +' > > >+� Q t6 N L L L ro LLn n N c N ro U O O m E c�i� N U +. +. +. ro t6 t6 N O N +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +� co � � � � C C C C C C N N N N Y to to N U N N N N N N > p cn + + � E E E E E E m rl c � U ro p N N 4— OO O O c p 0 Uc U N O O O O O O N (U � �E -0 -0-0 ro +V 72 O N N N cNNNo > N N N E +- fro +- fro +- fro +- fr"o N Q + + + + + + + + + + nA 06 Q > > > to to to to +, p v O O O N NM i i i i a N N N v O O O O O O O N N N U O +� to Q Q Q U� O O O O � N N N p O qA qA qA qA qA qA cn bz N N CO O O O O O O O O O co N N N N O bA O +, O > > > > Ln a +� +I - N Q •- N nA ro p ttA ttA ttA N N N N N N N N t6 t6 t6 t6 Q - = Y N co in in in - - - - - - - +. +. +. +. p a O v a w w w w O t6 co co co co U Co a O O a ro CL �i Ln Ln m 00 O O CO cn 00 co co � c v ro m O N u +' a to = N a N ro � •t6 `1 N � cc U L V G NN Co O Co cNi� Co N +' to a N 0 +' L +-; Ln O ?: O > _I_-> qA N N U to— ro cn O0 JO c U N N = _I_-O N ro (u i D qA N N +> O i N O N +' U O t6 N ro N �, a O 1 to O v ro N ro N f6 ro ro N 72 fLn N co +�-� = +�-� oo N a a > Y Y a -C — U O 1 Y Y— — C O N 'i N u — \ — CO O O 2 = � O Q N +, c6 nA c6 01 i i +, +, LO > > nA nA t6 O = t6 = = cn cn O N �_ N to UM d + Q + N N N O O O O Q r-i 6 = U= H U Z LLO LLO _= U N N U M Q >O o _-0 N 0 — N L -I N LL ( N i1 3 N Q Ln = t6 N N nA Q a v Q p N N N t6 m + + cn to nA t6 > u Nro i O •� N N t6 Q + cn N N O O p CO J ro N N N N LL LZ co Q > LILPi cn U I L U U N N .� 0 Q S i IC 11',j. IDII-) C NIADA � ;� 5 September 26, 2017 Jonathan Taylor Common Clerk City of Saint John 8th Floor City Hall Saint John, New Brunswick Dear Mr. Taylor Please accept the attached document requesting the Secondment of a City of Saint John employee to be the Games Manager for the upcoming Canada 55+ Games. This position would be a short term secondment, January 8, 2019 through September 28th, 2018, to assist with the planning and execution of this event and to ensure that the volunteer host organizing committee is able to fulfil our hosting requirements. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact either myself or co-chair Emil Olsen (506-647-4783). Thanks, Barb Curry Co -Chair, 2018 Canada 55+ Games 506-650-9300 1f_Crr canada55plussi.ca canada55p1ussj.ca 2018SJ55+ Mayor Darling and Members of Common Council, Re: Secondment Proposal SJ 2018 Canada 55+ Games Inc. will be hosting the Canada 55+ Games in Saint John, August 21-24, 2018. SJ 2018 Canada 55+ Games Inc. is co -Chaired by Barb Curry and Emil Olsen and welcomed Honourary Chair Scott McCain in the spring of 2017. This group of local businesspeople, and retirees, has formed an incorporation and are acting as the host organizing committee for this major event. This biennial event is comprised of multi -event games with a unique blend of active and passive activities. The mission of the Canada Senior Games Association is to work continuously to influence personal behaviour and social supports that encourage healthy, active living for older adults throughout Canada. The local host committee has been securing venues and planning detailed events for the Games over the past 12 months. These games will feature 24 events, played in 25 venues with 21 of the 25 venues located within the City of Saint John. These games are expected to bring 1500-2000 participants and their families to Saint John and will have an estimated economic impact of $3 million for our region. An event of this magnitude requires not only a great deal of financial commitment (we are forecasting an $850,000 operating budget) but also dedicated staff, that are able to be involved in the planning and execution stages of the event. The majority of the members of our host committee are still actively in the workforce so; we are putting forth this letter as a formal request for a secondment of a City of Saint John employee. The SJ 2018 Canada 55+ Games Inc. is looking for an employee that can fill the position of Games Manager. Their duties and responsibilities would be as follows: The Games Manager shall bring industry -related knowledge, sport contacts, technical expertise and previous sport management experience to the role. This individual will play a key part in the development and delivery of projects, reporting and strategies to ensure the events of the 2018 Canada 55+ Games are successfully delivered in collaboration with Games partners and key stakeholders. The Games Manager will manage key relationships with the local host committee members, venue contacts, Directors of the Canada Senior Games Association as well as Provincial Sport Organizations, Corporate Business partners and our local politicians. 1f_Crr canada55plussi.ca canada55plussj.ca 2018SJ55+ C:1'] The Games Manager must have experience in: 1. Planning and executing events as well as exhibiting progressive growth in leadership responsibilities/roles. 2. This individual should have a broad knowledge of sport, be able to development and manage complex projects, have strong management and leadership skills with an enhanced sense of accuracy and attention to detail. 3. Have strong leadership ability, proven decision making skills and good communication and negotiation skills. 4. The ability to focus and clarity when working under pressure. 5. Be highly organised and able to prioritise competing demands with a demonstrated ability to deliver under tight deadlines. 6. The ability to work with stakeholders at all levels of an organisation 7. Proven experience within budget management and corporate policies 8. Ability to work outside of traditional work hours. 9. Self-starter and quick learner who is able to manage his or her own time and work with little supervision. 10. Detail oriented and able to interact well with a wide group of personalities, excellent verbal and written communication skills. 11. Experience in meeting tight deadlines. 12. Excellent communication skills to facilitate organisational information sharing. 13. Proficient in Microsoft Word, Excel, Power -point, etc. 14. Accustomed to dealing with complex organisational issues and strategies. 15. A strong team player, prepared to work with all levels of the organisation. 