Finance Select Committee Meeting Minutes - July 25th, 2002
Finance Select Committee
Date: |
Thursday, July 25th, 2002 |
Place: |
Anderson Room |
Present: |
Councillor Kiichi Kumagai,
Chair |
Also Present: |
Councillor Lyn Greenhill |
Call to Order: |
The Chair called the meeting to order at 2:01 p.m. |
|
|
MINUTES |
|
1. |
It was moved and seconded |
|
|
That the minutes of the meeting of the Finance Select Committee held on Thursday, June 20th, 2002, be adopted as circulated. |
|
|
CARRIED |
|
|
DELEGATION |
|
2. |
|
|
|
Advice was given that Mr.
Matthew was not in attendance at this afternoons meeting and that
he would make his presentation to a future meeting of the Committee. |
|
3. |
RELIGIOUS PROPERTIES NO. 5 ROAD |
|
|
|
At the request of the Chair,
the General Manager, Finance & Corporate Services, Jim Bruce,
reviewed the history of the 1/3-2/3 requirement, i.e. one-third of
the property would be used for the religious facility and the rear
two-thirds would be farmed.
He explained during his review that City staff had been
unable to find any written agreement which reflected this latter
requirement. In
response to further questions, Mr. Bruce advised that: |
|
|
|
|
permissive exemptions, authorized by
Council, were applied to all religious properties in Richmond no
matter where they were located, for specific items over and above
those allowed under a statutory exemption |
|
|
|
statutory exemptions were regulated by the BC Assessment Authority (BCAA) |
|
|
|
exemptions were applied to the land and improvements associated to
the religious institution; the rear two-thirds of the property was
assessed by the BCAA; recreational or business uses were not permitted |
|
|
|
the
area of the property which provided parking qualified as a
permissive exemption; only the building and land under the building
which was used as a place of worship qualified as a statutory
exemption. |
|
|
Discussion then ensued among Committee members and
staff on whether (i) there were any documents in existence which
required that the rear two-thirds of the No. 5 Road religious
properties were to be farmed; (ii) the rear two-thirds of these
properties were to be given permissive exemptions; and (iii)
covenants were in place to require that the backlands be farmed. Advice was given during the
discussion that there were no formal agreements in place between the
City and the landowners, and that if these agreements existed, they
were between the Agricultural Land Commission and the owners.
|
|
|
|
Also addressed during the discussion were the
complaints made by a number of commercial businesses who believed
that the operators of these religious facilities who rented their
facilities to the public as banquet facilities had an economic
advantage because of the special tax rate.
|
|
|
|
The history of this matter was then reviewed by staff
with the Committee. As
well, information was provided on the various land classifications
used by the BC Assessment Authority.
During the discussion, staff were requested to provide to the
Committee, a copy of the report prepared by former City employee Ian
Chang on the No. 5 Road Backlands Study.
|
|
|
|
Comments were made during the discussion that now was
the time to address this matter, and that as an incentive, the
affected property owners should be advised that until farming
activity occurred on the rear portions of their respective
properties, that the permissive tax exemptions would be removed. |
|
|
|
Mr. Steven Choy, representing the Cornerstone
Evangelical Baptist Church, questioned whether the City had advised
his church that farming was to be undertaken on the property. Discussion then ensued among
Committee members and Mr. Choy on the suitability of the soil for
farming. Committee
members and staff also spoke about the need to undertake a review of
the permissive tax exemption and the uses permitted within that
exemption.
|
|
|
|
In concluding his presentation, Mr. Choy advised that
his church had never received a written request from the City to
farm the rear portion of the property and never had any plans to
undertake any farming activity.
He questioned whether any action would be taken if his church
did not farm the property, and requested written direction from the
City. |
|
|
|
Mr. Herb Barbalett, a former member of the committee
which studied the feasibility of farming the No. 5 Road backlands,
expressed concern about the integrity of the farmland in that area. He stated that the only
reason church property owners had been allowed to build in this area
was because those owners had indicated that they would farm the
backlands. Mr.
Barbalett stated that while large scale farming was not possible,
small operations were.
