Online Town Hall

Like many Canadians I spoke with over the last few weeks, I couldn’t help but draw comparisons between the opening ceremonies of the Canadian Winter Olympics and the opening ceremonies of the recent summer Olympics in Beijing.

Without a question, the Beijing opening ceremonies were flawless and awe inspiring. They were a spectacle the kind of which may never have been witnessed before. The Canadian opening ceremonies were…well, not exactly flawless.

As many of you know, the fourth ‘leg’ of the Olympic cauldron didn’t work. It failed to rise up out of the floor leaving one of our torch bearers holding the bag, or more precisely, holding the torch.

In the weeks that followed I heard many people respond critically about our opening ceremonies; it wasn’t “perfect” - it “failed” - it was an “embarrassment”. I began to contemplate how well, or how poorly, our opening ceremonies portrayed our nation to the rest of the world. It wasn’t until 17 days later watching the closing ceremonies that it became apparent just how proud I am to be a Canadian.

Perhaps one of the moments I remember most vividly about the opening ceremonies in Beijing was the little girl in the pigtails and red dress who sang the anthem. Lin Miaoke, a cute 9 year old from Beijing become a national sensation and darling to the international media following her performance; the only problem, she was a fake.

The real singer was a seven-year-old girl named Yang Peiyi. She had won a gruelling competition to perform the anthem, but was pulled at the last minute because while she had a perfect voice, she wasn’t considered pretty enough to represent her nation to the rest of the world. So on the night of the opening ceremonies, while a pre-recording of Yang Peiyi played Lin Miaoke was seen but not heard.

By contrast, our opening ceremonies were flawlessly real - warts and all.

The way I see it, life doesn’t always work out the way we want it to. Sometimes we fail, we don’t get that job we wanted, we miss the bus, or our fancy Olympic flame just doesn’t work right. As Canadians we pick each other up and we just keep going.

We also laugh about our follies. It was no surprise that our closing ceremonies opened with a three legged Olympic torch complete with a theatrical “mechanic” who after several unsuccessful attempts ultimately succeeds in pulling up the arm with an imaginary rope so that Catriona Ann Le May Doan, the athlete who was previously denied, is given the honour of lighting the cauldron.

Perseverance, tolerance, creativity, humour, helping each other to become great…THAT is being Canadian, and I am proud we shared it with the world.

Last summer I hand delivered a survey to several thousand households in our neighbourhood to better understand and represent your needs at City Hall. I was grateful to receive well over 300 responses, many commenting it was the first time anyone had asked for their opinion.

Five common themes emerged that will continue to require focused attention and action. Here’s what I heard;

KEY THEMES

• Communication - residents want timely information about progress on current and emerging issues
• Employment  - job creation and economic development is critical at this time
• Control Spending / Reduce Taxes - appropriate controls and measured spending need to be in place
• Protect our Environmental - our water sources and supply need vigilant attention
• Community Safety -  more physicians are required and vandalism and speeding needs to be curtailed

THANK YOU

One of the most challenging roles for a City Councilor is to maintain a strong connection with those I serve. Thank you for your continued support.

QUESTIONNAIRE RESULTS

Click on the graphs for a larger image - click on larger image for full screen

How would you rate the overall quality of life in the City of Guelph today?
The quality of life in the City of Guelph in the past three years has…
How satisfied are you with the overall level of quality of services provided by the City of Guelph?
How effective do you feel City Council is overall, at dealing with important issues in the community?

How important are each of the following services and how satisfied are you with the job the city is doing providing that service?
Recreation Facilities
Public Transit
Garbage Services
Fire Protection
Ambulance Services
Emergency Planning
Entertainment Centres such as River Run / Sleeman Centre
Arts and Culture Programs
Tree Maintenance along roadways and in parks
Road Maintenance asphalt repairs, snow removal, sweeping
Roadside Maintenance sidewalk repairs, mowing, boulevard treatments
Parks, Trails and other green spaces
Sports Fields
Recreation the variety of available programs

How satisfied would you say you are with yard waste collection?
How supportive would you be of an increase in twice yearly yard waste pickup?
How supportive would you be of increasing yard waste pickup if each additional pickup would increase your property taxes?
1$ annually
2$ annually
3$ annually
How satisfied are you with the city’s current sidewalk snow removal service?
How supportive would you be if the city were to change this it’s sidewalk snow removal service? This change would mean that able bodied residents would be responsible for clearing their own sidewalks but would result in a property tax savings of approximately 2$ per year.

What is your level of satisfaction with the following transportation issues?
Public transit between Guelph and the surrounding communities such as Waterloo, Kitchener, Cambridge
Transit service between Guelph and Toronto Area (GTA)
The level of congestion on Guelph roads?
The job the City has done encouraging bicycle use through the creation of paths and laneways?
Overall transportation in the city?
When was the last time someone in your home used public transit?

How likely do you think the following initiatives would be to make you take public transit more often?

The Sustainable Neighbourhood Engagement Framework Study explores the way in which the City partners, and engages with specific neighbourhood groups. It also includes how the community can respond to the elimination of funding for Community Development workers currently provided by Family and Children’s Services to work in vulnerable neighbourhoods.
The following lists our progress to date in key project areas:

Project Scope Expanded:

• Following consultation with the community and a number of supportive agencies, the scope of this study was recently expanded to include a review of the elimination of the F&CS CD worker positions and future funding options

SNEF Advisory Committee:

• Developed in November of  2009
• Have held 2 meetings to date
• Currently 16 members including neighbourhood group leaders and agency representatives
• Will be expanding to include 3 new members to accommodate change in scope

Literature Review:

Public Interest conducted an initial review of empirical studies and research on community-led service delivery. The literature pointed to a number of benefits that can occur when municipalities and community groups co-produce services:

• Improved service quality and effectiveness
• Enhanced participation and engagement
• More opportunities to establish and expand social networks and social supports
• Develops social capital

The literature reviewed highlighted a number of challenges and barriers to obtaining these potential benefits:

• Delivering effective community-led services is complex and elusive
• Strong organizations in and of themselves don’t necessarily ensure benefits of community development, social capital and collective efficacy.

