HomeMy WebLinkAboutFND-019-11 Clarbgton REPORT
FINANCE DEPARTMENT
Meeting: GENERAL PURPOSE AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE
Date: SEPTEMBER 26, 2011 Resolution#: " 5.93°// By-law#:
Report#: FND-019-11 File#:
Subject: MUNICIPAL PERFORMANCE MEASURES PROGRAM - 2010
RECOMMENDATIONS:
It is respectfully recommended that the General Purpose and Administration Committee
recommend to Council the following:
1. THAT Report FND-019-11 be received for information.
4
f �v
Submitted by: Reviewed by:
Nancy T to , CA. Franklin Wu,
Director of Finance/ Chief Administrative Officer
Treasurer
NT/hjl
CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON
40 TEMPERANCE STREET, BOWMANVILLE, ONTARIO L1C 3A6 T 905-623-3379
REPORT NO.: FND-019-11 PAGE 2
1. BACKGROUND
1.1 The Province dictates the formal requirements for Year 11 (2010) of the Municipal
Performance Measures Program (MPMP).
1.2 The required measures have been filed with the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and
Housing and are included in Schedule "A".
1.3 The Province has mandated that these measures be published to taxpayers by
September 30, 2011. The information will be posted on the Municipality's website
and will be presented at the Clarington Board of Trade Annual Mayor's event,
September 27, 2011.
1.4 The provincial objectives of the MPMP are to enhance accountability to taxpayers,
increase taxpayer awareness and share best practices between municipalities.
The information is intended to be used as a tool to gauge improvements in service
delivery year over year.
1.5 The format of the attached report is a provincial form. For years where no
historical data is provided, that is as a result of changes to the formulas or
calculations determined by the Province which causes the new measures not to be
comparable to those prior to the calculation or methodology change.
2. CONCLUSION
It is recommended that the Municipal Performance Measures Program results for
2010 be received for information.
3. CONCURRENCE — not applicable
CONFORMITY WITH STRATEGIC PLAN —
The recommendations contained in this report conform to the general intent of the
following priorities of the Strategic Plan:
_ Promoting economic development
X Maintaining financial stability
_ Connecting Clarington
_ Promoting green initiatives
Investing in infrastructure
Showcasing our community
Not in conformity with Strategic Plan
Staff Contact: Nancy Taylor, B.B.A., C.A., Director of Finance/Treasurer
REPORT NO.: FND-019-11 PAGE 3
Attachments:
Attachment A - Performance Measures for 2010
MUNICIPALITY SCHEDULE A
Municipal Performance Measurement Program (MPMP)• 2010 RESULTS
Questions about MPMP results should be addressed to:
Name: NANCY TAYLOR Phone: (905)623-3379
Title: DIRECTOR OF FINANCE/TREASURER
Municipality: CLARINGTON
Email: ntaylor @clarington.net
Related documents and links:
Local Government
CONTACT PERSON FOR LOCAL GOVERNMENT: Nancy Taylor, Director of Finance
2010 2009
1.1 a) Operating costs for governance and
corporate management as a
percentage of total municipal 8.9% 8.9%
operating costs.
1.1 b) Total costs for governance and
corporate management as a 6.7%_______'
percentage of total municipal costs. -
OBJECTIVE:
Efficient local government.
NOTES& KEY FACTORS FOR UNDERSTANDING RESULTS:
In 2010, total costs include municipal election expenses, otherwise there would have been a reduction in this measure
from the prior year.
REFERENCE:
• The formulas for efficiency measures were revised in 2009 to reflect changes in the reporting of expenses
consistent with accrual accounting concepts. New total cost measures were introduced and revised in 2010. Total
costs mean operating costs as defined in MPMP, plus amortization and interest on long-term debt, less revenue
received from other municipalities for tangible capital assets.
• Financial Information Return: 91 0206 35(Operating costs measure)and 91 0206 45(Total costs measure).