16. Demonstrate a goal -oriented "hands-on" approach to achieving results with a strong achievement orientation, combined with high energy levels. A short term secondment is required to ensure that the host organizing committee is able to fulfil our hosting requirements. As such the term of this agreement would be for 5 days a week commencing January 8th, 2018 and ending September 28th, 2018. ICrr canada55plussi.ca canada55plussj.ca ] V 2018SJ55+ rill Received Date October 12, 2017 Meeting Date October 16, 2017 Open or Closed Open Session His Worship Don Darling and Members of Common Council Your Worship and Councillors: Subject: Stop Signs on Daniel Avenue Background: Residents have witnessed and endured a significant increase of vehicle traffic and excessive vehicle speeds following road construction 2 -years ago on Woodward Avenue. A traffic detour (onto Marlin Drive then right onto Daniel Avenue) and the implementation of two (2) three-way stop signs (on Woodward - one each at Brentwood Crescent and Ray Street) see many drivers continuing to take this "known short cut". They are collectively and gravely concerned for the safety of their respective families and those of the entire Daniel Avenue and Marlin Drive neighbourhood including children who attend M. Gerald Teed School and the YMCA Day Care and Community Centre, many of which walk and cross these streets to these locations. Residents therefore respectively request: - re -installation of three-way stop signs at Daniel Avenue and Westminster Court, - installation of three-way stop signs at Daniel Avenue and Bedell Avenue and, - following the signage installation, an initial concentration of vehicle activity monitoring and enforcement I understand the national traffic guidelines and studies concerning the use of stop signs and there ineffectiveness however, it was clearly recognized by local residents the stop signs worked when in place (for many years) at the corner of Westminster Court and Daniel Avenue. These signs had a significant impact allowing right-of-way and, contrary to reported studies, did not lead to increased acceleration or making up for lost time of which had a significant impact on vehicle speed coming over the blind knoll on Daniel Avenue heading west towards Marlin Drive. It is anticipated the same results would occur again with the re - installment of signs back at the corner of Daniel Avenue and Westminster Court and all residents agree the same positive results would occur at the corner of Daniel and Bedell Avenue. Motion: Council direct staff to immediately re -install the three-way stop signs at Daniel Avenue and Westminster Court, installation of three-way stop signs at Daniel Avenue and Bedell Avenue. And further that staff prepare a more appropriate and permanent traffic calming plan for Daniel Drive to be implemented in 2018. SAINT JOHN P.O. Box 1971 Saint Jahn, NB Canada E2L 4L1 I www.saintjohn.ca I C.R 1971 Saint John, N. -B. Canada E2L 4L1 ---- — I 71 Respectfully Submitted, (Received via email) John MacKenzie Councillor Ward 2 City of Saint John LA10 aii SAINT JOHN P.Q. Box 1971 Saint John, NB Canada E2L 4111 1 wwwsaintjohn.ca I CY 1971 Saint John, N. -B. Canada E21411 qq L u N N E N C7 ti mm� a 5400, U! $ N2 O N O -I Lr) ON 00 OCY) N r -I k6 r -I -I 0 CY) cn � � -Ln N 0 C: 41 O O N N u 4 410 Q L N VI N O L E ++ C i C � _ 0 Q N Y O 7 N L m Q O 0 N U m O D w t t 4-jU w z c p C7 C7 O U N O c6 Q U •U N O � Q E C6 N — i U +' O O C N N � N (1 f6 U E O t6 E i E f6 O cz U N N O� 1 U •C6 — Ln O _ O +, U a-, N U � X a a1 � U CID f6 LU C ru C O ru 1 +1 4- (n ru Ln C vit6 O } L O E O CID -0 0- L LU Q O O -0 f6 L C: > X � O N ul � O N Q Q O N i cn a N (u O � O N +, E N t6 O +� +, U N +� 4-1 O 2 4-1 .� L 0 cu 7 Q U 7 E O 4-1t C O O d L 4-1 c cu E cu C (0 N C .7 N m to RE -i N M N L N t +J O N O E Ln N C .N 7 L cu to O cu cu L 4-1 (0 U 4-1U N cu N t C cu co I'm Ln 4-1O U N O C co C O Q E 7 C O U N U 7 N L to (0 C N N U_ O t U L cu E 7 C O U to to cu c cu L E N to U X N to iG O Q O O C u U Eb _O O C t U N H m mi N O C V) a Nro U = N C3 ro O -N L N _N {"' a _I_ O OCU N CU ,O N Z d O N `~ C3 o +' N U N ro Cc: N -0 -r3 0 Lu C •i V z m Q S N a � QJ z Ln L °' �zN Ll L N O a CU 0 Ll- - .� N O CU a v O N ro ru LU Z ro f6 N d N a m N N m N w ro >O d ;� Ln c -I L ru U 3 0 L C o a, E ro N>, o •C: u O CU c O c L p O 0 +(U X 0 0 4- � CU Ov a w OC � L N QJ QJ v •� >-� N �O +- t6 O � i O a -Q ro a N U N r •� a1 LL ru U O E p N +' t6 O i t "� L 00 E z Q p a a 4- O �_ pU Uv OC i v� N U Z J D W • • W • 0 • D D U N 10 O (— v N L W �H 1 N }' O O O dA U V) 4 u f0 4-J a) L1 N }' dA Ln O Ln Ln U L N O Ln L Ln N O O L O "'E OLn ca ca Qi `) =5O U O L -0 LL � O >- b.0 Q L1 U U _O O d1 Q Cu X v v > 4-J ca }, v t U C� C�C N C U � 0 O O L 4-J> a--+ L O (n dA u U E m a--+ c a -J ++ Q� O L M d1 > N L d1 �O O w �n Ln C Ln (n o }' 4-c , 4-a.., a.., E(D a••' L a -J LO C: L 4-J N O Q 41 ca E dA c v N •- c v v �' v t C„....� v dA Qi > . Q1 , N L U C O � 4-1 _ Q .bnO N V O d1 t N U _� O x cabn _ O E .O ca v O L Ln N U 'n v C v 4-J LU a Q O ca t v t ca v V) c „' Ln U Ln t v � IIIIIII......° .. t I— Ln 0 , s� iV:' �N N w %W , `u U 41 0 Q O O t 41 qA �O O in •1 E N 0 -0 D ON 7 LU iN C o p O N N D 0 U U L 4-.O4-1 L N- N O m N p .� �' a-+ O U a C O r6 O 4- r U o O O tiA M t1A = O Cin in C N ro C ro C N o U U Q 7 N L N O N N a O i � C '= L 0 0 C o D c N C C pp O ECL N +' C of O +' dA (1)N C N OCA C O _O 3 O C t U 0 E D — .0 O O ` (6 Q 0 OULp p �(6�4- O rC6 O fa N � ,04Q C of 2 C t 0 +� O L O O O — i N � Q dA U vI 4J jn` i i C 4J Q �t CL -I �.�0 C� U a� fa fa� � o C L O p o •� 0 3 a� a o 0 0 C:+' a o _ o > O +' : ra � U O U a+ Q 4- 4- N O 6 O (n 4 Z L L ate+ L m N E Q j— 4- tMt C L C O u_ > Q 4 0 C G D i� O Q 'C O ++ -0 O +' N G O to O O_ N ++ � U_ N O .L O (6 ate+ (6 > 1 • • N .CL dA mm N C O j (L6 . w Q Z Z =3 U a+ cB O C =3CL Q Wklmelllll 0 0CL m m fB U z IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII w WE LU 0 LU L3 U a rill j LU t1u, z LU 10 64 rl E 3 » e � / \ (U \ y § E k % 3 0 Ln 0 � .$ G .$ k 0 -- ( E § 0 � \ n E 3 / E o \ ( � � CL0 E $ CL LO CL k e y 0 A 00 0 / 0 E 0 � \ 0 ( y C 2 % LO .- ro k \ $ U ® LO \ro k C) & 0 (U7 7 2 n E ƒ / m Q c § /\ 2 / 0 o / ® \ p / ) 2 k" 2 g / : k/ ® § E 0 e 3 E o \ o 2\ / 2 \ = E\ = / 0 � } f 0 \ > / S $ k' 0 c o 0 \ ƒ E Ln . / 0 CL 2 % E u » } a LU 7 $ 2k n u r y ? ' » E E \ / E m c 's 9u E e / 3/ a ° \ y E e 3 2 3 0 c3 2 / e E \ ] 2% / $ n \ " % 0 Z 2 41 u _ § o E c < C2 R o a E 2 2 ° D 2 C OLU u / 2 g{ E 0 ~ 0 c 2 o E§ g t ( 2 / e $ E - 3 » u (U 9 0 4- k / •- 3 LO � ® u ° / E n ƒ u E 0 A 00 c O Gj t t O cz O O CU_ 'yam C O U C O-0 U O LU Ln Gj U N N T 110 i N C N E 0 E 7 C O N N U C C: I M �F A a, t 4t 'J 01 VJ� u _5 \II w C O IrM L C6 O E m (6 N � O C6 N SO m Z w =) 4- c U O O w W U p i 00 to to O ta ro Q cb cb Co ci U Z I I I J W C6 0 LU C6 N U 0 +-' O OC C a w Oro t U O a -J 4-J C V) 4- N U j c f6 J W N N i v > 0 4-J v a1 E N Q a- N Q o N Q o N O N U O v l l l l • COUNCIL REPORT M&C No. 2017-235 Report Date October 16, 2017 Meeting Date October 16, 2017 Service Area Finance and Administrative Services His Worship Mayor Don Darling and Members of Common Council SUBJECT: Fair Property Taxation OPEN OR CLOSED SESSION This matter is to be discussed in open session of Common Council. AUTHORIZATION Primary Author Commissioner/Dept. Head City Manager Jeff Trail I Jeff Trail RECOMMENDATION Resolved that: 1. Common Council requests the Province to vacate the levying of provincial property taxes to provide tax room for municipalities; 2. Common Council requests the Province to change legislation to provide municipalities control over setting tax classes and tax rates; 3. Common Council requests the Province to end the assessment freeze as quickly as possible; EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Common Council set strategic priorities early in its term in 2016. Under the priority of "Growth & Prosperity", Council committed to: "Advocate for equitable taxation among residents, commercial