The literature also contained a number of recommendations for ensuring that community-led services are able to deliver services and additional benefits.

• Neighbourhood groups need clear criteria around:
• Context specific strategies that are able to change with the community
• Steadily broadening engagement and shared leadership
• Addressing barriers to participation (cultural/class differences, power imbalances)
• Conscious development of social capital ( building bonds within the group and bridges to other groups)
• Addressing issues that reflect broad need (rather than the narrow interests of a few)
• Both short and long term actions in areas that address these broad needs

Municipal staff need:

• Partnership policies
• Flexibility to adjust to needs of groups
• Training (facilitation of collaborative partnerships)

Finally, the literature also notes the challenge of funding neighbourhood groups and specifically points out that while the costs are generated locally, the benefits tend to accrue largely provincially.

Environmental Scan:

• Initial scan  which includes history of the NSC and policy development, related corporate polices, community profiles and information specific to each group
• completed and circulated for comment
• Community Consultation:
• List of key informant interviews ( 39 participants invited) and focus group participants ( 33 invited) has been established
• Public Interest scheduling interviews last week of February and first week of March

Please contact Barbara Powell (barbara.powell@guelph.ca), Manager of Integrated Services & Development at 519-822-1260 x 2675 if you have any questions.

There has been a tremendous outpouring of support for the victims of the disaster in Haiti

Below is a list of the local events / initiative in our community where you can lend your support.

1. TUESDAY NIGHT NON-PROFIT SCHOLARSHIP LEAGUE

Mike

Thanks for all your help regarding the fund raiser we are doing on Feb-06 and feb-07 at Woodlawn Bowling Alley
The program I run is a youth 10 Pin Bowling league which is totally different then any other league in Canada.
Our program kids will be going throughout the city asking people for their donations or pledges to help the youth in Haiti.

We will also be running a Silent auction, the week prior, all of the items have been donated from local businesses as well as the pro Bowlers Tour, they have given us signed Bowling Balls, Shirts, Towels, and much More.

We have the support so far of the Tribune and Roger`s T.V. we expect The Guelph Mercury as well.
Please see what you can do, we are really trying to raise $15,000, and every bit of support we get, will help us reach this goal.
Thanks
Bob

(Originally Printed in the Guelph Mercury, “Sightlines” - by Unto Kihlanki )

This past Monday, largely due to the efforts of Coun. Mike Salisbury, Guelph city council decided not to turn the city’s recently acquired building at 152-158 Wyndham St. into a parking lot, at least not yet. They voted to investigate the option of renovating it for other possible interim uses while we wait for the day, perhaps quite distant, when it is slated to become part of the proposed new central library.

Good for our council. The merchants currently located along Wyndham must be breathing a long collective sigh of relief. A gaping hole in the fabric of the existing frontage is the last thing they need now, as they struggle to maintain a semblance of commercial vitality on their street.

Finding an active use for the building has to be preferable to demolition; returning it to a retail use would be best because it would support the retail nature of the street, which, I’m assuming, is still an important objective.

But why the rush to demolish in the first place? Apparently, city staff had not even considered other options. They wanted to spend $400,000 now, rather than a few thousand on renovations to try to find new tenants. That could only make financial sense if the need to clear the site were a short-term certainty. It isn’t; the start of actual construction of the library is likely to take years before it happens, if it ever happens.

Furthermore, demolition would make it more difficult for our next council to modify the Baker Street redevelopment design concept, should it choose to do so. Our future councils need maximum freedom to respond to contemporary circumstances as they unfold, not to be impeded, unnecessarily, by the unfulfilled ambitions of previous councils.

Many people feel it is unfortunate that the library project has been postponed. I don’t know; maybe they are right. After all, design projects are never perfect, and at some point we need to just get on with the work of building. And I do agree that a new library is a worthwhile project for the city to undertake.

But, I also think that the current design scheme for the Baker Street redevelopment project is seriously flawed. Readers of this column may remember that when the various design options were under evaluation I weighed in against the present proposal, preferring the ones that would place the library on Baker Street instead, while keeping the tradition of commercial frontage along Wyndham intact.

I have never been convinced by the urban design rationale put forward by the city’s consultants to justify the extreme measure of expropriation. The idea that the new library will serve as a “second anchor” for the Wyndham Street retail corridor, along with the new city hall on the south, is seductive but fanciful.

The concept of reinforcing a retail corridor by placing anchor tenants at the ends is born of shopping mall design. It works because the major retailers that are typically used as “anchors” draw more shoppers to the smaller shops that lie between them than they could draw on their own.

But, imagining that you can simply substitute a library for a major national retailer to serve as a retail anchor is to misunderstand the concept completely. Perhaps we should test the idea by outbidding Sears for their spot at the Stone Road Mall, and offering to put the new library there; but I doubt that the mall would go for it, even if we offered twice what Sears is willing to pay. The owners are not that naive.

While it is true that the library would draw new traffic to the street and that many of the people would be the ones that the store owners are trying to attract, they are not likely to be in the same shopping mood as they are when they decide to pay a visit to a major retailer. And that is the critical difference.

To our city staff and politicians, it may seem like a daunting task to try to find a major national retailer to locate on Wyndham Street; it may be politically unappealing to many of them compared to the easy sell of a new library. But if we are serious about maintaining the commercial vitality of our main downtown shopping street, it deserves consideration.

Like it or not, since we now have additional time, and some additional property to work with, we might as well take full advantage to make sure we undertake the best possible project, when we eventually can build it. Getting this right is the key to the successful revitalization of the downtown commercial core, it is extremely important.

I like Gerry Barker - I find myself waiting eagerly for his editorial column; a longstanding diatribe about local municipal politics published bi-weekly in the Mercury.