1
MUNICIPALITY
Municipal Performance Measurement Program (MPMP)• 2010 RESULTS
Fire Services
CONTACT PERSON FOR FIRE SERVICES: Gord Weir, Director of Emergency Services
2010 2009 =
2.1 a) Operating costs for fire services per
$1,000 of assessment. $ 1.15 $ 1.16
2.1 b) Total costs for fire services per = _-
$1,000 of assessment. $ 1.25
OBJECTIVE:
Efficient fire services.
NOTES & KEY FACTORS FOR UNDERSTANDING RESULTS:
REFERENCE:
• The formulas for efficiency measures were revised in 2009 to reflect changes in the reporting of expenses
consistent with accrual accounting concepts. New total cost measures were introduced and revised in 2010. Total
costs mean operating costs as defined in MPMP, plus amortization and interest on long-term debt, less revenue
received from other municipalities for tangible capital assets.
• Financial Information Return: 91 1103 35(Operating costs measure)and 91 1103 45 (Total costs measure).
2010 2009
2.2 Number of residential fire related
civilian injuries per 1,000 persons. 0.057 0.046
2.3 Number of residential fire related
civilian injuries averaged over 5 years 0.034 0.046
per 1,000 persons. - -
OBJECTIVE:
Minimize the number of civilian injuries in residential fires.
NOTES &KEY FACTORS FOR UNDERSTANDING RESULTS:
For further details, see Emergency Services Annual Report for 2010.
REFERENCE:
• Financial Information Return: 92 1151 07 (2.2)and 92 1152 07 (2.3).
2
MUNICIPALITY
Municipal Performance Measurement Program (MPMP). 2010 RESULTS
2010 2009
2.4 Number of residential fire related
civilian fatalities per 1,000 persons. 0.000 0.000
2.5 Number of residential fire related
civilian fatalities averaged over 5 0.000 0.000
years per 1,000 persons.
OBJECTIVE:
Minimize the number of civilian fatalities in residential fires.
NOTES & KEY FACTORS FOR UNDERSTANDING RESULTS:
REFERENCE:
• Financial Information Return: 92 1155 07 (2.4)and 92 1156 07 (2.5).
2010 2009
2.6 Number of residential structural fires
per 1,000 households. 1.229 1.159
OBJECTIVE:
Minimize the number of residential structural fires.
NOTES& KEY FACTORS FOR UNDERSTANDING RESULTS:
REFERENCE:
• Financial Information Return: 92 1160 07.
3
MUNICIPALITY
Municipal Performance Measurement Program (MPMP)• 2010 RESULTS
Roads
CONTACT PERSON FOR ROADS: Fred Horvath, Director of Operations and Tony Cannella, Director
of Engineering
2010
4.1 a) Operating costs for paved (hard top)
roads per lane kilometer. $ 923.98
4.1 b) Total costs for paved (hard top) roads
per lane kilometer. $ 3,763.83
OBJECTIVE:
Efficient maintenance of paved roads.
NOTES& KEY FACTORS FOR UNDERSTANDING RESULTS:
In 2009, a significant amount of capital fund expenses were transferred to operating in accordance with PSAB/TCA
requirements. In 2010, this amount was significantly reduced.
REFERENCE:
• 'The formulas for efficiency measures for paved roads were revised in 2010 to net out revenue received from
utilities for utility cut repairs.
• The Total cost measure was also revised in 2010. Total costs mean operating costs as defined in MPMP, plus
amortization and interest on long-term debt, less revenue received from other municipalities for tangible capital assets.
• Financial Information Return: 91 2111 35(Operating costs measure)and 91 2111 45(Total costs measure).
2010 2009
4.2 a) Operating costs for unpaved (loose
top) roads per lane kilometer. $ 1,859.41 $ 2,513.32
4.2 b) Total costs for unpaved (loose top)
roads per lane kilometer. $ 15,717.83
OBJECTIVE:
Efficient maintenance of unpaved roads.
NOTES& KEY FACTORS FOR UNDERSTANDING RESULTS:
2010 seasonal rainfall was average in comparison to 2009. Ongoing improvements to the tangible capital asset
reporting process resulted in an increase of total costs in comparison to 2009.