businesses, institutions and industry". Tax experts Harry Kitchen and Enid Slack were engaged to review and assess the fairness of the City's property tax rates and structure (Tax Fairness Report). Slack and Kitchen concluded that that there is little Saint John can do to improve fairness absent changes to Provincial legislation. E:iI -2 - The following report includes staff's recommendations and insight respecting the following issues in the Tax Fairness Report: 1. The Provinces Role in Property Taxes & Assessment Freeze 2. Machinery & Equipment Exemptions 3. Spillover PREVIOUS RESOLUTION "RESOLVED that Common Council make a request to the Province to remove machinery and equipment exemptions from the Provincial Property tax legislation. Furthermore, if the Province is unwilling to remove machinery and equipment exemptions from the Property Tax legislation, the Province provides a transfer payment to municipalities in lieu of lost municipal property tax revenues due to the exemptions put in place by the Province of New Brunswick." BACKGROUND The main source of revenue in Saint John is property taxes, accounting for $120.8 million dollars and 78% of overall revenues. As seen in Exhibit 1, 61% of property tax revenue is derived from the residential tax base, while 22% is sourced from commercial/institutional taxpayers, and 17% from industrial. EXHIBIT 1 Saint John has the highest property tax rate in the Province at 1.785; the tax rate is approximately 46%-50% higher than the tax rates in Rothesay and Quispamsis: E-111 -3- io:c►r1r0 IIll II ' lu°RI�i1101111, IIVIII!IIII@ Vi!!iiii III � III III 1111111 II ��� VIII III ��� 111111 �) IIII III � m �: �u I Illlllll�llll�lll Il IIIIIIIIII�IIIIIIIII�IIIIIIIII�III�III lllllllll411IIID 111111111.�III�IIIIIIIIII�III�III IIII I�IIIILIIIIIIIIIIIIIII�IIIIIIIIIIIUIII ILII IIII�IIIIII111111111111111111 IIILIIIIIII�llllllllllll�lllllllllplllllllll�lll 1.785 1.6393 1.4211 1.22 1.19 1.25 1.37 1.785 1.6393 1.4211 1.24 1.19 1.25 1.37 1.785 1.6393 1.4211 1.25 1.20 1.25 1.37 1.785 1.6497 1.4211 1.27 1.21 1.25 1.37 1.785 1.6497 1.4211 1.28 1.22 1.26 1.37 1 The Non Residential Tax Rate is legislated in NB at 1.5 times the Residential Rate, making the total tax burden higher in Saint John than Moncton and Fredericton: i�:c►r.�rri:J Combined with the Provincial Property Tax Rate, the total tax rate for Non Residential Taxpayers in Saint John climbs to $4.864 per $100 of assessment. This does not include applicable BIA levies or Provincial Assessment Fees. The high tax rate in Saint John is a deterrent for growth. Exhibit 4 demonstrates Saint John has experienced significant slower growth than neighboring communities since 2013: EXHIBIT 4 Tax Base Growth 2013-20172 Sa i nt J oh n 2.11 Grand Bay/Westfield Hampton Rothesay UIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII�IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII Quispamsis 0 2 5.12 VIII 5.37 6.27 7.83 4 6 Percentincrease 8 10 i Municipal Property Tax Issues in in the City of Saint John, Harry Kitchen & Enid Slack, September 2017 2 Municipal Property Tax Issues in in the City of Saint John, Harry Kitchen & Enid Slack, September 2017 E:11.1 pact of Provincial Property Tax ppIrn ��I��iPduuulu��l �lii ill�l°uuu�m"of l�� ���iuuld�m ������ IIII �Ii'�i"i riiii�i 11 h"I lio�ilul�ui o i�i�V Vii �Oii�uiiu �i°I iow oillu Res Non Res Res Non Res Res Non Res I������IIYI�Iljpll�l�@IIIIII��III�IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIilllllllllll�lllll ��'' 99 1.12.3 2..186 1.1.2.3.3 u� IIII IIII VIII w ����������IIII III II I�����ii VIII liiill 2.1.86 IIII VIII 1.123 2.18£01 IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIiiih����a�� 1..785 �11111��uI�I����W�m�N ll�l I��I�� 2.678 1.421.1. ��������IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII 2.1.32 1.650 2.475 2.908 4.864 2.51144 4.318 2.773 4.661 Combined with the Provincial Property Tax Rate, the total tax rate for Non Residential Taxpayers in Saint John climbs to $4.864 per $100 of assessment. This does not include applicable BIA levies or Provincial Assessment Fees. The high tax rate in Saint John is a deterrent for growth. Exhibit 4 demonstrates Saint John has experienced significant slower growth than neighboring communities since 2013: EXHIBIT 4 Tax Base Growth 2013-20172 Sa i nt J oh n 2.11 Grand Bay/Westfield Hampton Rothesay UIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII�IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII Quispamsis 0 2 5.12 VIII 5.37 6.27 7.83 4 6 Percentincrease 8 10 i Municipal Property Tax Issues in in the City of Saint John, Harry Kitchen & Enid Slack, September 2017 2 Municipal Property Tax Issues in in the City of Saint John, Harry Kitchen & Enid Slack, September 2017 E:11.1 -4 - According to the 2016 Census, the population in Saint John is also in decline and residential assessment per capita is lower in Saint John than it is in neighboring communities. Assessment per capita is an indicator or measure of a community's wealth (40-60% higher in KV): EXHIBIT 5 3 Residential Tax Base per Capita Municipalities Residential Tax Base per #of Properties Residential Tax Base per Capita 2011 Census Residential Tax Base per Capita 2016 Census Residential Tax Base Population 2011 Population 2017 # of properties (Tax Info) Rothesay 231,310 95,684 98,047 1,143,134,300 11,947 11,659 4,942 Quispamsis 218,098 88,368 86,629 1,580,554,000 17,886 18,245 7,247 Fredericton 262,908 87,700 84,693 4,930,847,300 56,224 58,220 18,755 Moncton 1 204,186 1 77,085 1 74,067 1 5,324,570,900 69,074 71,889 1 26,077 Grand Bay Westfield 141,825 69,845 71,998 357,399,300 5,117 4,964 2,520 SaintJohn 159,517 59,326 61,510 4,156,523,300 70,063 67,575 1 26,057 Statistics Canada data indicates Saint John also has the lowest median income amongst Quispamsis, Rothesay, Moncton and Fredericton. There is a significant difference between the median household income in Saint John and the surrounding communities. Median income is 94% higher in Quispamsis, 69% higher in Rothesay and 61% higher in Grand Bay -Westfield. Even though Saint John is a less wealthy community, Saint John households carry a higher proportion of property taxes to household income ratio than Rothesay, Quispamsis, Moncton and Fredericton do, in some cases more than double. The gap widens when incorporating water and sewerage services. EXHIBIT 64 Saint John is unique compared to other cities across New Brunswick given its mix of residential, commercial and industrial sector; home to an Oil Refinery, two Paper Mills, a Power Generation Facility, and a Pipeline. It is interesting to note however, the largest single payer of municipal taxes in Saint John is the s 2017 Sec 2 Table by Class - Municipal Assess Tax Bases, SNB 4 http://www 12.statcan.gc.ca/census-recensement/2016/dp- pd/prof/details/page.cfm?Lang=E&Geo 1=CSD&Code 1=1305057&Geo2=CSD&Code2=1301006 &Data=Count&SearchText=quispamsis&SearchType=Begins&SearchPR=01&B 1=Income&TAB I13=1 E:�l i Median Household Income $ 52,132 $ 101,968 $ 88,623 $ 56,062 $ 60,592 Average Home - $170K - Taxes $ 3,035 $ 2,176 $ 2,074 $ 2,804 $ 2,416 Income 6% 2% 2% 5% 4% Average 2017 Water Bill $ 1,296 $ 872 $ 915 $ 1,057 $ 916 income Taxes & Water 8% 3% 3% 7% 5% Saint John is unique compared to other cities across New Brunswick given its mix of residential, commercial and industrial sector; home to an Oil Refinery, two Paper Mills, a Power Generation Facility, and a Pipeline. It is interesting to note however, the largest single payer of municipal taxes in Saint John is the s 2017 Sec 2 Table by Class - Municipal Assess Tax Bases, SNB 4 http://www 12.statcan.gc.ca/census-recensement/2016/dp- pd/prof/details/page.cfm?Lang=E&Geo 1=CSD&Code 1=1305057&Geo2=CSD&Code2=1301006 &Data=Count&SearchText=quispamsis&SearchType=Begins&SearchPR=01&B 1=Income&TAB I13=1 E:�l -5 - Province's Regional Hospital, assessed at approximately $256 million and garnering over $4.5 million in municipal property taxes for the City. The top 17 Municipal Property Tax Revenues for the City of Saint John are presented in Exhibit 7 below: EXHIBIT 7 Top 17 Property Tax Revenues August2017SNB Data Owner Description Assessment Municipal Taxes Saint John Regional Hospital Land & Building $256,206,300 $4,573,282 Irving Oil Limited Land & Oil Refinery $98,553,200 $2,638,762 Irving Oil Limited LNG $98,000,000 $2,623,950 NB Power Corporation Coleson Cove $93,181,500 $2,494,935 University of NB UNBSJ $71,674,000 $1,279,542 McAllister Place Holdings Inc Land & Building $69,736,900 $1,867,205 Province of NB Community College $42,356,200 $756,058 Province of NB Saint John Law Courts $41,622,600 $1,114,445 Irving Pulp & Paper Ltd. Pulp & Paper Mill $39,485,400 $1,057,222 St. Joseph's Hospital Land & Building $34,584,700 $617,337 Calloway Reit (Saint John) Inc Strip Mall Complex $30,593,200 $819,133 Irving Paper Limited Bayside Pulp Mill $29,905,000 $800,706 SOT Brunswick Square Inc Office & Retail $28,348,000 $759,018 Saint John Port Authority Port Parcel $27,234,400 $729,201 Emera Brunswick Pipeline Pipeline $26,001,000 $696,177 JD Irving Limited Office Building $21,234,300 $568,548 7724993 CANADA INC Mall - Land & Building $18,625,300 $498,692 *Subject to Appeal ** Assessed at Residential Rate FAIR TAXATION Common Council set its strategic priorities early in its term in 2016. Under the priority of "Growth & Prosperity" Council committed to: "Advocate for equitable taxation among residents, commercial businesses, institutions and industry". To support Council's priority of equitable taxation, Common Council engaged experts Harry Kitchen and Enid Slack to review and assess the fairness of the City's property tax rates and rate structure. The Tax Fairness Report concluded that there is little Saint John can do to improve fairness given property tax is governed by the Province. E:1:3 -6 - Notwithstanding the lack of municipal authority, the following report offers staff's recommendations and conclusions respecting 3 areas of focus on the tax fairness report: 1. The Provinces Role in Property Taxes & Assessment Freeze 2. Machinery & Equipment Exemptions 3. Spillover PROVINCE'S ROLE IN PROPERTY TAXATION With the exception of Newfoundland, every Provincial Government in Canada levies a provincial property tax. The original rationale for provincial property tax levies were to fund education, however, property taxes have now become just part of provincial general revenue. The Tax Fairness Report concludes property tax is not a good tax for funding provincial services, including education. Provincial services should be funded through income taxes and HST. Slack and Kitchen state on page 9 of the report: "The property tax is a good tax for local government but not necessarily appropriate to pay for the redistributive services provided by the Provincial government, such as education and health care. The Province should gradually get out of levying property taxes." Slack and Kitchen state on page 53 of the report: "Moreover, eliminating the provincial property taxes would reduce the pressure on the municipal property tax rate and increase transparency in the property tax system." "It would also provide municipalities with needed tax room" The Tax Fairness Report recommendation is supported by the discussion paper released by the Department of Finance in New Brunswick in June of 2008 that called for a reduction in the provincial property tax. Based on staff estimates, the Province draws between $30-35 million annually in Provincial property taxes from the Saint John tax base. This significantly exceeds the Community Funding and Equalization Grant (Unconditional Grant) that is approximately $20 million in 2017. With respect to the Provincial Assessment Freeze, Kitchen & Slack state property tax freezes create inequities between properties that will result in properties with similar market values not paying the same taxes — page 58 states: E-lue "An assessment freeze creates serious inequities in the property tax system and, where implemented, should be removed as quickly as possible. The longer the freeze is in place, the more difficult it is to remove." The Tax Fairness report sheds light on the fact that municipalities in New Brunswick have the least amount of authority to control and set tax rates or classes of customers compared to cities in other provinces. As illustrated in Exhibit 8, most Cities in Canada have authority to set tax rates and tax classes whereas in New Brunswick cities are only permitted to set the residential tax rate: Io:CI►H11K Province Property Tax Authority New Provincial Restricts Non Residential municipal tax base to 1.5 Brunswick Times the residential rate Alberta Municipalities Free to Set Own Tax Rates without Provincial Restriction Nova Scotia Municipalities Free to Set Own Tax Rates without Provincial Restriction Prince Edward Municipalities Free to Set Own Tax Rates without Provincial Island Restriction Newfoundland Municipalities Free to Set Own Tax Rates without Provincial Restriction British Municipalities Free to Set Own Tax Rates but Province Regulate Columbia Special Rules Saskatchewan Municipalities are Free to Set Own Tax Rates but Province Can Set Limits Quebec Municipalities Are Free to Set Tax Rates But Province Sets Minimum and Maximums Ontario Municipalities Are Free to Set Different Tax Rates But Province Sets Fairness Limits The general practice in Canada and around the world is to levy higher property tax rates on multi -residential properties as well as on commercial and industrial properties than on residential properties. According to the Tax Fairness Report, the provincial multiplier in New Brunswick of 1.5 between residential and non-residential properties is lower than comparator municipalities across Canada. Exhibit 9 compares the municipal tax ratios between residential properties and other property classes in jurisdictions similar to Saint John based on population 0I91 and composition. The New Brunswick multiplier of 1.5 is well below the property class averages shown in the table below: EXHIBIT 9 Municipal tax ratios in selected Canadian Municipalities, 2015 (Source: fair taxation report )5 city Commercial Industrial Marcor/Large Industrial Prince George, BC 2.0509 3.298 6.0228 Sarnia, Ontario 1.6271 2.0476 3.0035 Sault Ste. Marie, Ontario 2.1404 2.9624 5.2614 Greater Sudbury, Ontario 2.1397 3.1038 3.5180 Saint John, NB 1.5000 1.5000 1.5000 Sydney, NS 2.4942 2.4942 2.4942 St. John's, NL 3.2346 3.2346 3.2346 Strathcona County, AB 1.9842 1.9842 1.9842 Regina, Saskatchewan 1.5123 1.5123 1.5123 Average 2.0759 2.4597 3.1701 ANALYSIS The following analysis applies the average tax ratios above in Exhibit 9 to the Saint John Property Tax rate structure (Commercial being 2.08 times residential, 2.46 for light industry, 3.17 for large industry). Applying these ratios to the Saint John tax residential tax rate would generate approximately $28 million in additional property tax revenue. This would only be feasible if the Provincial government vacated the levying of Provincial Property taxes to provide the tax room for municipalities. If the Province in turn eliminated the $20 million unconditional grant the net incremental revenue to the City would be approximately $8 million, with no dependency on the Provincial grant. In 2017 the City of Saint John has a budget of $154M with approximately 121M in property taxes, $20M in a provincial grant, and $13M revenue from own sources. EXHIBIT 10 reflects the current property tax distribution representing revenues of $121 million. Residential customers represent 61%, Commercial 22%, Light Industrial 9% and Heavy Industrial 8%: s Municipal Property Tax Issues in in the City of Saint John, Harry Kitchen & Enid Slack, September 2017 021 EXHIBIT 10 -9 - 2017 Taxes - Current Tax Structure to 7RAU Qo, $10.4 Mil Residential (rate @ 1.785) Commercial/Institutional (rate @ 2.678) 111111 Light Industrial (rate @ 2.678) 111111111111 Heavy Industrial (rate @ 2.678) Exhibit 11 provides a view of what the City's property tax revenue and distribution would be if the City adopted a new rate structure based on the tax ratios presented in Exhibit 9. 2017 Taxes - New Rate Structure 520.6 Mil. 14% $17 Mil , 11% IIIIIIIIIII Residential (rate @ 1.785) 111111111111 Commercial/Institutional (rate @ 3.71) 111111 Light Industrial (rate @ 4.39) 111111111111 Heavy Industrial (rate @ 5.66) ON -10 - Under this scenario, in 2017 the City of Saint John would generate property tax revenues of $149M and have revenue from own sources of $13M for a total of $162M in revenue. The 2017 Operating Budget expenses were $154M. The additional $8 million in tax revenues could be used to reduce the tax rate. The additional tax room is facilitated by the Province eliminating the Provincial property tax. The new distribution would see Residential customers representing 50%, Commercial 25%, Light Industrial 11% and Heavy Industrial 14%. See Exhibit 11 below: The following tax rate analysis assumes net incremental revenue of $8 million ($28 million in new property tax revenue from the new rate structure offset by the loss of the Unconditional Grant of $20M) is used to reduce the tax rate. Other assumptions include: • Provincial legislation is changed to allow control over setting new rate and rate structure; • The City adopts new tax rates based on the ratios in the Exhibit 9; • The Province vacates the Provincial Property Tax Levy; • The Province eliminates the unconditional grant; A comparison of the current property tax rates and property tax rates assuming the above assumptions are presented below in Exhibit 12: EXHIBIT 12 Municipal & Provincial Property Tax Rates, Saint John, NB Slack and Kitchen state that New Brunswick has a Non Residential Tax Rate of 1.5 times the residential rate (set by the Province), which is much less than most Canadian jurisdictions. However they conclude that the non-residential tax rate should not be increased further: 019] Current Tax Structure Future Tax Structure Property Categories Municipal Provincial Total Municipal Provincial Total Change Residential, Owner - Occupied 1.785 1.7850 1.695 N/A 1.6950 -0.0900 Residential, Non Owner -Occupied 1.785 1.1233 2.9083 1.695 N/A 1.6950 -1.2133 Commercial, Institutional 2.6775 2.186 4.8635 3.519 N/A 3.5190 -1.3445 Light Industrial 2.6775 2.186 4.8635 4.169 N/A 4.1690 -0.6945 Heavy Industrial 2.6775 2.186 4.8635 5.373 N/A 5.3730 0.5095 Slack and Kitchen state that New Brunswick has a Non Residential Tax Rate of 1.5 times the residential rate (set by the Province), which is much less than most Canadian jurisdictions. However they conclude that the non-residential tax rate should not be increased further: 019] -11 - "The city should not fall prey, however, to some of the bad ideas that are being talked about such as putting an additional tax on vacant land, taxing businesses at an even higher ratio of the residential tax rate than currently, or increasing property tax incentives to attract businesses." The creation of new customer classes by employing the average tax ratios mentioned earlier would not increase the overall tax rate if the Province vacated property taxes. In fact, as presented in Exhibit 12 above, eliminating the Provincial property tax rate and moving to ratios similar to Exhibit 9 would result in the reduction of overall property tax rates for all classes of customers with the exception of a 10% increase to the Heavy industrial sector. The residential tax rate would be reduced to 1.6950. In conclusion, the property tax reform included in the above analysis is estimated to generate sufficient property tax revenues to remove the City's dependency on the provincial unconditional grant and generally taxpayers would benefit from overall tax rate reduction due to the Province vacating the practice of levying property taxes. Therefore, staff recommends the following: 1. Common Council requests the Province to vacate the levying of provincial property taxes to provide tax room for municipalities; 2. Common Council requests the Province to change legislation to provide municipalities control over setting tax classes and tax rates; 3. Common Council requests the Province to end the assessment freeze as quickly as possible; MACHINERY & EQUIPMENT EXEMPTIONS The Province of New Brunswick, through legislation, exempts most machinery and equipment from property taxes. Given the prevalence of heavy industry in Saint John, an industry which has a large proportion of machinery and equipment, the exemption has a significant impact on City tax revenues. The Tax Fairness Report indicates that machinery and equipment exemptions are commonly exempt in the majority of jurisdictions across Canada; however it is assessed and taxed in the vast majority of municipalities in Alberta. Exempting Machinery and Equipment from taxation has been justified on the basis that it expands economic activity. However on page 6 of the Tax Fairness report Slack & Kitchen also notes "it provides an incentive to alter production so as to minimize property taxes". SLI -12 - In the conclusion section on pages 58 and 59 of the Tax Fairness report, Slack & Kitchen offer the following comments:6 "Including machinery and equipment in the