I also like Steven Colbert - Steven is a popular late night TV talk show host featured on the Comedy Network who plays an opinionated and self-righteous commentator who “unwittingly” uses a number of logical fallacies to ridicule the actions of politicians and other public figures. By taking their statements and “the facts” to the furthest (supposedly) logical conclusion, he uses irony and sarcasm to paint a twisted picture of reality.

Both of these gentlemen are gifted satirists and both of them can be very entertaining (and even enlightening) if you don’t take them too seriously.

Satire is a complex literary tool, and it is not uncommon to be misunderstood. Take for example Gerry’s latest rant titled “An Assessment of Guelph’s Finances”. Purportedly a three part analysis of how the current city council is bankrupting Guelph. The Mercury refused to publish the editorial and so it started floating around cyberspace along with emails from the prince of Estonia who needs me to send him money so he can access the family fortune (which he promises to share with me).

According to Gerry’s email - “salaries and benefits have increased by 31.8 per cent” – “council has spent $8,300,000 from this Tax Stabilization Reserve to conceal rising costs and artificially contain tax increases” – “Guelph Transit is a financial basket case” – and there is “imminent danger that huge increases in debt will downgrade our city’s credit rating” all of this to support council’s “vanity projects”. Of course… this spells “a disastrous financial outcome for residents”

WOW

Because of the viral nature of email, Gerry’s writings began to cause quite a stir. With constituents beginning to panic, The Mayor responded:

The information in this column is factually incorrect and misleading. I appreciate this opportunity to correct the record.

Mr. Barker’s assertion that Barrie operates a larger city with fewer employees is full of holes. He has incorrectly calculated the number of City of Guelph staff – we have 1,149 full-time employees, not 1,305. He also fails to mention that Barrie contracts out a number of services – including waste management, snow plowing, and transit – so these FTEs do not appear in their numbers. Guelph, on the other hand, has taken on delivery of ambulance service, a service we previously paid for through a contract with Royal City Ambulance. This is a primary reason for an increase in our FTEs between 2008 and 2009.

Assuming Mr. Barker’s calculations on Barrie’s payroll costs are accurate, Guelph’s costs per employee are actually $21,000 less than Barrie’s.
His assertion that salaries and benefits have increased 31.8% over two years is also wrong. In each year, economic increases to staff were 3%, with additional recognition pay to fire services as per Provincial arbitration.

I could go on. All three parts of Mr. Barker’s column are rife with inaccuracies. In contrast, the City’s budget process – which is transparent and open to the public, and will begin in mid-November – will provide factual information and a true picture of the City’s finances.

Like many businesses and residents in Guelph, the City has felt the impacts of the economic downturn. Through the budget process, Council is prepared to make tough decisions to ensure our city is strong, and our AA credit rating is maintained.

Given the number of inaccuracies in it, I am not surprised that the Mercury refused to publish it. It is unfortunate that it is circulating through e-mail, as those who receive it may not realize the many errors in it.

Phil Andrews managing editor of the Mercury wrote with regard to refusing to publish the writings:

They were declined pending the columnist revealing and enumerating the precise documents cited that gave rise to the data in the pieces. Further, I insisted that I needed to be informed of the identity of the financial adviser who purportedly offered analysis of the data for the columns — before they could be considered for publication. Those terms weren’t met.

OK… So Gerry got a little over excited, and with a just over a year to the next municipal election I guess you can’t really blame him.

And speaking of elections – I guess those with a burning desire for political recognition are beginning to rev up the campaign machine once again – one of the candidates from the previous election published “An Assessment of Guelph’s Finances” on his website asking for people to “forward (it) to those who may share the same concerns.”

Nothing like false controversy and hearsay to get people all worked up!

Personally I think creativity, honesty, and integrity make for better reading AND better leadership in government.

On June 5, 2009, the governments of Canada and Ontario announced a joint investment of more than $44.4 million for 21 infrastructure projects identified as priorities for the City of Guelph that will create jobs and help build a stronger community.  The City of Guelph will contribute $22.2 M.
Through Canada’s Economic Action Plan, the federal government has established a new $4-billion Infrastructure Stimulus Fund that provides funding to provincial, territorial and municipal construction-ready infrastructure rehabilitation projects. Funding to Ontario communities, which will be matched by the government of Ontario as part of its 2009 provincial budget, Confronting the Challenge: Building our Economic Future, is available for two years for projects that will be built during the 2009 and 2010 construction seasons.,

The City, through its operator Wyndham House, has provided an interim shelter for at-risk youth since November 2008 at the former Delhi Community Centre.  This interim facility provides twelve beds and has been operating at about a 50 percent occupancy rate. There have been 51 clients using the facility in the period between November 2008 and the end of March 2009 and the average length of stay was six days. Over 40% of the youth participated in Wyndham House’s After-Care support program to obtain the individual supports they need to find and maintain a longer-term housing situation.

To date, 17 youth (33%) have moved from the shelter into longer term, independent housing, have remained at the same address and continue to participate in the After Care program through one-on-one meetings, group workshops, and the After Care Facebook connection page. Out of those 17 youth, 4 planned moves into Wyndham House’s long-term residential programs and are now enrolled in a community high school. Almost 70% of the Shelter clients have made use of the services available at Wyndham House’s Youth Resource Centre on Douglas Street to assist them in looking for housing alternatives, help with food, transportation, referrals for medical/mental health resources and workshops

Debbie Bently-Lauzon, Executive Director of Wyndham House and the operator of the shelter, has expressed excitement “…about the work that is going on at the shelter and the initial results that demonstrate a multiple-service (or continuum of services) approach is working to support the youth in making positive steps towards living independently in their community.”

Renovations at the permanent Youth Shelter at 18 Norwich Street East are underway.  Starting as an eight-bed facility, it will provide office space, shelter, on-site food preparation and dining, examination room and Registered Nurse Practitioner’s office, as well as counselling rooms. Renovations are being completed by KMA Contracting Inc. of Guelph and these are expected to be complete by the end of June 2009.

