Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutFND-017-12 Clarhwn REPORT FINANCE DEPARTMENT Meeting: GENERAL PURPOSE AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE Date: June 25, 2012 Resolution#: - By-law#: Report#: FND-017-12 File#: Subject: MUNICIPAL PERFORMANCE MEASURES PROGRAM — 2011 RECOMMENDATIONS: It is respectfully recommended that the General Purpose and Administration Committee recommend to Council the following: 1. THAT Report FND-017-12 be received for information. 1' p "4 Submitted by: .% 1111114, Reviewed by Nancy T ylor, BA, CA, Franklin Wu, Director of Chief Administrative Officer Finance/Treasurer NT/blm CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON 40 TEMPERANCE STREET, BOWMANVILLE, ONTARIO L1C 3A6 T 905-623-3379 REPORT NO.: FND-017-12 PAGE 2 1. BACKGROUND 1.1 The Province dictates the formal requirements for Year 12 (2011) of the Municipal Performance Measures Program (MPMP). 1.2 The required measures will be 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, 2012. The information will be posted on the Municipality's website and will be presented at the Clarington Board of Trade Annual Mayor's event in September. 1.4 The provincial objectives of the MPMP are to promote local government transparency and accountability. The information is intended to provide municipalities with useful data to make informed municipal service level decisions while optimizing available resources. 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 2011 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-017-12 PAGE 3 Attachment "A" — Municipal Performance Measurement Program (MPMP) - 2011 Results List of interested parties to be advised of Council's decision: Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing Attachment "A" to Report FND-017-12 MUNICIPALITY Municipal Performance Measurement Program(MPMP) • 2011 RESULTS Questions about MPMP results should be addressed to: Name: NANCY TAYLOR Phone: 905-623-3379 ext 2602 Title: TREASURER/DIRECTOR OF FINANCE Municipality: MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON Email: ntaylor @clarington.net Related documents and limos: Local Government CONTACT PERSON FOR LOCAL GOVERNMENT: Nancy Taylor, Director of Finance • 2011 2010 2009 1.1 a) Operating costs for governance and corporate management as a percentage of total municipal 7.2% 8.9% 8.9% operating costs. 1.1 b) Total costs for governance and corporate management as a 5.5% 6.7% percentage of total municipal costs. OBJECTIVE: Efficient local government. NOTES& KEY FACTORS FOR UNDERSTANDING RESULTS: 2010- Included Municipal Election expenditures 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) • 2011 RESULTS Fire Services CONTACT PERSON FOR FIRE SERVICES: Gord Weir, Director of Emergency Services 2011 2010 2009 2.1 a) Operating costs for fire services per $1,000 of assessment. $ 1.17 $ 1.15 $ 1.16 2.1 b) Total costs for fire services per $1,000 of assessment. $ 1.26 $ 1.25 OBJECTIVE: Efficient fire services. NOTES& KEY FACTORS FOR UNDERSTANDING RESULTS: Finalization of fire arbitration award. 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). 2011 2010 2009 72.2 Number of residential fire related civilian injuries per 1,000 persons. 0.089 0.057 0.046 2.3 Number of residential fire related civilian injuries averaged over 5 years 0.044 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 2011 REFERENCE: • Financial Information Return: 92 1151 07 (2.2) and 92 1152 07 (2.3). 2 MUNICIPALITY Municipal Performance Measurement Program (MPMP) • 2011 RESULTS 2011 2010 2009 2.4 Number of residential fire related civilian fatalities per 1,000 persons. 0.000 0.000 0.000 2.5 Number of residential fire related civilian fatalities averaged over 5 0.000 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). • I ;11 2011 2010 2009 2.6 Number of residential structural fires per 1,000 households. 