REFERENCE:
• The formulas for efficiency measures were revised in 2009 to reflect changes in the reporting of expenses
consistent with accrual accounting concepts. New total cost measures were introduced and revised in 2010. Total
costs mean operating costs as defined in MPMP, plus amortization and interest on long-term debt, less revenue
received from other municipalities for tangible capital assets.
• Financial Information Return: 91 2110 35(Operating costs measure)and 91 2110 45(Total costs measure).
4
MUNICIPALITY
Municipal Performance Measurement Program (MPMP)• 2010 RESULTS
2010 2009
4.3 a) Operating costs for bridges and
culverts per square metre of surface $ 4.82 $ 8.16
area.
4.3 b) Total costs for bridges and culverts
per square metre of surface area. $ 38.40 $ 39.95
OBJECTIVE:
Efficient maintenance of bridges and culverts.
NOTES & KEY FACTORS FOR UNDERSTANDING RESULTS:
In 2009, a significant amount of capital fund expenses were transferred to operating in accordance with PSAB/TCA
requirements. In 2010,this amount was significantly reduced.
REFERENCE:
• The formulas for efficiency measures were revised in 2009 to reflect changes in the reporting of expenses
consistent with accrual accounting concepts. New total cost measures were introduced and revised in 2010. Total
costs mean operating costs as defined in MPMP, plus amortization and interest on long-term debt, less revenue
received from other municipalities for tangible capital assets.
• Financial Information Return: 91 2130 35(Operating costs measure)and 91 2130 45(Total costs measure).
2010 2009
4.4 a) Operating costs for winter
maintenance of roadways per lane $ 845.99 $ 1,110.41
kilometer maintained in winter.
4.4 b) Total costs for winter maintenance of
roadways per lane kilometer $ 1,096.96
maintained in winter.
OBJECTIVE:
Efficient winter maintenance of roads.
NOTES &KEY FACTORS FOR UNDERSTANDING RESULTS:
The 2010 winter season had moderate winter conditions with significant reduction is snow removal;2010 winter call
outs decreased from 44 in 2009 to 28.
REFERENCE:
• The formulas for efficiency measures were revised in 2009 to reflect changes in the reporting of expenses
consistent with accrual accounting concepts. New total cost measures were introduced and revised in 2010. Total
costs mean operating costs as defined in MPMP, plus amortization and interest on long-term debt, less revenue
received from other municipalities for tangible capital assets.
• Financial Information Return: 91 2205 35 (Operating costs measure) and 91 2205 45(Total costs measure).
5
MUNICIPALITY
Municipal Performance Measurement Program (MPMP)• 2010 RESULTS
2010 2009 2008 2007 2006
4.5 Percentage of paved lane kilometres
where the condition is rated as good 59% 58% 68% 67% 71%
to very good.'
OBJECTIVE:
Pavement condition meets municipal objectives.
NOTES &KEY FACTORS FOR UNDERSTANDING RESULTS:
REFERENCE:
• 'Pavement condition is rated using a Pavement Condition Index(PCI)such as the Index used by the Ontario Good
Roads Association (OGRA)or the Ministry of Transportation's Roads Inventory Management System (RIMS).
• Financial Information Return: 92 2152 07.
2010 2009
4.6 Percentage of bridges and culverts
where the condition is rated as good 79% 79%
to very good.'
OBJECTIVE:
Safe bridges and culverts.
NOTES&KEY FACTORS FOR UNDERSTANDING RESULTS:
REFERENCE:
• The effectiveness measure for bridges and culverts was introduced in 2009.
• 'A bridge or culvert is rated in good to very good condition if distress to the primary components is minimal,
requiring only maintenance. Primary components are the main load carrying components of the structure, including the
deck, beams, girders, abutments,foundations, etc.
• Financial Information Return: 92 2165 07.
6
MUNICIPALITY
Municipal Performance Measurement Program (MPMP)• 2010 RESULTS
2010 2009 2008 2007 2006
4.7 Percentage of winter events where
the response met or exceeded locally
determined municipal service levels 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%
for road maintenance.
OBJECTIVE:
Response to winter storm events meets locally determined service levels for winter road maintenance.
NOTES& KEY FACTORS FOR UNDERSTANDING RESULTS:
REFERENCE:
• Financial Information Return: 92 2251 07.