As part of our commitment to good governance, Guelph City Council met last night to learn more about the City’s Long Term Financial Plan and a new tool that will help prioritize capital projects, both of which will strengthen strategic and fiscal management for the City.

Guelph’s Long Term Financial Plan is a new approach to prioritizing capital projects and is intended to help the City set long-term priorities based on the community’s vision and strategic goals. To do that, Finance staff have developed a tool to help manage a balanced and integrated capital plan designed to balance the City’s need to repair and replace existing infrastructure, while continuing to fund capital projects that maximize residents’ quality of life and Guelph’s economic growth potential.

Both the Long Term Financial Plan and the City’s Capital Plan will help ensure affordability whereby costs and benefits are shared between existing and future ratepayers; help the City maintain existing infrastructure and afford new infrastructure to support new growth and economic development; address community health and safety, and environmental risks; and implement strategic initiatives and community priorities.

Guelph City Council voted to adopt the policy recommendations of Water Conservation and Efficiency Strategy Update at last night’s Council meeting.

The policy recommendations include formally endorsing the three water reduction goals of the City’s Water Supply Master Plan, the formation of a Water Conservation and Efficiency Advisory Committee to provide ongoing public consultation throughout strategy implementation, and an enhanced public education program.

Residents, multi-residential building owners, businesses and developers can expect to see a number of new and enhanced rebate programs to encourage further water reduction. Rebates for the installation of water-efficient toilets, washing machines, humidifiers, outdoor water timers, rain barrels, as well as grey water reuse systems, and rainwater harvesting systems are some of the rebate programs recommended in the strategy.

The goal of the Strategy Update was to identify preferred program, policy and resource alternatives to best meet the water reduction goals identified in the Guelph Water Supply Master Plan, Community Energy Plan and Council Strategic Plan. The WCESU also identifies preferred program implementation forecasts, program support staff, and maintenance based resources required to meet and sustain the water reduction goals.

Since the completion of the 2006 WSMP, the City has achieved a 7.7 per cent reduction in daily water use. Implementation of the new conservation strategy is expected to save an additional 8.7 million litres of water per day by 2019 and will cost just over $20 million. The total combined water savings accounts for a 19.7 per cent reduction based on the 2006 average day water use of 53 million litres.

Water conservation is the most cost-effective and immediate source of new water supply and wastewater treatment capacity. It is anticipated that water savings to be gained through the new conservation strategy will allow for the possible deferral of future water supply and wastewater treatment infrastructure needs. Guelph’s water and wastewater master planning studies estimate that construction of equivalent water and wastewater infrastructure to deliver 8.7 million litres of water per day would cost approximately $44 million.

Construction of Guelph’s new organic waste processing facility could get underway as early as this fall, after Guelph City Council selected Maple Reinders to design and build the facility at last night’s Council meeting.

Maple Reinders presented its proposal to design and build a new organic waste processing facility using in-vessel tunnel composting — a process whereby organic material is completely sealed inside a concrete container as it decomposes.

This in-vessel tunnel compost system is based on proven European technology that has been used for more than 15 years in over 100 facilities word-wide. In Canada, Maple Reinders has built municipal compost facilities in Hamilton, the Region of Peel and Cape Breton using this technology. The new OWPF will include proven odour management technology including the use a biofiltration system developed by BIOREM Inc., a Guelph-based company that specializes in odour control systems. BIOREM Inc. has over 600 installations world-wide.

The Master Plan identifies three waste diversion targets; the first target is 55 per cent by 2011. In 2007, Guelph’s waste diversion rate was 44 per cent. Once the City begins to locally process its organic waste, waste diversion is expected to increase by 10 to 12 per cent, putting Guelph on track to meet its first diversion target.

Today, Guelph’s new City Hall is officially open to the public. The new building located at 1 Carden Street is home to City departments that have, until now, been based out of five satellite locations around the city.

Just inside the front doors is ServiceGuelph, the City’s centralized customer service, makes access to information, services and resources even simpler. People can purchase transit passes, sign up for recreation programs, buy dog licenses, pay parking tickets and property taxes and more. ServiceGuelph is open Monday to Friday, 8:30a.m. to 4:30p.m. A full list of services is available at serviceguelph.

Guelph invested $39,090,010 in the building, and will now save over $658,000 per year in rent costs. The Province of Ontario contributed $803,000 to restore the historic Winter Fair Wall which is incorporated into the design of the building, and $3,000,000 in Federal Gas Tax funds paid for the building’s heating and cooling system. The efficient system uses 38 per cent less energy and emits fewer greenhouse gas emissions than a typical system.

The building has a number of green features; a green roof, living wall, eco-friendly building materials and fixtures that use 30 per cent less water than a typical office building. Guelph’s City Hall is built to the LEED Silver Standard set out by the Canadian Green Building Council.

The combination of striking heritage features and contemporary design expresses Guelph’s proud history, its continued vitality and its vision for the future.

Bravo for creating arts, culture post

By Renann Isaacs, curator, Alma Gallery, Guelph

Dear Editor - Re: “Need for cultural post debated” (Guelph Mercury, Dec. 19).

Hooray for Mike Salisbury and the six other councillors who voted in support of creating a much needed position for an arts and culture supervisor. I can’t believe Guelph has been without one.

I recently moved from Montreal to be closer to my parents. I chose Guelph because of its potential and because I wasn’t prepared to move back to the architecturally and culturally demolished city of Toronto, where my parents live.

Downtown Guelph is a gem waiting to be discovered.

Despite the poor placement of buses, the abundance of pubs, and the chaotic signage, the core of the city consists of stunning neighbourhoods and heritage buildings that are ideal for accommodating a beautiful community of bed and breakfasts, cafés, fine dining restaurants, boutique shopping, galleries, and anything to do with the arts in general.