1.073 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) • 2011 RESULTS Building er i Inspection Se ices CONTACT PERSON FOR BUILDING PERMITS & INSPECTION SERVICES: Tony Cannella, Director of Engineering ® o 2011 4.1 a) Operating costs for building permits and inspection services per$1,000 of contruction activity(based on permits $ 3.61 issued). 4.1 b) Total costs for building permits and inspection services per$1,000 of contruction activity(based on permits $ 3.61 issued). OBJECTIVE: Efficient building permits and inspection services. NOTES&KEY FACTORS FOR UNDERSTANDING RESULTS: REFERENCE: • MPMP measures for building permits and inspection services were introduced in 2011. • Financial Information Return: 91 1301 35 (Operating costs measure) and 91 1301 45(Total costs measure). 4 MUNICIPALITY Municipal Performance Measurement Program (MPMP) • 2011 RESULTS • • o - 1 0 2011 4.2 Median number of days to review a complete building permit application and issue a permit or not issue a permit, and provide all reasons for refusal: a) Category 1: Houses (houses not exceeding 3 storeys/600 square metres) 7 Reference: provincial standard is 10 working days. b) Category 2: Small Buildings (small commercial/industrial not exceeding 3 storeys/600 square metres) 4 Reference: provincial standard is 15 working days. c) Category 3: Large Buildings (large residential/commercial/ industrial/institutional) g Reference: provincial standard is 20 working days. d) Category 4: Complex buildings (post disaster buildings, including hospitals, power/water, fire/police/EMS, communications) 9 Reference: provincial standard is 30 working days. OBJECTIVE: Complete bulding permit applications are processed quickly and accurately. NOTES &KEY FACTORS FOR UNDERSTANDING RESULTS: REFERENCE: • MPMP measures for building permits and inspection services were introduced in 2011. • Financial Information Return: (a) 91 1351 07, (b) 91 1352 07, (c) 91 1353 07, (d) 91 1354 07. 5 MUNICIPALITY Municipal Performance Measurement Program (MPMP) • 2011 RESULTS Roads CONTACT PERSON FOR ROADS: Fred Horvath, Director of Operations and Tony Cannella, Director of Engineering 2011 2010 mm�7 5.1 a) Operating costs for paved (hard top) roads per lane kilometre.' $ 704.70 $ 923.98 5.1 b) Total costs for paved (hard top) roads per lane kilometre. $ 3,716.14 $ 3,763.83 OBJECTIVE: Efficient maintenance of paved roads. NOTES& KEY FACTORS FOR UNDERSTANDING RESULTS: Operating costs fluctuate year to year between paved (hard top), unpaved (loose top), bridges, culverts, and other maintenance priorities. This can be the result of variable weather conditions that affect maintenance needs. 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). • a - • ® 2011 2010 2009 5.2 a) Operating costs for unpaved (loose top) roads per lane kilometre. $ 2,348.32 $ 1,859.41 $ 2,513.32 5.2 b) Total costs for unpaved (loose top) roads per lane kilometre. $ 15,980.19 $ 15,717.83 OBJECTIVE: Efficient maintenance of unpaved roads. NOTES & KEY FACTORS FOR UNDERSTANDING RESULTS: See 5.1 above-2010 seasonal rainfall was at an average level vs. higher rainfall levels in other years. 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). 6 MUNICIPALITY Municipal Performance Measurement Program (MPMP) • 2011 RESULTS � o 2011 2010 2009 5.3 a) Operating costs for bridges and culverts per square metre of surface $ 8.04 $ 4.82 $ 8.16 area. 5.3 b) Total costs for bridges and culverts per square metre of surface area. $ 39.74 $ 38.40 OBJECTIVE: Efficient maintenance of bridges and culverts. NOTES &KEY FACTORS FOR UNDERSTANDING RESULTS: See 5.1 above 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). 2011 2010 2009 5.4 a) Operating costs for winter maintenance of roadways per lane $ 1,423.78 $ 845.99 $ 1,110.41 kilometre maintained in winter. 5.4 b) Total costs for winter maintenance of roadways per lane kilometre $ 1,652.93 $ 1,096.96 maintained in winter. OBJECTIVE: Efficient winter maintenance of roads. NOTES &KEY FACTORS FOR UNDERSTANDING RESULTS: 2010 had moderate winter conditions with less snowfall and freeze thaw conditions. See Operations department winter budget reports for further details. 