property tax base (for example, for oil and gas refineries) would result in fairer treatment of all manufacturing and processing plants and reduce the distortion in production techniques created by exempting one factor of production. If, by doing so, there is a concern about the impact on economic activity, the non-residential property tax rate could be lowered" "Property tax exemptions are unfair and should be removed unless there is a sound public policy reason for the exemption. At the very least, exempt properties should be assessed on the some basis as non-exempt properties so that the foregone tax revenue is made explicit" Strathcona County, in Alberta is often cited as a contrast of Property Tax Policy when it comes to Machinery and Equipment. In Strathcona County, Alberta (population approximately 98,000, home to two oil refineries with a combined capacity of 327,000 bbl/day), machinery and equipment is fully assessed and taxed. A quick comparison of property tax revenue breakdown between Strathcona and Saint John shows a stark contrast in property tax distribution: EXHIBIT 137 6 Municipal Property Tax Issues in in the City of Saint John, Harry Kitchen & Enid Slack, September 2017 https://www.strathcona.ca/files/files/at-fin-2017_approved budget.pdf OR -13 - In Strathcona, residential homeowners share only 35% of the property tax burden compared to Saint John where the residential base represents 61% of the City's property tax revenue. On the flipside, Strathcona industrial property tax revenue (including light, heavy industry and linear) makes up 44% of overall tax revenue whereas it is 17% in Saint John. A main difference between the two cities is of course the taxation of machinery and equipment. Industrial properties in Strathcona County were assessed at a much higher value (2016 -$9.5 billion), generating approximately $94 million in property tax revenue. In Saint John, industrial properties are assessed at approximately $761 Mil (2016) and generate approximately $20 million in property tax revenue. Exhibit 14 compares the total property taxes paid by the Refinery in Saint John to City to the property tax revenue generated from the two refineries in Strathcona that have a similar combined production capacity. The combined taxes paid in Strathcona is almost a multiple of 10 times the amount paid in Saint John: EXHIBIT 149 Strathcona County is also the location of Shell Scotford, which has various oil and gas businesses including an Oil Refinery and chemical plants. According to a 2014 Shell Scotford presentation on the County's website10, Shell paid $54 million in property taxes which represents 27% of Strathcona County total property tax revenue. Since 2013, over a 5 year period, the residential assessment base in Saint John has grown by only 3% while the commercial assessment base has increased 7%. The industrial tax base in Saint John has not grown; in fact industrial assessments have declined 7% since 2013 mainly due to the reduction in assessment for the pulp and paper mill in 2014 as presented in Exhibit 15: s https://regionaldashboard.alberta.ca/region/strathcona-county/property- assessments/#/stacked/property-type 9 source S�RrWhconGl'ropert,lAssessrrrcrr Online Tool, Ww https://moppinp.strothcono. co/HW5Viewer/Index.html?viewer=PropertVAssessment 10 Shell Scotford, November 2014, Michael Frigge, GM Scotford Upgrader, Tim Wiwhar, Quest Business Opportunity Manager -14 - EXHIBIT 15 900,000,000 Industrial assessment 807 Mil has decreased 7% 800,000,000 since 2013 47 Mil 700,000,000 745 M 600,000,000 500,000,000 Commercial Industrial 400,000, 000 iiiiiii Others 300,000,000 200,000,000 100,000,000 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 The decline in the industrial assessment combined with the modest growth in the residential assessment has had a significant impact on the City's annual property tax revenue. To keep up with expenditure growth, the City's assessment base needs to grow annually 3% to 4% due to inflationary factors. ANALYSIS If machinery and equipment was assessed in Saint John, the property tax environment would shift dramatically. Such an increase in property tax revenue would spur a reduction to the City tax rate for all taxpayers. This would also be consistent with the recommendation in section 5.8.2 of the tax fairness report "a preferred approach and one that was suggested in section 5.8.1, would be to include all M&E in the tax base and lower the tax rate on all non-residential properties" The following tax rate analysis in Exhibits 16 & 17 was produced for 2 scenarios based on the following assumptions: • Machinery and equipment is valued and assessed at $1 & $2 Billion • LNG Assessment is not appealed; • New Tax Ratios in Exhibit 9 are applied; • 2018 Operating Budget Shortfall is balanced through expenditure reduction; • Province gives authority to cities to control setting tax rates; • The Province vacates the Provincial Property Tax Levy; • The Province eliminates the unconditional grant; • Incremental tax revenue is applied to tax rate reduction; Al -15 - EXHIBIT 16 - PROPERTY TAX RATE ANALYSIS - $1 Billion M&E EXHIBIT 17 - PROPERTY TAX RATE ANALYSIS - $2 Billion M&E Current Tax Structure Future Tax Structure with $1 Bil M&E Property Categories Municipal Provincial Total Municipal Provincial Total Change Residential, Owner - Occupied 1.785 1.7850 1.1872 N/A 1.1872 -0.5978 Residential, Non Owner - Occupied 1.785 1.1233 2.9083 1.1872 N/A 1.1872 -1.7211 Commercial, Institutional 2.6775 2.186 4.8635 2.4645 N/A 2.4645 -2.3990 Light Industrial 2.6775 2.186 4.8635 2.9204 N/A 2.9204 -1.9431 Heavy Industrial 2.6775 2.186 4.8635 3.7633 N/A 3.7633 -1.1002 EXHIBIT 17 - PROPERTY TAX RATE ANALYSIS - $2 Billion M&E If machinery and equipment was fully assessed and taxed in Saint John, and assuming the value of machinery and equipment was between $1 and 2 Billion Dollars, the Property tax rates would be reduced significantly for all classes of customers. The residential rate could drop to between 0.934 and 1.187; commercial tax rate would range between 1.940 and 2.464; light industry would rates would range between 2.299 and 2.920; and Heavy Industrial rates would range between 2.963 and 3.763. The taxation of machinery and equipment results in a property tax distribution comparable to the distribution shown in Exhibit 13 for Strathcona. Exhibit 18 and 19 present the Saint John tax breakdown for the above 2 scenarios: 01:3 Current Tax Structure Future Tax Structure with $2 Bil M&E Property Categories Municipal Provincial Total Municipal Provincial Total Change Residential, Owner - Occupied 1.785 1.7850 0.9348 N/A 0.9348 -0.8502 Residential, Non Owner - Occupied 1.785 1.1233 2.9083 0.9348 N/A 0.9348 -1.9735 Commercial, Institutional 2.6775 2.1861 4.8635 1.9406 N/A 1.9406 -2.9229 Light Industrial 2.6775 2.186 4.8635 2.2996 N/A 2.2996 -2.5639 Heavy Industrial 2.6775 2.186 4.8635 2.9633 N/A 2.9633 -1.9002 If machinery and equipment was fully assessed and taxed in Saint John, and assuming the value of machinery and equipment was between $1 