Visitors from all over have admired the area and some have even contemplated moving here.

Imagine then my shock when I heard that there were still folks around like Councillors Gloria Kovach, Christine Billings and Kathleen Farrelly who referred to a proposal supporting arts and culture as “nebulous.”

Wow! How terribly Sarah Palinesque!

If a city wants to position itself for a changing world it has to attract and excite people, not make their lives dull.

Sprawling suburbs and strip malls with redundant conformity do not stimulate economies. Culture does.

Bravo to those Guelphites who have the courage to look to the future. By providing the city with an arts and culture supervisor we can facilitate the change needed to make this city an even greater going concern. Yes we can!

I find it interesting that when city staff reported the possibility of a 6.5% tax increase it was front page news. However, when Council pared down this estimate to deliver the lowest tax increase of the last two terms of council it was reported on page three of the Mercury.

Well, I certainly feel that the lowest tax increase in 5 years (despite being among the fastest growing urban areas in Canada) is VERY significant.

Along with growth demanding increased use of the city’s roads, water, wastewater, housing and quality parks and public spaces we have dramatically improved public transit with the implementation of 20 minute bus service this year.

6.9% in 2004 – Previous Council
5.1% in 2005 – Previous Council
4.7% in 2006.
4.3% in 2007
3.8% in 2008

How are your Taxes Spent?

In 2008, Guelph collected an average of $2,602 per household in property taxes, based on an average assessment of $238,000. The graph shows how those tax dollars were spent on services provided by the City each month. Some highlights include:
$24/month for 24-hour fire protection services
$12/month for public transit
$9/month for Guelph Public Library
$6/month for curb side waste collection

Taxes in other cities

A recent survey of 79 Ontario municipalities showed that, compared to cities in the area offering the same services per capita, people living in Guelph pay LESS than the average residential taxpayer.

* Data Source: BMA Management Consulting 2007 Municipal Study. Full study available here

One of the benefits of living in the ward I represent is noticing the small things that need attention. One of those “small things” can now be crossed off my list.

At the beginning of my term I toured our neighbourhood with the Director of Community Design and Development. I pointed out that while Paisley Rd. was one of the primary connections to the rest of the city, the sidewalk on the north side of the road was missing.

In fact, the sole bus stop on Paisley road required residents to walk along a dusty goat trail to access the rest of the community; not particularly accessible to say the least.

The original plan was to look at installing the sidewalk as part of a larger motion I made to move forward with a pedestrian rail underpass to Margaret Greene Park  as identified in the trail master plan following the fatal accident we had last year.

I expect this issue to be debated by council next year, however by the end of this summer a number of sidewalk projects planned by the city could not be completed and my request was bumped up to the front of the line.

Together with staff we reviewed a number of other sidewalks that need to be completed in the west end including Imperial Rd. south of Speedvale and Elmira Rd. south of Willow. These projects are in the works for next year.

We were told that the changing regulatory environment was forcing the issue. “Merge now or risk being forced to do so at a later date”.

While I think that it is pretty unlikely that we will be forced against our will to merge I believe that the OEB will continue to create a regulatory environment so onerous that smaller utilities will ultimately have to choose between spiralling distribution rates and operational deficits of full ownership or to accept a “tax incentive” to partner with other LDC’s for survival.

This Machiavellian reality of the current provincial energy policy was certainly not the sole reason to consider a merger, it was however the context of the discussion.

It was estimated that the savings for Guelph citizens as a result of this partnership with Horizon Utilities would be measured in the millions of dollars. Critics were quick to point out that the impact to individual ratepayers was only 20% of 20% (the distribution portion) of their hydro bill and the cost of power will continue to rise even if the distribution rates continue to go down.

While most rate payers may be tempted to sacrifice a small financial savings on their hydro bill to maintain the perceived benefits of full ownership it is important to put the dollars into perspective.

The estimated annual savings per rate payer in Guelph was the equivalent to a 2% reduction in the municipal tax rate - the equivalent of two glass sorting machines for the recycling facility, or twice covering the extra cost of 20min bus service recen.

Perhaps two of the biggest opportunities I saw with the proposed merger were being in a position to embrace technological changes in the energy distribution industry and meet the growing social changes with regards to conservation and demand management.

Smart meters and smart grids – micro generation – increasing role for our distribution system that didn’t exist a few years ago… I may not know much about the emerging technological opportunities however I can almost guarantee one thing – it won’t be cheap!

Having rigorously reviewed the business case I was comfortable that this was a good partnership.

Why?

• Combination of urban density, growth and favourable geography
• Guelph would have become a strategic partner based upon our location and expertise – (reflected in the premium valuation of our assets)
• As a strategic partner our facilities and the jobs created by these facilities would have been insulated during subsequent mergers – in fact we had language in the legal agreements to protect our assets

Very simply – we either needed to embrace the vision of larger regional distribution or not. This time around we chose not to, however my fear is that by choosing so we run the risk of becoming an island.

Case in point; we are NOT part of discussions with our neighbours (Kitchener, Waterloo, Cambridge) to establish commuter rail in the tri-cities area even though we already own an existing and profitable railway! There may be a number of reasons why our neighbours have chosen not to include us but I wonder if it had anything to do with our reaction to amalgamation pressures a number of years back and our withdrawal from regional projects like the “technology triangle” or the regional airport?

Perhaps the greatest lesson we can all learn from this exercise can be summed up in one word – TRANSPARENCY.

From day one - I fought to have the business case for merger be made public. I consistently maintained that such an important issue mandated complete and total transparency and the participation and consultation with our community. I argued that if this is a good recommendation it will weather the intense scrutiny of public review and that if it cannot, then it is not a good recommendation.

Unfortunately the public never had the chance to debate the real issues from the business case and instead were forced to rely on summaries and speculation – a bad combination.

I can only hope that this entire process will become a stepping stone to much greater things for our community with regards to Guelph Hydro and our community energy plan.