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). 7 MUNICIPALITY Municipal Performance Measurement Program (MPMP) 0 2011 RESULTS 2011 2010 2009 2008 2007 5.5 Percentage of paved lane kilometres where the condition is rated as good 57% 59% 58% 68% 67% to very good.' OBJECTIVE: Pavement condition meets municipal objectives. NOTES&KEY FACTORS FOR UNDERSTANDING RESULTS: REFERENCE: e 1 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). e Financial Information Return: 92 2152 07. 775-% 010 2009 5.6 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: e The effectiveness measure for bridges and culverts was introduced in 2009. e 1 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. e Financial Information Return: 92 2165 07. 8 MUNICIPALITY Municipal Performance Measurement Program (MPMP) • 2011 RESULTS Vi 2011 2010 2009 2008 2007 5.7 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. 9 MUNICIPALITY Municipal Performance Measurement Program (MPMP) • 2011 RESULTS Storm Water CONTACT PERSON FOR STORM WATER: Fred Horvath, Director of Operations 2011 2010 2009 Operating costs for urban storm water management(collection,treatment, disposal) per kilometre of drainage $ 1,774.18 $ 1,948.31 $ 1,405.76 system. 8.1 b) Total costs for urban storm water management(collection, treatment, disposal) per kilometre of drainage $ 5,873.43 $ 5,882.15 system. OBJECTIVE: Efficient urban storm water management. NOTES&KEY FACTORS FOR UNDERSTANDING RESULTS: See 5.1 above- More storm water facilities have been assumed since 2009 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). 10 MUNICIPALITY Municipal Performance Measurement Program (MPMP) • 2011 RESULTS 2011 2010 2009 8.2 a) Operating costs for rural storm water management(collection, treatment, disposal) per kilometre of drainage $ 665.02 $ 649.94 $ 655.97 system. 8.2 b) Total costs for rural storm water management(collection,treatment, disposal) per kilometre of drainage $ 665.02 $ 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). 11 MUNICIPALITY Municipal Performance Measurement Program (MPMP) •2011 RESULTS Parks and Recreation CONTACT PERSON FOR PARKS AND RECREATION: Joseph Caruana, Director of Community Services and Fred Horvath, Director of Operations 2011 2010 2009 11.1 a) Operating costs for parks per person. $ 23.79 $ 21.46 $ 23.34 11.1 b) Total costs for parks per person. $ 31.40 $ 27.37 OBJECTIVE: Efficient operation of parks. NOTES&KEY FACTORS FOR UNDERSTANDING RESULTS: Costs have been fairly consistent in this area. 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). 110NJ� •GRAMS EFFICIENCY 20111 2010 2009 11.2 a) Operating costs for recreation programs per person. $ 23.17 $ 26.72 $ 26.52 11.2 b) Total costs for recreation programs per person. $ 23.17 $ 26.72 OBJECTIVE: Efficient operation of recreation programs. NOTES &KEY FACTORS FOR UNDERSTANDING RESULTS: The Community Services department reviews and assesses each program offered to maximize class sizes based on popularity and trends. See Community Services department annual report for additional information. 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). 12 MUNICIPALITY Municipal Performance Measurement Program (MPMP) • 2011 RESULTS m7 2011 2010 2009 11.3 a) Operating costs for recreation facilities per person. $ 116.23 $ 98.57 $ 91.44 11.3 b) Total costs for recreation facilities per person. $ 149.45 $ 133.99 OBJECTIVE: Efficient operation of recreation facilities. NOTES &KEY FACTORS FOR UNDERSTANDING RESULTS: Amortization is a significant component for recreation facilities. Energy upgrades were a major focus in 2011, so the payback should be reflected in future years. The impact of an allowance setup regarding the development charges appeal currently outstanding is reflected in this category. Also, a reallocation was made from capital to operating in 2011 for items that were commenced prior to tangible capital asset reporting requirements but completed after and required reallocation under the new rules. There was also a change in the reporting requirements for the interest charges on long term debt financed through development charges. 