and 2 Billion Dollars, the Property tax rates would be reduced significantly for all classes of customers. The residential rate could drop to between 0.934 and 1.187; commercial tax rate would range between 1.940 and 2.464; light industry would rates would range between 2.299 and 2.920; and Heavy Industrial rates would range between 2.963 and 3.763. The taxation of machinery and equipment results in a property tax distribution comparable to the distribution shown in Exhibit 13 for Strathcona. Exhibit 18 and 19 present the Saint John tax breakdown for the above 2 scenarios: 01:3 EXHIBIT 18 -16 - Tax revenues ($1 Bil M&E) EXHIBIT 19 Tax revenues ($2 Bil M&E) Heavy Industrial customers would see a significant increase in its share of the property tax burden; going from 8% today to 39%-52% based on assessment machinery and equipment values of $1-2 Billion. Residential, Commercial and Institutional customers would benefit from taxing machinery and equipment; Residential would drop from 61% to 28%-35%, and Commercial/Institutional from 22% to 14%-18%. For purposes of this analysis, machinery and equipment was assumed to be most prevalent in heavy industry, the distribution above may change slightly based on a more detailed analysis. It should be noted there are opposing points of view on whether Machinery and Equipment should be taxed given the application across the country as well as the concern that taxing M&E may discourage manufacturing and processing plant and economic expansion. 06%] -17 - At the very least, machinery and equipment should be fully assessed and disclosed for tax purposes based on the basic principle of transparency. Common Council took a position on the matter when Council adopted the following resolution on Oct 2, 2017: "RESOLVED that Common Council make a request to the Province to remove machinery and equipment exemptions from the Provincial Property tax legislation. Furthermore, if the Province is unwilling to remove machinery and equipment exemptions from the Property Tax legislation, the Province provides a transfer payment to municipalities in lieu of lost municipal property tax revenues due to the exemptions put in place by the Province of New Brunswick." Although machinery and equipment is commonly taxed in the Province of Alberta, it is more commonly exempt across the country than it is taxed. It is assumed these policies are justified for economic reasons, however, staff could not find any policies across the country that provided an explanation for machinery and equipment exemptions. Another approach may be for the Province to fully assess machinery and equipment but then set a policy that applies a cap that limits taxation of the assessment base. For example, a policy that permits taxation of machinery and equipment at 25% or 50% of the assessment base. The policy however should provide full disclosure to the purpose and reasoning for the cap limit. Staff makes the following conclusions respecting the issue of taxing machinery and equipment: 1. Staff supports the position taken by Common Council to request the Province to remove machinery and equipment exemptions from legislation. At the very least, as recommended in the Tax Fairness Report, machinery and equipment should be assessed and disclosed, if not taxed, for purposes of transparency. The Tax Fairness Report indicates a preferred approach is to fully assess machinery and equipment in the tax base but lower the tax rate. 2. Staff also supports the notion that if the Province views the exemption of machinery and equipment as being critical to economic development, that the exemptions can be left in place but transfer payments should be made by the Province in lieu of lost revenues to Municipalities; SPILLOVER As indicated early in this report, population in Saint John is in decline and growth in the assessment base has slowed dramatically in recent years. Over the past `tell] -18 - five years growth in Saint John has lagged the growth of its neighboring communities, and by a fairly large percentage. Slack & Kitchen make the following remarks on page 56 of the Tax Fairness Report: "Part of the explanation lies in the much higher tax rate in Saint John." "At least part of the explanation for the higher tax rate in Saint John is that it provides services that benefit neighboring communities. This problem was recognized in 2008 by Commissioner Finn's Report on the future of local government in New Brunswick where he noted that population growth was occurring outside the municipal boundaries of the larger centres in the province and that tax rates were increasing in the larger centres to pay for services used by people of neighboring communities." Slack and Kitchen indicate that the issue of spillover cannot be addressed through property taxation. Options would be to levy taxes that capture the benefits of services used by commuters such as a payroll tax (income tax) based on place of work or a tax on fuel or hotel occupancy to capture cost of services used by non-residents. Saint John has a voluntary hotel levy but revenues are dedicated to tourism and not used to pay for local services. To minimize cross border impacts, these taxes would have to be levied on a regional basis. However, all these changes would require Provincial approval and support. The Tax Fairness report concludes in the executive summary of the report on page 5: "At least part of the explanation for the higher tax rate in Saint John is that the city provides services that benefit neighboring communities. Evidence from other jurisdictions also suggests that people in surrounding areas use services that are paid for urban residents, such as roads, for example. Addressing the problem of service spillovers in the Saint John region where each municipality has its own independent governing structure is not something that can be resolved with changes to the property tax. Indeed, this issue was identified in the Finn Report where he recommended the creation of regional service districts and the amalgamation of municipalities. The creation of larger municipalities or two-tier districts, for example, could result in all of the beneficiaries of local services paying their share of the cost of services." `to]I -19 - Conclusion The recommendations contained in the 2008 Finn Report should be revisited to address policies that could be put in place by the Province to ensure beneficiaries of local services pay their share of the cost of services. Chc k here to enter text, SERVICE AND FINANCIAL OUTCOMES N/A INPUT FROM OTHER SERVICE AREAS AND STAKEHOLDERS N/A ATTACHMENTS `[oya a L U m M a ml 0 00 0, XA- O N o: � o O N o N 0 0 0 0 � 0 0 DO 0 c1 O O O O O O O O, O N, O O O O O O Ln 00 Il r -I 0 Lr) m N c -I 0 O N o N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O O O O O, O O O O O O O O O O 00 Il O Lr) m N c -I 0 K O N r -I -U? N t�A m t�A a-+ ca i N Q 0 r - r -I O N c O 4-j O Ln r-1 LO No 46 0 +' N (6 N 4L 41 N � U C C CE C O U H ri Ln Ln Ln Ln 1�0 N N N N N r -I r -I r -I r -I r -I m m O r -i N r -i r -i N N N r4 r4 r4 r4 r4 N Izi- Ln r- w N N N N N r -I r -I r -I r -I r -I ti O r -i r -i r -i r -I r - r -I N N N N N r -I r -I r -I r -I r -I rn rn rn rn rn r -i r -i r -i r -i r -i Ln Ln Ln Ln Ln w ri O N m O N O Q) UO m m X I- Ln I- O I- a� O - Ln I- N Ln 01 N I- O Ln O o *k Q X 00 CD N CD co O � p Ln ::I- r-4 00 CD I- lD N N 00 m Ln }, n to r1 r-4 00 00 I -Z O r -I r -I Ln I� lD Z3 0- 0 O Cl - O 0 00 N r- r -I CD 4- r1 m 00 N O r-1 O � O r -I I� k.6 (7 Ln O Z3 .