7
MUNICIPALITY
Municipal Performance Measurement Program (MPMP)• 2010 RESULTS
Storm Water
CONTACT PERSON FOR STORM WATER: Fred Horvath, Director of Operations
2010 2009
7.1 a) Operating costs for urban storm water
management(collection, treatment,
disposal) per kilometer of drainage $ 1,948.31 $ 1,405.76
system. - -
7.1 b) Total costs for urban storm water
management(collection, treatment, - -
disposal) per kilometer of drainage $ 5,882.15
system. -
OBJECTIVE:
Efficient urban storm water management.
NOTES &KEY FACTORS FOR UNDERSTANDING RESULTS:
In 2010, increase in catch basin maintenance in comparison to 2009. More storm water facilities are being assumed
by the Municipality pursuant to subdivision agreements.
REFERENCE:
• The formulas for efficiency measures were revised in 2009 to reflect changes in the reporting of expenses
consistent with accrual accounting concepts. New total cost measures were introduced and revised in 2010.Total
costs mean operating costs as defined in MPMP, plus amortization and interest on long-term debt, less revenue
received from other municipalities for tangible capital assets.
• Financial Information Return: 91 3209 35(Operating costs measure)and 91 3209 45 (Total costs measure).
8
MUNICIPALITY
Municipal Performance Measurement Program (MPMP)• 2010 RESULTS
2010 2009
7.2 a) Operating costs for rural storm water
management(collection, treatment,
disposal) per kilometer of drainage $ 649.94 $ 655.97
system.
7.2 b) Total costs for rural storm water -
management(collection, treatment, = -
disposal) per kilometer of drainage $ 649.94
system. = -
OBJECTIVE:
Efficient rural storm water management.
NOTES & KEY FACTORS FOR UNDERSTANDING RESULTS:
REFERENCE:
• The formulas for efficiency measures were revised in 2009 to reflect changes in the reporting of expenses
consistent with accrual accounting concepts. New total cost measures were introduced and revised in 2010. Total
costs mean operating costs as defined in MPMP, plus amortization and interest on long-term debt, less revenue
received from other municipalities for tangible capital assets.
• Financial Information Return: 91 3210 35(Operating costs measure)and 91 3210 45 (Total costs measure).
9
MUNICIPALITY
Municipal Performance Measurement Program (MPMP)• 2010 RESULTS
Parks and Recreation
CONTACT PERSON FOR PARKS AND RECREATION: Joseph Caruana, Director of Community
Services and Fred Horvath, Director of Operations
2010 2009
10.1 a) Operating costs for parks per person.
$ 21.46 $ 23.34
10.1 b) Total costs for parks per person.
$ 27.37
OBJECTIVE:
Efficient operation of parks.
NOTES &KEY FACTORS FOR UNDERSTANDING RESULTS:
In 2009, transfer of capital fund expenses to operating in accordance with PSAB/TCA requirements. In 2010,this
amount was significantly reduced.
REFERENCE:
• The formulas for efficiency measures were revised in 2009 to reflect changes in the reporting of expenses
consistent with accrual accounting concepts. New total cost measures were introduced and revised in 2010. Total
costs mean operating costs as defined in MPMP, plus amortization and interest on long-term debt, less revenue
received from other municipalities for tangible capital assets.
• Financial Information Return: 91 7103 35(Operating costs measure)and 91 7103 45(Total costs measure).
2010 2009
10.2 a) Operating costs for recreation
programs per person. $ 26.72 $ 26.52
10.2 b) Total costs for recreation programs
per person. $ 26.72
OBJECTIVE:
Efficient operation of recreation programs.
NOTES & KEY FACTORS FOR UNDERSTANDING RESULTS:
In 2010 and in addition to previously offered programs, new programs were implemented to remain viable and
competitive. Such programs include Fitness Bootcamp, Zumba, and Kettlebells.
REFERENCE:
• The formulas for efficiency measures were revised in 2009 to reflect changes in the reporting of expenses
consistent with accrual accounting concepts. New total cost measures were introduced and revised in 2010. Total
costs mean operating costs as defined in MPMP, plus amortization and interest on long-term debt, less revenue
received from other municipalities for tangible capital assets.