2010 has been modified to reflect these reporting requirement changes. 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). 2011 2010 2009 11.4 a) Operating costs for recreation programs and recreation facilities per $ 139.40 $ 125.29 $ 117.96 person (Subtotal) 11.4 b) Total costs for recreation programs and recreation facilities per person $ 172.62 $ 160.71 (Subtotal) OBJECTIVE: Efficient operation of recreation programs and facilities. NOTES &KEY FACTORS FOR UNDERSTANDING RESULTS: There was also a change in the reporting requirements for the interest charges on long term debt financed through development charges. 2010 has been modified to reflect these reporting requirement changes. 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). 13 MUNICIPALITY Municipal Performance Measurement Program (MPMP) •2011 RESULTS TRAILS 2011 2010 2009 2008 2007 11.5 Total kilometres of,trails 20 20 20 19 19 11.5 Total kilometres of trails per 1,000 persons 0.22 0.23 0.23 0.22 0.23 OBJECTIVE: Trails provide recreation opportunities. NOTES& KEY FACTORS FOR UNDERSTANDING RESULTS: REFERENCE: • Financial Information Return: 92 7152 05 and 92 7152 07. OPEN SPACE—EFFECTIVENESS 2011 2010 2009 2008 2007 11.6 Hectares of open space(municipally owned) 639 547 379 379 379 11.6 Hectares of open space per 1,000 persons(municipally owned) 7.1 6.2 4.4 4.4 4.5 OBJECTIVE: Open space is adequate for population. NOTES& KEY FACTORS FOR UNDERSTANDING RESULTS: In 2010,the number of hectares of open space was updated to include valley lands owned by the Municipality which was previously excluded. REFERENCE: • Financial Information Return: 92 7155 05 and 92 7155 07. 14 MUNICIPALITY Municipal Performance Measurement Program (MPMP) • 2011 RESULTS • 1 - . , • • - • - • - . 2011 2010 2009 2008 2007 11.7 Total participant hours for recreation programs per 1,000 persons. 8,824.4 8,806.1 8,962.1 9,138.3 9,103.4 OBJECTIVE: Recreation programs serve needs of residents. NOTES&KEY FACTORS FOR UNDERSTANDING RESULTS: Results are fairly consistent in the last two years. See Community Services annual update for further details. REFERENCE: • Financial Information Return: 92 7255 07. 3• • - RECREATION FACILITY 2011 2010 2009 2008 2007 11.8 Square metres of indoor recreation facilities(municipally owned). 32,221 32,128 32,128 32,128 26,375 11.8 Square metres of indoor recreation facilities per 1,000 persons 358.4 365.5 370.8 374.0 312.1 (municipally owned). OBJECTIVE: Indoor recreation facility space is adequate for population. NOTES &KEY FACTORS FOR UNDERSTANDING RESULTS: In 2011, the RRC facility completed an expansion of a portion of the change rooms on Pad A. REFERENCE: • Financial Information Return: 92 7356 05 and 92 7356 07. 15 MUNICIPALITY Municipal Performance Measurement Program(MPMP) • 2011 RESULTS 72,4211 2010 2009 2008 2007 11.9 Square metres of outdoor recreation facility space(municipally owned). 2,421 2,421 3,179 3,179 11.9 Square metres of outdoor recreation facility space per 1,000 persons 26.9 27.5 27.9 37.0 37.6 (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. 16 MUNICIPALITY Municipal Performance Measurement Program (MPMP) •2011 RESULTS Libraries CONTACT PERSON FOR LIBRARIES: Edith Hopkins, Chief Executive Officer COSTS 12.1 LIBRARY • 2011 2010 2009 12.1 a) Operating costs for library services per person. $ 32.85 $ 28.14 $ 29.08 12.1 b) Total costs for library services per person. $ 41.73 $ 38:36 OBJECTIVE: Efficient library services. NOTES &KEY FACTORS FOR UNDERSTANDING RESULTS: The impact of an allowance for the outstanding development charges appeal is reflected here. 