The following entry is reprinted from a memo sent out by the Mayor regarding the proposed Hydro merger.

As the Shareholder Representative on the Guelph Hydro Inc. (GHI) Board of Directors, I support the recommendation to merge Guelph Hydro Electric Systems Inc. (GHESI) with Horizon Utilities Corp. (Horizon).

Context

Industry consolidation is being driven by regulatory pressures, the capital needs of utilities and increased consumer advocacy (e.g. industrial and commercial sectors seeking rate harmonization).

The GHI Board of Directors has been delegated the responsibility by Guelph City Council to manage the business and to “enhance the value of the Corporation (GHI) and its subsidiaries (GHESI & Ecotricity)”. The GHI Board unanimously recommends the merger with Horizon to respond to industry changes being driven by the Province of Ontario and the Ontario Energy Board (OEB), as the regulator.

Industry changes present both risks and opportunities for GHESI. Council’s role as stewards of this valuable public asset is to separate potential risks from fear and to understand how those potential risks can be effectively mitigated. Equally, Council must also consider opportunities for maintaining or enhancing the value of this public asset for the benefit of the community.

The role of Council is to provide strategic leadership based on the best available information. Critical to fulfilling this role must be an understanding that a decision to take no action at this time will not alter the course of industry change and comes with its own set of risks that must be well considered.

Due diligence

Council and the citizens of Guelph can have confidence that the due diligence process has been robust.

The due diligence process is a process of discovery for the shareholder (Guelph City Council) with respect to the merging entities (Horizon and GHESI). This process is designed to assist Council in the assessment of the risk and opportunities with respect to the proposed merger.

The strength of the due diligence process is demonstrated by the significant resources that have been assembled to consider the proposed merger. They include:

• Council’s appointment of a skills-based Board of Directors for GHI comprised of members with extensive industry and business expertise
• a GHESI Management Team with substantial industry knowledge and experience
• retaining Borden, Ladner and Gervais LLP for GHESI/Horizon to conduct the legal due diligence

The scope of the work included:

• corporate organization
• financial matters
• real property, plant and equipment
• technology and intellectual property
• regulatory matters
• material contracts and commitments
• management and employees
• benefit plans
• insurance

• retaining Deloitte & Touche LLP for GHESI/Horizon to conduct the financial due diligence

The scope of the work included:

• valuation of each merged entity (including relative contribution of each party to the merged entity, value of each entity on a stand alone basis, and the value of the merged entity)

• retaining Kinetrics Inc. for GHESI/Horizon to conduct the operational due diligence

The scope of the work included:

• asset verification
• asset condition assessment
• comparison of observed asset value with book value
• review of capital expenditure
• operation and maintenance programs and budgets City Hall
• review of reliability statistics and planning
• identification of any technical issues leading to financial risk

• retaining of Gowlings LLP for GHI/GHESI to provide independent legal advice
• retaining BDR for the City of Guelph to conduct an expert, independent options analysis
• retaining BDR for the City of Guelph to conduct an expert, independent peer review of the merger business case and accompanying analysis performed by Deloitte
• the engagement of Aird & Berlis LLP as independent legal advisors to the City of Guelph to assist in its review of legal documentation concerning the proposed merger
• the review of all documentation by the City of Guelph’s Chief Administrative Officer, City Treasurer and City Solicitor
• significant opportunity for the public to provide input and questions
• significant access of Council to resources and expertise

Strategic benefits & timing

In considering the available options, merger makes the most sense when shareholders want both the advantages of ownership and the benefits of good returns.

Many merger discussions only focus on potential financial savings. The comprehensive “Merger Principles” adopted by GHI at the outset have both informed the process and expressed a commitment to achieving a broader set of community benefits. The success in achieving these principles is reflected in the choice of merger partner and the breadth of benefits achieved.

There are several compelling reasons why moving forward with a merger at this time, rather than holding, is in the best interest of customers, employees, the community and the shareholder.

GHESI is entering the merger discussions from a position of strength. This is reflected in the strong ownership proportion identified for Guelph in the business case. As consolidation continues, Guelph’s relative size and position in the industry will decrease. The number of potential merger partners will decline and our strategic options along with our ability to set the terms of a merger in the future will be diminished.

Customers

All customers will benefit from lower rates (20% reduction in distribution rates after rate harmonization; lower distribution rate increases over time) and improved service (extended customer service hours; enhanced local emergency response). Lower distribution rates can only be achieved through a merger. Ongoing reliability of service is ensured not only by the past performance of both utilities but also regulation. The OEB regulatory environment protects customer and shareholder interests.

Employees

If we hold, our ability to negotiate as strong a transition package for GHESI employees will be compromised along with our ability to negotiate a significant level of local business presence as many of these opportunities will be locked in by other merger agreements.

Horizon and GHESI have complementary not competing human resource strengths which has facilitated the development of the human resources strategy.

The particular commitment of the GHI Board of Directors to the employee community is consistent with the City of Guelph’s corporate values.

Community

Horizon’s undeniable commitment to conservation and demand management (C & DM), their strong voice at the provincial level and the designation of Guelph as the Centre of Excellence for C & DM for the merged entity will leverage substantial new resources and partnership opportunities for the implementation of Guelph’s Community Energy Plan (CEP).

Lower industrial and commercial rates will give Guelph a competitive advantage. The merger will result in $40 million of savings for ratepayers over the next 10 years. This money will stay in the community having a positive economic impact.
Shareholder

BDR’s conclusion, after thorough analysis, is that the business case is fair and reasonable from a financial point of view.

A merger will mitigate impacts of new regulatory requirements that would otherwise be felt by the customer through increased rates and by the shareholder as a decline in asset value and dividends. It is anticipated that the OEB will adopt performance based regulation (IRM) that will reward actions of those entities that merge to find cost efficiencies.