� .� Ln lD I- Q N O a x O O O O O O O O O O O O ro M O M m M M +� M Lin Ol N ro r--1 Ln 00 Ln M Ln ::1- 00 M N Ln Ln Vn r -I Ln Ol M M r -I c r -I r -I Ln cv aj Ol M 00 O CL o O � m c w N �O O Ln (IjM 4 00 (. qe qe 1-4r- m v m 00 00 r- r- lD ,,, Q (Ij V ::1- 00 O Ln Ln lD Or- ai o lD M O 00 M CL r4 Ln 00 I� I� (7 (7 O) 00 00 I- lD Ln Co V coV O 00 00 lD Ln I- ��- C r --i m O 00 N r --i W M O m r- I 00 Ln cv 4tQ r -I 0 0 N - c -I Ol m 0 M r --i lD O 9:3 -Ln N (Ij N N N N r -i r -i N N N N N .N O Q N U O m O U N Q N U 4 -JC) c� 0 cO «/ �\ 8-" z:J- Ln Lr) CY) ®/ (�D O O 00 Lr) Lr) O « ( �\ Lr) / M L r�4 r--. r14 T--1 M /\\/ (�D O CT) � 00 r14 00 -Lr)- <«/ 00 (-o r14 r M (�D,r- CT) T. -I r- 00\ T--1 rl�4 2 ^� r,jL (-o< 00 \ � Om L M ' ^\ � 2» � x ; F7- 0 0 4-A 4-a i� Z:3 O 0 p r,4 E E c O c Ocu z H a� x HONO lN0 Ln m � 0 00 � N I- m l0 00 r i I- 00 N N I- m m Ln N Ln � N m m0 r i O I- � al ra m06 m� ai � m ri r- O N� Ln IZ I- m N m I- l0 .� Ln O dl dl l0 00 00 • V Ln l0 l0 N o0 � •� O l0 00 000 r- r- ko Ln r4•� i�l� ir4 iNl� iNl� ih ih iJ} iJ} iJ} iJ} iJ} iJ} iJ} iJ} iJ} iJ} iJ} 3 0 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 41 m N 0 Ln O m N Co -:t r, N O O -:t O m m E k-0 M O l0 l0 N LnM Ln 00 � r-' � Ln H 0 Ln O 00 I, m Ln N o0 m O� m O m N Ln O. i l0 I- m 1.0 -:t Ln Ln m m N O N l0 H & 00 00 M r -i pl N r -I pl -:e O al 00 r- l0 r -I 00 Q Ln al al al r, l0 -:i -:i m m m N N N N N r l �n tip ii x i qA dA O - - qA W _ tip O O Q c6 a.+ m m Z3 U " m -Z3 CO C >` —j CL H O z 06 CL co m u i r - GJ -0 CO -0E - ` O a mN 76 U Ln _u u v v ucc i Qc U j O -a � tip C 4- -j 4- 0) O _ O Z ts� =- °; z m 0o Q c6 Q C cc a o o z z Q a °' o iE EQ O 2 O O a t Ln Qu E Q a O •� J J >• L J Z a QJ •� 0_ U Q 4w }� O O L L ci Q a� C: rn Q 0 0 a Ln CL b.0 C t L al O t O C O ++ L a L s b..0 O > � i O m al 4 v aO N a Z) Ln � m a-+ LLo -, N 4w h Ln 4- m - > V O (3).S v h �y :3 C Z Q L O M E h Q. U f6 N N Lu Q Q Ln U IO � � 0 E E / 'x § § § § D E 2 . k k k k a D2 R C: m U E ƒ R E k k k k w S � 0 ' ¢ ¢ ' '¢ '¢ C E .5; m § D D D D D ¢s 2 ƒ x 2 ƒ x 2 ƒ x 2 ƒ x 4a ƒ x 4-j x � @ / E w J x or_ x - f ( + � � � � � f Q f f f f f / / / 2 2 / / / / / 2 2 § LL 2 § LL 2 § LL 2 § LL 2 § LL § LL r § LL r a § LL r a .§ .§ .§ E E E E E E E E k k k k k k k k � � 00 m IZI- O O N to N M r -I N M r -I 00 O IZI- IZI- IZI- N O O O N Lr) O� Izi- N Ol Lr) r -I lfl M Ll1 M r -I N M r -I r -I M 0) r -I IZI- r- O N to N M 0) O� N qt M O al M 00 r -I I- O to r -I r -I Lll Izi- N Ol Lll O N r -I N N r -I N M r -I r -I N u M 00 r- 1� 1� N O Zi- N 0) IZI- to O O al M 00 r -I Ll1 cV O 0) r -I Lr) Izi- N Ol Lr) IZI- M N N M li N M r4 r4 N 0) r -I IZI- r- O N to N M 0) O� N qt M O al M 00 r -I I- O to r -I r -I Lll Izi- N Ol Lll O N r -I N N r -I N M r -I r -I N u Z ITS 0 a m Ln Ln tn tia r m c� u 10 en to 0 w 2 'u z z z z z :3 LL. if) W) CY) CY) 17y) M in in in 44 M r4 H :3 t :3 m w w w .2- .2 Z6 o w C-) Z CL 40 ICU 0 Ln Ln CL CL D4-1 Ln u m CLu W U rz 0 D 0 Ln a a c c O O 75 Ql N O N t!)- t!)- r:'r 75 r-4 o6 CID CID CID Ln \ 0bns z r:'r U L E E 0 U M s � c O a) a) EU N C c r, r -I O N r -I O N O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O Ql 00 I, l0 L M N r -I r -I O N M r -I O N a 00 rl rl N LQ m x 9 uj z z z z r,4 rq 11r) m CL co 00 Q,4 kD • � V-4 rq r,4 n� Ln Ln Ln r% n kf) �D UD t-4 rl r� rl CL V4 tA 0 Au- 0 76 4-1 Ln Ln CL :3 Ln u Qj 4- a) U aj U 0 biol w CL C4 0 c(D]:3 u 3: a a If CA Ln cn cn CA m CA cri al Ln m _r_ -I CA CA u uj m W t :3 X kD m m H CL m M Ch kO w G 9 C�l CD CD r4 r� U. Ln LO Ln 9 9 R r4 N 4 4 qf :3 Mrl kD kf) U) x r� rl H m �D N N r! 0 r3 0 Ln (u 44 0 z Ln (U CL Ln D u 0 0 bO I CL cc cr u "Zi a If UO O .UO D U O U Q) 0 .0 SAINT JOHN BOARD OF POLICE COMMISSIONERS ONE Peel Plaza, E2L OEl PO Box 1971 Saint John, New Brunswick Canada E2L 4L1 Bureau des Commissaires du Service de Police de Saint John C.P. 1971 Saint John Nouveau -Brunswick Canada E2L 4L1 JENNIFER CARHART Chair/ President BRIAN BOUDREAU Vice Chair/Vice President MIKE HAYCOX Secretary/Secretaire MAYOR DON DARLING Commissioner/Commissaire GARY SULLIVAN Commissioner/Commissaire ANNE -MARIE MULLIN Commissioner/Commissaire WILLIAM THOMPSON Commissioner/Commissaire Commissioner/Commissaire JOHN T. W. BATES, M.O.M Chief of Police/ Chef de Police DAPHNE WAYE Executive Administrator/ Secretaire Administrative Telephone/Telephone: (506) 648-3324 E-mail/Courriel: policecommission(o) saintiohn. ca Explore our past/ Explorez notre passe Discover your future/ Decouvrez votre avenir October 6, 2017 Mayor Don Darling, and Members of Common Council M&C 2017-259 Your Worship and Councillors: Re: Saint John Board of Police Commissioners — Additional Board Member At the October 3, 2017 meeting of the Saint John Board of Police Commissioners, a resolution was passed to send a letter to Common Council requesting the appointment of an additional Board member. Composition of the Board is to be determined in accordance with the provisions contained in the Police Act, and the member composition is important as the skills and competencies of the Board are crucial to the ability of the board to effectively manage the role of governance. The Board currently comprises seven members. Six members are appointed by Common Council; two of these may also be members of Council. The seventh member is appointed by the Minister of Public Safety. Respectfully submitted, Jennifer Carhart, Chair Saint John Board of Police Commissioners JC/dew `PU �E The My of SWnt Johns October 16, 2017 Deputy Mayor and Councillors Subject: Field House Proiect City's Capital Contribution The Committee of the Whole, haying met on October 16, 2017, made the following recommendation: RESOLVED that as recommended by the Committee of the Whole, having met on October 16, 2017, that Council reduce the City's Capital contribution by up to maximum of $835,600 of the grant amount requested to the Field House Project. Sincerely, a1, 1� if ii, if % NI I. v .tid,A,,'"f'I ,I,I.Y � w� ��� in j�'1"� � � "' �aV�PL�G��br!'�, October 16, 2017 Deputy Mayor and Councillors Subject: Abandon Rezoning Consideration in Cedar Point Estates The Committee of the Whole, having met on October 16, 2017, made the following recommendation: RESOLVED that as recommended by the Committee of the Whole, having met on October 16, 2017, that the City abandon consideration of the proposed re -zoning of lands identified by PID Nos. 55180558 and 55156954 in the Cedar Point Estates Area from the Suburban Residential Classification (RSS) to the One -Unit Residential Classification (111). Sincerely, Don Darling Mayor .oid 1114m, ,rw o'sw I:'A'I � n °a� �Illml&�� r" � AI X41 aNWCOI,O,Pt-YB AFI�vAA I°""I, V `P11.11