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). COSTS 12.2 L11BRARY 2011 2010 2009 12.2 a) Operating costs for library services per use.' $ 1.67 $ 1.41 $ 1.63 12.2 b) Total costs for library services per use. $ 2.12 $ 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. • 1 The calculation of electronic library,uses was updated in 2009 to include the number of people using the public library wireless connection. In 2011 three additional categories of reference transactions were added to the definition of library uses.This may affect the comparability of 2011 results with earlier years. • Financial Information Return: 91 7406 35(Operating costs measure) and 91 7406 45(Total costs measure). 17 MUNICIPALITY Municipal Performance Measurement Program (MPMP) •2011 RESULTS 2011 2010 2009 12.3 Library uses per person.' 19.64 19.92 17.82 OBJECTIVE: Increased use of library services. NOTES& KEY FACTORS FOR UNDERSTANDING RESULTS: REFERENCE: • 1 The calculation of electronic library uses was updated in 2009 to include the number of people using the public library wireless connection. In 2011 three additional categories of reference transactions were added to the definition of library uses.This may affect the comparability of 2011 results with earlier 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. ELECTRONIC 2011 2010 2009 12.4 Electronic library uses as a percentage of total library uses.' 34% 30% 25%; OBJECTIVE: Better information on library usage. NOTES&KEY FACTORS FOR UNDERSTANDING RESULTS: REFERENCE: • 1 The calculation of electronic library uses was updated in 2009 to include the number of people using the public library wireless connection. In 2011 three additional categories of reference transactions were added to the definition of library uses.This may affect the comparability of 2011 results with earlier years. • Financial Information Return: 92 7463 07. 18 MUNICIPALITY Municipal Performance Measurement Program (MPMP) • 2011 RESULTS • o 2011 2010 _ _2009 12.5 Non-electronic library uses as a percentage of total library uses.' 66% 70% 75% OBJECTIVE: Better information on library usage. NOTES&KEY FACTORS FOR UNDERSTANDING RESULTS: REFERENCE: • 1 The calculation of electronic library uses was updated in 2009 to include the number of people using the public library wireless connection. In 2011 three additional categories of reference transactions were added to the definition of library uses.This may affect the comparability of 2011 results with earlier years. • Financial Information Return: 92 7462 07. 19 MUNICIPALITY Municipal Performance Measurement Program (MPMP) •2011 RESULTS Land Use Planning CONTACT PERSON FOR LAND USE PLANNING: David Crome, Director of Planning LOCATION OF • - 2011 2010 2009 2008 2007 13.1 Percentage of new residential units located within settlement areas. 100% 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. PRESERVATIOWOF AGRICULTURAL LAND DURING REPORTING , - 2011 2010 2009 2008 2007 13.2 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: REFERENCE: • Financial Information Return: 92 8163 07. 20 MUNICIPALITY Municipal Performance Measurement Program (MPMP) • 2011 RESULTS 2011 2010 2009 2008 2007 13.3 Percentage of land designated for agricultural purposes which was not re-designated for other uses relative 88% 88% 83% 83% 83% to the base year of 2000. OBJECTIVE: Preservation of agricultural land. NOTES&KEY FACTORS FOR UNDERSTANDING RESULTS: In 2010, a correction was made to the 2000 base year. REFERENCE: • Financial Information Return: 92 8164 07. • • • - 2011 2010 2009 2008 2007 13.4 Number of hectares of land originally designated for agricultural purposes which was re-designated for other 0 0 61 61 0 uses during the reporting year. OBJECTIVE: Preservation of agricultural land. NOTES &KEY FACTORS FOR UNDERSTANDING RESULTS: REFERENCE: • Financial Information Return: 92 8165 07, 21 MUNICIPALITY Municipal Performance Measurement Program(MPMP) • 2011 RESULTS 2011 2010 2009 2008 2007 13.5 Number of hectares of land originally designated for agricultural purposes which was re-designated for other 3,922 3,922 3,922 3,922 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. 22