The strength and size of Horizon will bring many operational benefits to the merged entity including:

• stronger credit rating
• new systems and technologies to enhance operational efficiency that would have been cost prohibitive for GHESI to implement (i.e. the high fixed costs and rapid depreciation of these new systems and technologies can be spread over a larger customer base)
• The electrical distribution industry is highly regulated. Local boards and shareholders have limited control over the business. The legal agreements that have been negotiated preserve one important area of control - influence over the strategic direction of the merged entity (i.e. future mergers or acquisitions). Should we hold, our ability to negotiate a merger agreement in the future, that allows the same level of influence over future strategic business decisions, will be diminished.
• Finally, increased dividends will assist the City of Guelph address the infrastructure deficit and CEP implementation.

The Guelph Chamber of Commerce (representing 825 businesses in Guelph, and over 40,000 employees) has come out with their own independent analysis of the Guelph Hydro merger proposal.

The entire report can be downloaded here - Chamber of Commerce Hydro Analysis.

Excerpts from the report are reprinted below.

CONCLUSION

The Board of Guelph Hydro has been charged by the Corporation of the City of Guelph to make recommendations based upon what is best for the City. The thoroughness of the preparations and reports from the Board shows they have acted very well within their mandate and should be congratulated for a job well done. Following our own due diligence, the Guelph Chamber of Commerce supports the recommendations of the Guelph Hydro Board of Directors to merge Guelph Hydro with Horizon Utilities.

RECOMENDATIONS

1. The financial presentation shows stronger performance from Horizon than from Guelph Hydro or most other utilities. The financial arguments favour merger.
2. The merger provides opportunity for enhanced engineering support, that will benefit Guelph businesses looking for cost savings programs via conservation and new technologies.
3. The management preparation of the merged company has been from the bottom up, which reduces the problems inherent in bringing two organizations together.
4. The mass of the merged entity will position the utility for changing economic times ahead, providing better opportunity for stabilizing rates and investing in infrastructure.

NOTES

This report has been prepared following :

* Consultation by our ten person Advocacy Committee representing retail, industrial, education, legal, personnel, agri-technology, financial, and institutional sectors. Committee members consulted their peers.
* Chambers of Commerce were consulted in St Catharine’s and Hamilton regarding corporate citizenry of Horizon, service levels, and meeting forecast revenue and expense targets
* Guelph Hydro Board of Directors were met with twice for clarification of issues
* Guelph Hydro Management was consulted
* The public was polled on our website, including members and non-members
* The Guelph Chamber of Commerce held a public meeting with our members and members of Horizon and Guelph Hydro boards of directors

COMMENTS

* Service and Rates:

The Horizon cost and rate projections have met the projections presented prior to merger in other areas. Cost and rate projections should be made to Council by Horizon. Initial comparisons look favourable.

* Local Employment Impacts:

Contract talks need to focus on the support of local contractors currently doing civil and other work for Guelph Hydro, based on their local expertise and value.

* Engineering Support:

Having additional demand management team members will assist Guelph Chamber of Commerce members to take part in cost savings opportunities. Having additional engineering staff will also help our members to identify cost savings programs requiring additional application and monitoring available via the larger administrative staff at Horizon.

* Conservation and Demand Management:

Guelph becoming the environmental champion for Horizon is the result of our work on the Community Energy Plan, and will offer additional innovation possibilities for our area, as well as research possibilities to make Guelph a centre for excellence of conservation and demand management.

* Long Term Strategic Plan:

Longer term strategic positioning will give Guelph a competitive negotiation advantage when other utilities in our area look at merging with larger utilities. The additional mass of the merged entity will offer higher returns on equity and financial stability for the City of Guelph and at the same time help to stabilize our utility rates for making local businesses more competitive.

* Experience in Mergers:

Horizon has a proven track record on concluding successful mergers which should be considered as an advantage in current discussions.

* Merged Utility Structure:

Management and employee teams from both Guelph Hydro and Horizon have reviewed best practices for each utility. The merger teams have recommended the new corporate structure to management. The merged organization has been structured from the bottom up versus structure being imposed, facilitating the job of joining workforces.

* Timing of Merger:

Negotiations put Guelph two years ahead of competitive utilities that may consider future mergers. Some manufacturing is feeling pressure from the downturn in the USA economy, and the merge would provide medium and long term relief on utility costs, as well as protecting against rate fluctuations.

* Regional Advantage:

The merged utility would be an attractive option for nearby utilities, benefiting Guelph’s future negotiating position. Rather than joining other local initiatives, Guelph would be leading

* Attraction of Business:

The excellent financial performance of Horizon, combined with local engineering advantages is a drawing card for businesses looking to locate in Guelph

* Risk:

Historically the assumption is doing nothing is less risk than changing. History shows not changing and adapting provides the higher risk. Historically opposition is stacked against change, with the most vocal opinions calling for the status quo.

Parks Planning Department is preparing to replace playground equipment in Marksam Park. Existing play equipment (swings, slides, climbers, timber edging etc.) in the park will be removed and new playground equipment which meets current Canadian safety standards will be installed as soon as possible after the removals.

Information was gathered by City staff throughout the winter and spring of 2008 to choose appropriate play equipment items. Besides the submitted resident comments, equipment choices for each park also take into account: vandalism records, maintenance requirements, diversification of the neighbourhood’s play equipment options, and maximizing play value.

The work shall be permitted during the following hours:
7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. Monday – Friday
9:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. on Saturdays
At no time on Sundays and Public Holidays

Please be aware that heavy equipment will be entering and leaving the area. Pedestrian routes around the work area may be obstructed temporarily. Caution should be exercised when using these routes and adult supervision of children passing through this area of the park is strongly recommended.

The Council of Canadians is Canada’s largest citizens’ organization, with members and chapters across the country. The general public has an expectation that an organisation of this calibre will present well thought out and researched opinion on matters of public policy.

Unfortunately I believe that this is not the case in regards to a recent email they sent out to the newspapers regarding the proposed Hydro Merger.