• Financial Information Return: 91 7203 35(Operating costs measure)and 91 7203 45(Total costs measure).
10
MUNICIPALITY
Municipal Performance Measurement Program (MPMP)• 2010 RESULTS
2010 2009
10.3 a) Operating costs for recreation $ gg.57 $ 91.44
facilities per person.
10.3 b) Total costs for recreation facilities per
person. $ 121.05
OBJECTIVE:
Efficient operation of recreation facilities.
NOTES& KEY FACTORS FOR UNDERSTANDING RESULTS:
In 2010, increase in amortization expense. Newcastle& District Recreation Complex was amortized for a full year in
comparison to 2009 with one-half year expensed. This facility was readied for use in July 2008.
REFERENCE:
• The formulas for efficiency measures were revised in 2009 to reflect changes in the reporting of expenses
consistent with accrual accounting concepts. New total cost measures were introduced and revised in 2010.Total
costs mean operating costs as defined in MPMP, plus amortization and interest on long-term debt, less revenue
received from other municipalities for tangible capital assets.
Financial Information Return: 91 7306 35(Operating costs measure)and 91 7306 45 (Total costs measure).
2010 2009
10.4 a) Operating costs for recreation
programs and recreation facilities per $ 125.29 $ 117.95
person (Subtotal)
10.4 b) Total costs for recreation programs
and recreation facilities per person $ 147.78
(Subtotal)
OBJECTIVE:
Efficient operation of recreation programs and facilities.
NOTES & KEY FACTORS FOR UNDERSTANDING RESULTS:
In 2010 and in addition to previously offered programs, new programs were implemented to remain viable and
competitive. Such programs include Fitness Bootcamp, Zumba, and Kettlebells. Newcastle& District Recreation
Complex was amortized for a full year in comparison to 2009 with one-half year expensed. This facility was readied for
use in July 2008
REFERENCE:
• The formulas for efficiency measures were revised in 2009 to reflect changes in the reporting of expenses
consistent with accrual accounting concepts. New total cost measures were introduced and revised in 2010. Total
costs mean operating costs as defined in MPMP, plus amortization and interest on long-term debt, less revenue
received from other municipalities for tangible capital assets.
• Financial Information Return: 91 7320 35(Operating costs measure)and 91 7320 45 (Total costs measure).
11
MUNICIPALITY
Municipal Performance Measurement Program (MPMP)• 2010 RESULTS
2010 2009 2008 2007 2006
10.5 Total kilometres of trails 20 20 19 19 16
10.5 Total kilometres of trails per 1,000
persons 0.23 0.23 0.22 0.23 0.19
OBJECTIVE:
Trails provide recreation opportunities.
NOTES & KEY FACTORS FOR UNDERSTANDING RESULTS:
REFERENCE:
• Financial Information Return: 92 7152 05 and 92 7152 07.
2010 2009 2008 2007 2006
10.6 Hectares of open space(municipally
owned) 547 379 379 379 377
10.6 Hectares of open space per 1,000
persons (municipally owned) 6.2 4.4 4.4 4.5 4.5
OBJECTIVE:
Open space is adequate for population.
NOTES & KEY FACTORS FOR UNDERSTANDING RESULTS:
The number of hectares of open space has significantly increased from previous years. In 2010, the number of
hectares of open space includes valleylands owned by the Municipality which previously were not included the
calculation.
REFERENCE:
• Financial Information Return: 92 7155 05 and 92 7155 07.
12
MUNICIPALITY
Municipal Performance Measurement Program (MPMP)• 2010 RESULTS
2010 2009 2008 2007 2006
10.7 Total participant hours for recreation
programs per 1,000 persons. 8,806.1 8,962.1 9,138.3 9,103.4 9,717.9
OBJECTIVE:
Recreation programs serve needs of residents.
NOTES & KEY FACTORS FOR UNDERSTANDING RESULTS:
REFERENCE:
• Financial Information Return: 92 7255 07.