He then spoke about the refusal of the owners to consolidate their
properties to make farming more viable and the lack of co-operation
between the owners and the City.
|
|
|
|
In response to questions, Mr. Barbalett suggested
that orchards could be established in the backlands. He noted that the church
owners had been asked to voluntarily farm their respective
properties with negative results, and advised that he agreed with
earlier suggestions that the permissive tax exemptions on these
properties should be revoked. |
|
|
|
As a result of the discussion, the following motion
was introduced: |
|
|
|
It was moved and seconded |
|
|
|
That: |
|
|
|
(1 ) |
staff provide the owners of the religious properties located on No. 5 Road with information on the amounts of both their statutory and permissive tax exemptions; |
|
|
(2 ) |
the owners be advised that unless there is agricultural activity taking place on the backlands of their properties, that the permissive tax exemption applied to such property would be revoked for the 2003 year; and |
|
|
(3 ) |
the owners be requested to provide a formal response to the City on this matter by September 1st, 2002. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
The question on the motion was then called, and it was CARRIED with Cllr. Howard opposed. |
|
4. |
RFP FOR SALE AND
LEASEBACK AGREEMENT FOR VEHICLE FLEET |
|
|
A brief discussion ensued
among Committee members and staff on the proposal, during which
advice was given that the project was financially viable because
City staff could leverage a higher rate of return.
|
|
|
It was moved and seconded |
|
|
That the Purchasing department issue a Request For Proposal for a sale and leaseback agreement for the vehicle fleet (as described in the report dated June 27, 2002 from the Fleet Management and Budgets & Accounting Departments) and report to Committee with a recommendation. |
|
|
CARRIED |
|
5. |
AMENDMENT TO WATERWORKS & WATER
RATES BYLAW |
|
|
|
|
|
That Waterworks & Water Rates Bylaw No. 5637, Amendment Bylaw No. 7405, be introduced and given first, second and third readings. |
|
|
CARRIED |
|
6. |
SERVICE LEVEL
REVIEW CITY CLERKS OFFICE |
|
|
City Clerk Richard McKenna
reviewed the service levels provided by the City Clerks Office,
during which a brief discussion ensued on the availability of
reports on the City's web site. |
|
|
(Councillor Kumagai left the meeting at 3:40 p.m.,
and did not return.
Councillor McNulty assumed the Chair.) |
|
|
It was moved and seconded |
|
|
That the memorandum (dated July 8th, 2002, from the City Clerk), regarding the Service Level Review City Clerks Office, be received for information. |
|
|
CARRIED |
|
7. |
SERVICE LEVEL REVIEW LAW
DEPARTMENT |
|
|
|
|
|
That the report (dated July 8th, 2002, from the City Solicitor), regarding the Levels of Service Law Department and Land Agent, be received for information. |
|
|
CARRIED |
|
8. |
SERVICE LEVEL
REVIEW CORPORATE & STRATEGIC PLANNING |
|
|
The Manager, Corporate &
Strategic Planning, Lani Schultz, responded to questions from the
Committee on the rationale for (i) overhead expenses, and (ii) the
use of consultants. |
|
|
It was moved and seconded |
|
|
That the report (dated June 20th, 2002, from the Manager, Corporate & Strategic Planning), regarding the Service Levels for Corporate & Strategic Planning, be received for information. |
|
|
CARRIED |
|
9. |
SERVICE LEVEL
REVIEW CUSTOMER SERVICE |
|
|
The Manager, Customer Service,
Anne Stevens, reviewed the level of service provided within her
area.
|
|
|
(Mayor Brodie entered the meeting at 3:46 p.m.) |
|
|
During the brief discussion which ensued, the
Committee spoke favourably of the services provide by the members of
the Customer Service Department. |
|
|
It was moved and seconded |
|
|
That the memorandum (dated July 10th, 2002, from the Manager, Customer Service), regarding Service Levels for Customer Service, be received for information. |
|
|
CARRIED |
|
10. |
SERVICE LEVEL REVIEW HUMAN
RESOURCES DEPARTMENT |
|
|
The General Manager, Human
Resources, Mike Kirk, briefly reviewed the service levels provided
within his department, and responded to questions on whether outside
assistance would be required to help with upcoming labour
negotiations. |
|
|
It was moved and seconded |
|
|
That the report (dated June 20th, 2002, from the General Manager, Human Resources), regarding the Human Resources Department Levels of Service, be received for information. |
|
|
CARRIED |
|
11. |
MANAGERS REPORT |
|
|
Mr. Bruce reviewed with the Committee, the proposed schedule for the 2003 budget process. |
|
|
ADJOURNMENT |
|
|
It was moved and seconded |
|
|
That the meeting adjourn (3:54 p.m.). |
|
|
CARRIED |
|
Certified a true and correct copy of the Minutes of the meeting of the Finance Select Committee of the Council of the City of Richmond held on Thursday, July 25th, 2002. |
_________________________________ |
|
Councillor Kiichi Kumagai |
|
_________________________________ |
_________________________________ |
Councillor Bill McNulty |
Fran J. Ashton |