Earlier this week, I had several email conversations with Dave Sills, Co-Chair of the Guelph Chapter on this matter; I really appreciated his observations and frank discussion with me. Given that the issues raised by the Council of Canadians were vigorously explored in the business case I referred him to Art Stokman at Hydro to set up a meeting:

If the Council of Canadians haven’t already done so, you should be aware that your organisation can schedule a meeting with Guelph Hydro to personally discuss all of the concerns you have raised. Your issues have been raised during the various meetings we have had with Hydro and they will be able to address your concerns in detail.

Given the complexity of the issues and the significant impact of this decision the management of Guelph Hydro have maintained an open door policy to meet with the community to answer questions regarding the merger business case.

To date numerous groups have taken Hydro staff up on this offer including, the Guelph Developers Association, the Chamber of Commerce, Friends of Guelph, as well as several independent industry leaders and individuals.

By contrast, the Council of Canadians didn’t bother to seek answers to their concerns about the proposed merger before condemning the idea.

Their shopping list of concerns appears significant, but each of them has been vigorously explored by Hydro in reaching their recommendation. This doesn’t necessarily mean that if the Council of Canadians had sought out answers to their questions that they would have agreed with Hydro`s conclusions - however by reaching a conclusion without asking leaves me wondering that perhaps the Council of Canadians simply didn’t want to hear the answers.

I spent 10 hours over Labour Day weekend combing through the hydro merger business case. To be honest I was specifically looking for reasons NOT to support the recommendation. I read the business plan looking for details / or the lack of details that would support my basic personal bias that smaller is better.

The business case is about two and a half inches thick, not including the legal agreements and appendices. After combing through the plan I had come up with about 30 questions.

I invited any councillors available to attend to a meeting with Guelph Hydro executives to review the list of questions. After an intensive 3 hour discussion my head hurt and I had a whole new understanding of the many complex issues involved in this decision.

From the very beginning I have argued that the business case for the proposed hydro merger should be made public. I believe that if the business case is solid, public review would only strengthen the recommendation to merge. However, my biggest fear is that by not releasing the business case the general public will feel that Hydro is hiding key issues from the public. I DO NOT believe this is the case.

Hydro executives have been VERY forthcoming with information in regards to our staff, advisors and councillors involved in the review of the business case and I have been told that a number of public interest groups have also had meetings with Hydro to discuss their concerns. In fact, Hydro executives will be available at the upcoming Ward 2 town hall meeting to answer questions from the public.

Unfortunately the legal advise that Hydro has been given subscribes to the ‘better safe than sorry’ approach and they will not be releasing the full business case. Hydro staff have complied written answers to my Hydro Q&A and this can be downloaded here.

The format of the document may be confusing as it was originally prepared specifically for Hydro staff already familiar with the subject matter (It was never intended it to be a public document) nevertheless it will give readers a flavour of the discussion and hopefully add to the debate.

Many of you may have noticed construction equipment in Margaret Greene Park recently.

New playground equipment which meets current Canadian safety standards will be installed at a new location within the park, closer to the washroom building and the existing play equipment (swings, slides, climbers, etc.) will be removed at a later date. Additional plantings, pathways and parking will also be installed.

Information was gathered by City staff in 2007 to choose appropriate play equipment items. Besides the submitted resident comments, equipment choices for each park also take into account: vandalism records, maintenance requirements, diversification of the neighbourhood’s play equipment options, and maximizing play value.

The work shall be permitted during the following hours:
7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. Monday – Friday
9:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. on Saturdays
At no time on Sundays and Public Holidays

Please be aware that heavy equipment will be entering and leaving the area. Pedestrian routes around the work area may be obstructed temporarily. Caution should be exercised when using these routes and adult supervision of children passing through this area of the park is strongly recommended.

It was so nice to get this email I just wanted to share it with you.

Mr. Salisbury,

I want to thank you for your help with my request for assistance in recognizing our Novice girls fastball team representing Guelph at the Quebec nationals.

I have heard from the Mayor’s office today and have they have offered assistance.

I was pleasantly surprised with your calls today and the efforts you took upon yourself which resulted in quick involvement of the Mayor’s office.

This is the second time I have sought you out, and in both instances your help was invaluable.

Once again, thank you.

Regards,
Robb Graham 

The 2008 City of Guelph Citizen Satisfaction Survey, conducted by Ipsos Reid Public Affairs is being presented at the July 28th council meeting and the results are very informative.

This type of communication is vital to the democratic process, in fact I think it is so important that I have established the “Ward 4 Survey” an online questionnaire based upon the original Ipsos Reid survey. I would like to encourage everyone to take out a couple of minutes and share your thoughts and opinions.

It will take only a couple of minutes to fill out, but will greatly improve my ability to represent your needs and priorities. Your participation and comments (both positive and critical) are requested and encouraged.

I recently received an email indicating that Rogers Cable television would be unable to televise City of Guelph council meetings in the month of July due to staffing shortages. Unfortunately there are several very significant issues coming before council in July.

While I can’t guarantee anything can be done to ensure that Guelph residents won’t be left in the dark, I made a call to Jeremy Clark, Regional Station Manager at Rogers Television and Dave Carswell at CTV to ensure that they were aware of the issues we are debating in July.

Please consider covering these important public issues.

Monday July 7th

An issue that divided the community, cost millions of dollars in legal fees and took over a decade to resolve in the courts returns once again as Wal-Mart Canada proposes to expand one of its most controversial developments.

Monday July 14th

Information presentation to Council regarding the proposed merger of Guelph Hydro and Horizon Utilities. A business merger that will have provincial ramifications involving one of Canada’s the oldest public utilities .

Monday July 21st

Public delegations and deliberations on the Guelph Hydro merger.

Hopefully they will be able to do what is necessary to cover the meetings.

With the implementation of 20-minute bus service this summer, the City of Guelph will be posting fixed transit schedules with much more user information for riders.