2010 2009 2008 2007 2006
10.8 Square metres of indoor recreation
facilities (municipally owned) 32,128 32,128 32,128 26,375 25,910
10.8 Square metres of indoor recreation
facilities per 1,000 persons 365.5 370.8 374.0 312.1 309.7
(municipally owned)
OBJECTIVE:
Indoor recreation facility space is adequate for population.
NOTES & KEY FACTORS FOR UNDERSTANDING RESULTS:
REFERENCE:
• Financial Information Return: 92 7356 05 and 92 7356 07.
13
MUNICIPALITY
Municipal Performance Measurement Program(MPMP)• 2010 RESULTS
2010 2009 2008 2007 2006
10.9 Square metres of outdoor recreation
facility space (municipally owned) 2,421 2,421 3,179 3,179 1,841
10.9 Square metres of outdoor recreation
facility space per 1,000 persons 27.5 27.9 37.0 37.6 22.0
(municipally owned)
OBJECTIVE:
Outdoor recreation facility space is adequate for population.
NOTES &KEY FACTORS FOR UNDERSTANDING RESULTS:
REFERENCE:
• Financial Information Return: 92 7359 05 and 92 7359 07.
14
MUNICIPALITY
Municipal Performance Measurement Program (MPMP)• 2010 RESULTS
Libraries
CONTACT PERSON FOR LIBRARIES: Edith Hopkins, Chief Executive Officer
2010 2009
11.1 a) Operating costs for library services
per person. $ 28.14 $ 29.08
11.1 b) Total costs for library services per
person. $ 38.36
OBJECTIVE:
Efficient library services.
NOTES &KEY FACTORS FOR UNDERSTANDING RESULTS:
REFERENCE:
• The formulas for efficiency measures were revised in 2009 to reflect changes in the reporting of expenses
consistent with accrual accounting concepts. New total cost measures were introduced and revised in 2010. Total
costs mean operating costs as defined in MPMP, plus amortization and interest on long-term debt, less revenue
received from other municipalities for tangible capital assets.
• Financial Information Return: 91 7405 35(Operating costs measure) and 91 7405 45(Total costs measure).
2010 2009
11.2 a) Operating costs for library services
per use.' $ 1.41 $ 1.63
11.2 b) Total costs for library services per
use. $ 1.93
OBJECTIVE:
Efficient library services.
NOTES & KEY FACTORS FOR UNDERSTANDING RESULTS:
REFERENCE:
• The formulas for efficiency measures were revised in 2009 to reflect changes in the reporting of expenses
consistent with accrual accounting concepts. New total cost measures were introduced and revised in 2010.Total
costs mean operating costs as defined in MPMP, plus amortization and interest on long-term debt, less revenue
received from other municipalities for tangible capital assets.
• 'Also, the calculation of electronic library uses was updated in 2009 to include the number of people using the
public library wireless connection.
• Financial Information Return: 91 7406 35 (Operating costs measure)and 91 7406 45(Total costs measure).
15
MUNICIPALITY
Municipal Performance Measurement Program (MPMP)• 2010 RESULTS
2010 2009
11.3 Library uses per person.' 19.92 17.82
OBJECTIVE:
Increased use of library services.
NOTES & KEY FACTORS FOR UNDERSTANDING RESULTS:
REFERENCE:
• ' In the 2009 FIR, the definition of library uses was changed to add the number of people using the library's wireless
connection.Therefore,this effectiveness measure, library uses per person, is not comparable to prior years.
• Financial Information Return: 92 7460 07.
Line numbers for prior years:
• The FIR reference for the measure, library uses per person, did not change in 2009.
2010 2009
11.4 Electronic library uses as a
percentage of total library uses.' 30% 25%
OBJECTIVE:
Better information on library usage.
NOTES & KEY FACTORS FOR UNDERSTANDING RESULTS:
REFERENCE:
• ' In the 2009 FIR,the definition of library uses was changed to add the number of people using the library's wireless
connection.Therefore,the effectiveness measure for the percentage of electronic library uses is not comparable to
prior years.
• Financial Information Return: 92 7463 07.
16
MUNICIPALITY
Municipal Performance Measurement Program (MPMP)• 2010 RESULTS
2010 2009
11.5 Non-electronic library uses as a
percentage of total library uses.' 70% 75%
OBJECTIVE:
Better information on library usage.
NOTES & KEY FACTORS FOR UNDERSTANDING RESULTS:
REFERENCE:
• Financial Information Return: 92 7462 07.
• 'In the 2009 FIR, the definition of electronic library uses was changed to add the number of people using the
library's wireless connection. Therefore, the effectiveness measure for the percentage of non-electronic library uses is
not comparable to prior years.
Line numbers for prior years:
• The FIR reference for the measure, non-electronic library uses as a percentage of total library uses, did not change
in 2009.
17
MUNICIPALITY
Municipal Performance Measurement Program (MPMP)• 2010 RESULTS
Land Use Planning
CONTACT PERSON FOR LAND USE PLANNING: David Crome, Director of Planning
2010 2009 2008 2007
12.1 Percentage of new residential units
located within settlement areas 100% 100% 100% 100%
OBJECTIVE:
New residential development is occurring within settlement areas.
NOTES & KEY FACTORS FOR UNDERSTANDING RESULTS:
REFERENCE:
• Financial Information Return: 92 8170 07.
2010 2009 2008 2007 2006
12.2 Percentage of land designated for
agricultural purposes which was not
re-designated for other uses during 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%
the reporting year.
OBJECTIVE:
Preservation of agricultural land.
NOTES & KEY FACTORS FOR UNDERSTANDING RESULTS:
Historically, the number of hectares of agricultural land in the Official Plan has been manually calculated.The
calculation took the number from the previous years figure and reduced it by the amount of land known to have been
removed from the Agricultural designation. There was a major adjustment in 2005 when Oak Ridges Moraine lands
were redesignated into environmental protection. The original 2000 base amount does not match Prime Ag (which is
less than the combination of prime and general ag) but is closer and could have been the difference between the
accuracy of the mapping products from Map Info and Auto Cad to today's system of ARCReader(the GIS mapping
program). In 2010, a correction has been made to the 2000 base year amount to be 32,249 hectares.
REFERENCE:
• Financial Information Return: 92 8163 07.
18
MUNICIPALITY
Municipal Performance Measurement Program (MPMP). 2010 RESULTS
2010 2009 2008 2007 2006
12.3 Percentage of land designated for
agricultural purposes which was not
re-designated for other uses relative 88% 83% 83% 83% 83%
to the base year of 2000.
OBJECTIVE:
Preservation of agricultural land.
NOTES &KEY FACTORS FOR UNDERSTANDING RESULTS:
Historically,the number of hectares of agricultural land in the Official Plan has been manually calculated. The
calculation took the number from the previous years figure and reduced it by the amount of land known to have been
removed from the Agricultural designation. There was a major adjustment in 2005 when Oak Ridges Moraine lands
were redesignated into environmental protection. The original 2000 base amount does not match Prime Ag (which is
less than the combination of prime and general ag) but is closer and could have been the difference between the
accuracy of the mapping products from Map Info and Auto Cad to today's system of ARCReader(the GIS mapping
program). In 2010, a correction has been made to the 2000 base year amount to be 32,249 hectares.
REFERENCE:
. Financial Information Return: 92 8164 07.
2010 2009 2008 2007 2006
12.4 Number of hectares of land originally
designated for agricultural purposes
which was re-designated for other 0 61 61 0 0
uses during the reporting year.
OBJECTIVE:
Preservation of agricultural land.
NOTES & KEY FACTORS FOR UNDERSTANDING RESULTS:
REFERENCE:
• Financial Information Return: 92 8165 07.
19
MUNICIPALITY
Municipal Performance Measurement Program (MPMP)• 2010 RESULTS
2010 2009 2008 2007 2006
12.5 Number of hectares of land originally
designated for agricultural purposes
which was re-designated for other 3,922 3,922 3,922 3,861 3,861
uses since January 1, 2000.
OBJECTIVE:
Preservation of agricultural land.
NOTES & KEY FACTORS FOR UNDERSTANDING RESULTS:
REFERENCE:
• Financial Information Return: 92 8166 07.
20